Review: BTU Shocker (3 x XM-L T6 NW | 3 x 18650)

great review!
i cant wait! i got the same configuration as the one reviewed (nw, regulated driver)

id love to get an AR lens and a gitd o-ring for the lens. anyone have any leads??

the can you please post any other lux measurements of similar lights that you have, like the tn31 you mentioned?

Here are some throw figures measured at 4m (just like this BTU)

- TN31 stock CW ~90kcd

- FF STL-V6 de-domed ~95kcd

- Skyray King NW ~20kcd

  • Small Sun T08 stock ~35kcd

And then there is this one, just proving that my meter doesn’t top up at 100kcd…

  • X6 with de-domed XM-L U3 w. copper pcb ~210kcd :wink:

Thanks for the review, been waiting on this one. Outside throw shots would be nice if you get a chance. Thanks again.

Care to test it further than 4m?

I think 2100 measured TK70 to be 80kcd at <10m, but the reading became 97kcd at 13m.

The greater distance will allow multiple beams to fully converge and give the final intensity reading.

Yeah man, it’s 80+ for the shorter distances, and my copy is 92kcd actually. Not a lot, but still there is a difference.

But 80k cd is quite low. Wonder if it’s really T6 3C.

Fenix TK70 is also T6. But there could be some output differences (slight) within the T6 bin as well.

3.6A is high enough, there probably won’t be much of a difference with the DRY at say 4.x amps. If this is 3.6A with PWM (however slight) then there is a very very slight loss as well. << — I noticed this with the DRY driver……the earliest ones are full blast with no PWM, and the latter drivers are with PWM even in turbo mode just that the PWM perhaps switches on and off at 95% power @ xxx Hz, ie a wee bit cut only… while the lowest modes are like 5% power @ xxx Hz. I do not have the latest 700Hz DRY driver.

So we’ll need the U2 version and see how it does. :smiley:

mine just arrived! threw some aw 3100s in it and let her rip! great companion to my nw skyray king… one for throw one for flood!

charging up batteries now since they were @ 3.6v before

2 day shipping from ric to usa!

My NW SR King metered almost a fourth more than his, so please don't take these as absolute numbers.

I would guess that _the's_would hit over 100k lux on a higher-reading meter.

I'm starting to regret not jumping on the pre-order...

Outdoor beamshots added to OP

Thanks for the beamshots.

nice shots

I like the BTU tint more than the others

That mouseover vs the TN31 is jaw-dropping. :open_mouth:

Very nice beamshots :slight_smile: That BTU is a beast :bigsmile:

Thanks very much for the review! Frontpage’d and Sticky’d.

This is the NW T6 version. There is a U2 version available also, which outputs around 3k lumens.

@Shaquille

I fail to understand the need to attack this light or my review of it, but I'd like to try to answer to some of points you brought up.

First of all, I didn't get this light for free. I paid the normal pre-order / introductory price, and i think Slewflash did the same for the light he reviewed.


1. T6 & output

As Slewflash pointed out, an U2 CW version is available. It was my own decision to go for T6 NW instead of U2 CW. The output is lower, but the tint is more important in my planned usage.

Over four times the throw of Skyray King is very impressive to me.


2. Battery carrier

I think the battery carrier is very high quality. Upside down springs look funny, but they work really good when inserting the batteries. I would take this carrier over the Fenix carrier (or the linked DIY carrier) any day.

3. Emitter mounting & Thermal paste

I agree that the thermal paste around emitter stars doesn't look good, but I'll explain how this has happened: The emitters are pressed against the heat sink by the aluminum reflector, which is tightened with the screw through the heat sink. So, during the manufacturing, some thermal paste is applied under the stars, after which the reflector is tightened so that the all extra paste comes out (as we know, less paste equals better thermal transfer)

This can be thought to be sloppy job, but it results in good thermal characteristics, as can be seen in the thermal graph.

4. Only Panasonics are good up to 3.5A

Not exactly true. Panasonics are good cells, but there are others that can be used too. I use XTAR 18700 2600mAh, which are based on Sanyo cells, and can easily provide 3.6A / cell. Even some cheaper cells can do this.

5. AR coating

I agree. This light would deserve an AR coated lens. I'll upgrade it with one if I manage to find a suitable one.

Final words:

I'm sorry if the review or light itself wasn't good enough for you, but I tried my best to describe what I think of the light and why. After all, I'm still very happy with this light.

The most enthusiastic flashaholics get the lights first. Some of them even pay extra for quick DHL shipping.. ;)

If I had to choose between TK75 and this light, I would choose both. Really. They are so different..

On the other hand, between TK70 and this, it would be this, hands down.

i didnt sleep for 2 days awaiting for its review !!! im the enthusiastic flashaholic :bigsmile:

I agree the tk75 is a better buy, even with slightly less throw you get 2600 lumens for longer with a superior build, although I wouldn’t mind owning the Btu as well :slight_smile:

Every reviewer can put the rating he wants to. Of course, every reader can question his rating. I am one of them that question the 5 stars ratings.
To me BTU is really a lower quality job comparing the full package of TK70 or TK75. The UI, the AR lens, the HAIII body, the battery holder, the reflector finishing, all are not as good as Fenix. I really doubt this BTU worth USD150 where some can get TK70 for USD175, somemore it doesn’t involve R&D cost as much as it copy Fenix TK70 and can’t copy 100% as it involve a lot of R&D cost to copy 100%.

It is either the reviewer doesn’t own a TK70, else he won’t ignore the differences.