1x14500 XM-L lights: How do their beams compare?

I'm looking for an even wall of light from a 1x14500 light....

Which has the most even beam (not hotspot + corona)?
Which has the widest beam?
Which has the greatest output?

Balder BD-1P XM-L (cool tint)
Balder SE-1 XM-L (cool tint)
Jetbeam PA-10 (cool tint)
Thrunite Neutron 1A (3 tints)
Xeno EO3 XM-L (3 tints)
Other?


hi Paul. some others to consider:

Quark X AA (with low or high voltage head, doesnt matter)

Eagtac D25AM Ti with Cree XM-L U2

Thanks. Quark doesn't sell a Quark X AA; just an X AA2. Would I "Lego" the head and a 1AA body and tailcap to make a 1x14500 X AA?

I didn't know the EagleTac D25A will soon have an XML version. IlluminationGear.com is listing is as "coming soon" for $65. Nowhere can I find the output, but I'm guessing it will be similar to that of the D25C, which claims 275 lumens OTF on a 3V cell...so maybe 360 on a 3.7V. Acccording to another site, the XM-L will be a neutral tint.

Yes, exactly as you devised. the head can be low voltage head or the high voltage head, either work with 1AA body and 1x 14500's.many people use this Quark setup as the perfect EDC (and i am waiting for my 4Sevens stuff to reach me) but the problem is we dont know the measured output and runtimes. tailcap doesnt matter (regular, tactical, turbo flat).

The specs for the Eagtac XML U2 output are at the bottom of the page, and i guess those numbers are for 1.2V eneloops.

Yes, I should have specified, "output on a 14500 cell."

Currently, Quark shows only its high-voltage head (3 to 9V).

Jetbeam RRT-0 XML (1x 14500)

Sunawayman V10A XML (1x 14500)

Sunawayman V10R XML (1x 14500 with extension tube)

Found two more:

Xeno E15, a 2AA that can convert into a 1x14500 by removing the extension tube. It's less contoured than the E03, so it's worth a separate mention. comes in cool white (430 lumens) or neutral white (400 lumens).

Xeno E11 cube, stainless steel, in cool white (430 lumens) or neutral white (400 lumens).

That makes an even dozen. I had no idea there were so many. Now all we need is beam shots.

I just discovered the Klarus XT1A. But it's not rated to use a 14500; working voltage 0.9 to 1.8V; 150 ANSI lumens.

I have both the Xeno 03 NW and the Balder SE-1 CW and the Balder has a bigger spot with a more uniform floody beam imo.

The width of the beam is just about the same i think as the reflectors are just about the same diameter.

The Balder has a little more output due to the CW tint.

I much prefer the Balder over the Xeno because of the body shape, the clip, the momentary on and the really low low which the Xeno lacks when used with 14500.

The Balder is also $7 cheaper than the Xeno in T6 version and $8.50 in T5.

Quality-wise I´d say they´re equal.

Just my humble opinion.

I know the question was specific to XM-L, but I have the XP-G versions of both the Balder and Xeno (cool white) and the brightness seems identical, but the xeno's hot spot is about 30% larger due to the shallower reflector. I also have the XM-L xeno and both XP-G lights appear noticeably brighter to the eye.

Regarding form factor, I prefer the forward clicky on the balder but the clip design is horrible. The clip has to be removed to change the battery and the clip tears up the finish every time you r/r it. The head on the balder doesn't fully seat on the body due to some engineering error, and I notice the same thing on high res review pics (you can see a sliver of non-anondized metal between the head/body). The Xeno's engineering/fit/finish are spectacular, but I wish it had a forward clicky. It has no clip but it can tailstand. Both lights are great, but I find myself attached to the Xenos.

The clip does not have to be removed to change the battery.

AFAIK, SE-1 comes with XP-Eand not XP-G :| Thats why Xeno has bigger spot, IMO.

About brightness, you say that Xeno XP-G is brighter that Xeno XM-L? :O :~

You can buy the SE-1 with an XP-E, an XP-G, or an XM-L. See the CPF sales thread.

They come in 3 flavors- mine is an XP-G. The hot spot is smaller due to the deep reflector. (EDIT-SORRY GUYS- I did order an XP-G R5 but I'm looking at it and cannot tell if they shipped me XP-E R3 by mistake)

Regarding XP-G being niticeably brighter than the XM-L, that is a known phenomenon where it "looks brighter" because of the brightness of the hot spot. Without any special equipment, you'd think an XP-E and XP-G are brighter than the XM-L unless you do a ceiling bounce which helps one notice the total output.

It's the same reason an XM-L cannot throw like the XP-E.

How do you do it? Maybe I have hands like Lennie from Of Mice and Men, but I can't do it without the clip scraping the finish.

The photo by old4570 shows that the clip does touch the head but only the Knurling part of the head comes off therefore it does not scrap the head.

All the new SE-1s ship with a very firm chrome clip. It contacts the upper body and not the head if you are fanatical about semantics. The only mark mine has is from the first removal of the clip right where it mounts.. so minor you really don't notice it. I would just prefer a screw-on mount.

The reflector is always the same, so if Xeno XP-G has bigger hot spot that Balder XP-G, the same thing will happend with XM-L. So one of you should be wrong :|

BTW, didn't know that Balder came with XP-G also. Thx for the info, guyz ;)

Huh? My clip hasn't put a single mark on the head of my unit, and I don't see how it possibly could... I never have once removed it to change the battery either.

And yes you are right that the new branded ones have a chrome clip.

Ya know what.. .I ordered a XP-G but it's possible shipped me an XP-E. I'm looking at the balder emitter and it looks the same as my XP-G Xeno (the XM-L is obviously HUGE). My eyes aren't good enough to count the filaments.... Somebody with XM-L balder and Xeno will just have to do beamshots.

Sorry for the misinformation!

XP-E has 3 holes around the die, XP-G not.