Looks like CNQ has the upgraded version of the SolarStorm ready and now called the APEX.
Tempting, very tempting, thanks for posting the new model
Edit: awesome, no blindly modes 
sold my sky ray l1 , so lets hope its around the same or a bit brighter , i also have the ultrafire uf t70 which is a very high quality torch but not quite as bright as the l1.i have paid for fast shipping so will give my thoughts when it arives i have no testing equipment but i am a reasonable judge of this type of light , recently sold my tk70 which has no equal but its size makes it very impractical.
I ran across this light at powerwholesale.net and they have it listed for $67.74. Probably not the same version Ric has but it’s also roughly 2/3 the price. Would it be considered too under driven even though it’s cheaper? Thoughts?
Yes, I would go with the APEX modified version even if you’re paying more. It was modified specifically to be driven harder than the stock Solar Storm. Otherwise you might as well go with the Sky Ray KING. If you’re concerned with output and drive levels then you’d probably accept the higher price tag if you’re particularly interested in this light.
Yeah, I guess you’re right. No reason to be underwhelmed at $70. I was actually looking at the Trustfire X100 and I saw this one.
Powerwholesale needs to charge you shipping. About 40 bucks for the X100 if you are doing DHL. It was 29 dollars for me for CPAM here in SG.
That’s the Solarstorm version, about 1.4A driven. APEX is 1.7A. Unfortunately the 2.0A driver never made it, guess the stresses are too high.
I just placed an order for the pale-white tint model. I’l do a Detailed review when it arrives…. just sit tight chaps!!!
People in the other thread are saying its over-priced for a budget light. I agree its not cheap (at $105 shipped). Still though I dont think its over priced, by the time you add up the feature-set and design elements offered here… its got some pretty unique features going for it. I don’t know any other multi-XML light that uses TIR lenses (for example), and almost all of the m have disco modes… which I personally can’t stand.
One more thing too, have you guys priced other manufacturers/builders who do semi-custom builds for the other www forums? I guarantee you, we’re looking at least $2-400 if anyone else offered a 3000 bulb lumen light with this design… and constructive feedback taken from a www community.
Early on myself and others noted that we wanted a light driven harder (than its initial offering), no disco, and I for one wanted a high frequency PWM. Ric came through on most if not all of those points.
I’ll keep you all posted…
Are you sure the model you ordered has TIR lenses? The pictures of the light in CN’s site look like regular smooth reflectors to me, or is it a mod you plan to do?
Thanks!
I didn’t even realize it was only 1.7A. That’s really not much of a difference, then again it’s only $5 more than the Solar Storm he is selling. I wonder why 2.0A wasn’t acceptable. That’s still half of the turbo mode from the DRY and in a very safe range of the XML. I guess I need to be enlightened as to why it wouldn’t work.
There would be way to much heat with more xmls more heat would be generated. Ric had originally tried to make a 2 amp version but he didn't since it go to hot.
DHL tells me the Apex is local and should arrive Tuesday. A buddy has the Sky King and eager to run the Apex along side. We shall see.
Once you get it make sure to post up some beamshots. :D
these look like they could be TIR lenses not traditional vapor deposition reflectors. Although it could just be the lighting and camera refelctions. So nope… I am definitely not entirely sure.
Heat build up is too much for a light this size/mass for the run times and more “constant-ON” intended target of its designer (edited for clarity). The TR-J12 is 5XML only driven at ~1.4A and it gets very warm after 10 minutes, hot after ~15. I speculate the additional .3A going to each Apex led will make it run slight but noticeably hotter than the TR-J12, and at 1.7A its right around the point of diminishing returns. The multi-XML designs, in hosts this compact & light weight simply CAN’T be run full tilt current (at least not for very long).
So 2.0A * 5 XML is hotter than 4.0A * 3 XML? I figured if the the DRY could manage at those levels than the 5 XML’s at only 2.0A would be safe enough for a short duration. I understand the concept of heat output. I just thought the 2.0A level would still be safe given what we already know about the DRY.
I believe 4A*3 will get hotter than 2A*5 since leds in theory produce more lumens/Amps the lower they are driven which means they are more efficient, so less heat per Amp.
The way I understand it 43 watts of heat is going to run hotter than 34 watts despite the fact that running it at a lower current is more efficient.
4A into each of 3 XML = 12A total to the 3-LED array
At~3.6Vf that equates to 3.6V x 12A = 43.2 Watts
2A into each of 5 XML = 10A total to the 5-LED array
At ~3.4Vf that equates to 3.4V x 10A = 34 Watts
On paper 5-XML at 2A each should run cooler. Its dissipating less wattage into more LEDs, that will result in lower temperatures overall.
Note also that the DRY can’t run longer than a few minutes tops before significantly heating up its LEDs. So while it can “manage” those levels, its far from optimal for anything longer than a short time.
So I’m confused then. Aren’t you now saying the 2.0A drive level is quite possible given the calculations and comparing it to the DRY? Even at 2.0A we’re still only at 80% of maximum wattage generated by the DRY. Unless, of course, Ric is going a different direction this time and is more concerned with safety and efficiency regardless of mode arrangement.