4Sevens Maelstrom G5 *SHIPPING VERSION* Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS +
- Thread starter selfbuilt
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
Beacon of Light
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2005
- Messages
- 2,054
Re: There is no spoon, but there is a tree.
I saw in ti-forces review thread, 4Sevens quotes the runtime in moon mode as 7 days wheras the regular Quark 2x123 they advertise is 30 days. Why would there be that huge of a difference in run-time with the same battery type and the same lumens (.2 lumen)? Isn't an XP-G an XP-G? Why would this be less efficient on lower levels than the other XP-G Quark 2x123? Strange the older Quark 2x123 would last 4 to 5 times longer on moon mode. That is all!
I saw in ti-forces review thread, 4Sevens quotes the runtime in moon mode as 7 days wheras the regular Quark 2x123 they advertise is 30 days. Why would there be that huge of a difference in run-time with the same battery type and the same lumens (.2 lumen)? Isn't an XP-G an XP-G? Why would this be less efficient on lower levels than the other XP-G Quark 2x123? Strange the older Quark 2x123 would last 4 to 5 times longer on moon mode. That is all!
Last edited:
candle lamp
Flashlight Enthusiast
Re: 4Sevens Maelstrom G5 Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!
Thanks for your detailed and wonderful review ! :twothumbs
Thanks for your detailed and wonderful review ! :twothumbs
Re: There is no spoon, but there is a tree.
Probably simply because one uses PWM and the other CC.
Probably simply because one uses PWM and the other CC.
Beacon of Light
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2005
- Messages
- 2,054
Re: There is no spoon, but there is a tree.
THAT big of a difference though? 4-5 times the difference? This seems unheard of even comparing current controlled and PWM lights at such a low level 1mA
THAT big of a difference though? 4-5 times the difference? This seems unheard of even comparing current controlled and PWM lights at such a low level 1mA
TwitchALot
Enlightened
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2009
- Messages
- 248
Re: 4Sevens Maelstrom G5 Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!
Thanks for the review selfbuilt! Now on a general note, I think anyone disappointed in the UI has to take a step back and consider the purpose of this light. My suspicion is that it's going to be marketed as a tactical and weapon mounted light. As such, it makes sense to have the turbo and strobe mode in the same group, easily accessible, for people using the light for these purposes.
For the casual user, I think the normal output modes are pretty good. Moonlight mode is pretty awesome, low is good, and the "medium" mode is enough to get most tasks done. But for more throw and light, the high mode is a good balance between brightness and efficiency. Considering the runtime difference between high and turbo, and the logarithmic nature of our eyes, I think the settings are pretty well-spaced and well-thought out.
We just have to keep in mind what this light was meant for. And with that in mind, the way the brightness settings were set up is actually, I think, very smart. You essentially have an interface that allows you to use the light for tactical purposes and EDC purposes at the same time. If you're a more casual user, the normal outputs will work well enough for your purposes. But if you're going to put this thing on a gun, switch to the tactical outputs and you have outputs that generally work just as well. In my eyes, the way this light is set up is a compromise- attempting to be useful for both tactical and EDC purposes. And thus, while it's not perfect at either, it's pretty good overall.
Thanks for the review selfbuilt! Now on a general note, I think anyone disappointed in the UI has to take a step back and consider the purpose of this light. My suspicion is that it's going to be marketed as a tactical and weapon mounted light. As such, it makes sense to have the turbo and strobe mode in the same group, easily accessible, for people using the light for these purposes.
For the casual user, I think the normal output modes are pretty good. Moonlight mode is pretty awesome, low is good, and the "medium" mode is enough to get most tasks done. But for more throw and light, the high mode is a good balance between brightness and efficiency. Considering the runtime difference between high and turbo, and the logarithmic nature of our eyes, I think the settings are pretty well-spaced and well-thought out.
We just have to keep in mind what this light was meant for. And with that in mind, the way the brightness settings were set up is actually, I think, very smart. You essentially have an interface that allows you to use the light for tactical purposes and EDC purposes at the same time. If you're a more casual user, the normal outputs will work well enough for your purposes. But if you're going to put this thing on a gun, switch to the tactical outputs and you have outputs that generally work just as well. In my eyes, the way this light is set up is a compromise- attempting to be useful for both tactical and EDC purposes. And thus, while it's not perfect at either, it's pretty good overall.
Re: 4Sevens Maelstrom G5 Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!
Your reasoning is quite sound - the modes do make sense from a tactical/casual user perspective. And as AardvarkSagus has pointed out, the Hi mode is quite acceptable for every day use (and frankly how I would run the light, given that I prefer the Regular mode set). It also has the advantage of full regulation on 18650, my preferred battery source by far. :thumbsup:
But I am sympathetic to the camp that would like to see Turbo in the Regular mode set. It wouldn't preclude putting the Turbo in the Special mode as well. The Regular mode levels could be spaced differently to allow the casual user access to max output. This would be preferable to me, as I don't really need a lot of low modes on a light of this size (that's why I carry 1xRCR and 1xAAA on me at all times).
But I appreciate the different perspectives!
I think you make a number of excellent points TwichAlot (sorry I couldn't quote it all, but I urge folks to read the whole post).
Your reasoning is quite sound - the modes do make sense from a tactical/casual user perspective. And as AardvarkSagus has pointed out, the Hi mode is quite acceptable for every day use (and frankly how I would run the light, given that I prefer the Regular mode set). It also has the advantage of full regulation on 18650, my preferred battery source by far. :thumbsup:
But I am sympathetic to the camp that would like to see Turbo in the Regular mode set. It wouldn't preclude putting the Turbo in the Special mode as well. The Regular mode levels could be spaced differently to allow the casual user access to max output. This would be preferable to me, as I don't really need a lot of low modes on a light of this size (that's why I carry 1xRCR and 1xAAA on me at all times).
But I appreciate the different perspectives!
TwitchALot
Enlightened
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2009
- Messages
- 248
Re: 4Sevens Maelstrom G5 Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!
Instead of typing it out, next time you can just copy and paste the text and manually type, "selfbuilt said:
…[//QUOTE]" at the beginning and end of the text to put it in those quote boxes. Just use one backslash instead of two (if I had used one, it would have put the, "…" in a quote box and you wouldn't be able to see the quote parts).
I suspect the crew attempt to achieve the best regulation possible with all of these different outputs and battery configurations. Although I'm disappointed flat-top 18650's won't work in the G5, hopefully that issue has been addressed in the production models or will be addressed in the future. Of course, I did forget to discuss that there IS full regulation on the high mode with 18650.
I also suspect that this, and the output levels, was thoughtfully designed. Think about it this way— casual users or CPFer's may want to run 18650 with full regulation. The only way to do this with the circuit design is to have the highest "casual setting" be, "high." If it were turbo, casual users would have good regulation on only, say, 3 out of 4 outputs, as the circuit can't fully regulate on turbo with an 18650. This is brilliant for two reasons.
The first is that casual users running 18650 will have full regulation on all four of their output modes, and in addition, get enough light on high mode for a relatively long period of time. This suits most purposes just fine, as 200 lumens is really plenty of light for a lot of situations, and you get it for three hours.
The tactical user, however, will probably not run 18650, if only because it's a more niche battery type, and more importantly, protected cells can potentially have their protection circuits damaged by weapon recoil. Thus, they will likely run primary 123A's, which, lo and behold, are fully regulated on the modes tactical users would use (and normal modes, of course). The end result is that the people who are likely to use either the casual or tactical setup will have full regulation on all output modes with the battery type they are most likely to use. And of course, any casual user can also run R/CR123A's and get fully regulated output on turbo mode, if they'd like.
Now there is one last point to be made. As I said, 4Sevens probably did the best they could with the regulation. Now look at the output on 18650. Over time, you see a steady decrease in output on turbo mode, which is really quite understandable. Now think of the implications of this. What it means is that on 18650, you really don't get the maximum output for all that long. As the output slowly tapers off, you start to approach the high mode in brightness. Taking a wild guess, maybe you go down from 300 (on the test sample) max to 250 or even less over time on an 18650. Visually, the difference between 200 lumens and 250 lumens is not that much. But because you're running on turbo, the runtime is much shorter. So the question is, since full regulation on turbo can't be achieved with an 18650, would you rather have a constant 200 lumen output for three hours, or declining brightness that makes turbo and highl nearly indistinguishable over time for two and a half hours? I much prefer the former. YMMV.
Truth be told, I like being able to easily access the Turbo mode for any light very easily. But I think I also understand why 4Sevens did things the way they did. While NO light will suit everyone's purposes and tastes perfectly in either output or UI, I think the G5 was pretty intelligently designed and strikes a good balance in an attempt to achieve usefulness for both tactical and casual users. And while I like being able to easily access turbo mode, I also find moonlight and low to be VERY useful modes, and the medium mode is enough to get stuff done in the dark, at least at close range. The high mode, though not super super bright, is bright enough for most purposes as well, so despite my preference for easy access to turbo mode, I'm pretty happy with the spacing on the outputs.
If I have any constructive criticism (not having any experience with the light at all
If it were done this way, it would be easy to switch modes within an interface (stick with the rotate the head method), and easy to switch between interfaces (use one hand and turn the light on and off with clicks rapidly). Neither action is prone to accidental activation, either, so that's what I would recommend.
As for tactical/visual feedback for switching modes, well, that's another long post for another time. Perhaps I'll cover that later.
Last edited:
4sevens
Flashlight Enthusiast
Re: 4Sevens Maelstrom G5 Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!
Hey everyone -
I've been following this thread and I'll just chime in on a few points...
- Why don't flat-top 18650's work? It's because of the reverse polarity design in the head. It's more important to make sure batteries inserted backwards don't fry the electronics than to accommodate non-standard 18650's. As someone mentioned, using some flat magnetic discs should work fine.
Also, the design inside the head reaches into the body chamber to "clamp down" the batteries such that a) the battery/batteries are fixed with light to prevent a self destructing "hammer effect" when mounted on an automatic rifle (yes, we've tested these lights in these applications) and b) the clamping down also prevents battery rattle with both cr123a as well as 18650's.
- moonlight mode efficiency - why is it less than the Quarks? The circuit is fundamentally different. The maelstrom circuit is designed to push almost twice as much current thus the circuit is more complicated and setup to push more current. The moonlight mode is a compromise - achieving moonlight mode with this circuit was quite a challenge as it is. Short of making a second circuit to run in parallel - it's not possible to get the same runtime.
- max and special mode choice. with each set of modes, the first two would be the most likely used. ie max/strobe and high/medium. I would say these woudl meet 90% of tactical needs. In fact, most just use max and occasionally strobe. We've had this light tested with police departments and we adjusted according to their feedback. (btw we're working on outfitting some departments with the G5 ). the inclusion of the high, medium, low, moonlight was mainly for you cpf'ers I considered not having those modes but eventually decided to include them - of course at my own peril - drawing more opinions and criticisms.
- why not click to change modes? This should be an obvious one. For it to be a true tactical light the clicky switch should under no circumstances changes modes from flashing the tail switch period. These guys operating in tactical situations need the light to be predicable and not do different things during operation. We'll be offering remote switches for the G5 - imagine this light being used in a tactical situation and the operator clicks it a few times then all of a sudden the light does funny things. unacceptable.
just a few points to clarify our design decision
Hey everyone -
I've been following this thread and I'll just chime in on a few points...
- Why don't flat-top 18650's work? It's because of the reverse polarity design in the head. It's more important to make sure batteries inserted backwards don't fry the electronics than to accommodate non-standard 18650's. As someone mentioned, using some flat magnetic discs should work fine.
Also, the design inside the head reaches into the body chamber to "clamp down" the batteries such that a) the battery/batteries are fixed with light to prevent a self destructing "hammer effect" when mounted on an automatic rifle (yes, we've tested these lights in these applications) and b) the clamping down also prevents battery rattle with both cr123a as well as 18650's.
- moonlight mode efficiency - why is it less than the Quarks? The circuit is fundamentally different. The maelstrom circuit is designed to push almost twice as much current thus the circuit is more complicated and setup to push more current. The moonlight mode is a compromise - achieving moonlight mode with this circuit was quite a challenge as it is. Short of making a second circuit to run in parallel - it's not possible to get the same runtime.
- max and special mode choice. with each set of modes, the first two would be the most likely used. ie max/strobe and high/medium. I would say these woudl meet 90% of tactical needs. In fact, most just use max and occasionally strobe. We've had this light tested with police departments and we adjusted according to their feedback. (btw we're working on outfitting some departments with the G5
). the inclusion of the high, medium, low, moonlight was mainly for you cpf'ers I considered not having those modes but eventually decided to include them - of course at my own peril - drawing more opinions and criticisms. - why not click to change modes? This should be an obvious one. For it to be a true tactical light the clicky switch should under no circumstances changes modes from flashing the tail switch period. These guys operating in tactical situations need the light to be predicable and not do different things during operation. We'll be offering remote switches for the G5 - imagine this light being used in a tactical situation and the operator clicks it a few times then all of a sudden the light does funny things. unacceptable.
just a few points to clarify our design decision
Re: There is no spoon, but there is a tree.
Yeah, it seems a bit too much. Especially since regular Quarks don't have such a great efficacy in the moon mode. The question is how accurate is the specification that we know. Many manufacturers in the lower modes seem to provide "not less than" brightness values instead of the real ones and I think we don't have an official specification for Maelstroms yet.
Yeah, it seems a bit too much. Especially since regular Quarks don't have such a great efficacy in the moon mode. The question is how accurate is the specification that we know. Many manufacturers in the lower modes seem to provide "not less than" brightness values instead of the real ones and I think we don't have an official specification for Maelstroms yet.
Re: 4Sevens Maelstrom G5 Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!
I admit I was once on the strobe bandwagon but I hope that in the future manufacturers will be pragmatic and let go of the strobe - unless the military/LEO market find a way to make it a necessity. Otherwise, it's a gimmick (for this use). Beacon I can see the use for - as well as SOS.
Also, since this was intended to be a tactical light there should be a recoil spring behind the head, shouldn't there? This is a pre-production light so understandable that it's not there.
Gun users - how would this light fair in use?
Edit: I see 4sevens post. Thanks for posting guys! :thumbsup:
I admit I was once on the strobe bandwagon but I hope that in the future manufacturers will be pragmatic and let go of the strobe - unless the military/LEO market find a way to make it a necessity. Otherwise, it's a gimmick (for this use). Beacon I can see the use for - as well as SOS.
Also, since this was intended to be a tactical light there should be a recoil spring behind the head, shouldn't there? This is a pre-production light so understandable that it's not there.
Gun users - how would this light fair in use?
Edit: I see 4sevens post. Thanks for posting guys! :thumbsup:
Last edited:
photonstorm
Newly Enlightened
Re: 4Sevens Maelstrom G5 Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!
As usual an excellent comprehensive review from Eric.
Any idea what the MSRP is?
As usual an excellent comprehensive review from Eric.
Any idea what the MSRP is?
was.lost.but.now.found
Enlightened
Re: 4Sevens Maelstrom G5 Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!
David,
It's good to get your take on the matter of the UI. I myself had also thought, "why have a moonlight mode if you pick up the light and it's been on max/special mode set, and you have to go through the max-strobe series 4 times, then through high, medium, and finally low?" Well the answer is pretty clear as you have pointed out.
To that end, I'm surprised the official "release" came from the reviewers and not from you. The first word coming from you would surely have resulted in an entire round of naysayers (myself partially included) being silenced before the first word was spoken.
David,
It's good to get your take on the matter of the UI. I myself had also thought, "why have a moonlight mode if you pick up the light and it's been on max/special mode set, and you have to go through the max-strobe series 4 times, then through high, medium, and finally low?" Well the answer is pretty clear as you have pointed out.
To that end, I'm surprised the official "release" came from the reviewers and not from you. The first word coming from you would surely have resulted in an entire round of naysayers (myself partially included) being silenced before the first word was spoken.
recDNA
Flashaholic
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2009
- Messages
- 8,761
Re: 4Sevens Maelstrom G5 Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!
18,000 lux? I'm hooked. Hope its a bargain!
18,000 lux? I'm hooked. Hope its a bargain!
Re: 4Sevens Maelstrom G5 Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!
I'll leave it to those with direct experience/need to chime in on that.
My long-standing preference as a "regular" user would be for slow signalling strobe/beacon modes (i.e 0.5-2Hz range) in most lights. I could see myself finding that useful. But the G5 is not designed to be an everyday regular-user light, so I can appreciate the choices made here.
Thanks for chiming in David. It's always good to have clarity around design choices directly from the manufacturer. It certainly helps prevent run-away speculative discussions.just a few points to clarify our design decision
I've never been a tactical strobe fan myself - but then, I'm not a very tatical guy.
I'll leave it to those with direct experience/need to chime in on that.My long-standing preference as a "regular" user would be for slow signalling strobe/beacon modes (i.e 0.5-2Hz range) in most lights. I could see myself finding that useful. But the G5 is not designed to be an everyday regular-user light, so I can appreciate the choices made here.
Last edited:
tab665
Flashlight Enthusiast
Re: 4Sevens Maelstrom G5 Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!
that was generous of them to include high, medium, and low modes for us regular folk. perhaps they should have designed a civilian model with the low, med, high, and turbo levels alone. id like to know which would be the bigger seller. oh well, i guess i'll speak by keeping my wallet closed.
that was generous of them to include high, medium, and low modes for us regular folk. perhaps they should have designed a civilian model with the low, med, high, and turbo levels alone. id like to know which would be the bigger seller. oh well, i guess i'll speak by keeping my wallet closed.
woodrow
Flashlight Enthusiast
Re: 4Sevens Maelstrom G5 Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!
Selfbuilt, Thanks for another great review (that will separate my hard earned money from my wallet ) Had I only seen the runtime/output graphs on the 18650's I might have passed, but i do not mind spending the $1 a pop on titaniums to get the kind of performance this light seems to produce on them.
Thanks for such a complete review as always. I look forward to picking one of these up!
Selfbuilt, Thanks for another great review (that will separate my hard earned money from my wallet
) Had I only seen the runtime/output graphs on the 18650's I might have passed, but i do not mind spending the $1 a pop on titaniums to get the kind of performance this light seems to produce on them.Thanks for such a complete review as always. I look forward to picking one of these up!
TwitchALot
Enlightened
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2009
- Messages
- 248
Re: 4Sevens Maelstrom G5 Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!
Perhaps I'm not clear on the UI, since I don't have a sample. It's a forward clicky switch much like the Quark Tactical line, correct? Now I'm not sure how the remote switch will work, but if this is the case, wouldn't someone need to physically click the switch on and off for the modes to switch settings? That is, momentary use of the light with a switch wouldn't change modes- only pressing the button in fully and releasing it (for the audible click as opposed to the soft press of a forward clicky) several times within a very small time frame would switch modes.
Presumably, any remote switch would only depress the tailcap button slightly to avoid the audible click that occurs every time the tailcap is fully depressed. Thus, there would be no way to accidentally switch modes with the remote switch. The situation would be similar in handheld use. I understand the reasoning behind the decision, of course- I'm just trying to clarify the UI. Of course, if I'm wrong and it's not a forward clicky with a momentary option at a light press like the Tacticals, this obviously wouldn't apply, and rotating the head then becomes the next obvious choice for switching between interfaces.
Hey everyone -
- why not click to change modes? This should be an obvious one. For it to be a true tactical light the clicky switch should under no circumstances changes modes from flashing the tail switch period. These guys operating in tactical situations need the light to be predicable and not do different things during operation. We'll be offering remote switches for the G5 - imagine this light being used in a tactical situation and the operator clicks it a few times then all of a sudden the light does funny things. unacceptable.
just a few points to clarify our design decision
Perhaps I'm not clear on the UI, since I don't have a sample. It's a forward clicky switch much like the Quark Tactical line, correct? Now I'm not sure how the remote switch will work, but if this is the case, wouldn't someone need to physically click the switch on and off for the modes to switch settings? That is, momentary use of the light with a switch wouldn't change modes- only pressing the button in fully and releasing it (for the audible click as opposed to the soft press of a forward clicky) several times within a very small time frame would switch modes.
Presumably, any remote switch would only depress the tailcap button slightly to avoid the audible click that occurs every time the tailcap is fully depressed. Thus, there would be no way to accidentally switch modes with the remote switch. The situation would be similar in handheld use. I understand the reasoning behind the decision, of course- I'm just trying to clarify the UI. Of course, if I'm wrong and it's not a forward clicky with a momentary option at a light press like the Tacticals, this obviously wouldn't apply, and rotating the head then becomes the next obvious choice for switching between interfaces.
AardvarkSagus
Flashlight Enthusiast
Re: 4Sevens Maelstrom G5 Review (XP-G R5) - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!
If I am not mistaken, a remote switch will likely be a whole new tailcap with wires running to a momentary only switch rather than having a mechanical setup that partially depresses the existing one.
The mode changes with most forward clickys will still cycle if you only use momentary mode because you are still power cycling it. This way, having the head rotate to change modes prevents any accidental output changes and allows it to be a completely reliable tactical light.
If I am not mistaken, a remote switch will likely be a whole new tailcap with wires running to a momentary only switch rather than having a mechanical setup that partially depresses the existing one.
The mode changes with most forward clickys will still cycle if you only use momentary mode because you are still power cycling it. This way, having the head rotate to change modes prevents any accidental output changes and allows it to be a completely reliable tactical light.
