FINALLY I had a little time to get to the boxes :-)
And they are nice. I'll not comment on all the tape removal ideas... Mine had none.
Good for gifting. If you can get yourself to do that. :-)
Opening the box is a small bag of spareparts and the light sitting safely in soft foam.
The light itself
Content of the bag:
Glow in the dark tailcap and 2 spare o-rings plus a usable quality lanyard.
Handling the light it is clear that the good quality anodizing is still present as compared to the original X6 that I bought.
The handling is still good. The feel is good with this one. As with the original I'd have liked the knurling to be more grippy. But at least they got the positioning right. All over!
The emitter is well centered.
The above picture was taken while the light was tailstanding - no mods required. Something the original would not do.
See below :-)
Looking at the tailcap it is clear it should be easy to dismantle and braid the spring and or replace the switch with a high qual unit of known heritage.
The threads are square and well cut. The anodizing is also well done here so tailcap lock out is indeed possible making travelling with one of these stowed in a backpack or suitcase a safe endeavor.
I also noted that they were lightly lubed. Nice touch. I wish more makers would pay attention to such little things. All dust, crud, hairs and other bodily matters freely donated by yours truly.
Unscrewing the battery tube I find that it is still reversible. They kept the same square threads in both ends and looking down the backside of the head I see the threads extending down to the retaining ring. Well done. As with the original.
I also note that the retaining ring is changed.
The width of the ring is decreased. Or the hole in the middle is bigger. Whichever way you put it my calibers says the retaining ring opening now measures 15,6 mm
So who cares? Why am I telling you this? I care because that means that I can use the BLF17DD driver directly when I mod this baby. No opening the center hole as I did on the original.
Nice!
During the testing phase of this light there was much debate about the AR-coated lens.
I have not measured anything on these lenses yet so I cannot tell you anything about how efficient it is but I tried catching the blue sheen on pictures. You decide if I succeded.
Closer
The UI is simple: 4 modes - ascending order. Mode memory. No blinkies. So far so good.
So far it has been a walk in picture land but now I will try to serve some fresh measurements.
My lumens measurements are made in a big cream white bucket from Ikea and calibrated as carefully as I could. Not against flashlights but against a whole host of other light sources.
My shunt for measuring Ampere is home made an calibrated against a Qlite driver..
All I am saying is that if these measurements do not sit well with you - by all means make your own. You are welcome.
Note that power measurements were taken with a Sony VTC5 @ 4,18 V and that lumens/lux measurements were taken with a Panasonic NCR A battery @ 4,15 V
The lumens/lux measurements increase only about 10% when using the hotter Sony VTC5 battery.
No. 1 - My own
Moon ?? Amps; 5 lumens; 142 Cd => 23 meter throw
Low 0,25 Amps; 185 lumens; 4900 Cd => 140 meter throw
Med 1,25 Amps; 407 lumens; 13622 Cd => 233 meter throw
High 2,5 Amps; 680 lumens / 670@ 30 sec.; 18669 Cd => 273 meter throw
EDIT: Last 2 out of the 3 I have now tested and here are the numbers. Tested with a rested panasonic protected battery at 4,14V --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
No. 2
Moon 4 lumens
Low 173 lumens
Med 388 lumens
High 675 lumens
No. 3
Moon 4 lumens
Low 177 lumens
Med 417 lumens
High 715 lumens
END EDIT --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
And on that bombshell I'll leave for now but promise to update this thread when I have more time for the next set of experiments I want to do - To be continued :-)
----- PART II ----- PART II ----- PART II ----- PART II ----- PART II ----- PART II ----- PART II ----- PART II ----- PART II ----- PART II ----- PART II ----- PART II -----
eXP-E2rimenting
WHOA! What is that little fella doin in there! (Please look behind the fingerprints and crap on the lens)
Thats right. I stuck a little XP-E2 in there. On Noctigon of course.
Changed nothing else.
Notes: Original copper mcpcb was firmly attached using fujik type TIM. It took a firm hand to remove it.
The led shelf has slight machining marks. Nothing serious and I did not sand and shine it.
For the new led I used a high silicon carbide content valve lapping compound as it is easily removable and controllable. And gets the job done cheaply.
The led is as annoying to center as with the original.
I upfcked most pictures by not having a proper charge on the camera... :-(
But I guess what most people want are measurements.. So with no further ado:
All current and lumens/lux measurements were done with a fully charged Sony VTC5.
I only measured throw on high this time.
XP-E2:
High 2,1 Amps; 255 Lumens; 538 Cd @ 7 meters => 26362 Cd @ 1 meter => 324 meters throw
Medium 1,6 Amps; 245 lumens
Low 0,2 Amps; 115 lumens
Moon ?? Amps; 4 lumens
So was it a success? Well yeah. I really am wondering about the medium vs high measurement but I repeated it again and again. No sense.
So was that it? The whole update? Finito ?
Noo ;-)
Next up :
Dedoming these tiny emitters is as funny as all the others. For those to whom it might make a difference I used gasoline.
This is not the same emitter as the first one. As the TV cooks always say - "Here is one I prepared a little earlier" :-)
So I also took a set of measurements on this one :
High 2,1 Amps; 285 lumens ; 1210 Cd @ 7 meters => 59290 Cd => 486 meters throw
Medium 1,6 Amps; 210 lumens
Low 0,2 Amps; 97 lumens
Moon ?? Amps; 3 lumens
So what do I make of this... The unexpectedly high lumens measurements AFTER the dedome indicates that something was fishy with the first emitter.
Which the unexpected low lumens measurements from that first emitter also suggests. But I can see NOTHING wrong with it! I can measure NOTHING wrong with it EXCEPT in the bucket of light. I am puzzled. Never had this happen before. Anyone out there ever had a fluke emitter like that ?
So tthis did not go like I thought it would.
But I'll give you this: It is now a thrower in my mind. In my mind I have this number that separates the throwers from the rest. It is 40 kCd. 40000 Cd. Or 400 meters of throw.
Why?? Because it is easy to remember. Not that hard to reach with modern emitters and in the future where the surface brightness is bound to go up it will be even easier.
So I made a "pencil beam" thrower. Do I like it?? Yes I do. But I think the spill is too bright. I prefer throwers to have very little spill as I find the spill backscatters from nearby objects and reduce my night vision and thus the perceived light on target.
But for the size?? It rocks! I'll have to try to better the centering. And change the driver. The modes are too close. I figure a qlite with 6 chips and i'm good to go :-)
Update: A shot in the mist.
The neigbours seasonal light pollution is playing a little havoc on the camera here. But the distance to the end of the field is almost exactly 400 meters from the spot where I took the picture. Just wish the mist would lift. But even with horrible conditions I like the light.
And on that bombshell I'll leave for now but will be back with more.. scientific testing. LOL
