okay, it was you then against whom i lost on ebay? (favourlights/olightworld)
haha 
congrats to the win!!
No, it wasn't me I'm not guilty ;)
lol.
on ebay they sell (XP-G R5, greenish tint) at ~30.00$. tomorrow's the next round!
lemme check, in Germany they sell (XP-G S2) at €39.90 plus €4.50 shipping. you know.. such prices ruin the fun and the purpose of buying it. Not long ago the colored aluminum versions were on sale on Shiningbeam, some US$ 14.xx (= ~€10.00). 10EUR vs. 45EUR for essentially the same light .. hilarious.
The "9.0grams" .. would be absolutely amazing. Yes please, exact measurements to the 1/10 of a gram, thanks a lot for the help!!
Yes, the price is range is enormous. Thats why I buy it from China or US and prefer to wait a few weeks.
I bought it for the same reason: Weight. I hope it delivers what it promises.
But on ebay the sell it for ~ 40$ as well.
it must be even lighter than the DQG Tiny II (1x AAA) .. probably because the DQG is made out of steel and the iTP out of Titanium.
i am wondering what the DQG Tiny III (=Titanium) will weigh. Cant be much less than the "9grams"!!
If i cant get the iTP for 30.0$ on ebay, i'll wait for the Tiny III, no problem. I dont have any rush with buying more flashlights.
I guess it will still take sometime until the DQG Tiny III is ready to buy. But with a little luck (and patience 
) you should get the iTP for $ 30 from ebay.
i have found another inet resource which seems to be trustworthy. it lists the Titanium as [quote]
weight: 14.3
weight keychain: 8.0 grams
weight pocket clip: 1.4 grams [/quote]
so pocket clip and keychain weigh together 9.4 grams. apparently the (14.3 - 9.4 =) 4.9 grams cant be the weight of the bare flashlight, thus the 14.3 is the weight of the bare flashlight. These data, unfortunately, contradict the 11.6grams measured by selfbuilt. Why contradict? Because a Titanium flashlight should be lighter than an Aluminum flashlight (or am i wrong?).
With these data (14.3, 69.5mm), the light isnt any (much) better than my Lumintop Worms (14.3, 71.46mm), with which i am very satisfied. My Worms have insane runtimes on Medium and High levels - that's why i chose them (purchase) over the iTP A3/Olight i3's.
Back to the iTP. 30US$ would equal 22.2461 EUR and i'd be grudgingly willing to pay this kind of money for no additional gain. (Interestingly the linked dealer sells at 27.95€ which is a not too far from the ebay price, but still too expensive for what you get!).
Here a summary of the website's data:
weight Alu version: 10 grams 16,90€
weight Titanium version: 14.3 -14.9 grams without batteries (+ Protected Trustfire 16440 3.7V 8.7grams) 27,95€ (ouch!)
weight Stainless Steel version: 21.4 - 22 grams 22,90€ (ouch!)
The titanium torch is on order now with ebay-seller favourlights (formerly ebay-seller "olightworld"), paid US$31 total, nice price! The main reason why i am getting it is the LiIon compatibility (for turbo boost runtimes), reportedly nice beam pattern+tint on all brightness levels, the centricity of the keychain attachment point, the robustness of the keychain attachment point, and the nice looking polished metal finish, in theory scratch resistant (it's not, of course; see youtube videos of Preon 1/2 Titanium LE). It is confirmed info that the Alu is the most light-weight version (9-10grams), the Stainless Steel is the heaviest, and the Titanium is in between. Its size and weight isnt notably better than the Lumintop Worm Aluminum, so that's not the gain or improvement i will be getting for the unnecessary splurge.
For our records, I will also check if i can switch heads (lego-ability) between the Lumintop Worm and the iTP. (*FYI* 4Sevens Preon heads are interchangeable with iTP A3 heads!), why? Because the iTP cant tailstand (and the design of the Olight i3 is sub-optimal too as is Maratac's) similar to many other AAA lights (Preon Revo (lol), Klarus MiX6, ..).
Stay tuna
i think i know what ails our lights. i noticed that when not fully tightened (off position) the light still tends to activate momentarily when a slight downward force is applied to the head. i noticed this a couple of times so i suspect that inside my pants pockets it could have happened more times. especially if your wearing jeans.this seems to have an effect on the contacts inside the light such that even when fully tightened the contact dont seem to connect to each other.
what i do is to give it a gentle tap on the head (or sides of it) and presto.... it lights up! i have done this ever since and the light activates. so its a twist and tap routine now.:)
so to avoid this i suggest to make a extra turn or two when you loosen the head to switch off the light to prevent unwanted downward pressure on the head when in your pants.
hope this helps.:)
Here some notes on the iTP A3 Titanium which i got today!
For our records, ive scanned the iTP A3 manual for the SS/Ti versions. everybody may want to compare it with the manual of the Alu versions or of the Olight i3. Interesting is the explicit mentioning of "XP-G R5" and the explicit mentioning of "10440 cells". It means that the iTP A3 officially supports 10440 LiIon cells .. as long as you control the temperature (e.g. by bathing lmao the torch in a cold water bucket).
At the same time, people report that Protected 10440's do *not* fit and one would have to apply some German work-around trick (e.g. adding a flat washer, grommet or piece of wire) haha.
www.rundring.de sells so-called "Kupferdichtringe". A working size is
Kupferdichtring DIN 7603A 08,0 x 12,0 x 1,0, i.e. 8.0mm inner diameter, 12.0mm outer diameter, and 1.0mm thickness. The "12.0" is perfect and the "1.0" is fine but it should be no more (0.7mm-1.0mm is an okay range). The "8.0" however is a little tight and it should be wider: possibly in the middle between 8.0 and 10.0mm because the copper ring could form a short with the positive end (button) of the Protected 10440 cell. So either file/bore/dremel the 8.0mm hole wider to say 9.0 or 9.5mm, or file/dremel the 13.5mm down to 12.0mm ( Kupferdichtring DIN 7603A 10,0 x 13,5 x 1,0 ), you decide! Alternatively you could cut out a litte piece (ring sector) from the 13.5-ring and then bend the loose ends towards each other to close the circle (ring). While this is maybe the fastest way to get a safe working ring, i certainly prefer one of the other non-destructive methods.
my own measurements:
length is, without nub: 67.10mm (light off), 66.95mm (light on, head fully twisted)
length is, with nub: 69.35mm (light off), 69.28mm (light on, head fully twisted)
height of nub is (calculated): 2.25-2.33mm
on a post scale (accuracy 1gram) the weight of the Titanium version is: 14grams (without split ring and without pocket clip and without keychain). (I will publish more accurate weight data at some later point thanks)
The tint and beam pattern are pretty much perfect. Large bright hotspot, not greenish but 100% coolwhite. On low mode, the tint is clearly not white, not greenish, but blueish. On med mode, the tint is coolwhite (i.e. very slightly blueish). On high mode, the tint is white with a slight greenish tendency. not bad at all. it looks very nice, with a impressively large hotspot due to the large emitter, the XP-G R5, and a minimum of artifacts (corona).
The pocket clip is extremely thin and flimsy (and sh*tty). While it is still usable, it has to be the worst clip i've ever experienced on a flashlight!! Der Clip ist fürn Arsch, ganz einfach.
The pocket clip is reversible, even though there is no dedicated groove (notch) for it. I've reversed it and clipped the torch to my baseball cap and did some work in front of our house. This worked out quite well .. but i certainly prefer to reverse the clip on a Quark and wear the Quark on my baseball cap.
Which material is the clip made of? i dunno. only this: the Titanium torch is heavily magnetic, the Fenix LD20 pocket clip is heavily magnetic, but this clip is hardly magnetic. Ergo, it's not made out of Titanium! In any case, the clip is cr*p. While it sits and fits very snug and tight onto the Titanium body, it is simply too flimsy to be attached to a rocking pocket for serious purposes: you will lose the torch sooner or later.
Is the Titanium body scratch resistant or what? No, it isnt. As soon as you detach the pocket clip (e.g. when you want to reverse it), you will scratch the body (here: the clip groove). My new torch is already scratched a lot. I dont know if a stainless steel body performs better here regarding scratch-resistance.
There is a serial number "laser-engraved"(?) on the head of the torch. The same number is printed on a sticker on the tin box (the packaging of the Titanium version).
The threads on my sample are smooth. No grating. It requires quite some force (torque) to twist the head --and there is no way one could ever lose the head!!!-- and operate the modes, but there is definitely no grating in the threads. My threads are smooth and tight, and i am thankful for this production sample.
Subjectively the light feels "thin-walled and overall too light-weight" .. After a while i should get used to the light feeling of the torch.
My unprotected 10440's should arrive anytime soon.. I just hope that i wont over-discharge them in the A3. (i dont own any voltmeter or sophisticated charger, ..)
I dont know anything yet about tested runtimes (and i dont own any Eneloops, sorry!).
It is possible to operate the torch one-handed -- there is enough grip on the head! However the tight sitting head makes operating the light difficult with a single hand. Well, I dont mind using two hands .. for the benefit of a securely sitting head.
Tailstand is possible with some (again German) trick or with heat shrink shrinkable wrap tubing.
[...]
Here another try to summarize my experience after several months with it:
Thanks for your impressions. I'm still waiting for my Ti Version. It seems I will check the clip first ;)
congrats to the Ti purchase ;) it's quite difficult to buy it (with XP-G R5 emitter) these days. on ebay they sell it with the old XP-E emitter (XP-E Q5 with 80lumens i think), Shiningbeam has it in stock, and also eledron.de
interesting finding, the heads of the Lumintop Worm and my iTP A3 Ti are interchangeable. they have the exact physical total length (height) and diameter, and the threads are of the same type too. While it's easy to tell that there *are* differences between the heads (e.g. the circuit board, the emitter, the length of the threads), you can operate one head on the other's body without problems. It's pretty cool .. because, unless you operate the A3 with 10440's, imho the Worm head is a little superior, and here comes why:
Comparing the beams, the A3 has a notably larger beam (angle, spill) with a notably larger hotspot; i would not call it floody though. However, in comparison, the Worm (XP-E emitter) has a smaller beam angle and hotspot, a really white tint on all levels (The Worm has 2 modes only: Hi, Lo) and throws much better. In a typical situation the Worm actually looks brighter and lights up things better than the A3 .. simply because the hotspot is brighter, more intense and really white (no greenish tint, no blueish tint), on both levels.
On the other hand, the A3 has a perfect round hotspot with that large hotspot, and the overall beam pattern looks as perfect as it could get with a 1x AAA light; hardly visible corona artifacts. In comparison, the A3 looks greenish on all levels -- but only because the Worm is so damn pure white. I've seen much worse and stronger greenish tints on lights, so owners of the A3 should not worry about their tint at all. It is a nice tint after all, as described in my previous post. I am just making the point that other lights (such as the Worm) have an even better/nicer tint.
i know, the above picture is for the Olight i3 (XP-G R5) .. but the FL-1 Standard specs for the iTP A3 Titanium (XP-G R5) should be the same, dont you think? Well, the Worm was compared more in detail (with graphs, and runtimes, beamshots etc.) by selfbuilt on cpf, and due to the superior performance i bought the Worm first!
It's good to have them both though. Interchangeable heads! *winkwink*
love the smell of spam pork in the morning :)
lol :bigsmile: I wouldn't said it better :bigsmile:
*FYI* here my own measurements:
iTP A3 EOS Titanium XP-G R5 (low-med-high mode sequence), i took 7 separate measurements with the FC50 high precision scale [and a kitchen scale]:
pocket clip: 1.317g [1g]
split ring: 0.208g [0g]
head only: 6.797g [7g]
body only, w/o split rings/pocket clip/battery: 7.664g [8g]
head+body, w/o split rings/pocket clip/battery: 14.461g [14g]
head+body+pocket clip, w/o split rings/battery:15.780g [16g]
head+body+split ring, w/o pocket clip/battery: 14.670g [15g]
head+body+split ring+pocket clip, w/o battery: 15.984g [16g]
feel free to do the maths on your own whether the above numbers add up correctly 
btw, the manual states a total weight of "22.5g", so the difference (22.5 - 15.984) has to be the weight of the clamp (keychain). i gave the clamp to a friend, so i am unable to measure its weight, sorry!
OMG!! What a work to take the measurements!
Thanks!
So 16 grams (complete) is very low weight. At this moment, IMO there is no flashlight better than the itp (talking about size, weight, quality, modes and performance)
true true!
one thing's for sure: with 10440's the iTP is the very brightest AAA flashlight i know of. Brighter than Tank E09 with 10440's. Much brighter. On the other hand, the Tank E09 has the better head for heat-sinking because it's made out of Aluminum and its mass unusually dimensioned:
Aluminum head Worm 5.400g (=5.400/13.100= ~41.22%)
versus
Titanium head A3 6.797g (=6.797/14.461= ~47.00%)
versus
Aluminum head E09 6.272g (=6.272/12.796= ~49.92%)
Whoever owns already the iTP A3 should be happy and not look further. For people with no AAA lights and looking for a best value, then the Tank E09 is really good choice. E09's form factor resembles more iTP A3 than Fenix LD01 or Fenix E05 imho.
Here some further pertinent info for fran's thread. My light is the iTP A3 EOS Titanium with Cree XP-G R5 (mode sequence Lo-Med-Hi). These are my own tailcap readings with fresh cells:
| iTP A3 EOS Titanium XP-G R5 | High | Med | Low |
| Alkaline abc | 0.903A | 0.339A | 0.042A |
| Alkaline xyz | |||
| Varta NiMH | 0.88A | 0.329A | 0.041A |
| Eneloop AAA | 0.906A | 0.308A | 0.040A |
| Grey UltraFire 10440, protected | 1.2A | 0.214A | 0.015A |
| Blue UltraFire 10440, unprotected | TBA | TBA | TBA |
I also measured actual runtimes, both on Protected 10440's and Eneloops:
Protected 10440's runtime tests:
As we know, the ITP A3 EOS (Cree XP-R5) head does run on 10440's flawlessly. Runtimes on 10440's depend heavily on the built quality of the particular individual cell. Of my grey Ultrafire 2pack cells, cell1 seems to deliver more capacity than cell2. Instead of measuring tailcap reading (amperage) i am measuring the runtime in real life tests. On high-mode i wrapped the torch tightly with snow (It finally snowed this winter in Germanyikes) which later on converted to ice. In either case the torch was really cold over the whole testrun time and it was safe to operate it continuously on High-mode with Protected 10440's. Let's recall that selfbuilt never tested the iTP A3 with 10440's on High-mode. So the following test results maybe a world-premiere on the inet, brought to you by kreisler the permabanned:
| HIGH | 10440, cell1 | 10440, cell2 |
| testrun1 | 5m45s | 3m27s |
| testrun2 | 5m30s | 3m17s |
| testrun3 | 14m21s | 9m27s |
Testruns 1&2: After the given time the protection of the cell trips and the light shuts off completely. Not even 6.0mins whaaahhtt??!! yepyep. At least with the brandnew cells i got from Dealextreme (Grey Protected Ultrafire 10440's from DX). Maybe the Grey Protected Trustfire 10440's from DX have a considerably longer runtime than that, but i highly doubt it. Please be reminded that this output (at least with a freshly charged 10440 and in the first few seconds, i.e. before it begins to dim) is brighter than the Quark X AA 8-mode 1x 14500 on its High-mode (i.e. brightness level 4outof5; fyi level 5outof5 is called Max-mode, 1/5 is called Moonlight-mode). And the above results teach us that, if you use the Blue Unprotected Ultrafire 10440's from DX, you should not run it longer than 6mins total on High-mode because after 6mins (or 3.5mins, see cell2!) you begin to overdischarge the cell and 
haha S)
Testrun3 was conducted after many other testruns on the same cells (the below testruns on MED-mode plus the testruns(!!) with the Tank E09) but this time i didnt freeze the entire torch with packed snow. Instead i immersed the tip/top part of the A3's Titanium head into cold water bezel down, and the rest of the head and the body were in plain environmental air at room temperature. Interestingly, the ~1cm water immersion acted very well as heat sink and the body, the LED/driver, and the cell were operating at "normal" temperatures (~25-35° Celsius, estimated) instead of ~0°C of the snow-ice-water mixture. This experiment (testrun1, testrun2) demonstrates the effect of diminishing effective cell capacity when the cell adopts freezingly low environmental temperature.
And let's measure the other modes too, tested at room temperature and with intermittent cooling by human hands:
| MED | 10440, cell1 | 10440, cell2 |
| testrun1 | 1h14m25s | 1h16m51s |
| testrun2 | 1h16m34s | 1h13m27s |
| testrun3 | 1h15m03s | 1h16m12s |
Not bad at all, huh. Cell2 doesnt seem that bad after all. On Med-mode at room temperature it performs even better than cell1 (see testrun1 and testrun3). Let's recall that selfbuilt had measured only 1h7min with the iTP A3 Q5.
And finally, for the first time on the inet, someone is measuring and publishing the iTP A3 XP-G R5 runtime data on 10440's on Low-Mode:
| LOW | 10440, cell1 | 10440, cell2 |
| testrun1 | 15h59m55s (2.774V) | 16h31m22s (2.769V) |
| testrun2 | 16h33m38s (2.685V) | 16h54m07s (2.653V) |
| testrun3 | N/A | N/A |
Here again the runtime depends heavily on the quality (capacity) of the charged cell. Taking the highest measured runtime as reference (record mark) then the iTP A3 runs for almost 17.0hrs on Low-mode with Protected 10440's until the protection circuit trips.
Eneloop runtime tests
High-mode:
| High-mode (iTP A3 w/ XP-G R5) |
testrun stopped | remaining offline voltage | recoverable to | capacity consumed |
| Eneloop cell#1 & testrun#1 | 59min | ~1.14V | 1.2379V | 706mAh |
| Eneloop cell#2 & testrun#2 | 60min | ~1.08V | 1.2205V | 743mAh |
| Eneloop cell#3 & testrun#3 | 62min | ~0.94V | 1.2149V | 737mAh |
| Eneloop cell#4 & testrun#4 | 63min | ~0.88V | 1.1982V | 773mAh |
From the above table we can determine the Eneloop runtime in High-mode as 63min (=1.0h). selfbuilt had clocked 59min, HKJ had estimated 1.0h, Manufacturer's specs are "55 Minutes". FYI i made my Eneloops come off the charger at 1.54V. Freshly charged Eneloops can have a voltage between 1.45 ~ 1.54V and a typical voltage would be 1.47V. So my measured runtimes reflect the absolute optimum, and in real life with an "Eneloop charged full with a dubious quality NiMH charger" your runtime will be lower than my record mark.
Med-mode:
| Med-mode (iTP A3 w/ XP-G R5) |
testrun stopped | remaining offline voltage | recoverable to | capacity consumed |
| Eneloop cell#1 & testrun#1 | 2h15min | ~1.17V | 1.2330V | 703mAh |
| Eneloop cell#2 & testrun#2 | 2h19min | ~1.11V | 1.2039V | 753mAh |
| Eneloop cell#3 & testrun#3 | 2h22min | ~1.01V | 1.1860V | 765mAh |
| Eneloop cell#4 & testrun#4 | 2h29min | ~0.83V | 1.1815V | 779mAh |
From the above table we can determine the Eneloop runtime in Med-mode as exactly 2h20min (=2.33h). selfbuilt had clocked 2h9min as did HKJ. Manufacturer's specs were "4 Hours", which is a total lie, shame on Olight!!
Low-mode:
| Low-mode (iTP A3 w/ XP-G R5) |
testrun stopped | remaining offline voltage | recoverable to | capacity consumed |
| Eneloop cell#1 & testrun#1 | 19h17min (dead) |
~0.82V | 1.1395V | 807mAh |
| Eneloop cell#2 & testrun#2 | 18h16min | ~0.85V | 1.1714V | 777mAh |
| Eneloop cell#3 & testrun#3 | 18h2min | ~1.09V | 1.1856V | 759mAh |
| Eneloop cell#4 & testrun#4 | 17h58min | ~1.111V | 1.1870V | 757mAh |
18h39min ~0.85V 1.1758V 786mAh (falls noticeably out of regulation)
On Low-mode HKJ estimated 10.4hrs, i had expected 20hrs, and manufacturer's specs were "50 Hours", which is a complete lie, shame on Olight! In my real life tests the absolute max runtime until the light drops 100% dead is 19h17mins. From the above table we can conclude that the average runtime on Low-mode down to 50% brightness is 18.0hrs.
Thanks kreisler!
These cells seems to be bad.
All my cells ( the unprotected ones ), after about 10 minutes they are 3,6 volt... And the protection cuts at about 2,75 volts, so something is bad in these cells...
i will do runtime tests on medium and low, so that i can compare my results with selfbuilt's measurements. Only cell2 is bad. I can tell more about voltages when i receive my multimeter. yes, the protection cuts at 2.75V under load. this equals an offline voltage of 3.6V because of the sag (drag).
The blue Ultrafire cells have a higher rated capacity.
I prefer running 6mins *with* protection to running 10mins *without* protection.
So how did you measure the 10mins? You got snow in Spain too? :D
EDIT: now i am thinking that the 6mins. resulted from using snow. the battery was running at 0°Celsius. low temperature influences battery performance i guess.