Review: Xtar WK25B 1xAA/WK26 1x14500 (Pic Heavy, Beamshots, very long)

Xtar WK25B/WK26 Review

I’ll start off by thanking Miles at Xtar for providing these lights for review. The WK25B and WK26 are the two newest members of Xtar’s EDC series of flashlights, in this case they fill the highly competitive 1xaa sized space in the line-up. While I generally never include multiple lights in one review, I felt it appropriate to do so here. As the pictures show the two lights are virtually identical. In fact, the only apparent specified design change between the two lights is the use of a different driver so these two lights are close sisters. The WK25B is a direct descendant/replacement of Xtar’s WK25. Both lights maintain the same body of the original WK25, but have been upgraded to the XP-E R3 emitter. The difference in driver between the WK25B and WK 26 is significant as while they both are AA sized lights, Xtar made the interesting decision to make the WK25B a AA light only, with a specified voltage range of 0.8~1.5 volts, and the WK26 a 14500 li-ion rechargeable light only, with a specified voltage range of 2.7~4.2 volts. Both lights are priced at around $20 which put these clearly in the budget category with its closest competitor being the Balder SE-1, which I reviewed previously.

FEATURES 4/5

The first thing you notice about the WK series lights is the packaging. They come in a very nice cardboard gift box. The inside of the box has nice cut-outs for the light and accessories. There is a professional looking warranty card and in the case of the WK26, a quite extensive operation manual. Curiously, the WK25B lacks the manual, but I suspect that is because it lacks the DIY functionality of the WK26 (more on that in a moment). The manual does have some garbled English. Perhaps Xtar should hire a member of the flashlight community to rework the English for future versions. One of the cut-outs in the box is the exact size to insert a AA sized battery. Perhaps Xtar gives retailers the option to include or not include a battery with the sale. It would be quite easy to insert a battery post delivery for gifting or resale. The overall presentation is quite impressive for this price level and makes this a light that would be easily giftable. Accessories are very limited consisting of only a very basic, cheap lanyard. I’d like to see a spare clicky switch and an o-ring or two included.

The WK25/26 feature a somewhat tapered body. The design is quite simple, yet provides a nice variation from the standard black tube. Xtar eschews knurling for concentric grooves on each of the three sections of the light, similar to that used on the classic ITP A series lights. It looks nice, but as is the case with the ITP A series, the grooved lines do not provide as much grip as traditional knurling. Fortunately, the tapered shape and varying diameter in the design allows the light to still be held in place quite firmly and I never felt that the light would slip out of hand. The light is of average diameter for the 1xaa edc class, but is a tad longer than average. Despite its length, it is quite light and easily pocketable, being slightly lighter than the similarly sized Balder SE-1. The tailswitch is recessed so tailstanding is supported. Threads on both ends are not anodized, meaning no lock-out.

Both lights choose to use a forward tail clicky despite also being multi-mode lights. I say this because they use the standard Chinese mode changing UI of half presses of the tail clicky. Usually there is some debate of the user friendliness of this type of UI as in this arrangement you must half click through to find the mode you want before fully depressing the switch to stay on. Once on, you must fully depress to turn off the light to then switch to a new mode. The arrangement also eliminates the signaling capability that a forward clicky can accommodate. I have to admit that when I first encountered this type of UI, I did not care for it. However, as I have used more lights with it and gotten used to it, I actually kind of like it now, perhaps better than this type of UI in the more standard reverse clicky arrangement. The instant on advantage of the forward clicky outweighs the disadvantage of having to turn the light off first to change modes, which I find I seldom need to change modes once the light is on.

This brings me to the next point of the drivers and available modes. The WK25B driver is very similar to that used in the older WK25. It is a basic three mode driver consisting of high-low-and strobe. It has no memory so it does come on in high. However, I found it took far too long after turning it off for it to revert to high instead of advancing to the next mode. If you have it on high and turn it off, you have to wait about 5 seconds to turn it on again if you want it to turn on in high, otherwise it advances to the next mode. That delay is too long. There is no reason for it to be longer than 2 seconds. There is no customization option to this mode arrangement so it is quite simple. As mentioned earlier, this driver is not rated for voltage higher than 1.5 so 14500’s are not an option for this light and I did not attempt to use one.

The WK26 driver is a completely different animal. It uses Xtar’s unique DIY driver which has been talked about previously in reviews of Xtar lights. It is a five mode driver of low-medium-high-strobe-sos. This mode arrangement is user customizable via some basic soldering or with a pencil for short term changes. On the inside of the head of the flashlight, there is a group of pins, each of which controls a different mode. A blob of solder on each pin, will remove the corresponding mode of that pin. The aforementioned owner’s manual explains it in detail and provides a chart to show the various combinations. If you solder all four contact pins, you turn the light into a single mode light, which actually restores the signaling capability of the forward clicky. It also means you can easily get rid of the flashy modes for those that don’t like them. It’s a nice feature for a light of this price level even if it does require a bit of work on the part of the owner. The disadvantage of using this driver is that it only operates on the higher voltage provided by a 14500 li-ion battery. I did try using a nimh in the light to see if any of the modes would still work on the lower voltage, but the light was completely inoperable.

BUILD QUALITY 3.5/5

At this price level, you are generally ahead any time you receive a light that operates as it’s designed and does so reliably. With that in mind, I may be being too tough here, but there were some flaws that bothered me, particularly with the rock solidness of my sample of the similarly priced Balder SE-1 in comparison. It is possible that I received pre-production models so the build quality flaws may be limited to my samples. Even though the WK25B and WK26 use the exact same body, they almost seem to be made on two entirely manufacturing lines. The anodizing on both was well done, even, and without flaw. However, my WK25B seemed a deeper shade of black and also shinier. I actually preferred the more matte look of the WK26 as it made it seem to be of a higher quality, but that may be personal preference. The lettering of the WK26 was also much cleaner and better looking. The lettering on the WK25b was not as crisp, sharp, and even as on the WK26. The quality difference seemed to indicate a completely different machine used to do the lettering. The machining of the body itself is clearly superior on the WK25B. I felt a clear sharp edge on what should be a smooth bezel on the head of the WK26. The WK25B provided that smoothness. The tail end on the WK25B also had some slight beveling to taper and smooth its lip, which was not done on the WK26. The threading on the tail of the WK26 was also a bit rough. Despite cleaning and relubing it, there is still a grinding roughness whenever threading the tail. The WK25B was buttery smooth in comparison. If I could get the machining of the WK25B with the finishing of the WK26, it would be about perfect. The smooth reflector looked flawless and the emitters were well centered. Internally, everything looked very clean and well done.

An issue Xtar needs to address is the feel of the clicky switch. My WK25b and WK26 samples feel completely different. The WK26 requires a large amount of travel and a huge amount of pressure to switch on. I found it very awkward to use. Because of the travel and pressure issue, I found that it was possible to unintentionally skip modes and I felt that overall, it was very awkward and uncomfortable to use. The WK25B in comparison is highly sensitive and is really almost too easy to click. There was not quite enough resistance and I felt a strange sort of wiggliness in the boot. I then noticed that the switch in WK26 is noticeably further recessed into the tail. The WK25B in comparison also showed some bulginess. It made me think that they used a completely different switch, but as it turns out that is not the case. I decided to take apart the tail piece of each light and was surprised to see the exact same switch. Both lights use an integrated one piece switch assembly. It does make assembly and disassembly easy, but if the switch ever needs to replaced, it will be tough to find a replacement. As it turns out the problem is not directly the switch, but the combination of the switch and boot itself. The boot is a bit too deep for the design of the switch. Xtar’s solution is too insert a piece of material in the boot to fill the extra space. In the case of the WK25B, it was a small aluminum plug. It was perhaps a little too thick which is why the boot was bulging slightly and also responsible for what I was detecting as wiggliness in the tactile feel. The WK26 uses a small piece of silicone rubber. It was less than half the thickness of the aluminum plug, but is also very soft. This combination leads to the problem with the switch being too hard to use. I tried removing this bit and seeing how it worked and it did make it worse so a spacer of some sort is necessary. Given the choice, the aluminum plug solution was preferred by far as operation was a lot easier and more accurate, but does make the light more prone to accidental switch-on. If they can come up with something in between that would be better. Ideally, Xtar should consider a slight redesign of the switch assembly so that the switch extends a little further out so that it matches the depth of the boot.


LIGHT OUTPUT 4.5/5

Do you like throw in a compact package? If you do, these are good choices for you. The size and depth of the reflector is nearly the same as the Balder SE-1, which has already been noted as being a very throwy 1xaa light in the XP-E version. The Xtars use the same XP-E emitter, but instead of the OP of the Balder, the reflector is smooth. As such, these lights are made for throw. When comparing the 14500 powered WK26 to the Balder on 14500, the hot spot seems a bit more focused, but not necessarily any tighter. The Balder suffered from some artifacting and ringiness in the beam even with an OP reflector and with the Xtar using a SMO reflector I was surprised to see that the beam was clearly cleaner, though not perfect. Overall output is slightly higher with the Balder as seen with the ceiling bounce shots. The Xtar hotspot is as bright if not very slightly brighter, but it is not a huge difference. However, this brings me to the advantage of the WK26 over the Balder. The Balder driver is designed to be a jack of all trades, able to be used with all AA sized battery types and with multiple emitter combinations. In comparison, the Xtar driver is designed only for 14500 and is optimized in combination with the XP-E emitter. Therefore, while the Balder is greatly overdriven on 14500, the Xtar achieves nearly the same brightness (somewhere close to 250 lumens) and as much if not more throw without driving the emitter so hard. The WK26 overall is more efficient.

Measurements: High 1.00a, Med 0.40a, Low 0.02a

As seen by the measurements, the modes are well spaced and the low is quite low. Not moonlight mode, but being well below the 10 lumen mark makes it quite useful. The 5 lumen manufacturer claim seems about right. It does use PWM, but it is a high enough frequency to not be bothersome. I don’t have measurement equipment, but it does seem to be notably higher than the PWM of the Balder SE-1. In practical use, I didn’t ever notice it, but the high speed fan test does readily reveal it.

L to R: Balder SE-1, Xtar WK26, Xeno E03 all on 14500

Outdoor beamshots: Control

Balder SE-1 14500

WK26 high

WK26 Med

WK26 low

Xeno E03 14500

Ceiling bounce (some extras here, from approximate lowest to highest)

ITP C7 14500

ITP A2 SS R2 14500

Xtar WK26

Balder SE-1 14500

Xtar WK21

Xeno E03 14500

The WK25B also shares the advantage of being optimized for a specific emitter and battery type, in this case standard AA’s. As such, on high, it has a huge advantage over the Balder. Output is really quite impressive. Xtar claims 150 lumens ANSI, and while that may be a little high, it is in ballpark. It is substantially brighter than my ITP C7, ITP A2 SS R2, and the Balder on Nimh. Its predecessor, the original WK25 was criticized for being somewhat anemic by a few posters and I have to say that is not the case with the WK25B. I was actually more impressed by the output of theWK25B on Nimh than the WK26 on 14500. It does pull 2.4a on high so you are looking at only 45-50 minutes of output. Low mode pulls about 0.15a and is claimed to be 15 lumens and I would say that is also about right. It’s not quite as low as I would like, but is reasonable for a light of only two brightness levels. Again PWM is used, but again is not really noticeable. It seems to be at an even higher frequency than that of the WK26. However, there is an audible whine when the light is on low.

Beamshots L to R: Balder SE-1, WK25B, Xeno E03 all on Nimh

Outdoor shots

ITP A2 SS Nimh

ITP C7 Nimh

Balder SE-1 Nimh

WK25B High

Ceiling bounce

ITP C7 nimh

Balder SE-1 Nimh

Xeno E03 Nimh

Xtar WK25B

OVERALL 4/5

Xtar really took an interesting approach to the 1XAA sized market by releasing two separate lights with each optimized to a different battery type. In some ways, it’s very effective. However, it also limits the overall appeal of each of the models as they have more limitations than a single light than can run on all battery types. For a light that works on everything in comparison, the Balder SE-1 is overdriven on 14500 and handicaps itself on max brightness on Nimh. worked out. The niggling build quality issues holds these Xtar lights back a little bit and hopefully Xtar can get those issues resolved. The tailswitch on the WK26 was a major turn-off for me for making the light a usable one for EDC. Now that I’ve figured out the issue, I’ll probably switch out the rubber spacer in the boot for the aluminum plug in the WK25B (or I could find something else to use in the WK26), or I may just carry the WK25B instead as I really likes its output on Nimh.

Xtar has really stepped up their game in areas of presentation and design. I have to remind myself that these are $20 lights as they clearly are a major step above the usual ***fire lights out there despite only a modest increase in price. I give kudos to all the work they have done and strongly encourage them to keep up the progress. Build quality is still somewhat behind the more established brand names but is not far off. There are plenty of examples of lights costing 2x to 5x more having similar issues, my own experience with a Thrunite Neutron 1A comes immediately to mind. Xtar’s CS has been very good to the flashaholic community so they do seem to care about their perception as well.

Despite being the same size and class of light and having nearly identical designs, the two lights really fulfill two separate niches. The WK25B is a great light for gifting to non-flashaholic friends and family. These are the people who would never use 14500 batteries, and for them this light would be a nice inexpensive option, providing a lot of wow factor with a standard battery and excellent presentation with the nice gift box and included warranty card. The WK26 is really for flashaholics only, being only 14500 compatible and with the DIY driver. It’s a great option for those that want throw from a small, pocketable light.

Very nice, descriptive review.

I hit save on accident before I got all my pics in so it now has the beamshots. Sorry about that.

Nice review. Thanks.

Very nice review! Thanks for all the great details. Frontpage'd and Sticky'd (moved to Reviews section).

It looks like these are updated versions of the WK25 I have. I'm glad to see it tailstands now.

Very very nice review (on an appealing new torch), thanks.

( some reader might be interested in a series of runtime tests, and also discharge/brightness graphs )

Thanks for the great review , SirJohn .

Very descriptive review. Thank you for taking the time to help all of us.

Very good review and pics, thanks for posting that.

These are very nice looking lights.

Mea culpa - I went through my test notes again and realized I made a mistake on the timing of the WK25B UI. I retested it and it is in fact 5 seconds, not 10 seconds. Still too long so my point remains, but not as bad as previously stated. I am updating the review.

Excellent review and comparison, Sir :D

Just one thing: when you put images in your review, well, don't know if it's just me, but all of your images are automatically resized to monitor resolution you use. My is 1680x1050, and in my case, final image are twice as big, so I see them slightly blurry. So, and just my 2 cents, for low or med-low res images, I think it would be better to posts them without scaling. What do you think? (all these stuff can be changed on-the-fly, and maybe last mode will be saved)

I should probably use a different site to host the images. The one I use automatically resizes the images downward. My originals are actually higher resolution and wouldn't be a problem.

Spam from liars and thieves, oh my !