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

254 posts / 0 new
Last post
rdrfronty
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: 05/05/2012 - 11:45
Posts: 938
Location: Texas

DENGOH wrote:
20 minutes is very long compare to 3 minutes. Your ASSUMPTION of current consumption about TK75 is wrong as it doesn’t match runtime measurement of 4*18650 and someone already make measurement about TK75 using power supply. BTU is over driven for 3 minutes, harming LED and battery, but does not better than TK75 that last for 20 minutes. BTU throw better due to its reflector, but flood worse than TK75, your beamshots show this but you still claimed BTU flood as good as TK75 (not sure you have changed your mind about this).

Just to neutralize, so that not many newbies fall in the “trap” buying BTU. There are better choices. We don’t need to support an expensive copycat brand.


No there isn’t better choices. There are other good choices, like the TK75. And yes the TK75 has slightly better flood than the BTU. And the King has better flood than the TK75. This is all normal results from shallow reflector (king), deep reflector (tk75), and very deep reflector (BTU). This is also why their throw goes in the opposite direction. BTU, TK, King. Simple facts of reflector size and depth. The BTU and TK75 are setup to do a good job of both throw and flood. One has an edge in throw and one has an edge in flood. Both slight in either direction.
The BTU is not over driven and its not driven any harder than the TK75. A U2, like in the TK75, will not produce the 975otf lumens I tested on the TK75 when pushed under 3 amps like you believe. Now thats a fact. I’ve tested countless T6’s, U2’s, and U3’s. none can come anywhere close to that number out-the-front driven so low. Only a freak of nature XML would produce those numbers driven so low. The light is drawing over 3.5A, no way possible its not.
And any newbie that falls into the “trap” of buying a BTU will be rewarded with a awesome light. They should count themselves lucky to start the hobby with a BTU.
And I’m perfect content supporting a non-brand light. I think you should have noticed that at least 75% of the lights talked about on this forum are not “name” brand lights.
Dale
Dale's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/19/2012 - 07:26
Posts: 3188
Location: WV

rdrfronty wrote:
DENGOH wrote:
20 minutes is very long compare to 3 minutes. Your ASSUMPTION of current consumption about TK75 is wrong as it doesn’t match runtime measurement of 4*18650 and someone already make measurement about TK75 using power supply. BTU is over driven for 3 minutes, harming LED and battery, but does not better than TK75 that last for 20 minutes. BTU throw better due to its reflector, but flood worse than TK75, your beamshots show this but you still claimed BTU flood as good as TK75 (not sure you have changed your mind about this).

Just to neutralize, so that not many newbies fall in the “trap” buying BTU. There are better choices. We don’t need to support an expensive copycat brand.


No there isn’t better choices. There are other good choices, like the TK75. And yes the TK75 has slightly better flood than the BTU. And the King has better flood than the TK75. This is all normal results from shallow reflector (king), deep reflector (tk75), and very deep reflector (BTU). This is also why their throw goes in the opposite direction. BTU, TK, King. Simple facts of reflector size and depth. The BTU and TK75 are setup to do a good job of both throw and flood. One has an edge in throw and one has an edge in flood. Both slight in either direction.
The BTU is not over driven and its not driven any harder than the TK75. A U2, like in the TK75, will not produce the 975otf lumens I tested on the TK75 when pushed under 3 amps like you believe. Now thats a fact. I’ve tested countless T6’s, U2’s, and U3’s. none can come anywhere close to that number out-the-front driven so low. Only a freak of nature XML would produce those numbers driven so low. The light is drawing over 3.5A, no way possible its not.
And any newbie that falls into the “trap” of buying a BTU will be rewarded with a awesome light. They should count themselves lucky to start the hobby with a BTU.
And I’m perfect content supporting a non-brand light. I think you should have noticed that at least 75% of the lights talked about on this forum are not “name” brand lights.

Brother, no amount of logic is going to penetrate that haze. You know this…. The boy has been anti BTU from the word go. Despite all the people who have bought them & love them. The only question I have? What was his hire date @ Fenix… LOL

rdrfronty
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: 05/05/2012 - 11:45
Posts: 938
Location: Texas

Good one dale!

ZT
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 6 months ago
Joined: 09/23/2012 - 23:25
Posts: 89
Location: SEA

TK70: Hey, in defense of my twin brother, the BTU, this is what I have to say

1. BTU is way cheaper now – $100

2. Add another $50 – you get the SRK.

3. Add the 2 light together, 5000 over OMG lumens. Huge throw and flood. For the money – how to fight the BTU with the TK75? Will outshine and outdo even Olight X6.

4. Formidable weapon in defense and attack due to heft and reach.

5. Versatility – Leds and driver easily self replaceable and or upgradeable. So you can drive it like crazy – no worries here. Marginal replacement cost. Dedome or not, U2/ U3 / XML2 U2 or neutral white – up to you.

6. TK75 breakdown hurts – huge shipping cost, plus lost time.

7. Turbo – BTU at 3 mins and repeatable (heft and size adequately handles the heat); TM26 at 4 mins; repeatable 1 min. each time; TK75 – 20 mins.

8. No AR coating is not a big deal. Clean the AR lens often, the coating will wear down as well.

9. Feeble battery holder – resolved easily. See Shaquille beefup do-over.

10. Stepdown after turbo – BTU high mode – 2000+ lumens and TK 75 lumens at high ??

Given the new price, the BTU is formidable in every respect.

Dale
Dale's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/19/2012 - 07:26
Posts: 3188
Location: WV

ZT wrote:
TK70: Hey, in defense of my twin brother, the BTU, this is what I have to say

1. BTU is way cheaper now – $100

2. Add another $50 – you get the SRK.

3. Add the 2 light together, 5000 over OMG lumens. Huge throw and flood. For the money – how to fight the BTU with the TK75? Will outshine and outdo even Olight X6.

4. Formidable weapon in defense and attack due to heft and reach.

5. Versatility – Leds and driver easily self replaceable and or upgradeable. So you can drive it like crazy – no worries here. Marginal replacement cost. Dedome or not, U2/ U3 / XML2 U2 or neutral white – up to you.

6. TK75 breakdown hurts – huge shipping cost, plus lost time.

7. Turbo – BTU at 3 mins and repeatable (heft and size adequately handles the heat); TM26 at 4 mins; repeatable 1 min. each time; TK75 – 20 mins.

8. No AR coating is not a big deal. Clean the AR lens often, the coating will wear down as well.

9. Feeble battery holder – resolved easily. See Shaquille beefup do-over.

10. Stepdown after turbo – BTU high mode – 2000+ lumens and TK 75 lumens at high ??

Given the new price, the BTU is formidable in every respect.

OH GOD!!!! NOOOOOOO!!! NOW HE’LL ARGUE ALL NIGHT!!! …I’M GOING TO BED. Seen this show to many times…

DENGOH
DENGOH's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 5 months ago
Joined: 10/06/2012 - 05:26
Posts: 2157

I know many won’t admit they bought a worse product. Luckily fact is fact and not changeable by anyone.
You have been ignoring all the bad thing about BTU. Its weight, lousy UI, lousy battery carrier, etc.

BTU is cheaper now, you know why. Think about it.
If BTU is selling for $100 now, it should be correct price for it(I once said it should be $120). It was aiming $180, remember?

Not targeting anyone here though Dale accuse me as being Fenix employee. I am not.
You can love your BTU, but you should not boast around its 3 minutes performance and that will lure newbies to buy it.

cool i'll see you when you get there

Dale
Dale's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/19/2012 - 07:26
Posts: 3188
Location: WV

The facts put forward by RDR. Look if you don’t like the BTU. Thats your right. But the curious thing. RDR & even myself concede what a great light the TK75 is. We have all conceded that it’s a matter of personal preference. Yet you continue to slander the BTU as sub standard. Being that Mrs D has her masters in psychology. I know that all behavior is purposeful. Bearing that in mind I can’t help but wonder… Whats your motivation behind the behavior. Even when confronted with facts you ignore them. It’s like you have a personal vendetta against a flashlight or something. Were you violated with a BTU or something? If so there are several private self help groups I could point you to.

makapuu
Offline
Last seen: 21 min 33 sec ago
Joined: 07/18/2011 - 00:08
Posts: 553
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Dale wrote:
The facts put forward by RDR. Look if you don’t like the BTU. Thats your right. But the curious thing. RDR & even myself concede what a great light the TK75 is. We have all conceded that it’s a matter of personal preference. Yet you continue to slander the BTU as sub standard. Being that Mrs D has her masters in psychology. I know that all behavior is purposeful. Bearing that in mind I can’t help but wonder… Whats your motivation behind the behavior. Even when confronted with facts you ignore them. It’s like you have a personal vendetta against a flashlight or something. Were you violated with a BTU or something? If so there are several private self help groups I could point you to.

Big + 1 and LMAO
That pretty much sums it up.

Slewflash
Slewflash's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 9 months ago
Joined: 07/05/2012 - 08:43
Posts: 1977
Location: Australia, Melbourne

DENGOH wrote:
I know many won’t admit they bought a worse product. Luckily fact is fact and not changeable by anyone.
You have been ignoring all the bad thing about BTU. Its weight, lousy UI, lousy battery carrier, etc.

BTU is cheaper now, you know why. Think about it.
If BTU is selling for $100 now, it should be correct price for it(I once said it should be $120). It was aiming $180, remember?

Not targeting anyone here though Dale accuse me as being Fenix employee. I am not.
You can love your BTU, but you should not boast around its 3 minutes performance and that will lure newbies to buy it.

I’ll highlight some of your arguments which are not correct:
“You have been ignoring all the bad thing about BTU. Its weight, lousy UI, lousy battery carrier” and “but you should not boast around its 3 minutes performance”
They’re not ‘bad things’ being ignored – because they’re not “lousy”, and I’ll tell you why.

  • The weight – It’s approximately 1kg without batteries (and 1.2 with). While someone who may struggle to lift this may find it cumbersome it comes with its merits. More mass means a longer time before the body becomes saturated with heat which translates to better cooling for the LED (in short bursts).
  • The modes (or UI) – It has mode memory, and cycles from low to medium, high and then turbo then repeats. I do not see how this is “lousy”.
  • The battery carrier – It has copper discs on each terminal to reduce resistance which is the primary factor in controlling the amperage in direct drive (which can be used in the DRY driver). It isn’t aesthetically pleasing? Suck it up, it goes inside the light. Nobody complains when I spill coffee on the inside of my suit.
    It’s weak and flimsy? No, it has a metal frame. Even if it was made of hot glue it wouldn’t matter, as long as it fits snug there will be no stress applied on the carrier. The battery carrier rattles? This is a misconception – it does not.
  • Lens – It’s clear enough, plus AR lenses will be available soon and Ric may send them to owners free of charge (I had to email him, but he’s sending one to me when it’s available).
  • Reflector isn’t as shiny as the TK75 – Fair enough, it may not be as shiny but in terms of output the Shocker still beats the TK75.
  • Three minute turbo – This seems to be your main argument. After it steps down from turbo to high after 3 minutes you can just half depress the button to bring it back up to turbo. It’s not much of a visible difference between high and turbo in real life usage, and isn’t a big deal. The High mode on the Shocker is still over 2000 lumens, which again is not visibly different from the TK75. Remember you need 4 times the output to perceive a double in brightness. Eg, a Shocker @ 3k lumens will only look twice as bright as a 700 lumen P60.

You seem to dislike it and say that the owners will not admit to buying a bad product, but have experience with it. Not all the Shocker owners are asying it’s good if you haven’t noticed already. You’ve been openly bashing the Shocker without even trying it. It’s a multi-emitter light with crazy throw. It combines high total output with long throw (and they usually aren’t associated with each other) in a relatively small package. Why hate?

Slewflash 

manxbuggy1
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 4 days ago
Joined: 04/24/2012 - 07:27
Posts: 720
Location: Montgomery, Texas

I own a TK75 and love it to death but can not for the life of me understand how someone can hate on a light that obviously has an almost perfect balance of throw and flood like the BTU does. I am amazed at the performance of both lights every time we take them out. When both lights were evenly priced it would be hard to choose between them. Now with the the BTU at $100 it’s almost a no brainer that the shocker is the super deal.

relic38
relic38's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 4 months ago
Joined: 12/28/2012 - 00:39
Posts: 3390
Location: Toronto, Canada

The TK75 and the BTU Shocker, performance-wise, are very close. Owners of both lights have shown this with quite good beam shots.
DENGOH, can you explain why you believe these two lights are so far apart (i.e. one is great, the other is a bad product)?
It appears that you are not basing this comparison on the full set of information presented before you by the owners/reviewers.
In other words, your opinion appears to be biased, but please (in a civil way) correct me if I am wrong.

Welcome the night.

My Reviews   My Mods    http://budgetlightforum.com/search?

ZT
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 6 months ago
Joined: 09/23/2012 - 23:25
Posts: 89
Location: SEA

+1

DENGOH
DENGOH's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 5 months ago
Joined: 10/06/2012 - 05:26
Posts: 2157

Slewflash wrote:

I’ll highlight some of your arguments which are not correct:
“You have been ignoring all the bad thing about BTU. Its weight, lousy UI, lousy battery carrier” and “but you should not boast around its 3 minutes performance”
They’re not ‘bad things’ being ignored – because they’re not “lousy”, and I’ll tell you why.
  • The weight – It’s approximately 1kg without batteries (and 1.2 with). While someone who may struggle to lift this may find it cumbersome it comes with its merits. More mass means a longer time before the body becomes saturated with heat which translates to better cooling for the LED (in short bursts).

DENGOH: Since we are comparing TK75 and BTU, why TK75 can have same output in Turbo for 20 minutes even it is lighter than BTU? The weight sure help BTU, but I am saying it is not performing as good as TK75 that is lighter.

Slewflash wrote:
* The modes (or UI) – It has mode memory, and cycles from low to medium, high and then turbo then repeats. I do not see how this is “lousy”.

DENGOH: You can stand up, hold BTU in your hand, try switch it on with one hand. Then you see why I say it is lousy tail clicky. It is such a heavy light, it should be side clicky.

Slewflash wrote:
* The battery carrier – It has copper discs on each terminal to reduce resistance which is the primary factor in controlling the amperage in direct drive (which can be used in the DRY driver). It isn’t aesthetically pleasing? Suck it up, it goes inside the light. Nobody complains when I spill coffee on the inside of my suit.
It’s weak and flimsy? No, it has a metal frame. Even if it was made of hot glue it wouldn’t matter, as long as it fits snug there will be no stress applied on the carrier. The battery carrier rattles? This is a misconception – it does not.
  • Lens – It’s clear enough, plus AR lenses will be available soon and Ric may send them to owners free of charge (I had to email him, but he’s sending one to me when it’s available).

DENGOH: I myself find the battery carrier to be very ugly so springs protruding out. You can compare it side by side with TK75 battery carrier picture. I don’t know what happen to those after sale services. It is good Ric is filling up the gap where BTU is stated to have AR lens.

Slewflash wrote:
* Reflector isn’t as shiny as the TK75 – Fair enough, it may not be as shiny but in terms of output the Shocker still beats the TK75.

DENGOH: rdr already confirm TK75 has slight higher output than BTU after 10s, or I should say they are equal in output. But BTU does it with very high driving current though some claim it will not harm LED, but it is out of CREE recommendation. The point is BTU has to go beyond manufacturer limitation to be equal with TK75. TK75 is not driven as hard as BTU even though rdr assume it is because someone already measure TK75 using power supply.

Slewflash wrote:
* Three minute turbo – This seems to be your main argument. After it steps down from turbo to high after 3 minutes you can just half depress the button to bring it back up to turbo. It’s not much of a visible difference between high and turbo in real life usage, and isn’t a big deal. The High mode on the Shocker is still over 2000 lumens, which again is not visibly different from the TK75. Remember you need 4 times the output to perceive a double in brightness. Eg, a Shocker @ 3k lumens will only look twice as bright as a 700 lumen P60.

DENGOH: I agree with you not much difference. The point is since the whole thing is about boasting BTU Turbo performance, so I point out BTU weakness that it can only do it for 3 minutes. RDR claim no problem to use BTU in Turbo mode as long as he likes, but he doesn’t try it. I asked rdr before to switch BTU on for 10 or 20 minutes, always put it back to Turbo mode when it step down, and record the output with light meter. Seriously, I think we should think about why BTU limit it to 3 minutes in first place.

Slewflash wrote:
You seem to dislike it and say that the owners will not admit to buying a bad product, but have experience with it. Not all the Shocker owners are asying it’s good if you haven’t noticed already. You’ve been openly bashing the Shocker without even trying it. It’s a multi-emitter light with crazy throw. It combines high total output with long throw (and they usually aren’t associated with each other) in a relatively small package. Why hate?

DENGOH: I dislike bad quality product that charge for premium price. If BTU is selling at $100 now, I am okay with it. But it looks like it is not as it involve SRK in the purchase. When I see people boasting about their product, I can’t help to voice out. I don’t openly bashing BTU everywhere, it is only after someone boasting BTU and I will voice out there are better choice.

Sorry to others who like attacking, attacking statements are ignored by me. I don’t study psychology but I am not easily provoked.

cool i'll see you when you get there

DENGOH
DENGOH's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 5 months ago
Joined: 10/06/2012 - 05:26
Posts: 2157
relic38 wrote:
The TK75 and the BTU Shocker, performance-wise, are very close. Owners of both lights have shown this with quite good beam shots. DENGOH, can you explain why you believe these two lights are so far apart (i.e. one is great, the other is a bad product)? It appears that you are not basing this comparison on the full set of information presented before you by the owners/reviewers. In other words, your opinion appears to be biased, but please (in a civil way) correct me if I am wrong.

See my reply to Slewflash. I don’t think I am biassed though. If BTU is selling at $100 in current package, and I am still bashing it, then I am biased.
Remember it was aiming $180 and use $150 to lure everyone to buy in current package. Now Ric is filling up at least one gap, that is AR lens, I look forward to see how the lens look like.

cool i'll see you when you get there

Slewflash
Slewflash's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 9 months ago
Joined: 07/05/2012 - 08:43
Posts: 1977
Location: Australia, Melbourne

Yes, in my review I also questioned the choice of using a tailcap switch.
At the time of announcing it was one of THE best lights out for the price (TK70 head with 18650s? Ingenious). I agree that the TK75 may look better but they’re for different purposes. Neither is better than the other.
If someone wants throw and high output why would you recommend a TK75 when the Shocker is clearly the better choice? But of course if you want more flood and high output you can just get a TK75, or if you want even more flood then a TN30.

Slewflash 

relic38
relic38's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 4 months ago
Joined: 12/28/2012 - 00:39
Posts: 3390
Location: Toronto, Canada

Technically the BTU Shocker is still $150; you get a $50 coupon to buy more items from Fancyflashlights. It has nothing to do with the SRK (unless you want to use the coupon to buy one).

Welcome the night.

My Reviews   My Mods    http://budgetlightforum.com/search?

DENGOH
DENGOH's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 5 months ago
Joined: 10/06/2012 - 05:26
Posts: 2157
Slewflash wrote:
Yes, in my review I also questioned the choice of using a tailcap switch. At the time of announcing it was one of THE best lights out for the price (TK70 head with 18650s? Ingenious). I agree that the TK75 may look better but they’re for different purposes. Neither is better than the other. If someone wants throw and high output why would you recommend a TK75 when the Shocker is clearly the better choice? But of course if you want more flood and high output you can just get a TK75, or if you want even more flood then a TN30.

Since their output is about same, TK75 flood better, BTU throw better, might not noticeable to human eye, then I think from usability or quality point of view, TK75 is the better choice.
1.Longer runtime
2.Lighter
3.2 years warranty
4.Better UI
5.IPX8
6.AR Lens
7.Shiny Reflector
8.20 Minutes Turbo

cool i'll see you when you get there

DENGOH
DENGOH's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 5 months ago
Joined: 10/06/2012 - 05:26
Posts: 2157

ZT wrote:
TK70: Hey, in defense of my twin brother, the BTU, this is what I have to say

1. BTU is way cheaper now – $100

DENGOH: No, they are still $150.

2. Add another $50 – you get the SRK.

DENGOH: Let’s focus on TK75 and BTU.

3. Add the 2 light together, 5000 over OMG lumens. Huge throw and flood. For the money – how to fight the BTU with the TK75? Will outshine and outdo even Olight X6.

DENGOH: You are refering to my 2*BS Terminator? I can hold it with one hand, try holding two BTU in one hand and see.

4. Formidable weapon in defense and attack due to heft and reach.

DENGOH: Possible.

5. Versatility – Leds and driver easily self replaceable and or upgradeable. So you can drive it like crazy – no worries here. Marginal replacement cost. Dedome or not, U2/ U3 / XML2 U2 or neutral white – up to you.

DENGOH: Ya, to me BTU is more suitable for serious modder. That doesn’t mean TK75 can’t be modded.

6. TK75 breakdown hurts – huge shipping cost, plus lost time.

DENGOH: Almost same price as BTU if you know where to find.

7. Turbo – BTU at 3 mins and repeatable (heft and size adequately handles the heat); TM26 at 4 mins; repeatable 1 min. each time; TK75 – 20 mins.

DENGOH: Kindly make a 20 minutes video with BTU on Turbo, use light meter to monitor its output. Or email Ric to make it 20 minutes, he has been too careful. Let’s see how many case of failure of BTU after it is changed to 20 minutes.

8. No AR coating is not a big deal. Clean the AR lens often, the coating will wear down as well.

DENGOH: It is a big deal, why you think Ric is filling up the gap now? Kindly email Ric that you don’t need the AR lens if it not big deal to you.

9. Feeble battery holder – resolved easily. See Shaquille beefup do-over.

DENGOH: Ya, BTU is more suitable for modder. That doesn’t mean TK75 can’t be modded.

10. Stepdown after turbo – BTU high mode – 2000+ lumens and TK 75 lumens at high ??

DENGOH: BTU is brighter but it step down after 3 minutes.

Given the new price, the BTU is formidable in every respect.

DENGOH: It is not $100 like you say.

cool i'll see you when you get there

Shaquille
Shaquille's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: 05/15/2012 - 20:50
Posts: 459
Location: Vancouver

IS the ar lens available for the btu ?  I hope Ric sends me one after i told him im a fasttech customer nowLaughing

Ric should make available for the BTU ...AR lens , diffrent reflector designs ( for flood or throw), diffrent digital drivers if choice !!!!,the driver holder ring,the leds can be purchased as newer and more powefull once get available, battery carrier is already available and an upgrade would be nice , and this light would be the mother of all hosts for modding and upgrading since heat decipation is a non issue with its thick body ! itl  stay with the pack for many years to come. This is a flashaholics light after all so needs lots if optional parts and accesories available .selling parts and accesories for the btu will get him more cash then selling the light itself Smile I know i would buy a "flooder " reflector design.

Tecmo
Tecmo's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: 09/30/2011 - 09:00
Posts: 1470
Location: Indiana

Hey DENGOH, the TK75 throws like a little girl compared to the BTU. The BTU is the undisputed throw king of multi-emitter lights. That’s why people buy it, duh. I don’t know what your fascination is with the TK75 having magic xmls that produce more light with lower current.

Shaquille
Shaquille's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: 05/15/2012 - 20:50
Posts: 459
Location: Vancouver

can anyone with a lux meter ,take readings with lens On and then take reading with the lens off and tell us the diffrence. 

Tecmo
Tecmo's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: 09/30/2011 - 09:00
Posts: 1470
Location: Indiana

I want 3 de-domed xp-g2 in mine.

Shaquille
Shaquille's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: 05/15/2012 - 20:50
Posts: 459
Location: Vancouver

tecmo is krazeeeeeeeeeeeee 

DENGOH
DENGOH's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 5 months ago
Joined: 10/06/2012 - 05:26
Posts: 2157
Tecmo wrote:
Hey DENGOH, the TK75 throws like a little girl compared to the BTU. The BTU is the undisputed throw king of multi-emitter lights. That’s why people buy it, duh. I don’t know what your fascination is with the TK75 having magic xmls that produce more light with lower current.

That is completely not true. TK75 is one of the best thrower and flooder in one light. BTU is just copycat of TK75 brother with no new innovation in it. Glad you love your BTU though. No, people are not buying it unless get trapped by all these boasting.

cool i'll see you when you get there

Dale
Dale's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 4 months ago
Joined: 10/19/2012 - 07:26
Posts: 3188
Location: WV
DENGOH wrote:
Tecmo wrote:
Hey DENGOH, the TK75 throws like a little girl compared to the BTU. The BTU is the undisputed throw king of multi-emitter lights. That’s why people buy it, duh. I don’t know what your fascination is with the TK75 having magic xmls that produce more light with lower current.

That is completely not true. TK75 is one of the best thrower and flooder in one light. BTU is just copycat of TK75 brother with no new innovation in it. Glad you love your BTU though. No, people are not buying it unless get trapped by all these boasting.

Aha! There’s the issue! The 75 was bought with the expectation it would steam roll the BTU. When it didnt. A case of EBHS ( EXTREME BUTT HURT SYNDROME) developed. Then the evil RDR came in with actual fact ( which were as welcome as a transvestite prostitute in the vatican.) Thus compounding the EBHS… & here we are… LOL

Tecmo
Tecmo's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: 09/30/2011 - 09:00
Posts: 1470
Location: Indiana
DENGOH wrote:
Tecmo wrote:
Hey DENGOH, the TK75 throws like a little girl compared to the BTU. The BTU is the undisputed throw king of multi-emitter lights. That’s why people buy it, duh. I don’t know what your fascination is with the TK75 having magic xmls that produce more light with lower current.

That is completely not true. TK75 is one of the best thrower and flooder in one light. BTU is just copycat of TK75 brother with no new innovation in it. Glad you love your BTU though. No, people are not buying it unless get trapped by all these boasting.

Nope, sorry. BTU throws the best and is just as bright. I feel sorry for people who listen to you and buy an inferior light for more money!

manxbuggy1
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 4 days ago
Joined: 04/24/2012 - 07:27
Posts: 720
Location: Montgomery, Texas
Tecmo wrote:
DENGOH wrote:
Tecmo wrote:
Hey DENGOH, the TK75 throws like a little girl compared to the BTU. The BTU is the undisputed throw king of multi-emitter lights. That’s why people buy it, duh. I don’t know what your fascination is with the TK75 having magic xmls that produce more light with lower current.

That is completely not true. TK75 is one of the best thrower and flooder in one light. BTU is just copycat of TK75 brother with no new innovation in it. Glad you love your BTU though. No, people are not buying it unless get trapped by all these boasting.

Nope, sorry. BTU throws the best and is just as bright. I feel sorry for people who listen to you and buy an inferior light for more money!


The TK75 is a great thrower and flooder but Dengoh the BTU outthrows it by a 100 yards. This is not just speculation. This is what me and my brother observed in multiple tests with a light meter at multiple distances. Period. As much as I love my TK75 I can not and will not say it is a better light because it is not. In my opinion the BTU isnt better either over all. I promise if you get either one in cool white you will be impressed with your light. This is just a matter of personal preference. As for the R&D in the Fenix making it better, that also is not true. Fenix was once a new comer in this industry also and look what it has become. BTU has a very strong start with the quality of the shocker and I can see them going places. Sorry just my $.02.
myst999
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 28 min ago
Joined: 05/04/2011 - 16:25
Posts: 154
Location: New York

First of all, I think the BTU and TK75 are both good lights, but after looking at the beamshots here – I have to say the TK75 and BTU are pretty close at 300 meters – the zoomed in shots look very close.

manxbuggy1
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 4 days ago
Joined: 04/24/2012 - 07:27
Posts: 720
Location: Montgomery, Texas

The zoomed in shots are definately dark. I am going to work on my settings a bit this weekend and see if I can fix this problem. The lights are equally impressive with a slight edge in throw going to the BTU and slight edge in lumens and maybe flood going to the Fenix.

DENGOH
DENGOH's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 5 months ago
Joined: 10/06/2012 - 05:26
Posts: 2157

Both lights are equal in output or throw to human eyes though in calculation BTU is 100m longer because BTU copy TK70 reflector (credit goes to Fenix). But what about flood? From beamshots, I clearly can see the difference that TK75 is better because flood is about angle of beam profiles. It is not something far away like throw. Again, a flashlight is not just about throw and flood. Let’s not forget a lot of things on BTU are sub standard and don’t deserve current price.

Well, BTU brand start as copycat with a lot disappointments. I have not much high hope on this brand. Ultrafire copy either, at least they sell it at much lower price. Just look at UF-T50 and Zebralight, Ultrafire is 2-3 times cheaper. Why? Because they know they save a lot on R&D and they are not greedy. BTU also spend a lot less on R&D as it copy TK70. If TK70 is selling at $180, can BTU sell at $90 or lower, definitely can as all these high end flashlights have 100% gross margin as they can’t sell as many as low end flashlights. I am still alarmed to see some of you defending BTU when you pay $150 for BTU where it is stated to be 3500 Lumens and AR lens. Well, maybe some of you really “LOVEBTU. But that doesn’t mean you should spread around wrong information about BTU saying how good it is and hiding all the “cheatings” it has.

Those BTU lover attacking me or TK75, you need to reconsider your BTU throw is effort of Fenix. Be grateful when you enjoy throw of BTU. I don’t attack you all, I am just stating facts about BTU.

And I don’t work for Fenix. I once insisted TN31 out throw TK70 when ILIKEFLASHLIGHTS posted a lot beamshots about TK70 and TN31.

cool i'll see you when you get there

Pages