# OLIGHT M20 WARRIOR SST50 TITANIUM LIMITED EDITION



## RainerWahnsinn (Aug 11, 2009)

6 hours earlier Sunlight and 6 hours earlier Olight







*Limited Edition: 500 pcs worldwide! 

• World-class super bright Luminus SST50 LED 
• Max 500 lumens 
• Max 30 hours long runtime 
• Tactical momentary-on forward switch, protruding switch for easy momentary or click to lock on 
• Three digitally controlled constant brightness levels and strobe. 20lm (30hrs)-80 lm (8hrs)-500 lm (1.2hrs); Strobe(500lm/2.4h). Note: Uses 2 pcs 
CR123A to get 1.2 hours runtime in high mode 
• Auto memorization of specific function for instant access 
• Linear functional adjustment for easy change of functions 
• Fluorescent tail switch for easy finding when operating in darkness. 
• Front removable Titanium Alloy striking bezel and rear striking bezel, removed for daily use, installed for close quarter combat 
• Ergonomic design with solid structure for easy operation 
• Full orange peel reflector, perfectly centered light source, for flawless beam with the longest shot 
• Cutting-edge reverse polarity protection, with the right batteries, you can leave them in long direction for extended period, it will not burn the circuit 
• Strong / quick to release lanyard to prevent loss and easy access 
• Highly Water resistant 
• Anti-shattering ultra clear lens, anti-scratching and anti-slip 
• Metal ‘cigar hold’ ring optimally positioned offer additional anti-roll properties and is pre-installed but removable for smoother body hold 
• Engineered anti-slip body texture that give you a firm tight grip 
• Stainless steel pocket clip • 
• Advanced digital power management system for best smooth and even brightness during battery life time *


----------



## Monocrom (Aug 11, 2009)

oo:

Sweet does not come close to describing that stunning beauty!


----------



## berry580 (Aug 11, 2009)

wow........ and how much?


----------



## RainerWahnsinn (Aug 11, 2009)

If you want to follow the actual discussion in my Forum, here is the link. Lot of us are Members of CPF and enjoy it.


----------



## icaruz (Aug 11, 2009)

Wow, what a beauty...:twothumbs
220 Euro...
will it take 18650?


----------



## RainerWahnsinn (Aug 11, 2009)

yes, for sure, although the text above dont says it, I asked bacK. And please dont understand it wrong 220€ is for members of our forum, for all others it is a little more.


----------



## ARA (Aug 11, 2009)

WoW gr8 light, looks awesome


----------



## icaruz (Aug 11, 2009)

So how much is it for others..including shipping?


----------



## RainerWahnsinn (Aug 11, 2009)

sorry, since this is not the CPFM, I do not want to be unfair, you will find out with the available informations


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 11, 2009)

Yes, a sweet looking light...great price and the first I`ve seen using the SST50. I bet some of our members would love to order this...could you start a for sale thread in the CPF market place...give us a price in $$$$ :thumbsup:


----------



## strinq (Aug 11, 2009)

Oh my that's a beauty...and 500 lumens to boot.


----------



## Zeruel (Aug 11, 2009)

That would be about... US$310. :thinking:


----------



## RainerWahnsinn (Aug 11, 2009)

I use to order in the past at Matt or 47´s as well as at Susanna´s. This time I found it at Susanna´s first.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Aug 11, 2009)

Wow that is one nice looking light!

Must resist however 

I wonder what the change in LED was for? :thinking:


----------



## SilentK (Aug 11, 2009)

DimeRazorback said:


> Wow that is one nice looking light!
> 
> Must resist however
> 
> I wonder what the change in LED was for? :thinking:



"Max: 500 lumens" I think it was because the were not enough LED pocket rockets out there.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Aug 11, 2009)

:nana:

But a Luminus SST50 LED is alot different to a cree :thinking:


:shrug:


----------



## Centropolis (Aug 11, 2009)

Wow....can they make a non TI version of this so that people like me can afford them?


----------



## soeren (Aug 11, 2009)

Centropolis said:


> Wow....can they make a non TI version of this so that people like me can afford them?


 

+1
I would spent max 220$ for an 500Lumen version of the M20


----------



## RichSlaney (Aug 11, 2009)

Hi there,

I may be dim, but how does 500 lumen compare with 170 or 200 candlepower?
I'm always confused by this.

Looking for a nice light and was considering a RA Clicky Ti or a Gatlight V3 or something similar. This looked like a nice option.

Rich.


----------



## RichSlaney (Aug 11, 2009)

Hi there,

I may be dim, but how does 500 lumen compare with 170 or 200 candlepower?
I'm always confused by this.

Looking for a nice light (as my Mr Bulk LionHeart had died) and was considering a RA Clicky Ti or a Gatlight V3 or something similar. This looked like a nice option.

Any other suggestions guys and gals?

Rich.


----------



## Centropolis (Aug 11, 2009)

Although total output is not everything, I have this feeling that in the next 2 or 3 months, there will be new lights with much higher output in a single die than the ones we own right now. 

And all the money I spent now on 100 lumens single CR123A flashlights will be decrease the amount I can afford to spend on these new ones.


----------



## Monocrom (Aug 11, 2009)

Maybe 500 lumens from 2xCR123 primaries, but from 1x18650?

That's kinda pushing the limits.


----------



## tab665 (Aug 11, 2009)

HOLY RUSTED METAL BATMAN!!! but wait, it looks like they copied the new eagletac design!! (sarcasm, got to love it)


----------



## MattK (Aug 11, 2009)

Marketplace link is up with additional photos


----------



## MattK (Aug 11, 2009)

Also posted a teaser thread for something else....


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Aug 11, 2009)

MattK said:


> Also posted a teaser thread for something else....


Yeah, I saw that... Amazing, both of them.


----------



## Moonshadow (Aug 11, 2009)

> But a Luminus SST50 LED is alot different to a cree



Exactly - my tenterhooks are twitching at the thought of 500 Lumens, but does anyone have any more information on the characteristics of these Luminus Leds:

- Warm or cool tint ?
- Flood or throw ?
- Any artifacts - donuts, cree-like rings or the like ?


----------



## Henk_Lu (Aug 11, 2009)

I also wonder why nobody asks about the caracteristics about that SST-50. Its emitting surface is huge compared to a Cree XP-E.

So, I preffer to wait for more data and beamshots before I get an expensive titanium M20 which might not fullfill my dreams of unlimited brightness, bright spill and great throw. What I already know is that the 500 Lumen are a lot hungrier than the 250 from the R2...


----------



## easilyled (Aug 11, 2009)

Henk_Lu said:


> I also wonder why nobody asks about the caracteristics about that SST-50. Its emitting surface is huge compared to a Cree XP-E.
> 
> So, I preffer to wait for more data and beamshots before I get an expensive titanium M20 which might not fullfill my dreams of unlimited brightness, bright spill and great throw. What I already know is that the 500 Lumen are a lot hungrier than the 250 from the R2...



If you think about it 500 lumens for 1.2 hours from 2 CR123s, according to the spec., is very impressive.

With an SSC-P7 or MC-E, the runtime is usually about half an hour with 2 CR123s at max. brightness.

I've read that the luminus SST-50 is a single die, so will have a much smoother beam than the SSC-P7 or MC-E. 

It also is supposed to throw a lot further than either of these quad dies.

The emitting surface of the SST-50 is not as big as the emitting surface of the SST-90 as far as I know. You may be confusing the two possibly.


----------



## Haz (Aug 11, 2009)

it's pretty impressive


----------



## Mjolnir (Aug 11, 2009)

Monocrom said:


> Maybe 500 lumens from 2xCR123 primaries, but from 1x18650?
> 
> That's kinda pushing the limits.



Why would the use of 18650s make it any harder to reach 500 lumens than with 2 CR123s? Granted, it probably would draw a fair amount of amps from an 18650, but they should be able to handle it. Failing that, there are always IMR cells...


----------



## pamparius (Aug 12, 2009)

any clues on how this new LED light's characteristics? is it going to be like M20 Premium which has yellowish color??


----------



## Burgess (Aug 12, 2009)

_


----------



## easilyled (Aug 12, 2009)

Centropolis said:


> Although total output is not everything, I have this feeling that in the next 2 or 3 months, there will be new lights with much higher output in a single die than the ones we own right now.
> 
> And all the money I spent now on 100 lumens single CR123A flashlights will be decrease the amount I can afford to spend on these new ones.



Unfortunately, that's always the way with the relentless march of technology.

Maybe you should sell some of your lights quickly and use the money to buy new ones.


----------



## Henk_Lu (Aug 12, 2009)

easilyled said:


> If you think about it 500 lumens for 1.2 hours from 2 CR123s, according to the spec., is very impressive.
> 
> With an SSC-P7 or MC-E, the runtime is usually about half an hour with 2 CR123s at max. brightness.
> 
> ...



I'm not consuding the two LEDs, I know that the SST-50 is 5 square mm emitting surface while the SST-90 is 9 square mm. So, also the SST-50 is quite large compared to a Cree XP-E or even XR-E. The new XP-G (now I may confuse some letters...) will be about the same size as the XP-E IIRC.

Here's my post from the SST-90 thread, which was the wrong thread actually :



> Olight provides us pictures of a shiny polished titan M20. Looks great!
> 
> But, I would be more interested in a beam shot. Before investing 3 times the amount of money my M20 Warrior Premium cost, I have to see more. Before you buy a prototype, be sure that you know what a prototype is.
> 
> Even that won't be enough for me, I think I need a complete review here on CPF! If the titan are all gone and they reveal to be the revolution in LED technology, I'll just buy the aluminium version that follows with some improvements...



You'll stumble over the term "prototype" now, but I meant it in the way I wrote it. No more buying the cat in the sack! :duh2:


----------



## PhantomPhoton (Aug 12, 2009)

Too bad. :sigh:
But It likely has poor regulation with 18650... that is if an 18650 works at all. Depends on the VF of the LED.

Oh well, I'll just continue dreaming of what could be :mecry:


----------



## easilyled (Aug 12, 2009)

Henk_Lu said:


> I'm not consuding the two LEDs, I know that the SST-50 is 5 square mm emitting surface while the SST-90 is 9 square mm. So, also the SST-50 is quite large compared to a Cree XP-E or even XR-E. The new XP-G (now I may confuse some letters...) will be about the same size as the XP-E IIRC



Its true that the SST-50's die is bigger than that of the XR-E, XP-E or SSC-P4.

So if you're looking just for out-and-out throw, then you probably won't find it in this light.

However since the overall lumens output is more than twice as much compared to the other single-die leds you mentioned,
the surface brightness must still be good and I predict that the throw will be very respectable.

If you look in Nailbender's Sales Threads for his P60 dropins, you'll see that the beam produced for the SST-50 dropin is a very nice balance between throw and flood and the quality of the beam is excellent.

Its these factors which lead me to believe that the beam will be very nice in this light and very impressive if its anywhere near the 500 lumens claimed and sustained for over an hour with only 2 CR123 sized cells.





Henk_Lu said:


> Olight provides us pictures of a shiny polished titan M20. Looks great!
> 
> But, I would be more interested in a beam shot. Before investing 3 times the amount of money my M20 Warrior Premium cost, I have to see more. Before you buy a prototype, be sure that you know what a prototype is.
> 
> Even that won't be enough for me, I think I need a complete review here on CPF! If the titan are all gone and they reveal to be the revolution in LED technology, I'll just buy the aluminium version that follows with some improvements...



There's always a dilemna between being the early adopter and regretting it and on the other hand regretting not buying something that has turned out to be the best buy of the century!

Its a judgement call and we will each make this call differently depending on impressions and perhaps past experiences.

Talking about past experiences, I have been impressed with my Ti Olight Infinitum and my M30 Triton, so I have good will towards Olight products at the moment.

On top of that I happen to love Titanium as a material and I think this light looks superb. :thumbsup:


----------



## Henk_Lu (Aug 12, 2009)

easilyled said:


> So if you're looking just for out-and-out throw, then you probably won't find it in this light.
> 
> However since the overall lumens output is more than twice as much compared to the other single-die leds you mentioned,
> the surface brightness must still be good and I predict that the throw will be very respectable.
> ...



Well, that's exactly the combination I'm looking for and I also supposed the beam to be like you described it, but only seeing is believing...



> Its these factors which lead me to believe that the beam will be very nice in this light and very impressive if its anywhere near the 500 lumens claimed and sustained for over an hour with only 2 CR123 sized cells.


If the beam holds up to my expectations, runtime will be OK. I only wished they would have copied the UI from the T20C2, as they already got the design... 



> There's always a dilemna between being the early adopter and regretting it and on the other hand regretting not buying something that has turned out to be the best buy of the century!


So true, but surely more lights with the SST-50 will follow. They won't be made out of titan quite sure as well.



> Its a judgement call and we will each make this call differently depending on impressions and perhaps past experiences.
> 
> Talking about past experiences, I have been impressed with my Ti Olight Infinitum and my M30 Triton, so I have good will towards Olight products at the moment.


My sand beated Titanium has a noticeable lower Low than my polished one and a higher High as well. If I had only one, I would have been pleased, but these huge differences didn't make me feel confident.

The M30 on the other hand was somewhat a disappointment to me. While the beam is great, the mechanical (or crafted) quality isn't the best.

I also was one of first buyers of the M20, mine didn't have any low battery warning failure and the quality is top. Now, I can think the way I want :

- M20 better than the Titanium which was better than the M30 - quality decreases all the time!

- M30 was worst, Titanium better, M20 great - This is an M20 so it'll be great!



> On top of that I happen to love Titanium as a material and I think this light looks superb. :thumbsup:


+1

The light looks terrific and while I still have to check if Titanium is magnetic, it has an attraction on me at least! :huh:

I must talk to my dealer I think...


----------



## recDNA (Aug 12, 2009)

berry580 said:


> wow........ and how much?


 
If you have to ask you can't afford it! LOL

I know I can't so I'll just try to win the Titanium light in the contest!

I think If I had one I'd want to just leave it on the mantle or mount it on a frame. What a looker.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 12, 2009)

They cost $35 more than a Surefire U2 ultra.


----------



## CGD08 (Aug 12, 2009)

hahaha :wow:

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3046469&postcount=28

And to think JUST 2 hours and 31 minutes ago EST, my mailman handed me my EagleTac T20C2 with RGB kit, and tailstanding tail cap. Wow. This thing makes me feel a bit sad what irony 

But I'm not selling, or returning. I'll use this light and get another one 1 or 2 year+ from now. 

 All good. That's just the market for you.


----------



## Henk_Lu (Aug 12, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> They cost $35 more than a Surefire U2 ultra.



Strange, in Europe they cost 50€ less than a Surefire U2... 

I had a look at beamshots from the SST-50, I didn't find many, to be honest, but those I found look good. Combining these with my knowledge of LED sizes and builts, reflectors and their structure I think I can deduct that the beam of this M20 SST-50 will really be quite floody, homogenous and have the necessary throw without being a thrower.

No idea about the difference in power to a Fenix TK10 (to take a beam pattern I think this will be comparable to). As beamshots won't arrive soon, do you think I'm right? It's about what easyled concluded as well.

That would be my light for sure... lovecpf


----------



## DimeRazorback (Aug 12, 2009)

I've been thinking about this light... and I don't know... I would LOVE one but I just can't justify buying one :shakehead

We will see! 


:devil:


----------



## recDNA (Aug 12, 2009)

CGD08 said:


> hahaha :wow:
> 
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3046469&postcount=28
> 
> ...


 
Ya but we're not getting this Titianium special edition for under $100!

I wish I could justify it but I really don't need THIS one....one of these days though I AM going to go crazy and buy a limited edition Titanium light that I really like. I wonder how the resale value runs on these collector editions? I'd probably never sell it but if I honestly believed I could get my money back for it I wouldn't feel so guilty about it.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 12, 2009)

recDNA said:


> Ya but we're not getting this Titianium special edition for under $100!
> 
> I wish I could justify it but I really don't need THIS one....one of these days though I AM going to go crazy and buy a limited edition Titanium light that I really like. I wonder how the resale value runs on these collector editions? I'd probably never sell it but if I honestly believed I could get my money back for it I wouldn't feel so guilty about it.



Years ago I bought a TI Fenix LOD...not a Q4...not a Q5...not a R2. I paid $100 for it brand new. I have no idea where it is...somewhere in my house...maybe in my shed. Used it a little for a month or so...so wherever it is it`s like new. But I doubt I could sell it for what I paid on account of it`s silly dim by todays standards. Myself, from now on, I will buy lights only to have the latest brightest toy. Not for what they are made of...rather buy a gold coin if I want a metal investment.

I might be willing to buy a standard one for $125~$175 if they prove to be bright and do well in the reveiws.


----------



## RocketTomato (Aug 12, 2009)

The price does seem a bit high for what is essentially a mass-produced light. The Olight infinitum was only around $130.00 when it came out. :shrug:

It does look great and I am a big fan of the Olight M20 Warrior. I would definitely want to see a review before I would plunk down > $300 for it though.


----------



## MattK (Aug 12, 2009)

Not exactly mass produced with only 500 being made with unique circuits, bodies (including strike bezels), reflectors, packaging, etc.

MSRP on the infinitums was $150 - 3 x that of a T10 at the time so the M20 Ti is ~3X the cost of an M20 R2. 

The only 'comparable' light right now would be the Jetbeam TC-R3 which is about $30 less out the door and uses an XR-E R2 for 240 lumens...


----------



## RocketTomato (Aug 12, 2009)

MattK said:


> Not exactly mass produced with only 500 being made with unique circuits, bodies (including strike bezels), reflectors, packaging, etc.
> 
> MSRP on the infinitums was $150 - 3 x that of a T10 at the time so the M20 Ti is ~3X the cost of an M20 R2.
> 
> The only 'comparable' light right now would be the Jetbeam TC-R3 which is about $30 less out the door and uses an XR-E R2 for 240 lumens...



Those are some good points. The SST-50 is also probably a pretty expensive LED in comparison to the XR-E R2. I still would like to see a good review though before I place an order. There are not too many lights out there with these new SSTs and it would help people make up their minds to see how they perform in a high quality flashlight. Perhaps there is a prototype that can be loaned to Selfbuilt or someone else for review? 

Plus, I have to budget carefully, especially with the K90 intimidator coming out. :naughty:


----------



## Xak (Aug 13, 2009)

Will Olight offer these in M20's with standard materials in the future, or is titanium needed for some reason like heat dispersion? Will this really run @ 500lm for 1.2 hrs, or is it more of a novelty that will get too hot and/or damage batteries when run for a few minutes?

Are 2x123 sized lights about to become significantly brighter (and I don't mean Q5 vs R2) but with similar runtimes? This just seams like one of those "too good to be true" deals. I would love to have a light that can run @ 200-250lm as they do now, but have the ability for 500lm turbo, all in the same 2x123 sized light.

Really, what's the catch (other than the price)?


----------



## HKJ (Aug 13, 2009)

Xak said:


> Will Olight offer these in M20's with standard materials in the future, or is titanium needed for some reason like heat dispersion? Will this really run @ 500lm for 1.2 hrs, or is it more of a novelty that will get too hot and/or damage batteries when run for a few minutes?
> 
> Are 2x123 sized lights about to become significantly brighter (and I don't mean Q5 vs R2) but with similar runtimes? This just seams like one of those "too good to be true" deals. I would love to have a light that can run @ 200-250lm as they do now, but have the ability for 500lm turbo, all in the same 2x123 sized light.
> 
> Really, what's the catch (other than the price)?




One catch is the larger led die, that means that the light can not be focused as well, i.e. it is a flood light.

OLight will probably make something like this in aluminum later, they did with the Titanium Infinitum. Aluminum is, for most purposes, a better material for flashlight, than titanium, it is much better at heat sinking and has less density, i.e. the light will weight less.


----------



## Illumenaughty (Aug 13, 2009)

*Starting to get that spendy feeling*


----------



## Patriot (Aug 13, 2009)

Xak said:


> Really, what's the catch (other than the price)?





I agree with HKJ that they'll likely produce something like this in aluminum in the future. It's not uncommon for manufacturers to introduce new product formulas in premium materials to kick off a product launch. 

As far as any catches go, I don't think there are any pressing ones. The SST50 at 5 square mm surface area still isn't all that large so throw should remain reasonable. To my thinking, this isn't a throw specific design to begin with regardless of the LED that's used. This is further reinforced by the fact that it's an OP reflector. I would speculate that this light will be hard to beat for any purpose that a flashlight is normally used for. The combination of reflector and SST50 ought to produce and incredibly smooth and bright beam.







I just wanted to add that I definitely wouldn't consider this to be a "mass produced light." I view it as being much closer to the custom side of the scale since it's likely that a smaller number of individuals are going to be assembling them from a low number of base components. Being that I'm somewhat familiar with handling low number, machined and assembled, special product offerings myself, with automotive accessories, I can say that these types of projects are handled differently. For example, with 500 total units, you might just have one or two guys that do all of the polishing, one or two workers doing all of the assembling and one person doing quality control unless it's being handled by the assemblers, who cross check each other. In any case special productions like these spend a lot more time in human hands and tend to get a substantially more regard during manufacturing. A bit pricey...yes, but not unsubstantiated.


----------



## recDNA (Aug 13, 2009)

RocketTomato said:


> The price does seem a bit high for what is essentially a mass-produced light. The Olight infinitum was only around $130.00 when it came out. :shrug:
> 
> It does look great and I am a big fan of the Olight M20 Warrior. I would definitely want to see a review before I would plunk down > $300 for it though.




But I fear they may sell out before we get a good review


----------



## Xak (Aug 14, 2009)

Man, I want that light SO bad, but I can't drop that kind of money. Hopefully there will be some other nice lights coming out like it that are reasonably priced. Sounds like it will make a great light.


----------



## CGD08 (Aug 16, 2009)

HKJ said:


> Aluminum is, for most purposes, a better material for flashlight, than titanium, it is much better at heat sinking and has less density, i.e. the light will weight less.



*Then why not make a copper flashlight?!?! hahaha *



Illumenaughty said:


> *Starting to get that spendy feeling*



*Your avatar made me laugh* :laughing:



recDNA said:


> Ya but we're not getting this Titianium special edition for under $100!
> 
> I wish I could justify it but I really don't need THIS one....one of these days though I AM going to go crazy and buy a limited edition Titanium light that I really like. I wonder how the resale value runs on these collector editions? I'd probably never sell it but if I honestly believed I could get my money back for it I wouldn't feel so guilty about it.



*Thanks. Agreed.  Not sure about resale, if they are so rare, you might be able to take advantage of people  hahaha. But doesn't titanium get damaged by the oils in our skin/sweat/etc? Because I know handling gold can damage it. So pretty much use gloves wit this thing ?*



recDNA said:


> But I fear they may sell out before we get a good review



*Yeah, I have to agree with you on that too, there are quite a few flashaholics who have been saving, waiting for something like this to pop up and scare the poop out of people :hahaha: :duck:

Could always ask :santa: lol*


----------



## easilyled (Aug 16, 2009)

HKJ said:


> OLight will probably make something like this in aluminum later, they did with the Titanium Infinitum. Aluminum is, for most purposes, a better material for flashlight, than titanium, it is much better at heat sinking and has less density, i.e. the light will weight less.



We've had these Al vs Ti discussions many times before.
I don't agree that Al. is for most purposes a better material, especially where the output is specifically regulated so that the current level does not result in much heat being produced.
This is almost certainly the case for this light because at 500 lumens, the luminus SST-50 is pushed nowhere near its maximum.
There are many advantages of Ti over Al.
Its much stronger and distorts less on impact. (ie in case of a fall)
It won't corrode when used in salt-water or marine environments.
It doesn't need a coating because even its oxide is a good conductor.
Al. needs a coating because the oxide of Al. is not a good conductor.
Because Al. needs a coating, as soon as its scratched, the appearance of the light is marred permanently.
Ti has the lustre and appearance of a precious metal and aesthetically it is far more pleasing.


----------



## HKJ (Aug 16, 2009)

easilyled said:


> It doesn't need a coating because even its oxide is a good conductor.
> Al. needs a coating because the oxide of Al. is not a good conductor.
> Because Al. needs a coating, as soon as its scratched, the appearance of the light is marred permanently.
> Ti has the lustre and appearance of a precious metal and aesthetically it is far more pleasing.



That is not correct, the outer coating is not to improve connection, in fact, it prevents connection and is often used for a lockout tailcap.
Some manufacturers uses a inner coating to improve connection, but light without this connection does work.

PS: I am not against Ti lights, I already has some and has more on order, but I still believe that aluminum lights are better for many purposes (but not for everything).


----------



## wapkil (Aug 16, 2009)

easilyled said:


> We've had these Al vs Ti discussions many times before.
> I don't agree that Al. is for most purposes a better material, especially where the output is specifically regulated so that the current level does not result in much heat being produced.
> This is almost certainly the case for this light because at 500 lumens, the luminus SST-50 is pushed nowhere near its maximum.



Well, it's driven at ~5.6W - similar to what is present in larger MC-E lights and two times more than a "regular" M20...



easilyled said:


> There are many advantages of Ti over Al.
> [...]
> Ti has the lustre and appearance of a precious metal and aesthetically it is far more pleasing.



I've read some of the discussions related to Ti vs. Al and it seems that for me the only benefit of titanium lies in the aesthetics.


----------



## easilyled (Aug 16, 2009)

HKJ said:


> That is not correct, the outer coating is not to improve connection, in fact, it prevents connection and is often used for a lockout tailcap.
> Some manufacturers uses a inner coating to improve connection, but light without this connection does work.
> 
> PS: I am not against Ti lights, I already has some and has more on order, but I still believe that aluminum lights are better for many purposes (but not for everything).



I didn't mean that the outer HA coating on Al. lights was in order to improve conduction, but that the *inner* threads are chemkoted for this reason.

Bare Al. lights accumulate an oxide that interferes with conduction. This is a disadvantage when lights are designed with conduction through the threads to complete the circuit. Although it works to some extent, it is unreliable.

Ti lights do not have this problem because the oxide on Ti conducts well.


----------



## easilyled (Aug 16, 2009)

wapkil said:


> Well, it's driven at ~5.6W - similar to what is present in larger MC-E lights and two times more than a "regular" M20...



I believe you are mistaken here.
5.6W is far less than what most larger MC-E or SSC-P7 lights are driven at.
They are normally driven at 10 - 12W.
Driven at spec MC-E or SSC-P7 leds need 2.8A and roughly 4V which equates to 11.2 Watts.

The SST-50 is clearly driven nowhere near spec in this Titanium light and is still outputting a very respectable 500 lumens.
This will put out next to no heat and the Titanium host will be more than adequate to handle it.




wapkil said:


> I've read some of the discussions related to Ti vs. Al and it seems that for me the only benefit of titanium lies in the aesthetics.



What about strength, durability, and non-corrosiveness? To many these are all big advantages too.


----------



## HKJ (Aug 16, 2009)

easilyled said:


> Bare Al. lights accumulate an oxide that interferes with conduction. This is a disadvantage when lights are designed with conduction through the threads to complete the circuit. Although it works to some extent, it is unreliable.



Just to put you statement in perspective: Lights like Fenix, Quark and OLight are not chemkoted and they usual works.

But this discussion does not really belong here, we obvious both like Ti light and you are convinced that there are more advantages than I believe there are.


----------



## wapkil (Aug 16, 2009)

easilyled said:


> I believe you are mistaken here.
> 5.6W is far less than what most larger MC-E or SSC-P7 lights are driven at.
> They are normally driven at 10 - 12W.
> Driven at spec MC-E or SSC-P7 leds need 2.8A and roughly 4V which equates to 11.2 Watts.



An MC-E at maximum specified current of 700mA has Vf of 3.4V so ~9.5W. My point was that this light at 1.75A is driven much harder than any other small, single die flashlight. Even in these lights there are temperature problems so I don't see how it should not be a concern in something that produces 50%-100% more heat.



easilyled said:


> The SST-50 is clearly driven nowhere near spec in this Titanium light and is still outputting a very respectable 500 lumens.
> This will put out next to no heat and the Titanium host will be more than adequate to handle it.



The specifications are not written for "typical conditions present in small flashlights". You could try to put inside an CSM-360, and (if the battery would be able to power it) at half of the maximum current it would consume 40W, heat up and die, if the driver is not killed before.

I don't know how the titanium affects the thermal situation inside a flashlight but with this LED at 500lm heat is definitely not a problem that can be ignored.



easilyled said:


> What about strength, durability, and non-corrosiveness? To many these are all big advantages too.



The mechanical properties of (hard anodized) aluminum are completely sufficient for me. I don't know about non-corrosiveness but I know that titanium oxide is conductive. I think it may also create a layer preventing from additional oxidation. I forgot to mention it, although I don't know if oxidation of aluminum flashlight bodies can be a problem (haven't experienced it yet).


----------



## easilyled (Aug 16, 2009)

wapkil said:


> An MC-E at maximum specified current of 700mA has Vf of 3.4V so ~9.5W. My point was that this light at 1.75A is driven much harder than any other small, single die flashlight.



Your argument is misleading because quite clearly, even though this led is a single-die, its thermal management is set up to cope with currents of a magnitude far higher than any other manufacturer's single-dies, in fact its in line with the quad-die emitters currently available.

It is therefore irrelevant that it is a single die emitter, what is relevant is whether a flashlight of the size of the M20 can cope with heat-sinking 5W of power.

There are many lights in this size that are pushed far more than 5W. (like the Wolf-Eyes MCE Explorer, Xtar SSC-P7 and Xtar-MCE and many other examples)

That is why I think that the heat-sinking in this light is a non-issue.



wapkil said:


> I don't know about non-corrosiveness


Ok, well then let me tell you that Titanium does not corrode in salt water. It is therefore a very useful material for dive-lights in marine environments.
It is so non-reactive that it is the ideal material to use in surgery for implants and prostheses too.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


In general with increasingly better thermal management of new generations of leds, it becomes far less crucial to use only Aluminium for flashlights.

This is one reason why McGizmo and many other great custom makers here are producing so many lights in Ti. Its heat conduction is perfectly adequate as long as the leds are driven conservatively as they are in this case.

Heck, McGizmo even said that many led-lights will be made in plastic before long.


----------



## wapkil (Aug 16, 2009)

I must say that I liked the previous version of your post better... What is it with all these posts completely re-edited before I can finish answering to them? Well, I hope at least it won't change again.



easilyled said:


> Your argument is misleading because quite clearly, even though this led is a single-die, its thermal management is set up to cope with currents of a magnitude far higher than any other manufacturer's single-dies, in fact its in line with the quad-die emitters currently available.



The thermal management is not much better. The package thermal resistance is only 15% lower than in MC-Es, the maximum junction temperature is exactly the same as everywhere - 150 deg. C. It has nothing to do with the maximum current, except that with higher currents keeping the temperature low becomes much more complicated.



easilyled said:


> It is therefore irrelevant that it is a single die emitter, what is relevant is whether a flashlight of the size of the M20 can cope with heat-sinking 5W of power.
> 
> There are many lights in this size that are pushed far more than 5W. (like the Wolf-Eyes MCE Explorer, Xtar SSC-P7 and Xtar-MCE and many other examples)
> 
> ...



I think the MCE Explorer is a good example. If I understand its specification correctly, it is driven at 6W, not 9.5W which that be allowed by the LED specification. I think it is quite probable that the reason lies exactly in the thermal management - at higher power the temperature may be too high for the LED to work properly. Six watts is also not "far more" than ~5.6W in this light here.

The efficacy of every new generation of LEDs gets higher. If they were used to produce the same output as older ones, the heat generation would indeed be lower. But they are not. They are here to replace 250lm lights with 500lm ones. Moreover, currently these LEDs have the surface brightness similar to their predecessors. They only have bigger surface and thus can consume more power. More power generates more heat and more thermal problems.

I don't have any doubts that Olight engineers performed a good work to ensure that this light will not overheat. I only wanted to correct your statements that "this will put out next to no heat", or that "heat-sinking in this light is a non-issue".


----------



## Xak (Aug 16, 2009)

Think Olight will produce an SST-50 drop-in upgrade for people who currently own an M20 (or 2)?


----------



## Monocrom (Aug 16, 2009)

Xak said:


> Think Olight will produce an SST-50 drop-in upgrade for people who currently own an M20 (or 2)?


 
Now that would be sweet indeed.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Aug 16, 2009)

That would be nice, but I doubt it will happen :shakehead


----------



## divine (Aug 16, 2009)

Xak said:


> Think Olight will produce an SST-50 drop-in upgrade for people who currently own an M20 (or 2)?


I've taken needle nose pliers to the pill on my M20 and I couldn't budge it. If they put thread lock on it, I doubt they will be able to upgrade them.


----------



## 276 (Aug 16, 2009)

Anybody preorder one of these yet curious as to know if if I should go for it now or wait a little longer ?


----------



## Henk_Lu (Aug 17, 2009)

276 said:


> Anybody preorder one of these yet curious as to know if if I should go for it now or wait a little longer ?



First, I wanted to wait for more details and beamshots, comparisons with the M20-R2 and the M30.

But, thinking over it some more, I had doubsts that there will still be a light available at the time we'll have all the necessary information. There are 2 possibilities : The light is great and will go fast or the light sucks and only the hardcore collectors will buy it.

So, I built the specs we have together in my head and the beam was quite bright and floody. I am a titanium fan too and the light looks awesome.

I preordered the light immediately! :duh2:


----------



## easilyled (Aug 17, 2009)

wapkil said:


> I must say that I liked the previous version of your post better... What is it with all these posts completely re-edited before I can finish answering to them? Well, I hope at least it won't change again.



I didn't expect you to be waiting so eagerly for my reply. In general I prefer to read what I have written and edit the bits that are clumsily expressed.



wapkil said:


> The thermal management is not much better. The package thermal resistance is only 15% lower than in MC-Es, the maximum junction temperature is exactly the same as everywhere - 150 deg. C. It has nothing to do with the maximum current, except that with higher currents keeping the temperature low becomes much more complicated.



Perhaps you don't realise that the MCE is a quad die? You have just admitted that the thermal management of the SST-50 is superior to the MC-E.
This proves that you were wrong to say that this flashlight should be compared with "other small single-die flashlights"
You have obviously realised your error which is why you are now comparing it with a quad-die flashlight as you should.



wapkil said:


> I think the MCE Explorer is a good example. If I understand its specification correctly, it is driven at 6W, not 9.5W which that be allowed by the LED specification. I think it is quite probable that the reason lies exactly in the thermal management - at higher power the temperature may be too high for the LED to work properly. Six watts is also not "far more" than ~5.6W in this light here.



I think you're guessing about the MCE Explorer. Its current level is not revealed. The fact that Wolf Eyes are responsible in their limits and the MC-E is definitely driven harder is what counts. There are many other examples of lights of this size being driven around 8+W in any case.




wapkil said:


> I don't have any doubts that Olight engineers performed a good work to ensure that this light will not overheat. I only wanted to correct your statements that "this will put out next to no heat", or that "heat-sinking in this light is a non-issue".



Well I am afraid that you have failed to correct my statements because they were not incorrect.

However .....
your earlier assertion that 5.6W output is comparable with larger quad-die lights was blatantly incorrect since the larger quad-die lights are driven about twice as much.
In addition your argument that the SST-50 light should be compared with non Luminus single-die lights is also flawed.

We will see when the Ti Olight M20 comes out. If it becomes very hot on the highest level and drops its output rapidly then you will have been proved correct.

I am not expecting that.


----------



## wapkil (Aug 17, 2009)

easilyled said:


> I didn't expect you to be waiting so eagerly for my reply. In general I prefer to read what I have written and edit the bits that are clumsily expressed.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't need the current level for MCE Explorer. If its LED produces 580lm, it's driven at ~6W. I wrote that the SST Olight can be compared with other small single-die flashlights because its previous version was a single-die flshlight. You wanted comparison to MC-Es so I made it.

The SST-50 package thermal resistance is not only ~15% lower than in MC-Es it is also ~70% lower than for an XR-E LED. What you fail to understand is what these values mean. At 2.45 deg.C/W the junction temperature of an SST-50 driven at 5.6W will be ~11 deg. C higher than its case temperature. At 8 deg.C/W the junction temperature of an XR-E driven at 2.8W will be ~18 deg. C higher than its case temperature. You gain an incredible 7 deg.C - around 7% of the 100 deg. C temperature rise below which you struggle to keep the LED. Yes, between the LED case and the junction situation is a bit easier but, compared to an XR-E Olight M20, you have to transfer *two times* as much energy from the case to the outside of the body and dissipate it.

I understand that you believe 5.6W is not a problem. You can easily see it yourself. Just get a 3.3 Ohm 10W ceramic resistor, place it on an inflammable surface and connect it to a charged LiIon battery. It will conduct around 1.25A and dissipate around 5.1W. Wait a few minutes and try to touch it. Then try to imagine that all this "next to no heat" is not generated in a 50mm*10mm*10mm "brick" but in a few mm^2 area. And you have to conduct it outside.

You also believe that there are many properly cooled MC-E lights driven 8+ W. For an MC-E 8W is around 750 LED lumens and 550 OTF lumens. You can go to MrGman IS tests and see how many MC-E lights are able to sustain this output for a first few minutes. Do you know why some of them don't even start with this power? Because they would overheat. Do you know why they lose the output after a few seconds? Because they overheat. You can also see how large are these lights.

I don't see the point in continuing this discussion. You should know the heat is a problem in current flashlights. You know that this new version will generate two times more heat than the previous model. Yet you believe that "heat-sinking in this light is a non-issue". The same logic lets you write that the light needs to overheat to prove that the thermal considerations are important. If Olight engineers manage to design it so it does not overheat, then apparently heat was not a problem and, as you write, there is "next to no heat". I cannot and don't want to argue with this type of logic.


----------



## Xak (Aug 17, 2009)

divine said:


> I've taken needle nose pliers to the pill on my M20 and I couldn't budge it. If they put thread lock on it, I doubt they will be able to upgrade them.



Well, Replacement heads, then?


----------



## Metatron (Aug 18, 2009)

this looks like a very handsome flashlight, no doubt, but 500 lumens? is that it? Given that i have a P7 pushing 600 lumens with a single rcr123, i am not sure apart from good looks, what the excitement is all about. now if it was pushed to say 1200 lumens on say 2 rcr's , i would be paying more attention, after all a ferrari with a vee dub motor is just that.


----------



## HKJ (Aug 18, 2009)

Metatron said:


> this looks like a very handsome flashlight, no doubt, but 500 lumens? is that it? Given that i have a P7 pushing 600 lumens with a single rcr123, i am not sure apart from good looks, what the excitement is all about. now if it was pushed to say 1200 lumens on say 2 rcr's , i would be paying more attention, after all a ferrari with a vee dub motor is just that.



Try putting that P7 in a integrating sphere an you will see that it is probably only 400 lumens.
Doing high quality lights the manufacturer has to look at more than just lumen. Other parameters like runtime, reliability and heat does also count.


----------



## Metatron (Aug 18, 2009)

HKJ said:


> Try putting that P7 in a integrating sphere an you will see that it is probably only 400 lumens.
> Doing high quality lights the manufacturer has to look at more than just lumen. Other parameters like runtime, reliability and heat does also count.


a P7 driven at 2 amps = 400 lumens? not sure
clearly the manufacturer must look at all the parameters, and clearly the sst 50 was not designed for a tiny flashlight that would overheat in seconds if it was driven at 75% capacity...


----------



## easilyled (Aug 18, 2009)

wapkil said:


> I don't need the current level for MCE Explorer. If its LED produces 580lm, it's driven at ~6W. I wrote that the SST Olight can be compared with other small single-die flashlights because its previous version was a single-die flshlight. You wanted comparison to MC-Es so I made it.
> 
> The SST-50 package thermal resistance is not only ~15% lower than in MC-Es it is also ~70% lower than for an XR-E LED. What you fail to understand is what these values mean. At 2.45 deg.C/W the junction temperature of an SST-50 driven at 5.6W will be ~11 deg. C higher than its case temperature. At 8 deg.C/W the junction temperature of an XR-E driven at 2.8W will be ~18 deg. C higher than its case temperature. You gain an incredible 7 deg.C - around 7% of the 100 deg. C temperature rise below which you struggle to keep the LED. Yes, between the LED case and the junction situation is a bit easier but, compared to an XR-E Olight M20, you have to transfer *two times* as much energy from the case to the outside of the body and dissipate it.
> 
> ...



You cannot and don't want to argue with this type of logic but you still do anyway ....

My line of thought is that the O-light MC-E M30 Triton which is rated at 700 lumens and pushes out about 10W, is not that much bigger than the M20 in form factor. Yet even with twice as much power to dissipate, it copes well on high for a reasonable amount of time.

This light has to dissipate about half the power and the led inside it has better thermal resistance. I think that this makes up for the fact that the light is made of titanium which isn't as good as aluminium at conducting heat away admittedly.

I cannot claim to know this with 100% certainty, but it is my gut feeling.

I am assuming that O-light have thought this out properly and will design a beefy aluminium heat-sink to transfer as much heat from the light engine to the outer casing.

When I said that heat is a "non-issue", I meant that I don't think it will be a big concern for this light given the drive levels and assuming responsible design.


----------



## HKJ (Aug 18, 2009)

Metatron said:


> a P7 driven at 2 amps = 400 lumens? not sure
> clearly the manufacturer must look at all the parameters, and clearly the sst 50 was not designed for a tiny flashlight that would overheat in seconds if it was driven at 75% capacity...



The typical value is 700 lumen at 2.8 A, this gives 500 lumen at 2 A and with 80% efficiency in the optic system, you are down to 400 lumen. This assumes that you can sustain the 2 A and keep the temperature down. I do not believe that many has done that with single RCR123 lights.
Running a RCR123 at 2A does not really make a useful light, it will have a very short runtime.

The advantage when running led well below maximum is the much better efficiency and SST also has a good thermal connection, helping keeping it cool and keeping the efficiency up.


----------



## Metatron (Aug 18, 2009)

HKJ said:


> The typical value is 700 lumen at 2.8 A, this gives 500 lumen at 2 A and with 80% efficiency in the optic system, you are down to 400 lumen. This assumes that you can sustain the 2 A and keep the temperature down. I do not believe that many has done that with single RCR123 lights.
> Running a RCR123 at 2A does not really make a useful light, it will have a very short runtime.
> 
> The advantage when running led well below maximum is the much better efficiency and SST also has a good thermal connection, helping keeping it cool and keeping the efficiency up.


well, it knocks the socks off a wolfeyes storm, so i am delighted with that, call it what you will, in fact its a 'no contest' to be sure, and thats good enough for me, so i still see no point in having a ferrari motor throttled down to equal a hyundai.


----------



## wapkil (Aug 18, 2009)

easilyled said:


> You cannot and don't want to argue with this type of logic but you still do anyway ....



Well, I'm choosing the parts where I believe that I can explain something 



easilyled said:


> My line of thought is that the O-light MC-E M30 Triton which is rated at 700 lumens and pushes out about 10W, is not that much bigger than the M20 in form factor. Yet even with twice as much power to dissipate, it copes well on high for a reasonable amount of time.
> 
> This light has to dissipate about half the power and the led inside it has better thermal resistance. I think that this makes up for the fact that the light is made of titanium which isn't as good as aluminium at conducting heat away admittedly.
> 
> ...



The M30 if rated 700lm is actually driven at around 8W-8.5W. The amount of energy to conduct (~50% more than in the SST M20) is once again more important than the differences in the LEDs thermal resistance - this time this difference would contribute to ~10deg.C difference between these LEDs. 

I'm not sure if the M30 can be described as similar to the M20. It weights ~35% more but, probably more importantly, Olight engineers added the fins on the head to enlarge the surface. They are almost certainly not for aesthetic reasons but are required to dissipate the heat.

Unfortunately I don't know how important (or unimportant) is the poor thermal conductivity of titanium. Maybe someone with more knowledge in this area could comment.

I believe we now generally agree on the subject. Like you, I believe that Olight managed to properly design this light. I wanted only to point out that if they did, it wasn't as easy task as it may seem at first glance. These new single-die LEDs, even if driven at half of the maximum power, can be much more demanding than their predecessors from Cree driven at full power.


----------



## easilyled (Aug 18, 2009)

wapkil said:


> I believe we now generally agree on the subject. Like you, I believe that Olight managed to properly design this light. I wanted only to point out that if they did, it wasn't as easy task as it may seem at first glance. These new single-die LEDs, even if driven at half of the maximum power, can be much more demanding than their predecessors from Cree driven at full power.



Agreed. 

The Luminus-SST50/90 leds are demanding because they output a lot of lumens. 

You don't get a lot of lumens without consuming quite a lot of power at the same time unless there's a big advance in efficiency.

I don't know the lumens/watt specs for the Luminus leds at different currents and temperatures, but suspect that they won't be a huge leap forward on other manufacturers.

Because of the high power consumption, although the luminus leds are single-dies, it is more relevant in my opinion to compare them with the MC-E and SSC-P7, than the single die XRE or SSC-P4.

I think they are an improvement on the MC-E and SSC-P7 because they are built to withstand higher currents given the proportionate heat-sinking.
In addition, the beam quality is much better because they do not project the donut/cross artifacts that the MC-E and SSC-P7 do.

The reason why I made my comments was that I thought 500 (presumably emitter) lumens output was quite a responsible level to set for this form factor and that therefore with proper due diligence in design, that the resultant heat should be within reasonable limits to sink and control.

There seems to be a conception, maybe a misconception, that Titanium is a completely unsuitable material for a flashlight and this winds me up sometimes because I think that in many ways it has excellent potential and properties for use in the casing for a flashlight.

I am fortunate enough to have a 3 beautiful Titanium Aleph-Style lights built by the likes of TB and Mirage_Man with biflupic SSC-P7 light-engines made by darkzero.

The highest level on one of them is about 1.7A, and the other 2 goes well beyond 2A.

The Aleph L.E is very small so there is not a lot of room for making a thick heatsink.

Even so, the light that runs on 1.7A seems to have no problem maintaining that level while running reasonably cool. I have touched the heat-sink after about 5 continuous minutes and its not excessively hot.

The 2 that run over 2A heat up faster of course, but their automatic shut-down mechanism isn't activated even after about 10 continuous minutes of running them according to darkzero.

I err on the side of caution though and don't run them for such a long time continuously.

Anyway, armed with this knowledge is another reason that gives me cause for optimism with the Olight M20 Warrior SST50 Titanium


----------



## LuxFAN (Aug 18, 2009)

I have mine on order. I can't wait to see this. 500 lumen seems reasonable if they are purchasing only top bin parts of the SST-50. Or course one has to factor in the efficiency of the optic but a reflector should be at least 90% efficient.


----------



## Henk_Lu (Aug 18, 2009)

easilyled said:


> Anyway, armed with this knowledge is another reason that gives me cause for optimism with the Olight M20 Warrior SST50 Titanium



You seem to really have a lot of knowledge about the whole LED stuff...

... and I hope you are right about the M20 SST-50!


----------



## CGD08 (Aug 18, 2009)

Still the question remains, why not make a copper flashlight?


----------



## jahxman (Aug 18, 2009)

CGD08 said:


> Still the question remains, why not make a copper flashlight?


 
Cause it will turn your hands green.....:sick2:

Come to think of it, why not make a solid gold flashlight? It has better electrical AND thermal conductivity than aluminum! And it never corrodes and looks great when polished! This could be the next big thing in flashlights! :nana:


----------



## non (Aug 19, 2009)

Is this "pure" titanium or _Ti6Al4V ?
_


----------



## CGD08 (Aug 19, 2009)

jahxman said:


> Cause it will turn your hands green.....:sick2:
> 
> Come to think of it, why not make a solid gold flashlight? It has better electrical AND thermal conductivity than aluminum! And it never corrodes and looks great when polished! This could be the next big thing in flashlights! :nana:



It will? :laughing: hahah. maybe they could coat it with something 
You're right about gold, it's even better than copper!  But doesn't Gold get easily damaged by sweat and oils? :thinking:


----------



## non (Aug 21, 2009)

_Ti6Al4V or pure titanium?_


----------



## easilyled (Aug 22, 2009)

non said:


> _Ti6Al4V or pure titanium?_



I think all the mass-produced Titanium lights so far have been gradeII or nearly pure titanium.

Its a bit easier to machine.

I'm sure this light will be the same, but maybe Matt can confirm.


----------



## LumensMaximus (Aug 27, 2009)

Has anyone received their new lamp yet?


----------



## Henk_Lu (Aug 28, 2009)

LumensMaximus said:


> Has anyone received their new lamp yet?



If I understood correctly, the first lamps should arrive at their owners next week, wednesday or later! :huh:


----------



## MattK (Aug 31, 2009)

Please forgive the lousy iPhone pics - I figured it was better than nothing.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Aug 31, 2009)

Pics!!!


:twothumbs

Looks awesome!!


...beamshots??


----------



## ARA (Aug 31, 2009)

Nice, can't wait for the review


----------



## LumensMaximus (Aug 31, 2009)

#1, very cool... :rock:


----------



## RainerWahnsinn (Aug 31, 2009)

Congratulations Matt, you won the early Picture-Match this time. Very nice pictures and a wonderful No.1 of 500


----------



## xcel730 (Aug 31, 2009)

Matt,

Gorgeous light ... I couldn't help myself and placed an order for one, and I don't even fully know this light at all. CPF is evil. I have a couple of questions for Matt or whomever know the answer:

1. I never owned the M20 before, how do you switch mode in this one? half-clicks, turn bezel, or combination?

2. It says it has a fluorescent tailcap to see in the dark, the photo looks like it's a black tailcap. Can you confirm which ones? 

3. Is there a sleeve so that I can take off the combat ring and replace it, or will there will an unsightly gap if I take off the combat ring?

Only in CPF would some be crazy enough to buy something without having full answers. :devil:


----------



## xcel730 (Sep 1, 2009)

............


----------



## Henk_Lu (Sep 1, 2009)

xcel730 said:


> Matt,
> 
> Gorgeous light ... I couldn't help myself and placed an order for one, and I don't even fully know this light at all. CPF is evil. I have a couple of questions for Matt or whomever know the answer:
> 
> 1. I never owned the M20 before, how do you switch mode in this one? half-clicks, turn bezel, or combination?



On the "normal" M20, it is changed by twisting the head. I don't especially like it, as operation requires two hands...



> 2. It says it has a fluorescent tailcap to see in the dark, the photo looks like it's a black tailcap. Can you confirm which ones?


On the pictures Matt posted above, I thought having identified a fluorescent one. On the normal M20 there was one as a spare.



> 3. Is there a sleeve so that I can take off the combat ring and replace it, or will there will an unsightly gap if I take off the combat ring?


Nope, nothing. You'd better leave the ring on. On the normal M20 it also secired the clip.



> Only in CPF would some be crazy enough to buy something without having full answers. :devil:


Hm, I was crazy enough to buy it without knowing anything about the emitter, the heatsink, the beam and where to take the money for it. Everything will be good, because the light is on its way to me!


----------



## tolkaze (Sep 1, 2009)

OMG! I just saw the M20 titanium for the first time... Damn! I wanna buy one of those


----------



## jhc37013 (Sep 1, 2009)

tolkaze said:


> OMG! I just saw the M20 titanium for the first time... Damn! I wanna buy one of those



Yes me to and if I could have any light right now this would be it. oo:

And I don't even own a regular M20.


----------



## pamparius (Sep 1, 2009)

damnn, can't wait for my #207


----------



## tolkaze (Sep 1, 2009)

Its just so pretty, and shiny, and BRIGHT! (I assume) The fiance wont miss $320 from the wedding fund right?


----------



## kaptein america (Sep 1, 2009)

I woke up this morning to already find a youtube of this light beam. Short & sweet, but uploaded already none the less.

Again, you guys are crazy


----------



## Henk_Lu (Sep 1, 2009)

tolkaze said:


> Its just so pretty, and shiny, and BRIGHT! (I assume) The fiance wont miss $320 from the wedding fund right?



No, she surely won't miss the well invested money, because she'll marry a man with a polished titanium flashlight of about 20 centimeters with a big head and which puts out a huge load of white light during nearly 2 hours until it gets weak... :devil:

Shine on, you crazy flashlight!!! lovecpf
EDIT : "nearly 1 hour and a half, not 2 hours..."


----------



## kaptein america (Sep 1, 2009)

What is the hold up with some reviews man


----------



## kaptein america (Sep 1, 2009)

Would anyone say this light has pocketablitly as a Lx2 would?


----------



## Henk_Lu (Sep 1, 2009)

kaptein america said:


> Would anyone say this light has pocketablitly as a Lx2 would?



It is a little bit longer and the head is much larger too...

My M20 fits well in a coat pocket, but no way in a trousers', unless you are 2 meters tall and your trousers XXXL size.

I don't have an LX2, but an L4, they seem quite the same in size, the L4 would aready be too long for me to call it pocketable, only lights with one cell are pocketable for me.


----------



## Xak (Sep 1, 2009)

Any word if they plan on releasing standard M20s with the SST50 and/or replacement heads for owners of standard M20s?


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Sep 1, 2009)

Xak said:


> Any word if they plan on releasing standard M20s with the SST50 and/or replacement heads for owners of standard M20s?


I've asked the question once, but my email didn't receive a response. I did re-send it today, so we'll see if I can come up with an answer for you.


----------



## 276 (Sep 1, 2009)

I tried asking that question to olight and my email didn't go through. Glad someone else is asking too.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Sep 1, 2009)

The email address they list is different than the one that is linked to. The @olightworld bounces, but the @gmail doesn't. I haven't yet received a response from them from it however and I can't seem to get their website contact form to work (might be my firewall at work).


----------



## 276 (Sep 1, 2009)

I dont think your alone on that it wont work for me.


----------



## MattK (Sep 1, 2009)

It doesn't matter if it got through or not - Olight is not going to release potential future product data until they are ready. 

My guess is that even should there be an aluminum M20 SST-50 then there won't be an 'upgrade path.' The light engines are difficult to remove without a special tool so it would have to be a complete new head assembly; now you're replacing everything but the battery tube, switch and switch body - it wouldn't be significantly less expensive than a whole new light.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Sep 1, 2009)

MattK said:


> It doesn't matter if it got through or not - Olight is not going to release potential future product data until they are ready.


Understandable there, but it wasn't my only question for them. 

Personally I can't wait until this starts landing in peoples hands. That polished Ti looks amazing and I am hoping the output matches it!


----------



## MattK (Sep 1, 2009)

Let me know if I can help with any other questions.


----------



## applevision (Sep 1, 2009)

By the gods!

Is it just me or is that one of the most beautiful lights in the universe!

It really shatters my idea about what a Ti flashlight should look like! Usually they are fairly plain and round and smooth, presumably because the stuff is so hard to machine... this looks like a light dipped in sliver! Amazing...

I can't wait to hear the reviews...


----------



## AusKipper (Sep 2, 2009)

applevision said:


> By the gods!
> 
> Is it just me or is that one of the most beautiful lights in the universe!



Nope... not just you, my lust for this one is strong!!

I have managed to control myself (and my wallet) so far... but I only just found out today it comes with an optional smooth reflector.. that would possibly make it out throw my TK40, oh dear.... no no, I can hold off till next year.. they will still be some around sometime right? and maybe Olight will have made an affordable version by then.... Yeah.. Next year it is... for now... (Probably until i see a beamshot of it against a TK40 lol )


----------



## RainerWahnsinn (Sep 2, 2009)

Got mine






Its nice and bright. Not a thrower, not as bright in the Spot than the normal Warrior. No Donut. With smooth it has a little ring around the Spot, with OP there is less kontrast to that ring.

Material and finish is great. I thought it was brighter, but thats my problem. All in all it gives a little more light than the R2 version.


----------



## pamparius (Sep 2, 2009)

any beamshots on outdoor??? how the beam compared to M30 Triton??


----------



## Henk_Lu (Sep 2, 2009)

pamparius said:


> any beamshots on outdoor??? how the beam compared to M30 Triton??



In Europe we approach noon now, so, the only outdoor comparison possible in the next 10 hours will be against the sun. While I still don't have my SST50, I can't really say, but I guess the sun would be brighter after all!


----------



## stienke (Sep 2, 2009)

I got my no:338 this morning , great build quality and very shiny.
I compared the light in my basement with the M20 Warrior R2 and saw the hotspot is much bigger than the R2.
I think you can compare this emitter with the M-CE without the donuthole, but I think it trows a little further.
The tint is on the warm side to my eyes.
Now waiting when the sun goes down and fire it up at night to see the difference with the R2.
Hmmmm whe have full moon , what the hell :devil: I'll give it a try.
BTW , the case is not the best quality, I expected more for this price, but the light is very,very nice:naughty:

:wave:


----------



## easilyled (Sep 2, 2009)

#336 arrived in the UK today from qualityflashlights. :thumbsup:

My first impressions are that this is a beautiful light, probably the nicest non-custom light I have.
The beam from the SST-50 is definitely superior to the quad-dies in terms of having no donut or cross pattern
and with the OP reflector its very smooth.
I think the high mode is very bright but the only way I can tell how bright is to compare it with other lights at night
using the crude but effective ceiling-bounce method.

Perhaps the only thing that I would want to change about this light is that it does not tailstand.

Apart from that, I think O-light have struck a home-run. To include a smooth reflector, diffuser, lanyard, spare o-rings,
tail-boot and holster all in a carrying case with instruction manual is a nice touch too.
The holster is very smart and a great way to carry the light.


----------



## Henk_Lu (Sep 2, 2009)

If 338 arrived in the Netherlands today, 319 should have arrived in Luxembourg too (as they were probably sent from the same place). Let's see in the post office this afternoon! :huh:

As for the case, it's the same as the one of the M30. I was used to real gun carrying cases, as I once was in a shooting club. Compared to those the Olight case looks and feels like a water-pistol to a Smith & Wesson. I was not really disappointed, it was more an amusement, as the M30 has a sticker with soldiers in action on it, I just hoped not to find some plastic soldiers instead of a flashlight inside! 
Yeah, the full moon could make real tests impossible outdoors, for the moment the sky iscovered in clouds, but they could be gone this afternoon. The next two days will be stormy and rainy, not the best conditions as well with the full moon over the clouds. What about moon and weather in USA?


----------



## DimeRazorback (Sep 2, 2009)

This thread needs more pics!!!!


----------



## soeren (Sep 2, 2009)

DimeRazorback said:


> This thread needs more pics!!!!


 

+1 and more beamshots..... in europe it gets dark in 4,5 hours I expect Beamshots in 5h*G*


----------



## octaf (Sep 2, 2009)

non said:


> _Ti6Al4V or pure titanium?_


 
neither of them.
I heard this M20 is made of TA4 Titanium.
I guess TA4 titanium is far softer than 6al-4v Grade5 Titanium.
Probably, closer to CP titanium, as easilyled pointed out earlier in this thread. 

http://www.titaniumingots.com.ua/

http://www.plierstool.com/ti/version_parameters.htm


----------



## AKWolf (Sep 2, 2009)

Yeah, the full moon is definitely ruining these early September outdoor beam shots .


----------



## easilyled (Sep 2, 2009)

I have now compared the output of this light on high to my other high-powered lights (ie ones with quad-dies) using my crude, ceiling bounce method.

My guestimate of the *out-the-front lumens* is 350-400.


----------



## Henk_Lu (Sep 2, 2009)

easilyled said:


> I have now compared the output of this light on high to my other high-powered lights (ie ones with quad-dies) using my crude, ceiling bounce method.
> 
> My guestimate of the *out-the-front lumens* is 350-400.



I also compared to a lot of other lights, my conclusion is that the light is definetely brighter than the EagleTac T10C2 and not so bright than the M30. My subjective conclusion is, that the emitter-lumen are there, we are in presence of a large hotspot and a well-lit spill, a homogenous beam.

I like the look and touch of the light, the beam is how I like the, the tint of my light is very neutral, so they can release a neutral white now! 

The outdoor test will be performed later...


----------



## MattK (Sep 2, 2009)

400 OTF makes sense if we assume the typical 20% optical loss.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Sep 2, 2009)

Pics already!!




:twothumbs


----------



## Mikey V (Sep 2, 2009)

The brown truck of joy dropped mine off today. Lucky (hopefully!) Number 13 of 500. It is a thing of beauty! Well, it just got dark out. Initial comparisions are in line with the previous posters. It is very close to my MC-E equipped DBS in apparent lumen output, but spill and hotspot are wider. The hot spot is very big and the spill is very bright with smooth feathering. At 12 feet away, the outer edge of the spill is about 16 feet in diameter and the hotspot is about 4 feet in diameter. 

The regular M20 with R2 has a brighter smaller hotspot, but the overall light put out by the M20Ti is greater. The M30 Triton is definitely brighter, but for its size, this has to be the brightest overall light I own. Throw is decent, but it is no R2 pilled DBS, nor even an R2 M20 Premium, which can out-throw it. It's more of a Surefire L4 wall of light on steroids. It just lights up the whole room. Very pleasant smooth quality beam to the light, and tint is about as pure white as can be. Haven't tried the SMO reflector yet. 

Outside, well, lots of city lights, a really bright full Moon, and even Mars is shining brightly, but it can light up a telephone pole top that is a half a block away, and if it were darker, I think it might be lighting the pole a full short NYC city block away. (The regular R2 M20 can easily light the far pole top). Went across the street and my entire house, lengthwise, fell within the spill, so it can light up the whole house! In short, a beautiful general purpose light. Not the master of throw, but bright and well rounded. 

Well Done, Olight.


----------



## AusKipper (Sep 2, 2009)

Mikey V said:


> The regular M20 with R2 has a brighter smaller hotspot, but the overall light put out by the M20Ti is greater. The M30 Triton is definitely brighter, but for its size, this has to be the brightest overall light I own. Throw is decent, but it is no R2 pilled DBS, nor even an R2 M20 Premium



Is this with the smooth or orange peel reflector?

What happens if you put the other one in?


----------



## Mikey V (Sep 2, 2009)

AusKipper said:


> Is this with the smooth or orange peel reflector?
> 
> What happens if you put the other one in?


 
Go back to paragraph two. Re-read last sentence.


----------



## AusKipper (Sep 2, 2009)

Mikey V said:


> Go back to paragraph two. Re-read last sentence.



Gotcha 

Well let us know what its like when you do try it


----------



## Henk_Lu (Sep 3, 2009)

Mikey V said:


> It's more of a Surefire L4 wall of light on steroids. It just lights up the whole room. Very pleasant smooth quality beam to the light, and tint is about as pure white as can be. Haven't tried the SMO reflector yet.



I also took out the L4 (Luxeon V) to compare after a moment of reflection. 100 Lumen against 500 Lumen? Dos that make sense? Will we even see the beam of the L4 after the SST50?

Well, it was a bit surprisingly, but, according to the laws of multiplying Lumen no surprise on the other hand. You chose the right words in your statement above! I was very pleased, that an L4 isn't outdated yet. The beam ist still floodier, the tint isn't the pure one of the SST50, but still on the good side. I still like my old L4 after the comparison, sad is only the fact that the L4 burns out the 2 cells faster than the SST50...

I won't try the SMO. I like the beam the way it is now, I don't want more rings and I have other lights for throw, e.g. an M20-R2 with the SMO installed. A test with the SMO would only make sense outdoors, for those who need more throw. As it comes with the light, everybody can choose what is best for him (it is an option for the regular M20)!


----------



## easilyled (Sep 3, 2009)

To whet the appetite a bit.


----------



## Henk_Lu (Sep 3, 2009)

I could add a sand-beated Titanium to your picture, but I preffer take it myself, so that I'll have my own serials of the polished Titanium and the M20 Titanium... :nana:


----------



## easilyled (Sep 3, 2009)

Henk_Lu said:


> I could add a sand-beated Titanium to your picture, but I preffer take it myself, so that I'll have my own serials of the polished Titanium and the M20 Titanium... :nana:



Moien Henk. My partner is from Luxembourg and we often go there to see her family. Next time I'm there I'll have to look you up. 

My Olight Infinitum in the picture was the last one of the polished (American) versions. 

I think it goes well with the M20 Ti LE :thumbsup:


----------



## Henk_Lu (Sep 3, 2009)

easilyled said:


> Moien Henk. My partner is from Luxembourg and we often go there to see her family. Next time I'm there I'll have to look you up.
> 
> My Olight Infinitum in the picture was the last one of the polished (American) versions.
> 
> I think it goes well with the M20 Ti LE :thumbsup:



Well, the world is small! 

I wonder if the Quark Titanium set will also go well with the Olights... :huh:

I think from now on I will focus on Titaniums, your signature is an inspiration and I'll change mine soon, that list below looks even horrible to me by now! From now on, the collection will be split in two : The discontinued flashlights and the active Titaniums!


----------



## LuxFAN (Sep 3, 2009)

I just got mine this morning. Can't wait for the sun to set!:twothumbs


----------



## HKJ (Sep 3, 2009)

I also got mine:






I love the look of a titanium light.






But I had to take it apart and it was very easy to do.






The reason to take it apart was to look at the new led. It looks like we are secured that the led is always centered.

That was the good part, when comparing it to other lights, the output is a bit low:






This is done with my usual ceiling bounce. The output from the light is about the same as one level down on TK40, i.e. just below 300 lumens (I used 2x16340 batteries).

Edit:
The light (at least my copy of it) need 4.2 volt to get full output, i.e. 18650 will not stay in regulation.






The lumen value is scaled from the specification and my lux measurements, a max. of 280 instead of 500 would probably be more correct.


----------



## wapkil (Sep 3, 2009)

HKJ said:


> That was the good part, when comparing it to other lights, the output is a bit low:
> 
> This is done with my usual ceiling bounce. The output from the light is about the same as one level down on TK40, i.e. just below 300 lumens (I used 2x16340 batteries).



Matt wrote in the Market Place thread that the LED is driven at 1.6A. For your measurements it means ~87% driver efficiency which, I believe is, quite possible if the driver is optimized for the high level. If the flux bin is WJ (as Matt also wrote) according to the specification the LED should put out 470lm - 560lm. Even if you are unlucky, I think you should get closer to 400lm OTF than 300lm you estimated. Have you tried to check if the LED overheats?

EDIT: I read it once again and I'm not sure if I understood you correctly. Do you estimate the output as 300lm OTF or 300lm on the emitter. I think Fenix specifies emitter lumens but 300lm for an SST-50 at 1.6A seem ridiculously low...


----------



## MrGman (Sep 3, 2009)

There is only one sure way to find out. Matt should send me one next week and I will test it. If he offers to pay return shipping and donate a new 1AA Terralux pocket light for services I will see to it he even gets this back, for other than a show off light I really don't need it and wouldn't use it as a "working light". The sphere of truth is going away time is short, kind of a now or never proposition. I will be gone next week on a secret vacation but will be back by the following monday. I will try to get a full 5 minute set of readings on it. This nagging question really needs to be settled. I am of the belief its another 300 to 350 out the front lumens type of light. G.


----------



## HKJ (Sep 3, 2009)

wapkil said:


> Matt wrote in the Market Place thread that the LED is driven at 1.6A. For your measurements it means ~87% driver efficiency which, I believe is, quite possible if the driver is optimized for the high level. If the flux bin is WJ (as Matt also wrote) according to the specification the LED should put out 470lm - 560lm. Even if you are unlucky, I think you should get closer to 400lm OTF than 300lm you estimated. Have you tried to check if the LED overheats?
> 
> EDIT: I read it once again and I'm not sure if I understood you correctly. Do you estimate the output as 300lm OTF or 300lm on the emitter. I think Fenix specifies emitter lumens but 300lm for an SST-5 at 1.6A seem ridiculously low...



I would expect the led current to be more like 1.3A from the current/brightness graph. My lumen guess is OTF lumens, calculated from the assumption that TK40 is delivering 630 OTF lumen on turbo. If TK40 is lower then M20 is also lower (Based on the same assumption TK11 is 224 lumen and M30 is 564 lumen).

I did run the light a few minutes before doing the measurement and the output does drop a bit, but I did not write the initial value down.


----------



## HKJ (Sep 3, 2009)

MrGman said:


> There is only one sure way to find out. Matt should send me one next week and I will test it. If he offers to pay return shipping and donate a new 1AA Terralux pocket light for services I will see to it he even gets this back, for other than a show off light I really don't need it and wouldn't use it as a "working light". The sphere of truth is going away time is short, kind of a now or never proposition. I will be gone next week on a secret vacation but will be back by the following monday. I will try to get a full 5 minute set of readings on it. This nagging question really needs to be settled. I am of the belief its another 300 to 350 out the front lumens type of light. G.



Ceiling bounce, cheap luxmeter and another light as reference is not exactly the epitome of precision. It would be nice to see a real lumen measurement of this light.

I would also be nice to see some other voltage/current sweep, if the 4.2 volt is typical or I just have a led with high Vf. One *guess* could be that the high Vf forced OLight to reduce the led current, to keep the heat down.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Sep 3, 2009)

Great mini-review HKJ!

Thank you for the breakdown!!

:twothumbs


----------



## easilyled (Sep 4, 2009)

HKJ said:


> Ceiling bounce, cheap luxmeter and another light as reference is not exactly the epitome of precision. It would be nice to see a real lumen measurement of this light.
> 
> I would also be nice to see some other voltage/current sweep, if the 4.2 volt is typical or I just have a led with high Vf. One *guess* could be that the high Vf forced OLight to reduce the led current, to keep the heat down.



LEDZeppelin has a thread in the home-made section where he used an SST-50 in a mag-mod.

He measured the Vf as 3.7V when it was driven at 5A. At 1.75A, it would have been much lower. 

So I don't think that 4.2V is typical of all SST-50s and I certainly hope its not.

I have to say that the output on mine looks to be quite a lot higher than 280 out-the-front lumens.


----------



## HKJ (Sep 4, 2009)

easilyled said:


> LEDZeppelin has a thread in the home-made section where he used an SST-50 in a mag-mod.
> 
> He measured the Vf as 3.7V when it was driven at 5A. At 1.75A, it would have been much lower.
> 
> So I don't think that 4.2V is typical of all SST-50s and I certainly hope its not.



That makes me wonder if OLights new polarity protection is a diode in series with the battery? I do not really believe that they would use that kind of solution. I will probably do some more measurement later today.



easilyled said:


> I have to say that the output on mine looks to be quite a lot higher than 280 out-the-front lumens.



I would also have expected it to be brighter, maybe mine is below average. I will hope some more people can do measurement, so we can compare.


----------



## n1ch0 (Sep 4, 2009)

#500 of 500 is here


----------



## HKJ (Sep 4, 2009)

HKJ said:


> That makes me wonder if OLights new polarity protection is a diode in series with the battery? I do not really believe that they would use that kind of solution. I will probably do some more measurement later today.



I have done some more measurements, peek current is 1.4A and with a cold light it is at about 4.2 volt, when the light heats up it drops to 4.0 volt.



HKJ said:


> I would also have expected it to be brighter, maybe mine is below average. I will hope some more people can do measurement, so we can compare.



I tried doing these measurement again today and got the same result, brightness is just below TK40 on max. (Rated 277 lumen, but I get 300). I used 3 different battery configurations (2x16340, 2xCR123, 1x18650) and two light meters (CA813, HD450).


----------



## MrGman (Sep 4, 2009)

and yet not a single beamshot or video, you guys should all be embarassed. This is a $300 plus dollar flashlight and we can't get a single good beamshot comparison out of it yet. sheeesssssshhhhhhhh. 


:candle:


----------



## DimeRazorback (Sep 4, 2009)

I agree with MrGman!!

:devil:


----------



## n1ch0 (Sep 4, 2009)

I've taken some pic comparison with the M20 Q5 and R2.. just need to clean up the pic abit and will post asap


----------



## HKJ (Sep 5, 2009)

MrGman said:


> and yet not a single beamshot or video, you guys should all be embarassed. This is a $300 plus dollar flashlight and we can't get a single good beamshot comparison out of it yet. sheeesssssshhhhhhhh.
> 
> 
> :candle:



Here you go: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3074740#post3074740


----------



## n1ch0 (Sep 5, 2009)

about 3meters.. 




M20 Ti>R2>Q5

At about 7 meters.. 




M20 R2>Ti>Q5

All on 18650s - M20 Ti with 2x RCR 123s actually have smaller hot spot (is this the correct term?) and better throw
------------------------------------------
Short review..

Comparison between M20 Ti/R2/Q5, 
Ti has bigger hotspot(?), kinda more to M30 ish kinda of light. Compared 500lumens of Ti to 250lmns of R2 and 230lumens of Q5, I would say the R2 is more tighter on the light and actually feels brighter on short range. 

However on further range, the Ti actually is pretty good at flooding and at about 50-60ms I can still shine my brother and he have to cover his eyes .. with the Q5s, he can still squint a bit... 

Using 2x RCR 123s actually have different output for the Ti. The beam is more tighter and is better thrower => We compared 2 Ti's side by side.. and theres noticeable differences..

But considering the light is only 2x CR123 size and can be stored in jeans pockets, the light surely pack alot of power. I've gotten quit a few "wows" when showing them indoor with interior lights on.






btw, is the pics too small?


----------



## ARA (Sep 5, 2009)

Hey nice personalization with the name etching how did you get that done


----------



## n1ch0 (Sep 5, 2009)

I asked the factory very nicely through the authorised Olight agent in Indonesia <<<< uhmmm myself  hehehehe


----------



## xcel730 (Sep 5, 2009)

I got the M20 earlier this week and the build is absolutely beautiful. Nothing like holding a titanium flashlight in your hand. 

I do have one issues though. I don't feel like my M20 is as bright as it should be. I have the Jetbeam M1x, which is rated 400 Lumens out the front and it completely blows the M20 away. I compared it with the Surefire U2, which is rated for 100 lumens, and the M20 is only a tad brighter. I've tried running it on 1x18650, 2xCR123, 2xRCR123 and it doesn't make a difference. To me, it seems like the M20 is more in the 200ish lumens than 500. Did you guys feel the same way? Did I get a bad batch or is my eyes just going bad?

I still think this is a beautiful light and I still love it, but just wished it was brighter. Let me know what you guys think.


----------



## HKJ (Sep 5, 2009)

xcel730 said:


> I do have one issues though. I don't feel like my M20 is as bright as it should be. I have the Jetbeam M1x, which is rated 400 Lumens out the front and it completely blows the M20 away. I compared it with the Surefire U2, which is rated for 100 lumens, and the M20 is only a tad brighter. I've tried running it on 1x18650, 2xCR123, 2xRCR123 and it doesn't make a difference. To me, it seems like the M20 is more in the 200ish lumens than 500. Did you guys feel the same way? Did I get a bad batch or is my eyes just going bad?



There is one thing wrong with you comparison, the M1X is a thrower (I do not know about the SF), it will always be brighter than other lights with same or even higher lumen rating. If you have a small room with white ceiling and walls, try shining the lights at the ceiling and look at the floor, this gives a much better comparison of lumen (But is not perfect).
If you look back in this thread you will see my take on the light output of the M20 Ti and if you look here you will see how it looks compares to some other lights.


----------



## MattK (Sep 5, 2009)

I would also add that the Jetbeam M1X is rated at 700 lumens at the emitter and 450 out the front lumens - the 500 for the M20 Ti is at the emitter lumens (no rating for OTF - ~375-425 would be a good assumption allowing for optical loss and component variation)so it's not suprising the M1X is much brighter. Also, the M1X has a huge reflector and lense - they will be much more optically efficient than a small lense and reflector like on the M20. Also, the larger reflector is better and collecting and focusing the light into a tighter beam. I'm not sure of the reflector diameters but the M1X is like the TK40 I think - ~65mm and the M20 is ~35mm - 3CM is a big difference.


----------



## xcel730 (Sep 5, 2009)

HKJ, thanks for the link. Very nice comparison.

Matt, thanks for the quick response.

I just wanted to be sure that I didn't just happened to stumbled upon a bad batch. It's a beautiful light and definitely a keeper.


----------



## Metatron (Sep 5, 2009)

post deleted


----------



## tab665 (Sep 5, 2009)

post deleted


----------



## jahxman (Sep 8, 2009)

Number 333 of 500 is here! I love my serial #!

I'll try to take a few pics tomorrow, and maybe a beamshot or two. 

For tonight, I did a bunch of quick and dirty ceiling bounce readings to get a sense of the output:






As you can see, the M20 Ti SST-50 ceiling bounce output is higher than all the other single die lights, and lower than all the multi-dies (and the ROP) except for the DX MC-E drop-in.

Actually it's about what I expected and I am quite pleased with it, the beam is quite beautiful. I find I prefer the OP reflector, the SMO when screwed all the way in creates some chromatic separation in the middle of the hotspot; backing it out a little fixes this somewhat.

One puzzle is how I'm supposed to attach the included lanyard; the clip can't fit in the lanyard hole on the light, and no intermediate ring was provided. I attached a black leather lanyard that I had and it works well.

Overall, very pleased with my M20 Ti SST-50 #333 !:twothumbs:twothumbs:twothumbs


----------



## applevision (Sep 9, 2009)

jahxman said:


> Number 333 of 500 is here! I love my serial #!
> 
> As you can see, the M20 Ti SST-50 ceiling bounce output is higher than all the other single die lights, and lower than all the multi-dies (and the ROP) except for the DX MC-E drop-in.
> 
> ...



Wow! Thank you so much for this *jahxman*!--what an amazing chart! I so love these, though "quick and dirty" perhaps, they tell us so much about the lights!
lovecpflovecpflovecpf


----------



## Metatron (Sep 9, 2009)

i decided that 340 lumens was just a total waste of time and have rigged it for direct drive with an IMR pushing it. this flashlight now may claim to be one, prior to this it was just a bonnet ornament.


----------



## easilyled (Sep 9, 2009)

Metatron said:


> i decided that 340 lumens was just a total waste of time and have rigged it for direct drive with an IMR pushing it. this flashlight now may claim to be one, prior to this it was just a bonnet ornament.



I'd love to see a runtime chart. ie output vs. time.

In the non-adulterated version this would hopefully be a near horizontal line.

In your version I would expect output to drop pretty quickly.


----------



## jahxman (Sep 9, 2009)

easilyled said:


> I'd love to see a runtime chart. ie output vs. time.
> 
> In the non-adulterated version this would hopefully be a near horizontal line.
> 
> In your version I would expect output to drop pretty quickly.


 
Yeah, I wonder how well the heat sinking would keep up on direct drive off an IMR. It does appear the Olight went with a copper heat sink inside the titanium tube; I'm sure this helps but it is still limited by the size of the light, and I would expect the light to get too hot to hold in a fairly short time on DD.


----------



## Metatron (Sep 9, 2009)

jahxman said:


> Yeah, I wonder how well the heat sinking would keep up on direct drive off an IMR. It does appear the Olight went with a copper heat sink inside the titanium tube; I'm sure this helps but it is still limited by the size of the light, and I would expect the light to get too hot to hold in a fairly short time on DD.


I expect you are correct easilyled, as for the heatsink, well, its paper thin and may not perform overly well, so this light will remain a 'shock and awe' light.


----------



## ShineOnYouCrazyDiamond (Sep 10, 2009)

Well I just received mine from Mike at Battery Junction and I couldn't be happier. The light and the build is beautiful. A little too much lube on the threads but that was an easy fix.

I've compared it against a TK40, SuperStorm, M2XC4 - warm, Fox-1 and T20C2 - neutral. I think I can agree with most of the above statements about brightness, but I think this is one of the nicest lights I have ever had. It really fits almost perfectly what I have been looking for in a light for almost 90% of my personal usage.

Lo could be a touch lower, but med and hi are perfect. No 500 Lum for sure but with a bigger spot and more brightness in the flood it is comparable (as mentioned above) with the TK40 on max. Color is a little cooler than the TK40 but still nice and warm with the OP reflector.

I put on the smooth reflector and I didn't like the beam. Too blue in the center and green around the edges. A lot of artifacts all over the place. Better throw but not worth the distortions.

I did some measurements of battery voltage and amps running rcr123s and a 18650: (run on Hi for about 2-3 minutes)

2 x rcr123
before V:8.15
after V: 8.03
Average V: 8.09
Amps: 0.765

Battery = 750 mAh, .75*60/.765 = 58.8 minutes

Average Power = 6.19W

1 x 18650
before V: 4.17
after V: 4.14
Average V: 4.155
Amps: 1.45

Average Power = 6.02W

Battery = 2600 mAh, 2.60*60/1.45 = 1 hr 47 minutes

Nothing truely scientific about my measurements but it shows that on a fresh 18650 there is only about ~3% difference in power running through the light.

I like the UI but wish there was a way to skip strobe. Also wish I could do a tailstand.

Overall - 4.5 out of 5 for me.


----------



## PhantomPhoton (Sep 11, 2009)

easilyled said:


> I'd love to see a runtime chart. ie output vs. time.
> 
> In the non-adulterated version this would hopefully be a near horizontal line.
> 
> In your version I would expect output to drop pretty quickly.




Actually I doubt the non-adulterated version has flat regulation for very long with an 18650 cell. But I'd be happy to see a runtime graph prove me wrong...  If anyone has seen one that I've missed please point me to it.


----------



## easilyled (Sep 11, 2009)

PhantomPhoton said:


> Actually I doubt the non-adulterated version has flat regulation for very long with an 18650 cell. But I'd be happy to see a runtime graph prove me wrong...  If anyone has seen one that I've missed please point me to it.



No, that's true but I was talking about using the non-adulterated one with 2 CR123s or RCR123s since that is what it takes to provide regulation according to the specs.

Obviously with an 18650, one would expect it to drop although since its not direct drive, it should drop more slowly than one in direct drive which should plummet due to the excessive heat produced.


----------



## ShineOnYouCrazyDiamond (Sep 14, 2009)

easilyled said:


> No, that's true but I was talking about using the non-adulterated one with 2 CR123s or RCR123s since that is what it takes to provide regulation according to the specs.
> 
> Obviously with an 18650, one would expect it to drop although since its not direct drive, it should drop more slowly than one in direct drive which should plummet due to the excessive heat produced.


 
Speaking of heat I have a question for you guys, if you know....

When I run the M20 Ti on 2 x RCR123 the light is visibly a touch brighter than 18650. Runtime just under 1 hour on constant. The light gets pretty hot around the head are after about 10 -15 minutes.

When I run with a 18650 I get almost 2 hours and the head of the light never becomes more than warm.

So what is causing this extra heat? Is it the higher constant Amps running through the head or does the buck circuit have to drop the extra voltage and do so across resistance in the form of heat (that seems very old school before the days of switching power supplies).


----------



## LumensMaximus (Sep 16, 2009)

Finally received mine but couldn't seem to get it to fire on high beam, just low and medium. Changed batteries and same result, also thought I had a dud, changed batteries a second time and she finally came to life. Pretty bright and very nice beam, however the real reason I made the purchase was it's titanium and limited. It may take a little while but eventually they will be all gone. Alot of ti for the money. :devil:


----------



## Xak (Sep 17, 2009)

I wonder if the M20 would work better with the XPG R4.


----------



## MrGman (Sep 17, 2009)

ShineOnYouCrazyDiamond said:


> Well I just received mine from Mike at Battery Junction and I couldn't be happier. The light and the build is beautiful. A little too much lube on the threads but that was an easy fix.
> 
> I've compared it against a TK40, SuperStorm, M2XC4 - warm, Fox-1 and T20C2 - neutral. I think I can agree with most of the above statements about brightness, but I think this is one of the nicest lights I have ever had. It really fits almost perfectly what I have been looking for in a light for almost 90% of my personal usage.
> 
> ...


 

If I read this correctly the voltage numbers are open circuit before and after and not under load. they don't reflect the sag in voltage under direct load at the time so the calculated power numbers can't really be as close to the truth as they should be and the comparison of power levels using the 2 batteries versus 1X18650 is probably a greater difference than what is shown as well. 

this probably explains shineonyoucrazydiamonds experience with the unit not being as bright or getting as hot with just an 18650 battery.

Taking before and after voltage readings of the battery and calculating the average is not nearly as accurate as measuring the actual voltage drop under load, because batteries recover under no load condition to a higher voltage which is misleading. G.


----------



## ShineOnYouCrazyDiamond (Sep 17, 2009)

MrGman said:


> If I read this correctly the voltage numbers are open circuit before and after and not under load. they don't reflect the sag in voltage under direct load at the time so the calculated power numbers can't really be as close to the truth as they should be and the comparison of power levels using the 2 batteries versus 1X18650 is probably a greater difference than what is shown as well.
> 
> this probably explains shineonyoucrazydiamonds experience with the unit not being as bright or getting as hot with just an 18650 battery.
> 
> Taking before and after voltage readings of the battery and calculating the average is not nearly as accurate as measuring the actual voltage drop under load, because batteries recover under no load condition to a higher voltage which is misleading. G.


 
I don't disagree with your comment about voltage under load, but I was using AW cells to support not too much V dip under load. Also these cell are only being driven at around .6C on the 18650 which shouldn't really cause a big V dip under load. I only have one multi-meter so I didn't have any way to record V and A at the same time. I took the after V measurement right after turning the light off so recovery, although present, should be minimal. 

I'll see what I can do to take some more accurate readings under load but I don't expect too much of a change.

At anything under 1C I don't believe a LiIon cell will produce a big V dip of more than .1 or .2 volts. At least not a good cell. I run massive 6S1P LiPo cells in my RC cars which can pull 20C continuous and 30-35C burst pushing 1000-2000 watts and I only see 0.5-0.7 drops on these cells. I'm sure my numbers aren't too far off.


----------



## HKJ (Sep 17, 2009)

ShineOnYouCrazyDiamond said:


> I'll see what I can do to take some more accurate readings under load but I don't expect too much of a change.



You readings are close to the ones I published in post #143, that was a sweep from 2.6 volt to 9 volt. You also has to be aware that the current depends on the temperature of the led and driver.


----------



## ShineOnYouCrazyDiamond (Sep 17, 2009)

HKJ said:


> You readings are close to the ones I published in post #143, that was a sweep from 2.6 volt to 9 volt. You also has to be aware that the current depends on the temperature of the led and driver.


 
HKJ it was your post which prompted me to do the testing when I got the light. I love running on 18650 because of the added runtime but also feel better with 2xRCR123 as it then becomes nicely regulated at a higher brightness.

Based on your testing do you know/think it is PWM or current regulation?


----------



## HKJ (Sep 17, 2009)

ShineOnYouCrazyDiamond said:


> Based on your testing do you know/think it is PWM or current regulation?



Definitely current regulation, I could find no traces of pwm in the light when doing my Danish review.

But the high voltage to reach maximum brightness do surprise me, when the light is cold it is nearly 4.2 volt and it will drop down to about 4 volt when the light warms up.


----------



## berry580 (Sep 18, 2009)

how come there's still no runtime/output graphs so far? Its been 7 pages already.
Anyone who knows better? 

thank you in advance.


----------



## wow400 (Oct 22, 2009)

Hi all, how durable is the Ti body - does it scratch / dent easily?

I have a Breitling watch that's made out of Ti & it barely marks but the Olights looks really shiny...

Thanks

Nic


----------



## easilyled (Oct 22, 2009)

wow400 said:


> Hi all, how durable is the Ti body - does it scratch / dent easily?
> 
> I have a Breitling watch that's made out of Ti & it barely marks but the Olights looks really shiny...
> 
> ...



Ti objects can accumulate very superficial surface scratches quite easily, but they are hard to see and can be buffed out with without much effort.

Far preferable to when hard-anodized Al flashlights pick up scratches. They are much more obvious because the coating is a different color from the raw Al and the appearance is permanently spoiled.

Also Ti objects will not dent/distort as much as Al ones when dropped from a height due to being harder and stronger.


----------



## recDNA (Oct 22, 2009)

berry580 said:


> how come there's still no runtime/output graphs so far? Its been 7 pages already.
> Anyone who knows better?
> 
> thank you in advance.


 
See HKJ's review in Danish and translate into English with Google translate...or just find the graph...no translation needed.


----------



## wow400 (Oct 25, 2009)

Thanks EasilyLED


----------



## Henk_Lu (Jan 21, 2010)

I just played around with my Titanium, checking how it runs on an 18650. To my surprise, it begins to flicker now and then as soon as the head gets slightly warm... 

With 2 x 16340 IMR I can't see any flickering, didn't notice any with 2 x CR123A. I find nothing on CPF about the M20 Titanium flickering, but I know that some quad-die also present that behaviour on an 18650, but not on 2 x RCR123 because of the higher voltage... :shrug:


----------



## recDNA (Jan 21, 2010)

Has anybody built an SST-50 flashlight with output that even aproaches that of MC-E? SST-50 SHOULD be brighter but none actually ARE????


----------



## Henk_Lu (Jan 22, 2010)

The Thrunite Catapult announces 900 Lumen and the Olight K50 shall have 1.000 Lumen.

The SST-50 needs some serious heatsinking to be driven to the maximum, as well as more than a single 18650.

What e saw until now are underdriven lights which work in the efficient range, but I keep on wondering if flickering on an 18650 is normal... :candle:


----------



## easilyled (Jan 22, 2010)

recDNA said:


> Has anybody built an SST-50 flashlight with output that even aproaches that of MC-E? SST-50 SHOULD be brighter but none actually ARE????



Yes, the Thrunite catapult is on a par with the brightest P7 and MC-E lights and uses an SST-50.

The output depends on how hard the led is driven. ie. current.

I'm not sure why you insist that an SST-50 should be brighter at an equal current level.

I doubt this is always true. It depends largely on which bin SST-50, P7 and MC-E is used and also on the Vfs of the respective leds.

As far as I know, they are all quite comparable with each other.

The main advantage of using an SST-50 is that because its a single-die led, reflector design should be easier
(ie donut/void not so much of an issue)

Another advantage is that, in theory, it can be driven harder than a P7 or an MC-E


----------



## turboBB (Jan 22, 2010)

Does anyone have #117?

Thx,
Tim


----------



## Flashlites R Us (Feb 11, 2010)

Henk_Lu said:


> I just played around with my Titanium, checking how it runs on an 18650. To my surprise, it begins to flicker now and then as soon as the head gets slightly warm...
> 
> With 2 x 16340 IMR I can't see any flickering, didn't notice any with 2 x CR123A. I find nothing on CPF about the M20 Titanium flickering, but I know that some quad-die also present that behaviour on an 18650, but not on 2 x RCR123 because of the higher voltage... :shrug:


 

So does mine. But I notice the faint "now and then" flicker ONLY on high power (on a white wall) and when it does happen the head may be either cool/warm or hot.

It does not seem that head temperatures will cause a flicker.

Anyway this is something that one would only notice if staring intently at a close up "white wall" beam shot for awhile. The only thing that the staring got me was a headache. :sick2:

BTW I use only 18650 protected rechargeables in my light.


----------



## Mark Mck (Jun 22, 2010)

I just picked up #200 of 500. It is a very nice light in regards to fit and finish and the beam is very nice. It is larger than my Ti Haiku XP-G warm EDC but the leather holster makes carrying the light very comfortable. The UI is very intuitive and I like the settings as they come from the factory. It's my first Olight and I am impressed!:twothumbs


----------



## MattK (Jun 23, 2010)

Sweet - enjoy!


----------

