Thrunite TN 42 ,a new record in Throw

437 posts / 0 new
Last post
DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Online
Last seen: 10 min 1 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 14745
Location: Heart of Texas

Build a light, measure it’s lumens and candela. Then de-dome it. Measure lumens and lux again. You’d find that that the lumens dropped while the candela nearly doubled. Less lumens, more candela. Fact. There are more variables at play here than it would seem.

I’ve done this literally hundreds of times.

Dale

seery
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 12/23/2015 - 12:31
Posts: 48
Location: USA
DB Custom wrote:
Build a light, measure it’s lumens and candela. Then de-dome it. Measure lumens and lux again. You’d find that that the lumens dropped while the candela nearly doubled. Less lumens, more candela. Fact. There are more variables at play here than it would seem.

Correct. So many variables in fact, that you are unable to keep all others factors constant while changing one.

As hard as you’re trying to convince yourself [and us] otherwise, the only fact here remains [even] you cannot defy physics.

maukka
maukka's picture
Online
Last seen: 11 min 16 sec ago
Joined: 12/31/2015 - 04:15
Posts: 565
Location: Finland

Modifying the emitter is not keeping everything else constant.

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Online
Last seen: 10 min 1 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 14745
Location: Heart of Texas

But, taking a lumens reading immediately after taking a lux reading on the same light, same cells, IS maintaining constants. And those number disagree with the representation of physics here.

I can’t argue with physics, unless the chapter and verse being quoted are wrong. Wink

By the way, who said we couldn’t send a man to the moon? And who is now planning to send men to Mars? Physics and it’s laws change as we learn, there are very few hard cold facts.

I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything. I’m the guy with the light in hand, the results from testing in front of me. It’s everyone else that’s scrambling trying to figure it all out. Fact is, at 42% of the output, the light is making less than 7% of the throw.

That does not support the theory that halving lumens also halves candela. So when the facts from testing don’t support the theory, it’s time to put new chalk on the board.

Dale

EasyB
Offline
Last seen: 27 min 49 sec ago
Joined: 03/09/2016 - 15:24
Posts: 935
Location: Ohio

Could you humor us and take the measurement again? On turbo there was 28100 lux at 5m. How many lux on high?

seery
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 12/23/2015 - 12:31
Posts: 48
Location: USA
DB Custom wrote:
Fact is, at 42% of the output, the light is making less than 7% of the throw.

Impossible.

DB Custom wrote:
I can’t argue with physics…

But not for a lack of trying though! Big Smile

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Online
Last seen: 10 min 1 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 14745
Location: Heart of Texas

The meter read 1830 on High, 28100 on Turbo. My meter has 3 places, it actually showed 183 to the power of 10 in High, errored in Turbo and I had to switch to the power of 100, where it showed 281.

I argue to understand, not necessarily to prove anyone wrong. I forget a lot. Widely known fact. So if I can argue myself to an understandable truth it is well worth all the verbage expended in the acquirement. Wink

Yes, it is entirely possible that I made a mistake taking the readings, so I will do it again. (I have been known to make the same mistake over and over, so bear with me. Silly ) I will go slower, double checking mode levels along the way, for extra care and authenticity.

Dale

mdeni
mdeni's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 08/06/2016 - 05:17
Posts: 226
Location: Europe

Measure everything to the power of 100. You will find your mistake. Don’t change settings between readings.

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Online
Last seen: 10 min 1 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 14745
Location: Heart of Texas

So there ya go, y’all are pretty much spot on. Within a couple percent. lol

I forget little things, like all of how the UI works. I forgot that when you press and hold from off the TN42 comes on in moon, then will cycle through 3 more levels LMH. BUT if you cycle it through again, there are only the 3 levels LMH, moon is only accessible from off. So I must have cycled it back through checking that I had the right mode after setting up the meter and was actually in Medium instead of High.

The numbers, carefully obtained…

High (Level 3 in the main UI) is making 1003.95 lumens (I got that correct in the light box) and 272Kcd for 1043.07M throw
Turbo (Double click in any mode when on) is making 2477.1 lumens and 702.5Kcd for 1676.31M throw.

Thank ya’ll for pushing me into finding where I went wrong. 41% of the lumens is making 39% of the lux, so it’s fairly linear if not quite exactly. The actual throw numbers are not linear, the candela reading pretty much is.

Dale

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Online
Last seen: 10 min 1 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 14745
Location: Heart of Texas

Now I’m confused in the other direction. lol

Why is it that by the numbers, with the lumens at 41% and the lux at 39%, the throw is actually at 62%?

I’m gonna have to give up. When the time comes that you know you don’t know half of what you think you know but you really only know a quarter of what you thought you knew you know then it’s time to have a drink. Silly Seriously though, you hear about the football players that retire dang near a vegetable after so many concussions in their career? Or a boxer? Well, I’ve had more concussions and micro concussions in the past 16 years than a great many professional athlete and it’s catching up to me. Gonna be drooling and staring off into space before long, I can see it coming. (I’ll have a light to shine the way though, in case anything’s really out there.)

Thanks for bearing with me.

Dale

seery
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 12/23/2015 - 12:31
Posts: 48
Location: USA

Glad you’ve got it figured out.

If you wouldn’t mind sharing…

What is it you do [or did] that resulted in so many concussions?

EasyB
Offline
Last seen: 27 min 49 sec ago
Joined: 03/09/2016 - 15:24
Posts: 935
Location: Ohio

Thanks for clearing that up that measurement, Dale.

You know, I find that I don’t really understand a concept until I’ve been utterly confused about it a few different times; it’s all part of the process.

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Online
Last seen: 10 min 1 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 14745
Location: Heart of Texas

(listening to some tunes on new dual driver headphones from XiaoMi, GearBest. $17, these things sounds like Bose or something!)

Well, almost 17 years ago I started having issues with severe spasms, eventually diagnosed as a Conversion Disorder. Stress, both physical and emotional, causes me to have spasms that might just affect my arms, or my whole body, sometimes causing my head to shake side to side violently. It’s these last episodes that crash me, sometimes leaving me walking crooked for several days. Early years, it was daily or every other day. Nowaday’s it’s more sporadic but damage has been done and each time causes more. I once had a pec muscle torn for 2 years! And once I went to shake a bottle of ketchup at the table and it caused a partial vision loss for several minutes in my left eye.

I mod for relaxation, got into it because I needed a portable light to use to take macro ring shots at weddings. Couldn’t find a light that fit the bill and started trying to create one. Found that I liked the modding part of it and before you know it I’ve got more flashlights than most stores. lol

Gettting harder to wrap my mind around things, to remember details, names, virtually anything really. Sometimes what I DO remember may be way off base, leaving me arguing a false point but convicted in the knowledge I’m right. Hard to believe, I know, but it’s true. Silly And then I see that little detail I was missing, and the rest comes together and shows me I was on the wrong page. Whatareyagonnado? And such is life in the basement of Dr. Frankendale, discombobulated and non-incorporated.

Dale

seery
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 12/23/2015 - 12:31
Posts: 48
Location: USA

Thanks Dale.

Your strength is to be admired. God deals us all different hands and it’s how we deal with what we’re dealt that matters.

Stay positive, stay strong, and God Bless.

blueb8llz
Offline
Last seen: 20 hours 47 min ago
Joined: 06/02/2012 - 01:16
Posts: 2581
Location: California

Sounds intense Dale. Take it easy when you can and thanks for all you do here.

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Online
Last seen: 10 min 1 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 14745
Location: Heart of Texas

Take it easy, says he. I was about 140 lbs all my life, I now weigh in at almost 210. Been taking it pretty dang easy and eating plenty! Smile

Dale

bibihang
bibihang's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 12 min ago
Joined: 11/10/2011 - 09:32
Posts: 2286
Location: Malaysia

Stereodude wrote:
DB Custom wrote:
It might be very important to note the K70 uses 4 series cells and as such, a Buck driver. The TN42 uses 2P2S and as such, a Boost driver. So the type of cell can probably matter more to the boost circuit than the Buck circuit, in other words, it would probably benefit the TN42 more to use better cells, the K70 wouldn’t show any marked increase for the top or premium cell.
Boost or Buck is irrelevant if the output is constant current and the drive circuity is competently designed. As long as the inductor is sized to switch enough current without going into saturation after the battery voltage sags, you’re pretty much set.

IMO, none of these lights should use cells in series if they need unprotected cells. Unprotected cells and series use is a dangerous recipe without a proper battery monitoring system. Of course all of these lights all lack such a system.


A boost driver can be very well-designed and the efficiency can be optimized, but due to the nature of the circuitry the efficiency of a boost driver can never beat the efficiency of a buck driver, given everything else being constant except that for a buck driver has Vin > Vout.

Although running 4 batteries in series isn’t something that sound very safe, but it can sustain at the maximum output much longer and better than the TN42 (and let’s not talking about any programmed step-down feature). Correct me if I am wrong.

P.S. I am always a fans of buck driver with Vin > Vout, because instead of having a 400kcd output that can only sustain for 5 mins then quickly decrease over the time, I’d rather have that 400kcd light which can constantly sustain at this output until the batteries are almost depleted.

bibihang
bibihang's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 12 min ago
Joined: 11/10/2011 - 09:32
Posts: 2286
Location: Malaysia

DB Custom wrote:
Led-Rise’s calculator is misleading. You cannot directly convert lumens to lux. Lumens is a measure of total output, lux is the measure of intensity in the center of the hot spot. A floody 1500 lumen light creates very little lux, whereas a pencil beam thrower making 1500 lumens puts virtually all it’s lumens down the middle, into the hot spot, for far greater Lux.

A simple converter just can’t show that.


I think the LedRise calculator is fine, because it takes the “Viewangle” into account, which determines how floody or focused your beam is. Smile

Thanks for the clarification and all the hard works and measurements that put into this Dale. Your works and other’s theoretical input have linked theory and field results together pretty well, and that’s feeling good.

Theodore41
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 02/20/2016 - 12:57
Posts: 420
Location: Athens Greece.

mjgsxr wrote:
Maiden666 wrote:
HI

I,ve done a (non profesional) review- comparative k70-TN42. Its in spanish Flashlight Forum ForoLinternas. (In spanish).

“K70-TN42”:http://www.forolinternas.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=12790

Hi Maiden666, great looking review with plenty of pics. Sorry I can’t read spanish.
I would say you review looks very profesional. Do you feel the TN42 has made much of a step forward over the K70?


I used Google url translator,and it is 100% OK.Try it.
blueb8llz
Offline
Last seen: 20 hours 47 min ago
Joined: 06/02/2012 - 01:16
Posts: 2581
Location: California

I wish someone out there would mod this with a dedomed xpl,xpg2, or xml2.
A year ago, we would be so stoked to have a reflecter of this caliber with a xml2 or xplHI.
And we would either dedome it or drop in a dedomed xpg2.
These were the known emitters for massive throw.
I feel the xhp35hi is geared for lots of throw with great lumens.
A super amped up xpl or xml2 wouldn’t be that much less lumens, but I suppose the lux would be a lot more don’t you guys think?

giorgoskok
giorgoskok's picture
Online
Last seen: 11 min 40 sec ago
Joined: 11/13/2015 - 10:46
Posts: 1940
Location: Greece
blueb8llz wrote:
I wish someone out there would mod this with a dedomed xpl,xpg2, or xml2. A year ago, we would be so stoked to have a reflecter of this caliber with a xml2 or xplHI. And we would either dedome it or drop in a dedomed xpg2. These were the known emitters for massive throw. I feel the xhp35hi is geared for lots of throw with great lumens. A super amped up xpl or xml2 wouldn’t be that much less lumens, but I suppose the lux would be a lot more don’t you guys think?

My vote would be dedomed xpl . Better throw and only a small (400?) lumen loss.
Because it has better throw than xpl hi . Ofcourse xp-g2 would throw better , but it will have around 1k lumens only .

mdeni
mdeni's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 08/06/2016 - 05:17
Posts: 226
Location: Europe

blueb8llz wrote:
I wish someone out there would mod this with a dedomed xpl,xpg2, or xml2.
A year ago, we would be so stoked to have a reflecter of this caliber with a xml2 or xplHI.
And we would either dedome it or drop in a dedomed xpg2.
These were the known emitters for massive throw.
I feel the xhp35hi is geared for lots of throw with great lumens.
A super amped up xpl or xml2 wouldn’t be that much less lumens, but I suppose the lux would be a lot more don’t you guys think?

Spotlights have this kind of reflectors all the time. But are regarded as dumb. But TN put a slightly bigger reflector and all run like hell. And charge 200$. Next year they will bring 10mm larger reflector and same story. Meanwhile years before spotlights are offering the same for 30$, but in a plastic body. I dont think the body costs 170$ pardon me.
Theodore41
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 02/20/2016 - 12:57
Posts: 420
Location: Athens Greece.

mdeni wrote:
blueb8llz wrote:
I wish someone out there would mod this with a dedomed xpl,xpg2, or xml2.
A year ago, we would be so stoked to have a reflecter of this caliber with a xml2 or xplHI.
And we would either dedome it or drop in a dedomed xpg2.
These were the known emitters for massive throw.
I feel the xhp35hi is geared for lots of throw with great lumens.
A super amped up xpl or xml2 wouldn’t be that much less lumens, but I suppose the lux would be a lot more don’t you guys think?

Spotlights have this kind of reflectors all the time. But are regarded as dumb. But TN put a slightly bigger reflector and all run like hell. And charge 200$. Next year they will bring 10mm larger reflector and same story. Meanwhile years before spotlights are offering the same for 30$, but in a plastic body. I dont think the body costs 170$ pardon me.

700000cd with incadescent? Shocked
Stereodude
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 20 hours ago
Joined: 03/16/2013 - 21:14
Posts: 356
Location: US of A

bibihang wrote:
A boost driver can be very well-designed and the efficiency can be optimized, but due to the nature of the circuitry the efficiency of a boost driver can never beat the efficiency of a buck driver, given everything else being constant except that for a buck driver has Vin > Vout.

Although running 4 batteries in series isn’t something that sound very safe, but it can sustain at the maximum output much longer and better than the TN42 (and let’s not talking about any programmed step-down feature). Correct me if I am wrong.

Boost and buck are both capable of similar efficiencies. Both can get well over 90%. A buck/boost circuit is less efficient.
DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Online
Last seen: 10 min 1 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 14745
Location: Heart of Texas

I charged up my “20 Million Candlepower” 12 inch wide spotlight that uses an automotive headlight bulb. Was going to take it with me for comparison beamshots on the mile long throw shots. Got it charged up, took it outside, it’s so pathetic I left it at home. I even have a high grade upgrade bulb in it. The Thrunite TN42 slaughters it.

The big spotlight was like $40, all plastic, bare bones with no heat sinking. Big 12V sealed acid battery. It’s not designed with any sort of quality in mind, just stick a car headlight in a plastic housing and give it a base that allows it to be propped up at an angle, gearheads’ll buy it at the Auto shop because they work on their cars at night and/or go fishing. Wink

The cost, yeah, I have to agree I think the cost is high. AceBeam, Thrunite, Nitecore, Fenix, they all have the same type pricing. I don’t like it myself, have few of their lights. This one though, this one was introductory with a 20% discount and promised that mile… I couldn’t help it. The only mile long thrower I ever built was based on an Olight SR-90 Intimidator, a $400 light before I even started modding. At $179, it seemed like such a deal… and compared to what’s out there on the market, it is!

One thing I found was tripping me up on the ideas of distance and light is that in photography we are trying to maintain brightness for the proper exposure. With flashlights we are allowing brightness to fall to a 1/4 lux. Massive difference and one I was not taking into consideration. In photography, we’re also trying to maintain a shutter speed that allows for some movement, so the light has to be considerably brighter to provide the shot.

Memory loss sucks, I do not recommend it.

Dale

mdeni
mdeni's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 08/06/2016 - 05:17
Posts: 226
Location: Europe

Theodore41 wrote:
mdeni wrote:
blueb8llz wrote:
I wish someone out there would mod this with a dedomed xpl,xpg2, or xml2.
A year ago, we would be so stoked to have a reflecter of this caliber with a xml2 or xplHI.
And we would either dedome it or drop in a dedomed xpg2.
These were the known emitters for massive throw.
I feel the xhp35hi is geared for lots of throw with great lumens.
A super amped up xpl or xml2 wouldn’t be that much less lumens, but I suppose the lux would be a lot more don’t you guys think?

Spotlights have this kind of reflectors all the time. But are regarded as dumb. But TN put a slightly bigger reflector and all run like hell. And charge 200$. Next year they will bring 10mm larger reflector and same story. Meanwhile years before spotlights are offering the same for 30$, but in a plastic body. I dont think the body costs 170$ pardon me.

700000cd with incadescent? Shocked

Incadescent or HID does not matter, lumen output does. I don’t think you have seen what 100W incadescent philips in a 20cm reflector can do. Don’t even venture into HID land, where 200W HIDs live for 100$+battery. Those millions of candles are EASILY attainable. And the “top” led thrower has 700k and people are talking like god is walking among us.

The point is, they want to milk money. All they do is put few mm bigger reflector and claim the “top” performer. Look at the Courui01 mods with 82mm reflector. Think of what an xpg3 sliced 150mm wide and 150mm deep reflector can do to this poor TN. Smile

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Online
Last seen: 10 min 1 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 14745
Location: Heart of Texas

Not as much as all that, I haven’t seen a sliced G3 do so well.

What it boils down to though is the bird in the hand thing. I HAVE this mile thrower TN42. I don’t have anything nor have I in 3 years seen anything that will best it.

Edit: I’ll also add that while HID’s are capable of impressive results, the only ones I’ve seen had horrible tint and took forever to warm up to peak output. Not practical, they have a place for sure but it’s not something an average user would put up with.

Dale

mdeni
mdeni's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 08/06/2016 - 05:17
Posts: 226
Location: Europe

I know. I would get the TN42 this instant. But the price is a bit steep for my taste. Smile

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Online
Last seen: 10 min 1 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 14745
Location: Heart of Texas

Interesting, isn’t it? How can Simon sell the wonderfully made L6 for such a low price while other manufacturers sell at 3 times the price and don’t really do much of anything all that much better? Ok, so they have a fancier proprietary driver, but it that alone worth well over $100? I wouldn’t think so! Having been working at learning the machining on my own lathe, turning the aluminum and anodizing it is a pretty basic part of the equation, for the most part the better lights are all the same in that regard and one shouldn’t cost more than the other. Same thing with the AR glass, Chris has the ultimate AR coatings at flashlightlens.com and his lenses aren’t ridiculously priced, so again the market should be fairly equal. With a decent reflector common to most all of em, it really boils down to the driver, and I’m building my own drivers for a while now with the most complex of them not being over $20 or so to produce, this a big custom designed driver for high output at that. So, is it the warranty? The overhead of a bigger fancier face online? Or just more greed?

I know some people will buy a like/same product for more money because they’re trained to perceive the costlier product as having a higher quality by default. Perhaps that’s the target audience for some of the big names, just mark it up to appeal to those with fatter wallets and run with it. Could be that’s all there is to it.

We could have Richard and ToyKeeper design a driver for Simon, he could build a 120mm boss hog light, and he’d probably sell it for $100 or something, now wouldn’t that go over well? Reckon he could build a de-domed XP-G2 1Mcd thrower with that kind of help? Wink Maybe we should get JDub to push in that direction, see where it goes…

Dale

mdeni
mdeni's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 08/06/2016 - 05:17
Posts: 226
Location: Europe

Excellent, and realistic idea.

Pages