Is veeeeeeeery interesting this light. I want tho purchase it. I wait your review. But...
Why cant use 14500? 240 lumens with alkalines/ni-mh is impossible.
Well, from what I have learned here, Don has said that a light designed to work only with 1.5V current is more efficient and will be brighter with alkalines and NiMHs compared to a light running 1.5V that can optionally handle >3V. This is an advantage for me, since I don't use 14500s.
Yes I agree with that, but I beleive that 240 lumens with alkalines/nimh is almost impossible. For 240 lumens i think 14500 required
But..................
I don't know, the only other XP-G R5 light I currently own is the Trustfire R5-A3, and on 1.2V NiMH it really is insanely bright. Could very well be 200+ lumens.
Mine got 115 at switch on with NiMH, 292 with 14500. The NiMH test might be on the low side and will be redone to get the 30 sec and 2 minute measurements.
BE CAREFULL
Watching carefully the pictures, see the picture showing the die. It is an XP-E not XP-G.
See the 3 holes around the die? xp-g has not those holes, the XP-E yes!
If you own the Trustfire R5-A3 and you truly want "insanely bright", you need to try it on 14500's. To my eyes and others, it becomes about twice as bright.
Agree, and now others are catching on to the same thing. XP-E and lack of 14500 support kills it for me. Darn! It sure looked like a nice light.
I have brighter - it's close to 3x as bright at switch-on - if I were prepared to push the voltage higher it would just about touch 300 lumens at switch on - it gets 117 or a bit more with an NiMH.
Mine has only had an NiMH in it for testing. It is indeed a real screamer on 14500 and doesn't set fire to your hands like the C3 stainless steel.
After grabbing the image and doing a brutal unsharp mask in Photoshop, it is possible that it is an XP-G - the image is too murky to be certain but there appear to be 4 segments.
There is not really enough data in the image to be certain.
As fran82 said, if there are three dots visible around the die the emitter isn't an XP-G and it wouldn't be the first time DX failed to list correct specs...
The 3 square dots do not lie
Well spotted Fran82.
It's a Xpe and not XPG compare with the trustfire R5-A3
Whoa, nice catch Fran82! Well, there goes a lot of the appeal of this light. Shame on DX and Eastward YJ for their deceptive advertising. I updated my first post.
Totally agree. Seems this behavior is spreading. Remember LighTake and his Trustfire S A7 with a R5,
which was nowhere near a R5. And now this. Shame on DX, LT and all the others who use deceptive
adverticing. Good we have this forum where the reality comes to light.
Looking forward to a review of this, seems like a nice alternative to Maratac AA, at a reasonable price. Strobe 
I actually cancelled my order when I found out about the deceptive advertising of the claimed XP-G emitter at DX. The company (Eastward) appears to be willing to do custom modifications, we'll see if we can work something out with them.
OK, will be interesting that. And, another thing: I cant find this model in the eastward website ¿why?
Yes, I was looking for the model on their website, and I can't find it either. Appears to be very new. I searched all over Google, and I couldn't even find it on the chinese trading sites.
My guess would be that they regard their consumer facing website as a very low priority. Their real customers are the HK distributors, not us end users. They probably have a private B2B website where they deal with the Hong Kong guys. I wonder if they have made more than a few prototypes of these yet.
I strongly suspect that specs of things they think might sell get released to the Hong Kong guys and if they are interested then they start making the lights. I have ordered several lights from DX on the day they were announced that never got shipped. I suspect they never got made.
But this could easily be wrong - I have no idea of what actually goes on in those Hong Kong distributors..