Very odd but I am unable to unscrew Manker battery tube from head. No matter how much force I use it won’t let…
Looks like some epoxy from driver catch the threads and it’s stacked?
On UT02 driver is just pressed to fit no glue at all.
If manker bumped down the current because of problems, it makes me question the driver in general. I was going to resistor mod the ut02 but maybe I shouldn’t just yet.
I could just give it a go and see how it lasts but I like the UI and would hate to ruin it. But then again… Can you sense my inner termoil? :cry: …The output is just too low for this form factor. My U11 at half the size puts out as much light. But the beam on the ut02 is pretty nice. See… here we go :person_facepalming:
Has anyone posted any beam shots with an XPL in one of these lights?
Thanks for the comparison dale!
I have the same question about the driver.
Can it be beefed up?
I mean only 1 Ampere means it’s only about 11 Watts, doesn’t it?
Then why bother with a XHP35? An XP-L can do 11 Watts too, and without the losses of a boost driver (but with the losses of a linear driver burning off excess voltage).
And can the driver handle 8.4 Volts?
^
But XP-L can’t do 1,000+ lm with just 2.3A current draw!
Aha!
Good point.
Well, technically, the XHP-35 won’t do 1000 lumens at 2.3A current draw either. As the cell dies the current will go up, increasingly more until the cell is stomped on. So in the end it’ll balance out something like a normal emitter with higher current draw. I don’t know exactly how it’ll pan out, probably some here that can figure that.
I personally would rather see the new XP-L W2 2B doing 2000 lumens in this light, pulling some 6.7A, with a tighter hot spot. That’s just me though.
Actually w2 bin is very close and xp-l2 can reach 1000 with less watts
A beginners question. What does the pcb board in the tailcap the spring is on do?
thanks for the comparision, the uto2 is surely the way to go if you ask me. i would have one already if it wasnt because of the ui. can’t remember off the top of my head, but it probably has to do with holding the switch to turn on or off light……i hate that.
are you planning to mod the light in any way? i know the lux can be greatly improved with an xpg2.
vinh actually sells his model of the manker 21, i think with his driver and xpg2, it more than doubled stock.
with still 1000 lumens.
Would a flat top 26650 protected Keeppower cell work in the UT02 and give max rated lumens?
I wish it would of have a tactical switch in the bottom , and the one in the head forma changing mods;
You answered your own question, least 50%. Only purpose of the PCB is to mount the spring to it, and give a point of contact to the body tube to complete the ground circuit. When the tail is tightened, the top edge of the tube makes contact to the ground ring on the PCB. This is why it does tail lockout so well - with quality anodized threads, slightly loosening the tail breaks electrically contact at that point of the outer ring on the PCB.
+1
The XHP35 and boost driver introduce all sorts of losses in a single cell light.
If someone does XPL W2 with shaved domo in this form factor of light I will buy it
Putting the 12V XHP-35 into a single cell smallish light with a large enough reflector for good throw was obviously a design goal. You can’t count losses when the goal is achieved. If the goal had been maximum lumens, or maximum lux, or minimum voltage, well you get the drift. They wanted the light to have this new popular emitter and they made it happen. That’s success.
Somewhat similar to how Chevrolet sells thousands upon thousands of Camaro’s that DON’T have the high performance engine. All those people driving a 6 cyl Mustang, an underpowered Camaro or even Corvette, they got what they wanted at the price level they were willing to pay, that’s not losses that’s a win win.
The complaining is usually because an individual wanted a different parameter considered for the design, like a multi-tool that never has the right combination of components. But it’s an impossible task. The manufacturer would have to offer up a special order with ten’s of thousands of options available to be able to please everyone, then assemble the product to the desire of the customer…and even then some would have issue. And the price would soar, so more would have issue.
I think Manker did a nice job on this U21. I think the Utorch UT02 is also a very nice light. When you look at what they do, how they’re made, the fit in hand and overall performance (including the charging performance) they’re a win at the price point. Remember that the base price has a narrower margin of difference, base price is $50 vs $65, between the two. The gap comes in with Manker’s refusal to do a group buy for us here at BLF.
FWIW, Vinh’s driver is Richards driver. 
In other words, Vinh mods a light in much the same way as you and I. He’s OCD about the emitter choice, he’s willing to buy a lot of emitters and cherry pick what he wishes to use, other than that and his attention to detail in focusing, he’s just like the rest of us. The high prices come with all the non-cherry emitters and time spent. Trust me, if you put in the effort and time on a build like Vinh does, you too would charge the premium.
Lexel, I recommend that you purchase the Utorch UT02 in this group buy. Play with it, get a feel for it, and if it doesn’t satisfy your needs then do what BLF is known for… modify it. 
The car analogy is interesting, but in this case wouldn’t it ba a Camaro with a bigger engine that has less performance, that has lower milage when driven the same way and that costs more and is probably also less reliable, than the other one that could exist (the XPL one or smaller better performing and more frugal and reliable engine if you will).
That would be how YOU would justify buying the RR version.
Meeting the design parameters is about giving people what they want. The XHP-35 is popular these days. Lights with a single cell boosted to the higher voltage emitters are selling well. So design teams pay attention. What’s selling? That’s what you’re building. If that means a bigger engine with lower performance, lower mileage and higher costs, paint it the most popular color and sell away!
Remember, China is a very big place. They sell a vast majority of the lights they produce to a general public that are not flashaholics. Appeal to your majority customer, just good business sense.
The question is do people buy a particular LED, or performance specs, lumens , throw, runtime etc…in other words, would this flashlight sell even better with better specs and an XPL, who knows ?
I suppose you would have to be pretty well versed in flashlights to recognize what a XHP35 is , but then again chances are if you know what it is you are also aware a XPL would fare better in all aspect in a single cell light.
Not so. The very newest and brightest XP-L W2 2B only makes 955 lumens at 3.15A in a flashlight like the Convoy M1, modded to the Nth degree. So for this light to be making 1094 lumens on 2.3A tail draw right out of the box is really a nice feature. Obtaining over 600M in throw at this relatively puny current draw is also a great feature, besting the Nightcore P30 at it’s own targeted game, throw. Again, an XP-L HI used in a 3A light to make a goal in throw and selling for well over the price of this light.
And giving the ability to use a 5200mAh cell, as compared to the relatively puny 3500mAh 18650.
So sometimes it’s a matter of options, design styles and variance, as there is no given best in anything… appeal to the public with money in their hands.
From the manufacturer’s perspective, how do you design a flashlight with enough appeal to pay for it’s design costs? How many have already been done? How do you create a new market? You use the newest, you pay attention to what’s drawing rave reviews, you make people want what you have by doing something that hasn’t been done. Marketing.
Perhaps now that they have people’s attention they will offer some emitter choices… who knows?