@Tatteredmidnight, your hand-o-meter is right . I have one of those IR thermometer guns that I use to check the lights, and yes the button is where I find the highest external temp.
BTW following are the results of how hot the lights are, 20 minutes after a Turbo start (once thermal regulation/step-down has kicked in):
Olight M2R Pro 36 C
Nitecore MH12S 43 C
Sofirn IF22a 43 C
Wurkkos SBT90.2 (max thermal limit set at 50 C) 45 C
It seems the Olightâs setting is too conservative and as result the light gets too dim, but there is nothing I could do about it since its UI is not Anduril. The Wurkkos with max temp limit set at 50 C measures close to the other lights, and thatâs about as hot as I like it for holding. This is one huge advantage of Anduril in high-power lights - the ability to adjust temp limit to maintain and prolong brightness (less severe step-downs) while still keeping the light at reasonable temp, not too hot to hold. FWIW these are the 2 factors I consider in adjusting max temp limit.
I absolutely agree that Andruil has many advantages for us enthusiasts. I wish it were paired with regulated lights more often, but for pocket rocket like this, thermals are going to be the limiting factor before regulation anyway.
I disassembled the head today to get some measurements of the lens. The lights overall dimensions (and appearance) are very similar to the Convoy M21C/D, and it seems the dimensions of the lenses are within half a mm of each other. Based on this, I am going to order an AR lens from Convoy. Hopefully this will work well and improve performance just a touch more. I am also going to order a holster from Simon as I feel more comfortable having one for storage and if I want to pack it in a bag for travel. I will post my findings when I get these goodies, but it will likely be 3-4weeks at least.
AR lens is a great idea - an improvement in transmission without any penalty in heat production. I could measure with ceiling bounce method a 5-10% increase in light output using Samsung battery instead of Wurkkos for example, but I suspect the increased heat would lead to faster step-down. Itâs a trade-off between brighter turbo, but faster step-down. (Basically IMHO I think of Samsung battery and spring bypass as a give and take mod particularly for a small high-power light like Wurkkos, when itâs all about the heat.)
I measured about 52-53 mm for diameter and 1.5-2 mm thickness for the Wurkkos lens - is that what you have? Iâve read great praises for the UCLv3 and UCLp lensUCL Lens - Flashlightlens.com - Online Store and like magic they happen to have the exact same dimension for UCLv3 and slightly thicker for UCLp lens.
I am about to order the UCLv3 or UCLp, anyone has any comment and advice before I click? The huge bonus is it should come pretty fast :-). Iâve found waiting for âtoysâ from China excruciating.
I busted out the Mitutoyo digital calipers (my initial measurements were using cheap, disposable, plastic calipers) and I got 51.5mm x 2.1mm for the original lens. I saw similar 52mm AR lenses but decided to go with the Convoy because from my measurements, 52mm is the absolute maximum possible size that will fit inside the head and not start to overlap the threads on the body.
Locking my calipers to 52mm and using the ID measurement jaws confirms that it is the absolute maximum diameter the head will accept (and canting them even a little, they hang up on the inner threads).There seems to be more wiggle room to go smaller though given the diameter of the inner lip in the head (which retains the o-ring), and on the shelf on the body.
Locking the jaws at the an 52.1mm, I am unable to get them into the head of the light, so given the +/1 0.13mm tolerance listed on the UCL site, it would be gambling that they are coming in slightly small. Based on this, I think the Convoy lenses are a safer bet, but I look forward to hearing your experience. I will try to get set up with imgur and post some shots for you, been too lazy so far.
I donât know how precisely these Chinese lenses are ground diameter wise, but for how cheap they are, it might be worth it just to pick up the 52mm as well and try them both, the lead out time is more of an issue than the cost on these.
Regarding higher current cells, I reached the same conclusion, but I donât have any higher drain cells. The cell here is acting to regulate the maximum output of the light, more current would likely have diminishing returns in visible throw (we donât perceive brightness linearly, and emitter efficiency drops with current and heat). Iâm not sure if the maximum turbo limit can be configured in Andruil, but using the included cell seems to be a cheaper and more convenient way to achieve this effect :D.
All things considered, for the price of this light, itâs proving to be a ton of fun to tinker with. I am a bit tempted to de-lens the emitter, but that may be too high risk given the cost of a replacement being half the cost of the light.
I share your sentiment about the wait from China, Simon makes it easy because I donât have a domestic distributor for his stuff. I look forward to hearing how these work out for you, and if it goes well, I hope that there is a lot of consistency lens to lens if I go ahead and pick one of those up.
Re. max Turbo limit in Anduril, if I understand your question correctly: donât think you could increase that limit in Anduril. With both Anduril 1 and 2 you could change the highest level so it equals Turbo, meaning now you could one-click to Turbo, but thatâs about it AFAIK.
Thanks for the very helpful measurements. How convenient they do have 51.3 mm lens. I need another 5% output from the Wurkkos like I need a hole in the head, but this sounds like fun so I took one for the team and ordered the following:
I was thinking the other direction, limiting turbo output to accomplish the same thing as a lower drain cell, but yeah, I was out on a limb there. I would be very cautious about that 51.3mm lens, I donât know how Acrylic would hold up to the heat this light kicks out on turbo. And this hobby isnât about what we need, otherwise weâd have a few lights to suit our needs and move on, and we wouldnât be refreshing this forum all day
Throw calculated from the excellent 1lumen review will be square root of (231,250x4=925,000) = 962 m , close to the claimed 952 m. Hopefully my math is correct?
Not bad for 60 bucks.
Up to you, itâs all about what you are interested in. That calculation would give you the ANSI FL-1 throw, but itâs up to you what you are into. Selfbuilt was a well known and respected flashlight reviewer from a few years ago (at least he was over at CPF). He has a good write up of the ANSI FL-1 standard here Testing Standards â Selfbuilt's Flashlight Reviews.ca
I was just curious if there is third party measurement of throw that comes close to Wurkkosâs claimed throw of 952m. Good to see Zeroairâs number matching it.
That article has a good explanation - thanks. Now I do notice 1lumen, etc. also mentions the 30 sec delay in their throw measurements.
I emailed flashlightlens.com expressing my concern that the 52.1mm lens may be too big and ask if they could measure a few and select a smaller sample to send me. Itâs such a small order I didnât expect much but to my surprise immediately got an answer. What service!
So fingers crossed. Canât wait to try it out; Iâve read nothing but great praises for these lenses.
email quote
Hi - It looks like the 52.1mm v3âs are running on the lower side - all the ones Iâm measuring are unde by a few hundredths. Let me know if what I send doesnât work and we can get you something that does.
That is very impressive customer service! Iâm curious if it is the rose or green tinted AR coating, a lot has been written on the impact on the tint of the beam. I have the same curiosity for the ones Simon shipped, it seems he has moved to the green tint for the newer lenses, but it seems to be a bit of a lottery. Iâll be watching this thread to see how it goes!
Iâm also debating with myself if I should attempt a delens. Vinh from Sky Lumens made a video about it, said he typically sees about a 5% increase in output. It seems like a fairly strait forward operation, but it is a very expensive emitter ($32+ from Convoy plus waiting for delivery) if I screw it up. It also seems it would require removing the MCPCB from the host, so a little desoldering and resoldering action. Not sure itâs worth the risk and effort for 5%.
Iâve gained more experience with ceiling bounce test (thanks @2100), with results more consistent and repeatable. One of the bathrooms in my house, the one without windows so I could test all day (grin), was the test âchamber.â I did multiple measurements of High (highest of the brightness steps) and Turbo: 1 click to high, double click to Turbo immediately. Each time the battery was then recharged to full level and flashlight allowed to cool down.
Followed is the result of Samsung 40T vs Wurkkos battery in TS30S with SBT90.2, an extremely powerful & current hungry LED. Even given the âapproximateâ nature of a ceiling bounce test, the Samsung battery surprises me. Not just because the gain is so significant, but that equally high gain is seen in High mode. The difference is very obvious and as mentioned repeatable.
In Turbo mode, the gain of Samsung 40T over Wurkkos is around 15%. In High mode, surprisingly the gain is equally significant, around 14%.
The test was repeated multiple times to confirm the incredible gain.
EDIT 11/9/2022: I finally got around to measure output with my Texas Ace Lumen Tube:
Stock Wurkkos Battery ~3980 lm
With AR lens ~4090 lm (~3% gain)
With AR Lens Samsung 40T+ ~4750 lm (3% + 16% gain) :+1:
Second Wurkkos battery is better, measuring ~4160 lm stock. Samsung 40Tâs gain over this battery is 11%.
The AR lens I used is UCLp Acrylic: UCL Lens - Flashlightlens.com - Online Store
Without doubt the Samsung 40T makes a big difference. The 4 Samsung batteries I tested got 4520 lm, 4730 lm, 4730 lm, and 4750 lm.
2 Wurkkos batteries:
Thatâs a very significant improvement, 18650batterystore has 40Tâs on sale for $4.99 and I think his is enough to push me over the edge. Out of curiosity, did you see an equivalent change in throttling behavior? Unlike the other changes discussed, more current means more heat more faster I assume.
Yes even with the non-exact nature of ceiling bounce test and my amateur level testing, the increase in brightness with Samsung during instant on/off test is unequivocal. I am going to test internal resistance of the Wurkkos to make sure itâs functioning well. My Opus supposedly is one of the few chargers that could test it accurately.
Step-downs between Samsung and Wurkkos: Unlike instant on-off test, run-down measurements from a Turbo start are quite a bit more complicated, takes longer to do, and longer to recover, so Iâve only done two runs for Samsung and one run for Wurkkos. All I could say from these runs is that at 1 and 2 minutes, I canât detect a trend and the variation from run to run is too much to rely on just a few runs. Having said that, the numbers for Wurkkos battery ARE approximately equal or higher than Samsung battery at 1 and 2 minutes. This should be considered a gain for âWurkkosâ and perhaps supportive of my âtheoryâ (lower heat of Wurkkos leads to less severe step-downs) since at least the Wurkkos is not less bright at lower level. I hope Iâm making sense here .
Bottom line is Samsung battery makes a big difference at Turbo and High brightness levels and I agree itâs a must for this light. At least itâs only a few bucks at 18650batterystore, where I bought mines from. Samsung 40T 21700 4000mAh Battery (40T3).
So I broke down and delensed the SBT90.2 in the TS30S. I did my best to capture some before and after numbers but take these with a grain of salt as my setup is far from scientific. Overall I rate the difficulty of this procedure at 2/10, very easy, assuming you are comfortable with tinkering and doing some basic soldering.
All measurements taken at turn on with an Opple Light Master Pro @ 5m by a laser measure. The light master doesnât have a very fast refresh on the lux measurements so there was a bit of trial and error to get somewhat consistent results. The output drops off very quickly. I set a fan up to help reduce some of the variability. The light was turned on at very low mode, aimed, and then switched to turbo. The cell was allowed to recover between measurements.
Before
Best: 230kcs
Repeatable around 225kcd (There was a learning curve and I have fewer quality data points here, but this is fairly generous).
After
Best: 247kcd
Repeatable above 235kcd with several runs over 240kcd
The before numbers align surprisingly well with the measurements taken by 1lumen, which is a pleasant surprise and makes me think these are at least plausible, although definitely not what I would call scientific. I would caution anyone not to compare these to measurements taken by other people (or maybe even me).
These also line up well with Vinhâs estimates of a roughly 5% increase, and in fact are a little above. I would recommend this modification if you are comfortable with necessary skills.
I have photos of the process and will post them shortly, need to get sorted with Imgur and figure out how to embed them here.
Iâll have a closer look at it but it is supposed to be coated. Any lens or optic will cause some transmission loss, thatâs one reason OTF lumens are different than emitter lumens (reflecors are also less than perfect).
AR coatings help reduce transmission loss due to reflection, but there will still be losses due to absorption, refraction, etc. They are also imperfect, drastically reducing reflection losses but not eliminating them completely.
Here is Vinhâs video if you are interested, itâs a bit long winded and doesnât talk about the losses much, but it is a good walk through on dedoming and delensing various emitters. SBT90.2 De-Lens VS Shave Dome VS De-Dome - YouTube
. I have one of those IR thermometer guns that I use to check the lights, and yes the button is where I find the highest external temp.
and ordered the following:
, close to the claimed 952 m. Hopefully my math is correct?
