# Quark Moonlight Runtime Test



## Darvis (Aug 20, 2010)

**** Test Completed 9/9/2010; Results Below ****

Alright, I said I'd do this, so here it is... I'm going to watch the grass grow over the next few days and see what time will tell us.

Here's my test... At Noon today, I fired up 3 single AA Quarks and an Eiger #1 all running on AA batteries. (The Eiger via the VC AA Arc adapter)

2 of the Quarks (one XP-E and one XP-G) and the Eiger are running on freshly cycled (via the lacrosse discharge/refresh selection) Eneloops.

One of the Quarks (an XP-E) is running on a brand new Duracell Alkaline AA

I am having a heck of a time with uploading photos, so I'm going to run this test verbally for all of you as I'm simply running until lights off.

I'm not expecting much of a difference between the two crees overall, so I also feel the Alkaline running with the XP-E will be fairly indicative of the XP-G runtime when all is said and done.

I'll check the lights @ roughly 12 hour intervals and make updates here every 12-24 hours as I expect this to be a long one!!! (at least I hope so) I'll also update if anything changes... for instance, as the Eiger dims over time and gets to the output level of the Quarks.

Hope you enjoy this one folks, the latest of the lowest of the lows series of time killers!!!

Regards,
Darvis

*Update 9/9/2010: *For those of you intereted in the lithium primary version of this test, a new post has been started here: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3519028#post3519028

Also, forgot to note that all three Eneloops came off the charger @ 1.46v and were between 1979 and 2000 mah as indicated by the lacrosse after the refresh

As for the three Quarks: One XP-E is a tactical, one is a standard. The XP-G is a tactical model. I Don't forsee this skewing anything, but if anyone knows differently, let me know

I honestly don't remeber which XP-E got the alkaline, but I'll note that at the end of the test. (It was the regular UI version)

*XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX *
*Results*
*XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX*

Peak Eiger XP-G #1 (Eneloop AA, VC AA adapter)

*25.5 hours to 50%*
*30.75 hours to less than Quark moon mode* (The Eiger "moon" mode lasted 3.5 hours)
*47 hours* to tritium brightness and .97v

*Conclusion:* A very nice steady, predictable and utterly usable decline over the course of 47 hours. This light will not just turn off on you and the VC AA adapter is extremely well made and makes for a great camping/survival rig. (I still prefer the AAA format for EDC given its compactness)

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Quark XP-G Tactical (Eneloop AA)

*266 hours to off* and .91v

Quark XP-E Tactical (Eneloop AA)

*270 hours to off* and .90v

Quark XP-E Regular (Duracell Alkaline AA)

*470 hours to off* and .77v

*Conclusion:* Holy Guacamole! 19.6 days continuous on an alkaline! 


XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

The lonely brothers Quark:








I also wanted to note (based on the recent banner warning against shilling) that I am running these tests for my own knowledge and to share with others in this forum. These were lights purchased with my own money for my personal use and I am in no way endorsing ANY brand of light, battery, accessory or dealer. Any of my opinions in this thread are my own, and you, as a reader, are free to form your own conclusions about the data presented here.

Enjoy!


----------



## copperfox (Aug 20, 2010)

No Quarks came with the XR-E. Perhaps you meant XP-E?

Good luck, I look forward to seeing the results.


----------



## wyager (Aug 20, 2010)

I'm glad someone is doing this test. I can't wait!


----------



## Darvis (Aug 20, 2010)

copperfox said:


> No Quarks came with the XR-E. Perhaps you meant XP-E?
> 
> Good luck, I look forward to seeing the results.


 
Copperfox, thanks for the catch! I do that all the time for some reason... I've corrected my opening post


----------



## swxb12 (Aug 20, 2010)

Darvis, thanks for doing this test! 



Darvis said:


> Here's my test... At Noon today, I fired up 3 single AA Quarks and an Eiger #1 all running on AA batteries. (The Eiger via the VC AA Arc adapter)



Wow, I had no idea the Valiant adapter worked on Eigers. Good info. to know for sure.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 20, 2010)

> Wow, I had no idea the Valiant adapter worked on Eigers. Good info. to know for sure.


 
Sure does! I have all stainless heads and it makes for one extremely smooth turning twisty. Looks like a .308 round at first glance due to the shape, but works all the same. The adapter itself is of very high quality as well.

It's an olive green shade of ano (in case you were wondering) and it's coated on the inside. The talicap is nicely done, uses a full spring, and from what I've read here in the forums, that spring can be flipped (somehow) and used with your choice of resistor to control output and runtime even more. Not exactly sure how this works, but I aim to find out. MWClint talks about it here in post #14: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/287386

A tad bit pricey, but hey, it doubles your AAA fun in more ways than one!


----------



## fisk-king (Aug 20, 2010)

I'm glad someone else out there is doing a "moonlight" runtime test besides me:laughing:. Since Sunday I have been running my Ra at its lowest setting. Can't wait to see the results of your test.

Also, if you have the tactical version maybe we can see a test run of the ''eclipse'' mode.

Nick


----------



## Wiggle (Aug 20, 2010)

I'd love to do a test but I don't think I can leave my Quark alone that long.


----------



## Cataract (Aug 20, 2010)

I need my quarks too often to be able to do this


----------



## Zendude (Aug 20, 2010)

Hey folks,

When Darvis said he was going to do this I went ahead and started a couple lights on low mode.

The contenders:

Nitecore D10 GDP (Duraloop)
Ti Quark MiNi AA (alkie)
NW Quark MiNi AA (Duraloop) 

As of 30hrs the Ti Quark and D10 are doing fine.

The NW Quark on the other hand died somewhere between 24-28hrs. Voltage was .89V. I didn't expect it to die so soon or I would have been monitoring a little more closely. I'm going to redo the test with a different battery in case it was a dud.

I was going to include my ZL h50b and h501 but I didn't have enough charged cells. I charged some last night so maybe I'll start them when I get home.


----------



## wyager (Aug 20, 2010)

fisk-king said:


> Also, if you have the tactical version maybe we can see a test run of the ''eclipse'' mode.


I just did a search for eclipse mode... I've never heard of it before, but apparently quarks use it... :thinking: is it some super secret .001 lumen mode I've never heard of?


----------



## cave dave (Aug 20, 2010)

If you measure the current off the battery when you start you can get in the ballpark of what the runtime will be for a regulated light on Nimh. Not so much for Alkies and unregulated lights.


----------



## rookiedaddy (Aug 20, 2010)

Zendude said:


> The NW Quark on the other hand died somewhere between 24-28hrs. Voltage was .89V. I didn't expect it to die so soon or I would have been monitoring a little more closely. I'm going to redo the test with a different battery in case it was a dud.


Zendude, your result is consistent with what some of us did a while back in this thread >> Quark Mini AA WW Lo-mode Runtime...


----------



## Xak (Aug 20, 2010)

wyager said:


> I just did a search for eclipse mode... I've never heard of it before, but apparently quarks use it... :thinking: is it some super secret .001 lumen mode I've never heard of?



Are you kidding? Any links to more info on this?

IIRC the Quarks have no parasitic drain when off, right?


----------



## fisk-king (Aug 20, 2010)

wyager said:


> I just did a search for eclipse mode... I've never heard of it before, but apparently quarks use it... :thinking: is it some super secret .001 lumen mode I've never heard of?



https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/246126

There is another thread at the marketplace on this subject as well. Also, some Fenix lights exhibit the same mode. The brightness is comparable to a Titan t1a on low.


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Aug 20, 2010)

Xak said:


> Are you kidding? Any links to more info on this?
> 
> IIRC the Quarks have no parasitic drain when off, right?



One dimmer (but higher-drawing! ) mode is to have the quark on the edge of changing from loose back to tight and slightly press the head inwards. Done correctly, a much dimmer-than-moonlight lasts until you click the Quark off or turn the head (or wiggle the head, if your O-ring isn't stable). Not sure if that's cool enough to be Cullen-worthy.


----------



## wyager (Aug 20, 2010)

It appears it is a hardware glitch, and consumes more power than moon or low modes. I would not recommend it. Also, I now have to look up this programming mode, I thought I saw it mentioned a long time ago, something about 200 quick power cycles? I saw it mentioned in the marketplace thread.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 20, 2010)

Well folks, I'm 10.5 hours in at this point and not a darn thing to report, all lights exactly the same as when I turned them on. Next report in the morning at some point.

These recent low mode run tests have completely converted me to the lower, darker side of flashaholism... I remain amazed at what these AAA and AA lights can do. 

Take this scenario: You have your Peak Eiger #0 or #1 mated to a VC AA adapter and are camping. You can literally turn the sucker on and not even bother to turn it off for the entire night, confident that it will run for the whole entire NEXT NIGHT!!!! 

If you're using an Eneloop and carry a powerfilm solar charger (as I do) just top the sucker off each day courtesy of the sun... One battery, one light, as long as you need it. Heck, say you just use the AAA setup... it'll still run all night.

The best part is that the whole package is so incredibly small and makes EDC so easy. I now have a tiny light in my pocket and a spare battery on my keychain for about 40 hours of light potential.

I love my big lights, but man, these little guys are my new favorites by far.

Anyway, catch you all in the morning. ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzz.


----------



## Dances with Flashlight (Aug 20, 2010)

These low, low light runtime tests are becoming addictive. Thanks to everyone for all the effort.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 20, 2010)

Awesome!!!! Another run-time test, this time in moon mode!!!! This will take a while.


----------



## wantsusa (Aug 21, 2010)

Yeah this is great, thanks guys for doing this :twothumbs

Now if we could just come up with a huge spreadsheet that could list each regularly manufactured flashlight with runtimes with alkies, nimh, li-ion, lithium at each of the different power settings ROFL.

Then we could all just look and see what lumens for what runtimes for what type of battery, and bingo come up with a list of what we want to buy!


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Aug 21, 2010)

wyager said:


> It appears it is a hardware glitch, and consumes more power than moon or low modes. I would not recommend it. Also, I now have to look up this programming mode, I thought I saw it mentioned a long time ago, something about 200 quick power cycles? I saw it mentioned in the marketplace thread.



There's another light out there with a "deluxe" programmable and "lame" non-programmable, where you get the programmable UI with a ludicrous number of on/off cycles...but I hadn't heard of this with the Quark regular.


----------



## Zendude (Aug 21, 2010)

Hey folks,

My tests for this batch are done. 

NW Quark MiNi AA: 24-28hrs (with duraloop) .89V

Ti Quark MiNi AA: 36hrs (with duracell) .69V

Nitecore D10 GDP ~48hrs (with duraloop) .86V

I gotta say that I'm pretty disappointed in the results.:sigh:

I just started my ZL lights and I'm retesting the NW Quark MiNi AA(all with Eneloops).

Edit: @rookiedaddy: I don't know how I missed that thread! As usual, I'm one step behind! I won't bother retesting the mini. I'm still disappointed with the alkie test. It was the cell that came with the light.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 21, 2010)

Sorry for the delay folks, my DSL was down all morning.

For starters, we're at hour 25.5 and there is no change for the three Quarks...

The Peak went an impressive 22.5 hours with no change in brightness compared to hour 1, however, at ~ hour 23, the light began its decline in brightness, following the Eneloops NIMH discharge curve. At hour 25.5, it's still brighter than the Quarks by about a bit more than half, so there is still time to go before it matches the moonlight brightness level. I'm calling this 50% brightness for the Peak.

Compare this to the 11-12 run of the peak on a AAA before it began to decline and until it was completely done at hour 22ish. This light continues to impress, especially mated to the Arc AA adapter. The #0 and Sub Zero should be all the more impressive!

Catch you all a little later on!

D


----------



## wyager (Aug 21, 2010)

AnAppleSnail said:


> There's another light out there with a "deluxe" programmable and "lame" non-programmable, where you get the programmable UI with a ludicrous number of on/off cycles...but I hadn't heard of this with the Quark regular.


Thanks, I looked it up yesterday. I thought it was funny how they charged you more for the exact same light, with the exact same amount of code


----------



## Darvis (Aug 21, 2010)

Hour 27 brings the peak to Quark moonlight level as it continues to decline, I imagine it will run until about hour 28 before it drops below.

The Quarks are as they were....

Will post back in a few hours


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 21, 2010)

Thanks for testing the Peak with the AA body. How many hours will it need to be, to compare to 3x the runtime of the AAA used in the regular test? It seems like it may fall short of 3 times the runtime on AAA.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 21, 2010)

It would need to go ~39 hours for a true tripling of hours (runtime to 50%) but I'm not sure it's a simple tripling to get there. The AAA's are 800 mah and the AA's are 2000 mah, so it's less than triple the reserves to start. That and I believe it really comes down the discharge curve of the battery and the VF of the led. 

I had done the math based on Peak's specs and thought it would at least run 38 hours to half brightness; waaayyyy off I know!!! I now know that I 100% messed the math up when calculating for the AA runtimes. I at least know the AAA math is right as both your tests and mine verified the results I had gotten when running the pure numbers. 

If I look at how the math worked for the AAA, I was getting 13 hours to 50% and this combination absolutely went 25+ hours before it hit that point. I think this is more realistic as I imagine that we're really dealing with a doubling of runtime when going AA and not a tripling. In other words, I think the Peak is dead on based on the specs published by Curt on the RMSK website.

If that's the case, *I would see the #0 easily running right around 36 hours to 50% on a AA Eneloop*... I have no data for the Sub Zero.

All that aside, @ 28.75 hours, the Peak is still as bright as the Quarks!!!! I now feel the Peak will go at least 30 hours before dropping lower than the Quarks.

No change for the Quarks.

The final results for the Peak XP-G #1 Eiger will probably look something like this:

*25.5 hours to 50% (confirmed)*
~30+ hours to less than Quark moon mode (tbd)
???? to tritium brightness, and thus the end for the Peak (tbd)


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 21, 2010)

Darvis, did you read my results on the Eiger #0 and #Subzero? I am puzzled why they both had pretty much the same runtime when I ended it (once it got dimmer than Quark brightness). The voltage wasn't particularly favoring the #Subzero either I think it was .1v more on the #Subzero than the #0. The #0 has a 56ohm resistor and the #Subzero has a 80ohm resistor according to Mark @ Peak. I was thinking that the resistor would not only reduce the lumens much lower (which it did), but also run the LED at a lower drive current so it would extend runtime, but I didn't see that benefit. Any idea of why this would be?


----------



## Darvis (Aug 21, 2010)

I did see your results and I honestly do not know the answer, but my guess would be something akin to resistance having more effect on the brightness of the bulb and not the equivalent effect on runtime. I would think the battery is supplying as much power to the resistor in both cases, and that does not, somehow translate to increased potential as much as it does decreased voltage to the LED. I guess what I'm getting at is maybe it has an exponential effect on brightness, but not on runtime, so there's no apparent 1:1 correlation that we see? Maybe the circuits are less efficient as the resistance increases???? 

But am no electrical engineer, so that is my SWAG!!! Maybe someone can explain it? That would be good to know!


----------



## ama230 (Aug 21, 2010)

Cree 5mm Vfmin = 1.7V Imin= 1micro amp

#0: 56ohm @ 3.4v = 60mA, then the eneloop takes a poop @ under 1v due to it not being within the threshold voltage. This transistor wants to have the higher current to keep the gate open. The lower the current the transistor wants to shut prematurely. It does make logical sense that the bigger resistor would deliver longer performance but this applies for direct drive. Its in the transistors characteristics to use a higher drive current. 


subzero: 80ohm @ 3.4V = 42mA, this should last longer but with the threshold voltage of an eneloop its not within a range that the eneloop wants to be and this is why you see it not last as long. Also you are dissipating power rather than using it as its is driving it at a lower intensity but not necessarily going to give you a longer runtime. A better transistor and better matched capacitor and bridge resistor is going to give you a better handle on runtime. It sounds as if the transistor loves the lower resistor for this setup. 

anybody else have an idea as it is weird...

hope this helps BOL


----------



## PeaceOfMind (Aug 21, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> Darvis, did you read my results on the Eiger #0 and #Subzero? I am puzzled why they both had pretty much the same runtime when I ended it (once it got dimmer than Quark brightness). The voltage wasn't particularly favoring the #Subzero either I think it was .1v more on the #Subzero than the #0. The #0 has a 56ohm resistor and the #Subzero has a 80ohm resistor according to Mark @ Peak. I was thinking that the resistor would not only reduce the lumens much lower (which it did), but also run the LED at a lower drive current so it would extend runtime, but I didn't see that benefit. Any idea of why this would be?



This may have to do with the fact that the forward voltage (Vf)/forward current (If) curve of an LED is very non-linear. At low voltages, changing Vf has decreasing effect on If, so you have likely entered a region of very diminishing returns in terms of runtime. If the peak circuit is setup like I'm picturing then you may be in a region of LED performance where the drop in voltage caused by the resistor creates very little change in the current through the LED. The voltage drop will make the LED dimmer, but there'd only be a very small decrease in current due to the LED's properties. If you look at the Vf/If curve for any LED you'll see what I mean about the lack of change within lower voltage regions.

Just guessing, as I don't know the specifics of how the circuit is setup or the specific Vf/If curve of the LED used, etc.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 21, 2010)

Folks, at jusssstt under 31 hours, the Peak is no longer as bright as moon mode.. sigh.
It ran from just brighter than moon to just dimmer than moon over the course of about 3.5 hours. Not too shabby!!!

I'll now track it to tritum level...

For those of you that count the Quark at moonlight level your lowest possible output level, you can expect the Peak Eiger XP-G #1 to run brighter at first, then match moon for 3.5 hours before dropping below the Quark over the course of almost 31 hours on an Eneloop AA. But this is a hard one to call, really, as the Eiger seems to have really hit a nice looonngg steady decline path. Even though it is a bit dimmer than the Quark, it's not dropping rapidly. In a survival situation, this light will continue to provide value even at this junction.

In fact, I just took it into a dark room and it is plenty bright... this light is far from out of the game!


----------



## rookiedaddy (Aug 21, 2010)

Zendude said:


> ...
> Ti Quark MiNi AA: 36hrs (with duracell) .69V
> ...
> Edit: @rookiedaddy: I don't know how I missed that thread! As usual, I'm one step behind! I won't bother retesting the mini. I'm still disappointed with the alkie test. *It was the cell that came with the light*.


Zendude, if the Duracell that came with your light is similar to what came with my WW Mini AA, then perhaps it explains the lower runtime. From this AA battery test thread, you can see that these made-in-China Duracell has lower capacity compare to those made-in-USA Duracell as tested by UserName.

I did the lo-mode Mini AA runtime test in Alkaline using Panasonic Evolta instead of the the included Duracell (_although 4Sevens did says that the quoted runtimes are based on included battery_ :shrug due to...

Panasonic Evolta has consistently perform really well in low-drain application
These made-in-China Duracell Coppertop are leaky (it leaks even when still in plastic wrap , and I have seen it leak in those retail blister pack)
Compare my results with the AAA version of these made-in-China Duracell in the E01 runtime thread to Scout24's made-in-USA Duracell test shows that even the AAA version of these made-in-China Duracell has lower capacity than the US-made cells


----------



## guiri (Aug 21, 2010)

First, let me say I love this test 'cause I'm one of those that is extremely intrigued by super long runtime on lights and as a matter of fact, I've started only buying lights that DO have a low or super low mode in addition to their other modes.

However (and I haven't read all the posts), aren't there lights that have claimed 30 day runtimes? Those are the ones that really tickle my fancy. I mean, if some of these are giving out after 30 hours, what's gonna happen with the 200 hour (claimed) lights?

George


----------



## guiri (Aug 21, 2010)

Maelstrom G5
Moonlight: 0.2 lumens, 7.5 days

TK40
Low - 13 Lumens, 150 Hours

TA21
Mode 1 (4 lumens - 215 hrs)

JetBeam III M R2
Min Output: 2 Lumen, lasting for 200 hours 

Quark AA
0.2 lumens for 10 days (1ma)


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 21, 2010)

guiri, how about a 4Sevens Quark "Lunar Eclipse" model? I'm hoping they do something like that in AAA format. Super low out put/ super long run-time. Sorry for getting off topic Darvis.


----------



## wyager (Aug 21, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> guiri, how about a 4Sevens Quark "Lunar Eclipse" model? I'm hoping they do something like that in AAA format. Super low out put/ super long run-time. Sorry for getting off topic Darvis.


This would be really hard. Right now, they're either using 10 bit PWM or hardware dimming for moon mode, and if they're using 10 bit PWM you really can't go any lower than max output/1024 (aka .2 lumens), and if they're using some kind of hardware trick to give .2 lumens it would probably be difficult to add another low mode.


Also, at some point, isn't it more practical to use tritium illumination over a light? I know they have some that are designed as reading lights...


----------



## guiri (Aug 22, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> guiri, how about a 4Sevens Quark "Lunar Eclipse" model?



I don't know that one..


----------



## wyager (Aug 22, 2010)

guiri said:


> I don't know that one..


We were just talking about that, it's basically a hardware malfunction it would seem, it actually draws about 11x more power than moonlight mode IIRC.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 22, 2010)

Beacon, no worries, I'm loving all the good dicussion coming out of this thread.

I'm not sure I buy some of the claimed 150-200 runtimes that I'm seeing these lights advertise anymore, not after what I'm seeing and learning through these tests, but that's just me. I will say that the Quarks remain unchanged coming into 45.5 hours... maybe they will go the distance!!! Their light has been at a constant level this whole time, mighty impressive!

I can say that the Peak still remains viable as a light. The decay at the tail end on this one is super long, much longer than I expected vs the AAA. I was able to use the light last night for various tasks and had no issues in the complete darkness. Since these run time tests tend to lean toward "survival" scenarios, where resources such as batteries may be at a premium, I can't count the Peak out just yet. It is still brighter than my sample green tritium vial at 45.5 hours. bright enough to read labels on food packages or medicine bottles. The key thing is that there will no surprises with this light.

I wish I had the measuring capabilities to go along with this run as well, as it's really hard to tell the difference between the Peak and the Quarks given the diffuser on the Peak medium. Given the alogorithmic way we see light, it also made it hard to tell when the peak was truly at, then below the level of the Quarks.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 22, 2010)

I called the Peak done at hour 47, now truly at tritium level. The battery was at .97v.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 22, 2010)

Quarks at 48 hours, no changes to report.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 22, 2010)

Quarks at 58 hours, no changes to report. Next report in the morning.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 23, 2010)

Quarks at 70 hours, no changes to report. These are looking mighty impressive folks.


----------



## Zendude (Aug 23, 2010)

48hrs and the H50b has started to strobe, H501 is fine.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 23, 2010)

Quarks at 82 hours and you guessed it, no change at all...


----------



## edc3 (Aug 23, 2010)

Why is something that theoretically should be as boring as watching paint dry so interesting? 

Look forward to the results. I may run out of popcorn before the end.


----------



## guiri (Aug 23, 2010)

edc3 said:


> Why is something that theoretically should be as boring as watching paint dry so interesting?
> 
> Look forward to the results. I may run out of popcorn before the end.



Maybe 'cause I'm sure they're actually not sitting there watching them 24 hours a day...also, I've got your back...click here...http://www.epopcorn.com/popr.html?c...tt_nwtype=search&ctt_cli=8^11002^64544^584134


----------



## edc3 (Aug 23, 2010)

All right! I'm switching to kettle corn. :naughty:

Actually I was referring not to the tester, but to myself, a spectator. I'm actually enjoying following all the low light runtime tests that are being done these days. No wonder my family thinks I'm strange.


----------



## guiri (Aug 23, 2010)

Well, then I'm strange too but hell, that's nothing new.

Hey, not to hijack this thread (so I'll only post this link and then if you have questions, pm me) but have you ever had black popcorn? Actually it's purple but looks black. It's bright white when you pop it and very good tasting http://www.blackjewell.com/

Anyway, back to our scheduled programming...Davis, let me know if you want to try some of my super long runtime lights that I mentioned above. I do have all five of them.

George


----------



## wantsusa (Aug 23, 2010)

OMG Guiri you mean to say you aren't doing the test already on all of those light hrrrrmmmpppphhh!

hehe I love these tests, great info!

Now if only it was easier to set up a spreadsheet to have the info from all the people who have done tests with mainly eneloops and AW batteries hehe that would be awesome...I can't figure out the best way to do it hehe.


----------



## guiri (Aug 23, 2010)

I'm too stupid to do it correctly, that's why.

As for the spreadsheet, google has online spreadsheets I believe that people can collaborate on


----------



## Darvis (Aug 24, 2010)

Guiri, I appreciate that link as I am a severe popcorn junkie! (I only make mine in an old pot on the stove, just oil and popcorn and lots of shaking). I've had black popcorn in the past and have not bought any in a while, going to have to get me some...

Anyway, if you guys think you're crazy, then my wife would agree... she thinks I'm touched the way I keep checking on the lights every few hours; but to her, the "why" behind this is the big mystery. "does it really matter how long the thing will run? It's just a flashlight..." 

Uh, yeah... impractical and theoretical capability needs are what we flashlight people are all about. I can't count how many time I've been trapped in the wilderness (in my minds eye) for weeks on end with only my trusty flashlight on super low showing me the way. Lighting up my Bear Grylls midnight arts and crafts projects and signaling the forces of good as they scour the country side for me. Out there in the woods, HDS means nothing to me, for I am RA!!! God of SUN!!!!

Anyway, like I said before, feel free to run your own tests and post them here... I'll try to compile the results in my first post so that folks can get some at a glance info right up front


----------



## Cataract (Aug 24, 2010)

edc3 said:


> Why is something that theoretically should be as boring as watching paint dry so interesting?
> 
> Look forward to the results. I may run out of popcorn before the end.


 
:twothumbs............:drunk:


----------



## Zendude (Aug 24, 2010)

At about 58.5hrs the H501 started to strobe. I went ahead and let it run but it was dead this morning. At 70hrs the H50b was still pulsing about every 4-5 seconds. 

To summarize:

NW Quark MiNi AA: 24-28hrs (with duraloop) .89V:thinking:

Ti Quark MiNi AA: 36hrs (with made in China duracell) .69V:thinking:

Nitecore D10 GDP ~48hrs (with duraloop) .86V:twothumbs

H501b 48hrs (with Eneloop) 1.1V

H501 58.5hrs (with Eneloop) 1.06V:twothumbs


I'm disappointed that the MiNi's and H50b didn't match the manufactures stated runtime. The D10 exceeded the manufacturer stated runtime and the H501 was pretty close. 


I may get some Kirkland Signature(USA made) alkies and redo my D10 and MiNi to see if I can match rookiedaddy's WW MiNi runtime.


----------



## guiri (Aug 24, 2010)

You're welcome Davis. They ARE good. I may get some myself 

As for the lights, tell your wife the reason I buy the low light ones are for emergencies, BUT, it would be stupid to buy a light that's claimed at 200 hours and not being sure about it. I think we would all feel much better if we knew how long they burn, really...

So, if I do this myself, what do I do? Charge the batt's to max, measure the voltage when freshly charged, start the lights at the lowest and see how long they last?
Am I supposed to be able to see if the lose power to half or something? I don't think I can do that, nor am I smart enough to know if they're supposed to strobe or what...

Other than that, I'd be happy to do this with my five lights above.

Let me know kids


----------



## guiri (Aug 24, 2010)

I own eneloops, powergenix batteries in AA, 14500's from AW and also RCR 123 and 18650 from AW.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 24, 2010)

Guiri,

It's that easy. Charge the batteries, measure starting voltage to ensure they're all at least close and fire up the lights.

A couple of things will help (and no one here is expecting you have the equipment to measure output):

1) Pick time intervals that you can reasonably support and will let you time box runtimes. I would pick time slices based on manufacturers specs. If they say a light wil run 20 hours on low, then I would try to check it every 2-4 hours. If they say 150 hours, then 12 hour slices work fine.

2) As for the lights fading in brightness, it helps to use a light that you're not testing to help judge the others. For instance, Scout24, BOL and myself used te Quark on moonlight as our defacto brightness tester. Was the light brighter? The same? Lower? As for judging 50% brightness, that's a judgement call without measuring equipment.

3) keep in mind that these are runtime tests, so the ultimate result is: how long did it run? try to get the "how it ran" stuff as close as you can (ie: 10 hours to 50%) but in the end, we just want to know how long it went...

Hope that helps.. I have no background in engineering, electronics, etc... I'm just sticking batteries in and describing what I see!

D


----------



## Darvis (Aug 24, 2010)

Quarks at 96 hours, no changes to report. That's 4 straight days people... 

In my practical view of the world, let's just say this was the only light/battery combo you had and you really needed it to survive. You could use the light for 2 hours each night and have light for over 45 days!!!!!

Heck use it for 3 hours every night and get 30 days of use!

4 hours you say? 23 days... 5 hours???? You get my point.

Insanity.

I think this battery would self discharge faster than you could use it up in real world use, a few minutes here and there.

I'm going to end up eating my "I doubt lights will run to 150 hours" statement.

If 4/7's could take the mini AA platform, make the light a *single moon mode only twist on/off AA light* and use this circuitry for runtime- annnnddd, this is key, lose the danged pre-flash, I would easily buy a dozen or more myself.... I just can't get past the pre-flash on theses lights, I have 6 of them (5 tacticals) and they all do it no matter what combo I try, except for the Quark regular... but I hate the cyclical interface. 

Please!!!! Build this light!!!!


----------



## guiri (Aug 24, 2010)

Well, I do have a very sensitive exposure meter so yes, I can measure the output, at least in EV values which is pretty cool 'cause it's something that's at least common and known. If I can find it but I think I know where it is.

So, the ones taking AA batteries, should I do them with eneloops or 14500's?


----------



## Darvis (Aug 24, 2010)

Start with Eneloops, the AW 14500's will be over-discharge protected and that may skew runtime results


----------



## guiri (Aug 24, 2010)

How about the ones taking the 123 form factor and the 18650's?

Also, how much should the eneloops measure fully charged?


----------



## Darvis (Aug 24, 2010)

For the cr 123's and 18650's I would consider starting a new thread(s) so as not to confuse what we're testing here, which are AA lights.

As for Eneloops, mine usaully come off of the Lacrosse charger at 1.46v they usually then settle down to between 1.39 and 1.42v


----------



## guiri (Aug 24, 2010)

Ok, I can do that and let's see what they tell me to do


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 24, 2010)

Darvis said:


> Quarks at 96 hours, no changes to report. That's 4 straight days people...
> 
> In my practical view of the world, let's just say this was the only light/battery combo you had and you really needed it to survive. You could use the light for 2 hours each night and have light for over 45 days!!!!!
> 
> ...



Now you see why I have been suggesting in multiple threads of an ultra low low dedicated light with 1 or 2 modes. Once you see how well the moon mode lasts on the Quark you wonder why they can't make a light in a AAA form factor with same mode geared for run-time.


----------



## guiri (Aug 24, 2010)

I personally agree with you and I'm a sucker for super long runtime.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 24, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> Now you see why I have been suggesting in multiple threads of an ultra low low dedicated light with 1 or 2 modes. Once you see how well the moon mode lasts on the Quark you wonder why they can't make a light in a AAA form factor with same mode geared for run-time.


 
I have embraced the dark side Beacon and am totally in your camp. You may call me: Darth Darvis

4/7's, you out there??? If you build it, we will come.

Beacon, BTW, I just came up with a great GITD mod for my keychain Peaks... I remove the screw in tailcap and fill it with a glow powder/epoxy combo for an awesome GITD mod that allows the light to tailstand and glow (essentially converts the keychain version into a pocket body)

Just modded one of the Eigers and it is awesome!!!


----------



## Zendude (Aug 24, 2010)

Darvis said:


> I have embraced the dark side Beacon and am totally in your camp. You may call me: Darth Darvis
> 
> 4/7's, you out there??? If you build it, we will come.



Lets see what happens tomorrow!

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=235094


----------



## gunga (Aug 24, 2010)

Wow, cool results!

I guess my regular Quark goes into the Bail-out Bag. Luckily I have a Ti one coming due to the latest sale...


:naughty:


----------



## guiri (Aug 24, 2010)

Darvis said:


> I have embraced the dark side Beacon and am totally in your camp. You may call me: Darth Darvis



...and I guess I will be "Swarthy guiri, the lord of blackness"

or maybe "moonlighting guiri"


----------



## ama230 (Aug 24, 2010)

I had just wanted to ask a few on here.

Its not like I know everything but this seems to be a major contributor when it comes to these lights responding the way that they do. When talking to the Tenergy and Eneloop companies they stated below.

1) The nominal voltage on the tenergy 2300mah lsd aa's and the 1000mah lsd aaa's are 1.32v.

2) The nominal voltage on the eneloop 2000mah lsd aa's and the 1000mah lsd aaa's are 1.34v.

I know both of these cells have alot of capacity and eneloops have the most consistent. The tenergys do just as well but their nominal voltage is just under the eneloops and the capacity and self discharge is right on par.

Anyways, the nominal voltage is what seems to be giving you guys the most trouble when trying to get the run times advertised.

I know there are battery experts on here, what do you think?:candle:


----------



## Darvis (Aug 24, 2010)

The Quarks have passed into the triples and are at 107 hours with no change... 

And the grass keeps growing and growing and growing....


----------



## Flying Turtle (Aug 24, 2010)

I would happily shake out some money for a super low level long runner.

Geoff


----------



## wyager (Aug 25, 2010)

At what point will you guys stop going for super low level lights and just switch to tritium? I mean come on, if we get much lower the light will break before the battery runs out


----------



## Darvis (Aug 25, 2010)

Quarks at 120 hours (5 days continuous), no changes to report.


----------



## flatline (Aug 25, 2010)

Flying Turtle said:


> I would happily shake out some money for a super low level long runner.
> 
> Geoff



Get a Quark AA and put a 14505 in it. You'll lose every level except moon-mode, but you'll get 3+ times the runtime in moon-mode than you'd get from a 14500 or eneloop.

If I haven't screwed up the math, we're talking something on the order of 1000 hours of continuous runtime.

--flatline


----------



## copperfox (Aug 25, 2010)

flatline said:


> Get a Quark AA and put a 14505 in it. You'll lose every level except moon-mode, but you'll get 3+ times the runtime in moon-mode than you'd get from a 14500 or eneloop.
> 
> If I haven't screwed up the math, we're talking something on the order of 1000 hours of continuous runtime.
> 
> --flatline



14505? What?


----------



## wyager (Aug 25, 2010)

copperfox said:


> 14505? What?


I did some google-fu, it looks like a 3.2V LiFePo or a normal 3.6v li-ion cell. I'm not sure if they have better capacity or anything though... I also don't know what the last digit refers to on the 14500. The 50 refers to 50mm long, but the extra 0 (or 5) I have no idea.


----------



## fnj (Aug 25, 2010)

14505's are nothing but low rate primary lithium thionyl chloride cells the same size as a 14500 lithium ion or AA cell.

http://www.batteryspace.com/primary...ize36v2400maher14505nonrechargeable864wh.aspx

They store about three times the energy of a 14500, as long as you are not in a hurry to get it out. So they're no good for high setting, and not so hot for even medium setting. And they are not rechargeable.

Sounds to me like flatline's idea is a great one.


----------



## wyager (Aug 25, 2010)

I think the ER in front of ER14505 refers to the chemistry, not the 14505 itself. You can get 14505s in Li+ and stuff too.


----------



## flatline (Aug 25, 2010)

wyager said:


> I think the ER in front of ER14505 refers to the chemistry, not the 14505 itself. You can get 14505s in Li+ and stuff too.



Ah, you're right. I should have said ER14505.

I've got a dozen or so of these cells that I saved from the trash at work some time ago. Don't know if I'll ever use them, but they work in my Quark AA, LF5XT, and (probably) my H501w if I'm ever desperate or want a dedicated reading torch.

--flatline


----------



## wyager (Aug 25, 2010)

flatline said:


> Ah, you're right. I should have said ER14505.
> 
> I've got a dozen or so of these cells that I saved from the trash at work some time ago. Don't know if I'll ever use them, but they work in my Quark AA, LF5XT, and (probably) my H501w if I'm ever desperate or want a dedicated reading torch.
> 
> --flatline


How did you get them from the trash? The only "esoteric" (to non-flashaholics) battery I have ever found was a dead 18650 in a garmin GPS unit.


----------



## flatline (Aug 25, 2010)

wyager said:


> How did you get them from the trash? The only "esoteric" (to non-flashaholics) battery I have ever found was a dead 18650 in a garmin GPS unit.



They were spare cells intended for sensor hardware that we were getting rid of. Nobody knew anything about them, so they were just going to throw them away. A buddy of mine set them aside for me since he knew I had an interest in such things.

After getting them home, I looked them up on-line and decided they were worth keeping just in case. Haven't used them yet, except the see if my lights would function on them.

I was tempted to put one in my Quark so that when the little man wants to play with one of daddy's lights, he can't accidentally switch to a brighter mode, but for $5, I bought him one of those lifegear glow sticks instead. He's content with that for now.

Edit: just to put this in context, I work in an research and development group. We do mostly software, but we're not afraid to get our hands dirty with hardware, at least for evaluation purposes, so it's not uncommon for us to purchase unusual hardware if we think it has the potential to be useful to us. I don't know the history of the sensors the ER14505s were from since I wasn't on that project.

--flatline


----------



## Darvis (Aug 25, 2010)

Quarks coming up on 131 hours, no... dang... change must... keep ......going............


----------



## guiri (Aug 25, 2010)

Sweet...what is the claimed runtime on it?


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Aug 25, 2010)

guiri said:


> Sweet...what is the claimed runtime on it?



30 days = 720 hours. It might tail off at the end, and I don't know what battery was used to test that (if not calculated).


----------



## guiri (Aug 25, 2010)

Eneloop I think


----------



## guiri (Aug 25, 2010)

Ok, which quark is this? This one says tend days.. http://www.4sevens.com/product_info.php?cPath=297&products_id=1597

By the way, I assume no cooling needs to be applied to something running that low even if it runs for weeks, right?


----------



## wyager (Aug 25, 2010)

guiri said:


> Eneloop I think


I think I read somewhere they claim to use the included cells, AKA chinese duracells (the cheap kind). If they do claim that, they're probably lying


----------



## guiri (Aug 25, 2010)

"2 of the Quarks (one XP-E and one XP-G) and the Eiger are running on freshly cycled (via the lacrosse discharge/refresh selection) Eneloops.

One of the Quarks (an XP-E) is running on a brand new Duracell Alkaline AA"


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Aug 25, 2010)

guiri said:


> Ok, which quark is this? This one says tend days.. http://www.4sevens.com/product_info.php?cPath=297&products_id=1597
> 
> By the way, I assume no cooling needs to be applied to something running that low even if it runs for weeks, right?



Oops, you're right - the Quark AA claims 10 days (240 hours). And you only have to dissipate the power taken by the light - in this case, something like 8 mA at 1.2v, or .0096 watts.


----------



## guiri (Aug 26, 2010)

Alright, so no cooling needed then..


----------



## wyager (Aug 26, 2010)

guiri said:


> Alright, so no cooling needed then..


IIRC the quark is burning less than a calorie an hour (that's less than 1/1000 of a food Calorie), if that helps to put things in perspective. The air is plenty to cool it down.


----------



## guiri (Aug 26, 2010)

Same as me then. No wonder I can't lose no friggin' weight...


----------



## Darvis (Aug 26, 2010)

None of the lights in this test ever got so much as any warmer than they were while off... That includes the stainless steel peak Eiger head, they are all cool customers!


----------



## Darvis (Aug 26, 2010)

guiri said:


> "2 of the Quarks (one XP-E and one XP-G) and the Eiger are running on freshly cycled (via the lacrosse discharge/refresh selection) Eneloops.
> 
> One of the Quarks (an XP-E) is running on a brand new Duracell Alkaline AA"


 

The one alkaline in the test was out of a Costco bulk pack of Duracells and is not the cell that came with the light itself. I am not sure if they're made in the USA cells or not, but will verify when I get back home from work.


----------



## guiri (Aug 26, 2010)

Darvis said:


> None of the lights in this test ever got so much as any warmer than they were while off... That includes the stainless steel peak Eiger head, they are all cool customers!




Cool


----------



## Darvis (Aug 26, 2010)

Quarks at 144 hours (6 days continuous), no changes to report.


----------



## guiri (Aug 26, 2010)

Whaddyamean no changes to report? Last time you reported it was only up to 131 hours... :devil:


----------



## Zendude (Aug 26, 2010)

I'd start watching those two eneloop quarks closely at about the 175hr point.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 26, 2010)

Zendude said:


> I'd start watching those two eneloop quarks closely at about the 175hr point.


 

:candle:


----------



## guiri (Aug 26, 2010)

Dude, you can't have a candle with you when you watch them. That's too bright...


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 26, 2010)

Is it permanent? I'd still like to be able to use the keychain attachment. Pics would be great!



Darvis said:


> I have embraced the dark side Beacon and am totally in your camp. You may call me: Darth Darvis
> 
> 4/7's, you out there??? If you build it, we will come.
> 
> ...


----------



## Darvis (Aug 26, 2010)

It is permanant unfortunately and kills the keychain capability.. but worthy.

for pictures... do you have to stage your pictures on photobucket first? I can't seem to upload from my laptop.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 26, 2010)

you can upload it quick and dirty without an account if you go to tinypic.com. Just use the (IMG) tag link once it is uploaded.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 26, 2010)

Got it, thanks! I took some shots tonight and will give it a go, will post a photo of the Quark brothers as well.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 27, 2010)

Here's a quick look at my Peak GITD mod using a clear 2 ton epoxy and glow powder mix. This will convert your keychain Peak into a pocket body and is a permanent venture; however, the results far exceeded my expectations and I have since converted other Peaks. The ultra green or blue powders are best, and after a full charge, will still be faintly glowing in the morning. They remain very bright for 2-3 hours and make it super easy to find your light in the wee hours of the night.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 27, 2010)

Quarks at 168 hours (7 days) continuous, no changes to report.

Here's a shot of the Q's at 7 days, the XP-G is on the far right (the die is juuuussst slightly larger) and the alkaline powered XP-E is on the far left.

Don't be fooled by the angle of the photograph, all lights are at the same brightness level and have been since hour 1


----------



## wyager (Aug 27, 2010)

I think there's a chance we might actually get to the stated runtime... oo:


----------



## Darvis (Aug 28, 2010)

Quarks at 192 hours (8 days continuous), no changes to report.


----------



## scout24 (Aug 28, 2010)

8 days straight and counting? SWEET!!!! Glad I kept mine...


----------



## guiri (Aug 28, 2010)

I love it! 

Can you spell bail out light?


----------



## Darvis (Aug 28, 2010)

These guys have crossed the 200 hour mark (204) with no changes to report...


----------



## 1anrm (Aug 29, 2010)

:twothumbs Sweet! Thanks for doing this.


----------



## guiri (Aug 29, 2010)

Man, that is soo cool


----------



## Hellbore (Aug 29, 2010)




----------



## dudu84 (Aug 29, 2010)

I'm very interested in seeing the actual runtime of Quark's moonlight mode as well, your work is greatly appreciated :thumbsup:.

Egsise's runtime reached 315h for Quark AA on eneloop, you might need to hang in there for "awhile" 
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3103582&postcount=118


----------



## Darvis (Aug 29, 2010)

Man, you guys are very welcome... this has been fun! I keep waking up thinking "surely they're toast..." but nope, these suckers just keep going; unreal... I know what lights I'll be stashing in my go bag.


----------



## amigafan2003 (Aug 29, 2010)

I started my Quark AA moon runtime test on 21st Aug @ 9am (gmt) on a month old eneloop (1.3965v I believe) - still going strong when I just checked it - that's 2.19h


----------



## Darvis (Aug 29, 2010)

Quarks at 216 hours (9 days continuous), no changes to report.


----------



## GarageBoy (Aug 29, 2010)

I was hoping the Eiger would do better


----------



## scout24 (Aug 29, 2010)

Darvis- Love my Ti AA, just ordered another in Al., and a 123 because of you...:twothumbs 10 and 15 days on low... crazy...:thumbsup:


----------



## Darvis (Aug 29, 2010)

Hard to deny the runtime prowess of these lights, eh Scout? I'm blown away. I seriously thought these things would go 3 days, maybe, and I thought the Eiger would be in the running as well. Not even close. 

You know the hard part of this for me though? The pre-flash thing just kills me... I can't explain it, but everytime I click one of these on and get that camera flash... arrrggghhhh!!! It's the only thing that keeps one of these from being my larger EDC of choice. 

I so wish 4 sevens would build this light on the Quark mini AA frame with just this one run level. Twist on, twist off, that's it.. no other levels, no tacticool blinky stuff... what a killer light that would be.

But nit-pickiness aside and getting past the pre-flash, I'll never part with these lights, not by a long shot; they are just too good at sipping juice from these AA's... they have got to be one of the ultimate go-bag/disaster readiness lights. Anyone reading this that's looking for light that can go the distance on a AA would be foolish to not buy this light. These will now become my absolute #1 travel go-to lights; ones that I can count on and not worry if I lose them at all...


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Aug 29, 2010)

Darvis said:


> everytime I click one of these on



Leave it on in Moonlight mode in your pocket, twist tight to be 'on.' Treat it like a tritium glow and recharge your AA 52 times per year - an Eneloop abused this way would last for a few decades like that (!!!!!!!!!).

No preflash. You know it has the runtime.


----------



## wyager (Aug 29, 2010)

AnAppleSnail said:


> Leave it on in Moonlight mode in your pocket, twist tight to be 'on.' Treat it like a tritium glow and recharge your AA 52 times per year - an Eneloop abused this way would last for a few decades like that (!!!!!!!!!).
> 
> No preflash. You know it has the runtime.



Seriously, moonlight mode is way too bright to use like tritium. I tried just leaving it there on moon mode, it still lit up the room after my eyes were that adjusted. It would be nice if they had a mode with super duper low output to be used as a locator.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 30, 2010)

Folks, 240 hours (ten days continuous) have come and gone and the Quarks are still going with no changes to report. These guys have met the stated runtime regardless of pill, or battery type...


----------



## dudu84 (Aug 30, 2010)

Thanks for the update, Darvis 
~13 days I hope it will run :naughty:


----------



## wyager (Aug 30, 2010)

Darvis said:


> Folks, 240 hours (ten days continuous) have come and gone and the Quarks are still going with no changes to report. These guys have met the stated runtime regardless of pill, or battery type...



are these running on 1 or 2 AAs?


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Aug 30, 2010)

wyager said:


> are these running on 1 or 2 AAs?


1 AA. I missed it at first, also, but in the first post...

" At Noon today, I fired up 3 single AA Quarks..."


----------



## Darvis (Aug 30, 2010)

wyager said:


> are these running on 1 or 2 AAs?


 
These are single AA hosts...


----------



## guiri (Aug 30, 2010)

Darvis, that is soo damn sweet, I'm gonna pee my pants. Told a friend of mine about it and it impressed the hell outta him.

I have the quark Ti AA, I assume mine does the same, or?

In any case, I'm getting to test it too soon.

Gotta get me a charger for the big batteries first and then I'll fire them all up at the same time


----------



## wyager (Aug 30, 2010)

AnAppleSnail said:


> 1 AA. I missed it at first, also, but in the first post...
> 
> " At Noon today, I fired up 3 single AA Quarks..."



Thanks. That's awesome then! I bet with 2xAA it lasts well over 30 days...


----------



## Darvis (Aug 30, 2010)

guiri said:


> Darvis, that is soo damn sweet, I'm gonna pee my pants. Told a friend of mine about it and it impressed the hell outta him.
> 
> I have the quark Ti AA, I assume mine does the same, or?
> 
> ...


 

Guiri, I'm 99.999999% sure your Ti is no different internally and that you should expect the same performance; in other words, I'm not aware of any stated differences outside of the skin.

Also, outside of the 2xcr123a head which runs at a higher voltage spread, these same 1xAA heads will run on 2xAA, 1xcr123a, 1x17670, and 1x18650


----------



## Hellbore (Aug 30, 2010)

These are normal Quarks not Quark Minis right?

I'm curious how the minis stack up...


----------



## longboat (Aug 30, 2010)

Darvis said:


> Here's a quick look at my Peak GITD mod using a clear 2 ton epoxy and glow powder mix. This will convert your keychain Peak into a pocket body and is a permanent venture; however, the results far exceeded my expectations and I have since converted other Peaks. ...


 
Is there enough room to add a small wire loop to the epoxy before it dries? If the loop is big enough to accept a split ring, you can still retain keychain-ability, although not as strong as the original.


----------



## longboat (Aug 30, 2010)

Darvis said:


> Folks, 240 hours (ten days continuous) have come and gone and the Quarks are still going with no changes to report. These guys have met the stated runtime regardless of pill, or battery type...


 
I think I read somewhere that, although the Quark can run forever, it only does so as long as you don't switch it off. IOW, once the battery falls below a certain voltage, the light can no longer switch on, as opposed to some other battery vampires (e.g. - E01). I would be curious to know if that is truly the case. It is possible that, for those using this light in an emergency, you may have longer use of the light by leaving it on CONTINUOUSLY, then by trying to save the battery by switching it off occasionally.

If so, then a better real-world test might be to switch the light on to moonlight mode every night, then switch off every morning, and see if you can still come up with 240+ hours. Maybe it is the pre-flash that kills it?


----------



## TwitchALot (Aug 30, 2010)

longboat said:


> I think I read somewhere that, although the Quark can run forever, it only does so as long as you don't switch it off. IOW, once the battery falls below a certain voltage, the light can no longer switch on, as opposed to some other battery vampires (e.g. - E01). I would be curious to know if that is truly the case. It is possible that, for those using this light in an emergency, you may have longer use of the light by leaving it on CONTINUOUSLY, then by trying to save the battery by switching it off occasionally.
> 
> If so, then a better real-world test might be to switch the light on to moonlight mode every night, then switch off every morning, and see if you can still come up with 240+ hours. Maybe it is the pre-flash that kills it?



That's because once the battery wears down, the circuit can no longer boost the voltage to the necessary Vf. Think of the Vf like an activation energy - if you don't reach that critical voltage, the LED won't turn on. Once the reaction goes, or the light turn on, it's not an issue anymore, but that initial barrier has to be overcome. Thus, it is more efficient to let the light run than turn it on and off, although you probably won't need light the full length of the day, and I'm not sure if running it for eight hours and turning it off for 16 is less efficient than leaving it running for 24.


----------



## Xak (Aug 30, 2010)

My Quarks (one regular and one tactical) do not preflash unless used on a higher brightness in a different mode first. I noticed for the first time that the opposite is true... when used in a lower brightness in one mode and then used for the first time since then in a higher brightness on a different mode they ramp up to the higher setting. Hard to notice because it happens so fast. Neither bothers me in the least. If that is the price to having a light that can stay on for weeks at a time it's fine by me. I can't think of another light I would rather have with me if I were trapped in a cave, under a building in an earthquake, or anywhere dark for days or weeks on end. Bad events are more likely to happen unexpectedly, and what light are you more likely to have on you in such an event? Your EDC.


----------



## wyager (Aug 30, 2010)

TwitchALot said:


> That's because once the battery wears down, the circuit can no longer boost the voltage to the necessary Vf. Think of the Vf like an activation energy - if you don't reach that critical voltage, the LED won't turn on. Once the reaction goes, or the light turn on, it's not an issue anymore, but that initial barrier has to be overcome. Thus, it is more efficient to let the light run than turn it on and off, although you probably won't need light the full length of the day, and I'm not sure if running it for eight hours and turning it off for 16 is less efficient than leaving it running for 24.


That can't be right.... then the quark would HAVE to pre-flash to "activate" the LED before moon mode, and some don't.


----------



## Zendude (Aug 30, 2010)

Hellbore said:


> I'm curious how the minis stack up...




Not even close! I didn't get 28hrs on an eneloop. 

Others are reporting similar results.

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/283552


----------



## PapaGary (Aug 30, 2010)

Hellbore said:


> I'm curious how the minis stack up...


Not nearly as well since the Qmini doesn't have moon mode.


----------



## jabe1 (Aug 30, 2010)

PapaGary said:


> Not nearly as well since the Qmini doesn't have moon mode.




And it's voltage, not current regulated.


----------



## Art (Aug 30, 2010)

I ordered one 123 version some days ago , did not arrive yet but will it do the moonlight mode like this? From the specs it lasts even longer to 15days compared to the AA.

I previously used a D10 in low mode and it lasted really long... 1 to 2h of use every night for 1month no problem.

Darvis: Thanks for your patience to test this


----------



## Darvis (Aug 30, 2010)

Art said:


> I ordered one 123 version some days ago , did not arrive yet but will it do the moonlight mode like this? From the specs it lasts even longer to 15days compared to the AA.
> 
> I previously used a D10 in low mode and it lasted really long... 1 to 2h of use every night for 1month no problem.
> 
> Darvis: Thanks for your patience to test this


 

You guys are all very welcome, this has been a great experience for me as well and my first "real" contribution to CPF since joining; gald to be giving back some of what I've learned here over the years!!

Art- Yours will have a moon mode, they all do, and based on what I'm seeing, I can say you'll more than likely hit the posted specs..

10 days of straight runtime is insane by any standard, any longer than that is just more insanity!!!!

Seriously, I think you'll be equally impressed with your 123 light...

I know I complain about the pre-flash, but that's really neither here nor there for the purposes of this test, these lights have seriously impressed me to the point where they will be my main BOB lights, bar none. I'll just cover them right before turning them on! 

I already have a solar charger and a bag full-o-Eneloops, now I'll have light for freaking ever too!


----------



## Art (Aug 30, 2010)

How does the moonlight mode compare to a low low on a D10?


----------



## edc3 (Aug 30, 2010)

Art said:


> How does the moonlight mode compare to a low low on a D10?



It's *much *dimmer. The D10 was the first light to get me interested in low modes. If I recall correctly, the model I have is in the 3-5 lumens range. The Quarks are .2 lumens. You'd be surprised at the difference.


----------



## wantsusa (Aug 30, 2010)

So far so good, I am glad you are doing the test on rechargeables (Eneloops) as that is what I have as well (when mine gets here). 

Now I think the question would be is what type of runtime on RCR123 compared to the regular 123's since RCR123 has so much less capacity. Of course the AA could also be tested moreso with alkalines as well to get an idea (and or 14500 which might do bad things hehe).


----------



## guiri (Aug 30, 2010)

Darvis, I think mine is the same too.

As for the preflash, I don't remember mine having any.

So, the word is, you keep your quark and a couple of extra eneloops with you in the BoB or whatever and you're friggin' set...sweet!

Maybe when I do MY test, I should actually do the turn on and off thing instead but instead of letting it sit during the day, I could just turn it off, wait a few minutes and turn it back on again...?


----------



## guiri (Aug 30, 2010)

Hell, I'm in a position to try the quark on eneloops, powergenix and an alkaline if I should want to and of course the 14500.

Is that something that's interesting or not?


----------



## wyager (Aug 30, 2010)

guiri said:


> Hell, I'm in a position to try the quark on eneloops, powergenix and an alkaline if I should want to and of course the 14500.
> 
> Is that something that's interesting or not?



the 14500 could certainly be interesting.... 1xAA or 2xAA?


----------



## guiri (Aug 30, 2010)

wyager said:


> the 14500 could certainly be interesting.... 1xAA or 2xAA?



1xAA


----------



## wyager (Aug 30, 2010)

guiri said:


> 1xAA



I say go for it.


----------



## guiri (Aug 30, 2010)

The 14500?


----------



## wyager (Aug 30, 2010)

guiri said:


> The 14500?



Yep. I'm mostly interested in the performance of a 14500.


----------



## guiri (Aug 30, 2010)

Sure thing 

Lemme get my charger then and I"ll do it. I ordered the Pila today


----------



## Darvis (Aug 30, 2010)

guiri said:


> Hell, I'm in a position to try the quark on eneloops, powergenix and an alkaline if I should want to and of course the 14500.
> 
> Is that something that's interesting or not?


 
Just keep in mind that one of the Quarks I'm running has an alkaline in it. only 2 are using Eneloops...


----------



## Darvis (Aug 30, 2010)

Quarks at 252 hours, no changes to report.


----------



## guiri (Aug 30, 2010)

Darvis, are they ALL still running or just one?


----------



## Xak (Aug 30, 2010)

wyager said:


> Yep. I'm mostly interested in the performance of a 14500.



+1

I EDC the QAA with the 14500. Same voltage as RCR123 with more capacity, yet can throw in the ever abundant AA.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 31, 2010)

guiri said:


> Darvis, are they ALL still running or just one?


 
All three lights are still running.


----------



## Zendude (Aug 31, 2010)

This is crazy! 

I expected the alkie to last this long(since that is what they used to test runtime on) but not the eneloops. I was thinking ~25% less runtime with the eneloop. It's nice to have expectations exceeded for a change!:thumbsup:


----------



## Darvis (Aug 31, 2010)

Folks, get your Spinal Tap reference guides handy... These lights go to 11

264 hours and 11 days continuous, all three lights still going


----------



## Flying Turtle (Aug 31, 2010)

In light of this, pun intended, we now need to convince 4Sevens to drop this engine in a QMini. There could be a few takers.

I'll have mine in warm tint, please.

Geoff


----------



## Darvis (Aug 31, 2010)

News flash!

at hour 266 the XP-G (yes, XP-G) running on the Eneloop is out of the race!!! ending voltage was .91v


----------



## scout24 (Aug 31, 2010)

I hope a proper memorial was held for that poor cell...:candle: :twothumbs


----------



## amigafan2003 (Aug 31, 2010)

> at hour 266 the XP-G (yes, XP-G) running on the Eneloop is out of the race!!! ending voltage was .91v



Cool - so that's 10% over spec 

My Quark AA (XP-E R2) still going - 253 hrs.


----------



## wyager (Aug 31, 2010)

Darvis said:


> Folks, get your Spinal Tap reference guides handy... These lights go to 11


----------



## Darvis (Aug 31, 2010)

The failed Eneloop has been paraded in front of his comrades as a WORTHLESS SCOUNDREL!!!

Slapped into the LaCrosse "bay of re-education" he will be drained and refreshed over and over until he can learn the meaning of what it is to be a member of the nimh elite!!!

That, or into the mouth of the Sarlacc where In its belly he will find a new definition of pain and suffering as he is slowly digested over a…thousand years

Now, where was I?


----------



## Darvis (Aug 31, 2010)

The Quark XP-E tactical is out as well at 270 hours and .90v... Eneloop driven...

Only the Alkaline remains


----------



## gunga (Aug 31, 2010)

Piece of junk. Only 253 hours?

I bet I can get a DX light for $5 that lasts at least 300.

:devil:





...


Wow. Very impressive, glad I have another Quark coming. And yes, I would be all over a neutral quark mini with these kind of runtimes...


----------



## TwitchALot (Aug 31, 2010)

wyager said:


> That can't be right.... then the quark would HAVE to pre-flash to "activate" the LED before moon mode, and some don't.



Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but that's what I've picked up around here. It's possible that it was explained poorly a couple of times, but this thread may be of interesting to you (see post 81 and more). Preflash seems to be relatively variable. Some have it worse than others, some have it in different circumstances to different degrees, so I'm not quite ready to rule out that Quarks don't have this as a general problem. It may not be as perceptible in some cases as opposed to others, and we all have different eyes anyway. 


But here's another vote for a 14500 test.


----------



## Wiggle (Aug 31, 2010)

With the 14500 the low draw may not trigger the protection circuit though, perhaps just periodically check it?


----------



## Art (Aug 31, 2010)

I bet that those eneloops after that discharge will only need 2 cycles to get back to its shape.

Keep us posted about the eneloops too , mines had the worst treatment possible and they all do more then 1900mah.


----------



## guiri (Sep 1, 2010)

Darvis said:


> The failed Eneloop has been paraded in front of his comrades as a WORTHLESS SCOUNDREL!!!
> 
> Slapped into the LaCrosse "bay of re-education" he will be drained and refreshed over and over until he can learn the meaning of what it is to be a member of the nimh elite!!!
> 
> ...



Yeah, god forbid you'd actually give it props for doing a great job...you're evil!


----------



## guiri (Sep 1, 2010)

Wiggle said:


> With the 14500 the low draw may not trigger the protection circuit though, perhaps just periodically check it?



Ok, I don't understand what you just said but I'll just post another thread with questions when I get ready to do it.

I do have a Pila charger coming from Flavio (he's got'em in stock if someone wants one) so I should be ready to go fairly soon.

I'll post a list of lights I have (all have a low mode) and people can say what they want tested on what type of battery.

I forgot, Darvis, that's sweet as hell. I'm soo damn stoked by this, it ain't funny.

As for a 4sevens LOW only light, I could give a $hit what tint it has. It's gonna be an emergency light anyway. I can see you guys buried in a building after an earthquake, in a super tight space where the only thing that would keep you from going insane would be your quark mini super low mode and you go, nope, I don't like the tint so I'm not gonna use it...


----------



## amigafan2003 (Sep 1, 2010)

My XP-E AA Quark has just crossed the 11 day barrier - 264hrs - and that's with a "not fresh off the charger" eneloop!

Edited - test started 21st @ 9am - that's 11 days - not 12! Doh!


----------



## guiri (Sep 1, 2010)

This is exciting as hell


----------



## amigafan2003 (Sep 1, 2010)

I might try an Energizer Lithium after this


----------



## guiri (Sep 1, 2010)

Hell yeah! 

The long runtime testing ground! Yessir!


----------



## Darvis (Sep 1, 2010)

Amigafan:

Based on what I'm seeing, the Eneloops go just about over 11 days and that's about all they got... both lights were pretty much dead on in that respect. 

Guiri:

My take is that I don't see the 14500 going much longer than any of the other types since the capacity is much much lower (AW's give about 750mah I think) plus, if it's an AW protected 14500, that will trip before you get any decent results. you could run an unprotected 14500, but if the voltage drops below 2.5 volts, your battery will be toast. I just don't want to get anyone's hopes up on the LiOn run as those batteries benefits are really for the increased outputs on high due to the voltage output and not necessarily what anyone should pick for the longer runs on low.

If anything, since we've all run Eneloops and I'm still running an Alkaline, the next valid test to me would be a Lithium Primary AA...


----------



## guiri (Sep 1, 2010)

Well, no sense in killing a ten dollar battery


----------



## Darvis (Sep 1, 2010)

guiri said:


> Well, no sense in killing a ten dollar battery


 
Exactly...:thumbsup:


----------



## guiri (Sep 1, 2010)

Well, that's out then. I guess no moonlight test for me or I can just test one with eneloops to see how MINE does, just in case.

Or, I can test it turning it off every so many hours.


----------



## Darvis (Sep 1, 2010)

I think it's a good idea to test and share your Eneloop data; this would provide excellent corraborative data and would also give you confidence in your personal lights. I'll bet there are folks that read this thread and go "no way dude!" so, the more data the better!

Jump on in Guiri, we want to hear how your lights do!


----------



## Darvis (Sep 1, 2010)

The last standing Quark: A regular XP-E R2 running on a single Alkaline AA, is *still going strong at 288 hours (12 days continuous)*. Unreal. 

I appreciate everyone who has followed this thread and contributed info and data, thanks for hanging in there!!! We ain't over it yet.

For you serious low level runtime junkies that need every single last drop of runtime, Alkaleaks and probably Lithiums are still the way to go!!!


----------



## amigafan2003 (Sep 1, 2010)

Jeez - just pulled the Eneloop from mine and it's reading 1.232v! That's after 272hrs running!


----------



## Darvis (Sep 1, 2010)

amigafan2003 said:


> Jeez - just pulled the Eneloop from mine and it's reading 1.232v! That's after 272hrs running!


 
Is your Eneloop one of the newer versions? (green or blue colored I think)


----------



## amigafan2003 (Sep 1, 2010)

Nope - coming up to one year old.


----------



## guiri (Sep 1, 2010)

Amigafan, why did you pull it out?

So, 288 is the highest so far?

Okie dokie on the eneloop test on mine and I also have a couple of others I can do for fun. I'll prolly just do'em all at the same time


----------



## Bucko (Sep 1, 2010)

Thanks for all the info/testing. I'm still learning my way around, but I am loving all the info I'm getting from here.

One thing I am still a little confused on though is Darvis (or anyone else), what is the difference between the XP-E, and XP-G that was mentioned in Darvis' initial post.

Also, could someone post a link to these flashlights. I am wanting to pick some up for my BoB/EDC bags.


----------



## Xak (Sep 1, 2010)

I'd like to see 2 tests like this with QAA XP-G vs XP-E:

1. A test with your average Duracell AA from a bulk pack @ Home Depot or similar store...

2. Instead of continuously running it turn it off for a minute or 2 then on every time you check on them.


Also interested in 14500. Will it last longer? Will it ruin the battery even though it's protected?


----------



## guiri (Sep 1, 2010)

Bucko said:


> Thanks for all the info/testing. I'm still learning my way around, but I am loving all the info I'm getting from here.
> 
> One thing I am still a little confused on though is Darvis (or anyone else), what is the difference between the XP-E, and XP-G that was mentioned in Darvis' initial post.
> 
> Also, could someone post a link to these flashlights. I am wanting to pick some up for my BoB/EDC bags.



http://www.4sevens.com/product_info.php?cPath=297_305&products_id=1597


----------



## mitro (Sep 1, 2010)

Just for my own "fun" I've been running the moon mode test since Thursday night and turn it off/on every time I check on it. I'm running an Eneloop as well with neutral XP-E AA tactical. 

I'm thinking of possibly testing a 14500. I know I may damage the cell, but that would be part of the test.


----------



## amigafan2003 (Sep 1, 2010)

> Amigafan, why did you pull it out


I haven't pulled out - the battery went straight back in after checking it's voltage. (It's still going btw).



> Also interested in 14500. Will it last longer? Will it ruin the battery even though it's protected?


A 14500 should last longer but it probably will ruin the battery as the low amp draw wont be enough to trigger the low voltage protection.

I have some unprotected TF 14500 cells that I might be willing to sacrifice.



> I'd like to see 2 tests like this with QAA XP-G vs XP-E:



I have a 0.9 - 4.2v Turbo head (XP-G) - I might try fire that one up.


----------



## guiri (Sep 1, 2010)

mitro said:


> Just for my own "fun" I've been running the moon mode test since Thursday night and turn it off/on every time I check on it. I'm running an Eneloop as well with neutral XP-E AA tactical.
> 
> I'm thinking of possibly testing a 14500. I know I may damage the cell, but that would be part of the test.



Alright, do it. I'll do some other tests myself.


----------



## Quension (Sep 1, 2010)

Bucko said:


> One thing I am still a little confused on though is Darvis (or anyone else), what is the difference between the XP-E, and XP-G that was mentioned in Darvis' initial post.
> 
> Also, could someone post a link to these flashlights. I am wanting to pick some up for my BoB/EDC bags.



All of the 4Sevens-made lights so far use Cree LEDs. The first ones were using LEDs with an XP-E package, R2 luminous flux; these have a "throwy" beam pattern. Late last year the Quark line was refreshed with a newer LED model, an XP-G package with R5 luminous flux. The larger XP-G package in the same reflector results in a larger hotspot in the beam pattern, making the output a bit more "floody", and the higher R5 flux bin was used to get brighter light output with the same runtime as the older models.

Darvis mentioned these details in case they was relevant to the test, but as we've seen it played out as expected -- runtime is essentially identical between models on the same battery. Only the R5 models are currently in production, although it's possible to find some of the older R2 models in old stock.

As guiri posted, you can find these on 4sevens.com. The difference between the Regular and Tactical versions is in the User Interface.

selfbuilt did a round-up review of the first models here, which provides a good overview of what the Quark line is about. ti-force has a ton of great pictures and explains the "lego" abilities here.


----------



## edc3 (Sep 1, 2010)

Bucko said:


> Thanks for all the info/testing. I'm still learning my way around, but I am loving all the info I'm getting from here.
> 
> One thing I am still a little confused on though is Darvis (or anyone else), what is the difference between the XP-E, and XP-G that was mentioned in Darvis' initial post.
> 
> Also, could someone post a link to these flashlights. I am wanting to pick some up for my BoB/EDC bags.



The simple answer is that the XP-E and XP-G are different emitters (LEDs). The first Quarks came out with XP-E emitters and now all are using XP-G emitters.

:welcome:


----------



## Darvis (Sep 1, 2010)

Bucko said:


> Thanks for all the info/testing. I'm still learning my way around, but I am loving all the info I'm getting from here.
> 
> One thing I am still a little confused on though is Darvis (or anyone else), what is the difference between the XP-E, and XP-G that was mentioned in Darvis' initial post.
> 
> Also, could someone post a link to these flashlights. I am wanting to pick some up for my BoB/EDC bags.


 

Welcome Bucko, some good explanations from the guys above as well...

I had hoped to show with this test that I didn't think that the runtimes would be any different between the two LED types, and that was validated with the two Eneloops pretty much running exactly the same amount of time...

That logic carries over to the third light in my test with the Alkaline (Duracell); so one can expect equal runtimes across each emitter since we've already proven that with the Eneloops.

What's my point? Buy a Quark with either emitter and be confident of the performance you'll get regardless of AA type. To me, the beam patterns are not all that much different to be worried about in real world usage; nor are a few extra hours at the end of an 11 day run!!!

Stay tuned for my Alkaline resultS, that sucker is still going!!!


----------



## Wiggle (Sep 1, 2010)

While the moonlight is taken care of, anyone here interested in a test on low? I've got duraloops, alkalines, 14500s and L91s.


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Sep 1, 2010)

Wiggle said:


> While the moonlight is taken care of, anyone here interested in a test on low? I've got duraloops, alkalines, 14500s and L91s.



I'm interested in it, if not just to see it really do the distance (48-50 hours).


----------



## wantsusa (Sep 1, 2010)

Yeah a low test would be good 

Now if only we had enough information to fill a spreadsheet 

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc...=CMvp39IC&waffle=false&forced=true&ui=2#gid=0

wish I had more info but takes so long to look stuff up hehe.


----------



## Darvis (Sep 1, 2010)

Super Alka-Quark is now at 300 hours continuous, no changes to report.


----------



## edc3 (Sep 1, 2010)

So, has anybody started an lithium primary test yet? I've got a fresh Ultimate Lithium ready to go at the top of the hour. :devil:


----------



## edc3 (Sep 2, 2010)

I fired up my Quark XP-G R5 with a fresh out of the package Energizer Ultimate Lithium at 21:00.

Darvis, when you checked the voltage of the Eneloops, did you check them under load? I did not check my lithium under load. Hopefully it doesn't matter. Anyway, the starting voltage was 1.803v. Hopefully, it will be more than a week before we have the results. :candle:

Don


----------



## guiri (Sep 2, 2010)

Darvis said:


> Stay tuned for my Alkaline resultS, that sucker is still going!!!



Alkaline, alkaline, alkaline... :rock:


----------



## guiri (Sep 2, 2010)

wantsusa said:


> Yeah a low test would be good
> 
> Now if only we had enough information to fill a spreadsheet
> 
> ...



Damn, that's sweet. I tried to get a spreadsheet going that listed the specs of all the major flashlights but couldn't get anyone to do it with me or basically, I was the only one that volunteered.

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/233834

George


----------



## amigafan2003 (Sep 2, 2010)

Woke up this morning - XP-E Quark is still going!

287hrs.

Might have to try the 2xAA for a laugh - but we'd be here around a month!


----------



## guiri (Sep 2, 2010)

amigafan2003 said:


> Might have to try the 2xAA for a laugh - but we'd be here around a month!



So, I have nowhere I have to be..


----------



## 4sevens (Sep 2, 2010)

You guys have no idea how much I love lurking and reading this thread


----------



## Darvis (Sep 2, 2010)

edc3 said:


> I fired up my Quark XP-G R5 with a fresh out of the package Energizer Ultimate Lithium at 21:00.
> 
> Darvis, when you checked the voltage of the Eneloops, did you check them under load? I did not check my lithium under load. Hopefully it doesn't matter. Anyway, the starting voltage was 1.803v. Hopefully, it will be more than a week before we have the results. :candle:
> 
> Don


 
I did not, I checked mine fresh off the Lacrosse, popped them in and fired them up...

I think that lithium is going to fry our minds... given the storage life of lithiums and the runtimes of these Quarks in moonlight mode, a pack of lithium batteries and one of these guys will get you throught anything you might possibly want to get through!! I think that, or the solar charger/Eneloop combo=light until time ends.


----------



## Darvis (Sep 2, 2010)

4sevens said:


> You guys have no idea how much I love lurking and reading this thread


 
Thanks for coming to the show, I hope you brought more popcorn!!!!!

Seriously, you've built one heck of a long running light... they will absolutely be in every vehicle and BOB I own.


----------



## scout24 (Sep 2, 2010)

^^^ What Darvis said... Thanks for the fast shipping on the AA and the 123 that I ordered over the weekend. They arrived yesterday, now to get some "tactical" tailcaps with my next order... For $9.00 ea., forward clickys rule!  Maybe another AA for the wife's car... I just gave my Ti AA away to my intern at work, and need a replacement. #211 of 750. He's a good kid, and I got tired of him borrowing my other lights.


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Sep 2, 2010)

4sevens said:


> You guys have no idea how much I love lurking and reading this thread



Knowing that we'd find them to last longer than claimed? It's a good feeling, knowing that people are about to find out how cool the things that you've done are. I know we're asking about a low-only flashlight, but I also don't think it would have a large market. Something something, AAA powered pendant light.


I'd love to join the testing, but I keep needing my Quark AA^2 most nights.


----------



## Zendude (Sep 2, 2010)

I started a retest of my D10 and MiNi with fresh Kirkland Signature alkies(Duracell?). Start time: 0400.

Hopefully my MiNi will redeem itself.:candle:


----------



## Darvis (Sep 2, 2010)

scout24 said:


> ^^^ What Darvis said... Thanks for the fast shipping on the AA and the 123 that I ordered over the weekend. They arrived yesterday, now to get some "tactical" tailcaps with my next order... For $9.00 ea., forward clickys rule!  Maybe another AA for the wife's car... I just gave my Ti AA away to my intern at work, and need a replacement. #211 of 750. He's a good kid, and I got tired of him borrowing my other lights.


 

Too funny! I just ordered 2 more reverse clicky caps so I can turn my remaining tactical models into tailstanders.


----------



## Darvis (Sep 2, 2010)

AnAppleSnail said:


> Knowing that we'd find them to last longer than claimed? It's a good feeling, knowing that people are about to find out how cool the things that you've done are. I know we're asking about a low-only flashlight, but I also don't think it would have a large market. Something something, AAA powered pendant light.
> 
> 
> I'd love to join the testing, but I keep needing my Quark AA^2 most nights.


 
I hate to admit that you're probably right about the tight market for low-only light, but man, what a light that would be... The AA mini/twisty with the moonlight only Quark circuitry. Heck, I live in Atlanta... if 4/7s would even build me a few one-off prototypes, I would drive there with cash in hand and pay the custom price for them.... that kind of performance would be very worth it to me!!! 

All kidding aside, though- I look at these test results, amazing as they are, I still think that after maybe 5-6 days of continuous runtime, what are we really gaining practically? Break it down by the hours and extrapolate it out, 100 hours of runtime is probably 40-50 even 60 days of practical usage. Don't get me wrong though, as I'm as stoked about the hours ticked away here as anyone else!!!

My point? I'd even be happy, like you said, with a AAA version of this light that goes 100-150 hours on a lithium or alkaline primary. The Prevo is cool, but he multi modes just don't speak to my love of purity in a light...

I think (really, seriously hope) the E01 killer IS coming and will be a stunner; and unlike a long running AA low only light, a AAA low only long runner would sell like mad... it's juuuussstttt the right amount slimmer and lighter. I hope it has the gorgeous design of the Revo with its glass lens and reflector and (thank you because I am not an XP-G fan!!!) XP-E emitter...


----------



## Darvis (Sep 2, 2010)

Read it and weep AA wannabes: *My Quark AA running on one Alkaline has just reached the 313 hour mark (13 days continuous)* with no changes to report.


----------



## mitro (Sep 2, 2010)

I'm running a couple tests on an AW 14500 (checking capacity, load voltage, short term self-discharge) while I wait for the eneloop to die then it will be time to try the li-on.


----------



## TwitchALot (Sep 2, 2010)

Hopefully when I come back from my vacation, the L91 will still be running.


----------



## guiri (Sep 2, 2010)

Ok, I've been stoked for awhile now but it's hard to stay stoked for so long, I'm gonna get a heart attack


----------



## Wiggle (Sep 2, 2010)

Wouldn't it be funny if someone setup a live webcam? I know its lame, but I'd tune in for sure


----------



## amigafan2003 (Sep 2, 2010)

My Quark AA XP-E on a single Eneloop has just crossed the 300hr mark  There is a slight flicker to the light - I don't think it's going to be running in the morning.

Cell voltage 1.2v.


----------



## guiri (Sep 2, 2010)

Wiggle said:


> Wouldn't it be funny if someone setup a live webcam? I know its lame, but I'd tune in for sure



If it weren't for the fact that I tend to walk around nekkid (360LBS), I'd do it but I'm thinking I'd get banned for it :devil:


----------



## guiri (Sep 2, 2010)

amigafan2003 said:


> My Quark AA XP-E on a single Eneloop has just crossed the 300hr mark  There is a slight flicker to the light - I don't think it's going to be running in the morning.
> 
> Cell voltage 1.2v.



Well damn Sam, 300 hours is nothing to sneer at.


----------



## Jash (Sep 2, 2010)

guiri said:


> I can see you guys buried in a building after an earthquake, in a super tight space where the only thing that would keep you from going insane would be your quark mini super low mode and you go, nope, I don't like the tint so I'm not gonna use it...



Oh that's so funny! Funniest thing I think I've ever read on CPF.

Been following this thread on and off but had to pipe in and say how much I love being a Quark owner. Now imagine the runtime if they made a 3D Quark.


----------



## guiri (Sep 2, 2010)

Jash said:


> Oh that's so funny! Funniest thing I think I've ever read on CPF.



Well, can you blame me with all the talk about tint...you'd think that they use the flashlights for studio photography of people where accurate skin tones is a must :nana:

If the 3D quark was under 100 bucks, I'd buy one just for the sake of having thousands of hours of runtime


----------



## flatline (Sep 2, 2010)

Jash said:


> Oh that's so funny! Funniest thing I think I've ever read on CPF.
> 
> Been following this thread on and off but had to pipe in and say how much I love being a Quark owner. Now imagine the runtime if they made a 3D Quark.



If they made a 1D quark tube, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. Ever since I found CPF and started reading about these AA wonderlights (Quarks, D10, LF5XT, etc), I've wanted a 1D light with similar capabilities.

We know what they can do with 1.2 volts, so why won't anyone make a 1D light?

--flatline


----------



## guiri (Sep 2, 2010)

I've been wondering the same as I would rather have a short light. A 1D would run forever. I was going to have some custom light made but I dont think that's gonna happen. A modular design is what I had in mind.


----------



## Darvis (Sep 2, 2010)

amigafan2003 said:


> My Quark AA XP-E on a single Eneloop has just crossed the 300hr mark  There is a slight flicker to the light - I don't think it's going to be running in the morning.
> 
> Cell voltage 1.2v.


 
That's impressive! I wonder why your Eneloop is running better and sustaining that level of voltage after sitting for a year? Both of mine bit the dust at the 260ish mark and that was after a full refresh run on the lacrosse and hot off the charger. I wonder if the vf of your pill is better and that accounts for the better runtime %?


----------



## wyager (Sep 2, 2010)

guiri said:


> I've been wondering the same as I would rather have a short light. A 1D would run forever. I was going to have some custom light made but I dont think that's gonna happen. A modular design is what I had in mind.



I was thinking about this a while back, a D cell light with a super low mode. Wouldn't that be pretty easy with a D cell mag? Just take the driver and LED out of a quark regular head, and transplant it to a mag?


----------



## guiri (Sep 2, 2010)

wyager said:


> I was thinking about this a while back, a D cell light with a super low mode. Wouldn't that be pretty easy with a D cell mag? Just take the driver and LED out of a quark regular head, and transplant it to a mag?



Ooo, please, someone do it.

Who wants to make me one and how much?


----------



## guiri (Sep 2, 2010)

Darvis said:


> That's impressive! I wonder why your Eneloop is running better and sustaining that level of voltage after sitting for a year? Both of mine bit the dust at the 260ish mark and that was after a full refresh run on the lacrosse and hot off the charger. I wonder if the vf of your pill is better and that accounts for the better runtime %?



It could be as scientific as "it was just a better unit"
Sometimes it IS that simple although not very exciting.
You know, mike bike starts easy but yours doesn't although it's the same model...why not batteries..?


----------



## Darvis (Sep 2, 2010)

guiri said:


> It could be as scientific as "it was just a better unit"
> Sometimes it IS that simple although not very exciting.
> You know, mike bike starts easy but yours doesn't although it's the same model...why not batteries..?


 
Very true and if the light dies at the 300 mark, it's really only a 10% difference in runtime which could easily be accounted for between overall mah and vf.


----------



## guiri (Sep 2, 2010)

Alright, who do we get to make a 1D with quark guts?

This has gotten me all hot and bothered now...


----------



## guiri (Sep 2, 2010)

Ooo, I have an idea Darvis. Would it be possible to just open up one of your lights and just hook it up to a D battery and repeat the test to see how long it'll last? That's doable isn't it?

I mean, just take the battery tube off, not actually rip it open I mean..


----------



## Wiggle (Sep 2, 2010)

oops, ignore


----------



## wyager (Sep 2, 2010)

guiri said:


> Alright, who do we get to make a 1D with quark guts?
> 
> This has gotten me all hot and bothered now...



I can't even manage to get the head of the quark separated... I'll let someone else make an infinimag first :nana:


----------



## Trancersteve (Sep 2, 2010)

This thread makes me want to buy a Quark, you know, for those times you may be trapped in darkness!


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Sep 2, 2010)

guiri said:


> Ooo, I have an idea Darvis. Would it be possible to just open up one of your lights and just hook it up to a D battery and repeat the test to see how long it'll last? That's doable isn't it?
> 
> I mean, just take the battery tube off, not actually rip it open I mean..



It could be done.
1) Program the Quark to Moonlight for tight (and loose, I guess).
2) Build this:
1.9 cm OD platform. At least one wire going up the side of it - battery (-).
Spring recessed in the middle. (Battery +)
Press the head onto this with something (A glass tumbler?)
Wire those contacts to the D cell.
Throw the switch
3) Wait a long. LONG. time.


----------



## Flying Turtle (Sep 2, 2010)

A little while back there was a thread bemoaning the lack of a 1D light, so I made one. A real one would be much better, but something like this is simple to do if all you need is a super long running ceiling bouncer.







Geoff


----------



## Darvis (Sep 2, 2010)

Very creative stuff... I was thinking... I have the 18650 adapter for my Quarks and at the top is essentially a jig that allows the Quark head to mate with the flat top 18650 cell. I could use that part and the simply wire up the D cell using a few alligator clips and a magnet or two. I'll have a look at it.

Let's see, 18000 mah... that would be like 2430 hours of runtime, or 101 days continuous... wow. I gotta think about that.


----------



## Darvis (Sep 2, 2010)

The alkaline driven Quark is approaching *hour 324* with no changes to report


----------



## edc3 (Sep 3, 2010)

Just passed the 24 hour mark with L91. I'm carrying it in my bag since I don't trust my wife and kids not to turn it off.


----------



## amigafan2003 (Sep 3, 2010)

And we're done.

My Quark AA XP-E on an Eneloop has just bowed out at the 312h mark - that's 13 days.

Cell voltage was 0.92v fresh out of the light (It's recovered to 1.1v as I've been typing this). The last 12hrs run time had a slight noticeable flicker.


----------



## Darvis (Sep 3, 2010)

Quark Alkaline at *336* *hours (14 days continuous)* no changes to report.


----------



## guiri (Sep 3, 2010)

Well yeah, I never meant busting up the light, I mean, just simulate a battery connection.

ANyway, my Pila charger is here so I'm getting ready to test MY lights.

Guys, I was going to start a general low mode runtime thread so that we could ALL post and compile our results in there.

Whatchathink?

You know, like this


Quark AA, XP-E, Eneloop, 334 hours
Etc...

Or someone else can if you prefer to and then we'll post results and the OP will paste them in the first post..


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Sep 3, 2010)

Darvis said:


> Quark Alkaline at *336* *hours (14 days continuous)* no changes to report.



I think this is a great candidate for a truly useful solar-charged light. Given that the 2000 mAh Eneloops ran for 250-300 hours, the drive circuit seems to be sucking power at the horrendous rate of (2000 mAh / 250 hours) 8 mA. Jeez 4sevens, it's only delivering about a third of that power to the LED! What a gas-guzzler!


----------



## guiri (Sep 3, 2010)

That's right. Can you spell class action lawsuit?


----------



## wantsusa (Sep 3, 2010)

Or link it to a spreadsheet so that no matter what it can be added to. Or another page that can be constantly kept up, since doesn't it lock at some point so that the OP can't change things? or is that only the title?



guiri said:


> Well yeah, I never meant busting up the light, I mean, just simulate a battery connection.
> 
> ANyway, my Pila charger is here so I'm getting ready to test MY lights.
> 
> ...


----------



## guiri (Sep 3, 2010)

Just the title and it also depends on which forum script people are using but here we can't change it ourselves.


----------



## scout24 (Sep 3, 2010)

Flying Turtle- Simply awesome...:devil: Couldn't let you and Darvis have all the fun. Works great with my Matterhorn head, won't work with my EO1 due to the negative path on the PCB... The Eiger is good to go also... I'm going to work on a PCV solution this weekend that makes this more permanent and usable. I'm tempted to do a runtime on this... Where's Beacon with the Eiger sub-zero??? Darvis- I cannot believe the times so far... no dimming?


----------



## wyager (Sep 3, 2010)

AnAppleSnail said:


> I think this is a great candidate for a truly useful solar-charged light. Given that the 2000 mAh Eneloops ran for 250-300 hours, the drive circuit seems to be sucking power at the horrendous rate of (2000 mAh / 250 hours) 8 mA. Jeez 4sevens, it's only delivering about a third of that power to the LED! What a gas-guzzler!



We could always have a 90% efficient driver at 1mA, but the problem is it would probably be 10% efficient at 700mA :sick2:

1000:1 contrast is nothing to laugh at...

that said, can we please have a dual-IC driver?
:thanks:

A low mode only driver would sell a lot less than a jack-of-all brightnesses driver... muggles don't appreciate super long runtimes. Maybe a 2-IC driver is a compromise?
I wonder if it would be more efficient to use PWM as well as linear dimming...


----------



## guiri (Sep 3, 2010)

First, before I forget. IF a 1D low mode light was made, I think that it would also be interesting to have another mode for it to make it more usable as a Bail out light. Maybe 100 lumens and the super low or something or 20 or 50 lumens or whatever but defaulting in super low mode just in case.

Now, I have a question, I'm getting ready to do my low runtime test on MY lights but I don't have a camera for beam shots. HOWEVER, I"m thinking of getting one and I wondered, does it really matter about beam shots or should I just go ahead and proceed with the runtime test?


----------



## Darvis (Sep 3, 2010)

scout24 said:


> Darvis- I cannot believe the times so far... no dimming?


 
Not a shred of dimming, it's really pretty amazing... these things (and the alkaline is STILL going) just run until the bitter end and then simply shut off. Amigafan reported some flickering, but mine did not have that behaviour. Only the Eiger had that nice long, slow decline at the end.



guiri said:


> Now, I have a question, I'm getting ready to do my low runtime test on MY lights but I don't have a camera for beam shots. HOWEVER, I"m thinking of getting one and I wondered, does it really matter about beam shots or should I just go ahead and proceed with the runtime test?


 
I would just proceed. I added some photos just so folks could see the three lights together, but man, nothing ever changes with the darn things when they run!!! Not much to photograph...


----------



## guiri (Sep 3, 2010)

Okie dokie. I'm getting my ducks in a row. Got the charger today and gonna charge everything up, measure and report.

So, should I start taht new thread when I"m ready to go or do you want to do it?


----------



## Darvis (Sep 3, 2010)

guiri said:


> Okie dokie. I'm getting my ducks in a row. Got the charger today and gonna charge everything up, measure and report.
> 
> So, should I start taht new thread when I"m ready to go or do you want to do it?


 
Totally up to you, also feel free to continue on here. I can post the results of the run test in my OP, that way we can have all batt types covered and right up front for all to see.


----------



## guiri (Sep 3, 2010)

Ok, let's do that. I was wondering if we'll attract a bigger crowd if we do more like a general low mode runtime test and not just quark which is what the subject says..that was really the main reason


----------



## Darvis (Sep 6, 2010)

For those wondering if it would, it has...* the Quark crossed 400 hundred hours* and is now at 404 hours


----------



## scout24 (Sep 6, 2010)

OhMyGawd... oo:


----------



## Wiggle (Sep 6, 2010)

Darvis said:


> For those wondering if it would, it has...* the Quark crossed 400 hundred hours* and is now at 404 hours



Ridiculous. Any flickering?


----------



## Darvis (Sep 6, 2010)

No flickering, just a nice steady light.... unreal.


----------



## wyager (Sep 6, 2010)

Darvis said:


> No flickering, just a nice steady light.... unreal.



If it gets to 480 hours, we'd better have a party or something. :nana:

Do you think 4Sevens will change the listed runtimes based on this thread? We still haven't tested a 2AA quark...


----------



## mitro (Sep 6, 2010)

Wow.. 400 is amazing! 

My Quark AA has been running on an Eneloop for 252 hours so far. Been clicking it on and off ever time I check it.
*
EDIT:* I just checked and I am starting to see a slight flicker, so the end is likely near. I have my cells all labeled with their tested capacity but I forgot to note what it was before I started. I'll be curious to see which I used and then I'll retest its capacity in the C-9000.


----------



## Tuikku (Sep 6, 2010)

Almost twice the official time :huh:

This thread is getting interesting!!


----------



## Mr. Tone (Sep 6, 2010)

This confirms that alkaline are indeed good for something, they are the low current champs of the world. And the Quark is very impressive, I was not expecting over 400 hours!


----------



## Darvis (Sep 6, 2010)

The Quark is at *411 hours (17+ days continuous)* with no changes to report.


----------



## Darvis (Sep 6, 2010)

mitro said:


> Wow.. 400 is amazing!
> 
> My Quark AA has been running on an Eneloop for 252 hours so far. Been clicking it on and off ever time I check it.
> 
> *EDIT:* I just checked and I am starting to see a slight flicker, so the end is likely near. I have my cells all labeled with their tested capacity but I forgot to note what it was before I started. I'll be curious to see which I used and then I'll retest its capacity in the C-9000.


 
So this confirms that clicking on and off makes no difference... that runtime is right in line with what we've seen with Eneloops (250's to 300-ish hours) accounting for vf variations, etc.


----------



## Bucko (Sep 6, 2010)

Incredible. I never thought I'd see a AA battery go for 400 hours. 

I'll end up buying several of these lights for my wife and kids to keep around for emergencies. 

Now I just need to find a good sale on them.


----------



## 4sevens (Sep 6, 2010)

Nice!

We spec'd it very conservatively. There are lots of junk alkalines out there. 
Frankly, I'm surprised it look this long for this thread to come out. The Quarks have been out for a year already.


----------



## wantsusa (Sep 6, 2010)

Hey 4sevens, you should put a place on your website for input "real world tests" where you could quote runtimes for it with the different cells!


----------



## 4sevens (Sep 6, 2010)

wantsusa said:


> Hey 4sevens, you should put a place on your website for input "real world tests" where you could quote runtimes for it with the different cells!


Nah I wouldn't do that. Even with seemingly identical equipment, you'll still get varying results - even the different batches of brand name cells will vary.

This is what CPF is for - real world tests... 
and for every test result or factoid, add 20 different opinions


----------



## wantsusa (Sep 6, 2010)

So sticky a 4sevens runtime thread in your forum where we can always see CPF testimonial (flashlight : LED : runtime : battery : CPF member name)

Then us CPFers don't have to do so much searching in the future for figuring out what is best based off of runtime!


----------



## 4sevens (Sep 6, 2010)

wantsusa said:


> So sticky a 4sevens runtime thread in your forum where we can always see CPF testimonial (flashlight : LED : runtime : battery : CPF member name)
> 
> Then us CPFers don't have to do so much searching in the future for figuring out what is best based off of runtime!


If someone wants to volunteer to organize and maintain one, I'm totally fine with stickying it.


----------



## amigafan2003 (Sep 6, 2010)

I've just started a moon mode run time test on a SAFT 3.6v 14500 Li-SOCL2 2600mah primary on the same Quark AA (XP-E R2) that got 300+hrs on an Eneloop.

I tested current draw at the beginning - 1ma. Do the maths


----------



## wyager (Sep 6, 2010)

amigafan2003 said:


> I tested current draw at the beginning - 1ma. Do the maths



Am I doing the math right? 2600/24=108.333?


----------



## wantsusa (Sep 6, 2010)

Well going to start a little thread with the 4Seven lights and the info from these tests (and mini tests) - Darvis, Amigafan, Mitro, I am taking the info from this and putting it in there. Everyone else if you see other places with more testimonial/run time tests for 4seven lights, point them out to me so I can add stuff to it! I think it will be great to have at least all the 4seven light information in one place. 

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?p=2544500#post2544500

take a look at the format and if you have any suggestions lemme know!


----------



## jupello (Sep 6, 2010)

wyager said:


> Am I doing the math right? 2600/24=108.333?



Yes, if you want the theoretical runtime in days. 

Amigafan2003: are you seriously going to see that through? pretty long time without being able to use that light on anything else than moon mode :nana:


----------



## Darvis (Sep 6, 2010)

amigafan2003 said:


> I've just started a moon mode run time test on a SAFT 3.6v 14500 Li-SOCL2 2600mah primary on the same Quark AA (XP-E R2) that got 300+hrs on an Eneloop.
> 
> I tested current draw at the beginning - 1ma. Do the maths


 
Whoa!!!! Do these charge in the Pila IBC charger... does anyone know? If so, I am gonna have to get me some!!! My Eneloops are already charged via my powerfilm solar charger most of the time, and I just got a 10w panel that will power the IBC and the Lacrosse. I want to be fully mobile if needed...

These and that L91 test are going to be amazing! BTW, the Fenix diffusers work on the Quarks if you wrestle them on... (just checked) They make for decent low level candle-lights in moon mode. Tea lights? Fugeddaboutit...


----------



## Mr. Tone (Sep 6, 2010)

amigafan2003 said:


> I've just started a moon mode run time test on a SAFT 3.6v 14500 Li-SOCL2 2600mah primary on the same Quark AA (XP-E R2) that got 300+hrs on an Eneloop.
> 
> I tested current draw at the beginning - 1ma. Do the maths


 
What is this battery you are talking about? I have never heard of that before. I am sure others want to know as well.


----------



## flatline (Sep 6, 2010)

amigafan2003 said:


> I've just started a moon mode run time test on a SAFT 3.6v 14500 Li-SOCL2 2600mah primary on the same Quark AA (XP-E R2) that got 300+hrs on an Eneloop.
> 
> I tested current draw at the beginning - 1ma. Do the maths



If you're taking tail cap current readings, could you do all of the modes (moon, low, medium, high, max)?

--flatline


----------



## wantsusa (Sep 6, 2010)

Sounds to me that it is a primary cell (think I found a website about $5 each) so not sure if Amigafan has/wants to do a lot of tests (and probably could only do moon and low right? sounds as if this type of battery can't take barely any current output). Sounds like it is made really for micro amp current.


from a website I see :
"[SIZE=-1]The LS14500 cell is designed specifically for long-term (3 to 15 years) applications, featuring a few UA based currents and periodic pulses, typically in the 5-150 mA range. "[/SIZE]




flatline said:


> If you're taking tail cap current readings, could you do all of the modes (moon, low, medium, high, max)?
> 
> --flatline


----------



## flatline (Sep 6, 2010)

wantsusa said:


> Sounds to me that it is a primary cell (think I found a website about $5 each) so not sure if Amigafan has/wants to do a lot of tests (and probably could only do moon and low right? sounds as if this type of battery can't take barely any current output). Sounds like it is made really for micro amp current.
> 
> 
> from a website I see :
> "[SIZE=-1]The LS14500 cell is designed specifically for long-term (3 to 15 years) applications, featuring a few UA based currents and periodic pulses, typically in the 5-150 mA range. "[/SIZE]



The reason I asked is that when playing with ER14505 cells which are supposed to be able to handle sustained currents up to 100mA, I could run moon-mode indefinitely, but nothing higher for more than a second or two, not even low mode. So I assumed that low mode had more than a 100mA draw at the tail...but sadly, I never confirmed that with a multi-meter.

--flatline


----------



## Zendude (Sep 6, 2010)

I guess my earlier post was a victim of the database debacle.

Anyway, as I said before I feel silly reporting this but....

Quark MiNi AA: 41hrs it was still on, at 46 hrs it was dead.:shakehead

D10 GDP: 68hrs it was still on, at 73 hrs it was dead.

Both lights died while I slept.

I did get better results in the Qmini from the KS alkie (5 hrs). Still disapointed.

I am happy with the D10. Compared to most lights it did very well....but not against the Quark AA.

OK that's done so............GO QUARK AA!!!!



(I can't remember how I worded my original post but this is pretty close.)


----------



## guiri (Sep 6, 2010)

Zendude said:


> Both lights died while I slept.
> 
> I did get better results in the Qmini from the KS alkie (5 hrs). Still disapointed.



...and I said that sleeping is overrated


----------



## Darvis (Sep 6, 2010)

Quark now at *419 hours continuous*, no changes, no flickering, nada... still going.


----------



## wyager (Sep 6, 2010)

Darvis said:


> Quark now at *419 hours continuous*, no changes, no flickering, nada... still going.



61 hours to go until we get 200% rated runtime. :duh2:


----------



## mitro (Sep 6, 2010)

I feel like I'm re-inventing the wheel. 

264 hrs. on the Eneloop. Still flickering slightly.

*EDIT*: Scratch that. I clicked it on and off again and it wouldn't come back on.

*Eneloop pronounced dead at 264 hours.* Ending voltage was .91v 60 seconds after last light. Previous break-in of this cell reported 1943 mAh capacity. I am running the cell though another break-in cycle to get a more recent test of the capacity. This cell is about the midrange of my Eneloop/Duraloops.

I've decided to move on to test low with an AW 14500. Still trying to figure out my methodology on the best way to preserve the battery. I'm probably going to pull it and test it at regular intervals and just stop when it gets sub 3v (In case the protection doesn't kick in).


----------



## edc3 (Sep 7, 2010)

I had to terminate my L91 test today. My son asked me for a flashlight to take with him on a trip to Spain and that was the best one to give him. Sorry. I can restart on one of my Ti AA's. I think they are R5 bin, but I'm not positive.


----------



## amigafan2003 (Sep 7, 2010)

> Amigafan2003: are you seriously going to see that through? pretty long time without being able to use that light on anything else than moon mode :nana:



Plenty of other flashlights to use, inc a Ti AA 



> Whoa!!!! Do these charge in the Pila IBC charger


No, they are primaries.



> The reason I asked is that when playing with ER14505 cells which are supposed to be able to handle sustained currents up to 100mA, I could run moon-mode indefinitely, but nothing higher for more than a second or two, not even low mode. So I assumed that low mode had more than a 100mA draw at the tail...but sadly, I never confirmed that with a multi-meter.


Measured tailcap current was 1ma on moon, 11ma on low and 55ma on med - so the SAFT 14500 should be able to do those three modes without issue.


----------



## flatline (Sep 7, 2010)

amigafan2003 said:


> Measured tailcap current was 1ma on moon, 11ma on low and 55ma on med - so the SAFT 14500 should be able to do those three modes without issue.



Hmm...I may need to try the ER14505 again in my QAA. At those currents, it should have been able to support modes higher than just Moon...

--flatline


----------



## Darvis (Sep 7, 2010)

The Quark has passed *432 hours (18 days continuous)* with no changes to report.


----------



## Darvis (Sep 7, 2010)

*The Quark is at 442 hours* with no changes to report. In two hours, it will be at 444 hours, or as some may say...

444: Sign of the Quark :devil:


----------



## wyager (Sep 7, 2010)

Darvis said:


> *The Quark is at 442 hours* with no changes to report. In two hours, it will be at 444 hours, or as some may say...
> 
> 444: Sign of the Quark :devil:



SO close to 480 hours... come on, you can make it! 

(I never thought I would be cheering on a flashlight :nana


----------



## Darvis (Sep 7, 2010)

wantsusa said:


> Well going to start a little thread with the 4Seven lights and the info from these tests (and mini tests) - Darvis, Amigafan, Mitro, I am taking the info from this and putting it in there. Everyone else if you see other places with more testimonial/run time tests for 4seven lights, point them out to me so I can add stuff to it! I think it will be great to have at least all the 4seven light information in one place.
> 
> http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?p=2544500#post2544500
> 
> take a look at the format and if you have any suggestions lemme know!


 
Just had a look at this, really well done!


----------



## wantsusa (Sep 7, 2010)

Thanks, it's just leg work really.

Plus every time I update it...it makes me want to get more flashlights!



Darvis said:


> Just had a look at this, really well done!


----------



## Beacon of Light (Sep 8, 2010)

Wow I forgot about this thread way back before it was at 100 hours or so. 400+ hours is remarkable. Like Darvis said, this circuit with a AAA would still get over 100 hours on a similar low lumen light. Let us now pray the E01 killer will have a super long runtime. haha


----------



## guiri (Sep 8, 2010)

Sure but why do AAA when there is AA and it's not that much bigger?


----------



## fnj (Sep 8, 2010)

guiri said:


> Sure but why do AAA when there is AA and it's not that much bigger?



Because one can


----------



## guiri (Sep 8, 2010)

As good a reason as any..


----------



## flatline (Sep 8, 2010)

guiri said:


> Sure but why do AAA when there is AA and it's not that much bigger?



Hold your Quark AA in one hand. Hold a Maratac or ITP AAA in the other and you'll realize that there's a huge size difference. Makes all the difference in the world when considering putting alight on your key chain or in your cell phone holster (or, as my wife pointed out, in the pencil slot of a purse).

The only AA light that is of comparable size to a AAA light is the Zebralight H501. The new ones have a low low mode that might have similar run times to what we're seeing here from the Quark. Anyone willing to run that test?

--flatline


----------



## Darvis (Sep 8, 2010)

*The Quark has passed 456 hours (19 days continuous)* with no changes to report.


----------



## guiri (Sep 8, 2010)

As a keychain light then yes, I agree. The thing is, I don't really want anything even that big on my keychain 

Darvis, that's damn amazing


----------



## scout24 (Sep 8, 2010)

oo:


----------



## gunga (Sep 8, 2010)

Darvis, what battery was that again?

Wow.




It's because of this I purchased one of those Ti Quarks on sale (or maybe it was the price, but still...)

:devil:


----------



## Harry999 (Sep 8, 2010)

Darvis,

You've done it now. I love the idea of a reliable light in single AA format with a moonlight mode. I've ordered a Quark AA today from a UK supplier because of this run time test and the uncertainty as to whether 4Sevens will ever release a dedicated ultra low light. I love my HDS lights with their ultra low levels on lithium primaries and Li-ion cells but I can not resist the single AA format the Quark provides. 

The Quark will be a nice compliment to my HDS line up. I've also placed an order with 4Sevens for the 2xAA Quark body just so I can have longer runtimes if required.

Thank you, Darvis! :thumbsup:


----------



## Darvis (Sep 8, 2010)

You guys are welcome! I've really enjoyed doing this as well and I appreciate all of the positive response to this thread. I am absolutely happy to have had the chance to give something back to this great forum.

This last light is the regular UI Quark running on a Duracell alkaline... unreal. 

I'm going to run a lithium next just for kicks. 

The Eneloops were no slouch and are the way to go for EDC in my eyes; but for emergencies, these alkalines on moonlight or a lithium are the shiz.

Any way you slice it, the practical runtimes are through the roof. I can't see anyone except the most die-hard long term hikers or survivalists hitting the limits in moonlight mode.


----------



## flatline (Sep 8, 2010)

Harry999 said:


> The Quark will be a nice compliment to my HDS line up. I've also placed an order with 4Sevens for the 2xAA Quark body just so I can have longer runtimes if required.



I think every flashaholic should have a couple of beater lights that take advantage of common and/or cheap cells.

My Quark AA and H501w can use any AA sized cell I find or even AAA if I use a spacer. My L-mini can safely use the free 18650s I pull from laptops.

I think I've already mentioned this in this thread, but just in case I haven't, I wish someone made a 1xD cell light (or a D-tube for the quark). I've got a pile of partially used D cells from baby toys that I'd love to be able to take advantage of.

--flatline


----------



## Harry999 (Sep 8, 2010)

flatline said:


> I think I've already mentioned this in this thread, but just in case I haven't, I wish someone made a 1xD cell light (or a D-tube for the quark). I've got a pile of partially used D cells from baby toys that I'd love to be able to take advantage of.



+1

Now that sounds like a great idea!


----------



## Darvis (Sep 8, 2010)

Man, I hate to even say this, but at hour 467, the Quark has developed an ever so faint flicker... I had to stare at it for a minute or two as I thought my tired eyes were tricking me; but it's there for sure. No dimming mind you, just the flicker... and barely noticable at this juncture.

I fear that these next 12 hours (the run to 20 days continuous and 100% over stated specs) may be a bit precarious.


----------



## Zendude (Sep 8, 2010)

JEEZ, this is weird! I almost feel like I'm standing at the bedside of a sick loved one!:candle:

Just hang in there!


----------



## FroggyTaco (Sep 8, 2010)

I recall reading somewhere here that an alkaline AA has 3000+ma capacity in low low draw/drain applications. It certainly seems to be holding true here.


----------



## Helmut.G (Sep 9, 2010)

Darvis said:


> Man, I hate to even say this, but at hour 467, the Quark has developed an ever so faint flicker... I had to stare at it for a minute or two as I thought my tired eyes were tricking me; but it's there for sure. No dimming mind you, just the flicker... and barely noticable at this juncture.
> 
> I fear that these next 12 hours (the run to 20 days continuous and 100% over stated specs) may be a bit precarious.



still you know now that some Quarks are probably existing with a slightly lower Vf LED compared to yours that will easily make it with a quality battery.


----------



## Darvis (Sep 9, 2010)

Well folks, the Quark has gone dark!!!

At Midnight (hour 468) the flickering was more pronounced and by 4am, it was off. I'll split that and call it an even *470 hours continuous until off (19.6 days)*.* The ending voltage on the Duracell was .77v*

What a run, eh?


----------



## Trancersteve (Sep 9, 2010)

Not bad at all! 

Thanks for running this impressive stamina test. You are now responsible for a dent in my wages at the end of this month. :huh:



Harry999 said:


> I've also placed an order with 4Sevens for the 2xAA Quark body just so I can have longer runtimes if required.



I think I'll be joining you on that also!


----------



## Zendude (Sep 9, 2010)

I believe a moment of silence is in order..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Great job Darvis!:thumbsup:


So who wants to do a moon mode runtime test on a 2AA or 123^2?:devil:


----------



## Trancersteve (Sep 9, 2010)

Zendude said:


> So who wants to do a moon mode runtime test on a 2AA or 123^2?:devil:



:devil: You read my mind. 

What do we think the 2AA will manage to hit? I am thinking well over a month, perhaps a month and a half!


----------



## Darvis (Sep 9, 2010)

It just so happens that I have the 2AA body. I'm going to buy a pack of Lithiums today and run a 2AA vs 1AA lithium test and test the Revo with a Lithium as well... I'll start a new thread: "4 Sevens Lithium Moonlight Runtime Test" so as to keep this one from getting too unruly. Stay tuned as I plan to get to the store today and start the test tonight.

Update: Test started @ 2pm ET 9/9/2010


----------



## leon2245 (Sep 9, 2010)

*Go Darvis!*


----------



## Helmut.G (Sep 9, 2010)

well, don't expect the result of the 2xAA lithium test until november:nana:


----------



## hoongern (Sep 9, 2010)

Oh man, I was hoping it would reach 477 hours... Although I guess that's 2Sevens, not 4Sevens. 

Someone should try the 2x123 head with 2xAA body, and 2x SAFT 3.6v 14500 Li-SOCL2 2600mah primary cells! I expect it would be even better as the buck driver should be more efficient at those higher voltages as well, than the boost driver!

Let's say the AA Alkaline has ~4Wh of energy. 2x Li-SOCL2 cells should have 18.7Wh of energy!!! That would work out to OVER 2000hrs of runtime! (about 3 months) Either that's crazy, or my math is wrong


----------



## wyager (Sep 9, 2010)

Darvis said:


> Well folks, the Quark has gone dark!!!
> 
> At Midnight (hour 468) the flickering was more pronounced and by 4am, it was off. I'll split that and call it an even *470 hours continuous until off (19.6 days)*.* The ending voltage on the Duracell was .77v*
> 
> What a run, eh?



Damn! So close! Just 10 more hours to 200% rated runtime...


----------



## Darvis (Sep 9, 2010)

The Lithium AAs have been purchased, next runtime test to begin at 9pm ET tonight


----------



## Helmut.G (Sep 9, 2010)

hoongern said:


> Oh man, I was hoping it would reach 477 hours... Although I guess that's 2Sevens, not 4Sevens.
> 
> Someone should try the 2x123 head with 2xAA body, and 2x SAFT 3.6v 14500 Li-SOCL2 2600mah primary cells! I expect it would be even better as the buck driver should be more efficient at those higher voltages as well, than the boost driver!
> 
> Let's say the AA Alkaline has ~4Wh of energy. 2x Li-SOCL2 cells should have 18.7Wh of energy!!! That would work out to OVER 2000hrs of runtime! (about 3 months) Either that's crazy, or my math is wrong



your math is right. regarding the probably noticably more efficient driver, it should be even more.


----------



## guiri (Sep 9, 2010)

Darvis, instead of making it a quark low runtime thread, should you not make it a general thread and that way we can post all tests there like we talked about? That way others with other lights can just get in there instead of doing more threads, OR, would it be better to split threads up into different brands or something...?

Just asking?

Something like.."We do Low Mode Runtime tests here, come on in.." or sumptin' like that..


----------



## Darvis (Sep 9, 2010)

I got started earlier than I anticipated, so:

And now for the latest installment of runtime madness:

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3519028#post3519028


----------



## Darvis (Sep 9, 2010)

guiri said:


> Darvis, instead of making it a quark low runtime thread, should you not make it a general thread and that way we can post all tests there like we talked about? That way others with other lights can just get in there instead of doing more threads, OR, would it be better to split threads up into different brands or something...?
> 
> Just asking?
> 
> Something like.."We do Low Mode Runtime tests here, come on in.." or sumptin' like that..


 
My only concern is that a thread of that nature would become to difficult to manage, especially sine the OP would be the only one that would be able to edit the original post. There was talk of using a public spreadsheet and Wantsusa has a 4Sevens general thread going...

I'm not sure what the best approch is? thoughts?


----------



## guiri (Sep 9, 2010)

Well, it would probably be too big, like you said. Too bad there isn't a way to have all these linked together somehow..


----------



## FroggyTaco (Sep 9, 2010)

Ask DM51's opinion since he practically moderates for a living! :nana:


----------



## guiri (Sep 9, 2010)

Hehehehe, well, the thing is, I'm not sure what I would want to be doable so to speak...I just feel there should be something else so to speak


----------



## Quension (Sep 9, 2010)

There _is_ an official CPF wiki, but I don't know what the contribution rules for it are. In theory it would be ideal for posting statistics like this.


----------



## amigafan2003 (Sep 22, 2010)

Quark aa xpe on saft 14500 still going strong @ 394 hrs.


----------



## amigafan2003 (Oct 2, 2010)

Quark aa xpe on saft 14500 still going strong @ 635 hrs / 26 days.


----------

