Acebeam EC65 review (21700, 4x XHP35 HI, cool white)

Here I did a test where I activated turbo and turned the light off when the output had stabilized after the stepdown. Then I let it cool down for five minutes with the help of a fan.

After the first activation the turbo is down to 3100 lumens. Now the Acebeam specification of 1 minute of turbo before stepdown also matches. It does produce the 3100 lumens at 0 sec and 3000 lumens at 30 sec consistently for several cycles so I’d rate this a 3000 lumen light, not 4000 and I feel Acebeam cheated a bit on this.

Has anyone tested the EC65 with the Acebeam ARC20700H-425A battery yet? How would this one perform in the EC65? I guess it’s the one that comes with the L30 and it has 4.250mAh of capacity.

I was making the same point on toobadorz thread. It just does not seem like it should be called a 4,000 lumen light.

On the other hand, if spring bypasses were done and a better battery were used it might be able to do 4,000lm multiple times for 1 minute each time.

Maybe this was their goal, but the finished product and chosen battery just has too much voltage sag.

Did you see the battery tests Toobadorz posted?

Yes I did but I could not see that he tested the ARC20700H-425A with this light. Have I overlooked something?

No. It’s a new light with a new battery size. Eventually more batteries will be tested. It just takes time.

Thanks for your review.

For a single battery flashlight this size, is using xhp35 with boost driver better than overdriven xp-l or othet 3v led?

Just doubt about efficience and other stuff.

They are all in the same ballpark. Look at the output of the xhp35-HI at 1A compared to a 3v led like the xp-l at 4A. They are both about 1350 lumen (before driver and optic losses).

The fact that the xhp35-HI has a bigger die than the xpl-hi (2.35 x 1.91 basically means the xpl is working a bit harder but it’s still not overly stressed.

I’m guessing they used the xhp35-HI because the beam color and output looked nicer than the xpl. There may be other reasons, like it gave them a bit more output compared to the xpl for instance. A more knowledgable person than me can probably say for sure.

They can try different emitters because I assume it’s using a 12v boost driver. They can make one mcpcb have 4 emitters in series (3v) and one that has 4 in parallel 12v.

Someone will probably swap the 4 nichia with xpl or xpl2 down the line just to try it out. The 50.2 at the same current is 1700lm. This would turn it into a legit 5,000 lumen light with the same current and heat. The beam might look ugly, though. You could also swap in a single xhp70.2 and have a legit 5,000 lumen light.

Interesting light and great review, thanks maukka.
Turbo times are really good.
I don’t like how they used a protected battery though, it just wastes 5 mm and increases IR.
Any chance to see driver pics?

You think a single instance of 15 to 30 seconds is “really good”?

Do you mean it’s good for such a small light that has such high output? Maybe you are comparing it to the Emisar D4? Even then a single blast of 15 to 30 seconds is not that great.

If they can fix the battery and voltage losses in the springs so it can repeatedly do 1 minute turbo times then I would say yes, they are good. Until then, I think they are really bad. Just my opinion.

Oh! Sorry for repeating the same question. :stuck_out_tongue:
At first, didn’t read other replies asking the same thing.

Thanks for the massive amount of data on this flashlight, that must have cost a few hours!

I really like the huge data table at the beginning, 75% of all information is already there and fast and easy to absorb! :slight_smile:

I hope that this copy of the EC65 holds up over time for you (I read the stories of dying EC65’s), it is a bit too nice flashlight too loose.

There are battery problems, but the second run of 3100 lm for 1 minute seems really good to me.
Do you know other lights of this size that can match that?

Fun: throw of the EC65 is exactly the same as my 2012 sk68 (with good old XR-E led) on a Trustfire ‘flame’ 14500 :slight_smile:

I was talking about 4000lm turbo. You are talking about 3100lm turbo.

3100 lumen for 1 minute is indeed pretty good, but not what is expected.

There are also not too many lights this size. period. In order to get about 3100 lumen I think you would need to look at the many compact 26650 boost driven lights. They are a bit bigger and typically run turbo a bit longer. So I would say the turbo your talking about (3100lm) is quite in line with them.

The bad part here is that Acebeam got our my expectations all jacked up, then did not deliver. If they had just spec’d it at 3100 lumen for 1m we I would not be so let down.

I do not feel let down, a 3000 lm flashlight with 4xXHP35 12V leds on a boost driver from one cell is new and an achievement, more so with a system efficiency of 90 lm/W at turbo.

Please remember that the 90 lm/W is average over the whole turbo runtime, which is at about 800 lumens most of the time. With the turbo cycling and 1229 lm*h it comes down quite a bit. I haven’t tested the battery capacity when it’s discharged in half an hour or at ~10 A so can’t tell you the actual number, but let’s say it’s about 16 Wh which comes down to 77 lm/W.

Ah, thanks! That makes it ok but not extremely special.

I received mine two days ago, the XHP35 version. I do feel a bit let down, turbo for about 12 seconds. I knew from the specs the light was too lightweight. But I bought one any way thinking AceBeam could pull it off. I would rather have an extra ounce or two over the rapid loss of performance. The format of 4 tight packed LED’s over a 21700 is a winner, execution just fell a bit short. On the positive side beam is a good mix of throw/flood. As is it’s a good 2000/650/300/20 lumens pocket light.

It’s not a lack of thermal mass that’s making it drop out of turbo. If that’s what your thinking.