I=99ve been using the PC680 with great success, it will hold a charge
for a very long time, they seem to last forever too. I change them out at a
bout five years and then use them in my ATV for another five years. I have o
ne =9Cused=9D on my work bench for 12 volt testing etc and charg
e it about once a year.
I would definitely recommend them.
Jerry Rehn
Mono XS, 914
Sent from my iPad
> On Apr 8, 2019, at 10:13 AM, <duanefamly@aol.com> <duanefamly@aol.com> wro
te:
>
> To compare the PC625 to the PC680 I believe comes down to size. Here are t
he specs off the website.
> PC625 PCHA 540 220 CCA 400 HCA 330 MCA 6.70 L 3.90 W 6.95 H 13.2LBS
> PC680 PCHA 520 170 CCA 350 HCA 280 MCA 7.27 L 3.11 W 7.55 H 15.4 LBS
>
> I guess if you haven=99t built the battery box yet, you can make it f
it. Or you can redo the box.
>
> Anybody have any other reason for choosing the PC680 over the 625?
>
> Mike Duane
> Las Vegas, NV
> PC680
>
> Sent from Windows Mail
>
> From: dmac7
> Sent: =8EMonday=8E, =8EApril=8E =8E8=8E
, =8E2019 =8E9=8E:=8E44=8E =8EAM
> To: europa-list@matronics.com
>
>
> Reading the spec's of the PC680 then the PC625 I was left questioning why t
he popularity of the PC680? It has lower power than the PC625 by 10 to 20% i
n all spec's. It's also 1 kilo heavier. Maybe the shape is the reason? I as
ked the Odyssey rep why the better spec's on the PC 625 his reply "The PC625
is a more efficient design"
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=488623#488623
>
>
>
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
>
>
|