# Ultrafire WF-500 information



## Daniel_sk (Aug 30, 2007)

I am looking for some feedback from people that own the Ultrafire WF-500 which is described as a "500 lumen" flashlight. 
It's VERY cheap - $26.50 shipped from DX and the spare bulbs cost $6/piece! 
What's the runtime on 2x 18650? Are the batteries in this flashlight driven hard? (can I expect less battery life?).
Is there something like a runtime plot for the WF-500 somewhere? (I would like to see how does the output drop over time).
It looks like there's not much that could go wrong in this flashlight (like in many incans)...

This looks like the "poor man's SF M6" :devil:...


----------



## Lighthouse one (Aug 30, 2007)

A friend of mine has one...it's excellent. 500 is probably a little high. Maybe a good 350 to 400. It's very bright. I just ordered one. DX also has an LED drop in for this light too. Mod it with a new Q2 or Q5 LED and it should be great. It's a real solid light. Sorry no runtimes...but it's plenty long with 2 18650's---just put in the LED if you need long runtimes!


----------



## 10milg29 (Aug 30, 2007)

What is the rapid tungsten buildup causing it to dim to 250 lumens all about?


----------



## scott.cr (Aug 30, 2007)

I just posted this thread about optimizing the WF-500's electrical path. (At least "optimizing" it as best *I* could think to.)

With freshly-charged cells it's brighter than my Surefire M4 with the low-output lamp. With the high-output lamp the Surefire throws an easily noticeable amount more light, at least in my dark neighborhood.

The WF-500 seems to have reliability problems surrounding the lamp, as in it's being driven really hard to achieve this high output. I've read reports on CPF about the lamps lasting about 10 minutes before blowing, but cannot substantiate one way or another. My light is still new and I want to enjoy it before doing destructive tests, heh.

I'd like to add that the lamp is soldered into a Surefire-like lamp assembly and the quality of the solder joints appears questionable.

Given the shortcomings, so far I'm very pleased with my $27 purchase. It only has to last one outing to be worth the money imho.


----------



## Monocrom (Aug 31, 2007)

Only heard good things about this light.... until now. Must admit, always wondered how a $27 light could pump out as much lumens as an M6. 

Then I remembered that Surefire's lumens numbers are more accurate since they are measured out the front of their lights. An M4 also seems to be a bit more powerful. Still, that's a sweet price for an M4 competitor. Just hope the build-quality is good enough so that the light can be used, several years down the road.


----------



## scott.cr (Aug 31, 2007)

Monocrom said:


> Must admit, always wondered how a $27 light could pump out as much lumens as an M6.



Well I think there are several factors playing with the marketing claims.

Surefire's lumen ratings include losses from the reflector and lens (ie. "torch lumens"), and they are not the lumens ratings with fresh cells; they account for some voltage loss.

The WF-500 is probably bulb lumens at rated voltage; assuming you can actually run the lamp at full rated voltage, multiply by .65 to get torch lumens. That's approximately 325 torch lumens, which is still really bright. If the lamp is being overdriven then that figure could be a lot higher at the expense of lamp life.

With freshly charged 18650s the WF-500 is the rough equivalent of my M4 with the high-output lamp and fresh CR123s in terms of output. The WF has a more concentrated hotspot but the M4 has more spill.


----------



## jrv (Sep 6, 2007)

Daniel_sk said:


> It looks like there's not much that could go wrong in this flashlight (like in many incans)...


Sadly, there is just enough to go wrong...

The one I just received does not light up at all. The problem appears to be in the *tail cap* area (voltage between - on the rear battery and the exposed Al after removing the tail cap is about 8v).

It wasn't instantly obvious how to take apart the tail cap to see what's wrong so I'll look at it after some sleep.


----------



## brunt_sp (Sep 6, 2007)

This worked for me.
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/161267


jrv said:


> Sadly, there is just enough to go wrong...
> 
> The one I just received does not light up at all. The problem appears to be in the *tail cap* area (voltage between - on the rear battery and the exposed Al after removing the tail cap is about 8v).
> 
> It wasn't instantly obvious how to take apart the tail cap to see what's wrong so I'll look at it after some sleep.


----------



## robm (Sep 6, 2007)

The current draw (>2.5A) is too much for most protected cells (AWs are OK).

Most others require multiple 'clicks'.

To check if this is the problem try with either unprotected 18650s or with 3x CR123 primaries.

See this thread for a similar problem:

Help With Problem With WF 500

There is very little that can go wrong with the tail cap itself.

With the right cells this is an excellent value light


----------



## PayBack (Sep 6, 2007)

I'm happy with the output of mine. I just think the throw could be better. I'd love a smooth reflector with a tighter focus.


----------



## Wassernaut (Sep 8, 2007)

jrv said:


> Sadly, there is just enough to go wrong...
> 
> The one I just received does not light up at all. The problem appears to be in the *tail cap* area (voltage between - on the rear battery and the exposed Al after removing the tail cap is about 8v).
> 
> It wasn't instantly obvious how to take apart the tail cap to see what's wrong so I'll look at it after some sleep.


 

It's not the tail-cap, *it's the batteries*. I thought the same thing with mine, as we hashed out in the thread mentioned above (Help with WF-500). I finally broke down and bought two *AW protected 18650's* and it immediately lit up like gangbusters.

Other batteries will not get you a glimmer or a blink because: They either don't provide the high power this light needs; or The protection circuit in the cheaper batteries are set too low, causing the circuit to kick in before you reach the threshold of volts the light must have.

Buy a couple of AW's - problem solved.

- Larry


----------



## jrv (Sep 8, 2007)

Wassernaut said:


> It's not the tail-cap, *it's the batteries*.


After some sleep I realized I hadn't used Ultrafire unprotected 18650s but rather Trustfire protected 18650s, which I know can't supply a lot of current. It works fine with unprotected cells.

I have some button-top AW protected cells on the way; the flat-top protected AW cells aren't quite long enough.


----------



## Wassernaut (Sep 8, 2007)

I'm happy to hear your mystery is solved and your light is working. Vendors of this fine light should put this info on their site - there's no telling how many lights are returned as defective because of this. I sent a message to DX and they've now posted this on the WF-500 page.

Enjoy,

- Larry


----------

