Thanks for review, very thorough and honest. It convinced me to cancel pre-order.
Thanks for the honest and very through review.
I wanted to like this flashlight. Thought the black version was hideous but with the copper head it was not as obnoxious.
Anyway, the fact that the thing Blows it’s Wad within 2 minutes and ends up at 90 lumens and this is with the 18650 not the shorty 18350 makes this a one trick pony.
Even on the much lower “top of ramp” at 3 minutes it’s limp.
No can do.
Thanks for saving me money.
Keith
Thanks.
I wonder why only 89 lm at 7135? Even if Banggood uses the lowest bin (D220), that seems low.
Maybe there is a problem somewhere. I have all the bins to quads with the same driver type (1×7135+FET) and the lumens at 7135 are always around (D220-105lm, D240-120lm, D260-130lm).
Mine shipped today. I will check when arrived and report back.
Me too. There is a problem somewhere.
Talked me out of purchasing one. Thank you Maukka. Another great review.
I have the 219C S43 all aluminum version and I’m waiting anxiously for my S43S Copper which is somewhere betweeen China Post Logistics and Long Island.
My S43 has perfectly set and clean quad emitters. I don’t mind that it’s a proprietary optic. I feel the beam is great as it is IMO. I gotta wonder what the point of proceeding with the review is when you have a pre-production version and the first thing you notice is wonky optics and dirty emitters. The production version has been in the hands of others now for weeks and reviewed so how does this help? Did you ask them if they still wanted you to post it knowing that pre-prod versions maybe had these issues? Curious.
Thank you for your review! As always the charts are amazing! I’m going to disagree on a couple points. The whole long and slippery 18650 tube and heavy copper head thing that people have been saying since this torch was first posted. I mean, this is the third version of this torch, can we just agree the copper is heavier than the aluminum and move on and not list it as negative or positive. We’ve been asking for more copper since 2010 and I’ll take even more if they give it. About the length, the S43 can handle my Acebeam protected 18650 where the S42 tube doesn’t have a chance with anything but unprotected cells. I get what maukka is doing but it’s not apples to apples. Two of those can run an 18350 too including the S43S; you’ll lose it in your pocket it’s so small with that tube.
I like to personally compare this field of torch to a P60. Yes I know they’re drop-ins, but until recently it’s what we had to buy and I have no desire to go back. My point is we’re still carrying the P60 mentality every time it’s said this is slippery, however I’d like to see some knurling too, in this case yea it’s slippery and needs some knurling. It mattered more with a P60 size; unless you have tiny hands it’s impossible not to grab the S43 by the tube and tail, and unless you just had bacon, it’s not too bad but it is.
I had owned an EC65 and I passed it off first chance I got. It was much less bright than my S42 and than yours looks by a lot. We’re also comparing a $27 S43S to a $130 EC65 here, though the Acebeam is waaaay overpriced. Yes this comparison includes both length and output because they’re both mentioned in the review and you’re paying for both by a huge margin on the EC65. I’m not even gonna start on the feature list like poor UIs any other down sides with the others since maukka didn’t, but the list could be rather long including no moonlight, poor mode spacing, green beam, no protected cells and no RVP, bad parasitic drain, price….and so on.
I wasn’t told this was a pre-production light, just that the factory messed up with the bezel. But of course I can’t know if something else has changed since. I’m getting the S43 soon as well and will update this post for any possible changes when I’ve tested that.
edit: if a company sends a light to a reviewer, I expect it to be at least at the level of quality the consumer can expect. Unless it’s DOA or dies before I’ve completed all the tests, I’ll publish the review.
Yeah. Is it possible for him to have gotten a pre-production unit?
He also got a smooth bezel, while the production unit doesn’t have one.
I’ve edited the conclusion part of my review to better reflect my feelings. While my original verdict might have seemed negative, it’s not a bad light by any stretch. I’m especially happy about the level of improvement from the S42.
Still, it’s an inefficient 7135+FET with some icing (charging, NarsilM, copper) on top, which is of course perfectly fine for its low price.
I once published a review where the light died before completing the testing. The manufacturer did not get back to me within two weeks after I reported that it died.
“Cons: doesn’t work”
Thanks for another excellent review. Despite some unfortunate shortcomimgs, it is alot better than the S41 and S42 that I have, which costed more. I like how they beefed up the copper for better heatsinking. I wish the efficiency was higher but at this pricepoint, cant really expect that.
What ti mean exactly less efficient maukka?In which era?My english didnt help me.Thanks
what in particular made you cancel?
Got a production sample of the Astrolux S43. Its tint is practically identical to the S43S reviewed here (CCT 100K higher and duv about 0.0010 points greener). Output on turbo is about 5% lower. 7135 output (90 lumens) and efficacy are also similar to the S43S, so there is no real change in performance.
While the S43S does have the awesome copper head, I do like the light construction of the S43.
Here is the first 1.5 minutes on turbo comparing the two. I used fresh new 30Q batteries, so the numbers aren’t directly comparable to the original review, which was done with cells cycled many times. These new ones have a lower internal resistance which explains the higher lumens on a FET light.
Also, since it’s not possible to adjust the stepdown temperature accurately in NarsilM, these are just with factory defaults.
Great beamshots the second location is perfect to show the difference between these lights.
Thanks for following up maukka. 50 second of turbo is a good reason to go Copper, I didn’t expect that long.
Bill got 3300 lumens and flashaholics reported in the same area and others were mentioned to be around 2500 at turn on. I don’t see anyone mentioned ANSI. What accounts for those differences do you know? Must be more than battery.
Two things, or perhaps 3:
1. Difference in LED bins. There can be as much as a 7% brightness difference between bins.
2. Spring compression/battery size. It can make a huge improvement in conductivity, especially since these are copper alloy springs. If a coil touches another one, there will be a non negligible compression bypass, meaning resistance will be lowered, and current will be upped. A button top can help with this due to the additionnal height.
3. Most importantly, maukka has a ANSI calibrated light setup. Most of us don’t, like flashaholics.
A lot of people have uncalibrated light measurement devices without a proper shape for accurate integration. Their results are still useful, but can be off by quite a bit. The amount of inaccuracy in most cases is unknown.
Flashaholics is known to report significantly higher numbers than reality, and uses a very odd measurement device so the readings can’t be scaled down by a consistent ratio to get accurate numbers.
Maukka has a calibrated integrating sphere, and reports some of the most accurate numbers available. When in doubt, trust maukka’s numbers.
I want a light with good thermal throttling.
My Emisar D4 is retarded - if I set the thermal limit so that it behaves well (neither gets too hot nor steps down excessively) in the medium lumen range then it burns my fingers if I accidentally ramp too high.
If I set the thermal sufficiently limit low so that turbo can be safely used, then the light behaves too conservatively the medium lumen range - stepping down too fast and too much.
I was hoping that due to:
a) the large(ish) mass of copper (and generally a light that seems way bigger than it needs to)
b) user-configurable ceiling (remove the possibility of accidentally going too high)
c) the fact that its 2018 and thermal throttling should improve over time due to lessons learned etc
that S43S would be right for me. But according to review, it is not. It gets hot enough to burn, then steps down to 95 lumen and never steps back up. Basically the worst of both worlds, somehow even worse than the D4.
uff…after the turbo limit it never goes back to the maximum? there are no circles?it can be used for maximum just once?