I have this drop in and didn’t notice that it had two emitters, just checked mine - bought a few months ago - and it has two.
It works very well to charge GITD and also works well on “black light” enhanced posters, must be the ageing hippy side of me. :8)
I’m running mine on 18v 6x3v CR123s in a Solarforce L2P with 2 extension tubes, the CR123s rattle a bit but work well, I tried it with a single 18650 fully charged and it was definitely not as bright.
I have several “no name” UV P60s and a couple of Solarforce UVs and the Kaidomain pushes out less visible light and more UV.
I went through my son's toys with a 365nm light (my Ledengin LZ1 mod), a lot of cheap plastic fluorescence like crazy
Yep, looks like the real deal to me. Tried it out last night and it definitely shows stuff that my 395nm can’t.
In terms of GITD stuff, my 395nm one that runs off 2xCR2032 cells only manages to make a toy GITD lizard glow for 10 seconds after charging it for 10 seconds. The P60 off a single 18650 manages to make the same lizard glow for over a minute and then some! Might have found a metric for measuring UV power.
Heh, if glow time is the metric, I’d better avoid testing with my bottle of glow paint. It generally glows all night just from ceiling-bounced mood lighting.
I agree, the KD 365 nm has a lot less visible light than my “no name” 380 nm. At least it does on two 18650 cells, on one cell it is very disappointing.
I need to try two cells as I’m quite pleased with the output of mine. I can get things fluorescing quite well from about 2 metres, and good results charging up the kids GITD stars on the ceiling from about 5 feet. Maybe I got a similar one to DBCstm.
Oops…
Was this intended to be used with 8.4V?
I only tried it with single 18650.
Current draw at about 0.38A, no heat issues 
3v to 18v so it’s quite flexible on voltage but I find the higher the voltage the better the effect.
Hmm, interesting. My 12-LED cheapo runs at about 0.16A to 0.20A (takes ~30 seconds to ramp up, then holds at around 0.2A). It’s not a bad item, for $10, but it’s not exactly a good UV light either.
So, the cheapo is about 0.20A at ~375nm, the P60 drop-in is about 0.38A at 365nm, and the CU6 is probably somewhere around 0.83A at 365nm with specially-chosen glass.
$11 is not so cheap for a cheapo IMO. The 9-LED version is only around $3.80 at BIC.
http://www.buyincoins.com/item/35755.html
I bought one but hasn’t arrived.
I do have several single-LED UV, they’re not bad like you said. Just not strong. I’m pretty sure they use similar cheap LEDs.
mfm, that was an Amazing Review!!!
I am thinking of buying the TK-566, but I would like to see one more photo (comparison if possible) of how well it does on Cat Urine. I have a UV/white light head lamp that I used for night fishing, but it has so much Visible wavelength, it does not flouresce cat pee at all.
Does anyone with the TK-566 have a bad cat and a camera that will catch the result?
Thanks!!!
Does a bad infant also count? I do not have the TK-566 but another 365nm light I have lights pee up clearly.
Thank you djozz!
I have been doing a lot of research on the 365nm lights, but I am curious how the TK-566 with the CREE chip compares to a “365nm” LED. I saw one that looks promising which costs only $18. It’s called “Peedar”, but I have read that cheaper uv “claiming” 365nm is In fact not. $60-$80 for the TK is pricey, but I want to track down this little booger’s Hot Spots and take care of them, even if it costs a lot.
Tiger Fusion, it’s worth mentioning that the original review in this thread was three years ago. I wouldn’t expect to get a response from the original poster.
Also, UV protection glasses help a lot when trying to see fluorescence. They typically don’t cost much; even the yellow party glasses I got at a dollar store work reasonably well.
Thanks ToyKeeper!
I saw something next to the original post that said 12 weeks, but did not pay attention to the date posted….
Thanks for the advice!
I have been doing more research on the Tank007 TK-566 uv 365nm 1w & 3w model.
Some on eBay show a picture of the flashlight with "TK-566" only on the side:
Others show "TK-566" & a Hexagon with "CREE RX-E":
Is one a knockoff or is there one with a Cree emitter and one with a different type of LED???
Just received the 3W 365 nm drop in today, cant wait to try it!!
There is a regular TK566 that is not a UV. It uses a CREE XR-E. I’m assuming the RX-E is a misspelling.
I picked up a pair of those. They really, really cut out the blue and purple light. Probably some green, too. It cuts out so much, actually, that I have a harder time seeing UV fluorescence with them than I do with cheap yellow dollar-store glasses. Even under a UV light, everything looks orange. So, that was a bit disappointing. However, they might also be rather useful for a test I’ve been meaning to run for a few years… getting myself to be sleepy earlier by wearing blue-blocking glasses at night.
Thank You Mr. Floppy,
Yes, the "RX" was a misspelling.
As for the CREE XR-E issue, I assumed that sellers were using "Stock Photos", however, the UV TK-566 in this UV Flashlight Shootout by "mfm" has the CREE XR-E logo.... I am still confused :-(