Acebeam x45 vs Haikelite MT09R

Thank you for confirming. I have not yet found an actual spec sheet for the MT09R. I wonder how much further the v.2 would throw at the “24,000 lumen”. It seems reasonable that the v.2 could likely throw around 800 meters at least. I doubt the V.2 could only throw what the V.1 did.

MT09R specs from manual

Wow so the v.2 gains no more throw with the extra lumens. I did not see that coming. I figured the Candela likely went up therefore the throw did but I guess not. Thank you for sharing the user manual.

I see the manual on the Haikelite says to use button top batteries with some protections listed. I was wondering which protected button tops you use and if there are any problems with the fit. I’m about to buy some cells but am worried Buttontop & protected cells may not fit or be too tight to close. Figured i’d ask someone that actually has one. Thank you.

I got the one with ’35s and VTC6es (maybe, might be VTC5s or VTC5As), and never had any problems.

Then again, I don’t try imitating the sun, so don’t leave it cranked up that much for that long.

But whichever you do use, they’re the Protected ButtonTop version or regular Flattops?

Series, so protected BTs, unfortunately.

XHP35 HI have a much smaller die than the XHP70.2, and are domeless. This makes them much more throwy.

What reputation does Haikelite have?

Well not a good one. From what I’ve hear is if you can replace the fake FET and do spring bypasses you’ll have a good light. If you can’t don’t buy it.

The lumens on the XHP70.2 went significantly up from v.1 to v.2. I thought candela would have went up too therefore throw must have gone up a bit too. I don’t get how adding more lumens does make the light throw slightly further but thats because I clearly just don’t understand how it works.

This light hasn’t had a model using XHP70A so I’m not sure why you’d say the throw would be the same with them. The XHP70.2 is very close in size of the light-emitting surface and the huge output bump from the 50/70.2 models will definitely increase throw due to sheer output when compared to the original 50.2/70 in the same light.

The cd/lm (a measure of “throwiness) should be very close between A (original) and B (< ”.2”) models.

I was not familiar with the v.1 as all the specs I checked were for the v.2. The only thing I knew was that the numbers doubled in the v.2. I figured they must’ve still been the same-ish components since the reasons for needing the V.2 were more corrective instead of it just being the time to upgrade the model. Clearly I was wrong and that’s exactly why my theory of further throw didn’t pan out with the higher lumens. 600 meters is still very much respectable for what is considered a floodier light. Thank you for helping me understand why it wasn’t making sense to me.

Ohhhhh you’re talking about the light itself, thought you meant XHP70 vs XHP70.2 emitters.

The cd/lm stays the same and throw increases proportionately. The original throw number were almost certainly inflated just as output numbers were, but with the updates (and potentially FET swap and spring bypass) real-world performance gets closer to those optimistic figures.

Yes I apologize, my lack of knowledge when it comes to emitters makes me imply things I don’t really understand yet when I mention different versions of flashlights.

What happened was that I came across the original group-buy thread on here for the v.1. In the description I saw the thrower went something like 1000 meters and the flood went 600 meters. This is where I got my original impression of the V.1 and it’s specs. From that minimal understanding of the first one is how I made the leap to the farther throw when I saw what the V.2 offered lumen-wise. I didn’t know what emitters were used or that those numbers were inflated. But now I understand that they never actually met those specs throw-wise until the V.2 came out. So that explains why the ratings on throw were identical on paper. I always figured it was a typo and of course all this fueled my ignorance even more.

Thats what brought me here wondering how two different lights (one being noticeably upgraded) could possibly still have the very same throw distances. Thank you for the detailed explanation and sorry for the head-scratching questions.

No worries, it wasn’t your fault for being confused… Haikelite made this confusing for everyone. :weary:

That said hopefully the light lives up to expectations. A friend of mine had one with the updates and it was very impressive for the price.

I did an upgrade for the MT09R driver :person_with_crown:

I had an MT09R last year and this year have an X45. Don’t have both same time but I measured them. MT09R out of the box made around 17000 lumens. X45 made around 16000 lumens.
I made spring bypasses in MT09R and it made the FET go up in smoke. Replaced the cheap FET with a trusty brand one and it made 21510 lumens with bypasses.
I tried unrotected and new 30Q batteries in X45 but never gone over the 16100 lumens for me. But it is beautiful quality light and can hold 5000 lumens for good amount of time and much shorter than MT09R.
I don’t have any problems with X45 but maybe soon I give it a Lexel driver with Anduril because Anduril is my favourite. And maybe dedome all 4 leds.