Closed the sale - The Defiant "C" flashlight.

43 posts / 0 new
Last post

Pages

Old-Lumens
Old-Lumens's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
Joined: 11/04/2011 - 11:39
Posts: 7478
Location: Tyler, TX, USA
Closed the sale - The Defiant "C" flashlight.

I am closing this sale thread. It has turned into a mess, (my fault) and I am going to try again later maybe, when all the dust settles, or maybe on CPF (doubtful).

Up for sale are two modified lights. The Defiant brand "C" flashlight and the Defiant brand "D" flashlight. Please review the thread on these lights. It has a lot of info on the builds and beam shots of the two lights.

Summary:

The Defiant "C" light has the original reflector, a glass lens, a Cree XM-L2 T6 3C LED, a 12x7135 NANJG driver with three modes H/M/L. It uses a Maglite C switch and a Maglite C tail cap spring. The springs have the low resistance mods. The pill has been filled with copper for a heat sink. The light uses three 4/5 Sub-C NiMH batteries in a pack and you will need a hobby charger to charge them.

c

 

 

The Defiant "D" light has the original reflector (stippled now), a glass lens, a Cree XM-L2 T6 3C LED, a 10x7135 NANJG driver with three modes H/M/L. It has a Maglite 2D body and uses the Maglite D switch and tail cap spring. The heat sink is aluminum. The light uses three Sub-C NiMH batteries in a pack and you will need a hobby charger to charge them.

d

 

 

 DEFIANT "D" IS SOLD!

Price on the "C" Defiant is $70 $60 Shipped CONUS.  Battery packs are included with the lights.    DEFIANT "D" IS SOLD!

If an International buyer really wants to pay the high costs, then it's a possibility. I will consider shipping a light out of the US, but be advised the shipping costs will be high! International would be an additional $15 for regular airmail and Registered (Registered is Optional) would be an additional $13. That's a LOT of money! $60+$15+(optional$13) Whew!

 

Payment is PayPal. oldlumens(insert the @ sign here)gmail.com is the paypal addy.

Post here which light you are taking and follow it with a payment and a PM to me, with your full name and address.

 

Thank You

My PayPal address: oldlumens (insert the @ sign here) gmail.com

My YouTube Flashlight Video Channel

The BLF Modding Links Thread 

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/1374/jQ2wdL.jpg

 

Edited by: Old-Lumens on 03/05/2013 - 12:56
MRsDNF
MRsDNF's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 1 week ago
Joined: 12/22/2011 - 21:18
Posts: 13473
Location: A light beam away from the missus in the land of Aus.

Some lucky people will have to be quick to beat scaru before he sniffs this out and comes back on line.

 

djozz quotes, "it came with chinese lettering that is chinese to me".

                      "My man mousehole needs one too"

old4570 said "I'm not an expert , so don't suffer from any such technical restrictions".

Old-Lumens. Highly admired and cherished member of Budget Light Forum. 11.5.2011 - 20.12.16. RIP.

 

shhh
shhh's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: 09/10/2011 - 07:53
Posts: 214
Location: Winnsboro,Texas

No scaru is just lucky I just bought a ton of tooling the other day.lol
So hobby funds are low.

Old-Lumens
Old-Lumens's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
Joined: 11/04/2011 - 11:39
Posts: 7478
Location: Tyler, TX, USA

 The Defiant C on Mouse Out and the Defiant D on Mouse Over. Two totally different beams. The Def C sort of looks blue, but it's not, it's just the fact that most all of the light is concentrated into a small spot, where the Def D beam is spread apart by the stippling.

 

m2a

 

My PayPal address: oldlumens (insert the @ sign here) gmail.com

My YouTube Flashlight Video Channel

The BLF Modding Links Thread 

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/1374/jQ2wdL.jpg

 

gords1001
gords1001's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 7 months ago
Joined: 05/07/2012 - 14:02
Posts: 5276
Location: wigan england

I wish I could but I just cant. Congratulations to the lucky people who grab these. :bigsmile:

GottaZoom
GottaZoom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 5 months ago
Joined: 04/12/2012 - 03:14
Posts: 2179
gords1001 wrote:
I wish I could but I just cant. Congratulations to the lucky people who grab these. :bigsmile:

+1

jmpaul320
jmpaul320's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 1 week ago
Joined: 05/22/2012 - 09:06
Posts: 4189
Location: CT

i would be all over these if i wasnt busy destroying mine!

Would you mind keeping the wrong flashlight?
Best wish, May
Tmart service team

 

Soumil wrote:

PLEASE HELP ME GEARBEsT! IM LITERALLY CRYING!

 

Slim Pickens
Slim Pickens's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 58 min ago
Joined: 04/28/2012 - 19:50
Posts: 1231
Location: Lehigh Valley

If the tint in real life looks anything like in the pics, it ought to be gorgeous. If I could spare the cash right now…the side switch upgrade doubles the appeal over the stock 3D light.

tjhabak
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 2 weeks ago
Joined: 08/14/2011 - 14:12
Posts: 100
Location: Cleveland OH

Gotta jump on the 3D! Heading over to PP now. >)

Old-Lumens
Old-Lumens's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
Joined: 11/04/2011 - 11:39
Posts: 7478
Location: Tyler, TX, USA

So, someone help me here with the calculations for throw. I see the thread I was using is gone, as well as a member.

Defiant 3D @2meters - 24,900 lux   and @10meters - 2,800 lux

Defiant 3C  @2meters - 76,900 lux    and @10meters - 8,000 lux

 EDIT: I think the meter might have been on x10, not on x100 so these numbers might make more sense?

Defiant 3D @2meters - 2490 lux   and @10meters - 280 lux

Defiant 3C  @2meters - 7690 lux    and @10meters - 800 lux

 

 

How do I convert these numbers. The formula I had is gone.

 

My PayPal address: oldlumens (insert the @ sign here) gmail.com

My YouTube Flashlight Video Channel

The BLF Modding Links Thread 

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/1374/jQ2wdL.jpg

 

dct73
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 06/29/2012 - 21:40
Posts: 384
Location: wisconsin

Reading at 10m x 100 (10^2) for 1m equivalent

Old-Lumens
Old-Lumens's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
Joined: 11/04/2011 - 11:39
Posts: 7478
Location: Tyler, TX, USA

dct73 wrote:
Reading at 10m x 100 (10^2) for 1m equivalent
My apologies. I never got past basic math in school. I do not know what that symbol means and does the result equal throw in meters?

My PayPal address: oldlumens (insert the @ sign here) gmail.com

My YouTube Flashlight Video Channel

The BLF Modding Links Thread 

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/1374/jQ2wdL.jpg

 

texaspyro
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
Joined: 04/29/2011 - 12:43
Posts: 4593

Take your LUX reading at M meters. To calculate the equivalent reading at one meter calculate:
LUX times M times M

For a sanity check compare the calculated 1 meter readings taken at different distances. They should be close. If they are not, then most likely the beam profile has not leveled out at the closer distances and you need to take the readings at a farther distance.

To calculate throw distance, take the calculated 1 meter LUX reading, multiply it by 4, and then take the square root of that number. That is the throw distance in meters (when the lux reading should be 0.25 lux).

Slim Pickens
Slim Pickens's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 58 min ago
Joined: 04/28/2012 - 19:50
Posts: 1231
Location: Lehigh Valley

Old-Lumens,
The ANSI FL-1 standard dictates that throw is the maximum distance a light is supposed to paint 0.25 lux on a target.

The 3D’s reading you took at 10m is equivalent to 28kCd, good for 335m of throw to 0.25 lux.

The 3C’s reading you took at 10m is equivalent to 80kCd, which is good for 566m of throw to 0.25 lux.

As texaspyro pointed out, you’ll find that you get a more representative reading further away, especially when larger-reflectored lights such as these come into play.

Old-Lumens
Old-Lumens's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
Joined: 11/04/2011 - 11:39
Posts: 7478
Location: Tyler, TX, USA

Slim Pickens wrote:
Old-Lumens, The 3D's reading you took at 10m is equivalent to 28kCd, good for 335m of throw to 0.25 lux. The 3C's reading you took at 10m is equivalent to 80kCd, which is good for 566m of throw to 0.25 lux. As texaspyro pointed out, you'll find that you get a more representative reading further away, especially when larger-reflectored lights such as these come into play.
Thank you.

So if I do the 1M reading and them keep going farther out, at some point I will find a peak, where the beam is collimated?

My PayPal address: oldlumens (insert the @ sign here) gmail.com

My YouTube Flashlight Video Channel

The BLF Modding Links Thread 

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/1374/jQ2wdL.jpg

 

Old-Lumens
Old-Lumens's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
Joined: 11/04/2011 - 11:39
Posts: 7478
Location: Tyler, TX, USA

texaspyro wrote:
Take your LUX reading at M meters. To calculate the equivalent reading at one meter calculate: LUX times M times M For a sanity check compare the calculated 1 meter readings taken at different distances. They should be close. If they are not, then most likely the beam profile has not leveled out at the closer distances and you need to take the readings at a farther distance. To calculate throw distance, take the calculated 1 meter LUX reading, multiply it by 4, and then take the square root of that number. That is the throw distance in meters (when the lux reading should be 0.25 lux).
Thank you

My PayPal address: oldlumens (insert the @ sign here) gmail.com

My YouTube Flashlight Video Channel

The BLF Modding Links Thread 

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/1374/jQ2wdL.jpg

 

texaspyro
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
Joined: 04/29/2011 - 12:43
Posts: 4593
Old-Lumens wrote:

So if I do the 1M reading and them keep going farther out, at some point I will find a peak, where the beam is collimated?

Depending upon the beam profile, it might not be a peak. The calculated 1 meter readings could be increasing or decreasing as you move farther out, but at some distance they should settle down to a reasonably constant value.

Also, you want to take the reading at the brightest point of the beam. That may not always be apparent to the naked eye. Move your meter around and hunt out the hotest spot.

Old-Lumens
Old-Lumens's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
Joined: 11/04/2011 - 11:39
Posts: 7478
Location: Tyler, TX, USA

texaspyro wrote:
Old-Lumens wrote:

So if I do the 1M reading and them keep going farther out, at some point I will find a peak, where the beam is collimated?

Depending upon the beam profile, it might not be a peak. The calculated 1 meter readings could be increasing or decreasing as you move farther out, but at some distance they should settle down to a reasonably constant value. Also, you want to take the reading at the brightest point of the beam. That may not always be apparent to the naked eye. Move your meter around and hunt out the hotest spot.

I could not read the meter and aim the light at the same time, so I enlisted my wife. Picture her with her back to me and the meter sensor hanging over her shoulder, on her back, while she reads the meter itself, as I aim the lights at her back. I did move the beams around and she recorded the highest reading from each.

She puts up with a lot!

My PayPal address: oldlumens (insert the @ sign here) gmail.com

My YouTube Flashlight Video Channel

The BLF Modding Links Thread 

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/1374/jQ2wdL.jpg

 

Slim Pickens
Slim Pickens's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 58 min ago
Joined: 04/28/2012 - 19:50
Posts: 1231
Location: Lehigh Valley
Old-Lumens wrote:
So if I do the 1M reading and them keep going farther out, at some point I will find a peak, where the beam is collimated?

Yes, especially in the case of these two lights with honkin’ big reflectors. You’d find a measuring distance that gives readings close to the maximum throw potential. Any further than that yields minimal returns.

We can use the throw equation,

ANSI Throw = SquareRoot[(lux reading*distance from lux meter*distance from lux meter)÷(0.25 lux)]

and the readings you took to demonstrate this idea.

For the 3D’s reading you took at 2m:

Throw = SquareRoot[(2490)(2)(2)÷(0.25)] = 200m

Compare this to the 335m of throw obtained by the 10m reading. The 10m reading more closely represents the true throw of which the light is capable.

dct73
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 06/29/2012 - 21:40
Posts: 384
Location: wisconsin
Old-Lumens wrote:

dct73 wrote:
Reading at 10m x 100 (10^2) for 1m equivalent
My apologies. I never got past basic math in school. I do not know what that symbol means and does the result equal throw in meters?

I should have been more clear. 10^2 is ten squared or 10 times 10. As everyone else has said, simply multiply your meter eading by the distance squared to get equivalent 1m reading. The throw formula is a post or two above this.

jmpaul320
jmpaul320's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 1 week ago
Joined: 05/22/2012 - 09:06
Posts: 4189
Location: CT
Old-Lumens wrote:

texaspyro wrote:
Old-Lumens wrote:

So if I do the 1M reading and them keep going farther out, at some point I will find a peak, where the beam is collimated?

Depending upon the beam profile, it might not be a peak. The calculated 1 meter readings could be increasing or decreasing as you move farther out, but at some distance they should settle down to a reasonably constant value. Also, you want to take the reading at the brightest point of the beam. That may not always be apparent to the naked eye. Move your meter around and hunt out the hotest spot.

I could not read the meter and aim the light at the same time, so I enlisted my wife. Picture her with her back to me and the meter sensor hanging over her shoulder, on her back, while she reads the meter itself, as I aim the lights at her back. I did move the beams around and she recorded the highest reading from each.

She puts up with a lot!

does your lux meter not have a peak function?

Would you mind keeping the wrong flashlight?
Best wish, May
Tmart service team

 

Soumil wrote:

PLEASE HELP ME GEARBEsT! IM LITERALLY CRYING!

 

Old-Lumens
Old-Lumens's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
Joined: 11/04/2011 - 11:39
Posts: 7478
Location: Tyler, TX, USA

jmpaul320 wrote:
does your lux meter not have a peak function?
No, it does not. It's the one I am sending back, because it's the wrong one.

My PayPal address: oldlumens (insert the @ sign here) gmail.com

My YouTube Flashlight Video Channel

The BLF Modding Links Thread 

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/1374/jQ2wdL.jpg

 

apt323
apt323's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 4 days ago
Joined: 03/19/2012 - 20:18
Posts: 1556
Location: North Texas

I have that same meter. What i do is measure from 3 meters on the 20,000/x10 setting what ever that number is I multiply that number x 3 × 3. For example the jacob a60 does around 800.
So that would be 800 × 3 × 3 = 7,200 then add the zero for the x10 setting which give 72,000 or 72k

Hope this what you are looking for dont know though. Heck hopefully i am doing it correct. I just know that that is about the numbers some people are getting out of there stock lights.

luvlites
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 5 months ago
Joined: 02/29/2012 - 16:55
Posts: 354

Old-Lumens wrote:

Defiant 3D at 2meters – 2490 lux and at 10meters – 280 lux


Defiant 3C at 2meters – 7690 lux and at 10meters – 800 lux



I think your distances or readings are in error.

Because your second set of readings (from 10m) is 5 times as far from the source as your first set (from 2m), the lux readings at 10M should be approximately 1/25th of the readings at 2m, with some leeway for measurement error and optics. This is the “one over r squared” rule (1 over 5 squared = 1 over 5 times 5 = 1/25).
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/YBA/M31-velocity/1overR2-more.html

Your readings are more like 1/9th for two different lights with totally different beams which implies a consistent error. Either the two distances were actually 3 times as far from the lights or there’s some issue with the readings. I’ve done this extensively with all kinds of lights at varying distances and see nothing about your lights, either from the beam shots or the optics, that would warrant such a huge discrepancy.

apt323
apt323's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 4 days ago
Joined: 03/19/2012 - 20:18
Posts: 1556
Location: North Texas

Defiant C looks like its doing 77K lux. Thats pretty sweet mine is only getting 55-56k with copper added to the pill and a xml U3 1C (thats the only mods that have been done).

So this pumping out some light! Someone needs to get this one atleast!

Old-Lumens
Old-Lumens's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
Joined: 11/04/2011 - 11:39
Posts: 7478
Location: Tyler, TX, USA

luvlites wrote:
Old-Lumens wrote:

Defiant 3D at 2meters - 2490 lux and at 10meters - 280 lux

Defiant 3C at 2meters - 7690 lux and at 10meters - 800 lux

 

I think your distances or readings are in error. Because your second set of readings (from 10m) is 5 times as far from the source as your first set (from 2m), the lux readings at 10M should be approximately 1/25th of the readings at 2m, with some leeway for measurement error and optics. This is the "one over r squared" rule (1 over 5 squared = 1 over 5 times 5 = 1/25). http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/YBA/M31-velocity/1overR2-more.html Your readings are more like 1/9th for two different lights with totally different beams which implies a consistent error. Either the two distances were actually 3 times as far from the lights or there's some issue with the readings. I've done this extensively with all kinds of lights at varying distances and see nothing about your lights, either from the beam shots or the optics, that would warrant such a huge discrepancy.
Since I have slept, I couldn't tell you what might be wrong. I measured the distances and did the readings, but I probably won't go back and do any more. I am returning the meter. I think it sucks and I realize that, like anything else, you need a good one to be accurate and then it still needs to be calibrated, none of which I am going to do. I'm just going to stick to the old way. It's Damned Bright and lights up a long ways.

My PayPal address: oldlumens (insert the @ sign here) gmail.com

My YouTube Flashlight Video Channel

The BLF Modding Links Thread 

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/1374/jQ2wdL.jpg

 

dct73
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 06/29/2012 - 21:40
Posts: 384
Location: wisconsin

I doubt there is anything really wrong with that meter. Readings at 1m can be WAY off when it comes to throwers. Go by your 10m readings and disregard the 1m readings. Like I said in your thread about “bought lux meter, now what” you probably shouldn’t be using it at only 1m anyway.

77Kcd is pretty darn good. If I didn’t have another project coming in the mail right now I’d consider it!

luvlites
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 5 months ago
Joined: 02/29/2012 - 16:55
Posts: 354

Old-Lumens wrote:

Since I have slept, I couldn’t tell you what might be wrong. I measured the distances and did the readings, but I probably won’t go back and do any more. I am returning the meter. I think it sucks and I realize that, like anything else, you need a good one to be accurate and then it still needs to be calibrated, none of which I am going to do. I’m just going to stick to the old way. It’s Damned Bright and lights up a long ways.


I’ve done a ton of readings and have learned a lot through trial and error so if you want any help with this, just ask.
No need to use your wife by the way but you’re a lucky man that she’s so willing Smile
luvlites
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 5 months ago
Joined: 02/29/2012 - 16:55
Posts: 354

dct73 wrote:
I doubt there is anything really wrong with that meter. Readings at 1m can be WAY off when it comes to throwers. Go by your 10m readings and disregard the 1m readings. Like I said in your thread about “bought lux meter, now what” you probably shouldn’t be using it at only 1m anyway.

77Kcd is pretty darn good. If I didn’t have another project coming in the mail right now I’d consider it!


He didn’t take any readings at 1m and only one of the lights was a thrower. And both lights were off by the same factor.

Take a look at some quick and dirty readings I took of six different lights at 5, 10, 15 and 20 feet with a $15 lux meter and notice how all, including the TN31 and HD2010, consistently “obeyed” the 1/r^2 rule, even at 5 feet.
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/10277#node-10277

I’ve since taken many more readings from a wider variety of lights with a better lux meter (which I’ll post if/when I have time) and have never seen readings as inconsistent as what O-L posted. That’s not a slam, I love his work and am just trying to help.

Old-Lumens
Old-Lumens's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
Joined: 11/04/2011 - 11:39
Posts: 7478
Location: Tyler, TX, USA

luvlites wrote:
I've done a ton of readings and have learned a lot through trial and error so if you want any help with this, just ask. No need to use your wife by the way but you're a lucky man that she's so willing :)
The meter does not have a peak setting, so someone has to be reading the meter, while someone aims the light at it. That's why I used my wife for the "meter reader", LOL.

My PayPal address: oldlumens (insert the @ sign here) gmail.com

My YouTube Flashlight Video Channel

The BLF Modding Links Thread 

http://imageshack.com/a/img922/1374/jQ2wdL.jpg

 

Ouchyfoot
Ouchyfoot's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 09/01/2012 - 06:15
Posts: 5089
Location: Canada

Old-Lumens wrote:

I’m just going to stick to the old way. It’s Damned Bright and lights up a long ways.


Dead reckoning! Now that’s a system I know and trust.

Pages