Efficiency Copper Lumintop Tool, Worm, Maratac, ReyLight

[Etex]

Getting confused.

Would any of this have anything to do with reported differences some people have using 10440 batteries?

[jon_slider]

@Etex

anything to do with reported differences some people have using 10440 batteries?

no, but, dont worry about it
enjoy your lights!

[mrmatt]

Another two data points for this test. I have a copper and aluminum version of the Tool and the copper has the efficient driver but the aluminum does not from what I can tell. These are the run times on medium and high with a 750mAh Eneloop (from Costco) to when there is no more light coming from the LED:
Tool Cu - 4hr4min - 59min
Tool - 3hr40min - 46min

Right now I have them in low and the aluminum one expired between 23-26 hrs but the copper is still running (27+). Here is the driver on each, notice the small gold pad at about 10 o’clock on the copper version

!!

[sp5it]

My tool ti driver board:

[jon_slider]

@mrmatt

Another two data points for this test. I have a copper and aluminum version of the Tool and the copper has the efficient driver but the aluminum does not from what I can tell.

thanks for the data and pics

fwiw, the efficient driver runs flat regulation on high, you might want to invest in an inexpensive light meter so you can determine if the lights have flat regulation

though I agree the runtime on your copper sounds like the more efficient circuit based only on runtime on high
otoh, your copper also has more runtime on medium, which suggests a battery difference, not a circuit difference… fwiw, the inefficient drivers are not different on medium, only on high, and spec for medium is now 4 hours,

tangent about Medium and runtime, spec used to be 10 hours… nobody has posted one of those, I suspect it was from the version with PWM, before Oct 2015, but have none of my own to check… can you confirm both your Tools are the NoPWM versions?

@sp5it

My tool ti driver board:

thanks for the pic, looks different than some, maybe similar to the one matt posted with the gold leaf at 10 oclock

if you want to contribute a test, do this

1. Turn the light on, on High and start a stopwatch. Let us know if it lasts 30 or 60 minutes
2. It really helps to have a lightmeter, then you can answer the question about the runtime curve, and whether it is flat regulated, or constantly falling brightness. You only need to check brightness at the beginnig and at the 35 minute mark.
   The efficient driver will still be at the same brightness, while the inefficient driver will be at less than 50% of its initial brightness.

This is maukkas excellent example of the two different runtime curves on High

@maukka

note, the TiTool can overheat on high, see maukkas in depth review

[sp5it]

Mine is with 219C, 50% drop after 35min
Mike

[jon_slider]

these 5 lights are the efficient ones that turned up through this thread

[sp5it]

Would be great to see those driver on the other side…
Mike

[jon_slider]

these 5 lights are the efficient ones that turned up through this thread

my reading of the pics
maukkas CuTool and my CuWorm both have large buttons and are efficient
my ReyLight CuTool, the Brass Worm, and mrmatt’s CuTool all have small buttons, mrmatt’s is different than the rest, it has the gold square at 10 oclock.

my takeaway is that all the worms tested have been efficient, even when they have different sized contact buttons
one but not all reylights is efficient, two but not all CuTools are efficient, none of the TiTools are efficient.

Based on mrmatt’s runtime report, he got 24 more minutes on medium from the efficient driver

@mrmatt

run times on medium …with a 750mAh Eneloop…
Tool Cu - 4hr4min
Tool - 3hr40min

maukka got 30 minutes longer runtime from his efficient driver (w eneloop pro)

@maukka

it does appear there are efficiency differences in terms of runtime on medium as well as on high. On high mode the efficient drivers run both regulated and longer. On medium both efficient and less efficient drivers run regulated, but the efficient ones run about 25 minutes longer.

[jon_slider]

@sp5it

Would be great to see those driver on the other side…
Mike

I expect it would show a difference in the inductor, as gunga reported, but, there is no way for a buyer to recognize which light will have the efficient driver, by outward appearance. The only way to “guarantee” you get an efficient driver, is to buy a worm. Similarly, you can guarantee getting the non efficient driver, by buying a TiTool or Brass Tool…

[CRX]

I take it this is a bleed resistor on the tool ti driver to feed the switch, does that affect efficiency?

@sp5it

My tool ti driver board:

[jon_slider]

@CRX

I take it this is a bleed resistor on the tool ti driver to feed the switch, does that affect efficiency?

maukka tested a TiTool and a CuTool, both with Nichia 219b
he determined the efficiency difference was not in the switch

@maukka

The Ti seems very inefficient compared to the Copper. The problem lies in the driver or the titanium body, since the copper version works well with the electronic tailcap from the Ti.
…
When the Copper Tool is fitted with the electronic Ti tail switch, the efficiency drops just a bit. Even the slightest variation in battery capacity is probably bigger than the actual difference here.

after maukka reported the efficiency difference, I thought it was due to the Titanium, others thought it was due to the switch. I now believe all electronic switch Tools have the new less efficient driver, all Worms w Nichia still have the efficient driver, and a mix of some efficient drivers exists among the tools w mechanical switches.

So far only the Worm w Nichia (Copper, Brass, Stainless) has consistently tested to have the efficient driver.

during the Copper ReyLight w Nichia era (end 2015, begin 2016) there was
a change in inductors reported by gunga:

[QUOTE=gunga] … the ReyLight driver. I’ve used and sold many. I did notice a change in inductor size. It’s possible that the earlier run had a bigger and more efficient inductor. …

… the inductor changed on some or all. I currently don’t want to dismantle everything to check .[/QUOTE]

[djozz]

My Reylight copper Tool’s not so efficient non-visible PWM driver:

[Muto]

I got the Cu Reylight when they were first released and purchased 3 extra drivers.
How do you know which inductor is the good one?
Must be really small and covered by a cap because I see no coil on the board.
They are all small button.
Thanks,

Keith

[jon_slider]

@Muto

How do you know which inductor is the good one?

you could help us figure that out, here are a few possible ways

test your Reylight, determine if it is regulated at the 35 minute mark, or has dropped below 50% brightness.
armed with that knowledge, compare the board in your tested light, to your other 3 drivers
post pics

and or
motivate someone with both types of lights, and entice them to disassemble them in the interest of science?

and or
buy and dissassemble a Worm w Nichia (pm me if you want a code for a brass worm for $18.24), after confirming its efficient, and compare it to your Reylight if it has the inefficient driver…

[CRX]

Some numbers for my Tool Ti on Efest 10440.
Cooled on high mode with a damp cloth.

[mattlward]

Neither of my Reylight Ti Tools have that resistor, or a spot for it.

@CRX

I take it this is a bleed resistor on the tool ti driver to feed the switch, does that affect efficiency?

@sp5it

My tool ti driver board:

[jon_slider]

@CRX

Some numbers for my Tool Ti on Efest 10440.

unregulated

brightness comparison (low CRI), 10440 in a light w XP-L

@UPz

[

](r)

[CRX]

Cool thanks, always nice to see a graph.

[Coppet]

Here are my 2 Cu Tools and my 2 Ti Tools, both Cu Tools have the small gold pad at 10 o`clock.
Does anybody has a good trick to unscrew the head of the Ti Tool, its hard to make a picture through the whole thing?
I would like to test my 4 Tools but I have no lightmeter, how can I test it the best?