Thrunite TN42 V2

great info, thank you kawiboy1428. I had a feeling you that may have been your answer for the gt90 / tn42 sbt90. And that is one reason why i just ordered the mf02v2 instead of the k75. not that i didnt want the K75 more, but i will start this large light journey with one that i will hopefully use more. Although i see myself using my K1 sbt90 the most still anyway.

I now have the Thrunite TN42 V2 and here are my thoughts so far. The only modest gains in throw are due to a shorter depth of the reflector compared to the TN42. The fact that it has 4x21700 batteries might be great if not for the 1 major…and I will stress major flaw. The 21700 batteries supplied are modified protected 21700 batteries much like the Olight batteries. They have a center button surrounded by a negative washer like area on the same side. All 4 baterries positive buttons contact a brass conductive ring in the head. Beside the brass ring is a plastic insulator ring that prevents the washer like negative area on the positive button side of the battery from touching anything conductive. The negative on the positive side serves no purpose in this light, but that is not the worst part. Similar Olight batteries will not work because the button top has insulators on the side of the button. Orbtronic protected button top 21700 batteries will not work because the button is not tall enough to reach the conductor. Samsung 21700 40T batteries will work with small magnets, but since unprotected batteries are dangerous to use when all 4 batteries share a common positive and negative contact points on the light. If 1 battery had an internal short, it would kill all 4 batteries, perhaps even cause them to vent explosively. I have found no alternative batteries that work without modification to the battery or light, so these are basically proprietary batteries. Now here is the kicker… exact replacement batteries are not even listed for sale on the Thrunite website, or anywhere else I can find. That is ridiculous, because if that remains true the batteries dying forces either light modification or it becomes useless. The extra lumens and larger center spot is good, but had I known the proprietary battery issue, it would have been a deal breaker.

It is the shorter reflector depth that prevents a further throw. That is not the biggest downfall of this light…it is the idiotic proprietary modified 21700 batteries which are not even listed for sale on the Thrunite website. At this point I have buyers remorse. For some strange reason Thrunite chose to have a negative post on the positive side of the battery much like Olight batteries. This negative post only touches a plastic insulator ring, so has no practical purpose.

Read post #22 to see why these 4x21700 batteries are not a good thing. I wish I had known beforehand the battery issue. It would have been a deal breaker.

Thank you for the information in post #22 and here, Sarge. Sorry to hear about your thoughts on this light so far, but hopefully they will change and it will grow on you? I mean i understand proprietary batteries suck though.


Could you please post some pics of the driver?
And carrier?

thanx for info

looks like Thrunite themselves killed potentially great idea...

Sorry to hear that Sarge12.

I just wrote to Thrunite and told them about their proprietary battery pack.Bad decision on their part. :person_facepalming:

I Never had and Never will buy a torch with proprietary battery.This one seems worse than the others.

This makes my TN42vn NW CFT90 look even better. :+1:

Regarding these batteries Not being on their website.This is a relatively New light.I would be willing to bet they will have them soon.It will be a money maker for them and a rip off for the general public, compared to 4 X 21700 batteries that we can buy.

Can the light be modified to support standard cells?

A lot of talented people on here I am sure some could.

The bulk of the members here and your average Joe Could Not.Me included.

So this light and the way Thrunite chose its battery pack is a definite negative for the average Joe.

No one should have to modify a light in order for it to work properly with standard batteries instead of Thrunites ,Under their mercy for replacement proprietary batteries that are always 2 to 4X more expensive than than loose batteries.

Yea these batteries are a deal killer. That sucks.

I wonder (if Thrunite was responsive to the community) a new upgraded carrier could be designed for this and sold as an accessory on there site? Would a differently designed battery carrier fix this “problem”?

Yeah I agree, horrible design decision.

As someone who holds a wide range of Thrunite products including the original TN42 and TN40 i find it disappointing that they have copied Olight by going the proprietory route. First it was the TT20 and now the TN42 v2….i personally refuse to support this practice

I also have several of their lights.

I will say this Eva Z. From customer service has always been helpful and have sent me FREE parts…holsters and a battery tube(threads stripped) for my TN42.

They have been more than fair and Very responsive and expedient at that.

I am interested to see how she responds to my email regarding TN42 V2 and its ill advised proprietary battery.

I’m still a little unsure that a special battery is needed. The way it sounds to me is the TN batteries have a bit of specialized construction with having pos/neg terminals on the button top end. Maybe that construction is for magnetic charging from one end one a special charger outside of this light. But the user said his Orbtronic protected cells did not work and unprotected Samsungs worked when magnet was put on top. Basically, what I’m hearing is that button top with tall enough button is all that is needed. Is this not the case, or does this light actually require a specialized cell beyond a sufficient button top on the positive terminal?

You have a point.Here is my Thrunite 26650 cell.Appears to have same construction .

That battery was for my Catapult V6.Orbtronic 26650 5750mAh Unprotected battery also worked.

It is the case that all that is needed is another button top protected battery with a tall enough button. The issue is that I have yet to find one. I think the removal of the plastic insulator which is held in the head with three screws might in fact allow the use of orbtronic protected button top batteries, but since that will kill my warranty I am reluctant to try. My question is, why should the purchaser have to modify a light to use readily available batteries? Why was the existence of this issue not made public in the advertising. I do not like the propritary nature of the olight batteries either, but at least there was a purpose for having the negative contact on the positive side for their magnetic charging and remote triggering. On this light, the negative area on the positive side only contacts a plastic insulator. It appears this was done solely to make the battery proprietary. Thank God I did not pay full price for this light, but I still feel the failure to point out other button top batteries like orbtronic will not work was disengenuous on Thrunite’s part. Had I been aware of the proprietary nature of the batteries, I would have passed on this light.

Those batteries do not have a negative contact on the positive side…totally different.

Ok…Could you post a picture of the battery so I know what it looks like?