Nice, which option did you go for? I have a direct driven XPE in there, and truth be told, I'm somewhat underwhelmed.
For the dome on/off, I might still ask Vinh to dedome either the RC40 or the X60, but I doubt it. Reason being, for spotting, I'm more likely to grab a dedicated thrower, or the shocker.
I keep bugging Vinh about it, maybe you know... which would be the better thrower without the domes, the RC40 or the X60?
I would guess the X60 would trump the RC40. Though the RC40 should do nicely. However, for multi LED’s and throw, the BTU is still king from my experience. If they are focused properly like Tom E does.
Im getting pretty much whichever version of the Xsearcher Vinh feels throws the best in his observations. I feel dedomed xpe2 & dedomed xpg2 versions should both be somewhere in the 5-700kcd range. But i might be wrong.
I have a K40vn Fiat Lux, far out it’s a beast, throws far enough for me lol.
Still find myself grabbing the TK75 90% of the time though, love that tint and spill.
Thanx for posting these rdrfronty! The standard for light output and throw keeps on increasing everyday and our modified flooders and throwers will become obsolete soon if we do not do further upgrades. Good thing many trade secrets can be learned here in BLF. 
No question the X60 wins out because of that center LED, and it's driven harder, but it's not a significant difference. But the RC40 has a deeper reflector. So a bit of a toss up. Frankly I still find myself loving the TK75 domed the most, and it's far from a thrower, maybe 150kcd?
I'm really not 100% sure whether the Xsearcher I have is an XPG or XPE... kind of wish I knew, but bought it secondhand for a good price, so no complaints. The dot is almost laser like, but I did have to refocus it myself. Now just need a dark foggy night.
My “current boosted” TK 75 is 135kcd with domes on.
Thanks. Excellent beamshots as always!
I calculated the relative throw for each light, equalizing for differences in luminous flux (in lumens). The higher the throw factor, the greater the relative throw.
Here are the throw factors based on the data you provided:
Light Throw Factor
X60vn — 14.5
K40vn — 27.7
TN31vn — 30.0
K50vn — 31.1
TK61vn — 33.6
Interestingly, none of these beat your TN31mb in relative throw which has a throw factor of 42.5 (741lm, 426kcd), although all but the K40vn beat it in raw throw.
Also for comparison, the Jacob A60 has a throw factor of 26.6 (320lm, 72kcd) and the original stock TN31 has a throw factor of 18.9 (1075lm, 122kcd).
Thank you!! That was helpful and I learned something! My TN31mb is 470Kcd!! It was the last one he made a few months ago. Michael had it laying around and modded it for me. the reason for the increased cd was because of an updated emitter,I believe it is an XP-G2[S2]. It proves how efficient his is not only in run time but getting that much throw with only about 800 lumens!
What would the “Throw Factor” be for 470Kcd with the same lumens,maybe a bit more w/ the upgraded emitter??
How do you calculate that?? I want to do it for the rest of my torches! THANKS
You’re welcome. 741lm & 470kcd = 44.6 throw factor; 800lm & 470kcd = 43.
Here’s the excel formula for throw factor @ =SQRT (PI()*C2/B2)@ where B2 is luminous flux in lumens and C2 is luminous intensity in candela. Copy & paste the formula and enter the data in the respective cells.
Or worked with a calculator:
Step1: 470,000 / 741 = 634.28
Step2: 3.14 * 634.28 = 1991.64
Step3: Square root of 1991.64 = 44.6
I understand c2 and b2 but what is the sq.rt. PI?
OK,THANKS,That makes it easier!! It is almost dark!! TK61vn has been delayed,K40vn tonight!!
,have a good night
SQRT is excel for square root and PI is excel for pi (the ratio of a circle’s circumference to its diameter), so if you’re using excel just cut and paste the whole formula and excel will know what to do
Otherwise I see you noticed step by step calculator version.
My best thrower rates a throw factor of 27.25.
The little Solarforce M3 I did for a member here yesterday figures out to 15.67. With this being all new to me, don’t know if that’s good or bad!
Thanks for throwing something new into the pot…
Thanks for that formula lovelites!! 
It seems like my OSTS TN31mb will be hard to beat in this category with that impressive 44.6 rating!
For stock lights my TN32 and Olight M3X did the best’ :bigsmile:
TN32-20.61
M3X-17.0
Thanks. Thats a pretty interesting way to look at throwers.
Duh! 
This is new to me too. So which is better, a higher throw factor or a lower throw factor? :~
Higher is better, it shows more of the available light making it downrange.
If 3000 lumens put’s light out to 500 yds it’s sheer power making it happen.
If 700 lumens put’s light out to 500 yds it’s genius of focus. Pencil beam comes to mind, nothing lost peripherally.
Edit: It might be a misleading formula though, as the light that reaches distant targets while spilling light on the surroundings between is a much more powerful light than the one that threads a trace of light through the darkness to illuminate a small area downrange. So based on the number alone, one might choose an XR-E light that is focused perfectly to illuminate marker signs or meters (say an electrical meter) for reading in poor light from a distance, whereas the lower relative number light may actually throw further and show more in the surrounding area, like a cow that is having calving problems that you can easily see at 700 yds distant through binoculars. So 2 lights with fairly different numbers in this formula might not be good for the same task, and the higher number could mislead as to which task it’s good for. Unless, of course, one knows his formulas…
EditII: To clarify, a pencil beam might show a cow in the distance having trouble calving, but not the 4 coyotes 10 yds away waiting for that calf to drop. The broader beam spill pattern of a more powerful light can show other things that are relative and equally important.
A higher throw factor only means higher relative throw after equalizing for differences in luminous flux. As I wrote a few posts ago, rdrfronty’s TN31mb has higher relative throw than any of his lights here, although all but the K40vn throw farther.
To avoid any misunderstandings about what this metric does and does not do, here’s more info about relative throw and flood. Throw factor is metric #3.
Comparing LED with different die size is wrong.Put xp-g2 in that tk-61 and you will increase "throw factor" by more than 50%.
You mean, like throwing that 6900 lumen multi emitter light in with the single emitter throwers?
Actually that’s the point. It does (and should) increase throw factor because an xp-g2 is relatively “throwier.” Throw factor lets you compare apples to oranges by equalizing for differences in luminous flux.
Don’t want to hijack rdrfronty’s thread, so go to How to Calculate Relative Throw and Flood With Excel Formulas for the detailed reasoning and calculations behind the metrics.