Astrolux FT02 vs FT03: why such price diffrence?

Non defective one also have a huge parasitic drain, around 4mA, wich will drain your battery in a month, i love my FT02 but the parasitic drain defeats the purpose of the led switch, this is a pretty big design flaw.

The 4mA parasitic drain (it is 4mA with and without the breathing switch light on) is a design flaw, all FT02’s have it. Remember to slightly twist the tail cap to lock the light out every time.

I have both the FT02 and FT03. I think a lot of attention went into the design of the FT02 which they want to earn back, the FT03 was easier as it seems a spin-off of the FT02, the design looks less nice and they did not do the centering of the led right. What I like about my FT02 is that the lens sits in a u-shaped silicon sleeve, like many Olight’s. The FT03 does not have that. What I don’t like is that it has a micro-USB port while the FT03 has the more robust USB-C port. A friend of mine had broken off the micro-USB socket off his FT02 (micro-USB is notorious for that), I managed to solder it back for him but it was almost impossible to do that.
The user interface of the FT02 is simpler than the FT03 (it is not Anduril) but I actually like that for this type of light.

Agree with you all - I also have both (FT03 even in both LED options) and because of tint shift and temperature I prefer my FT02 warm too.
So this leads me to a conclusion, that FT03 was a quick project oriented to sell in big number with little margin (was it 2500pcs within 2 months? or so?). Contrary to FT02.

Anyway, waiting for autumn and shorter days to have an opportunity to play with these 3 beauties.

I much prefer the look of the FT02 but the price of the FT03 is hard to beat.

Mateminco TO2 (Astrolux FT02); Mateminco MT35Mini (Astrolux FT03); Mateminco MT35 (Astrolux MF02); Mateminco MT35Plus (Astrolux MF04)

Big difference in reflector diameter, yet little throw difference (between FT02 and FT03)

Tatasal - how many flashlights do you own?
(and where do you store them :smiley: )

Only the lights that I edc are not stored, all the rest (like those in the photo) are sleeping soundly in their original boxes, together with the various chargers and batteries that I also hoard. How many? I never counted them yet, though not many as the others have here.

Well, isn’t this :confounded: ?

:beer:

The main difference in prices come from the a bit more expensive emitter and the fact that it uses a boost driver

Does that explain the negligible throw difference between the two even though the FT03 has much larger reflector?

Domed vs dedomed

I thought FT-03 had unregulated (FET) driver, not a linear one.

You thought probably right Agro. I just didn’t check becasue I meant only to put it in opposition to Boost.
So let it be, (…) over FET and SST-40.
:beer:

I tried to learn more about it…None of the reviews that I see mentions that. Actually none shows a head disassembly. One appears to show regular spare o-rings.
Could you tell us some more about it?

Only some reviews nowadays show a complete disassembly, it was more normal back in the days.

I checked my FT02 and I was not completely correct: instead of one u-shaped ring there are two o-rings instead: one regular one at the reflector side of the lens, and one L-shaped one at the bezel-side also covering the side of the lens. So the lens is protected at all sides just like with an U-shaped ring but then a bit different.

Thank you for producing this picture djozz! :beer:

The design of the FT02 looks much better. I especialy like the functional design of the heatfins.

So… it seems FT02 is just built with more attention to details?

I’m quite surprised about Astrolux policy, it seems these two compete against each other. I imagine most of regular customers just pay attention to lumens, runtimes, batteries and not that much about LED or driver type. Can it be after announcing FT03 the interest in FT02 dropped? Judging by often promos: yes.

I also miss reviews that show the light comletly disasembled with mesurements of the parts like reflector hight, diameter. . .
If i had found one i would not have to ask this question. What diameter does the MCPCB have?

No, it’s a completely different driver design. You should see much more stable outputs over a cell cycle due to the boost circuit and the XHP35 is a great performer in a mid-sized thrower like this, nearly matching the output of a SST-40 while being throwier since it’s domeless.

Compared to a shaved/dedomed SST-40 the XHP35 will have better or equal output and basically equal throw per lumen (based on the numbers I’ve seen at least).

FT02 is a premium option that can match the performance of the FT03 in a smaller size. The trade off is the higher price.

I have both these lights, and while they seem similar, they’re really two very different lights.

FT03 advantages:

- Slightly higher output and throw (but only on a full battery)

  • Cheaper

FT02 advantages:

- Boost driver for regulated output, it’s just as bright on a half-drained battery as it is on a full battery

  • Smaller body and head, for easier fit in a coat pocket

I think it’s the boost driver, for regulated output on all battery levels, that makes the FT02 more expensive. The FT02’s XHP35 HI is a nicer LED, and allows for the smaller size for almost the same throw as the FT03.

But, yeah, if you don’t care about the size, and you keep your battery topped up, then the FT03 is a much better deal.

Note that both lights will eat your battery really fast. The FT02 even faster, since it’s gobbling up the energy from the battery at the same rate all the time. The FT03 output drops as the battery goes down, so will be dimmer and not use as much power by the time the battery is half-empty. But you’ll get more run-time at a high output from the FT02, since it doesn’t drop output until the battery is almost empty.