# Smallest 500+ lumen flashlight?



## RobertM (Jul 7, 2008)

Doesn't matter if it's incan, LED, or HID, what is the smallest 500+ lumen flashlight available today? 500 minimum torch lumens, not bulb lumens.


----------



## AlexLED (Jul 7, 2008)

What about the Wolf Eyes M90-13V-150R Rattlesnake: 

http://www.pts-flashlights.com/products/product.aspx?pid=1-140-20-40-87-6185

...with a 700 lm Lumens Factory EO bulb:
http://www.lumensfactory.com/d36_series_specification.htm

Bezel dia 4,5 cm, lenghth about 17 cm.


----------



## Jarl (Jul 7, 2008)

probably this:

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2546817#post2546817

Don't expect it to run cool, or long battery life


----------



## TITAN1833 (Jul 7, 2008)

Hmm,my vote the mega-micro over 400 lumens 1xcr123 batt (not 500,but I doubt you would notice much) .


----------



## Gunner12 (Jul 7, 2008)

If you are willing to mod, a good RCR123 and this light with a Seoul P7 instead of the Cree.

Non modded, a 18650 light DDing a P7 might be the next closest in size.


----------



## whitedoom34 (Jul 7, 2008)

THIS may interest you. I have one, and the light coming out the front of it is absolutely stunning. It blows my Tiablo A8 and ROP HI outta the water. Probably my most useful light to date.


----------



## RobertM (Jul 7, 2008)

Those little TrustFire lights with a P7 in them look pretty tempting. Which would be a better setup to add a P7 to: an RCR123 or an 18650 light?

These little lights look like they might work for my usual 5-60 second bursts that I use my lights for :naughty:


----------



## mdocod (Jul 7, 2008)

don't run a P7 on a RCR123. Read the write up for the mod, it draws 3.1A DD from an 18650. Maximum safe discharge rate for most 3.7V RCR123s is ~1A. I'd imagine on a RCR123 it would come to equilibrium around 2A with a runtime of maybe 5 minutes. The cell would only survive a few cycles. Go for the 18650.


----------



## RyanA (Jul 7, 2008)

RobertM said:


> Those little TrustFire lights with a P7 in them look pretty tempting. Which would be a better setup to add a P7 to: an RCR123 or an 18650 light?
> 
> These little lights look like they might work for my usual 5-60 second bursts that I use my lights for :naughty:



maybe primary cr123 with a driver.


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (Jul 7, 2008)

Mac's Mini-HID

Jill Light Eznite

or

Wolf-Eyes Boxer 10w/123X
http://www.pts-flashlights.com/products/product.aspx?pid=1-17-74-6231


----------



## nisshin (Jul 8, 2008)

What about an Elektro Lumens Shadeslayer-7 FatBoy? (Advertised at 1400+ lumens, 4 inches long).


----------



## gswitter (Jul 8, 2008)

Probably not _the_ smallest, but fivemega's 2x18500 Prince (WA1111) is worth mentioning.


----------



## Glen C (Jul 8, 2008)

Depending on your application, the Wolf Eyes P7 Sniper may be close. It is small.


----------



## Juggernaut (Jul 8, 2008)

I don't know if he still makes them but Elektro Lumens made the Fire Lion which made 550 lumens I think and was really small.


----------



## Rat6P (Jul 8, 2008)

I saw a surefire 3P with a P7 dropin around here somewhere.......can't find it now.


----------



## tebore (Jul 8, 2008)

Rat6P said:


> I saw a surefire 3P with a P7 dropin around here somewhere.......can't find it now.



It was AW's 3P.


----------



## 2xTrinity (Jul 8, 2008)

CR123s (rechargeable or primary) don't supply enough current to power a multi-chip LED up to 500 lumens. The smallest feasible cell to use would probably be a 18500. The host could also be optimized so that it's not much larger than the cell itself. 

When the MC-Es come out (physically smaller than P7, which should be a big improvement for tiny hosts), I definitely want to make a EDC that runs on a 18500, or 18650, with a neutral white emitter, and a variable output driver, along with some sort of temperature feedback.

The thought of having similar output to a de-focused ROP _in a pocket light_ is incredible, even if it could only be sustained for short bursts due to heat.


----------



## Metatron (Jul 11, 2008)

Glen C said:


> Depending on your application, the Wolf Eyes P7 Sniper may be close. It is small.


bloody fine floody u sent me mate, cheers for that, it rocks


----------



## Patriot (Jul 12, 2008)

Jill Lite Eznite

I can't think of anything that's brighter or throws farther for it's size. *(in stock form)*


*EDIT*


----------



## jumpstat (Jul 12, 2008)

What about this one...





A Milky SF KL2 3xUSWOH SSC X464.
It churns out 464 lumens (Regulated) for approximately 54minutes on a single 18650 protected rechargeable battery. More pictures below.


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (Jul 12, 2008)

Patriot36 said:


> Jill Light Eznite
> 
> I can't think of anything that's brighter or throws farther for it's size.


True, but LED fundamentalists really have no clue.


----------



## tricker (Jul 13, 2008)

whitedoom34 said:


> THIS may interest you. I have one, and the light coming out the front of it is absolutely stunning. It blows my Tiablo A8 and ROP HI outta the water. Probably my most useful light to date.



is your rop sick?

and how about 4 dracos taped together


----------



## vestureofblood (Jul 13, 2008)

jumpstat said:


> What about this one...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

Where can I purchase this light?


----------



## TITAN1833 (Jul 13, 2008)

Vestureofblood,this is not a production light,first get yourself a SF KL2 then contact milkyspit to have it modded or you might see one for sale,but those are your options.


----------



## Ninjaz7 (Jul 14, 2008)

Is Mac's Mini HID 500+ with 3 rcr123 or 4 cr123?Or is it just with 17670's?


----------



## LuxLuthor (Jul 14, 2008)

Many of the above posts did not take note of your asking for 500 torch lumens, or they did not understand what that means. You cannot be sure of torch lumens by using manufacturer's bulb/emitter lumen rating.

Since you did not say anything about run time, then I would say some of the bulbs on this list that would work in a 2s, 2s2p, or 4s Li-Ion Sub-1D Mag. There are others that I have tested in my Destructive Bulb sig link that may also work.


----------



## Patriot (Jul 14, 2008)

Good point Lux.


To the OP, it's really hard to know torch lumens because of so many variables such as the reflector type and lens. In a way it kind of like splitting hairs to specify torch lumens as a requirement since some lights will be close but it's difficult to know for sure if it falls slightly above or below 500 torch lumens. The only way to be sure is to overkill it a bit and shoot for an mag11 which can be build on a 2 x AW C cell based maglite, which is fairly compact in size

Fivemega also makes the FM11, ready to go..
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/161540


----------



## Edwood (Jul 14, 2008)

Pretty compact for 6 Die Ostar host using three CR123 batteries.

ArcMania MJP 15-3











Probably will be at least 800 Lumens output.

-Ed


----------



## mdocod (Jul 14, 2008)

It is often forgotten that with LEDs, there is less reflector loss since ALL of the light is being projected on the frontal "plane" so to speak. Incandescent bulbs suffer from increased reflector losses due to light being lost "out the back" and more of the light having to make it's way out by means of reflecting off of the reflector rather than just coming out the front. The general rule of thumb for incans in a reflector is 35% loss, for LEDs it seems that 20% loss is more realistic for most reflector designs, with many designs achieving 90% or better transmission efficiency through the use of optics. Point being, that a "625" emitter lumen LED light is pretty close to a solid 500 torch lumens, whereas a incan needs more like 770 bulb lumens. However, many applications will favor the increased contrast provided by a incan bulb, in which case less lumens may prove to be more useful than a high lumen rated LED light...


When reading the original post here, my interpretation is that if you can think of a pretty small light (pocketable, give or take) that is in that 500 lumen ballpark, it should be listed here and possibly discussed. The way I see it, lumen "requirements" should never be discussed as a specific number, but as a "ballpark." In reality, any light with somewhere between ~350 and ~1000 emitter/bulb lumens can be discussed as being in that 500 lumen "ballpark" because the total output is rarely the most important once you have defined a range, more important is the beam pattern for the intended application, combined with user interface, size, and runtime. In reality, modern "500 lumen" pocket rockets are going to have a floodier beam profile and there is no getting around that until they cram more of those lumens into a single die. So if reaching out and lighting up something at a distance is important, then there is not necessarily any need for that 500 lumen option since it's going to be floody in a small form factor, a "250" lumen single die light would be far more practical (like with a cree R2). 

What's amazing is, just a few years ago, the concept of a 2xCR123 size light pushing into this category of illumination was pretty much inconceivable, and now we have a whole LIST of options that are in this ballpark. If things continue at this rate, the concept of multi-thousand lumen flashlights in the EDC-pocketable category will be reality soon. 

Anyways, I'll quit my yappin 

Eric


----------



## whitedoom34 (Jul 14, 2008)

tricker said:


> is your rop sick?
> 
> and how about 4 dracos taped together



sorry tricker, i meant my ROP LOLA. Just a brain fart. Sorry for any confusion!


----------



## paulr (Jul 15, 2008)

mdocod said:


> The general rule of thumb for incans in a reflector is 35% loss, for LEDs it seems that 20% loss is more realistic for most reflector designs, with many designs achieving 90% or better transmission efficiency through the use of optics. Point being, that a "625" emitter lumen LED light is pretty close to a solid 500 torch lumens, whereas a incan needs more like 770 bulb lumens.



The sphere measurements I've seen on led lights (see various Arc threads) indicate that the 35% loss is about the same for leds.


----------



## Patriot (Jul 15, 2008)

mdocod said:


> When reading the original post here, my interpretation is that if you can think of a pretty small light (pocketable, give or take) that is in that 500 lumen ballpark, it should be listed here and possibly discussed. The way I see it, lumen "requirements" should never be discussed as a specific number, but as a "ballpark." In reality, any light with somewhere between ~350 and ~1000 emitter/bulb lumens can be discussed as being in that 500 lumen "ballpark" because the total output is rarely the most important once you have defined a range, more important is the beam pattern for the intended application, combined with user interface, size, and runtime. In reality, modern "500 lumen" pocket rockets are going to have a floodier beam profile and there is no getting around that until they cram more of those lumens into a single die. So if reaching out and lighting up something at a distance is important, then there is not necessarily any need for that 500 lumen option since it's going to be floody in a small form factor, a "250" lumen single die light would be far more practical (like with a cree R2).




Excellent post explaining why the lumen science can't be specified as an exact figure, but rather a "ballpark" figure. I also took the original post to mean the same thing whether the OP meant it that way or now.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Jul 15, 2008)

mdocod said:


> It is often forgotten that with LEDs, there is less reflector loss since ALL of the light is being projected on the frontal "plane" so to speak. Incandescent bulbs suffer from increased reflector losses due to light being lost "out the back" and more of the light having to make it's way out by means of reflecting off of the reflector rather than just coming out the front. The general rule of thumb for incans in a reflector is 35% loss, for LEDs it seems that 20% loss is more realistic for most reflector designs, with many designs achieving 90% or better transmission efficiency through the use of optics. Point being, that a "625" emitter lumen LED light is pretty close to a solid 500 torch lumens, whereas a incan needs more like 770 bulb lumens. However, many applications will favor the increased contrast provided by a incan bulb, in which case less lumens may prove to be more useful than a high lumen rated LED light...



With respect, I also question the validity of these theories as well as the percentages, despite their seemingly logical premises. Since I have been reading more about the various terms used to describe light from various sources, I'm not sure about most of the widely accepted terms, let alone the 65% out the front incan number. I'll just register my objections because the more times information like this gets repeated, the less people stop and question its accuracy. :tinfoil:


----------



## mdocod (Jul 15, 2008)

I can draw a simple diagram to prove it. but not tonight, i'm going to bed now.


----------



## adamlau (Jul 15, 2008)

Perhaps a P7 off 1x18650. The Dereelight prototype P7 D26, for example.


----------



## milkyspit (Jul 15, 2008)

I recently built a KL4-P7-DD for Yankeefist that ought to reach or exceed 500 torch lumens. It was designed to run on a 17670 cell, so it wants to run in a standard L4 configuration... but the head could also run on a 1x123 body with a single RCR123. I do NOT recommend this, but if the owner were so inclined and is willing to bear both the safety risk and the likelihood that his RCR123 will tank after a handful of chargings, he could indeed run like that for an insanely bright, absurdly small package.

My guess is the torch lumens on 1x17670 are around 600-650 lumens, and torch lumens on a freshly-charged RCR123 are around 500 lumens.

Anyway, the thread is *over here*.
















+1 regarding the sentiments of another poster, that we're on the way toward 1000+ lumen pocket-sized lights in the not-as-distant-as-one-might-have-imagined future... that's one heck of a bump to the performance of a device that was basically stagnant for decades prior to introduction of the high-output white LED. At some point the question will become, how many lumens does one need to accomplish the task at hand?


----------



## Sgt. LED (Jul 15, 2008)

For me I'll quit when I can get 16,000 lumens for 8 hours off one 18650 size rechargable cell.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Jul 15, 2008)

mdocod said:


> I can draw a simple diagram to prove it. but not tonight, i'm going to bed now.



Assuming that was directed at my last post....OK, I can wait.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Jul 15, 2008)

milkyspit said:


> +1 regarding the sentiments of another poster, that we're on the way toward 1000+ lumen pocket-sized lights in the not-as-distant-as-one-might-have-imagined future... that's one heck of a bump to the performance of a device that was basically stagnant for decades prior to introduction of the high-output white LED. *At some point the question will become, how many lumens does one need to accomplish the task at hand?*



Milky, your work, quality, friendship, hospitality, and knowledge is legendary. No question that LED's have made much progress. For me it is more than just asking your final question, which is a good one....but I don't believe that most people properly use or understand the term "lumens."

I do want enough lumens, but I also want the proper color, proper throw, proper focus/hotspot/spill to accomplish the task at hand. I have way too many practical scenarios where the 25 or so LED's I own just do not meet my needs.


----------



## tebore (Jul 15, 2008)

Oh Lux you and your undying love of incans. 
Not discounting what you said because it's true. Color and rendering something in it's true form is important. And it's too bad LED's aren't bright enough while achieving all that yet, and bright LEDs' can't do what you said that well. 

But one day even you will have to give in when LED's have proper color temp, CRI and put out 500lumen for 1 hour in a pocket light. 

And Lux I'm surprised you missed on the whole debate years ago about the 65% transmission factor. Most consumer level lights with your glass lens and aluminum reflector with an aluminum coating is only about 65% efficient. The number can be higher if you go to more exotic materials. I'll see if I can dig up the thread.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Jul 16, 2008)

tebore said:


> Oh Lux you and your undying love of incans.
> Not discounting what you said because it's true. Color and rendering something in it's true form is important. And it's too bad LED's aren't bright enough while achieving all that yet, and bright LEDs' can't do what you said that well.
> 
> But one day even you will have to give in when LED's have proper color temp, CRI and put out 500lumen for 1 hour in a pocket light.
> ...



Tebore, thanks for your post! :thumbsup: If you are really bored, you can check my couple of posts starting here in the incan section (or not). LOL!

I am totally open to LED's or any other new technology more effectively meeting my lighting needs. I think people misunderstand that my self-proclaimed "Incan Jockey" status must mean that I dislike LED's (or HIDs, or CFL, or Fluorescents, or Lasers, etc.). Untrue.

My only real objection is the recognition that "one (lighting) tool does not fit all applications." There is much misinformation, inexperience (with incans), and misrepresentations (about incandescents) resulting in very few ever hearing about their unique value.

I was trying to find that old series of threads talking about the 65% factor. I do remember reading several of them, including posts from the "Godfathers of CPF." The reason I brought this up with guarded suspicion, was after beginning to understand many of the light related terms that I discussed starting in this thread.

In particular, I forced myself to read (many times) and understand the Ryer handbook. 65% may be roughly accurate, but I'm not sure how much of chapter 3 & 4 were taken into account. I must have read this statement & supporting documentation 20 times: 

From the Ryer Manual, p. 17, under "Collimation":



> Lenses and reflectors can *drastically distort *inverse square law approximations, so should be avoided where precision distance calculations are required.


It left me wondering how the variety of reflectors alone could adequately be taken into account. Then there was the series of questions in my mind about how the light measurements were done. I was left with more questions, and a recognition that I had previously accepted many predictive values, and terms before I really knew what they were based on.


----------



## adamlau (Jul 16, 2008)

Similar to how I accepted predictive estimation values and colloquial terms in construction before I read Walker's Building Estimator's Reference Book  .


----------



## divine (Jul 18, 2008)

Sgt. LED said:


> For me I'll quit when I can get 16,000 lumens for 8 hours off one 18650 size rechargable cell.


There will be a day when we come on here and people will say that 16,000 lumens is barely enough to get around in the dark.


----------



## Juggernaut (Jul 19, 2008)

divine said:


> There will be a day when we come on here and people will say that 16,000 lumens is barely enough to get around in the dark.


 
I’ll be content when I have a pocket light the size of a wolf eye’s M300 that has the exact same output, and beam qualities as my 1000 watt GE PAR64, with over two hours of regulated run time on rechargeable, replaceable batteries. :devil::devil:


----------



## RobertM (Jul 21, 2008)

So does a small 10W HID put out about the same output as a small P7 light?


----------



## milkyspit (Jul 22, 2008)

LuxLuthor said:


> Milky, your work, quality, friendship, hospitality, and knowledge is legendary. No question that LED's have made much progress. For me it is more than just asking your final question, which is a good one....but I don't believe that most people properly use or understand the term "lumens."
> 
> I do want enough lumens, but I also want the proper color, proper throw, proper focus/hotspot/spill to accomplish the task at hand. I have way too many practical scenarios where the 25 or so LED's I own just do not meet my needs.




Lux, thank you for the very kind words. I certainly do appreciate them! And I believe we're on the same wavelength (yup, pun intended) as to a light being about far more than just brightness... heck, my own *Project-M* is built around that principle.




LuxLuthor said:


> My only real objection is the recognition that "one (lighting) tool does not fit all applications." There is much misinformation, inexperience (with incans), and misrepresentations (about incandescents) resulting in very few ever hearing about their unique value.
> 
> I was trying to find that old series of threads talking about the 65% factor. I do remember reading several of them, including posts from the "Godfathers of CPF."




+1 on the one-tool-does-not-fit-all sentiment. It's not just true about flashlights, but also in a number of other disciplines. In fact, the same tool by its very nature may be contraindicated for one application, and uniquely qualified for another! This is a concept that one tends to appreciate more and more the deeper one delves into their chosen vocation, and becomes increasingly familiar with the capabilities of its tools as well as their own personal needs. It's important to remember the PERSONAL aspect here, too... a tool at the end of the day becomes nothing more than an extension of its user.

To digress a little...

My stepfather has a passion for home improvement projects. When he visits us, he brings a full set of hand tools with him, despite the fact that I have most of those tools on hand, and in some cases my own tools actually exceed the quality of his. I asked him about it one day... turns out he continues to bring his own tools because he's grown familiar with them to the point that he's most comfortable using those rather than somebody else's.

One more...

For a number of years I was a competitive foil fencer, and over time grew increasingly specific in my requirements for a foil... I liked ONE specific style of grip, with ONE brand of blade and ONE specific type of tip... even the bend I put in the blade was specific to the point that I saved a broken shard of an old foil to use as a makeshift guide when bending my new blades... and when a good foil finally broke, it was an occasion met with some grief! I simply was not as effective using a different foil regardless of price and quality, as I was using the ones tailored to my personal needs. When I was fencing exceptionally well I really had the sensation that my thumb was sitting at the tip of the weapon... it felt literally like an extension of my hand.

Regarding the 65% figure, I did not participate in establishing it, but have spoken at length with various folks who did... Ginseng, Bwaites, JS, and SilverFox come to mind... and speaking as an LED guy, I can say with some confidence that I believe their figure to be on solid ground... their rationale and the research that went into arriving at the 65% number, though I cannot do justice in explaining it, made a lot of sense as well as being impressively rigorous. But here's the thing: it's a rule of thumb. As such it's bound to be imprecise, and you're right, any number of variations could lead to some error. The goal isn't to bring uncompromising precision to bear, though... rather to make possible a quick and easy calculation that puts one in the right ballpark.

I personally use the 65% rule of thumb for incandescent, and an 85% rule of thumb with LED. I've found these to be reasonable approximations, built on the assumption that the lens/reflector/optic are of high optical quality... if the assumption is untrue, the percentages should be adjusted downward accordingly.

Okay, enough pontification from this typist for now! oo:


----------



## LuxLuthor (Jul 22, 2008)

Milky, I was just reading your Project-M which I was not aware of. I thought I started understanding some of it, but there seems to be so many versions and revisions in the thread that I got lost. It was coincidently about the same time I saw the red center LED, and *Pilar Lastra* suddenly scrolled up into view. :huh: 

Regarding the 65% figure, I posted my assessment here.


----------

