WildTrail WT90 - SBT90.2 1800m+ throw 90mm 3x 21700 With Texas_Ace driver

318 posts / 0 new
Last post
Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9134
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

Mark M wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
Artiet59 wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
JaredM wrote:
At this size, I’d really expect about 950kcd. The TN42v2 is very close in size to the WT90 and it claims 864kcd, though, so maybe I’m expecting a bit too much.

I’d love to see beamshot comparisons vs the MF02Sv2/MT90.

TomE, what do you expect to get out of this one?

VOB is not replying to me, guess he is taking a break, anyone else ya’ll trust you would like me to send the prototype to for review? I have been away for awhile so not sure who is still around.


I really trust Flashoholic, and he does quality reviews. But I don’t know if the prototype thing is different for him?

Got a link to him? I am not familiar with him.

Yes you do, he had some “issues” with your TA tube. The_Flashaholic

It hit me after I posted that, that it might be him. I think I blocked him out of my memory lol.

Tubercle
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 4 min ago
Joined: 03/10/2019 - 14:28
Posts: 207
Location: USA

Texas_Ace wrote:
Mark M wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
Artiet59 wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
JaredM wrote:
At this size, I’d really expect about 950kcd. The TN42v2 is very close in size to the WT90 and it claims 864kcd, though, so maybe I’m expecting a bit too much.

I’d love to see beamshot comparisons vs the MF02Sv2/MT90.

TomE, what do you expect to get out of this one?

VOB is not replying to me, guess he is taking a break, anyone else ya’ll trust you would like me to send the prototype to for review? I have been away for awhile so not sure who is still around.


I really trust Flashoholic, and he does quality reviews. But I don’t know if the prototype thing is different for him?

Got a link to him? I am not familiar with him.

Yes you do, he had some “issues” with your TA tube. The_Flashaholic

It hit me after I posted that, that it might be him. I think I blocked him out of my memory lol.

Didn’t you complain about him and his personal ethics and antics w/ some dealings y’all had sometime a while back? (2 years ago)

Artiet59
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 35 min ago
Joined: 02/25/2020 - 17:55
Posts: 1679
Location: CT, USA

Texas_Ace wrote:
Mark M wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
Artiet59 wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
JaredM wrote:
At this size, I’d really expect about 950kcd. The TN42v2 is very close in size to the WT90 and it claims 864kcd, though, so maybe I’m expecting a bit too much.

I’d love to see beamshot comparisons vs the MF02Sv2/MT90.

TomE, what do you expect to get out of this one?

VOB is not replying to me, guess he is taking a break, anyone else ya’ll trust you would like me to send the prototype to for review? I have been away for awhile so not sure who is still around.


I really trust Flashoholic, and he does quality reviews. But I don’t know if the prototype thing is different for him?

Got a link to him? I am not familiar with him.

Yes you do, he had some “issues” with your TA tube. The_Flashaholic

It hit me after I posted that, that it might be him. I think I blocked him out of my memory lol.


Oh man,‘I was unaware my apologies.
Artiet59
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 35 min ago
Joined: 02/25/2020 - 17:55
Posts: 1679
Location: CT, USA

Texas_Ace wrote:
The bottom fin is deep enough but the reflector inside the light starts expanding, that is why the upper fins are shallower. By the 3rd fin, there would not be enough room for sure as it is only a few mm deep. I am not sure how thick the metal behind the fins is but the CAD drawing does not look like it would be thick enough.

I did ask them to look into it though and they are but they are much more receptive to a handle that can be added to the light understandably. I told them if they make the handle custom that adding a tripod mount to it would be great. We will see what happens.


Ok, that makes sense; woth the expanding width of the inside cavity of the head, resulting in less substance for the tripod hole.

And I am not at all opposed to the style handle you, Yokiamy, and others had been mentioning. That seems like a completely reliable and reasonable solution to me. I would pay extra for that, depending on price. If it was included even better, but I’d rather see the price of the light stay down and just purchase a handle after the fact.

Thanks TA for explaining this to me and your patience with it. Can’t wait for this light!

Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 48 min ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 14145
Location: LI NY

The tripod mount should be centered well to the weight when loaded with batts, for such a big light. It's somewhat odd to have the switch in front of the LED. I would think it puts your hand in the hot zone when holding it to operate the switch. Seems like they are trying to keep the length as short as possible while using a reflector as deep as possible. I'm not a fan of deep reflectors for throw, I know some are. Not sure if it's proven they result in any more kcd.

Without knowing the center of gravity, hard to say where it should be. Without a tripod mount it's not a deal breaker for me and does sound like only a re-design of this light would allow one to be designed in. I agree to punt for a designed in one for now, as TA is saying.

There's always the trade-off with switch position, making the hold area narrow enough to hold comfortably, and thermal design. I recall the old modded TN41's had a nice thin zone to hold comfortably but it was right where the LED is, and boy did that get hot.

Artiet59
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 35 min ago
Joined: 02/25/2020 - 17:55
Posts: 1679
Location: CT, USA

TA, I recommend Tom E to do a deep dive on this light. If he is willing of course?I know it would help me make a decision getting his two cents on it after he was able to handle it.

Artiet59
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 35 min ago
Joined: 02/25/2020 - 17:55
Posts: 1679
Location: CT, USA

Tom E wrote:
I’m not a fan of deep reflectors for throw, I know some are. Not sure if it’s proven they result in any more kcd.

If I can ask, why do you not like a deep reflector For throw? I honestly have never noticed if a light has a deep reflector or not. Is it because the effect it has on the beam? Or switch placement like you were mentioning?Or something else?
Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9134
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

Artiet59 wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
The bottom fin is deep enough but the reflector inside the light starts expanding, that is why the upper fins are shallower. By the 3rd fin, there would not be enough room for sure as it is only a few mm deep. I am not sure how thick the metal behind the fins is but the CAD drawing does not look like it would be thick enough.

I did ask them to look into it though and they are but they are much more receptive to a handle that can be added to the light understandably. I told them if they make the handle custom that adding a tripod mount to it would be great. We will see what happens.


Ok, that makes sense; woth the expanding width of the inside cavity of the head, resulting in less substance for the tripod hole.

And I am not at all opposed to the style handle you, Yokiamy, and others had been mentioning. That seems like a completely reliable and reasonable solution to me. I would pay extra for that, depending on price. If it was included even better, but I’d rather see the price of the light stay down and just purchase a handle after the fact.

Thanks TA for explaining this to me and your patience with it. Can’t wait for this light!

Ok, got an update, they will look into adding a tripod mount to future lights, not confirmed but they are going to give it their best shot if it can be done without effecting the rest of the light too much.

Also looking into handle options as well, so we will see what they come up with.

Artiet59
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 35 min ago
Joined: 02/25/2020 - 17:55
Posts: 1679
Location: CT, USA

Texas_Ace wrote:
Artiet59 wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
The bottom fin is deep enough but the reflector inside the light starts expanding, that is why the upper fins are shallower. By the 3rd fin, there would not be enough room for sure as it is only a few mm deep. I am not sure how thick the metal behind the fins is but the CAD drawing does not look like it would be thick enough.

I did ask them to look into it though and they are but they are much more receptive to a handle that can be added to the light understandably. I told them if they make the handle custom that adding a tripod mount to it would be great. We will see what happens.


Ok, that makes sense; woth the expanding width of the inside cavity of the head, resulting in less substance for the tripod hole.

And I am not at all opposed to the style handle you, Yokiamy, and others had been mentioning. That seems like a completely reliable and reasonable solution to me. I would pay extra for that, depending on price. If it was included even better, but I’d rather see the price of the light stay down and just purchase a handle after the fact.

Thanks TA for explaining this to me and your patience with it. Can’t wait for this light!

Ok, got an update, they will look into adding a tripod mount to future lights, not confirmed but they are going to give it their best shot if it can be done without effecting the rest of the light too much.

Also looking into handle options as well, so we will see what they come up with.

Thank you for the update TA!

Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 48 min ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 14145
Location: LI NY

Deep reflectors do narrow the spill, not sure if they narrow the hot spot much. If there is a gain in throw, it's not much. 3 main factors for throw in reflector lights:

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9134
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas
Tom E wrote:

The tripod mount should be centered well to the weight when loaded with batts, for such a big light. It’s somewhat odd to have the switch in front of the LED. I would think it puts your hand in the hot zone when holding it to operate the switch. Seems like they are trying to keep the length as short as possible while using a reflector as deep as possible. I’m not a fan of deep reflectors for throw, I know some are. Not sure if it’s proven they result in any more kcd.


Without knowing the center of gravity, hard to say where it should be. Without a tripod mount it’s not a deal breaker for me and does sound like only a re-design of this light would allow one to be designed in. I agree to punt for a designed in one for now, as TA is saying.


There’s always the trade-off with switch position, making the hold area narrow enough to hold comfortably, and thermal design. I recall the old modded TN41’s had a nice thin zone to hold comfortably but it was right where the LED is, and boy did that get hot.

It is strange to have the switch above the LED, and yes the grip does get hot but I worked with them on the thermal path quite a bit so the grip is only a few degrees warmer then the fins in my thermal test, so big picture it doesn’t seem to have that much of a real world effect on temps. Still took 6 mins to reach 60c at the grip in my test. I would say it is pretty close to the GT thermal gradient.

Loaded with cells the center of gravity is right below the switch it appears, feels pretty good in the hand. They got the balance pretty good for hand holding.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9134
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

I also got word they are planning to make 70 silver lights, total time should be about 30-40 days until those are ready (largely depends on the China holiday that is coming shortly). No word yet on if they will include a tripod mount, not sure if that will make it into this batch.

Artiet59
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 35 min ago
Joined: 02/25/2020 - 17:55
Posts: 1679
Location: CT, USA

I just noticed this- the silver picture is from 28 seconds into the OP video, And black picture is from the end of the video. Different head shape/design/roll stops. I like them both, but the silver one is nice. Kindve has a K1 feel to it. I wonder which one will make production?


Artiet59
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 35 min ago
Joined: 02/25/2020 - 17:55
Posts: 1679
Location: CT, USA
Texas_Ace wrote:
Tom E wrote:

The tripod mount should be centered well to the weight when loaded with batts, for such a big light. It’s somewhat odd to have the switch in front of the LED. I would think it puts your hand in the hot zone when holding it to operate the switch. Seems like they are trying to keep the length as short as possible while using a reflector as deep as possible. I’m not a fan of deep reflectors for throw, I know some are. Not sure if it’s proven they result in any more kcd.


Without knowing the center of gravity, hard to say where it should be. Without a tripod mount it’s not a deal breaker for me and does sound like only a re-design of this light would allow one to be designed in. I agree to punt for a designed in one for now, as TA is saying.


There’s always the trade-off with switch position, making the hold area narrow enough to hold comfortably, and thermal design. I recall the old modded TN41’s had a nice thin zone to hold comfortably but it was right where the LED is, and boy did that get hot.

It is strange to have the switch above the LED, and yes the grip does get hot but I worked with them on the thermal path quite a bit so the grip is only a few degrees warmer then the fins in my thermal test, so big picture it doesn’t seem to have that much of a real world effect on temps. Still took 6 mins to reach 60c at the grip in my test. I would say it is pretty close to the GT thermal gradient.

Loaded with cells the center of gravity is right below the switch it appears, feels pretty good in the hand. They got the balance pretty good for hand holding.


This is great info- about thermals, center of balance, etc. This light sounds solid!
Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 48 min ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 14145
Location: LI NY

I would be interested in testing/review of it. I could do vids as well. I have a better meter now I've been using for throw, as recommended by djozz - the Extech LT45, and even learned how to use it surprisedsmile. I also have a set of Vapcell T50's I'd like to try out in this light, as well as T30's and T40's

 

Ohhh - didn't finish my post before bout reflector depth. Some manufacturers think they need depth for max throw, so they add quite a bit to the length of the light, which is mostly a waste. Unless you really like the reduced spill area, and probably more brighter spill, I don't see the point of added length for basically no gain in throw.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9134
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas
Tom E wrote:

I would be interested in testing/review of it. I could do vids as well. I have a better meter now I’ve been using for throw, as recommended by djozz – the Extech LT45, and even learned how to use it surprisedsmile. I also have a set of Vapcell T50’s I’d like to try out in this light, as well as T30’s and T40’s


 


Ohhh – didn’t finish my post before bout reflector depth. Some manufacturers think they need depth for max throw, so they add quite a bit to the length of the light, which is mostly a waste. Unless you really like the reduced spill area, and probably more brighter spill, I don’t see the point of added length for basically no gain in throw.

I will send you a PM about the prototype.

Yeah, I agree that depth is not required but also not opposed to having it, just kinda neutral on it lol.

Artiet59
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 35 min ago
Joined: 02/25/2020 - 17:55
Posts: 1679
Location: CT, USA

Tom E wrote:

I would be interested in testing/review of it. I could do vids as well. I have a better meter now I’ve been using for throw, as recommended by djozz – the Extech LT45, and even learned how to use it surprisedsmile. I also have a set of Vapcell T50’s I’d like to try out in this light, as well as T30’s and T40’s


 


Ohhh – didn’t finish my post before bout reflector depth. Some manufacturers think they need depth for max throw, so they add quite a bit to the length of the light, which is mostly a waste. Unless you really like the reduced spill area, and probably more brighter spill, I don’t see the point of added length for basically no gain in throw.


I see what you’re saying about depth / vs. pure kcd benefit, makes sense. I guess I’d be neutral on it unless it added too much to the length of a light or really interferes with other design aspects. Good info I appreciate the explanation.

And I REALLY hope the prototype finds your doorstep. I think we would benefit from you having this light on your work bench. I know it’s helped me with other lights in the past. I’ll speak for myself, and I know others feel the same. Thanks guys.

Also- TA, any update about when We can PAY for this light? Lol. I have the money Burning a hole in my pocket Innocent and I don’t mind the whole “group buy” aspect where you throw your money in the hat before production is done. If that’s an option, If not no worries.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9134
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

After past experiences, I don’t do pre-pay anymore. Just too many possible issues and very little upsides.

They are supposed to be ready to go live with the listing in around 2 weeks depending on the china holiday that is going to shut china down for a week or so next week I think.

Artiet59
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 35 min ago
Joined: 02/25/2020 - 17:55
Posts: 1679
Location: CT, USA

Understandable, I have a tendency to get ahead of myself so good call. Thanks for heads up.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9134
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

The prototype is officially in the mail on the way to TomE for a more in depth review with beamshots!

Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 48 min ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 14145
Location: LI NY

Look'n forward to seeing it!

Artiet59
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 35 min ago
Joined: 02/25/2020 - 17:55
Posts: 1679
Location: CT, USA

awesome !

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 9134
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

Added the manual for the light to the second post

djozz
djozz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 15 min ago
Joined: 09/07/2012 - 17:04
Posts: 17676
Location: Amsterdam

I do like deep (but not extremely deep) reflectors. While spot brightness is not affected, some of the spill that is in shallower reflectors is in deep reflectors converted into a bit wider hotspot, which is where I find the light more useful than going to the side.

This Wildtrail light, from what I can see, has about my ideal reflector depth.

Artiet59
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 35 min ago
Joined: 02/25/2020 - 17:55
Posts: 1679
Location: CT, USA

i am getting very excited for this WT90, specifically because i got my MF02sV2 delivered last night, which is an awesome light. And this WT90 (i believe) will trump the mf02sV2, based on the reflector width (74mm vs 90mm), battery type (3 30t’s or 40t’s!), and design for thermal capabilities. I mean i could be wrong, and i really like my mf02sV2, but i see this WT90 being on a whole different level while being close to the same size. which is exciting.

Oh, and plus the WT90 has Narsil UI, which is just MUCH better then the stock Astrolux UI, i think most of us would agree. lol.

zoulas
zoulas's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 06/01/2020 - 08:35
Posts: 982

If they are ever mass produced, I am in for one of each color.

Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 48 min ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 14145
Location: LI NY

That MF02S v2 rating of 6500 lumens is way out there. I see Flashaholic got more reasonable #'s, think 4800 at 30 secs, 5600 at turn on. I'm even surprised it got 5600 lumens at turn on - that's impressive for a SBT90.2 in a factory stock light.

I'm assuming the short MF02S v2 has 4 parallel cells?

JordanZHP
Offline
Last seen: 21 min 25 sec ago
Joined: 03/25/2017 - 04:37
Posts: 524
Location: California

I agree, 5600 lumens is very nice. My Noctigon K1 SBT90.2 was 5,100 lumens at turn on and I know Hank pushes the envelope for sure.

@Lojik
Offline
Last seen: 10 hours 46 min ago
Joined: 05/20/2020 - 22:36
Posts: 98
Location: Kingdom of Los Angeles

Interested in a silver one.

BOMBAY
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 15 min ago
Joined: 04/24/2016 - 10:07
Posts: 232
Location: Polska
Tom E wrote:

That MF02S v2 rating of 6500 lumens is way out there. I see Flashaholic got more reasonable #‘s, think 4800 at 30 secs, 5600 at turn on. I’m even surprised it got 5600 lumens at turn on – that’s impressive for a SBT90.2 in a factory stock light.


I’m assuming the short MF02S v2 has 4 parallel cells?

2S2P

Pages