I guess that is not just “typical of cheaper lights” in what concerns to this particular light (UT01). As you’ve seen, the driver there is the same from the Manker E11 (the first to appear in the market - to my knowledge - with this host design and UI).
And if you do a quick search, you will notice that the E11 is not that cheap, being more expensive than the LT EDC05.
Also, I have one E11 and that driver “survived” a very big heating (didn’t measured it, but almost burnt my hand) provoked by an inverted 14500 inside it and left unattended some minutes.
What leads me to this question: do the UT01 and the EDC05 have Reverse Polarity Protection (specially for Li-Ion cells)?
If not, please be very careful, specially with flat top / unprotected cells! I once put - absently, and for some minutes, until I noticed the heat - the Manker Li-Ion14500 cell in inverted position inside the flashlight, and it caused the light to heat like burning water.
This was how the battery looked like after taking if from the inside of the flashlight:
I do not know if the EDC05 has reverse polarity protection. It’s not needed though if you are using protected cells in the first place. As mentioned before, that is the EDC05’S advantage is the ability to use protected 14500 cells.
Hum, that’s what I thought :person_facepalming:
I was a “faulty” operator when I put it inverted, but still, my opinion is that all the lights that are able to take Li-Ion cells should have RPP!! Thanks for the answer :+1:
sovereignknight, I will respectfully differ on this opinion as lots of people don’t have protected cells and it is possible to incur on the same mistake I did! I know that a owner must take care of the light and use it correctly, but…we know that mistakes happen.
Just an opinion of course!!
Other than these, both the E11, the UT01 and the EDC05 are pretty and good working lights, I can see from the user’s reports here
Sorry, my response was for answering your question stated earlier.
What leads me to this question: do the UT01 and the EDC05 have Reverse Polarity Protection (specially for Li-Ion cells)
Anyways, I agree, great care must be taken when dealing with lithium ion cells. Nothing replaces caution and diligence. With that, protection circuits can fail too so it’s best to use caution either way.
The UT01, EDC05 and Manker E11 do not have any kind of PHYSICAL reverse polarity protection. I highly doubt there is anything electrical in the circuit either.
I got a Lumintop EDC-05 two days ago. At first the button did not work.
After a while, I noticed that it needs to be pressed on the edge so that the flashlight turns on.
Now it works almost well. But now I have another problem.
If you turn off the flashlight, then you can turn it back on only
if you slightly open and close the back cover. That is, in fact, completely de-energized it.
I also saw that the tube does not press the entire surface to the contact of the head.
You can see it in the photo.
This is a long running problem with the UT01 as well. my EDC05 doesn’t have this though. Its a completely random occurring thing with the UT01… some have it some do not.
Have people on the forum already found a solution?
Or is it a death sentence?
(My UT01 have this problem only with 14500,
with Ni-Me 1.2v it’s work propertly)
I found this:
So, it’s tha same story with EDC-05.
The manufacturer simply changed the design, but kept the defective stuffing.
I just received my third EDC05 and while my other two work well so far, the third one I just received has some switch issues. It clicks but some presses do not register. I may have to return it. I’ve emailed lumintop on the matter but I don’t expect a response any time soon as it’s Chinese New year.
When I got this third light it was having allot of issues with the button. The more I clicked it, the better it became. However, the problem is still there it just doesn’t happen as much. Still I find this unacceptable.
Just for comparison, I measured the Zebralight SC5w mkII advertised at 550 lumens at only 44 lux. I tried swapping multiple fully charged eneloops and no change. Cannot believe a $10-$20 UT01 is brighter than a $70 SC5w mkII. I just wish the tint on the UT01 weren’t so green.
… and FWIW my EDC05 now also has the same condition as my (and others) UT01. The circuit must be dis-connected from the battery by unscrewing the tailcap, in order to turn the light back on. Its completely a non-issue with me since I always unscrew the tailcap to fully dis-engage the battery anyways.
It did not do this just a few days ago, so its something only recent.
Maybe unrelated , but occasionally my Sp 10b will be dim when turned on and the only way to make it go to high is to unscrew the head and tighten again . I just cleaned the contact surfaces today to see if grease is causing bad connection . Will see.
**1. Has 3 nice modes (1, 30-50, 250-300)
2. Has the highest AA output possible on high
I plan to run eneloops - don’t really want to bother with a 14500 since most lights I’ve seen tend to have a stupidly high medium mode around 90-100 lumens that is just a waste of power when you’re using a small battery.
From what I see:
- Manker E11 looks pretty good on AA: 2,60(11hrs),200,400. 14500 is an odd 10,100(12hrs),320,800
- Utorch UT01: same specs as Manker. Basically the same light?
I highlighted the medium modes above since those runtimes matter the most to me for practical use.
For some reason the medium mode on that sofirn gets a LOT less rundown time than the other two lights for some reason on a 14500 at ~ 100 lumens. Think this is just how it was measured? I can’t believe that an XPL is that much more efficient than an XP-G2 or that the Manker/Utorch is really getting that much longer use out of the same battery?
