TK's Emisar D18 review -- 3x18650 photon grenade

TK, thank you for another insightful review!

You said that you are “no good at beam shots.” However you are quite good at verbal descriptions. I’m wondering if you would provide a more detailed verbal comparison between the beam patterns of the D18 vs D4S.

Thank again,
Caleb

The site uses a HTTP referrer check. If a referrer is sent, and it’s not on the whitelist, the request is rejected. But BLF is on the whitelist. If you’re getting the login popup, it means your browser (or perhaps a proxy) is sending bad referrer info.

It’s just a slab of copper with some springs on it, and screws to hold it in place. Just as it should be.

The lanyard hole itself has a rounded edge, to avoid cutting the lanyard strap. It’s only the larger surrounding area which has somewhat sharp and serrated edges. That’s probably not much of an issue though, since the lanyard doesn’t really rub against that part much.

I don’t like buck drivers. Not a fan of boost either. Don’t typically like constant current so no, not confusing anything. I stripped all the components off the pcb in my M43 and threw the whole lot in the trash. I talk enough to usually be pretty sure of what I mean . :wink:

ToyKeeper, will you be able to weigh D18? It can be without a battery.

I don’t have that info, or a way to measure it.

Maybe even the kitchen scale? :wink:

Thank you for the review. Any photos next to the Q8?

Me in a kitchen?

You’re funny. I like you.


Is Nichia producing 219B’s again (including 4000K & 4500K)?

Very detailed review… thank you!! :beer:
This one looks like a ’must have’.

What is it that you dislike about buck, boost and constant current drivers?

They don’t give maximum output, of course. Lol

Nice review TK. :sunglasses:

Can’t wait for mine to arrive! :heart_eyes:

Is it an upgrade? It depends. Let’s go point by point:

The size of D18 vs M43 is six of one, half a dozen of another. One is a little longer, the other is a little wider. Overall volume is similar.

But let’s measure it anyway…

  • M43: ~242 cm3 ((40.5 x 63) + (57.4 x 50.7))
  • D18: ~213 cm3 ((43.0 x 58) + (59.5 x 46.1))

So… I’d say the D18 is about 13% smaller.

Depends on what you’re measuring:

  • Energy capacity: With 4 cells, the M43 has more energy capacity than the D18’s 3 cells. All other things being equal, M43 should have 33% longer runtime.
  • Overall efficiency: M43 is more efficient on medium modes, and thus should have longer runtime. However, D18 is more efficient at the lowest and highest modes. I don’t know where the graphs intersect, but I expect M43 has longer runtime at most levels except for maybe 20 lumens and below. Its low-mode efficiency is pretty bad.
  • Maximum runtime: The M43’s longest-running mode lasts about 35 days. The D18’s longest-running mode lasts about 8.5 months.
  • Standby time: The M43’s standby drain is more than twice as high as D18, so it has shorter standby time.

I’m not sure if this refers to current regulation or thermal regulation, but I’ve measured both.

In my testing, the M43 was not stable at any level… even low modes. It sags while it’s in regulation, and then it sags more when the cells are too low for regulation. But the D18 maintains mostly steady output in its regulated modes until the cell voltage is lower than emitter Vf.

To compare directly, I tested the current regulation in both lights. I set them to an easy level which any battery should be able to handle — about 120 lm. Then I connected them to a bench power supply and turned the dial to change the voltage, and I recorded the lumen output over time. Voltage went from 4.2V to 3.0V. Here’s how that went:

In terms of thermal regulation, the M43 I tested had pretty unstable output. The D18 isn’t completely stable there either, but it seemed at least a little less volatile than the M43.

I tried running both lights on turbo, to measure the thermal regulation. This is how the D18’s graph looked… It stayed at about 45 C throughout the test:

… and this is how the M43’s graph looked. It was about 60 C to 65 C during this test:

Both lights require high-drain cells to get full turbo output. Neither light requires high-drain cells for low and medium modes. Both are completely fine with old low-amp cells, as long as you don’t want more than a couple thousand lumens.

The boost driver is certainly fancier. It’s more efficient by a few percent, except on very low and very high modes. It balances output better across emitters of slightly different Vf. It doesn’t have PWM. However, it also has drawbacks… like increased price, more difficult thermal management, increased size, decreased efficiency on very low and very high modes, a smaller output range, etc. Both are good, but in different ways. I consider it another “six of one, half a dozen of another” comparison.

A good boost/buck driver is a wonderful thing. I really like DEL’s buck driver in the BLF GT. I love how steady my Zebralights are. I can’t really say the M43 has a good boost driver though… it has really unusual behavior.

This may be a cultural difference, but in much of the world, simple is good. It is not “simple” as in “simpleton”, meaning unintelligent… simplicity is robust and elegant. Complexity is a negative trait, to be avoided when possible.

I’ve tried to make the firmware simple and easy to modify, even for people who don’t normally write code. The best possible code is that which, when someone reads it, they immediately understand it. Ideally they should even go “Duh, why didn’t I think of that?” because it’s so obvious. This isn’t always possible, but it’s a good ideal to strive for.

The M43 is a clear winner here. I was hoping the D18 would have a button light, but it doesn’t. However, the driver has pads to connect one, and the firmware supports it… all that is needed is to physically add the light and connect it.

Huh?

Compared to the M43, the D18…

  • … is throwier.
  • … has a wider output range, going both much lower and much higher.
  • … is less likely to activate by accident.
  • … is easier to use.
  • … has a bunch of extra modes and firmware functions.

Yeah, that is an accurate description which in no way misrepresents anything. :wink:

I measured my M43 and D18. The M43 made about 4950 lm, while the D18 made about 14500 lm. But these numbers are probably not very accurate; I should have some more accurate measurements in a few days.

Not really. The M43 does not have a reputation for being mod-friendly.

So… Is the D18 an upgrade? Depends on your personal preferences. For me, it’s an upgrade.

The M43 was good. I liked the M43 enough to buy it at full price. It was stubby and cute and solid and bright. But I didn’t like its Carclo 10507 beam shape, the driver never really worked well on mine, and I really disliked its UI. The UI in particular held back the M43; it was probably the thing people complained about most.

The D18 fixes all these things.

On a related note, has anyone else noticed that Inferion recently made a linear driver with a ramping UI called Indigo v2.0 Lite? It looks interesting.

They’re the only unpopulated pads on the driver — G, I+, and R4.

The beams of D4S (XP-L HI) and D18 (SST-20) look almost identical, actually. The hotspot is the same size, the spill is the same size… except I think D4S has a somewhat brighter hotspot with less-bright spill, while the D18 has a somewhat less-bright hotspot with more lumens in the spill area.

So the beams look pretty similar, but the D4S gets more throw per Watt and the D18 has a more useful spill area. It’s weird that they look so similar when the D4S has a cd/lm value twice as high.

Something does not agree. As if the D18 had a similar beam of light to D4s with XP-L HI it would mean that it had about 125,000cd, and Hank would give 65,000cd. This means that the D18 shines wider or the measurements are from the ass. So far, however, Hank’s measurements were quite precise so? I will find out how I will buy one.

It sounds like the extra lumens in the spill mean less lux in the hotspot for the D18, allowing it to still have roughly the same apparent size to the hotspot.

@TK: Thanks for your review and the very detailed post no. 43!
Does the driver of the D18 have over-discharge protection?

Concerning the “throwyness”:
The Meteor M43 has more throw at a given level of output because of its larger optics.
D18 with SST-20: 65,000cd / 14,000lm = 4.64cd/lm
M43 with SST-20: 52,000cd / 8,200lm = 6.34cd/lm
The Meteor should be able to hold around 2500-3000lm steady with 15,840cd to 19,020cd.
The D18 holds 2000lm steady with 9280cd.

Only in the first 30s of operation the D18 is actually brighter and throws further.

I think the throw is very important with these lights. I have found my Meteor with partially de-domed LEDs to have the most practical beam of all my lights for walking in the woods. It has a very wide spot with decent throw and a super wide outer spill (a benefit of the Carclo optics). This means you stumble less because you see things on the ground from the corner of your eyes and you don’t need to move the light so much when walking.

In my eyes the biggest advantage of the D18 is the smaller diameter. It’s more ergonomic. I can also understand that its U.I. is more popular.