I do not trust a manufacturer who does not know the basic parameters of his products like dimensions.
440kcd, 850m throw in what should I believe?
It seems the driver and battery configuration play huge roles but is there really any difference in running series vs parallel emitters? For example if you had a quad 18650 set up running 3 series 1 parallel you’re netting 10.8V 6000Mah likely boosted to 12V.
If you ran 4x series each emitter is drawing 3V 1.5A total 3V 6A
If you ran 4x parallel the series is drawing 3V 6A
If you run led in parallel is it the same as incandescent where an emitter failure breaks the circuit and the entire series fails until the bad emitter is replaced?
lol I agree that their throw specs make no sense but the consensus appears to be that this is a result of not double checking written information. The proof that they do stand behind their measurements is that when Maukka tested the MM18JR which has an ansi 10,000 lumens his tests showed 9,650 lumens.
lol compare that to a company like Imalent who tests up to 30% lower than claimed lumens
I just checked the price and one is $200, the other $45. Case closed.
For me……it’s nice hobby but ultimately, it’s a tool. If I have to worry about dropping it or losing it, or rolling on the gravel when changing a tire, it’s no longer a tool.
Besides, the Q8 is a slam dunk BARGAIN of a light.
Well, don’t forget you can also get a coupon for the Niwalker.
The reason, as I said before, that I’m eyeing the Niwalker, is for the throwy versions.
XP-L HIs in the Q8 makes for a very throwy light. The CW emitters Sofirn used are gross but some 3-5000Ks could make a serious thrower with way less backscatter.
I’m wanting TN42+ levels of throw.
Their “rated throw” might be to higher than .25 lux. Candela converted to ANSI throw doesn’t factor in atmospheric conditions either.
You’re not going to get that with an XHP35 HI and a reflector that size to be frank.
Yeah, something must be wrong.
The BK-FA30S, their 1st thrower, was rated at 650,000cd, with a head diameter of 100mm.
Their second edition, the BK-LB11SV2, is rated at 900 000cd, with a head diameter of 91mm.
How does that work?
BK-FA30S this flashlight has a head diameter of 100mm but the manufacturer still gives the specification of 76mm
the length of the flashlight in the specification is also incorrect
Niwalker be like
Yeah.
While their combination lights look great(other than the 73kcd actual throw number), their throwers are quite confusing.
Now that is funny. 
Got the GB link and it takes you to their store… Their store has all the product info unlike the main website…
Uhhhhh
The two throwers are apparently identical except the magnetic switch it the more expensive one. But somehow they suggest that they’re nearly as far throwing as the BLF GT
MF5SV1 440kcd 850m throw…
Maukka test on identical light 73kcd 494m throw
LR7SV1 & LB11SV2 903kcd 1900m throw
These both are listed at 91mm width… BLF GT figures with the same battery set-up, same emitter and a reflector half the size???
I mean, they are driving the emitter 10% harder at 2200 lumens, and said they got much better focus out of the reflector.
I’m cautious. If it’s better than the BK-FA30S, it’s all good.
Otherwise, something seems off.
I dug everything up I could to try and estimate:
| lumen claimed | lumen tested | candela claimed | candela tested | throw claimed | throw tested |
|
| BK-FA30S | 2200 | 2199 | 650 000 | 563 000 | 1600m | 1501m |
| LR7SV1 | 2650 | 903 500 | 1900m | |||
| LB11SV2 | 2650 | 903 500 | 1900m | |||
| MF5SV1 | 10 000 | 9 350 | 440 000 | 61 000 | 850m | 494m |
| MM18JR | 15 000 | 440 000 | 850m |
so based on Maukkas reviews their lumen outputs appear to be bang on. to jump from 2200 in the BK-FA30S to 2600 in the two new ones is a 20.1% increase in output so it definitely looks like it's possible to achieve the additional throw.
Unfortunately the MM18JR didn't even come close to the throw specs but if they're indeed driving the leds 50% harder up to 15 000 lumens maybe they finally achieved the previous throw specs which were way over actual spec or they're only driving the 70.2s 50%+ harder to achieve the lumens and will have similar dismal throw specs lol I can't decide if I need them or if I should just save my pennies for the eventual MF03 or MF05 or GT4...
Think you got the last 2 lines there reversed. Maukka reviewed the older MM18JR model. I'll be getting an MF5SV1 in, shipped, maybe a few days away, and I'll test and post.
For the lumens, I suppose they cranked up the amps in this new model - it's certainly possible to get 15K out of 2 XHP70.2's and a XHP35 HI, figure 6.5K each, then 2K more for the XHP35 HI...
I would expect the throw #'s to be about the same as what maukka got. What were they think'n??
Dimensions seem to be the same so I would think throw is unaffected if the reflectors stayed the same, maybe they got more amps goin on hte XHP35 HI but that wouldn't make much difference.
Niwalker said they got the focus better with the new reflectors.
That means the reflectors have been tweaked a bit to achieve the optimal distance to focal-point.
That means either a different centering ring or a tweaked reflector as mentioned above.
Yeah but 61 kcd to 440 kcd? Or 494 m to 850 m? No way in something this size.
Of course.
Do they do any kind of.spell checking.on their.pages?