Hey, Bluzie. No, the spring hasn’t been bypassed. Thrunite soldered the cap of the spring to ensure maximum contact area with the contact button. yes, the spring has indeed been bypassed. Not sure how I missed that one. I’ve taken it apart and took a photo of it and updated the review with the new info. Thanks for point it out!
Thank you for an informative review. I am not surprised that ThruNite decided on a proprietary battery because of safety concerns.
Until the batteries and chargers are more regulated and the general public becomes more informed, I would expect manufacturers of these more advanced designs will be made with proprietary battery and charging.
I have to take it apart again as I didn’t take a sideways picture of the driver. I recall seeing the anode spring and the solder cap on it but didn’t notice a bypass wore. Wouldn’t be the first time something slipped past me. I will check and update.
My spring was bypassed as well. Looks like they all are that way. pretty sweet! Thanks for adding to Bluzie’s post. I took mine apart after your post and sure enough, I missed that damned spring bypass. I’ve updated my OP with photo and explanation.
Your test results are quite a bit higher than mine. A quick note about my stresses during this review, at first I was seeing 567.7kcd and 6600 OTF lumens. I was like, “WTF?!” How is this possible? Then I dug out an old light to calibrate against and sure enough, all my readings were off. I couldn’t understand how my readings could change since nothing in my testing had changed. I thought my light meter had shit the bed and was ready to get another one but I decided to change the battery first. Glad I did. Just like that all my readings were exactly as they were when I first calibrated my testing rig. My numbers are still a hair higher than ThruNite claims but not by much and can be accounted for with variances in individual LEDs. Long story short, as I’ve just learned, if you think your numbers are out of line with everyone else’s figures, check your light meter battery. Apparently they read high when the battery gets lower. Not saying it’s the case with your figures, just trying to save you the same stress I went through with my issues on the outside chance it is.
I think the future will be bringing more proprietary battery/charger lights like this one, and for me I will pass on this light for this reason.
Future buyers of flashlights most likely will not have the knowledge that many on this forum have gained, and people without the knowledge of lithium rechargeable batteries pose a block to market newer flashlight capabilities with current liability concerns.
I certainly hope flashlight design will not be ‘dumbed down’ in order to sell to a larger market.
Great review — but here’s a question: Does this light drop in output the longer you use it like seemingly all of the rest of the modern lights it is up against in this category?
IT does indeed, as one has to expect from any light that can produce a good amount of heat on Turbo. The good thing is that it is thermally controlled and not on a timer. I really hate doing runtime tests (probably because I don’t have the equipment to automate it) but Selfbuilt tested his and with no external cooling it didn’t step down until more than 10 minutes in Turbo. With a fan blowing on it he got around 20 minutes in Turbo.
Because the price difference from the TN40, is about $70.00,I think that there is not a charger in the package.I think that I will buy this one if there is some coupon from Martin.
—> The German forum tested/measured throw at 5 meters. I think this is not enough distance to test the throw of multiple emitter throwers.
So, your measurement will be closer to reality. Which makes this light even more impressive!