# Ultrafire C3 Cree Q5 LED Flashlight (DX sku.10727)



## mikek753 (Feb 1, 2008)

Hi all,

Finally I got this flashlight.
Somehow I'm a little disappointed 
I read somewhere it has build in regulator that allows 1 or 2 AA to output the same brightness just less runtime with 1 vs 2 AA.
No, it doesn't work in my flashlight.
With 1 AA it's dim and outputs less the RC-G2.
With 2 AA it's about the same as P4 (WF-606A), not any brighter  and isn't as narrow.
I expected to get brighter then P4.
Any one else can comment this?


----------



## bessiebenny (Feb 1, 2008)

Hmm. That doesn't sound too good. I've got one on the way so I'll update my review once I get it.
One of the review on DX says it is much brighter than the P4 version of the C3. We'll see.


----------



## Marduke (Feb 1, 2008)

#1 UF C3 problem....

Have you cleaned ALL the contacts with alcohol swabs??


#2 problem.....

Are you using alkalines?


----------



## LuxChaser (Feb 2, 2008)

got this last week, a quick lube+deoxit session entailed.
threw in some fresh eneloops and it IS noticeably brighter than
my UF 606a. 
my 2cents


----------



## LA OZ (Feb 2, 2008)

This should be in the LED section. It is not a review.


----------



## LightWalker (Feb 2, 2008)

mikek753 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> Finally I got this flashlight.
> Somehow I'm a little disappointed
> ...


 
I got my Ultrafire C3 Q5 today and here are my observations on my sample.
With 2 AA it is brighter than my older P4 C3 and seems to have brighter spill than my Fenix L2T V2 but the hot spot is brighter on the L2T.

With one AA it is dimmer than my older P4 C3. :sigh:

The WF-606A must be driven harder. :thinking:
I've read that the WF-606A has a pretty short runtime.

The C3 P4 on 2 AA has almost a 4 hour runtime.
I'm hoping the C3 Q5 on 2 AA has the same runtime. If it does then it will last more than twice as long as the WF-606A.



Cody,

Thy Word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
Psalms 119:105


----------



## LightWalker (Feb 2, 2008)

After looking at CPF member Selfbuilt's page: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2207113

I'm thinking that the new C3 Q5 has the same driver as the multistage C3 because it is much brighter on 2 AA than 1AA.

If so then the runtime for the C3 Q5 on 2 AA will be about half as long as the older C3 with P4 Cree.

I guess I will do a runtime test on my C3 Q5.:duh2:
I will post my results later.


Cody,

Thy Word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
Psalms 119:105


----------



## LightWalker (Feb 2, 2008)

I did a runtime test on my C3 Q5 on 2AA and it dimmed out after about 55 minutes. Maybe my Eneloops were not as fresh as I thought, but still a big disappointment.:mecry:

I am charging my Eneloops on my La crosse BC-900 and will probably do a runtime test on my C3 Q5 and C3 P4 with Eneloops fresh off the charger tonight or tomorrow.


----------



## bessiebenny (Feb 2, 2008)

According to Takebeat - run time is about the same with both 1AA or 2AA for this UF C3 Q5. Brightness is similar also for both. ?!
Seems to last around 100 minutes with both 1AA and 2AA. Very different to other C3's. (Assuming the usage of 2500mAh AA)
Also, he says it gets hot to the point where it is hard to touch after extended power on. Eek.

Hope he just got a dud. But I doubt it. I'll see once I get mine. 
btw, It is built cheaper than original C3. What is Ultrafire doing? geez.


----------



## bessiebenny (Feb 2, 2008)

Oops. Double posted.

Lightwalker, your results seems to confirm Takebeat's results.
I guess we cannot expect the old characteristics of C3 now. =(


----------



## LightWalker (Feb 2, 2008)

bessiebenny said:


> According to Takebeat - run time is about the same with both 1AA or 2AA for this UF C3 Q5. Brightness is similar also for both. ?!
> Seems to last around 100 minutes with both 1AA and 2AA. Very different to other C3's. (Assuming the usage of 2500mAh AA)
> Also, he says it gets hot to the point where it is hard to touch after extended power on. Eek.
> 
> ...


 
Runtime and brightness are about the same on both 1 and 2 AA?:thinking:
That don't sound right. If so I would use it with 1 AA since there would be no advantage to running 2 AA.

I may do a 1AA runtime test also. I bet my Q5 will last longer on 1AA than it did on 2AA since it is so dim on 1AA.

I cupped the head in my hand while doing the last test so it would act as a heatsink and it did get hot. I was switching from one hand to the other.

The build quality on my Q5 seems to be about the same as my original C3 which is good, the black paint on the new one is flat, not as shiny as the older one.

I got a P4 version about a month ago that had very poor build quality and stopped working. I exchanged it for a Romison. 

The original C3 I have now I got last summer.


----------



## bessiebenny (Feb 2, 2008)

Here's some differences that takebeat found between the old and new.
Can people who have the new C3 Q5 to confirm if theirs is the same?

1. Old one (left) had a switch module in a pill. C3 Q5 (right) does not. 
This can cause bad contact if the retention ring isn't tightly screwed.







2. Glass is thicker on the new one. (left) It also does not have an O-ring!


----------



## LuxChaser (Feb 2, 2008)

hey OP,
you're using the ceiling bounce test as per your claim it's not brighter
than P4 (WF606a) rather than shining against a wall and eyeballing it, right?


----------



## LightWalker (Feb 3, 2008)

I redid my runtime test with Eneloops fresh off my La Crosse BC-900 charger. 

The C3 Q5 on 2AA: It dimmed down at about *1:15* this time.
The Original C3 on 2 AA: *3:50*


----------



## psyrens (Feb 3, 2008)

LightWalker said:


> I redid my runtime test with Eneloops fresh off my La Crosse BC-900 charger.
> 
> The C3 Q5 on 2AA: It dimmed down at about *1:15* this time.
> The Original C3 on 2 AA: *3:50*


 
Thanks for your work Lightwalker!
So it looks c3 q5 has less than half runtime than original c3, is it more than twice brighter than original c3?
I ordered one, reading this thread makes me thinking canceling it. It's not shipped yet.


----------



## lightbug (Feb 3, 2008)

Thank you for the update Lightwalker. :thumbsup:
The runtime of the new C3 Q5 make me appreciate my original single mode C3 even more. It seems the original C3s are using much more effiecient circuit boards.


----------



## LightWalker (Feb 3, 2008)

psyrens said:


> Thanks for your work Lightwalker!
> So it looks c3 q5 has less than half runtime than original c3, is it more than twice brighter than original c3?
> I ordered one, reading this thread makes me thinking canceling it. It's not shipped yet.



Not the hotspot but maybe the spill. It seems to have a smoother beam profile than the older one. It is definitly being driven harder than original C3.


----------



## Spotpuff (Feb 4, 2008)

This is really disappointing; seems the Q5 one is a dud.

I got 2 of the P4 ones last week and other than the tailcap spring being really scratchy I am quite impressed with the runtime. 1 eneloop the light ran for about 1:45 before abruptly shutting down and people are reporting 4 hour runtimes on 2 AA's. This Q5 light is very, very disappointing. Why couldn't they just leave everything the same and change the LED?


----------



## LightWalker (Feb 4, 2008)

Doing a celing bounce my C3 Q5 seems brighter than my Fenix L2T V2 and my L1DCE on 14500. Shining it on the wall the hotspot does not seem as intense but the spill is very bright. My C3 Q5 gets Hot and the original C3 does not even get warm on 2 AA.


----------



## LightWalker (Feb 4, 2008)

bessiebenny said:


> Here's some differences that takebeat found between the old and new.
> Can people who have the new C3 Q5 to confirm if theirs is the same?
> 
> 1. Old one (left) had a switch module in a pill. C3 Q5 (right) does not.
> ...


 
I don't really have the proper tools to take it apart and am sorta affraid it won't work correctly if I do but my tailcap spring in my original C3 is copper and the new one is silver like the above. I don't think I will buy any more Ultrafire lights myself, there is just too much inconsistency in their lights, the AA lights anyway. It seems as though they have really cheaped out on the C3 by the looks of that new clickie.:thumbsdow


----------



## phreeflow (Feb 7, 2008)

LightWalker said:


> I got my Ultrafire C3 Q5 today and here are my observations on my sample.
> With 2 AA it is brighter than my older P4 C3 and seems to have brighter spill than my Fenix L2T V2 but the hot spot is brighter on the L2T.
> Cody,
> 
> ...


 
Hi All :wave:

Has anyone compared the output of the new Q5 C3 with the output of a 5-mode P4 C3 on high?? The 5-mode P4 C3 is noticeably brighter than the old single-mode P4 C3. So I'm really interested in how the new Q5 C3 compares with the old 5-mode C3. 

Thanks! :thumbsup:


----------



## phreeflow (Feb 15, 2008)

Anyone?:thinking:


----------



## Spotpuff (Feb 19, 2008)

Did some basic testing on the new Q5 C3. It's terrible. It's a bit brighter than the P4 (just barely by eye; no lux meter to test numbers though) but it starts to fade after about an hour and gets very dim whereas the P4 keeps going strong on 2 AA's.

The Q5 gets very hot, and has no O-ring behind the lens, so it rattles if you shake it.

Overall a very disappointing light.


----------



## CandleFranky (Feb 19, 2008)

Spotpuff said:


> The Q5 gets very hot, and has no O-ring behind the lens, so it rattles if you shake it.


Perhaps you can screw the driver a little deeper in the direction of the frontglass.


----------



## phreeflow (Feb 19, 2008)

deleted


----------



## Sampsa (Aug 8, 2009)

Maybe i'm stupid but 14500 battery seems to be too long for that flashlight? It works well with 2 aaa batteries but with one 14500 nothing happens, because its impossible to screw cap for lamp. Battery is too long about 3 mm.

Any ideas?


----------



## Thor20003 (Aug 9, 2009)

The clicky doesn't seem to be much cheaper looking than the one used in the Jetbeam pro model in this review. 

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/208280


----------

