# Kudos to Fenix on the L0D Q4 holiday special edition light



## Luminescent (Nov 28, 2007)

Fenix just introduced a nice L0D Q4 Holiday Special Edition light for the holiday season.


This light offers performance matching what a Rebel 100 based light could be expected to offer, and Fenix was nice enough to offer it at the standard L0D pricing with a nice presentation box.

I’m not sure that everyone appreciates the festive RED holiday color that Fenix chose for this light, but I like it, so I went ahead and ordered one.

Got my light yesterday, and, in a word, it’s INCREDIBLE !!!

This light is everything I expected it to be; Super bright, perfect ‘water-white’ tint, and a nice beam pattern.

Due to the way the HAIII type three hard anodizing takes the red dye coat, the light does look different than standard smooth type 2 red anodized aluminum, having a rich dark burgundy almost metal flake red apperence (I like it).

I have tested it up against some known 80 lumen lights and it seems to be right on the button with at least 75 lumens output (brightest AAA light I have ever seen!), and run time on high was better than an hour on a 1000mAh NiMH with the light barely getting warm! :thumbsup:

I have been fairly vocal in the past in critiquing Fenix for introducing the L0D RB80 :thumbsdow pointing out that RB100 emitters cost literally only a few dollars more than Rebel 80's and that it was boneheaded stupid not to take advantage of a more efficient emitter in a tiny light like the L0D due to the fact that it was ‘battery challenged’ (due to it’s single AAA power source), and therefore needed all the help it could get. 

Ok fair is fair. I have to admit that this light, with a nice efficient Q4 emitter (at the standard price no less) including a nice little presentation box, is one hell of a great deal.

Way to go Fenix!!! :twothumbs


----------



## daveman (Nov 28, 2007)

Good to know it's solid. I would jump in if not for the color; got to have black, no pink or red for me...


----------



## Luminescent (Nov 28, 2007)

daveman said:


> Good to know it's solid. I would jump in if not for the color; got to have black, no pink or red for me...


 
Truth be told, I also prefer most of my flashlights to have a simple black, dark gray, or satin-silver natural anodized finish, but variety is the spice of life as they say. 

Think of it as ‘aerospace red’ not pink.

I guess no self respecting S.W.A.T. or Deltaforce wanabe would ever be caught dead with a ‘pink’ anodized light, but I am more the astronaut/fighter-pilot wanabe type, and blue and red dyed anodized parts are very common on aircraft and space vehicles, and, trust me on this one, this little red light would look right at home in the sleeve pocket of any flight suit. 














I remember seeing a little 2AA golden anodized flashlight (that looked a bit like a modern 2AA mini-mag) in a Smithsonian air and space museum Apollo exhibit and thinking that this NASA light may actually have been what kicked off the whole precision milled aluminum flashlight revolution.


----------



## veleno (Nov 28, 2007)

Has the L0D Q4 still got a dark ring around the hot spot?


----------



## jasonsmaglites (Nov 28, 2007)

and super bright on 10440s too!


----------



## Luminescent (Nov 28, 2007)

veleno said:


> Has the L0D Q4 still got a dark ring around the hot spot?



The dreaded CREE dark ring is there allright, but it's not too bad in my light. It is quite noticable at some distances when shining the L0D Q4 on a white wall, but is not really noticable at all when actually using the light.

Here's a quick white wall beam shot at about 5 feet:


----------



## veleno (Nov 28, 2007)

Thanks for the anwers!


----------



## Lobo (Nov 28, 2007)

Nice pics!
I have to say that it looks much better on your pics than the previous ones I've seen. Nice catch!


----------



## Luminescent (Nov 28, 2007)

jasonsmaglites said:


> and super bright on 10440s too!




My L0D is more than bright enough for me on simple NiMH cells, and the runtime charts for the L0D show that it is a bit brighter on Energizer L92 E2 lithiums (which unlike 10440's are 1.5 to 1.6 volts and are fully approved for use in the L0D).

So I don't plan to use 10440's, but those that do want to try it should be a little careful about 10440's until they get a feel for how they work in their L0D.

In general, when the L0D gets to hot to hold, it's time to shut it off.

10440's don't make the driver in the L0D 'work better' as some seem to think, they just bypass the boost circuit and force the light into direct drive, which pushes a LOT of current through the emitter and makes the light run insanely bright.

The only problem with this 'direct drive' situation, is that you are pushing the emitter LED right to it's upper limits (right to the ragged edge), without being able to control exactly how much current flows.

Once the L0D is in this 'direct drive' mode, the only thing controlling the current is the slight internal resistance of the battery and circuitry inside the L0D and the voltage differential between the battery voltage and the forward voltage drop across the LED (Vf).

It's not rocket science, just simple division based on ohms law.

It works like this.

Let's assume that the battery voltage is 3.6 volts and the Vf of the emitter is about 3.3 volts and that the total internal resistance of the battery and circuits in the L0D is 0.3 ohms.

The voltage available to drive current through the LED emitter is the difference between the 3.6 volt battery and the the 3.3 volt emitter Vf (which in this case would be 3.6 - 3.3 = 0.3 volts).

Ohms law says if we divide the voltage by the resistance (0.3 volts/0.3 ohms) we get the current (1 Amp in this case).

These are pretty reasonable numbers, and one Amp of current won't fry the emitter if you don't let the light run too long, but notice that if the Vf of the emitter drops even a few tenths of a volt the current could DOUBLE (ouch!).

I think one reason that Fenix went with a Q4 instead of a Rebel100 (aside from the fact that they probably got a good price on them), is that some folks have had trouble with the Rebel when using 10440's due to the lower Vf, and even though Fenix never approved the light for use with these batteries, they know that some folks will do it anyway and they don't want to get fried L0D lights back.

The CREE emitters like the Q4 do seem to average a bit higher Vf numbers, which usually makes them a little more likely to work with a 10440, but nothing is guaranteed because, as the production processes have improved, some of the CREE LED's are also showing much lower Vf numbers (lower Vf numbers give better ' Lumens per Watt', which is the true measure of LED efficiency, so the manufacture wants to drive this number down).

There are all kinds of silly ideas about this floating around, like the idea that you can't use a Q5 in a L0D due to the fact that the Vf is too high (when in fact this was just based on ONE BATCH that someone saw with really high Vf values). The truth is that they have bins for Vf, just as they do for color tint, because, although the manufacture would like to make every emitter perfectly consistent, there are variations, and the Vf you get is going to be a bit of a crap shoot (just like tint).

In simple language, all the above means you can't tell how much current will flow very accurately when you twist the bezel and turn on any given L0D with a 10440 cell in the light for the first time.

It could be as little as 500mA or as much as 2 Amps!

If your light gets too hot to hold in just a few seconds, while others brag about leaving their L0D running for several minutes, this is why.

EDIT:

Some have pointed out that the multi-level nature of the L0D provides protection, because, unlike some other Fenix lights, you don’t completely loose control of MEDIUM, LOW, and HIGH modes when 10440 cells are used. The reason that other Fenix models can completely loose the low modes when used with higher voltage cells, is due to the fact that the brightness modes are done by current regulation in the boost converter circuit, so when the higher cell voltage hits and the light and bypasses the boost circuit, all control is lost. 

In the L0D, the lower modes are handled differently. The L0D uses a separate PWM chopper circuit that is still in the circuit when the boost converter looses control due to the higher cell voltage, so some control is still available.

That’s the good news, the bad news is that this is NOT a regulated circuit, just a simple on-off chopper that cuts down the apparent total brightness by turning the LED EMITTER on and off at about a 100Hz rate.

When the PWM switch is ‘on’ the resistance is extremely low, and the resulting pulsed current hit’s the same ‘peak’ level as it does continuously when the light is set to ‘high’.

This puts a lot of stress on the switch device if the Vf and battery voltage are such that high current flows as described above.

So, the way that the MODES control is done in the L0D creates both an advantage (you don’t loose control completely when over-voltage 10440 lithium cells are used), and also a vulnerability (the PWM switch is switching much higher current pulses and may actually fail due to the overload).

I mention this because, folks should be aware that, if their L0D is getting VERY HOT, VERY FAST when set to high power mode, just selecting a lower mode may not provide complete protection, because the very-hot, very-fast situation is a sure indication that the Vf and Battery voltage are such that the light is pushing way too much current, and therefore the PWM switching MosFET is switching much higher current pulses than it was designed for and could fail at any time.

At least a few L0D’s seem to have suffered near immediate failure when 10440 cells were tried, and I suspect that the reason was due to this switching device burning out. If the PWM switch MosFET fails ‘open’, the light will never light again until sent to Fenix for repair, and if it fails ‘short’ then all lower modes will not be available and the light will run full time at max brightness until sent for repair. I have seen at least a few posts indicating both these types of failures after 10440 cells were used, so this is more than just a theoretical issue.


----------



## datiLED (Nov 28, 2007)

If anyone is interested, there is a good deal on the L0D Q4 in the B/S/T forum. FWIW, the seller is a really good guy, and I have dealt with him several times.


----------



## PocketBeam (Nov 28, 2007)

I think the reason Fenix went with the Q4 is that they couldn't get the Rebels in the quantities they needed. Or at least this is what David basically said in another thread.

As for the color, well many people buy a black light that is hard to see in the dark. So they then put something that glows in the dark on it. Why not a light that is a little easier to see in the first place??? What good is a tool if you can't find it or you have a little trouble finding it when you need it?

I like the red, it is similar to a red sports car. It exudes performance...

I ordered two of these lights. One to give away and one to upgrade my current 10440 Lux III pocket light.


----------



## Luminescent (Nov 28, 2007)

PocketBeam said:


> I think the reason Fenix went with the Q4 is that they couldn't get the Rebels in the quantities they needed. Or at least this is what David basically said in another thread.



I hear that old saw about availability of the Rebel 100 emitters over and over again, but I have actually ordered several batches of rebel 100's from Future Electronics (the official Lumiled dealer), and never found them to be out of stock (I thought they were out of stock once, but Future's search function was just fouled up, and I found them to be in stock once I figured this out).

If Fenix has any brains, they will offer BOTH a Q4 (or Q5) CREE version AND a Lumiled Rebel 100 version of the L0D side by side. Not only would this let them please the customers who have a preference one way or the other, but it would let them play 'dual source' games, playing off CREE against Lumiled to get the best pricing. Vendors are always willing to ****er more when they know you have the option of shifting your production to another supplier if you don't get the price you want.



PocketBeam said:


> As for the color, well many people buy a black light that is hard to see in the dark. So they then put something that glows in the dark on it. Why not a light that is a little easier to see in the first place??? What good is a tool if you can't find it or you have a little trouble finding it when you need it?
> 
> I like the red, it is similar to a red sports car. It exudes performance...
> 
> I ordered two of these lights. One to give away and one to upgrade my current 10440 Lux III pocket light.



I actually lost my last L0D-CE (which was black), because I walked away and left it laying somewhere that I shouldn't have, after using it to peek up inside some ducts while running some cables. So I was thinking along, somewhat similar lines, hoping that the RED version would stand out a little better so I would not be quite as likely to goof up and forget to pick it up and put it back in my pocket after using it.

As far as the aesthetics of the red color goes, I think the flight suit example, proves your second point that the red color can be very attractive and professional looking, and would actually be preferred in certain settings.


----------



## geepondy (Nov 28, 2007)

I look at that light and I think it would be a good present for my girlfriend. But then I think she would never bother with rechargeables, she would only use alkalines, and alkaline's do terrible with that light, don't they?


----------



## Luminescent (Nov 28, 2007)

geepondy said:


> I look at that light and I think it would be a good present for my girlfriend. But then I think she would never bother with rechargeables, she would only use alkalines, and alkaline's do terrible with that light, don't they?



Good point, alkaline cells have been shown to cut the runtime down by about half in continuous tests, but this seems to be true for ALL high performance lights due to their higher current demands.

But there are two things that will help a lot in the case of the L0D when used with alkaline batteries -

- First; the typical CPF runtime tests are run in a one pass continuous discharge which favors NiMH. With intermittent use, Alkaline batteries recover a lot of capacity that would be lost in a continuous test and give more total hours of use than shown on the runtime test. 

- Second; the initial MEDIUM mode is the first one that comes up when you turn the light on, and thanks to the nice efficient Q4 emitter it is so bright in this mode that she will almost surely use this lower power mode 99% of the time. This will help out, because lower power modes favor the Alkaline batteries. Alkaline batteries actually have really good ultimate capacity at very low loads (in fact at very low loads it can even exceed NiMH). 

NiMH cells give about three hours, in medium mode, and with intermittent use figured in, the Alkaline cells will probably also hit close to three hours as well (even though the continuous runtime tests only show about two hours for Medium mode). 

So one of those giant packs of AAA Alkaline batteries from Costco will be more than a full YEAR's supply unless she is really going nuts using the light (and if she turns out to be that big of flashaholic, she will not mind dealing with a nice set of rechargeable NiMH batteries).

For heavy use of the high power mode, NiMH cells are definitely the most cost effective solution. 

For disposable cells, this light really likes energizer L92 lithium, but they cost about 2 bucks apiece, and to get that good price you normally have to get them by mail order through the net.

I see that Battery Junction now has no-name E2 clone cells for about $1.59 each in quantity 10, so with luck these cells will get a little less costly in the future.

You could always get her 10 or 12 of the E2 or E2 clone cells to get her started (that should last a full year or more even with heavy use of the high power mode), but be sure to tell her not to waste them by using them in a MP3 player or some similar low power device, because in these applications these high cost cells don’t really offer enough of an advantage over simple cheap alkaline cells to be worth the higher cost (alkaline cells work pretty well with low power loads, and L92 lithium cells really shine with higher current loads like a high performance flashlight).

Do try to come up with at least a single set of L92 Lithium batteries to put in the light when you present it to her because they not only last a lot longer, but they are noticably brighter than even NiMH, and significantly brighter in high mode than Alkaline, and so will create and incredible WOW FACTOR for this tiny light (I own a couple dozen lights and even I said WOW!). Make sure to get the real L92 Lithium E2's, as the wonderful folks at Energizer have started to use 'E2' for crappy 'sucker bet' Alkalines that offer only marginally better performance than cheap costco alkalines at 3 times the cost.


----------



## Dances with Flashlight (Nov 28, 2007)

Luminescent said:


> It works like this.



Luminescent - Explanations such as yours I can understand. Thank you for taking the time to lay it out.


----------



## geepondy (Nov 28, 2007)

Luminescent, thank you for the post as well. You're right she would use it intermittently and really I wish it was a single stage with the medium as the default output. I suppose I could give it to her and put in a L92 lithium as an initial default first cell.

One other question, when these lights go out of regulation do they suddenly stop working (like my Huntlight) or do they just dim in a hurry. I have a strong dislikes for lights that just stop working.

I've been working a lot lately and am considering a flashlight purchase for myself for Christmas. I am thinking either one of the Fenix Rebels or a Surefire G2L. I'm sure the Fenix would provide better bang for the buck but I like the runtime and runtime curve of the G2L and think it would make an excellent car light. Can't really be a true CPFer and buy both at the current moment.


----------



## Rzr800 (Nov 28, 2007)

Dances with Flashlight said:


> Luminescent - Explanations such as yours I can understand. Thank you for taking the time to lay it out.


 
+1 here; great post to tuck away in your gift set this Christmas. :santa:


----------



## Luminescent (Nov 28, 2007)

geepondy said:


> Luminescent, thank you for the post as well. You're right she would use it intermittently and really I wish it was a single stage with the medium as the default output. I suppose I could give it to her and put in a L92 lithium as an initial default first cell.
> 
> One other question, when these lights go out of regulation do they suddenly stop working (like my Huntlight) or do they just dim in a hurry. I have a strong dislikes for lights that just stop working.
> 
> I've been working a lot lately and am considering a flashlight purchase for myself for Christmas. I am thinking either one of the Fenix Rebels or a Surefire G2L. I'm sure the Fenix would provide better bang for the buck but I like the runtime and runtime curve of the G2L and think it would make an excellent car light. Can't really be a true CPFer and buy both at the current moment.



As I mentioned, because there is no mode memory, if you turn the light off for more than a few seconds, it defaults to turning back on in MEDIUM. This means that it can be painlessly used as a one mode (medium only) light with no effort whatsoever.

Here is a link to the actual runtime graphs of the L0D 

My L0D Q4 has more output, but maintains runtimes at least this good.

I also prefer lights that go into a nice low output 'moon mode' instead of just cutting off, and the L0D not only has a very nice 'moon mode' capability, but even more impressive, my L0D even starts back up again in 'moon mode' when shut off at very low cell voltages (which is a test that a LOT of lights fail, even if they offer some extended runtime in 'moon mode' if not shut down). :twothumbs

Note that there is a truely enormous 'moon mode' runtime when using Alkalines and a quite respectable one on L92 cells.

No light will give a super long moon mode on NiMH (the NiMH discharge curve cuts off too quick when they are fully discharged) but this little light does better than any of my others by a wide margin.

My experence is that NiMH do NOT cut off aburbtly as shown in the runtime plots (I suspect that the test was terminated when the light hit 50% on NiMH to protect the battery).

The general recomendation is to stop discharging NiMH cells at about 1 volt and never run them below 0.8 volts.

My personal experence is that running the NiMH cells flat doesn't usually hurt them in single cell lights like the L0D. The real danger is in multi-cell lights where the weaker cell will go dead first then be reverse charged by the stronger cell (this reverse charging can destroy the weaker cell). So I don't mind running the single cell lights like the L0D-Q4 into 'moon mode' on NiMH because the battery will just run flat with no danger of being reverse charged (but I am much more careful to cut off my multi-cell lights as soon as they start to dim).

If the NiMH runtime test had not been stopped as soon as the light started to dim, the L0D would have gone into 'moon mode' and run the cell all the way down below 0.8 volts (the NiMH 'moon mode' curve should look similar to the lower part of the curve shown for the L92 cell).


----------



## swxb12 (Nov 28, 2007)

Luminescent said:


>



Wow, great shot. Luminescent, is there some sparkle or glitter effect in that deep shine (like some car paints)? 

In comparison the red in the stock photo provided by Fenix looks really dull like something dipped in red house paint.


----------



## Luminescent (Nov 29, 2007)

deleted duplicate post


----------



## Luminescent (Nov 29, 2007)

CPF still acting up - Deleted


----------



## Luminescent (Nov 29, 2007)

swxb12 said:


> Wow, great shot. Luminescent, is there some sparkle or glitter effect in that deep shine (like some car paints)?
> 
> In comparison the red in the stock photo provided by Fenix looks really dull like something dipped in red house paint.



That's my MA-1 flight jacket, and if you have ever seen one of these, you know that it's normally kind of flat olive-drab color, but develops a kind of iridescent sheen when the light hit's it just right. 

Why mention that? Well, the red anodized finish on my L0D Q4 light has a very similar property. It does looks kind of like a simi-matt finish at first, then when the light hit's it right and you look a little closer, bingo! you see this really cool shiny almost 'metal-flake' effect.

Obviously, my L0D having almost exactly the same kind of drab-to-flashy iridescent quality as the nylon flight jacket makes the L0D look very, very cool in the sleeve pocket of the MA-1, but it sould also look quite nice in a lot of other settings.

I hate to get anyone too keyed up with high expectations on this though, because it's notoriously difficult to get perfectly consistent results when color dying hard coated anodized surfaces (so your mileage may vary).


----------



## chibato (Nov 29, 2007)

Anyone know if the LOD Q4 will be available in other colors, or any rumors of a Q5 version?


----------



## Luminescent (Nov 29, 2007)

chibato said:


> Anyone know if the LOD Q4 will be available in other colors, or any rumors of a Q5 version?



As you may already know, the normal colors on the L0D are Black and Natural ('natural' is un-dyed anodized aluminum, which varies from satin silver to very light gray), but there don't seem to be any L0D's available with Rebel100's or Q5's so far in these standard colors.

A dealer in Japan had some nice 'natural' Rebel 100's made up, but that was a special limited run and they sold out very quickly.

Since that time, this is the first chance to get a L0D with a higher output emitter so far as I know, but Fenix has apperently only whipped up this one special batch of L0D Q4's for the holidays, and I haven't seen them in any color except red.


----------



## gunga (Nov 29, 2007)

Luminescent, thanks you for your very informative post. I have been running L0Ds on 10440 on and off, and had decent success. 3 out of 4 were fine, but 2 tended to flicker on low mode for some odd reason. One flickered on low, then died eventually.

After reading your post, I see your logic on low mode not protecting the light. I think I will switch back to nimh full time. I don't get the blinding brightness, but I get a long running low mode back and I don't have to worry about killing my battery all the time.

I'll save the 10440s for a light designed to handle them (LF2, maybe new Lumapower) or just skip it. 

Great info, makes sense. 

:thumbsup:


----------



## p1fiend (Nov 29, 2007)

Luminescent said:


>


 
I like my Q4, but mine really doesn't look like the above.

My Q4 looks much more pale, no where near as deep in color. It almost looks like copper-ish orange red.:shrug:

The beam is certainly in no means pretty, mine is quite ringy on a white wall, along with a noticeable halo surrounding the main spill.

However, this is the first light that made me say "WOW"  since getting my first P1.......

It's one freakin bright light!


----------



## PocketBeam (Nov 29, 2007)

Copper orange red sounds nice to me. As for the ring around the hotspot, well I didn't like that about the L2D Q5 I had. But it wasn't horrible, I gave the light to me dad, and he doesn't know any better, so he loves it. (Makes me think I am spoiled by perfect beams.)

I can't wait to get me two L0D Q4s I ordered.


----------



## Luminescent (Nov 29, 2007)

p1fiend said:


> I like my Q4, but mine really doesn't look like the above.
> 
> My Q4 looks much more pale, no where near as deep in color. It almost looks like copper-ish orange red.:shrug:
> 
> ...



I'm not surprised that your light looks a bit different. I think both the beam profile, and the tint of both the beam and the light itself are a bit of a crap shoot.

I bought my original black L0D-CE from someone on EBay after seeing one owned by my friend. It made me say WOW, until I saw it side by side with my friends L0D. My beam was not quite as smooth and my friends light was noticably brighter (we even swapped the NiMH cells and his was still brighter).  This is one reason I am not a big fan of 10440's (because I remember a reference to 'works with 10440' in the eBay listing, which should have sent up a red flag at the time, but I didn't know any better).

I have always figured that the guy probably cooked the emitter with months of heavy use on 10440's then just dumped the light on Ebay. Of course, it might have just been an earler CREE P4 that was near the bottom of the bin output wise, and my friends light may have just got a lucky bounce and scored near the very top of the P4 output range, but I won't be running 10440 cells in this light after that experence just to make sure. 

I lost my original L0D, but my new one seems to have a little better beam, and MUCH more output than my old L0D (because it now beats the crap  out of my friends light :nana, so WOW AGAIN! :wow: .

So the L0D Q4 IS brighter than the standard L0D-CE, but the beam is about the same, and all these smooth reflector CREE lights from Fenix show at least a little ringyness (some more than others), so everone should keep this in mind.

I have been very pleased with my light when I use it closeup for real-world jobs like reading a map. It looks very smooth and just incredibly bright (on high it's like holding a 100W incandescent work light).

For those who insist on a perfect beam, you might want to bug the Fenix-Store about coming out with a nice batch of textured reflector L0D Rebel 100's in the future. I have always found the Rebel80 L0D's a little disapointing (because they are not really much brighter than a P4), but they were reported to have near perfect beams.

A nice Rebel 100 based L0D-RB100 would be just as bright as the Q4 but with a near perfect beam, and the lower Vf of the Rebel emitter should even give a few extra minutes of runtime. As nice as this light would be, lots of folks have reported problems with 10440's in Rebel based L0D's, so this new light should probably carry a warning about not using it with 10440 cells.

Personally, I have no interest in running 10440 cells (because these new lights work incredibly well even with standard NiMH batteries), and if Fenix offers a L0D-RB100 (with textured reflector), I will buy one the day it's offered.

But I won't be selling my L0D-Q4, because it's defenetely a KEEPER :twothumbs :twothumbs :twothumbs


----------



## GBone (Nov 29, 2007)

chibato said:


> Anyone know if the LOD Q4 will be available in other colors, or any rumors of a Q5 version?




4sevens said he hasn't heard of any other colors as of right now, I asked him in another thread.


----------



## da.gee (Nov 30, 2007)

I'm jealous. I want mine! Still waiting for arrival. Shipped 11/19 and not here yet.


----------



## Marduke (Nov 30, 2007)

chibato said:


> Anyone know if the LOD Q4 will be available in other colors, or any rumors of a Q5 version?



The Vf of the Q5 is too high for the LOD's circuitry, so it will probably never be made. Maybe we'll get lucky with an R-2 bin if the Vf is low enough, or some R100's with textured reflectors.


----------



## spica (Nov 30, 2007)

I just got mine and it has the "copper-ish orange red" body color. It looks great and I am impressed by its performance. I ordered another one. Paul


----------



## p1fiend (Nov 30, 2007)

Luminescent said:


> But I won't be selling my L0D-Q4, because it's defenetely a KEEPER :twothumbs :twothumbs :twothumbs


 
Neither will I...infact...



spica said:


> I just got mine and it has the "copper-ish orange red" body color. It looks great and I am impressed by its performance. I ordered another one. Paul


 
...I just ordered a second one too!


----------



## garence (Nov 30, 2007)

Wow, thanks for the super thorough details on this light, Luminescent. How could one resist buying it with such a convincing report? 

Btw, do you own a Dexlight X.1? I'm curious to know your comparison thoughts, given the close pricing.


----------



## Luminescent (Nov 30, 2007)

Marduke said:


> The Vf of the Q5 is too high for the LOD's circuitry, so it will probably never be made. Maybe we'll get lucky with an R-2 bin if the Vf is low enough, or some R100's with textured reflectors.



Q5's don't have any higher average Vf than Q4's. The Tint, Output, and Vf are all separate variables which change a little from batch to batch. There are Q5's out there now with Vf numbers that are just as good as the Q4's Fenix is using in the light right now, so they would work great.

I think this silly generalization got started because Fenix may have indeed had a very early batch of Q5's exhibiting very high Vf numbers at one point and found that they didn't work as well as they would have liked in the L0D and L1D single cell lights.

If that was the case, they should have bounced that whole batch of Q5's because such emitters are a sucker bet no matter which light you put them in (but Q5’s of any sort were in such short supply at the time that they probably couldn’t afford to be picky).

As I mentioned in a previous post, the goal of ALL manufactures is to drive the Vf down because that improves the 'lumens per watt' performance, and the Q4 in my L0D does seem to be doing a fantastic job, so I don't see any reason why a good low Vf Q5 shouldn’t also work well, but remember, even if the Vf does remain the same and the Q5 is working perfectly, the advantage would only average about 7%, based on the bin power specifications (which would be hard to even see).

Here are some real numbers so you can understand what I am talking about.

Bin Q4 runs from 100 to 107 lumens @350mA.

Bin Q5 runs from 107 to 114 lumens @350mA.

Damn, that's only about a 7% average advantage!

Now let's assume that CREE has fobbed off some CRAPPY Q5's on you that average 5% higher Vf than your last batch of Q4's.

This small increase in Vf would cancel almost all (everything but 2%) of your average advantage in using the Q5!

Why? Because what matters are Lumens per watt, not just the [email protected] rating that they use to assign the power bins.

As any custom light builder or home modder knows, you can get more lumens out of ANY LED emitter if you push a little more current through it.

The tradeoff is more heat and your runtime goes to hell because you are pumping in more watts.

In thier "Q5 mania" what some of these gullible rubes don't bother to take into account is that the Vf drive voltage works the same way.

A "Q5" that puts out 7% more lumens then a Q4 or Rebel 100 at 350mA, but which also needs 7% more Vf than the Q4 or Rebel 100 needs for the equivalent power level would be A STUPID RIPOFF no matter which light you put it in, because the 7% higher Vf means it needs 7% more WATTS and you could get EXACTLY the same increased output with a lower cost Q4 emitter that had a 7% lower Vf just by bumping up the drive current up by 7%.

So why did Fenix single out the L0D as not being suitable for a Q5, when they were willing to put the somewhat marginal high Vf Q5's in other lights?

Well, let's consider that previous example of a Q5 with a 5% higher Vf that cancels out all but 2% of the advantage of the Q5.

The L0D uses a 'boost' type DC/DC converter circuit, which has to work pretty hard to raise the low single cell battery voltage up to the 3.2 to 3.5 volts needed to drive the LED emitter. If the Vf is higher, this boost circuit has to work even harder because the boost ratio is higher, and it will loose some efficiency. Given the relatively small change in Vf this loss would be small, but if it cost's you even a few percent, then that eats up the remaining tiny advantage of using the crappy Q5 with the 5% higher Vf.

In other Fenix lights using CR123 cells, the voltage boost ratio is lower (or they use 'buck' converters which actually have to lower the voltage), so the Vf of the emitter doesn't cause a hit on efficiency, so even a relatively crappy Q5 with higher Vf might still be a few percent better, and therefore marginally worthwhile.

Again, all these issues go away if you use the better Vf grade Q5's that are available now, or Rebel 100 emitters (which have had lower Vf numbers all along).


----------



## p1fiend (Nov 30, 2007)

A BIG :thumbsup: to Luminescent and his participation in HIS thread.


----------



## Luminescent (Nov 30, 2007)

garence said:


> Wow, thanks for the super thorough details on this light, Luminescent. How could one resist buying it with such a convincing report?
> 
> Btw, do you own a Dexlight X.1? I'm curious to know your comparison thoughts, given the close pricing.


 
Never got into the Dexlights, since they are clones of older Jetbeam models that have since been improved.

Also, I never warmed up to the complicated UI on either the Dexlight or Jetbeam higher end X1 lights and preferred the little Jetbeam C-LE v1.2 because it seemed to offer a better blend of simplicity vs. capability.

Another HUGE advantage as far as I am concerned is that the C-LE uses EXACTLY the same mode switching sequence as my little L0D-Q4 (HOW COOOOL IS THAT!!!). :twothumbs

I have the older 'twisty' V1.2 C-LE's and find it makes it a great incremental step up from the little L0D when you can afford to carry a slightly larger light. It works exactly like my L0D-Q4 (Med, Low, High, Strobe, SOS), but with a bit more throw, and almost exactly twice the runtimes (except low which is almost exactly triple the runtime at a full 24 hours). 

The only real difference is that the C-LE 1.2 has memory, and the L0D always starts up in medium, but I find that this is actually the way I prefer it for both lights (larger light with memory, smaller light always defaults to medium), because that way I can set the larger light to come on in HIGH since it has longer runtimes and doesn’t eat batteries so fast.

Some don't like multimode lights at all, but I don't mind them in this case because both my two favorite EDC lights work the SAME, which makes things nice and simple.


----------



## BentHeadTX (Nov 30, 2007)

Received pinkish red L0D Q4
Put dual-layer heat shrink on flats of light to protect the finish, cover the snowflakes/bell and increase grip. 
Installed Sanyo Eneloop AAA NiMH cell. 
Tested light and it was white, bright and very light. 
Removed FireFlyIII from keychain. The FF3 was brighter but larger and much, much heavier. 

Been screwing around with the L0D Q4 for a few days and am comfortable with the modes and light output. I am now content with my keychain light.


----------



## chibato (Nov 30, 2007)

Luminescent said:


> For those who insist on a perfect beam, you might want to bug the Fenix-Store about coming out with a nice batch of textured reflector L0D Rebel 100's in the future. I have always found the Rebel80 L0D's a little disapointing (because they are not really much brighter than a P4), but they were reported to have near perfect beams.
> 
> A nice Rebel 100 based L0D-RB100 would be just as bright as the Q4 but with a near perfect beam, and the lower Vf of the Rebel emitter should even give a few extra minutes of runtime. As nice as this light would be, lots of folks have reported problems with 10440's in Rebel based L0D's, so this new light should probably carry a warning about not using it with 10440 cells.
> 
> Personally, I have no interest in running 10440 cells (because these new lights work incredibly well even with standard NiMH batteries), and if Fenix offers a L0D-RB100 (with textured reflector), I will buy one the day it's offered.


 
I would be right behind you in line for that light. :thumbsup:


----------



## shakeylegs (Dec 1, 2007)

Hi Luminescent, 
You may remember when I received my LOD reb 100s in August -
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/173150#22
I use the LOD more than any other light I've got. I carry it everywhere always. And every time I fire it up I'm still amazed. I've dropped it on tile floors repeatedly, washed it in the Maytag 3 or 4 times, and it still works and looks like new. 
Soon after I got it I was on my way to the beach, stopped at a backwater Safeway for ice, and the store power had failed. Took me 30 minutes before I could extract myself from "escort duty". Not one person who saw the LOD perform was unimpressed. BTW, the pickle and olive isle is sparklingly beautiful under the influence of a rebel 100. 
I'd be hard pressed to give up my rebel, but that red bodied Q4 is very enticingoo:


----------



## flashy bazook (Dec 1, 2007)

at least on specs (do not have the L0D Q4 - yet!), it seems to match the Rebel 100 special japanese store for most precious customers who only like green tea edition.

the main "disadvantage" is that the Q4 only comes in red. So far. I am convinced by luminescent's analysis that moving to the Q5 would not bring any large benefits with the current emitter.

Anyways, we are arguing over small differences by now, the L0D Q4 (or Rebel 100, if you could get it) seems to be in a class by itself. Having one of those on your keychain would seem to be a no-brainer, if you can get one whose looks you like--or at least do not find offensive!


----------



## todo (Dec 1, 2007)

Question. I have an original LODCE that has hundreds of 10440 battery cycles run thru it with no problems ever, its nearly a year old. I just got a new red LOD Q4. The Q4 on a 10440 is noticably brighter than my old LODCE on a 10440, it not a big difference but its obvious. Now is this what others are experiencing??? or is my old LOD suffering from diminishing lumins prob due to the 10440's???.


----------



## f22shift (Dec 1, 2007)

does any place sell a rebel 100 led? i dont see it anywhere


----------



## shakeylegs (Dec 1, 2007)

f22shift said:


> does any place sell a rebel 100 led? i dont see it anywhere



I saw some on future this am. Says to call.


----------



## WadeF (Dec 1, 2007)

todo said:


> Question. I have an original LODCE that has hundreds of 10440 battery cycles run thru it with no problems ever, its nearly a year old. I just got a new red LOD Q4. The Q4 on a 10440 is noticably brighter than my old LODCE on a 10440, it not a big difference but its obvious. Now is this what others are experiencing??? or is my old LOD suffering from diminishing lumins prob due to the 10440's???.


 
Shouldn't a Cree Q4 be noticeably brighter than a Cree P4? The Q4 should be brighter because the Cree Q4 has more output than the Cree P4 in your original LOD-CE.


----------



## flashy bazook (Dec 1, 2007)

OK, one correction - Lumapower is just putting out its Avenger 1xAAA EDC light which seems directed at the L0D formfactor (I say "seems" since I haven't yet seen the size specs).

It has the Rebel 100. So, if that's a strong consideration, Fenix may have some real competition here at last.

(I just posted a few more thoughts on this comparison in the "avenger" thread just started, if anyone is interested).


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 1, 2007)

WadeF said:


> Shouldn't a Cree Q4 be noticeably brighter than a Cree P4? The Q4 should be brighter because the Cree Q4 has more output than the Cree P4 in your original LOD-CE.



With normal batteries the original L0D-CE with a standard P4 was rated at 50 lumens on high, where the new L0D-Q4 is rated at 75 (one and half times higher output :thumbsup.

Aside from this natural increase due to the Q4's improved output, there is another factor at work with 10440 cells that needs to be taken into account. As I mentioned in a previous post in this thread, the Vf of the emitters is always a crapshoot, and and has been getting lower. If you got a lower Vf emitter in your new Q4 it will draw more current on 10440's which could also account for some additional brightness. You can easily check for this higher current situation by seeing which light gets hottest the fastest. The light that gets hotter faster, is drawing more current.

You can eliminate this variable quite easily. The L0D has very good current regulation when used with the batteries it was designed for, so to eliminate this Vf based difference, run both lights on identical NiMH cells or fresh alkaline batteries.

This should restore a precise 50% increase in brightness, which should be noticeable but not super super dramatic. If after the change to standard batteries, your new Q4 light is REALLY BRIGHT compared to your older light, then you may well have partially cooked the emitter. To be sure, you can check with a light meter because a 50% increase in brightness is less than one EV unit (one f-stop), so if you are seeing close to a full EV or 1 f-stop (or more) difference then that's a sure indication that you have lost some output on your older light.

You may have seen the recent thread from someone that had a couple lights in a row get dim after running them several months on RCR123's. Obviously since they were running RCR123s, these lights weren't L0D's but RCR123s were pushing this guys lights harder, just like 10440s do in the L0D (in fact the 10440 hits the L0D a lot worse). 

So I don't think there is any doubt that long term, the 10440 can indeed nuke your lumens on a L0D (depending on how hot it gets and how many hours it is run), but some folks figure it's worth the price for the extra output.

In any case, I would definitely do the heat comparison check I mentioned and make sure your new L0D-Q4 is not getting too-hot too-fast, because if it is, that's a sure sigh that you are probably in danger of cooking the Q4 emitter (and are also at a higher risk of an outright failure due to high current popping something else in the light's circuitry).


----------



## frankr (Dec 1, 2007)

Who makes the best 10440's, and any idea how the run times between the different brands compare on the the LOB


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 1, 2007)

flashy bazook said:


> OK, one correction - Lumapower is just putting out its Avenger 1xAAA EDC light which seems directed at the L0D formfactor (I say "seems" since I haven't yet seen the size specs).
> 
> It has the Rebel 100. So, if that's a strong consideration, Fenix may have some real competition here at last.
> 
> (I just posted a few more thoughts on this comparison in the "avenger" thread just started, if anyone is interested).




Found the Lumapower avenger thread –

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=171917

Intriguing looking little light; Rebel 100; textured reflector; clicky switch; but it’s still not quite what the L0D would be with a Q4 or Rebel 100. 

First, from the current drive levels they are quoting, it won’t be anywhere near as bright as the L0D Q4 or L0D-RB100 (it just doesn’t have enough drive).

Second the Avenger seems to use Lumapower's unique 2 level clicky interface. Though I am sure this will send Lumapower fans into raptures of ecstasy, I have never personally liked the way the lumapower lights go directly from super bright right to dim-dim-dim in a single jump (it’s always seemed to me that there was a hole in the middle somewhere). 

Third I predict that, like the LF2, the 'Avenger' is going to be panned by L0D/10440 fans, who are used to being able to blast the crap out of their light with more than five times the current drive that the manufacture designed it for, because Avenger is only quoting 270ma of drive on 10440 cells at 3.7 volts (which will only put it on a par with what the L0D can manage on NiMH cells, and far below what the L0D typically does on 10440).

Lastly, it's a little longer than the L0D. Though I am certain that the clicky switch in a longer profile light will be popular with some (look at all the posts in this thread), I personally kind of like the more compact and more reliable twisty switch form factor of the L0D.

The specs on the Avenger still seem to be preliminary, so it may improve, but even it it doesn't, the intoduction of this light IS a big deal because it will forever eliminate Fenix's option of going with anything less than a Q4 or R100 emitter in future L0D's if they want the light to remain competitive, and I think that's just great.

So Way to Go Lumapower !!! :twothumbs
I'm still waiting to see my L0D-R100 though.


----------



## Bearcat (Dec 1, 2007)

Thankfully, the Fenix LOD Q4 has a SOS and Flash mode and the Lumapower Avenger doesn't have a medium mode, so I can hold on to my money a little longer.

Nice lights, but they are not quite right for me. When they quit making toys and make something useful for my key-chain, they will part me of my money and replace my EO on my keychain.

Look what Arc did with simple, easy and dependable in its day.


----------



## garence (Dec 2, 2007)

Luminescent said:


> Never got into the Dexlights, since they are clones of older Jetbeam models that have since been improved.
> 
> Also, I never warmed up to the complicated UI on either the Dexlight or Jetbeam higher end X1 lights and preferred the little Jetbeam C-LE v1.2 because it seemed to offer a better blend of simplicity vs. capability.
> ..[edited]..


Thanks -- you make a very good case to ditch the idea of getting an X.1 Dexlight. Plus, with the discount Fenix is running, it's cheaper--less money and superior circuitry sounds like a winning choice to me. :thumbsup:


----------



## steelagman (Dec 2, 2007)

Was going through Lighthound yesterday and noticed they have an AAA Tiablo listed with a Rebel 100. Claims 100 lumens on high. ~$41. So there is competietion, which is good.

I got the Red LOD Q4 also and am very happy with it. For close up (e.g., walking around dark house) its just as bright as any of my singe AA lights (it doesn't have as much throw in the backyard test, but no surprise since small refelector is limiting).


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 2, 2007)

Bearcat said:


> Thankfully, the Fenix LOD Q4 has a SOS and Flash mode and the Lumapower Avenger doesn't have a medium mode, so I can hold on to my money a little longer.
> 
> Nice lights, but they are not quite right for me. When they quit making toys and make something useful for my key-chain, they will part me of my money and replace my EO on my keychain.
> 
> Look what Arc did with simple, easy and dependable in its day.




I take it from your post that, like quite a few others here on CPF, you don't have much use for STROBE and SOS modes on mult-mode lights like the L0D. 

I can understand your concern about this if your previous experience was with a light like the Jetbeam C-LE, or many of DX multi-mode lights which have 'mode memory', because on these lights in order to cycle back to MEDIUM or LOW from HIGH you must first cycle through STROBE, and SOS every time. This is the price you pay on a light with memory for being able to start the light right up in any mode and return to it by default every time you turn the light on.

But this is NOT how the L0D-Q4 or any other L0D series light works. 

I think most will find that their objection to these unwanted modes is offset somewhat by the fact that the L0D lacks mode memory. 

Because it lacks mode memory, an L0D light will always start in MEDIUM and then cycle to LOW and then HIGH. 

Sure STROBE and SOS are also available, but they always fall at the very end of the sequence so you won't even notice that they are there unless you need them. When you turn the light off for more than a couple seconds the sequence resets and the light will always start up in MEDIUM again.

This means that you can get to all three power levels every time you turn the light on and NEVER be bugged by having to cycle through STROBE or SOS under normal circumstances. 

You might have to bump through them in a couple tenths of a second to wrap things back around if you miss a mode as you are trying to hit high, but I have found the mode switching on my L0D is pretty solid and this hasn't happened to me even 1 time in 50.

So yes the L0D does have STROBE and SOS but most of the time you don't even know that they are there.

Under these circumstances I don't find the STROBE and SOS modes even a little bit bothersome, and in any case I don't share your low opinion of them. In an emergency situation, not only does the fast strobe mode more than double the run time compared to the normal high mode, but it will also do one hell of a good job in helping someone pick you out from other natural light sources at a distance. For example if you are ever in a natural disaster like Katrina, a wilderness mishap, or a boating accident, and need to get yourself or someone else lifted out by medivac copter, you can use the STROBE mode to pinpoint your location after making an emergency call by radio or cell phone and telling them to relay to the pilot that you will be signaling with a white flashlight with a fast strobe sequence. Don't worry the L0D-Q4 can be seen for miles if you point it straight at someone. How will you know where to point it? No problem, you can spot the copter because it will have a STROBE (the question is will you have one as well, so the pilot can spot you?).


----------



## BentHeadTX (Dec 2, 2007)

I used strobe mode last night. Two cars went to a hockey game and we were split up but I spotted the other car. Switched the L0D Q4 to strobe and pointed it in their direction and they turned towards me quickly. The comment was "figured you were the only one in town to have a strobe so it had to be you" Yes, it was me and our crew got back together. 

Last week I was riding to work on my bicycle as usual and my helmet light was going quickly dim as the batteries were depleting. Tapped the L2D RB100 helmet light once and switched to strobe. It kept strobing for 20 minutes as I completed my journey in the darkness. The strobe function allows me to make it there on low battery power and be noticeable or used during the day in heavy traffic. 

As a bicycle light or keychain light, I like strobe and use it here and there. No complaints.


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 2, 2007)

steelagman said:


> Was going through Lighthound yesterday and noticed they have an AAA Tiablo listed with a Rebel 100. Claims 100 lumens on high. ~$41. So there is competietion, which is good.



I would go slowly on the Tiablo A1 until we see a good independent review posted on CPF.

First it’s only a single mode light, which I am not really that interested in (especially if it’s a battery hog). There are already a couple less expensive single-mode AAA lights in this power range including the Ultrafire 602 SSC U-Bin, and the Kaidomain AAA ‘buckle light’ (which also specs a SSC U-bin emitter)

Also the specifications for the light sound like they have been padded.

The specified output and runtime for the light is:

* Run Time: 110 Lumens, 80 minutes to 50% output

Gee, that certainly sounds nice! The only problem is that this claimed performance violates the laws of Physics. You can’t get that much light, for that much time, with a Rebel 100 emitter, even if we assume the highest capacity AAA battery made, and 100% efficiency on the driver circuit.




steelagman said:


> I got the Red LOD Q4 also and am very happy with it. For close up (e.g., walking around dark house) its just as bright as any of my singe AA lights (it doesn't have as much throw in the backyard test, but no surprise since small refelector is limiting).



The throw is indeed a little less due to the floodier beam from the smaller reflector. To see how it really stacks up try a ceiling bounce test. When I do this, my L0D keeps up with almost all my 1 AA CREE lights (and blows away the 1W Luxeons).

I don't mind the slightly floodier beam at all, in fact I think it's just about perfect for the kinds of jobs you usually need your EDC light for.


----------



## LightInTheWallet (Dec 2, 2007)

Still waiting for mine, (ordered one week ago) Darn postal service. Haven't bought a "quality" light since my EL "Little Friend" seoul. Maybe I will go down to the local Lowes and check out the Surefires. ( NOT going to Buy Both, though it is too close to the holidays for that.) is anyone else out there waiting impatiently for their LODQ4? Thanks for letting me get that off my chest, not many flashoholics in my circle of friends/ family/ co-workers.


----------



## Wolf (Dec 3, 2007)

LightInTheWallet said:


> Still waiting for mine, (ordered one week ago) Darn postal service. Haven't bought a "quality" light since my EL "Little Friend" seoul. Maybe I will go down to the local Lowes and check out the Surefires. ( NOT going to Buy Both, though it is too close to the holidays for that.) is anyone else out there waiting impatiently for their LODQ4? Thanks for letting me get that off my chest, not many flashoholics in my circle of friends/ family/ co-workers.



You are not alone waiting on the postal service, I ordered a lodq4 that was shipped thurs from feinx-store at the same time as a order from lighthound, dunno how but the lighthound order showed up sat to my surprise, still waiting on the q4 to show up tho. Cant wait to play with the thing seeing the last good light I bought was a e2e surefire about 7 years ago (not counting the mag 3aaa led or the niteize 1watt kit I have, dunno if those count as good lol)


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 3, 2007)

LightInTheWallet said:


> Maybe I will go down to the local Lowes and check out the Surefires. ( NOT going to Buy Both, though it is too close to the holidays for that.) is anyone else out there waiting impatiently for their LODQ4? Thanks for letting me get that off my chest, not many flashoholics in my circle of friends/ family/ co-workers.


 
For the best 'out of box experience' have some Energizer L92 Lithium E2's on hand (or at least some freshly charged NiMH batteries). The L0D-Q4 is ok on plain old Alkalines but it was designed to really shine on NiMH or L92 Lithium cells. (some of course like the insanely bright 10440 cells but that puts a lot of stress on the light so I don't recommend them)

I would definitely hold off on the Surefires till you get your L0D-Q4, so you can check out your Fenix performance before investing in another Surefire.

Personally, after my experience with Surefire and having seen how my Jetbeam and Fenix lights perform, I plan on holding off on Surefire forever. 

Sad to say, the only light that has ever let me down in a critical situation was a Surefire. 

That’s really funny, because I just went to their web site and Surefire has a big snazzy banner ad with a caver lighting up a big underground cavern with a what I'm sure we are supposed to think is a Surefire flashlight (That's magically putting out more Lumens than an HID car headlight), with the text - 

"If a work of art 100 Million years in the making takes your breath away, you should see what happens when you light quits." 

Well they got at least one thing right, my Surefire light didn't 'quit', it just wouldn't turn on in the first place, when I desperately needed it to (due to one of Surefire's patented tailcap issues). Oh, and I wasn't in a cave, just on a very dark lonely stretch of road, on a very cold drizzly night, trying to get a damn blown-out tire changed. It was an old incan Surefire, that I got used, but it was immaculate when I got it and worked fine until I left it in the car for a few months. When I got home I found that the batteries were fine, and after much fiddling the light started working but I never trusted it again and gave it away to a friend in law enforcement with the advise that he should make Surefire replace the switch. Fortunately, on the night of my Surefire disaster, I remembered an old Dorcy light that I had stuffed under the seat when the Surefire took it's place of honor in my glove compartment. That twenty dollar Dorcy light from Target was scratched, dirty, and the batteries were 3 years old, but it worked perfectly and put out enough light that the several cars that came screaming around the turn were able to see me in time and swing wide enough to miss me on the narrow shoulder. If I had had to try to do the job in the dark, there is not a doubt in my mind I would probably be as dead now as my Surefire light was that night.

The Surefire G2L doesn't look too bad if you don't mind paying 65 bucks for a mostly plastic flashlight, but even if Surefire has cleaned up their act on the tail switch issues, this light uses a pair of CR123 batteries. I have personally seen CR123 cells vent in one of my lights (and NO I wasn't using cheapy batteries or mixing cells or any of the eighteen other silly rationalizations that CR123 groupies use to excuse totally unacceptable safety issues).

So between my past experience with Surefire, and the safety issues with CR123 cells, I will NOT be buying any Surefire lights in the near future.

Duracell plays the same B.S. game as Surefire with their ads, showing Firefighters and others with the tag line "If you life depends on your battery". Yeah, right, that's another laugh! I remember one time that I was just about to get in the car and take a brand new 2AAA River-Rock flashlight back to Target, when I decided (just for the hell of it) to check the brand new Duracell batteries that came with it first. It worked for about 20 minutes, suddenly quit and got a little warm. Well, surprise, surprise, of the two Duracell's that came with the light, one was ZERO volts (it had, after only a few minutes use, shorted out internally and self discharge). Brand new battery, zero volts! I guess it's a good thing no ones life depended on that Duracell. When I replaced the bad Duracell battery, the little light worked fine (and has worked perfectly every day since, and runs a good six hours or more even on cheap AAA cells).

It would appear that the days of quality American products are gone. The good conservative 'family values' CE0's of American companies like to demonstrate their patriotism by shipping millions of American jobs overseas, and shipping in the cheapest possible low quality products, so the quality of 'American' brands like Duracell no longer seems to stand for much of anything.

Sorry for the rant.


----------



## PocketBeam (Dec 3, 2007)

I agree, the strobe and SOS modes do not get in the way. Once you are used to the light, and you are not playing around, you will simply go straight to the mode you need and never pass Strobe or SOS mode. At first the strobe and SOS bugged me, but as I said now that I am used to the light and I have actually used it to do work, I never actually see those modes anymore. (Based on other Fenixes...)

I just got my L0D Q4 on Saturday. Actually I got two, one to give away. The box is nice, much smaller then I expected, well the light is small so what was I thinking? Both lights have the same color, which I and my unprompted wife both called copper orange. I like the color. I tested beam shots between the two L0D Q4's and they were almost 100% the same. There was a very minor beam difference int he hot spot that only a flashaholic would notice, and only when the beams are side by side. So I just randomly picked one to be mine.

The box comes with extra O ring, a split ring, and a pocket clip. I wasn't expecting the pocket clip, so that was a nice extra.

I compared the beam to my Arc body with a Lux III with a 10440 driven hard, and the L0D Q4 beat it in brightness. Not to mention the L0D Q4 has a impressive hotspot for a AAA sized light. I think it can throw to about 75 feet. Although that is a reach, but 50 feet is not too hard for it.

The mode switching is pretty easy and can be done one handed. it can be turned off with a small turn, although for security it takes a little bit more then a 1/4 turn to make sure pocket pressure won't turn it on. The anodizing is pretty hard as I was scratching it fairly hard trying to get the pocket clip on, but it didn't scratch. (Any secrets as I still don't have the clip on.) 

This light is impressive at how bright it can be off a simple 1.2 volt battery. I tried a battery run down test, I used a eneloop AAA and in medium mode I got about three hours runtime. At about three hours the brightness dropped off significantly. But it never totally shut off, it kept doing a low moon mode for a long time. (I didn't time it.) I then shut it off and let the battery recover for a bit and when I turned it back on I got a bright light that lasted for a few minutes then went into the super low mode. I did this several times, and in all cases the light would always turn on and give at least some small amount of light. I felt I could count on this light.

This light is almost as bright as my L2D Rebel 100 on high (not turbo). I am very impressed and very happy with this light. It is bright enough I think I already get the wow factor without risking 10440's. I give this two thumbs up for flashaholic or non-flashaholics alike.


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 3, 2007)

PocketBeam said:


> The anodizing is pretty hard as I was scratching it fairly hard trying to get the pocket clip on. (Any secrets as I still don't have the clip on.)


 
Glad you like your L0D-Q4! It's pretty hard not to like a light that packs such impressive performance into such a small package.

- Output that beats a 3 D-Cell Mag light and most LED lights six times it’s size.

- Efficiency high enough to run hours in the lower output modes on a tiny AAA cell, then taper off into a virtually perfect moon mode with no unexpected cutoff.

Like Yoda said . . .

“Size matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my size, do you?” 


Try this trick to get your pocket clip on without scratching anything. 

Get a piece of thin hard plastic film like a piece of 'view graph' overhead transparency plastic. It needs to be about as thick and tough as the base plastic used for photographic film negatives.

cut a piece of this so that it perfectly matches the circumference of the light minus about a half millimeter, and so it’s about an inch to an inch and a half wide, and wrap it around the light so it protects the area where the clip will rest, with at least a half inch sticking out past the end of the light. Now slide the clip up over the plastic and onto the light where it needs to be, then hold the clip in place and grab the plastic with a pair of pliers and pull it out from under the clip without letting the clip move.

The trick to getting this to work is to find a plastic material that is thin enough, tough enough, and slick enough not to bind as you pull it out from under the clip. That way the clip won’t move and scratch the light as it settles down onto the surface of the light.

Edit:

Something I didn't get a chance to try yet, but which should work quite nicely is to leave the plastic under the clip to permanently protect the surface of the light.

We would still start with the idea of an oversized piece of plastic wrapped around the light with the edge generously overlapping the edge of the light, so the clip can be more easily slid up over the edge of the light and into place.

But to allow the plastic under the clip to remain, before we wrap the plastic around the light we score a line with an exacto knife almost through the plastic parallel to the edge that will overlap the body of the light and exactly the width of the clip from that edge. The idea is to create a scored line on the plastic that we can tear along later to create a strip matching the width of the part of the metal clip that wraps around the L0D. (again, this is done before we wrap the plastic around the L0D's body, so we don't risk nicking the light's body with the exacto knife by trying to trim the plastic after it's on the light)

Then the plastic is wrapped around the light with this scored line also wrapping around the light (scored side down) and with the scored line overlapped at least an eighth inch up onto the body of the light so it's not right at the tail edge of the light (to keep it from tearing prematurely as the clip is slid up over it).

Then after the clip is slid up onto the light just tug the plastic back until the scored line matches up with the outside edge of the clip and tear the plastic neatly around this outside edge of the clip so the narrow strip of plastic under the clip stays in place. 

The advantage of this approach is that in addition to protecting the light when the clip is put on, the plastic remaining under the clip will protect it later if the clip needs to be slid back off.


----------



## todo (Dec 3, 2007)

Luminescent said:


> With normal batteries the original L0D-CE with a standard P4 was rated at 50 lumens on high, where the new L0D-Q4 is rated at 75 (one and half times higher output :thumbsup.
> 
> Aside from this natural increase due to the Q4's improved output, there is another factor at work with 10440 cells that needs to be taken into account. As I mentioned in a previous post in this thread, the Vf of the emitters is always a crapshoot, and and has been getting lower. If you got a lower Vf emitter in your new Q4 it will draw more current on 10440's which could also account for some additional brightness. You can easily check for this higher current situation by seeing which light gets hottest the fastest. The light that gets hotter faster, is drawing more current.
> 
> ...



Ok luminesent, I tried this. I put a fresh NiMH, in each the LODCE and in the LODQ4. The Q4 in all modes was slightly brighter, not by alot ,but noticeable. I also had the chance to check my well used LODce against another with only a few hrs on it. Results the same, my well used(10440's) LOD is still putting out virtually the same lumins(visually) as a new one. So in my case anyway I can easily say that with 100+ 10440 battery cycles run thru the LODce, the light is no worse for the wear.:twothumbs

As far as heating up, the Q4 seems to warm up slightly faster than my older LOD, however again I don't think its enough to scare me off of using the 10440's in the Q4, the performance upgrade(with 10440's) IS huge. On the other hand running NiMA in the Q4 is close enough in performance to the old LOD running on 10440's that I may just continue with the NiMA . Personally I like the Q4 beam better than my old LOD, it definatly has a bit more throw, but still retains the impressive flood qualitys of the older light, and the tint is nicer in my eyes as well. All in all the red Q4 is an improvement over the older version, making an incredible little EDC light even better.

In response to the strobe critics. There is NO down side that the LOD has a strobe feature. Very soon you get used to whipping it out of your pocket and giving it a quick one handed twist or 2, to get to your desired mode which 99% of the time is med or low. The strobe mode is the 4th twist, which does NOT get in the way of normal operation. However don't underestimate the advantage of strobe. You can easily get someones/anyones attention whether day or nite with a quick burst, try it even in daylight you'll be amazed at its effectiveness. Not to mention the obvious safety factor of getting attention in case of emergency.

A few LOD tips

how to.... put the clip on without scratching, use a bit-O-spit, it will slide on easier, no scratches.
how to.... make the LOD bite friendly and one hand friendlier, put a single wrap of tommy tape(self fusing silicone) around the head and tail end.
LOD xray ....on high using 10440's close your hand completly over the LOD in a dark room.


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 3, 2007)

todo said:


> Ok luminesent, I tried this. I put a fresh NiMH, in each the LODCE and in the LODQ4. The Q4 in all modes was slightly brighter, not by alot ,but noticeable. . .



It's great news that the emitter in your old light isn't cooked. It sounds like my guess was correct, the lower Vf is making your new Q4 draw a bit more current, and this PLUS the better efficiency that the Q4 has to start with, is accounting for the dramatic difference you are seeing, because there are two factors at work not one.

I can understand your mixed feelings, on the one hand it's hard to resist the incredible brightness offered by the L0D-Q4 on 10440’s, and on the other hand it sounds like you got a near perfect L0D-Q4, so it would be a shame if it died on 10440's (which does happen), because it’s replacement may not be quite as perfect. There was a quick survey where only about 10% of the users of 10440 cells reported problems, but with the newer lower Vf lights, I would not be surprised if that number will rise in the future to as high as 1 in 3, so it's up to you if you want to roll the dice with those odds.

For me at least, the deciding factor, aside from reliability, is runtime, which will be painfully short in all modes on your Q4 when running 10440's (due to the same higher current draw that makes it so spectacularly bright).

In my last post I recounted how having a backup light (that I barely remembered was in the car), saved my skin one cold drizzly night while changing a tire on a dark lonely stretch of road. Having a backup light probably saved my life that night, and that's one of the things that lead me to try to be a little more diligent about having a good reliable EDC light with me at all times.

Don't get me wrong, I am ecstatic about the fact that the L0D can run on 10440's and work fairly reliably, but NOT because I plan to use them in my L0D-Q4, but because the fact that this little light can survive this kind of abuse and still rack up a fairly reasonable record of reliability, tells me that if I stick to Alkaline, NiMH or L92 cells, my L0D-Q4 will never never never let me down, and the next time my life depends on having a flashlight that works, I can depend on my L0D.

As far as the output goes, even on NiMH batteries, the tiny little L0D has roughly three times the outputof the early 1 Watt Luxeon III light that saved my butt that dark cold drizzly night, so how much brighter does it have to be???

So even for someone like me who doesn't plan to run 10440's, the fact that the L0D can survive being blasted with more than 5 times it's designed level of drive with these cells is impressive, and serves as a usefull indication of just how tough this little light really is.


----------



## Daekar (Dec 4, 2007)

You guys convinced me, I pulled the trigger on one of these things yesterday evening. No 10440s for me, I'll just be using my Eneloops, but still I think I'll be pleased. These AAA and AA lights are where the most pronounced manifestation of new LEDs are going to appear... eventually we'll get away from the "more light at the same current" to "we already have enough light on medium and low, just keep dropping the current as emitters get better."

Can't wait to get mine! (My first Fenix! )


----------



## arty (Dec 4, 2007)

Which is the best LOD model? Fenix offers a number of them, and only lists the rebel on their website.
Better includes reliability as well as brightness.
I won't rule out a red model, since other aspects of a light are more important - e.g. finish durability, light reliability, beam, etc.


----------



## BentHeadTX (Dec 4, 2007)

I find the kudos interesting but being the flashaholic that I am, it must be quantified in person...with other flashlights of course! :thumbsup: 

I have a KD SSC-U AAA light that uses a Seoul LED with a runtime of a bit over 20 minutes. A Peak Baltic AAA with the highest output is on the way for comparison. The brightest go head to head to see who wins. 

My initial belief is the KD SSC-U AAA light will win since runtime be damned, it is all about brightness. The Fenix L0D Q4 wins for the keychain as it is tough enough to withstand that duty but not "bomb-proof". The Peak Baltic AAA with SSC LED running at max output (maybe an hour?) it is the dark horse. It's job will be the tool of the group and will reside in the small side pocket of a Leatherman Charge Ti leather holster. 

The KD outblasts the Fenix Q4 and the Q4 should be close to the Peak Baltic. Maybe this week I'll find out how this all plays out. If the Baltic replaces the KD as my tool holster light, what will I do with the KD? Oh yeah, ship it to my brother with a Powerex 1000mAH NiMH for Christmas.  

Who would of thought that a single AAA NiMH light would be good enough for most uses a year or two ago? I don't need "cheater" 10440 cells...life is good!


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 4, 2007)

arty said:


> Which is the best LOD model? Fenix offers a number of them, and only lists the rebel on their website.
> Better includes reliability as well as brightness.
> I won't rule out a red model, since other aspects of a light are more important - e.g. finish durability, light reliability, beam, etc.



There may be some other very nice L0D options later, but for now Fenix seems to have whipped up a big batch of these red L0D-Q4 lights for the holidays, and they are the highest performing L0D lights currently available (75 lumens on high).

If you don't mind the red color then the light you are looking for is:

Red L0D-Q4 seasonal special at the Fenix-Store

Fenix store helps support this forum, and unlike most other U.S. Fenix dealers, their price includes free shipping and they offer CPF members an 8% discount (use the discount code CPF8 since you are a member here). I'm not knocking any other Fenix dealer, but this is a great price and you can't go wrong dealing with the Fenix-Store folks as they have a very good track record here on CPF.


----------



## swxb12 (Dec 5, 2007)

Remember the silver P1? I'd like to see them bring this color back as an alternative to natural. Oven olive drab (P3D limited run) would be something different to try.


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 5, 2007)

*LOD-Q4 vs. 100W incandescent shop light -*

There has been a sub-thread in this thread relating to the brightness of the L0D-Q4.

Is it bright enough on NiMH? 

What about a this other Brand-X light that can do 100 lumens but has only 20 minutes run time, wouldn’t that be better?

For me the most important advantage of the higher efficiency Q4 emitter is that it gives the L0D a very nice combination of very respectable output AND good runtimes, making this little AAA light a very nice replacement for a larger light in most applications.

In a previous post I compared the L0D to a 100W shop light. Most of you probably thought that I was just speaking metaphorically. 

I was not, I was speaking literally.

So, for the benefit of those who wonder if 75 lumens is really ‘bright enough’ for their EDC light, lets look at that ‘L0D vs. 100W shop light’ comparison in a little more detail . . .

The hot spot on my L0D is about 1 foot in diameter at about 4 feet (this may sound small but, it's actually a little on the floody side, and the hotspot has soft edges that make the L0D very pleasant to use close up). 

So now let’s compare that hotspot brightness to the brightness of a 100W shoplight at the same working distance.

The 'shoplight' I am talking about is one of those simple bulb fixtures with half the bulb covered with a simple reflector. 

Let's use a big bright 100W bulb in the shoplight.

First the L0D . . .

Based on the efficiency of the average flashlight reflector, the L0D should be putting at least 25 lumens of it’s 75 emitter lumens into that hotspot (a little is lost and the rest goes into spill) This is a fairly conservative estimate. Using the PI*R^2 formula a 1 foot circular hotspot has an area of about 0.78 square feet, so the luminous intensity of the hotspot of the L0D at a working distance of 4 feet would be something on the order of 32 lumens/Square Foot.

Ok now, now lets figure out how many lumens / sq ft. a 100 watt shoplight throws at the same 4 foot distance . . .

GE specs their 100 watt longlife incandescent bulb at 1600 lumens while a 750 hour crystal clear bulb can do a little more at 1750 lumens. Let’s be as fair as possible to that good ol incandescent bulb and use the higher figure.

1750 lumens, that’s huge! The little L0D doesn’t have a chance right?

Wait, we are talking luminous intensity at 4 feet in lumens / square foot, so let’s do the math –

The 1750 figure is the TOTAL light output of the 100 watt bulb measured using an integrating sphere, so to figure out the lumens per square foot at four feet, we need to figure out the surface area of a sphere that has the same radius as the 4 foot working distance that I used above to calculate the 32 Lumen/Square Foot figure for the L0D.

The surface area of a sphere is calculated as 4*PI*R^2.

So a 4 foot radius sphere has a surface area of . . .

4 * 3.14159 * (4*4) = 201 square feet.

So with no reflector the filament would spread it's 1750 lumens evenly across 201 square feet at four feet.

Let’s be really really generous and assume that the little crappy shoplight’s reflector is 100% efficient and that it perfectly reflects half the lumens back across to the other side so that the 1750 lumens is only spread out over a half sphere at 4 feet. 

This would give us 1750 lumens spread out over roughly 100 square feet.

Gee, that’s an easy calculation; dividing our 1750 total lumens by the 100 square feet that they spread out over at 4 feet, we get 17.5 lumens / sq foot.

That’s just a little over half the luminous intensity of the hot spot thrown by the L0D-Q4, and in real life the 100W shop light would probably be less than half as bright, because for the above calculation I made pretty pessimistic assumptions for the L0D and very optimistic assumptions for the 100W shoplight.

Of course the huge cheat I am using here is to compare just the ‘hot spot’ of the L0D, to a shoplight that is almost 100% flood (though, remember, I did throw in a 2:1 reflector factor and use the highest output 100W bulb commercially available to favor the shoplight). 

Actually, I don’t think this is unreasonable at all, because the L0D has a nice moderately floody beam, and because of this, it’s not too hard at all to keep what you are working with centered in the beam and fully illuminated by that nice floody hotspot. 

For example, if you are reading a paperback book, and you hold the L0D at a distance of only 3 feet you can cover the whole book (both pages), with this equivalent of ‘150 Watt shoplight' bright illumination.

So, I apologize, I miss-spoke before, if you light something up with the L0D-Q4 it isn’t ‘just as bright’ as a 100W shop light, IT’S ALMOST TWICE AS BRIGHT at any given distance (and the inverse square law works the same for both the L0D and the 100W bulb so this will remain true at any working distance, not just the 4 foot distance used above).

Not too bad for a light that runs on a single AAA battery (and remember, all of the above calculations are for an L0D-Q4 running on HIGH on a standard AAA NiMH cell, not a 10440).

Thought you would get a kick out of this. :thumbsup:


----------



## LightInTheWallet (Dec 5, 2007)

Wow, this is a great light! Wish the all-night market had some lithium aaa's per cpf'er luminescents post. This is my first fenix and I am honestly impressed how bright this light is, especially for its size. It is going to be a bright year if the led manufacturers can continue to supply the flashlight market with ever efficient and well tinted bins. (good driver design helps too) :thumbsup:


----------



## TORCH_BOY (Dec 5, 2007)

This light is so tempting, but I have to wait as I just purchased a Fenix L2d-CE Q5. Maybe I will wait until they release a Black Q5 version?


----------



## PocketBeam (Dec 5, 2007)

I have had my L0D Q4 for several days now and I have wowed many people and I still have the wow that is bright giggles myself. This light is not my brightest but it is by far my favorite.


----------



## topcat39 (Dec 5, 2007)

After reading all the posts in this thread (especially Luminescent's insightful posts :bow, the posts in 4sevens Holiday Speacils thread, and some other threads - I bought one last night, even though I have a L0D CE that I like a lot. 

I even bought some 10440 batts and charger to run in the L0D CE, but decided against using 10440's except to wow folks from time to time. The L0D Q4 should have plenty of wow factor as well as being a very good EDC light coupled with use as an emergency light in the unlikely event of an emergency that turns out to be more likely than not . 

Cheers:thumbsup:


----------



## todo (Dec 6, 2007)

Thanks to Luminesent for an excellent thread, highlighting this very usefull little light.

Here is a picture of my 10 month old everyday carry LOD ce. It just won't quit, but if it does I have the even better Q4 waiting to take its place. Note the tommy tape on front of light makes it much easier to handle one handed, and the tape on back (with bite marks LOL) making it bite able.


----------



## Lite_me (Dec 6, 2007)

Slick... I do something similar.


----------



## GBone (Dec 6, 2007)

An Amazing little light! :twothumbs

Got it on Monday and can't stop playing with it...

It seems to have a bit more flood than my L0D CE as well as a more intense and whiter beam.

The tube is an reddish orange, it has really begun to grow on me. So much so that I have already gifted my CE to a friend... she loves it! :kiss:


----------



## ymfymf (Dec 7, 2007)

The specification of this LOD Q4 is impressive. And I don't mind the red colour. Anyhow, from the fenix store web photos of this little light, it seems that there are the X'mas decorations "printed" alongside the fenix logos. The problem is that I couldn't see clearly how it looks on the logos and I couldn't tell really if I mind it. Any LOD Q4 owners post pictures on the logos of this little beauty please?

ymfymf


----------



## alfablue (Dec 7, 2007)

I thought the xmas logos would be a deal breaker (especially as I bought this for a gift), but they are really very small, and barely discernable to my eyesight.

Here's a pic that shows them clearly (but this is larger than life-size, obviously)


----------



## ymfymf (Dec 7, 2007)

Thanks for the photo alfablue. I think I like the red colour honestly but I won't buy it because of the X'mas logo.

ymfymf


----------



## alfablue (Dec 7, 2007)

Really, they are really unnoticeable, just look like feint white blobs without a really close look. And if you use the included clip, that can be positioned to cover them. I first ordered the LOD CE because of the logos, but n hindsight they are a small price to pay for 75 lumens over 50 lumens.


----------



## PocketBeam (Dec 7, 2007)

Nobody I have shown the light to has noticed the Holiday icons. They are so small and when you hold the light they are covered up. To be honest I had forgotten about them until I saw these posts. On one hand I kind of like a note telling me how old the light is. That way months from now when I am trying to remember when I got this light, I will know. Anyway, the red/orange is nicely done and is much better in person I think. And the holiday symbols don't stand out as much as these pictures make it seem to.

This light rocks!


----------



## Wolf (Dec 7, 2007)

+1 about the holiday fenix logo not really being a deal breaker, I got mine last week and the copper color has grown on me and bells/bow dont really stick out much. Heck I knew it was a 1xAAA light when I ordered it and was still surprised at how small the thing is when I got it in...


----------



## GBone (Dec 8, 2007)

Wolf said:


> +1 about the holiday fenix logo not really being a deal breaker, I got mine last week and the copper color has grown on me and bells/bow dont really stick out much. Heck I knew it was a 1xAAA light when I ordered it and was still surprised at how small the thing is when I got it in...



here! here! I agree 100% :twothumbs


----------



## moses (Dec 8, 2007)

I actually like the Christmas logo....


----------



## Marduke (Dec 8, 2007)

Christmas logo? What Christmas logo???


----------



## PAB (Dec 8, 2007)

I figured out a use for those stupid little bar code tags that some stores hand out. They work great as spacers to keep the light on your keychain from being scratched up. I've had my light on my keychain since the 23rd of November and I still don't have a scratch on it. Wish I had thought of it earlier. I had a good sized SKA on my keychain and it really beat up my last light.


----------



## swxb12 (Dec 8, 2007)

Marduke said:


> Christmas logo? What Christmas logo???



If you look at it, you can only think xmas. Close enough.


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 8, 2007)

swxb12 said:


> If you look at it, you can only think xmas. Close enough.



Actually I would rearrange that statement a bit to say;

If you look at it close enough, you can only think xmas (because we are talking about tiny symbols the size of newsprint, and you do have to look pretty closely to even see them).

The 'Christmas Logo' consists of very tiny font sized symbols at either end of the normal "Fenix L0D" logo, a tiny snowflake and ribbon on the left and a tiny snowflake and bell on the right.

In forty years when you show this little jewel to your great grand children, the red color and those tiny marks will help you remember that you and your trusted little friend first got aquainted way back in Dec '07 ("Or was it '06? Grandpaw has such a bad memory these, days ... Here pull my finger") :hahaha:


----------



## Ice (Dec 9, 2007)

Well, isn't Christmas the time when the "Living Light came into our world" anyway?! :twothumbs


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 13, 2007)

I created this image to illustrate a point about how much better a cutting edge LED light is than an incandescent in another thread, but I thought that folks who have picked up an L0D-Q4 special edition light (or or thinking about it) might be interested –









Runtime for the big D-Cell Mags is just over an hour to 50% with output dropping from the first minute.

The L0D can do more output right from the start and then keep doing it for an hour and twenty minutes on a single L92 Lithium AAA cell with almost no light falloff, and will also run on a single AAA NiMH cell if you want to run rechargables, with a good hour of runtime.

Mag 4 D-Cell weight with batteries is about 2.2 pounds (1Kg)

L0D-Q4 weight with one L92 Lithium cell is less than 1 ounce (22.1 grams)


----------



## thwang99 (Dec 13, 2007)

gunga said:


> Luminescent, thanks you for your very informative post. I have been running L0Ds on 10440 on and off, and had decent success. 3 out of 4 were fine, but 2 tended to flicker on low mode for some odd reason. One flickered on low, then died eventually.
> 
> After reading your post, I see your logic on low mode not protecting the light. I think I will switch back to nimh full time. I don't get the blinding brightness, but I get a long running low mode back and I don't have to worry about killing my battery all the time.
> 
> ...



Would it be possible guys to take out the spring, and put some sort of resistive element there? Even just 0.1 ohms of resistance should help protect the LED, and you wouldn't lose much brightness, or must efficiency, since the voltage is so low, right?

- Tony


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 13, 2007)

thwang99 said:


> Would it be possible guys to take out the spring, and put some sort of resistive element there? Even just 0.1 ohms of resistance should help protect the LED, and you wouldn't lose much brightness, or must efficiency, since the voltage is so low, right?
> 
> - Tony



I have thought of the same thing.

You could tinker with the resistor values to get 400 or 500 mA of drive max.

A major change in 10440 Lithium cell chemistry or brand might require you to recheck the current and tweak the resistor values, but it would definitely be more stable during day to day operation and would give some way to compensate for the variable Vf of the Q4.

A pair of 1/8 watt SMT resistors could be embedded into a small circular piece of standard thickness 0.062 inch FR4 double sided PCB material, which would be cut with small rectangular openings to allow the two 1/8 SMT resistors to be embedded inside the board with one side of each resistor soldered to the top side copper foil and the other side soldered to the bottom side copper foil. 

The resistors would be selected to have slightly less thickness than the PCB material (which should be true for most 1/8 Watt SMT resistors), and would be mounted at a slight angle in the cutout opening so one end of the resistor is flush with the upper surface and the other end is flush with the lower surface. This angled mounting arrangement would help keep the side of each resistor that is not connected to it’s respective layer from shorting to the unwanted side.

I think such a tiny disk would easily fit under the tail spring, though you might need to trim a turn or so off the spring so it's not as tight.

The disk could also simply be dropped into the top side head between the top of the battery and the bottom of the driver board. A small solder bump could be added to the side of the disk which contacts the underside of the driver to insure good contact.

The top position would be better for day to day swapping between battery types, but the bottom position would be simpler for full time use of 10440's and would give the resistor disk good heatsinking into the body of the light at the bottom of tube where there is not much going on to create heat which would even out the temperature distribution much better.

To cut the current to the Q4 down to a more reasonable level the resistors would only have to dissipate less than 1/4 watt, but even this small amount of heat coupled right on the top post of the battery might make the 10440's thermal protect trip early, so the position under the tail spring is by far the safest bet.

Personally, I would love to work all this out in more detail and post some pics, but I am quite pleased with the light level my little L0D-Q4 puts out on plain old NiMH cells and really impressed with the way it works on L92 Lithium cells, so I don't really plan to run 10440's any time soon. Sorry.

With Slightly dimmed down 10440’s you would still probably be looking at less than 1/4 to 1/6 the runtime of L92 lithium cells and one of the things that attracted me to the L0D was it’s ‘best in class’ efficiency and runtime.

Take a look at this image again.








Now keep in mind that this comparison was based on actual measurements reported at FlashlightReviews.com with normal NiMH and L92 type batteries. 

Do you really need more light than a 4 D-Cell Maglight?


----------



## tsask (Dec 15, 2007)

chibato said:


> Anyone know if the LOD Q4 will be available in other colors, or any rumors of a Q5 version?


 
That's what I would need to hear.

My Q5 P1D CREE blows away my SSC lights. a Q5 in the L0D could be impressive.I would want black, not the red, or if custom colors are an option what about navy blue?


----------



## Ice (Dec 15, 2007)

Well, I recently got my L0D Q4 and like it, but I compared it to a regular L0D-CE and have to say there is a very small difference if any!
The light colour is much whiter or "bluer" if you want, so it may look a little brighter but I tested the two lights outside and there really was no big difference.
Also the colour of my L0D Q4 is more orange than red. Well, better then pink... 
At least I like the christmas logo a lot since I'm a huge Christmas-fan! 

P.S.:
I would really prefere a higher PWM frequency over a few percent more light!


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 15, 2007)

Ice said:


> Well, I recently got my L0D Q4 and like it, but I compared it to a regular L0D-CE and have to say there is a very small difference if any!
> The light colour is much whiter or "bluer" if you want, so it may look a little brighter but I tested the two lights outside and there really was no big difference.
> Also the colour of my L0D Q4 is more orange than red. Well, better then pink...
> At least I like the christmas logo a lot since I'm a huge Christmas-fan!
> ...




The original L0D-CE was spec'ed at only 50 Lumens where the new L0D-Q4 is spec'ed at 75 Lumens.

This is enough of a difference to definitely be noticeable but it takes something like a 2 to 1 difference before it will really start to look dramatic.

Also the Lumens spec may have been a little on the conservative side on your original L0D-CE as later P4's improved in output, and tended to fall near the top of their bin.

In any case this is one bright little light! 

I agree 100% on the PWM frequency. My C-LE uses about 3 times higher frequency, and that does make a difference. 

With the L0D I rarely notice the PWM, but with the C-LE I NEVER notice it.

In Europe standard fluorescent lights flicker at about 100Hz just like the L0D (they turn on and off twice in each full 50Hz AC cycle, once on the positive swing and once on the negative swing), but in the U.S.A. this would be 120Hz, which is a just bit higher than the frequency the Fenix L0D-Q4 uses for PWM so I think we are a little less able to tune it out.

I think Fenix felt that they were on solid ground because the 100 Hz they used is higher than even ergonomic computer monitors (that only have to refresh at 75 Hz or higher), but the light output created by the PWM is choppier than a monitor, so you need a higher frequency like 300 to 1000 Hz to make the PWM really unnoticeable.

At first I thought that this would only involve a software change in the lights processor, so was a little miffed that Fenix hasn't made the change to a higher PWM frequency yet.

Now, as an engineer I think that I can see at least one reason that Fenix may be holding off. 

I think you can probably blame the 10440 crowd for this situation. You see the L0D was never designed for these cells, but does work after a fashion. Fenix is well aware that this is going on, and may be concerned that the change to a higher PWM frequency would result in much more stress on the PWM chopper MosFet when 10440's are used.

They may have done some testing on this and decided to leave things as they are to avoid problems, with higher failures in the PWM circuit. 

The old V1.0 C-LE used a lower PWM frequency which was even more annoying than the L0D, but with the V1.2 and V2.0 versions, now the frequency is much higher, and I find that it is almost completly unnoticeable, but the V1.0 C-LE would work with 10440 cells and the V1.2 and V2.0 will NOT.

Even the slight increase to 300 Hz like the C-LE uses would be a big improvement, and there are small SMT MosFET's available now which should be able to handle this higher frequency even with the higher current of a 10440.

In any case, even if they have to do a little re-engineering on the driver, I hope that Fenix will figure out some way to bump up the PWM frequency by at least a factor of two or three, because this low frequency PWM issue keeps some folks from even considering the L0D, and they are loosing sales as a result of this.


----------



## StandardBattery (Dec 15, 2007)

Wouldn't it be more likely that they are sticking with 100Hz so that they keep their place on top of the hill as runtime king?


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 17, 2007)

StandardBattery said:


> Wouldn't it be more likely that they are sticking with 100Hz so that they keep their place on top of the hill as runtime king?



You could be right. MosFET's can switch in nanoseconds, so even several thousand Hz PWM should not technically be a problem, but it all depends on how you drive them. Another issue is that when you chop the light drive on and off very quickly the lights boost regulator either has to respond to these changes in load or get gated on and off with the same PWM signal, and some regulator circuits don't stay stable when the load is switched too quickly.

All this technical mumbo-jumbo aside, I agree with you 100 percent about the L0D being the most flexible light out there when it comes to offering both jaw dropping brightness in high and super long runtimes in low.

I don't know a single other AAA light which can do 75 lumens on high and still offer as long a runtime on low, as the L0D.

The Lumapower 'Avenger' could be a contender, but it looks like it already has a few issues, like the light doesn't really come anywhere close to 100 lumens, and some have already reported having trouble with the two position twisty level switch.

Have to wait and see how that all turns out, but with Fenix finally starting to get a little competition in the single AAA category, we may finally be able to see some changes.

Overall, aside from tweaking the PWM frequency and maybe driving the emitter a tad harder in high I wouldn't really change much, because the L0D is a super little light

I would be willing to see the runtime in high go down to 45 minutes to get 100 plus lumens. This wouldn't be too bad a tradeoff, because unlike the Lumapower Avenger the L0D has a very nice MEDIUM mode which comes up by default anyway, and using a higher PWM frequency would make this medium mode and the low mode even nicer. 


Also we should mention that this PWM thing shouldn't be much of an issue with the folks who are considering a single mode light because those lights run in the equivelent of the L0D's high mode all the time, and when you put the L0D in it's highest mode there is also NO PWM.


----------



## garence (Dec 17, 2007)

I second the Kudos to Fenix.

The L0D Q4 is a very good buy, despite the silly bell and bow imprinting. My L0D appears much more like copper than red, which I think looks sharp (although I do like the red too on the L0P--it has that spacecraft anodized aluminum look going for it).

Despite the PWM at the low setting, this light looks clean and bright. The center spot is bright and the spill is usable. I found the UI a little odd at first, but now that I've gotten used to it I like it. This makes a great general purpose EDC. I wouldn't lash it to a keychain though, as the anodizing feels like it will probably scrape off over time. I think I might try some heat shrink tubing on it. Can anyone suggest a good place to get some reasonably priced?


----------



## jbviau (Dec 20, 2007)

I know a lot of people have hesitated on this light due to its color, so maybe you all will find this interesting:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000ZM8CNA/?tag=cpf0b6-20

Yes, a black Q4 L0D-CE! I don't think it's a typo (i.e. that the red color was mistakenly not listed) because you can find this listing for a red one alongside it on Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000UTQ4WO/?tag=cpf0b6-20

Can anyone confirm? I'm finding it hard to resist buying one of these. If it were in olive, I'd pull the trigger for sure.


----------



## bourget117 (Dec 20, 2007)

jbviau said:


> I know a lot of people have hesitated on this light due to its color, so maybe you all will find this interesting:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000ZM8CNA/?tag=cpf0b6-20
> 
> ...




I think its either a typo or the seller thinks that anyone looking wouldnt know better. I noticed this myself a few days ago and thought that it was exactly what im looking for. I want the 75 lumens but in black, not red. I emailed the seller and have yet to hear back from him. Also when you go to his storefront(its not directly coming from Amazon) and click on that light, it brings you to a LOD CE.


----------



## Ducati (Dec 20, 2007)

*DOA!!!!*

:thumbsdow

I just received two L0D Q4s via USPS First-Class mail today. I'm very upset and disappointed that one of them does not work. I've tried different batteries and it doesn't turn on. I tried calling them but they're closed for the day. Now I have to go to the post office and ship this thing back to them and then hope that they'll send one back to me. Can they ship one immediately? I bought these lights as gifts and now I'm screwed...

I read somewhere on this forum that Fenix-Store has an active member on this forum. Who is this person?

BTW: these lights are not red (it's not even close) contrary to what the Fenix-Store website states and illustrates. Plus, the color isn't the same between the two that I received. What kind of company is this???


----------



## bourget117 (Dec 20, 2007)

*Re: DOA!!!!*

Where did you purchase them from? Was it one of the black LOD Q4s from Amazon?

UOTE=Ducati;2274547]:thumbsdow

I just received two L0D Q4s via USPS First-Class mail. I'm very upset and disappointed that one of them does not work. I've tried different batteries and it doesn't turn on. I tried calling them but they're closed for the day. Now I have to go to the post office and ship this thing back to them and then hope that they'll send one back to me. Can they ship one immediately? I bought these lights as gifts and now I'm screwed...

I read somewhere on this forum that Fenix-Store has an active member on this forum. Who is this person?[/QUOTE]


----------



## jbviau (Dec 20, 2007)

Ducati, the guy is 4sevens. 

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/member.php?u=4303


----------



## Ducati (Dec 20, 2007)

*Re: DOA!!!!*



bourget117 said:


> Where did you purchase them from? Was it one of the black LOD Q4s from Amazon?


No, it was the "red" ones from the fenix-store website...


----------



## Ducati (Dec 20, 2007)

jbviau said:


> Ducati, the guy is 4sevens.
> 
> http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/member.php?u=4303



thanks! Why do they still market this light as red in color? The box is closer to red. The light is closer to orange and copper.


----------



## Luminescent (Dec 20, 2007)

Ducati said:


> thanks! Why do they still market this light as red in color? The box is closer to red. The light is closer to orange and copper.



Sorry you ran into trouble with the light. Give the folks at the Fenix-Store a chance and I am sure they will straighten it out for you.

As far as the color on your two lights goes, my light was from an early shipment and it is indeed a very deep red almost burgundy color, but even with consecutive batches under pretty carefully controlled conditions you will still get some variations in all color anodizing, and these variations are much more pronounced with the thicker HAIII type finish.

This is why most commercial firms won’t offer color on HAIII Anodizing at all.

According to 4sevens in another thread, Fenix is shifting their Anodizing to in house production.

My guess is that the big demand for this light has caught Fenix by surprise and they either had to do another quick batch to meet demand, or else they jobbed the anodizing out to one of their other vendors, and there were slightly greater color variations.

In another thread I see that Fenix apparently plans to kill their ‘natural’ colored lights. I am not sure if this just applies to the T1 or if they will do this across the board.

I for one will be REALLY REALLY REALLY UNHAPPY if Fenix doesn’t offer the L0D in ‘natural’ again after the holidays.

Killing the L0D natural option would be a monumentally STUPID move, because the lighter ‘natural’ finish shows wear a lot less on keychain duty, but if Fenix does do this it will be because of just these kinds of complaints.

If we ***** enough about this plan to kill the ‘natural finish’ lights, perhaps Fenix will change it’s mind on this, but on the other hand, if the only bitching they are hearing is about “color variations”, then they will simply go back to the Henry Ford Model-T color options, i.e. “you can have any color you like, as long as it’s black”.

I know a lot of folks wouldn't mind this because they are waiting for the L0D-Q4 to be introduced in black, but for the record I have to say that, though I like my RED L0D-Q4 a lot, and have a place picked out for it which will help keep it's red finish in good shape, my next L0D will be a natural finish version (preferably a Rebel 100 or Q5) or NONE AT ALL.


----------



## patycake57 (Dec 20, 2007)

I seem to recall that the shift to in house anodizing will eliminate the natural in favor of olive drab, which is the finish on the T1. It sounds like that finish is fairly good, so I'll be looking forward to the new light introductions in January.


----------



## Ducati (Dec 20, 2007)

*Re: DOA!!!!*



Ducati said:


> :thumbsdow
> 
> I just received two L0D Q4s via USPS First-Class mail today. I'm very upset and disappointed that one of them does not work. I've tried different batteries and it doesn't turn on. I tried calling them but they're closed for the day. Now I have to go to the post office and ship this thing back to them and then hope that they'll send one back to me. Can they ship one immediately? I bought these lights as gifts and now I'm screwed...
> 
> ...


I received a very quick response tonight from Fenix-Store. They will express mail two flashlights tomorrow and hopefully I'll receive it Saturday or Monday. They will even try to pick the ones that are closer to red in color. I just have to send back the original lights upon receipt of the new ones. Hopefully everything will be okay.


----------



## da.gee (Dec 21, 2007)

I will add my kudos to this fine light. I gifted a couple to some clients and they are in love. Both are pretty non-technical but they are digging this bright little bugger. One e-mails me and says he is now an everyday carrier of the light. The other was showing his off to the office gadget geek and was overjoyed at making his colleague jealous with his own toy. He now carries it too. 

Just delivered another to a techy type client who I know is a latent flashaholic. Can't wait to hear his feedback.

Great light. Not red though. I would have to call it coppery orangeish if anything. Cool cuz the two guys mentioned above are both alumni of my alma mater whose colors are orange and black. I attached a nice black split ring for them instead of the included silver and voila, school spirit!


----------



## Ble (Dec 21, 2007)

I want one L0D Q4.

I'm ok with red / copper orange color. But I don't like the snowflakes and bells.
Do you know if would be easy to remove those, without affecting the color?

Thank you.


----------



## alfablue (Dec 21, 2007)

The bells etc are really tiny, you will hardly notice them in use.


----------



## Ble (Dec 21, 2007)

I know that they must be tiny, but I'm really picky, and I'm sure I'll try to remove them. So I'm afraid of ending with a scratched flashlight, or with a red and dirty-silver one, if I use chemical products on it.

Anyone have tried to remove it?

Do you think that could be easy?


----------



## mccavazos (Dec 21, 2007)

I just got a L0D Q4 in the mail. My previous AAA Keychain light was an ARC AAA from several years ago, and all I can say is WOW. This light is fantastic. It is actually smaller than what I thought it was going to be. I was originally skeptical about the color and Christmas designs, but once I had the light in my hand, all of that skepticism went away. The color is pretty cool, more copper-orange than red, and the small designs aren't noticeable unless you are looking for them. All in all this is a great light, its hard to believed that there is such a great amount of light coming from such a small package. 

Good job Fenix!


----------



## moses (Dec 21, 2007)

Got one for my wife and a friend got one for his. Highly recommended. Also highly recommend Energizer lithiums. pricey but worth it - much brighter.


----------



## CWR712 (Dec 21, 2007)

Ble,

I think you will be largely unsucessful removing the bells. They are not printed, but engraved into the light. There has been a huge dispute here about this feature of the LOD. In actuality, they are so small, I doubt you will really even notice them (the light itself is only slightly larger than the AAA battery that drives it). The engraving is TINY.


----------



## Alan B (Dec 21, 2007)

Get some heatshrink in your favorite color and cover the logo/bells. Red, black, purple, whatever. Increase the grip and personalize the color.

-- Alan


----------



## Burgess (Dec 22, 2007)

I can likewise recommend Energizer Lithium cells (L92) for this wonderful flashlight. :thumbsup:


Yes, they are a bit pricey.


But they perform GREAT, and you only use one at a time. 


Love my Fenix L0D-CE Q2 (natural finish).

Can only *imagine* what the Q4 looks like. 

_


----------



## Marduke (Dec 22, 2007)

Just place the included clip to cover the logo. It hides it completely.


----------



## KWillets (Dec 22, 2007)

We just got 2 delivered overnight from Fenix-store (I'm running a little late this year). Great gifts, if I can keep my hands off them.

I think I'll put in an L92 with each.


----------



## Ble (Dec 22, 2007)

Thank you alfablue, mccavazos, CWR712, Alan B and Marduke

I think that I'll wait to the Q4 natural finish, or to the copper-orange non Christmas version, the first one they release.


----------



## jbviau (Dec 22, 2007)

Well the natural finish has been discontinued at Fenix. Maybe copper non-holiday will appear down the line, but Trevor at Fenix Store told me in an email that there definitely wouldn't be an olive q4 version of the L0D-CE. Bummer! Then again, maybe that means an even better bin will make it into this light in some color other than black!


----------



## WadeF (Dec 24, 2007)

For anyone who is interested Walmart has red metalic fishing lure swivels. I found the split ring to be a pain to get onto the LOD, especially without scratching up the HA. These swiveling clasps are easier to snap on, then you can attach the split ring to the end of the swivel. The red matches the red red LOD-CE's pretty well, but won't match the orange-red/copper/light red, etc LOD's as well.


----------



## Ducati (Dec 26, 2007)

*Re: DOA!!!!*



Ducati said:


> Ducati said:
> 
> 
> > :thumbsdow I just received two L0D Q4s via USPS First-Class mail today. I'm very upset and disappointed that one of them does not work. I've tried different batteries and it doesn't turn on. I tried calling them but they're closed for the day. Now I have to go to the post office and ship this thing back to them and then hope that they'll send one back to me. Can they ship one immediately? I bought these lights as gifts and now I'm screwed...
> ...


Well, I received two new lights on Saturday morning. Very nice of Fenix to ship it express. (It cost them $16). I only needed one but they sent two. I sent back the bad one and the extra. I did notice that the beam was not consistent. One of them had a dead spot in the center and the beam color for two of the three was a bit purplish and uneven. Only one of them had a nice even yellowish/white tint. They're a little longer than the Arc AAA, I think. I can't find my Arc that i purchased in 2003. Did see it a few months ago. It's here somewhere. Anyways, the light is bright and the finish is good, although I did find that the one with the yellow/white tint to have some very fine lines in the HAIII finish.


----------



## sabre7 (Dec 26, 2007)

Sounds like you don't like much of anything about the L0DQ4. Maybe you would be happier if sent them all back and got something else entirely? Lots of great AAAs out there!


----------



## HoopleHead (Dec 30, 2007)

had the red holiday one, really liked it but hated red. bought the black L0D CE Q4 version on ebay. as noted, the medium and low lumens are slightly lower, but the high is still 75 (as compared to the holiday version). so the red one goes back. nice!


----------



## Ilikeshinythings (Dec 31, 2007)

You probably bought the CE model. It would be hard to distinguish which light is brighter with the naked eye.


----------



## Marduke (Dec 31, 2007)

Seeing as how the P4 and Q4 versions use the same EXACT driver, a lot of people are buying black P4 models thinking they are Q4's. Be very careful of these ebay lights.


----------



## jayflash (Dec 31, 2007)

The red LOD Christmas special is one of two lights she really likes; the other one is a 2C Victorinox LED.


----------



## Sir Lightalot (Dec 31, 2007)

Ilikeshinythings said:


> You probably bought the CE model. It would be hard to distinguish which light is brighter with the naked eye.



fenix tactical starts shipping the black model in late january and it does have the lower low... http://www.fenixtactical.com/fenix-l0d-q4.html
is there any visible difference to the led between the P4 and Q4? Not in brightness but the led itself.


----------



## Marduke (Dec 31, 2007)

Sir Lightalot said:


> fenix tactical starts shipping the black model in late january and it does have the lower low... http://www.fenixtactical.com/fenix-l0d-q4.html
> is there any visible difference to the led between the P4 and Q4? Not in brightness but the led itself.



They made a copy paste error, as the low modes will be identical to the red version.


----------



## cv3po (Dec 31, 2007)

Sir Lightalot said:


> fenix tactical starts shipping the black model in late january and it does have the lower low... http://www.fenixtactical.com/fenix-l0d-q4.html
> is there any visible difference to the led between the P4 and Q4? Not in brightness but the led itself.


 

?? I thought they all (LOD's) used the same driver. The brightness increases are due to emitter efficiency right? How could the q4 in one light have the same high but lower med and low? Methinks it's a typo or just general confusion with a p4 or rebel (the med and low levels for the light linked to here are the same as a rebel lod). Weird Whatever the case I freaking LOVE my lod-q4 (red). I can't stop comparing it to my original cmg infinity, which is still a great light and gets alot of use! I would have paid Titan prices for this light 5-7 years ago


----------



## Ilikeshinythings (Jan 1, 2008)

The L0D Q4 truly is a marvel of modern engineering. I don't even notice the holiday inscription since it is so small. I replaced my original Orb Raw with the L0D on my car keys, and I couldn't be happier!


----------



## FlashlightPhreak (Jan 1, 2008)

I agree with Iliekshinnythings. The LOD Q4 quickly replaced my ARC AAA-P. It's bigtime bright for such a little dude ! Hard to imagine a brighter single cell AAA led could be developed that could be brighter than the Q4 -- and if a brighter one is developed, the runtime would likely be less than 1 hour on high mode !?!

Mine is a coppery-orange color. It has grown on me, compared to typically buying everything in "natural"...

Long Live Fenix leds !!!!!

Happy New Year y'all


----------



## Ilikeshinythings (Jan 1, 2008)

good good! One thing I notice about the L0D is that it has a very useable beam for most applications...at least those that don't involve great distance'. The hot spot is pretty large, so throw is not as great as it would/could be, but it does its job greatly. I bought 3, one for me, one for my dad and one for somebody who has not yet been chosen. I am also considering having one shipped to my good friend who is in Iraq, hopefully they will ship straight from fenix-store to where he is stationed!


----------



## Luminescent (Jan 1, 2008)

cv3po said:


> ?? I thought they all (LOD's) used the same driver. The brightness increases are due to emitter efficiency right? How could the q4 in one light have the same high but lower med and low? Methinks it's a typo or just general confusion with a p4 or rebel (the med and low levels for the light linked to here are the same as a rebel lod). Weird Whatever the case I freaking LOVE my lod-q4 (red). I can't stop comparing it to my original cmg infinity, which is still a great light and gets alot of use! I would have paid Titan prices for this light 5-7 years ago



I don't want to cause anyone to feel bad about their purchase (especially so close to the holidays), but you are correct about the L0D driver having a fixed ratio between Medium, High, and Low, so something seems a bit fishy here.

The lower levels are set by the PWM ratio which is fixed in the lights MPU software. Folks have been bugging Fenix to update the L0D to a higher PWM frequency forever and they haven't, so the chance that they magically kicked out a special batch of lights with a different PWM ratio between medium, high, and low is essentially ZERO.

A more likely explanation by far is that the seller was LYING (this was EBAY right?). The way it works is like this; first someone who has read this thread sends a auction enquiry asking if the L0D lights the seller is offering are Q4's. Realizing that this is what folks want to hear, the light _magically_ becomes a Q4. Some of the Hong Kong dealers are really bad about this. Maybe it's a language issue, but they seem to consider claims like "Q4" to be on the same order as U.S. companies do words like "stylish” (which essentially means nothing).

Then why would the light look about the same on the HIGH mode?

First, It's harder to judge brightness when the L0D is in the super bright high mode, and if he had been playing with the original Red Q4 light for a few days when the Black "Q4" arrived, the battery in the original Red Q4 light would most likely have run down a little and not have been able to sustain quite as much output in the high mode as the fresher cell in the newer light. This would explain why the lower modes were still noticeably brighter on the original Red L0D-Q4, and the seeming conflict with the modes not working the same between the two lights. Actually the modes ARE working the same, it's just that on the L0D, as the battery runs down, the difference between high and medium shrinks (low modes stay regulated, but high drops down a bit as the battery can't sustain the needed current).

So my guess it that this guys "black L0D-Q4" is actually a standard black L0D-CE P4 light, and it’s just yet another case of an Ebay seller who figured that Q4 was the right ‘magic word’ he needed to make the sale, like all the 180 lumen lights on Ebay that only put out 60 to 80 lumens (if they work at all).

The bottom line here is that if you just really can't stand the idea of a RED or COPPER colored L0D Q4, then it's probably a good idea to wait until one of the more reputable dealers like the Fenix-Store have another version in stock.


----------



## Ilikeshinythings (Jan 2, 2008)

Sound advice indeed.


----------



## Bolster (Jan 15, 2008)

Great threat. It sales-talked me into purchasing two. I much prefer bright colored flashlights. It's hard to find a black one in the dark.


----------



## cv3po (Jan 15, 2008)

Luminescent said:


> The bottom line here is that if you just really can't stand the idea of a RED or COPPER colored L0D Q4, then it's probably a good idea to wait until one of the more reputable dealers like the Fenix-Store have another version in stock.


 

FYI, most of ya already know this but for those who don't...................Fenix-Store is selling black and olive Q4's now. If you've been waiting to buy one because of the red color then you're all out of excuses now


----------



## Bearcat (Jan 15, 2008)

cv3po said:


> FYI, most of ya already know this but for those who don't...................Fenix-Store is selling black and olive Q4's now. If you've been waiting to buy one because of the red color then you're all out of excuses now


 
Yeah, but I want a natual colored one to go on my key-chain.:mecry:


----------



## mokim (Jan 23, 2008)

I received my black L0D Q4. And I have been using it for a couple off days. All I can say is WOW :twothumbs This is a incredible light. Iam very impressed.

I use it as an EDC and at work for aircraft inspection. In stead off those ridiculous 2 D cell mag lights supplied by the boss.

Iam thinking about ordering a L2D for the longer runtime and the extra lumens.
But the L0d works good for now with a spare battery.


----------



## PocketBeam (Jan 23, 2008)

mokim, I love my L0D Q4 reddish, it is very handy. But for larger jobs I will grab my L2D Rebel 100. That way I save my L0D for other things, and my L2D has turbo mode when I really need to see details, plus the longer runtime. I think these two lights make a good set. Now if Fenix made a headlamp...


----------



## hiredgun (Jan 23, 2008)

cv3po said:


> FYI, most of ya already know this but for those who don't...................Fenix-Store is selling black and olive Q4's now. If you've been waiting to buy one because of the red color then you're all out of excuses now



I wanna purple one! Wahh! Wahhh!

(I do like my copper red though)


----------



## jbviau (Feb 1, 2008)

Thought it might be worth resurrecting this thread to let people in the LED forum know that there's a good review of the L0D-Q4 in olive up in the Reviews forum:

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/188124


----------

