Petzl NAO - high-tech headlamp review.

[Solscud007]

I believe the auto shutoff may be a feature in the OS.

You can see I have selected on>levels>off but there is another option on>off after 8 secs. I dont know why you would want that. I havent tried this mode. Could you still switch modes with that option selected? Why would you want your headlamp to turn off after 8 secs?

 

[lutgulajn]

I am revising my words because I was not understood.


There are two ways of switching ON the light.


First is to turn and release the knob as a short pulse (for a part of a second) - in my case this makes the light to go in Reactive Mod and everything is OK.
Second way is to turn and hold the knob as a longer pulse (for a second or more but under two seconds) - this activates the Constant Mode, which in my case (after I released the knob) works for exactly 10 seconds and then turn itself OFF...




Thanks Solscud007!

There is some possibility this shutoff to be some kind of precaution in the OS (like the automatic switch OFF in Reactive Mode when the surrounding light is enough) but I doubt. Thats why I am asking you if you could check this on your lamps.

I am using the same on>levels>off option as you so the problem has to be elsewhere. I have not tried the on>off after 8 secs option either.

 

[Solscud007]

Yes. I understood. My Nao doesnt do that. Check the software and make sure that option is not set. Otherwise you might need to return it and get a new one.

Also I found the extension belt kit on sale. Havent ordered one yet.

http://petzl.factoryoutletstore.com/details/36482-61329/petzl-extension-cable-nao.html

 

[HistoryChannel]

My Nao does not do that either.... it stays on and does not shut off. Like Solscud007 said, it might be your settings/programming?

 

[HistoryChannel]

Also I found the extension belt kit on sale. Havent ordered one yet.

http://petzl.factoryoutletstore.com/details/36482-61329/petzl-extension-cable-nao.html

I was interested in getting that extension as well. It doesn't attach to any other battery does it? I was hoping I could use my Nao with the extension cable to attach a Petzl ACCU 4 Rechargeable Battery (From the Ultra Rush Belt model) but the plug looks totally different. WHY do companies do this?!?!? Wouldn't it be better if they shared components? So we can use the Petzl ACCU 4 Rechargeable Battery with the Nao for incredible runtime?

 

[Solscud007]

They must have gotten their business model from Sony.

 

[uk_caver]

The Ultra uses a 2s or 2s2p battery.
Would the Nao even be capable of using such a battery if some suitable adapter was made?

Even if it was so capable, as far as 'incredible runtimes' go, maybe that isn't a factor in many designer's thinking, even if the only issue was a neat Nao-only solution vs a less-neat more flexible one.
After all, excluding polar and subterranean activity, it only stays dark for so long before getting light again.

Now, personally, I like having a headlight with multi-day runtimes on lower power levels, for reasons of convenience (and knowing that if I only have one spare pack underground, it will give me light for weeks if necessary), but those runtimes on lower levels are arguably still side-effects of having adequate runtime on full output for most caving trips.

 

[Szemhazai]

So we can use the Petzl ACCU 4 Rechargeable Battery with the Nao for incredible runtime?

It's a no go - NAO cannot work without the driver that is inside the battery pack.

 

[HistoryChannel]

It's a no go - NAO cannot work without the driver that is inside the battery pack.

Yup.... That's what I was saying. I wish Petzl would have designed it so we can. Or come out with a belt battery pack compatible with the Nao.

Hate when companies do things to make money, like not use a battery system so we can pop in and out an 18650 of our choice. Instead we have to carry along an entire battery pack as backup for $50. Al Petzl had to do was make the electronics built into the battery pack NOT the battery.

I sent a letter of complaint t petzl about that. I got back a generic response back that says currently they have no plans to do that and sorry for the inconvenience.... Blah blah. If every Petzl owner wrote them I bet it would get their attention about making a modular system so we can Lego pieces to our liking.

 

[HistoryChannel]

The Ultra uses a 2s or 2s2p battery.
Would the Nao even be capable of using such a battery if some suitable adapter was made?

Even if it was so capable, as far as 'incredible runtimes' go, maybe that isn't a factor in many designer's thinking, even if the only issue was a neat Nao-only solution vs a less-neat more flexible one.
After all, excluding polar and subterranean activity, it only stays dark for so long before getting light again.

Now, personally, I like having a headlight with multi-day runtimes on lower power levels, for reasons of convenience (and knowing that if I only have one spare pack underground, it will give me light for weeks if necessary), but those runtimes on lower levels are arguably still side-effects of having adequate runtime on full output for most caving trips.

For most of my trips and headlamp use, the current runtime is decent. But I do go on multi-day off grid excursions. Or for SAR activity when the lights are full blast all the time runtime dwindles to an hour or two with the OEM pack. I guess the measly 2300 mAh proprietary battery pack for $50 is good enough for most. Just saying it would be nice if they offered a $30 battery pack with electronics in the case, and we get to use our own 18650 and have the option of a bigger belt pack. Maybe even a 4 x 18650 belt case with extension cable system?

Then we can pop in a 3400 mAh cell or use 4 x 3400 mAh cells in the belt case. I need to be on the Petzl design team.

 

[uk_caver]

Hate when companies do things to make money, like not use a battery system so we can pop in and out an 18650 of our choice. Instead we have to carry along an entire battery pack as backup for $50. Al Petzl had to do was make the electronics built into the battery pack NOT the battery.

With the relative immaturity of 18650 as a retail option, and the slew of crap cells pretending to be high capacity, I guess being proprietary does at least save them from complaints from people regarding poor runtimes on one or other FailFire cell.

Realistically, just at the moment, I think if they had been looking to make a light with easily user-replaceable cells, they'd probably have made it 3xAA NiMH.

I sent a letter of complaint t petzl about that. I got back a generic response back that says currently they have no plans to do that and sorry for the inconvenience.... Blah blah. If every Petzl owner wrote them I bet it would get their attention about making a modular system so we can Lego pieces to our liking.

Somehow I doubt every Petzl owner would write to them. I suspect they're not simply relying on customer inertia protecting them against that, but on you not being a typical customer for this particular light.

 

[uk_caver]

For most of my trips and headlamp use, the current runtime is decent. But I do go on multi-day off grid excursions. Or for SAR activity when the lights are full blast all the time runtime dwindles to an hour or two with the OEM pack. I guess the measly 2300 mAh proprietary battery pack for $50 is good enough for most. Just saying it would be nice if they offered a $30 battery pack with electronics in the case, and we get to use our own 18650 and have the option of a bigger belt pack. Maybe even a 4 x 18650 belt case with extension cable system?
Then we can pop in a 3400 mAh cell or use 4 x 3400 mAh cells in the belt case.

I guess it comes down to perceived level of likely demand, and how things fit into a price structure.
A 4x18650 external pack would have to be seriously expensive in order not to make their 1x18650 spare look overpriced even by their own standards.
A 4p 18650 external holder would have to have solid built-in protection to keep it safe whatever kind of rubbish cells someone decided to use in it.

I need to be on the Petzl design team.

I get the feeling that they do things in their own way, but I don't think they would be entirely deaf to customer comments, if such comments were frequent enough.

When it comes to their vertical gear, it does seem like changes they make from time to time probably are responding to user experience, whether directly from users writing to them, or from comments filtered back up via retailers and distributors.
I replace my harnesses and metalwork on a fairly regular basis, and it appears that the places where kit tends to wear out first are the places where new versions seem to make design changes which seem to be aimed at reducing wear.

 

[HistoryChannel]

There are just as many crap AA and AAA cells out there. Someone can throw in their old NiCad AA from 6 years ago or even buy a new crap NiCad battery and experience bad runtime so I don't think that's the reason. I truly believe companies make proprietary pieces for profit and less cross brand compatibility. If you want a spare battery, you HAVE to buy the Petzl $50 one. That is on purpose.

People can run crap 123a batteries or crap 17670 LiIons or drop in a $5 Chinese LED etc. in a SF and there isn't a problem.

A protection circuit is cheap and easy to build into a battery case. Petzl wanted to make the battery pack proprietary for profit is my thought.

 

[uk_caver]

While I'm sure that economics may well play a part in the thought process, the consumer market for loose 18650s really isn't mature, and that might be enough on its own to make many manufacturers wary.

Where I live, I'm highly unlikely to find 18650s at any retail outlet, and if I buy any mail order, legally speaking they should be couriered to me since the Royal Mail declines to ship them.
Even here (let alone in many other countries) while I may be able to find the odd national supplier, most suppliers I could find will be overseas, with other shipping restrictions attached.

That's not exactly a fantastic environment to launch a consumer-level product into which takes bare cells.
At the moment, 18650s are rather niche products.
You and I know about them, where to get them, what to buy and not to buy, but few average consumers have a clue.

It is a bit of a chicken-and-egg situation, but unless/until quality cells are readily available, with brand names a consumer doesn't have to research first on the internet, it's hard to see many non-niche lights being made to run solely on loose 18650s (18650/2xCR123 lights maybe being a borderline case).

If/when there are Duracell 18650s on the high street, then I think it would be completely fair to call out a manufacturer for having proprietary cells for a single-cell light, rather than just partially understandable.

 

[HistoryChannel]

Then Petzl should have made the Nao with a 3x AA battery case option. They went proprietary 18650 battery pack for a reason. Maybe they should at least sell the 18650 with their special circuit board separately. It just bugs me that even though I can pop pot their battery, just the batter by unplugging it, to have a spare I have to buy the entire pack for $50 when I know it only has a 2300 mAh battery in it. 2300 vs 3400 is a huge runtime difference.

 

[HistoryChannel]

It doesn't bother you how they set up the Nao's battery system?

 

[Dirtbasher]

While I'm sure that economics may well play a part in the thought process, the consumer market for loose 18650s really isn't mature, and that might be enough on its own to make many manufacturers wary.

Where I live, I'm highly unlikely to find 18650s at any retail outlet, and if I buy any mail order, legally speaking they should be couriered to me since the Royal Mail declines to ship them.
Even here (let alone in many other countries) while I may be able to find the odd national supplier, most suppliers I could find will be overseas, with other shipping restrictions attached.

That's not exactly a fantastic environment to launch a consumer-level product into which takes bare cells.
At the moment, 18650s are rather niche products.
You and I know about them, where to get them, what to buy and not to buy, but few average consumers have a clue.

It is a bit of a chicken-and-egg situation, but unless/until quality cells are readily available, with brand names a consumer doesn't have to research first on the internet, it's hard to see many non-niche lights being made to run solely on loose 18650s (18650/2xCR123 lights maybe being a borderline case).

If/when there are Duracell 18650s on the high street, then I think it would be completely fair to call out a manufacturer for having proprietary cells for a single-cell light, rather than just partially understandable.

I tend to agree , here in Africa , you cannot just walk into a shop and get a 18650 , you have to look for specialist gadget shops or guns shop that sell Tac lights.

However , I want to buy the Nao, but this battery limitation is what turned me off, because the light will need a new battery in 2-3 years , it means another $50 , which I think is an issue, stores don't stock these accessories due to shelf life, so it's a special order and this overpriced light will just sit there , unless you do the battery hack.

 

[uk_caver]

Then Petzl should have made the Nao with a 3x AA battery case option. They went proprietary 18650 battery pack for a reason.

The went 18650 for one or more reasons.
Reasons could include size, weight, style.

Maybe they should at least sell the 18650 with their special circuit board separately. It just bugs me that even though I can pop pot their battery, just the batter by unplugging it, to have a spare I have to buy the entire pack for $50 when I know it only has a 2300 mAh battery in it. 2300 vs 3400 is a huge runtime difference.

Possibly one issue with the case is that given their charging-via-USB design, if they did sell cell+connector separately, then they'd probably have to sell a separate (USB?) charger.
It would be a bit crap if they sold you a spare cell where the only way of charging it was to swap it into a part of the light which you needed in order to use the light.
The existing connector setup might have to be rather more butch if the user was expected to be swapping cells in and out of the case on a regular basis, and carrying spare cells around stuffed into a rucksack.
I'd suggest that if they were going to go down that road, about the only logical place to stop would be a case designed for use with a holder for loose cells (and therefore a case designed for frequent user opening in field situations), rather than occasional opening for failed-cell replacement.

I'd certainly agree that the capacity does seem disappointing, especially given the pricing.
I wouldn't be surprised if they brought out an uprated battery at some point, but that point would probably be after they've shifted most/all of the 2300s.

It doesn't bother you how they set up the Nao's battery system?

It doesn't personally bother me since they're not hiding anything and I'm fairly unlikely to buy one - I'm quite happy with my various manual-control twin-beam headlamps.
I'd expect that if the automatic control does work well, it will start to appear on various other lights, including ones powered by mainstream cells.

 

[Solscud007]

Possibly one issue with the case is that given their charging-via-USB design, if they did sell cell+connector separately, then they'd probably have to sell a separate (USB?) charger.
It would be a bit crap if they sold you a spare cell where the only way of charging it was to swap it into a part of the light which you needed in order to use the light.

This is false. The current design already causes issues. Once the battery is drained in the pack, you have to unplug it and charge the pack. During that few hour charge time, the light is completely useless.

As History channel suggested, they could have easily put the chip inside the battery pack and built metal leads for an 18650 to be dropped in, then they could just buy 18650s and slap their name on it, like it is now. Then they make a statement, like SureFire, to not use cells other than their brand.

it is really annoying how they screw the owners over on this. They over complicated this system.

 

[uk_caver]

This is false. The current design already causes issues. Once the battery is drained in the pack, you have to unplug it and charge the pack. During that few hour charge time, the light is completely useless.

I don't think you quite followed my logic, quite possibly due to lack of clarity on my part.
I wasn't talking about the existing situation where someone only has a single cell/battery pack.

I was pointing out that selling the cell+internal connector without a battery back around it would have a particular issue in that when either cell was being charged, the light would be useless.

For someone to be able to charge-while-using (or charge more than one cell at a time) in that scenario, they'd either need a second battery case to act as a charger, or some separate proprietary charger with appropriate connector (or a suitably built/modified third-party charger).

As History channel suggested, they could have easily put the chip inside the battery pack and built metal leads for an 18650 to be dropped in, then they could just buy 18650s and slap their name on it, like it is now. Then they make a statement, like SureFire, to not use cells other than their brand.

As I said, if they were going to sell any less-than-complete setup for use as an active spare (rather than replacement for worn cell) a holder would seem to be more logical/useful than selling a spare cell+connector, since charging and use could easily happen in parallel, as could charging multiple cells.

it is really annoying how they screw the owners over on this. They over complicated this system.

It could depend to some extent on how they got to where they are.
Their previous lithium products do seem to have been multi-cell ones, where it is maybe more understandable that proprietary packs would be attractive for reasons of cell balance, as well as things like ease of sealing for weatherproofing, having a known level of protection for cells, etc.
That seems to be the way that most high-end headlamps from other manufacturers have worked in the past.
Even going single-cell, they might be expected to stay with that approach unless there was some particular strong reason to change.

Ignoring the price for a moment, someone could take the view that their approach is the least complicated from a user's point of view - each cell is packaged in a waterproof (weatherproof?) housing, which can be recharged in a whole host of places, from mains or vehicle power, without the need for a dedicated lithium charger, via a cheap USB power supply (or suitable PC/netbook/TV, etc).
Cost aside, arguably a replaceable cell arrangement would only be 'better' for people who were already existing 18650 users (which group probably overlaps little with expected Nao buyers) who already had and used chargers and had a use for cells in multiple pieces of equipment.
Seems to me that the main issue for most likely buyers is the cost of the replacements, not the convenience.

I'd wonder what their market research (if any) suggested the likely breakdown of users was as far as how many spare packs people might be likely to buy is concerned?