Acebeam L19 long range thrower *pics*

10 posts / 0 new
Last post
mgracia85
mgracia85's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 7 hours ago
Joined: 12/01/2017 - 18:35
Posts: 321
Location: East Texas
Acebeam L19 long range thrower *pics*

I am by no means a reviewer but I got a hold of this flashlight early and I figured I’d post some pics of it. I won’t mention any of the specs or go on some long rant about it. I figure if there are some people like me out there they just like to see pics and beam shots. I will post some today and some more later on.

Overall pretty impressive for its size as you can see in some of the comparison pics it’s not overwhelmingly large but compared pretty well to the much large Noctigon K1.

Only thing I will mention is that it’s UI is different than I expected. The tail button is ONLY for turbo. Once it’s turned on by tail switch, turbo is all you get, the side switch does nothing. If you turn it on using the side switch then you have access to all the brightness levels.

You can get it at www.acebeam.com for about $150 us

(P.S. don’t mind the fence leaning over, some strong winds knock it over. Been trying to get the neighbor to pay for half.)

This tree is about 60/70 yards away

THIS IS THE NOCTIGON K1 for comparison.

Here is the size comparison between the L19 and the K1.

I love my wife’s toy poodle

Edited by: mgracia85 on 01/17/2021 - 21:13
Sirstinky
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 18 min ago
Joined: 11/02/2018 - 17:07
Posts: 1374
Location: Vancouver, WA

That thing is slick. Looks like the L18 with added cooling and if course a Boost HX and new optic. I have the L18 and it’s bonkers.

drgentr
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 1 week ago
Joined: 03/24/2020 - 21:03
Posts: 16

for $150 they could surely afford an aspheric collimator instead of whatever $4 polycarbonate thing carclo has released this year

BurningPlayd0h
BurningPlayd0h's picture
Online
Last seen: 7 min 51 sec ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 02:16
Posts: 1788
Location: MN
drgentr wrote:
for $150 they could surely afford an aspheric collimator instead of whatever $4 polycarbonate thing carclo has released this year

And completely neuter the output? Lumen #s on the box matter for marketing and IMHO an aspheric beam has a pretty limited usefulness.

The cost of a reflector or optic doesn’t indicate its effectiveness for making a good flashlight. Acebeam does definitely charge a significant premium for their higher build quality though.

Sirstinky
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 18 min ago
Joined: 11/02/2018 - 17:07
Posts: 1374
Location: Vancouver, WA

I agree. The L1x series beams keep getting better from the L17, which was good, then the L18 which was more useful. I think for an optic these throw very well, and nearly meet the factory specs. Yah they’re expensive, but the quality is awesome.

drgentr
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 1 week ago
Joined: 03/24/2020 - 21:03
Posts: 16
BurningPlayd0h wrote:
drgentr wrote:
for $150 they could surely afford an aspheric collimator instead of whatever $4 polycarbonate thing carclo has released this year

And completely neuter the output? Lumen #s on the box matter for marketing and IMHO an aspheric beam has a pretty limited usefulness.

Polycarbonate nominal light transmission: 89~92%
Crown glass nominal light transmission: 95~97% (without AR coating – with, add 1~2%)

an aspheric lens would also be like 4-6x thinner than that bigass TIR (hence: less material to block transmission)

Re: “aspheric beams are too tight to be useful”, you can just put the lens on a helicoid thread and let the user make it afocal if for some reason they want less throw.

BurningPlayd0h
BurningPlayd0h's picture
Online
Last seen: 7 min 51 sec ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 02:16
Posts: 1788
Location: MN
drgentr wrote:
BurningPlayd0h wrote:
drgentr wrote:
for $150 they could surely afford an aspheric collimator instead of whatever $4 polycarbonate thing carclo has released this year

And completely neuter the output? Lumen #s on the box matter for marketing and IMHO an aspheric beam has a pretty limited usefulness.

Polycarbonate nominal light transmission: 89~92%
Crown glass nominal light transmission: 95~97% (without AR coating – with, add 1~2%)

an aspheric lens would also be like 4-6x thinner than that bigass TIR (hence: less material to block transmission)

Re: “aspheric beams are too tight to be useful”, you can just put the lens on a helicoid thread and let the user make it afocal if for some reason they want less throw.

You get losses from bouncing the light off the reflector so the total OTF percentage is similar to polycarb optics.

lumenflux
Offline
Last seen: 8 months 1 week ago
Joined: 12/12/2020 - 02:48
Posts: 15

I tried L19, these are my observations.

Hot spot is full, but has minor discoloration towards the edges.

Spill is non existent, TIR optic is the same type as Stremlight TLR-1. Instead of spill there is barely noticeable fill.

The purpose of such TIR optic is to minimize blinding from the spill while concentrating lumens into as higher candella value as possible.

TIR optics are applied well to a specific application – tactical weapon lights.

While L19 is not a hunting light, it is tactical light, with a number of shortcomings.

Acebeam series of lights are not of true 21700 format, and use propriety Acebeam cells with integrated USB-C chargers.

Acebeam cells are so much longer that they can no be used in other 21700 lights or chargers. User is locked into using the integrated USB-C charging, or a magnetic snap lead type charger.

The only positive aspect of such an arrangement is that the L19 does not have a charger ingratiated into the light housing itself, thus it has higher water resistance rating vs lights that use a rubber plug to cover the built in charging port.

L19 thickness of cell tube is really thin in comparison to other lights. The thickness of L19 tail switch wall is only .74mm. In comparison the thickness of Convoy M21C tail switch wall is 1.38mm.

The thickness of Convoy M21C cell tube measured from wall interior to thread is 2mm.

I just wanted to measure tube wall thickness of L19 and it’s another shortcoming that has to be mentioned.

Absence of a charge port integrated into the light housing and the need to take out the cell for charging presents another problem for a tactical light.

With the L19 installed on a weapon, pressure switch pad attached and lead wire fitted, unscrewing the pressure switch cap becomes a giant pain in the ass. You are either forced to twist the crap out of the lead wire, or remove L19 from the weapon.

This is a major shortcoming which separates this light from true tactical lights which use milspec detachable connectors. The light stays installed on the weapon, but the switch lead wire is detachable.

If L19 had a proper pressure switch pad with a tail cap that had a detach cable connector, it would be a viable low end tactical light option. Without a pro connector, as a tactical light L19 is a novelty item.

Pressure switch pad design is a major drawback of this light which negates its primary purpose of use.

Very thin wall construction also makes me doubt durability of the light in a drop test. Given standard attachment point by the tac ring and large diameter reflector, upon the drop the impact will most likely occur on the reflector head, which can deform cell housing tube.

I’m not going to try the test myself, but I have to doubt that a standard weapon drop test from shoulder height is survivable by this light.

This leads me away from tactical use and to everyday use.

In direct comparison to standard reflector of Convoy M21C, while M21C has a pronounced spill ring it also has a much tighter hot spot with odd shaped corona.

In totality of focus and throw, while L19 is noticeably brighter, it is not brighter by much. The brightness difference becomes evident at ranges of 200 meters, where larger yet brighter L19 hotspot is roughly 20% brighter then that of M21C. At closer ranges hotspot brightness level difference is negligible.

While I did test run times and thermals I did it for myself and did not record data.

In short Convoy M21C ran longer, at higher level output and at lower thermals. L19 overheated quickly, and after looking at L18 and design differences from L19, it’s obvious that L18 heats up even quicker.

Similarly, while L19 UI is acceptable, the side button is laughably anemic for practical application. It is tiny, totally flush with the body, and impossible to locate/operate not only with gloves on, but difficult to locate with bare hands. Button design is also utterly unfit for practical application in cold weather. The button itself is a metal disk positioned into a metal housing cylinder that’s pressed into the body. The gap tolerance between the housing cylinder and the button is very small, and the button is guaranteed to freeze shut against the housing cylinder in freezing temperatures.

The only usable tac switch of L19 is the tail switch, but at that it’s dual use function is dubious at best. Tail switch has a dual use button, which supposed to allow a momentary on with a half press, and constant on will full click press. The travel distance between momentary to full click is so short, that it’s very hard to feel it out with bare hands while just playing around with it, but when wearing gloves and actually doing something momentary function will be impossible to get, and it’ll always be a full click press.

As a tac light L19 falls completely short, L19 is not a hunting light as advertized since in most countries night hunting with a flash light is illegal anyway (safety concerns), and as a everyday light L19 TIR optic severely limits applicable use.

In direct comparison, for everyday use a $40 Convoy M21C is a much more reasonable alternative. While having very similar dimensions M21C is tougher built so if it’s dropped it is far less likely to be damaged, it holds turbo mode longer and with less heat buildup, it uses a standard 21700, and costs a fraction of what L19 does.

I have not tried L21C, but I suspect that with a large reflector it will actually beat L19 in hot spot candella, all the while providing usable spill, and similarly to M21C also at a fraction of the cost.

While I’ll be keeping my L19, I can not recommend it. It’s not a true tac light, and there are better and far, far less expensive everyday flashlight options out there.

While initially I did not get the L21C because of its extra weight and head diameter vs portable M21C, now I am kind of tempted to get it just for a comparison to M21C and L19. I did try Sofirn SF47T and that thing is such a hot mess it’s not even worth bringing it up, just avoid it.

That’s my take on it.

Gatzetec
Gatzetec's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 weeks 15 hours ago
Joined: 06/16/2013 - 16:45
Posts: 21
Location: Germany

The new AceBeam L19 Camo Edition is coming soon to Gatzetec.de
See more : https://www.gatzetec.de/Taschenlampen/Acebeam/L19-Camo-Edition.html

Regards Thorsten

Enderman
Enderman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 6 hours ago
Joined: 11/03/2016 - 22:42
Posts: 4278
Location: Vancouver, Canada
drgentr wrote:
BurningPlayd0h wrote:
drgentr wrote:
for $150 they could surely afford an aspheric collimator instead of whatever $4 polycarbonate thing carclo has released this year

And completely neuter the output? Lumen #s on the box matter for marketing and IMHO an aspheric beam has a pretty limited usefulness.

Polycarbonate nominal light transmission: 89~92%
Crown glass nominal light transmission: 95~97% (without AR coating – with, add 1~2%)

an aspheric lens would also be like 4-6x thinner than that bigass TIR (hence: less material to block transmission)

Re: “aspheric beams are too tight to be useful”, you can just put the lens on a helicoid thread and let the user make it afocal if for some reason they want less throw.


An aspheric lens only collects about 25-50% of the light from an LED, depending on the numerical aperture.
While a plastic TIR does have less transmission than glass, it actually collects 100% of the light from the LED due to its hybrid reflector-lens construction.
This is how a TIR can get 80-90% or more of the LED’s light out of the flashlight instead of most of it going to waste like in an aspheric light.