• You must be a Supporting Member to participate in the Candle Power Forums Marketplace.

    You can become a Supporting Member.

Sold/Expired Re:Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

Metatron

Banned
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
876
Location
perths lightening swamp
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

Hm, I don't no more about electric than some basis theory, but don't our readings state that it's better to use 2 cells?

The basic says V x A = W, so, if A goes up, it would mean that V goes down, doesn't it? I can't verify this, you'd have to measure the voltage under low. That would also be normal battery behaviour, the higher the draw, the more the voltage drops.

Unfortunately, 2 cells have significantly less capacity than an 18650, so runtimes are quite low. There's still no confirmation on the brightness, if the light falls out of regulation at a certain voltage, it surely is true at some point...
13.8 watts with a 18650 IMR as opposed to 10.8 with 2 RCR123 IMR. i imagine the brightest would come from the 18650 or am i guessing?
 

Flyhigh

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
81
Location
Northern Europe
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

13.8 watts with a 18650 IMR as opposed to 10.8 with 2 RCR123 IMR. i imagine the brightest would come from the 18650 or am i guessing?

Just to confuse the issue further; I've stated that my light is brighter using two IMR's, it also gets warmer compared to when using one regular 18650 so I get the feeling that the LED works harder. :confused:

Another thing is that the light never flickers when using two batteries whereas that frequently happens when using regular 18650's. I thought that that was because of crappy batteries or chargers but now I've tried two different chargers and eight different cells from two different brands, Eagletac and AW, and both brands are affected. What bugs is that is an intermittent problem and therefore difficult to pin down. I thought it was because the regular 18650's couldn't handle high A's but reading up on AW cells I see that even regular cells should be able to handle the A's that you guys have measured. :thinking:

Btw, I've also tried using two regular AW cells for a short while without any problems, when trying the same thing with Batterystation RCR's the light shut down after approx 30 seconds.

Cheers

K
 

Glenn7

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
1,597
Location
Tasmania, Australia (the butt end of oz)
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

so can anyone actually confirm that 2x IMR123's are brighter than 1x 18650 IMR or vice-versa??
I use a light meter at a set distance with the max button on to tell which is a brighter combination of batteries.
I dont have any IMR's but my white trustfire 18650 batteries are brigther than the blue trustfire's and is still brighter than 2x batterystation 123A primaries even the white trustfire 16340 are brighter in all my other lights than AW 16340's but they wont fit in the SF3
 

Metatron

Banned
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
876
Location
perths lightening swamp
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

so can anyone actually confirm that 2x IMR123's are brighter than 1x 18650 IMR or vice-versa??
I use a light meter at a set distance with the max button on to tell which is a brighter combination of batteries.
I dont have any IMR's but my white trustfire 18650 batteries are brigther than the blue trustfire's and is still brighter than 2x batterystation 123A primaries even the white trustfire 16340 are brighter in all my other lights than AW 16340's but they wont fit in the SF3
take it to the bank mate one IMR 18650 is tops, enjoy the snow this weekend:wave:
 

Metatron

Banned
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
876
Location
perths lightening swamp
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

Just to confuse the issue further; I've stated that my light is brighter using two IMR's, it also gets warmer compared to when using one regular 18650 so I get the feeling that the LED works harder. :confused:

Another thing is that the light never flickers when using two batteries whereas that frequently happens when using regular 18650's. I thought that that was because of crappy batteries or chargers but now I've tried two different chargers and eight different cells from two different brands, Eagletac and AW, and both brands are affected. What bugs is that is an intermittent problem and therefore difficult to pin down. I thought it was because the regular 18650's couldn't handle high A's but reading up on AW cells I see that even regular cells should be able to handle the A's that you guys have measured. :thinking:

Btw, I've also tried using two regular AW cells for a short while without any problems, when trying the same thing with Batterystation RCR's the light shut down after approx 30 seconds.

Cheers

K
i had some flickering going on, just unscrewed the tailswitch one iota and it was fixed...
 

one2tim

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
225
Location
Copenhagen
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

Tonight or tomorrow ill compare AW IMR 18650/16430 and the Black protected ones too. Just waiting for the postman to come with my IMR'S. Ill post Lux Reading when done
 

Glenn7

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
1,597
Location
Tasmania, Australia (the butt end of oz)
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

just did a run time test with a white trustfire 18650 and got 29 min before it flicked to low, not bad :grin2: but me thinks I will get some IMR's as I just heard (Thanks Menatron) that the IMR's make them scream
 
Last edited:

SCblur

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
818
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

Is it dangerous to run the light all the way down on IMR cells?
 

Flyhigh

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
81
Location
Northern Europe
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

i had some flickering going on, just unscrewed the tailswitch one iota and it was fixed...

Thanks for the tip, sadly, it didn't work for my light. I wonder why it flickers on a 18650? It never does on 16340's. Hopefully it'll be alright on the IMR.

Cheers

K

I forgot: my runtime on a pair of IMR 16340's is 14 min on high, in case anybody is interested.
 

gottawearshades

Enlightened
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
986
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

Interesting runitme data. I ran my light on high on two fresh surefires, and it dropped to low in a little over 10 minutes. After it had been off for a while, in the interest of science, I started it back up on high. This time it ran for more than twenty minutes. (It might have been very gradually dimming during this time; I don't have any equipment.) at thi spoint it started to flicker intermittently, so I turned it off. I took the cells out, let the rest overnight, and they measured 20% on my ZTS.
 

qarawol

Enlightened
Joined
Jan 16, 2004
Messages
380
Location
Southern California
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

I don't claim to know it all, but here's is my $0.02 on the battery/runtime question.

Get a drink, snack and a blanket.

I may jump around a bit and throw some type of cell chemistry and lamps in that we don't use on the SF-III but please bear with me…

DC (direct current)… for simplicity, we will call these batteries. These are generally rated by voltage and capacity. Capacity is usually rated in milliamp-hours (mAh). The chemical make up of the battery is the primary factor on how well in can deliver those volts and amps to a given load. Another factor that comes into play is what some call the internal resistance of the cell determined by the load… I like to call it Oomph!

In a perfect world, a 2500mAh rated battery can run a device that has a load of 2500mA for 1 hour, 1250mA load will run for 2 hours and a 5000mA load for 30 minutes. Got the math down packed? And just because a battery has a higher mAh rating does not make it the better choice.

It should be pointed out that Nickel Cadmium (NiCd) batteries can deliver more oomph then Nickel Metal Hydride (NiMH) batteries for high loads. High capacity NiMH batteries will last longer in general use electronic/digital items then NiCd's. But NiCd will outshine NiMH batteries in high resistive load like hot wire lamps and stuff. Don't get me wrong, NiMH can still be used on high loads but they aren't happy and may not have a long 'usable life' span. So if you plan on pushing the batteries to the limits, NiCd's are the way to go. You may not get as long of a runtime, but you may get better performance and longer usable battery life.

Some basic types of electrical loads are:
1) Resistive – incandescent lamps, heating elements (toaster, electric stove, etc)
2) Magnetic – transformers, magnetic ballasts & coils (induction)
3) Electronic – LED's, transistors, integrated circuits (IC) - this can be a combination of 1 & 2 above in a much smaller scale.

There are generally 3 factors of a complete working simple circuit… 1: Voltage, 2: Load and 3: Current (amps).

Incandescent Flashlights are the simplest of Flashlights because there are no electronics involved. Let's compare both the Surefire M3T and the Surefire M6 for both are 9volt Flashlights and both are simple circuit designs… battery, lamp and switch. The M3T uses three 3volt lithium primaries in series for a total of 9volts. The M6 uses six 3volt lithium primaries in a special battery holder which also puts out a total of 9volts. WHAT? You say! Six batteries but only 9volts? Why?... because the way the battery holder holds those six batteries. Rather then all of them in series to total 18volts; it places 2 sets of 3 batteries in parallel. When placing batteries in series, you add up the total voltage of each cell but the capacity remains the same. When you place the batteries in parallel, you add up the capacity but the voltage remains the same. The M6 battery holder combines both series and parallel configurations. Confused yet?

The M3T using a MN15 lamp will run for 1 hour with an output of 125 lumens (Surefire specs). The MN15 is a 9volt lamp and was specifically designed to be used with only three 3v primaries.

The M6 using a MN20 lamp will run for 1 hour with an output of 250 lumens (Surefire specs). The MN20 is also a 9volt lamp but was specifically designed to be used with six 3v primaries (2 sets of 3 in parallel).

Both of these 9volt lamps were designed for a specific number of cells and how they are arranged. A lot of thinking went into these lamps. When turned on, there would be a calculated voltage drop and a calculated current draw to get the rated output and runtime specified.

If you were to place the M6 lamp in the M3T, you would not get the full 250 lumen output even if you are supplying the 9volts needed. This is where not only capacity comes in but that oomph I was talking about. The lamp is rated at 9volts but needs not only the amperage output of the battery it also needs that added oomph that only placing 2 sets of 3 batteries in parallel can bring. Using only 3 batteries, the load would be too great and the cells would not have enough oomph to power that lamp fully.

If you were to place the M3 lamp in an M6, that lamp would go POOF! WHAT? Why wouldn't it just last longer? It is a 9volt rated lamp, isn't it with a lower current draw then an M6 lamp? Yes it is. With 2 sets of 3 batteries in parallel (still 9 volts) the M3 lamp would not drop the voltage to a safe level and therefore it will burn out. The M6 lamp, at 9volts, creates more of a load then the M3T lamp. Again, the lamps were designed to be used for a specific power source.

For added clarity on what is happening here… don't quote me on this for I am just using rough numbers to simplify what I am trying to explain. Let's say a 3volt primary has a capacity of 1500mAh (1.5amps). Three 3volt primary batteries in series would be 9volts @ 1500mA. It would be safe to say that if you had a 1500mA load @ 9volts it would run for 1 hour. Increase that load to 3000mA and it would run for 30 minutes. Increase the load to 4500mA and it should run for 15 minutes… right? In a perfect world, all of the above would be true. Remember, we are dealing with batteries here so all bets are off. If we load a battery beyond its limits, the chemistry in the cells starts to react to this load. The voltage will drop substantially, it will heat up and things in the cell begin to change and it will no longer give us what we though it should. Try using a 9volt transistor battery to power a M6 or a M3T lamp. You would be lucky if you get even a slight glow. 9volts is not 9volts, 1500mA is not 1500mA. It all depends on how the cell was made and for what type of load.

Now we'll get to the electronics portion of things. Most here can only measure the amps from the tail end of the battery. This is giving us ONLY the total load of the battery and not the drive current to the LED. Remember we have electronics between the battery and LED. In the above example of the M6 and M3T, the lamp is directly driven by the batteries and it will slowly dim as the cells are used up. With the SF-III electronics, the cell(s) are used up to a point to where the electronics are not happy anymore and they turn themselves off. There maybe still enough power to light an incan for several more minutes but not operate the electronics.

Using an 18650 3.7v battery, in the SF-III, the electronics has to work harder to boost up the voltage needed to light up the LED. This is causing more heat to be generated by the converter board then the heat by the LED alone.

Using 2 x RCR123 (7.4v) the converter board does not have to work 'as' hard to light up the LED but it still does heat up.

The 18650 has a higher rated capacity then the RCR123's. Some RCR's has a protection circuit built in that monitors battery and load conditions and has a certain internal resistance under a certain load. The IMR cells don't have the protection circuit but has a lower internal resistance then the regular protected RCR's.

Like the NiCd and NiMH example I gave above… the IMR's can handle a high load better then regular RCR's (starting to get the picture now of NiCd vs NiMH?). The SF-III converter board can feel or see this difference in the cell chemistry and therefore will ask for it and drive the LED more efficiently. That is probably why you can see the Flashlight put out a bit more light then with regular RCR's. Look at it like towing a 3000 pound trailer up a small hill @ 60mph. A 4 cylinder truck (RCR123) can do it. It will work hard but it will get the job done. But if you use the same truck with an 8 cylinder (IMR)… get the picture? Now increase the length and angle of the hill. With the same load and trying to keep up the 60 mph speed, chances of you hurting the 4 cyl are great but it would be nothing for the 8 cyl. Reduced the speed to 40 mph on the 4 cyl and things will turn out better for it. What changed? It is the same truck and the same load isn't it? All we did is change the hill. Ahhh! There lies that hidden variable that the oomph factor comes into play. While the outside of the trucks will look the same, it's what under the hood that matters. The IMR has a different engine then that of an RCR. It can supply the power if needed. Now if you are just using the truck for errands and not towing anything up a steep hill, do you need all that horse power?

Here in the SF-III, we have a bunch of electronic stuff doing a lot of thinking. It's looking at the battery voltage, capacity and how much oomph it has available. It's doing all that thinking and calculations so that it can boost what is needed to drive the LED to what it was told to do. Unlike the incan lamps that just use up power until it is gone… electronics monitors what is available and will shut itself off it something drops below a certain level. Using 2xRCR123's will work and my theory for it shutting off at around 10 minutes on high is that the battery cannot really handle this load for that long. You can turn it back on immediately showing that it was not the battery protection circuit kicking in. It is probably the SF-III electronics sensing the battery does not have the needed oomph to keep the converter happy. It could also be the battery protection circuit 'almost' activating but not fully because the SF-III sensed it and turned itself off before the battery protection circuit fully kicked in. Or there maybe a hick-up or a brain fart that the battery gives off during the chemical reaction on a high load demand and the SF-III electronics picks up on this and shuts itself off.

RCR's has a higher internal resistance then IMR's. An 18650 has a higher capacity then the RCR's or IMR's. 1x18650 will run longer then 2xRCR but not as bright. IMR's will be brighter then 1x18650 or 2xRCR's for that added oomph it has but you have to be sure not to over discharge. Using 2xIMR's may also cause higher converter temps then 2xRCR's because the battery has the added oomph that the converter will be happy to use. Give it just enough and the converter will do what it was told to do to the best of its ability. Give it more and it will be happier… hotter but happier. Just don't exceed the max input.

In the end, you have to find out what battery works for you based on how you plan to use the Flashlight. Just keep in mind that all cells have a mind of their own. Manufactures try to stay within a certain spec when batteries are made but one battery fart and auto shut off… Is it really the Flashlights fault?

Njoy…

p.s. please disregard all of the above.
 

Henk_Lu

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 31, 2007
Messages
2,008
Location
Golden Cage
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

Wow, qarawol, this story is highly interesting and confirms the ideas I made myself about all that stuff! :thumbsup:

You seem to not only know the needed details about electrics, electronics and the SF-III, but you also find the right words to explain it to those who don't know them in a way that I at least understand it... :wave:

Thanks for your essay! :wave:
 

easilyled

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
Messages
7,252
Location
Middlesex, UK
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

What qarawol says makes perfect sense. However it also explains why no configuration available gives the best of both worlds. ie maximum brightness for a reasonable length of time. (ie. over about 15 minutes)

If an extension tube was available to allow for 2 IMR 18500s (equivalent to the length of 3 CR123s), then this would be possible whilst still keeping the SF-III relatively compact.
 
Last edited:

Glenn7

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
1,597
Location
Tasmania, Australia (the butt end of oz)
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

qarawol: I was thinking of getting some IMR's to run this puppy - starting to think now 2x IMR 123's are the way to go - higher amps measured at the tail doesn't mean more ooomph! out the front thats why I use a light meter to measure what you actually get OTF.
Also I wonder if primary 3v 123s have a better internal resistance than IMR 123's so giving a longer runtime albeit not as bright.
 

SCblur

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 30, 2005
Messages
818
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

wow qarawol! That was awesome, thanks. I'm still wondering though, can I use an IMR 18650 and run the light all the way down until it kicks out of regulation without harming the cell? If so, that's the cell for me, but I'm afraid of any dangers I don't know about with the battery.
 

Flyhigh

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
81
Location
Northern Europe
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

Qarawol: Thanks for this excellent post! :twothumbs It seems to me that an IMR 18650 should be the perfect compromise between runtime and output. I can't wait to try it.

In the meantime I'm trying the different battery combinations that I have available right now to decide which ones are best for me.

I've tried two brands of 18650's (AW and Eagletac), rcr's 123 (AW and Battery station, the latter shut themselves down after just 30 seconds) and AW Imr's 123. I've settled on the Imr's because of output and because I can't get the SF-III to work reliably on a regular 18650 (Although I will try one of my Eagletac batteries again).

All of this battery switching really drives me nuts but then again this a fun part of our hobby, to be able to experiment. lovecpf


And just like Qarawol said, even the same type batteries from the same brand differ, that has become very clear to me while playing, sorry, working with my light.

Cheers

K

PS Just tried doing a runtime test using the Eagletac. It ran for 12 mins before flickering a little bit but then I shut it down beacuse it was almost to hot to touch DS
 
Last edited:

easilyled

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
Messages
7,252
Location
Middlesex, UK
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

1 18650 IMR will not achieve maximum brightness because the voltage needs to be boosted a lot by the converter and this wastes energy.

At least this is what I understood from what qarawol said.

This is why 2 IMR 18500s would be the best solution provided an extension tube could be made.

Then you would have max. brightness and a decent runtime.
 

one2tim

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
225
Location
Copenhagen
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

Alright finally got my IMR's from AW. Ive made a cealing bounce test on my bathroom with a lux light meter. The test showed this:

AW 18650 and AW IMR 18650 both stabilized on 22,5
AW rcr123 and AW IMR 16430 both stabilized on 24,0

so according to my test the IMR'S dosent make any difference. Only 2x 16430 is little brighter then 1x 18650.

Finally i can just relax and enjoy this fantastic flashlight, i carry it on work everyday in the nylon bag it came with, and im simply in love with it. Only concern i have is how many clicks the button will handle as i must be clicking it more then 100 times a day:huh:
 

one2tim

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
225
Location
Copenhagen
Re: Advance payment for limited SF-III run. ENDED!

So metatron 1 IMR 18650 is not brighter then either rcr123 or IMR 16430 unless your light is different then mine
 
Top