First impressions / mini review: Palight T6 (not mobile-friendly)

Still waiting for my Palight T6

With springs at both ends my bet is that in shortie configuration it will handle both two 16340's or two 18350's. I doubt it will then switch to low as it is doing with a single 18650.

Some kept saying here that this flashlight is the same with OTR X5. From the pictures the finish doesn't look that good as the OTR X5. X5's tube is nicer. With only one battery goes to low.... so not 1 cell thrower, I've heard that X5 might not be good because it can't take 1 cell like the Palight T6.

And look at the internals, this one is messy, has a spring, and a copper pill. The X5 doesn't have a spring or a copper pill.

This Palight T6 looks on the outside like the OTR X381.

Update: most images are now clickable for full-resolution shots.

And just to clarify: this is how the flashlight came out of the box. I haven't had a chance to clean or lubricate anything yet. That's why you can see metal shavings in one of the close-ups. Still, at this point in time, I think this light is a good deal. You can probably tell I'm a bit hesitant because I haven't used it for more than half an hour and haven't had much of chance to make up my mind. But, so far and for what it is, I like it.

I would say it's at least not from the same manufacturer because we know who makes the OTR lights and they're tight on their quality control.

Sorry, that must be me! Tongue out

Yeah, i'd definitely say with the OTR X5 beside me, that is absolutely a day-and-night difference, the OTR X5 is perfect. Anyway the OTR X5 is way more expensive if you get it by its own and don't "share" shipping + w/o a discount.

The OTR X5 also has a massive and very weighty drop-in (mass to absorb the heat even if you are in the tropics).

But hey, i think it'd still perform. Someone pls get some figures. :)

Driver/drop-in is different, definitely.


55mm head & 57mm head

You were not alone, 2100. I too made the mistake of thinking the Palight T6 was the same as the X5 and was an advocate of it. I didn't even know that there was a very similar looking but slightly smaller light on the market. Sorry folks.

A couple more pictures and some updates. Summer from DD requested that I add a link to their store and considering that this was a group buy, I'm happy to oblige.

I disassembled the light to inspect it, and noticed that the reflector wasn't screwed all the way down.

So, naturally, after I tightened everything back into place, I was left with this (note the gap).

And this is what it sounds like...

I suppose it's nothing an extra o-ring can't fix, but since I'm not at home and don't make it a habit to carry spares with me, I had to unscrew the reflector a bit to fix the annoying rattle. This is probably something the manufacturer should address in the future.

The light on high. All I have at the moment is my cell phone camera, which doesn't have an option to disable AWB. ISO 100, F2.8, 1/111s.

Drop-in amount of threads look ok. Should perform if LED is driven at full power. Lots of mass for heatsinking.

I have received my light today. I also have the same issues as Oxy Moron.

The glass lens is too small at 51mm needs to be 52mm, also needs to be couple of mm thicker.

My light came with no bubble warp. The tail cap was loose in the box this is because the box is too small, that's why they don not attach the tail cap.

The light only pulls 1Amp(High) 0.50Amp(Med) and 0.04Amp(Low).

Memory mode is perfect, you only have to wait 1-2 seconds.

There is a pre-flash when you start it on Low mode.

Oxy Moron how many Amps is your light pulling?

That is a good question. I only measured high, and I think I got 1.7ish A.

I loaned mine out to a friend and I should have it back sometime next week. Mine exhibits the same behavior on low, btw.

Can anyone tell me what Amps should I get at the tail-cap for the LED to get 3Amps?

Should I get a reading of 1.5Amps therefore I get 3Amps at the LED.

Right now I get 1 to 1.06Amps at the tail-cap, so is the LED getting 2 - 2.12Amps?

Yeah, actually you're more interested in watts (the power) rather than voltage or current

w = V x A, so if you double the tailcap voltage, halve the current.

At 1.06A @ 8.4v (dual fresh 18650s), you're still talking about about 8.5w of power, vs. ~12.5w for a 'hard driven' XML... From the spec sheets, it looks like you're losing about 20% of your emitter lumens in exchange for 50% longer runtime.

Does it mean that the light is making 850Lm?

100lm per Watt?

Match did some testing a while back, and the (relevant) results would be:

2A: 686 lumens

3A: 881 lumens

(you can see the results over here)

There will be a difference for 1 and 2 batteries. Yes?

Yes. Two batteries will supply double the voltage (assuming they're in series).

Anyways, easy way to think of it is that if you have a dual battery light, you expect half the current to produce the same amount of power. (all, of course, considering that the drivers might waste more power as the voltage rises)