# EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!



## selfbuilt (Mar 7, 2010)

*EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5 or XP-E R2) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*

_*Reviewer's Note: *The T20C2 Mark II was provided for review by EagleTac. Please see their website for more info._

_*UPDATE:* Results from the new XR-E R2 drop-in for the T20C2-II have been added to the review. _

*Warning: Even more pic heavy than usual! :sweat:*

*Specifications for T20C2 Mark II, according to EagleTac:*
_Please see my T20C2 review for detailed specs of the original model_

Cree XP-G R5 LED (Cool White) or XP-E Q4 (5A tint, Neutral White)
Maximum output (OTF): 300 lumen / 60lumen / 5lumen
Runtime 1.7 hrs / 13hrs / 180+ hr
Three levels of output activated by twisting the Head/Bezel
Tactical strobe is now user-enabled, can be removed from tailcap sequence
Also features hidden Beacon mode and SOS mode
New drop-in LED module for different colour output options
Crenulated Stainless Steel Bezel
Syntax ultra-clear harden/glass lens with AR coating
Mil-Spec Hard Anodized (Type III)
Smooth Aluminum Reflector (OP version available)
Gold Plated contacts for the good conduction
Added recoil spring behind the head
Engineered for a comfortable grip with aggressive knurling
Tactical Forward click tail-cap
Tailstanding possible with rubber tailcap extender
Soft rubber cigar grip ring/anti roll
Standard kit includes: Diffuser Filter , Spare O-rings, Battery Magazine for two CR123A, GITD Switch Boot, Black Stainless Steel Pocket Clip, Soft Rubber Cigar Grip, Heavy Duty Nylon Holster w/ Flip, Mil-Spec Para cord Lanyard w/ quick attachment clip, User Manual
Optional RGB Kit: Includes everything in base model, plus: Red Filter, Blue Filter and Green Filter
Optional Weapons Kit: Includes everything in the RGB Kit, plus: Remote Pressure switch w/ separate on/off switch, Aluminum Rail Mount for 1" Body
_[*]*NEW:* Optional XR-E R2 OP drop-in now available (for greater throw)_
MSRP ~$90 (~$100 with RGB filter kit)
The T20C2 Mark II is a significant upgrade to the original model I reviewed a little over 6 months ago. This review will focus on the updates to the model – please see my original T20C2 review for more background.







By default, the T20C2-II comes with a stainless steel bezel, rubber cigar grip ring and black stainless steel clip attached. Included in the package is the manual, warranty card, spare o-rings, extra GITD tailcap boot cover, wrist lanyard, good quality belt pouch with closing flap and lens diffuser attachment. 

Optional accessories are the RGB filter kit and weapon kit. My sample came with a rubber tailstanding tailcap add-on piece, but I don’t know if this is standard or not (previously, you had to buy a whole new tailcap). 

Please see my original T20C2 review to see R/G/B blue filters in action. Note that the bezel ring attachment diameter/threading has not changed, so the original T20C2 RGB kit still fits on the new Mark II version.

















From left to right: Surefire CR123A, EagleTac T20C2 MarkII, original T20C2, Olight M20, JetBeam Jet-III M.

*T20C2*: Weight 123.3g, Length 147.8mm x Width 34.9mm (bezel max)
*T20C2-II*: Weight 114.7g, Length 145.7mm x Width 33.5mm (bezel max)

While the external arrangement seems similar, things are quite different when you look under the hood (more on that in a moment)

On the surface, fit and finish remain excellent on my sample. No flaws in the black type-III hard anodizing. Consistent with other EagleTac lights, the knurling on the bezel and tailcap remains fairly aggressive. Identification labels are very sharp and clear, in bright white against the black background (perhaps unfortunately so, as there are still all warnings on the bezel/head).

The new rubber grip ring is easier on the fingers than the original polycarbonate one. Both the black stainless steel clip and rubber grip-ring are removable.










Screw threads are anodized for head or tailcap lock-out. :thumbsup: Due to the protruding forward clicky, the light cannot tailstand in its default form – but the rubber tailstanding attachment worked well in my testing (introduces some wobble, but I like that it’s easily swappable).














Here’s one major difference – a whole new emitter/pill/reflector assembly, and one that functions as a drop-in module. oo: Actually, it is literally a screw-in module – which should help with heat transfer away from the pill and to the aluminum body (always a concern with standard drop-ins). You can thus replace the whole pill assembly with other modules, to switch to a different LED or reflector finish.

Note also the new recoil spring at the positive battery contact surface. This should allow for more secure operation in weapon mounts.

_*UPDATE:* Eagletac has kindly sent me a new XR-E R2 drop-in for the T20C2-II. This should largely restore the throw and output characteristics of the original T20C2, while maintaining the new build and interface of the T20C2-II. Good to have the option for those who want it! :thumbsup:














The Mk II head dimensions have changed slightly from the original T20C2, so this drop-in has a slightly narrower width than the original T20C2. Orange Peel texturing also seems a bit higher on my drop-in sample. Still, I suspect this new drop-in will go a long way in restoring the throw and output of the original T20C2 - but with the new T20C2-II interface. _

Here are some shots with the XP-G R5 OP reflector module mounted:










The default standard cool white version uses the new Cree XP-G emitter, with a R5 output bin (no tint bin reported). Also available from EagleTac is the relatively warm "neutral" CR-E 5A tint with a Q4 output bin. And more recently, a new XP-E R2 drop-in for greater throw For those of you not familiar with tint bins, please see my Colour tint comparison and the summary LED tint charts found here. 

And now for a comparison of the smooth and OP XP-G R5 reflector modules. Both lights are on Max on an AW protected 18650, about 0.5 meters from a white wall. 










As expected, the OP texturing smooth outs the corona around the hotspot (i.e. hotspot edge is less defined). But there is a more subtle effect that is very important: _it also helps compensate for the dark void in the center of the smooth reflector’s hotspot._

Although difficult to see in the pics above, in real life, this "donut" effect on the smooth reflector’s hotspot is fairly noticeable, at all distances. :sigh: However, I did not notice it at all with the OP reflector. This could be due to a smoothing effect of the OP reflector, or may just be variation in exact emitter placement among samples. But personally, I would stick with the OP reflector just in case. 

To help you compare the effects of a diffuser, here’s a comparison of the OP version, taken about 1.5m from a white wall.










I didn’t retake the RGB filer shots, so please refer back to my original T20C2 review for a general idea as to the colors. 

_*UPDATE:* Here are some up-close white-wall beamshots comparing the new T20C2-II R2-drop-in with the original T20C2 (XR-E R2):


















Basically, throw seems pretty comparable, but the new drop-in is also more ringy beyond the hotspot’s corona.

I can't do side-by-side shots of the XP-G R5 and XR-E R2 modules for the T20C2-II (I only have one body ).

Here are some external 100-yard beamshots. Please see my Outdoor 100-Yard Round-up Review for more info on these shots.






Again, there is not a huge difference, but it does confirm what you can see in the white-wall shots – the new T20C2-II R2 drop-in throws similar to the original T20C2, although with some relative variation in the fore- to mid-ground rings. 

*UPDATE SEPT 19, 2010:* I've added some additional lights to my 100-Yard Outdoor Beamshot Round-up, including a number of XP-G R5 lights. Check out that round-up thread for more details. Here is a relevant animated GIF comparison:




_

*User Interface*

The T20C2 Mark II has an updated interface. Like before, tighten the bezel for Turbo, loosen for General mode. 

Where things change a bit are the "hidden" modes. Like before, there is a low output mode that can be accessed by rapidly switching the head within a sec or so (i.e. a rapid Turbo-General-Turbo, or General-Turbo-General switch). The low setting is not retained if you turn the light off – it will come back on in Turbo or General mode, depending on how you left the head. Interestingly, the light doesn't just jump from one output mode to another – when going down in output, it rapidly ramps down instead.

What’s new is the addition of strobe, beacon and SOS modes that you can cycle through in the same way as the Lo mode (i.e. just keep doing tighten-loosen-tighten switches to cycle through the hidden modes). A nice upgrade.

The main complaint with the original T20C2 was that strobe was also activated by clicking the tail switch off-on within 3 secs (later reduced to 1 sec). This prohibited momentary signaling. Now, you can enable or lock-out (i.e. remove) this tactical strobe feature by turning the light off-on fifteen times in ten seconds. Very nice to have the option to get rid of it completely! 

Strobe frequency was measured at 8Hz, similar to the previous model lights.

*No PWM (Pulse-Width-Modulation)*

Consistent with other EagleTac lights, I was unable to detect any signs of PWM.  As the runtimes clearly indicate, lower output levels appear to be current-controlled.

*Testing Method:* All my output numbers are relative for my home-made light box setup, a la Quickbeam's flashlightreviews.com method. You can directly compare all my relative output values from different reviews - i.e. an output value of "10" in one graph is the same as "10" in another. All runtimes are done under a cooling fan, except for the extended run Lo/Min modes (i.e. >12 hours) which are done without cooling.

Throw values are the square-root of lux measurements taken at 1 meter from the lens, using a light meter.

*Throw/Output Summary Chart:*

Note the new Mark II version is identified as T20C2II in the table below. OP refers to orange peel reflector, SMO to smooth reflector.

_*UPDATE:* The new XR-E R2 drop-in for the T20C2-II has been added to the results. It's identified as "T20C2II (XR-E R2) OP" in the table below._














Now this is interesting – consistent with my observation that the OP reflector didn’t show the dark void of the smooth reflector, center beam throw was actually slightly _higher_ on the OP version. oo: Again, I don’t know if this is a consistent finding, but I certainly prefer the beam patter of the OP version.

Note that max throw is reduced compare to the original T20C2, but overall output is significantly increased on all batteries. In fact, the new T20C2 Mark II is pretty comparable the SST-50 equipped Olight M21 in output (just with a different beam pattern).

_*UPDATE:* As these numbers show, the new XR-E R2 drop-in for the T20C2-II performs close to the original T20C2, with just a touch less output and throw on my sample._

*Output/Runtime Comparison:*

*Note:* _Effective January 2010, all CR123A runtimes are now performed solely on Titanium Innovations batteries sponsored by BatteryJunction.com. You can compare the generally excellent performance of these CR123A cells relative to the Duracell/Surefire cells used in all my earlier reviews here. I have marked all the new runtimes of lights with Titanium Innovations CR123As on the graphs with an "*". _

_*UPDATE:* The new XR-E R2 drop-in for the T20C2-II have been added to the results._




























Thanks to its R5 output bin emitter, the T20C2 Mark II is the brightest Cree-based 2xRCR/1x18650 light in my collection at the moment. Overall efficiency seems to be slightly higher than the Luminus SST-50 equipped Olight M21, for equivalent output.  

Regulation and runtime performance is very good, consistent with a current-controlled circuit. Note the Mark II seems to be driven a little harder on 18650 than the original T20C2, which should please fans of this battery setup. :thumbsup:

_*UPDATE:* The new XR-E R2 drop-in has comparable runtime to the original T20C2, but slightly less output on my sample. This is likely due to natural variation within the output bins (i.e. they cover a 7% range of outputs)._

*Potential Issues*

The smooth reflector (default config) produced a dark center void in the hotspot. This was noticeable at all distances in my sample (i.e. produces a ring or "donut" effect around the periphery of the sharply-defined hotspot). However, the effect was not observed on the OP version of the emitter module. Whether this is due to smoothing of the hotspot, or simply variation between samples, I don’t know – but to be on the safe side, I would recommend you opt for the OP version.

Light uses a drop-in design for the emitter/pill/reflector combo, allowing the user to upgrade or swap as needed. However, all drop-ins run the risk of reduced heat transfer to the body of the flashlight. In this case, EagleTac has thoughtfully designed the drop-in to actually screw into the head, which should help with thermal transfer.

Like most Cree XP-G R5 output bins, overall tint on my sample is slightly on the greenish side of premium cool white.

_*UPDATE:* The new XR-E R2 drop-in for the T20C2-II has considerably more throw than the standard XP-G R5 version, but less overall output and a fairly ringy beam pattern._

*Preliminary Observations*

I will cut right to the chase – this new T20C2 Mark II is a clear improvement over the original T20C2 in just about every way. 

EagleTac has fixed the main issue with the original T20C2 (i.e. mandatory tactical strobe mode that prevented momentary signaling). You can now enable or disable this feature at will, which is a great improvement.

They’ve also added a few new features and upgrades. In addition to the "hidden" Lo mode, you can now access strobe, beacon and SOS the same way (i.e. tighten-loosen-tighten switch of the head). Max output has increased significantly on the cool white version, thanks to the new XP-G R5 output bin (and seems to be driven even harder on 1x18650). :thumbsup:

The build has also seen a few significant modifications – the new user-replaceable drop-in module design (allowing you to swap emitter/pill/reflector combos), a new recoil spring in the head, soft rubber tactical ring, and the rubber tailstanding attachment. The optional RGB kit from the original T20C2 is still available, and fits the new Mark II.

What hasn’t changed is the overall build quality of the light, which I consider to be very good. It is certainly hard to argue with the value you get here for the price. oo:

 One thing to watch for is the beam profile – my smooth reflector module produced a noticeable dark center-void, and I have seen other complaints of this here on CPF. Your experience may vary, but I found the OP reflector module to produce a very pleasant beam with no signs of the dark spot. Note also that peak throw is reduced on the Mark II version compared to the original (but at least no Cree rings now).

More than just a fix of the original T20C2, this Mark II version is a significant upgrade that should meet the needs of many users quite well. A worthy contender in this class of light!

_*UPDATE APRIL 21, 2010:* EagleTac has also come out with new Mark II versions of the P20C2/P20A2 series lights. Please see my more recent review for details._

_*UPDATE JULY 23, 2010:*The new XR-E R2 drop-in for T20C2-II effectively restores the output and throw characteristics of the original T20C2, but with the build and user interface improvements of the T20C2-II. :thumbsup:_


----------



## lebox97 (Mar 7, 2010)

excellent detailed review selfbuilt - as always!


Tod


----------



## Dioni (Mar 7, 2010)

Thanks for the review!!!


----------



## houtex (Mar 7, 2010)

Another fine review. 

I have to say ,most of what I own(flashlights) are because of your reviews. Good work.


----------



## sfca (Mar 7, 2010)

Is it unusual for the OP reflector to have higher lux then the Smooth reflector?


----------



## Unclemonkey (Mar 7, 2010)

great review. Where's the best place for cpfr's to get this light?


----------



## sfca (Mar 7, 2010)

Oh, and if you still have the original what is the difference between hotspot size between Mark I and Mark II?


----------



## Phaserburn (Mar 8, 2010)

Excellent. As usual, SB, you are costing me money as I have waited for your review before placing my order. Thanks, I think.

Gold Standard stuff.

:twothumbs


----------



## Wilkerson Brasil (Mar 8, 2010)

Now that Cree updates specs for XP-G Eagletac would make a pill pushing led to 1.5A. 

Very nice review, as always. Thanks Selfbuilt.:twothumbs



Unclemonkey said:


> great review. Where's the best place for cpfr's to get this light?


 http://flashlightconnection.com :thumbsup:


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 8, 2010)

Thanks for support everyone! :grouphug:



sfca said:


> Is it unusual for the OP reflector to have higher lux then the Smooth reflector?
> Oh, and if you still have the original what is the difference between hotspot size between Mark I and Mark II?


Yes, it is very unusual - I have never seen another example where that has occurred. But in this case, it's due to the dark void in the center of my smooth reflector module - because the OP one doesn't have it, the center of the OP version is technically a bit brighter. Note that the the periphery of the hotspot is brighter than the center on the smooth reflector version, but I take all my measurements from the dead-center.

As for comparison to the original Mark I, the hotspot size is about the same - although it is more sharply defined on the Mark I (the Mark II has a much softer transition from spot to spill). Overall spillbeam width is the same, but the spill area is brighter on the Mark II.


----------



## ToNIX (Mar 8, 2010)

Really nice review! So many tempting lights...

I found a little typo, which may prevent the correct search terms. Should be Jet-III.



> From left to right: Surefire CR123A, EagleTac T20C2 MarkII, original T20C2, Olight M20, *JetBeam Jet-IIII M*.


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 8, 2010)

ToNIX said:


> I found a little typo, which may prevent the correct search terms. Should be Jet-III.


Fixed.


----------



## ToNIX (Mar 8, 2010)

How does this light compare to the Jet-III M for, let's say, LEO work 

From the reviews I read, the Jet-III M seemed better than the M20. But the new Eagletac is just so nice!


----------



## sfca (Mar 10, 2010)

It seems the front half of the drop-in has contact with the head on 2 places, near the lens and in the middle where the threads are. 
How tights the fit at the bottom half where the coil/springs are?


----------



## gopurple (Mar 10, 2010)

Just got my T20C2 MK II SMO in the mail today, WOW! Pure white R5, light dark spot start showing in the center when 4 feet away from wall, still very usable. Might have to get the OP version when they're in stock. Love the light with the new UI.:twothumbs

Selfbuilt keep costing me money with his reviews, keep up the good work.


----------



## superpila (Mar 14, 2010)

I got mine one week ago and I've been using it everyday since then. It's an amazing flashlight! Also, the tint in mine looks great compared to my other R5 powered flashlights (mostly from 4sevens). I don't know if it's just because I've been lucky in the lottery...
Anyway, great job Eagletac! And great review Selfbuilt!


----------



## Phaserburn (Mar 14, 2010)

Tint on mine is also fine; no greenie.


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 14, 2010)

Phaserburn said:


> Tint on mine is also fine; no greenie.


I've looked at literally hundreds of these lights as we process orders and since everyone's been talking about green tint with the XP-G R5 I've been looking but not once have a caught any that are green in the slightest. 
Maybe some of the first XP-G were on the green side (not from EagleTac of course) but Cree improved their production by the time EagleTac received their batch. 

Nice detailed review selfbuilt! :twothumbs


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 15, 2010)

Phaserburn said:


> Tint on mine is also fine; no greenie.





[email protected] said:


> I've looked at literally hundreds of these lights as we process orders and since everyone's been talking about green tint with the XP-G R5 I've been looking but not once have a caught any that are green in the slightest.
> Maybe some of the first XP-G were on the green side (not from EagleTac of course) but Cree improved their production by the time EagleTac received their batch.


Yeah, both of my samples are not really green at all - just on the slightly warm side of premium cool white. I would normally describe these as creamy yellow cool-white. It's only those with a severe aversion to the warm side of cool white that might have an issue.

A similar tint issue was common with XR-E R2 emitters when they first came out. As I recall, there were a lot of very green WH tint R2s at first. But later batches produced a reasonable number of premium tint bins. But as always, there is no guarantee - unless a given maker insists on a premium bin (and advertises as such), it is luck of the draw.


----------



## Federal LG (Mar 15, 2010)

Mr. Selfbuilt, thanks for the "hand shot".

Always important to get a size perspective!

:thumbsup:


----------



## h22 (Mar 16, 2010)

gopurple said:


> Just got my T20C2 MK II SMO in the mail today, WOW! Pure white R5, light dark spot start showing in the center when 4 feet away from wall, still very usable. Might have to get the OP version when they're in stock. Love the light with the new UI.:twothumbs
> 
> Selfbuilt keep costing me money with his reviews, keep up the good work.


 
:wave: Ok, so where do I buy one? I followed the link to Eagle Tac's web page and all they show is the older version, not the MK II .

So where do I get one?!


----------



## h22 (Mar 17, 2010)

h22 said:


> :wave: Ok, so where do I buy one? I followed the link to Eagle Tac's web page and all they show is the older version, not the MK II .
> 
> So where do I get one?!


 
:twothumbs https://www.pts-flashlights.com/default.aspx Found it. Nice web site. Should be it the mailbox this weekend.


----------



## Storogoth (Mar 17, 2010)

I think that this is the best light out there for the money. It's the most carried torch in my arsenal. You'll be VERY happy with your purchase and PTS is the place to get it for sure. Best customer service and pricing out there. I'm waiting for the Nano series release to pick up one of those too.


----------



## daberti (Mar 23, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


> _*Reviewer's Note: *The T20C2 Mark II was provided for review by EagleTac. Please see their website for more info._
> 
> *Warning: pic heavy as usual! *


 
There is an error: EagleTac T20C2 (R2) Max = 9hr..... should be 
EagleTac T20C2 (R2) *Med* instead.

GREAT review, as always:twothumbs
Thanks for your work


----------



## kobeer (Mar 23, 2010)

Based on this great review, just ordered t20c2 MKII RGB kit.

Thank you!

lovecpf


----------



## daberti (Mar 24, 2010)

kobeer said:


> Based on this great review, just ordered t20c2 MKII RGB kit.
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> lovecpf


 
Just as I did: you won't be disappointed :twothumbs


----------



## Justin13 (Mar 24, 2010)

I just ordered one of these today with the OP reflector. 

Sadly, I thought I clicked the RGB kit, but didn't. The light already shipped...


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 25, 2010)

daberti said:


> There is an error: EagleTac T20C2 (R2) Max = 9hr..... should be EagleTac T20C2 (R2) *Med* instead.


Fixed.  Just hit your browser reload to see the corrected legend.

And for those who have ordered the light, I'm curious to hear your experiences with it (including the beam pattern, for OP vs smooth purchases).


----------



## somename (Mar 25, 2010)

Great review Selfbuilt. I just got my T20C2 MKII with the OP reflector yesterday and I am BLOW away by the output! Amazing beam with no rings and the medium is brighter than my previous 'brightest' light an Element K2.

So does the light no longer come with O-ring grease?

My light came with the rubber tailcap extender, so I guess that is a standard addition. I put it on and like it so much its staying on. 

Another question, where can you attach the lanyard to the light because the standard tailcap does not have any holes? 

I see a hole in the pocket clip, but not sure I want to attach the lanyard there since the pocket clip can be removed simply by pulling it off. 

I would have thought it would have been better to require the tail cap to be taken off to remove the pocket clip. I can see its nice to be able to remove the clip quickly, but I can also see it as a disadvantage where your light my hang on something (like going through the woods) and then you loose your light.

I got the Weapons kit with the RGB filters and love the filters and they even included 2 pairs of velcro for the tactical button attachment which fits my application perfectly!

Thanks Mike and PTS for the amazing light!


----------



## daberti (Mar 25, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


> Fixed.  Just hit your browser reload to see the corrected legend.
> 
> And for those who have ordered the light, I'm curious to hear your experiences with it (including the beam pattern, for OP vs smooth purchases).


 

Up to now it is simply the best balance between throw and spill. Lasts long (battery) led tint is perfect white. Heat dissipation is very darn efficient.

Where could I get the weapon mount? It should be 1" diameter weapon mount, am I right? 

I would like to know the use of the "2 pairs of velcro for the tactical button attachment".

Thanks


----------



## somename (Mar 25, 2010)

daberti said:


> Where could I get the weapon mount? It should be 1" diameter weapon mount, am I right?
> 
> I would like to know the use of the "2 pairs of velcro for the tactical button attachment".


 
My weapon mount came with the "weapon kit". Really its the best deal out there since with the weapon kit you get the 1" mount, the remote pressure switch and the RGB kit. Price wise I couldn't beat that with the same setup in a Fenix or the Olights.

Here is the weapon mount they have for it.
http://www.pts-flashlights.com/products/product.aspx?pid=152-155-157-6783

When you look at the normal price of the weapon mount and the tactical button, its like your getting the RGB filters for almost nothing!


The velcro I can see as useful for having the ability to make use of the tactical button on multiple devices so that you don't have to purchase a separate tactical button for each device or spend lots of time removing it.

In my case I have several compound bows that will use this light, one recurve and one rifle. So having the velcro allows me to at least have two of the choices setup. I can add more velcro later to the others.


----------



## daberti (Mar 25, 2010)

somename said:


> The velcro I can see as useful for having the ability to make use of the tactical button on multiple devices so that you don't have to purchase a separate tactical button for each device or spend lots of time removing it.
> 
> In my case I have several compound bows that will use this light, one recurve and one rifle. So having the velcro allows me to at least have two of the choices setup. I can add more velcro later to the others.


 
Here I'm lost: i.e. how the velcro deals with the button.
Could you please post a picture?

Thanks for the link BTW


----------



## Vortus (Mar 29, 2010)

Our T20C2 MKII arrived today. First impression is it's everything good the reviews said it was. Bright, well made, and sturdy. Not sure our old lights will see much duty beyond taking up drawer space after this. Later tonight when its time to walk the dogs will be the true test.


----------



## Chevy-SS (Mar 31, 2010)

Hi *selfbuilt*,

I eagerly view your reviews and am very grateful that you take the time and effort to produce them. They are very thorough and have helped me with numerous buying decisions.

I am not sure I understand the charting system you are using. I have a few questions (on your chart). Is it possible you can 'enlighten' me as to my questions?

Again, many thanks for all the exemplary reviews.








-


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 1, 2010)

Chevy-SS said:


> I am not sure I understand the charting system you are using. I have a few questions (on your chart). Is it possible you can 'enlighten' me as to my questions?


*Initial Output/Throw:* This refers to the whole table. It means that I take my readings immediately after turning on the light (i.e. within ~30 secs or so). If you look at the actual runtimes, you will see most lights tend not to be fully regulated at first, so "steady-state" levels may be lower in many cases than what is reported in the tables.

*Throw Max: *"Throw" is defined as the square-root of center-beam lux readings taken at 1m from the lens. Actual lux readings at 1m are presented in the brackets. It is NOT a measure of lumens, since I do not have a calibrated integrating sphere. Since light decays by an inverse square law, I recommend you look at the "throw" numbers to get a relative sense of what you will see by eye (i.e. a throw value of 50 will appear to cast a beam twice as far as a throw value of 25). That relationship is still not exact (for a variety of technical reasons), but it gives you a general idea.
*
Lightbox Min and Max:* These are the relative output readings from my lightbox. Again, they are not in lumens, since it is not a proper integrating sphere. They are simply there to provide a relative sense of differences between lights, as measured in a milk carton light box. Someone else's lightbox will be different - you can only compare within one given lightbox.

*Ceiling Bounce Max:* Another relative measure of output, a ceiling bounce is just that - put the light on the floor, shinning up, in a small window-less room with a lux lightmeter beside it on the floor (also pointing up). This gives you a measure of the reflected output of light "integrated" over the whole room. It again does not provide lumens, but gives you another relative output measure. It is also specific to my room - anyone else's ceiling bounce numbers will be different.

I present both lightbox and ceiling bounce numbers to allow you compare relative differences. IMO, the ceiling bounce numbers are more accurate for very powerful (and tightly focused) lights. For lower outputs, I find the lightbox provides a more meaningful relative comparison.

Hope that helps .. :wave:


----------



## Vortus (Apr 2, 2010)

Feeling after a few days...I am gonna have to buy another light. Why? Because now my wife carries this one with her and leaves me without. We first bought it to use with the diffuser, but with that on it won't reach as far as she wants, but without the diffuser, its perfect. At first she wanted something along the lines size wise of the mag 2D she had been using, but now she prefers the new light.

The only negative I would have to say are the twist modes, and they are not bad, just a learning curve to use them correctly for a new user. But, as long as the high/med are easy, all we need.


----------



## Chevy-SS (Apr 2, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


> *Initial Output/Throw:* ............
> 
> Hope that helps .. :wave:




Many thanks for the explanations! 


-


----------



## hatman (Apr 4, 2010)

How good is the clip?


----------



## Justin13 (Apr 7, 2010)

This is the best light I own right now. I have the OP reflector MKII RGB kit.

Im ordering one more like this and a Neutral White OP version from PTS this week when they are back in stock. Not sure I want the SMO reflector. If I do, I can buy it seperately to try. 

I also bought the 2400mAh batteries with the Eagle Tac label. So far, so good.


----------



## BIGLOU (Apr 7, 2010)

I just got mine from Policetacteam. Just got back from my days off. Cant wait to try it out tonight. Sorry to ask a dumb question but what is that extra rubber ring for, is this a combat ring? I'm not talking about tailcap boot. :shrug:


----------



## uncle wong (Apr 11, 2010)

Can someone plzz explain the brightness , throw & build quality compare to Fenix TK-12 R5 or Fenix TK-11 R5 
Confused me for a few days , dun no which one to choose 
Hope someone can explain 
Thanks


----------



## daberti (Apr 11, 2010)

uncle wong said:


> Can someone plzz explain the brightness , throw & build quality compare to Fenix TK-12 R5 or Fenix TK-11 R5
> Confused me for a few days , dun no which one to choose
> Hope someone can explain
> Thanks


 
Short version: EagleTac T20C2 MkII hands down. For build quality, beam quality (no black holes into the hot spot and perfect transition from hot spot to corona), the pill is exchangeable (you can go the neutral white way if you wish) and the R5 tint is not awfully cool white.
Stock accessories come last but not least.
EagleTac is just in another class of its own.


----------



## uncle wong (Apr 11, 2010)

daberti said:


> Short version: EagleTac T20C2 MkII hands down. For build quality, beam quality (no black holes into the hot spot and perfect transition from hot spot to corona), the pill is exchangeable (you can go the neutral white way if you wish) and the R5 tint is not awfully cool white.
> Stock accessories come last but not least.
> EagleTac is just in another class of its own.


Thank You Very Much


----------



## daberti (Apr 12, 2010)

uncle wong said:


> Thank You Very Much


 
You're welcome 
Just as a confirmation
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3347408&postcount=12


----------



## uncle wong (Apr 13, 2010)

daberti said:


> You're welcome
> Just as a confirmation
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3347408&postcount=12



Any Idea compare to Olight M20-R5 ? 
I bet Olight build quality should be higher than EagleTac( correct me if i m wrong )
Base on the M20-R5 manufacturer spec , Olight should produce more bright than EagleTac T20C2 II ( I guess )


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 14, 2010)

uncle wong said:


> Any Idea compare to Olight M20-R5 ?
> I bet Olight build quality should be higher than EagleTac( correct me if i m wrong )
> Base on the M20-R5 manufacturer spec , Olight should produce more bright than EagleTac T20C2 II ( I guess )


Personally, I find it hard to ascribe better build quality to any one of the Olight/EagleTac/Fenix lights - all seem well built.

But as for output, I suspect the T20C2 Mark II will still be a bit brighter. If you look at my runtime charts, you'll see the original T20C2 (R2) was driven slightly harder than the M20 (R2). The T20C2 Mark II (R5) seems to be driven even harder than the R2 version was ... as such, I doubt the M20 (R5) would be brighter. 

In my experience, Olight tends to strike a better balance between output and runtime (i.e. not driven quite as hard). And frankly, the difference in output is so small as to not be noticeable unless compared side by side (and even then, you may not notice it). I would decide based on feature set and UI.


----------



## BrightAsTheSun (Apr 14, 2010)

selfbuilt, thanks for the detailed, informative review and those that provided feedback from their experience. I was trying to decide between the T20C2 Mark II and the Fenix TK12 R5 and after reading the reviews and feedback went for the T20C2 with OP reflector. PTS-Tactical had it to me within 2 days.

I really like the user interface. Getting to the desired output level is fast and efficient. The fit, finish, feel, beam pattern, and brightness are also excellent. I am very pleased with this flashlight and should get a lot of usage out of it. My only complaint is that I didn't buy two. My wife liked it so much that it went right into her purse. I had to put in a second order just so I'd have one.


----------



## sfca (Apr 14, 2010)

uncle wong said:


> Any Idea compare to Olight M20-R5 ?
> I bet Olight build quality should be higher than EagleTac( correct me if i m wrong )
> Base on the M20-R5 manufacturer spec , Olight should produce more bright than EagleTac T20C2 II ( I guess )



Offhand I think emitter rating for t20c2 is 380 lumens and for OTF lumens is 300. ... Which is the same as the R2 version but _not _the same hahaha


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Apr 15, 2010)

Nice review Selfbuilt! Very consistent with my findings as well. These new Mark II 20 series lights are very well thought out indeed. Definitely a good value in my book.


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 15, 2010)

AardvarkSagus said:


> Nice review Selfbuilt! Very consistent with my findings as well. These new Mark II 20 series lights are very well thought out indeed. Definitely a good value in my book.


Agreed. I've seen a lot of iterations of Eagletac lights, and these new Mark II T20C2/P20C2/P20A2 lights seem to have gotten it right (especially with the OP reflector). Still working on the P20C2/A2 reviews - should have them up in a week or two.
:wave:


----------



## johnnyguitar (Apr 27, 2010)

A great review particularly as I am currently considering the ET T20C2II and the Olight M20 R5 - although am now favouring the ET despite not being able to make a decision!


----------



## snowkap (Apr 27, 2010)

i just recieved both the ETt20c2 mxii r5 and the olightm20 r5. I'm giving one for a gift and keeping the other. after testing and evaluating both, I'm keeping the ET. The beams were almost identical, to the eye. I got the smo and op for both. Why am I keeping the ET I like the UI and the feel and options. I would have been very satisfied if I bought the M20 r5 alone. Oh by the way the m20 and the m20r5 are just alittle bit different. in physical size and although parts can be changed back and forth they are sloppy or tight.
Bottom line, both are good lights with plenty of light and throw. I perfer smo reflectors, and yes the ET does have a little drop out with the smo, but no big deal


----------



## uncle wong (Apr 28, 2010)

Olight M20 not regulated well with 18650 battery .
I bought EagleTac T20C2 MK II & P20A2 MK II


----------



## jirik_cz (Apr 28, 2010)

Olight M20 R5 should be regulated pretty well with 18650 because of the low Vf of Cree XP-G emitter.


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 28, 2010)

uncle wong said:


> Olight M20 not regulated well with 18650 battery .


To be fair, the ET T20C2 Mark I (XR-E R2) had exactly the same regulation pattern on 18650 as my Olight M20 (XR-E R2). Apples to apples, they look the same in output and runtime (i.e. direct drive).

Hard to know how the new M20 with an XP-G would perform without directly testing it. I would suspect it would be closer to the ET T20C2 Mark II (also XP-G).

I would recommend you decide on the basis of user interface and other features.


----------



## johnnyguitar (Apr 29, 2010)

I've gone for the ET too - mostly thanks to the helpful advice on CPF :twothumbslovecpf


----------



## Teobaldo (Jun 21, 2010)

Thanks for the review, I ordered one T20C Mark II the last Friday in Amazon. I will use it in my mountain bike with a 18650 battery for an optimum performance. Your review it helped me to decide me.

CPF rules!


----------



## maxsutter (Jun 22, 2010)

Best place to buy the op version?


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jun 22, 2010)

maxsutter said:


> Best place to buy the op version?


I'm a big fan of PTS-Flashlights for EagleTac products.


----------



## dr. quad (Jun 23, 2010)

this is a GREAT review! the T20c2 is what i've been wanting to buy instead of a maelstrom g5 for awhile now... i'm hoping that the wait will pay off... but its been grueling


----------



## btb601 (Jun 23, 2010)

AardvarkSagus said:


> I'm a big fan of PTS-Flashlights for EagleTac products.


 

Not sure if I am right, but I did not see a option for OP there??
Please correct me if I am wrong. Looking to buy, Thanks


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jun 23, 2010)

btb601 said:


> Not sure if I am right, but I did not see a option for OP there??
> Please correct me if I am wrong. Looking to buy, Thanks


Yeah, I don't see it either. I would say either PM or better yet call [email protected] and see whether it is available. Tell him AardvarkSagus sent ya!


----------



## About Tree Fiddy (Jun 25, 2010)

btb601 said:


> Not sure if I am right, but I did not see a option for OP there??
> Please correct me if I am wrong. Looking to buy, Thanks



From the PTS-Flashlights web page for the T20C2 MkII



> *Special Note:* This item comes with a smooth reflector (MAX throw) but we would be happy to change it to an OP/textured reflector (Smooth Beam) for you, just make a note in the comments box during your purchase.


I just ordered one tonight and included a note comment box at checkout so we'll see how it goes.


----------



## mcpingist (Jun 28, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


> Thanks for support everyone! :grouphug:
> 
> 
> Yes, it is very unusual - I have never seen another example where that has occurred. But in this case, it's due to the dark void in the center of my smooth reflector module - because the OP one doesn't have it, the center of the OP version is technically a bit brighter. Note that the the periphery of the hotspot is brighter than the center on the smooth reflector version, but I take all my measurements from the dead-center.



I'm a little confused about the available reflectors. I read somewhere that this model comes standard with an "LOP" (Light Orange Peel) reflector, with an OP and smooth (SMO) optional. The LOP doesn't seem to be mentioned in this thread. How many different reflectors are available and if there is an LOP reflector, what are its characteristics relative to the smooth and orange peel versions?

Thanks


----------



## lebox97 (Jun 29, 2010)

there you are - mcpingist...
:welcome:

here is a cut n paste from an email I just sent a customer with similar questions relating to T20C2 MKII:
"when I measured LUX output (center spot intensity) between the three reflector types w/ XP-G R5 LED I found on average:
*LOP* offered highest LUX
*SMO* was about 6% less
*OP* was about 12% less

LOP had furthest throw, OP had less throw (which makes sense) 

SMO having less throw than LOP is what was a surprise to everyone initially, as this is counter intuitive, and not the case with R2, Q5 and previous LED models (SMO typically offers 15-20% MORE throw)
But SMO w/ R5 LED typically produces a darker center - almost a donut hole which is what is being seen/measured by the LUX meter."

perhaps I am sorting my reflectors differently than others - :shrug:
when pre-testing, I run across some modules that have more texture, and thus a smoother beam transition than the LOP and set those aside and mark them as OP.


FYI, ET announced this week that the T100C2 MKII's are no longer going to be offered in SMO or OP choices - and their default for T100C2 MKII model is now LOP... 
so I think we will see a continuing trend as they migrate away from multiple reflector choices to a single factory recommended/default choice. (it would certainly make my life easier!) 

as always... YMMV

Tod




mcpingist said:


> I'm a little confused about the available reflectors. I read somewhere that this model comes standard with an "LOP" (Light Orange Peel) reflector, with an OP and smooth (SMO) optional. The LOP doesn't seem to be mentioned in this thread. How many different reflectors are available and if there is an LOP reflector, what are its characteristics relative to the smooth and orange peel versions?
> 
> Thanks


----------



## mcpingist (Jun 29, 2010)

Thanks Tod. I believe you were the original source of my info. I was curious why I hadn't noticed others even mentioning the LOP and was interested to see if anyone would confirm or dispute that info. No disrespect, just a newbie trying to make sure I understand things.

Thanks


----------



## Chevy-SS (Jun 29, 2010)

lebox97 said:


> .....
> "when I measured LUX output (center spot intensity) between the three reflector types w/ XP-G R5 LED I found on average:
> *LOP* offered highest LUX
> *......*
> ...




Very interesting about the LUX on the LOP reflector.

thanks for posting! :thumbsup:

-


----------



## Kremer (Jul 1, 2010)

From the runtime plots it doesn't look like it hits the cell protection cutoff on an 18650 (you can see all the lights clearly do on 2x RCR). This means to me that it won't suck an unprotected 18650 down into the ground. Good news for the laptop battery extractors among us.


----------



## Phaserburn (Jul 1, 2010)

I wonder if ET will release any XP-G R4 neutral white modules for this light...


----------



## Wilkerson Brasil (Jul 4, 2010)

How many amps do you get from tailcap on max?
Mine is only 0,65A.


----------



## Phaserburn (Jul 5, 2010)

Wilkerson Brasil said:


> How many amps do you get from tailcap on max?
> Mine is only 0,65A.



That sounds too low to me.


----------



## Wilkerson Brasil (Jul 6, 2010)

Phaserburn said:


> That sounds too low to me.


For me too. Flashlight is very bright. Output seems to be exactly as expected compared with others that uses XPG. My multimeter get normal (higher) values in other flashlight.


----------



## Vernon (Jul 7, 2010)

Thanks for keeping us well informed, Selfbuilt.


----------



## m3flies (Jul 25, 2010)

I just noticed that I can change the settings by pushing in on the bezel instead of twisting. Will this damage the light?


----------



## Lawliet (Jul 25, 2010)

Don't worry. The changing is always done by pushing, but normally that pushing is done by the threads. At some positions the play in the threads allows you to do that by yourself.


----------



## m3flies (Jul 25, 2010)

Thanks Lawliet. I thought this would be the case, but just wanted to double check.


----------



## selfbuilt (Jul 27, 2010)

_*UPDATE:* _

I’ve just updated the main thread with the results from a new XR-E R2 drop-in for the T20C2-II. Eagletac developed this module to restore the throw characteristics of the original T20C2 (which many seem to like), while maintaining the build and user interface updates of the Mark-II design. 

The new XR-E R2 drop-in for the T20C2-II:















Since the Mk II head dimensions have changed slightly from the original T20C2, this drop-in has a slightly narrower width than the original T20C2. Orange Peel texturing also seems a bit higher on my sample. Still, I suspect this new drop-in will go a long way in restoring the throw and output of the original T20C2 - but with the new T20C2-II interface. 

Here are some up-close white-wall beamshots comparing the new T20C2-II R2-drop-in with the original T20C2 (XR-E R2):


















Basically, throw seems pretty comparable, but the new drop-in is also more ringy beyond the hotspot’s corona.

I can't do side-by-side shots of the XP-G R5 and XR-E R2 modules for the T20C2-II (I only have one body ).

Here are some external 100-yard beamshots (sorry, I forgot to test the XP-G R5 version ). Please see my Outdoor 100-Yard Round-up Review for more info on these shots.






Again, there is not a huge difference, but it does confirm what you can see in the white-wall shots – the new T20C2-II R2 drop-in throws similar to the original T20C2, although with some relative variation in the fore- to mid-ground rings. 

Here are how the T20C2-II with the new XR-E R2 drop-in compares to other lights of this class (note: this configuration is identified as "T20C2II (XR-E R2) OP" in the table below).














Again, these numbers confirm that the new XR-E R2 drop-in for the T20C2-II performs close to the original T20C2, but with just a touch less output and throw on my sample.

Please see the main review thread for all the runtime results. Here's a sample:






Basically, the new XR-E R2 drop-in has comparable output and runtime to the original T20C2 XR-E R2. Any variation you are seeing there is likely just due to the binning (i.e. all R2 bins have a ~7% variation of outputs).

Bottom line, this new XR-E R2 drop-in for T20C2-II effectively restores the output and throw characteristics of the original T20C2, but with the build and user interface improvements of the T20C2-II. A good option for those who want it! :thumbsup:


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jul 27, 2010)

Hilarious that I should find this review right after I am outside attempting beamshots of this exact drop-in. Great write up, as usual.


----------



## selfbuilt (Jul 28, 2010)

AardvarkSagus said:


> Hilarious that I should find this review right after I am outside attempting beamshots of this exact drop-in. Great write up, as usual.


Haha ... looking forward to seeing how your beamshots come out.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jul 28, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


> Haha ... looking forward to seeing how your beamshots come out.


I believe the best term is: Meh. I don't have the best camera. I'll try to get the review up tonight though so you can determine for yourself.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jul 29, 2010)

I have posted my review of the XR-E Drop-in HERE on my site and HERE in my thread.


----------



## Glock27 (Sep 16, 2010)

Has anyone removed the reverse polarity plastic around the Positive connection on the head?
I have a bunch of flat top cells that won't work and the button top requirement sure limits choices.

G27


----------



## CM2010 (Sep 17, 2010)

I'm pretty sure i read someone else did and it then worked fine with flat tops.

Found the thread:

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3450980#post3450980



DeadButAlive said:


> I've removed the plastic ring on all of my Eagletac drop-in modules - I used a pair of wire nippers to _carefully_ cut away the edge of the black plastic ring until it basically pops off. Now they work even with my flat-top AW 2600mAh 18650's. I just have to be very careful about battery insertion from now on because I don't know if Eagletac uses any electronic reverse polarity protection or if they are relying on physical protection only - and I'm not really inclined to smoke one of my drop-ins to find out


----------



## Ray_of_Light (Sep 17, 2010)

Thanks for the review and the update, Selfbuilt.

Fellow CPFers knows how "picky" I am and the fact that I find defects in about every light; with the T20C2 Mk II, that I have bought few days ago, there is really nothing I can complain about; I would say buy it with confidence.

The T20C2 Mk II has replaced my Olight M20-R5. It is slightly brighter, due to a slight higher drive current; it weight a bit less and balances better in the hand, has better anodise, better UI (no mandatory strobe in sequence), has better grip, it is friendler to the pocket (I don't use holsters).

The other side of the "compare" with the M20, the T20 has a measurable activation delay, expecially on Med level (on High it is barely percepible) and has the problem caused from the physical polarity reversal protection, which impede the use of flat-top 18650. I didn't wanted to defeat the protection since I know I would blew the light if I change the battery in the dark, so I bought two Soshine 2800 with button-top.

Regards

Anthony


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 19, 2010)

Just updated the main thread - I've added some additional lights to my 100-Yard Outdoor Beamshot Round-up, including a number of XP-G R5 lights. Check out that round-up thread for more details. Here is a relevant animated GIF comparison:


----------



## Zwick2 (Oct 2, 2010)

I think,the EagleTac has the best practicable Kombination form Throw and Spill.
Thank you for this Pictures.

Regards Jens


----------



## Phaserburn (Oct 3, 2010)

Wonder if ET has any plans to release an R4 neutral XP-G module for this light. The Q4 XPE, while good, isn't as up to date for me for this light.


----------



## richpalm (Oct 3, 2010)

I just got one based on this review. Thanks Selfbuilt-you do nice work!

Very happy with mine. I lit up the whole back yard, the neighbor's yard, the house a block over... and... and....! 

Rich


----------



## selfbuilt (Oct 4, 2010)

Zwick2 said:


> I think,the EagleTac has the best practicable Kombination form Throw and Spill.





richpalm said:


> Very happy with mine. I lit up the whole back yard, the neighbor's yard, the house a block over... and... and....!


Yes, I agree - the XP-G R5 version has a nice balance of throw and spill for a general-purpose light. I particularly like how bright the spill is in the near area (i.e. you can see what is around you very well). 

Although the pics are useful to allow you to compare, in real life I find all these lights are brighter than they appear in the shots. A problem with the limited dynamic range of the camera (plus the fact that I optimized the settings to compare centre-beam throw). But the T20C2-II XP-G R5 does stand out as having among the brightest spill.


----------



## Torroni (Oct 14, 2010)

*Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5)*

Hi Selfbulit,

I was wondering if you could help me making a decision between the EagleTac T20C2 Mk2 and the Fenix TK12/11.

I will mainly be using the light for off-road and on-road cycling.

Simply looking at your nigh time beam shots, the Eagletac appears to be the clear winner, lighting up the road ahead much more brightly than the TK12.

However the TK12 seems to beat the T20C2 on battery life, holding it's power very steadily until power loss (looking at your graphs). Ideally I would like to get 2hrs + running max brightness.

Please could you shine some light on the pro and cons of both lights, which may have a bearing on my particular application as a bike light. At the moment I am leaning towards the EagleTac simply because it looks much brighter on the road surface in your beam shots. 

Many thanks in advance!


----------



## tandem (Oct 14, 2010)

*Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5)*



Torroni said:


> I was wondering if you could help me making a decision between the EagleTac T20C2 Mk2 and the Fenix TK12/11.
> 
> I will mainly be using the light for off-road and on-road cycling.



I've been looking at exactly these three lights (as well as the Malkoff M61 in a MD2 body). I've been trying to find a good general purpose light that can accept a single 18650 (including AW flat tops) cell and deliver a high level of light output along a fairly flat output-runtime trace, so naturally the TK12 R5 (and presumably also the TK11 R5) look like contenders as does the T20C2.

I don't need a thrower - brighter spill and/or a bigger hotspot are pluses for a bike oriented light. But this class of light seems generally to be more throw oriented, with differences of course between brands and models. Still I think either of these could work well for riding. I wonder if something mundane like battery compatibility (I'd like to use higher capacity cells wherever it makes sense) will point the direction?

Maybe these beamshots will help (Malkoff, Eagletac and TK11). Of the three for cycling I rather like the Malkoff's beam the best for the shape, but the runtime on the TK11/12 is likely to be the most even / longest of the three.

What I can't figure out is why the TK12 is somewhat cheaper than the TK11.


----------



## selfbuilt (Oct 14, 2010)

*Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5)*



Torroni said:


> Simply looking at your nigh time beam shots, the Eagletac appears to be the clear winner, lighting up the road ahead much more brightly than the TK12.


Well, part of that may be because the 100-yard shots were set up with camera settings and positioning to best show the center beam throw.

The TK12 actually has a wider spillbeam than the T20C2-II - but wider also means dimmer, which is why my exterior beamshots show the T20C2-II so much brighter in the foreground. Check out my TK12 review for white-wall beamshots - they give a general idea of the difference.

I haven't done much cycling at night, but what little I have done makes me suggest the T20C2-II. I personally prefer the tighter and brighter spillbeam. Note that I haven't gone off-road in the dark, but I would think you would want a tight beam even more in that situation.

As for runtime, all my measures were done on 2200mAh AW cells. Higher capacity cells would last longer.


----------



## tandem (Oct 14, 2010)

*Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5)*

I can think of another potentially good word for the T20C2-II and cyclists - if the beacon mode is something useful like a 2Hz pulse instead of SOS. If not, well, sigh. 



selfbuilt said:


> I haven't done much cycling at night, but what little I have done makes me suggest the T20C2-II. I personally prefer the tighter and brighter spillbeam.



For road riding I agree 100%. I want enough bright spill starting say 5 - 10 feet from me to aid in hopping over obstacles (potholes, curbs and such) even at speed and the hotspot and remaining spill far enough forward to give me time to react. If going fast you need that path of light to extend farther because reaction time needed at 10mph vs 30mph is quite different.

If they are urban "trails" - wider, fairly predictable - then anything that works for road use typically works well for urban trails.

Between the Eagletac and Fenix, for cycling use, I much prefer the Eagletac's beam over the TK11 (and presumably lthe TK12 is fairly similar).



> Note that I haven't gone off-road in the dark, but I would think you would want a tight beam even more in that situation.



I prefer a lot more floody light for actual off road rougher trail use. You are typically going slower, but the route you ride usually is a lot more variable and twisty. Particularly if bar mounted and going round a corner too tight a beam can cause you to miss the low hanging obstacle coming up fast at your head when it is opposite where your light is currently shining. 

Usually a helmet mounted light in addition to bar mounted is the right solution for such riding.

Thanks selfbuilt for your reviews, they've been incredibly helpful to me.


----------



## Torroni (Oct 15, 2010)

*Re: EagleTac vs Fenix*



selfbuilt said:


> Well, part of that may be because the 100-yard shots were set up with camera settings and positioning to best show the center beam throw.



I thought all of your beam shots used exactly the same camera settings, so should provide a reasonably reliable way of comparing the lights outdoors?

I'm still leaning towards the EagleTac but I'm still a bit confused...

The Fenix has a higher light output (more spill) but clearly comes off worse in the beam shot photos... the EagleTac is almost twice as bright and seems to have greater spill than the Fenix! Shouldn't it be the other way around?

Also the light intenisity of the Fenix remains practically constant throughout until the battery starts to die, as shown on the graph. The EagleTac light intensity starts off lower and slowly decreases as the battery drains. I'm concerned about how this affects performance of the EagleTac as time goes on, as opposed to the initial output?


----------



## Torroni (Oct 15, 2010)

Also Selfbuilt...

What is the highest capacity battery available for the EagleTac?

I read somewhere that the flat-top batteries aren't compatible? Only Fenix?


----------



## Torroni (Oct 20, 2010)

*Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II*

Can anyone help with answers to my questions above?


----------



## selfbuilt (Oct 20, 2010)

Torroni said:


> I thought all of your beam shots used exactly the same camera settings, so should provide a reasonably reliable way of comparing the lights outdoors? ... The Fenix has a higher light output (more spill) but clearly comes off worse in the beam shot photos... the EagleTac is almost twice as bright and seems to have greater spill than the Fenix! Shouldn't it be the other way around?


That's what I meant. All the pics are taken at the same settings, but those settings were designed to help you draw conclusions about the hotspot. To really compare the spill, I would have to pull the camera further back and perhaps try different exposure settings.

The problem with the two lights in question is typical in cases where the spillbeam width varies greatly. In a more closed-in environment, the TK12 could very well look brighter. But because you can't see the edge of the TK12's spillbeam in the 100-yard shots, you can't appreciate how much wider an area it lights up (and again, the exposure settings make it hard to see the TK12s spill). In real life, the TK12 does just fine.



> Also the light intenisity of the Fenix remains practically constant throughout until the battery starts to die, as shown on the graph. The EagleTac light intensity starts off lower and slowly decreases as the battery drains. I'm concerned about how this affects performance of the EagleTac as time goes on, as opposed to the initial output?


I wouldn't worry about that - the timescale is so large that you could not possible notice the gradual decline over time by eye.



Torroni said:


> What is the highest capacity battery available for the EagleTac? I read somewhere that the flat-top batteries aren't compatible? Only Fenix?


Can't remember off-hand if flat-tops worked (I'm away right now, and can't double-check. But 2900mAh Redilasts cells are now available (identical to the AW 2900mAh cells, but have a button).


----------



## Kevin1322 (Oct 21, 2010)

I have the Olight M20 Warrior Premium R2 and think I have finally decided on pulling the trigger on the T20C2 Mark II. Before I get the RGB kit or the extra tail standing tailcap, I was wondering if anyone can answer these questions: Do the filters for the M20 fit the T20? For those that have (if any) the rubber addapter tail standing piece and the actual optional tail standing tailcap, which do you prefer? Your thoughts please.


----------



## Zdenek (Oct 26, 2010)

Maybe my question is redundant because I have not read all the contributions. I wonder if buying EagleTac T20C2 MKII Cree R5 brings me a different quality than my present TK11 R2. Thanks.
Zdenek


----------



## selfbuilt (Oct 26, 2010)

Zdenek said:


> Maybe my question is redundant because I have not read all the contributions. I wonder if buying EagleTac T20C2 MKII Cree R5 brings me a different quality than my present TK11 R2. Thanks.


:welcome:
Both are good lights. Basically, the XP-G R5-equipped lightss have the advantage of smooth beams (no rings) with slightly more overall output. The older XR-E R2-equipped lights typically throw further, but with noticeable light and dark rings around the hotspot.

If you are happy with the beam pattern of your TK11-R2, then there's not much of a compelling reason to "upgrade" - unless you prefer the user interface, extras, or customizability of the T20C2-II.


----------



## Zdenek (Oct 27, 2010)

Thank you, selfbuilt.


----------



## Zdenek (Oct 27, 2010)

Thank you.


----------



## mac1987 (Oct 28, 2010)

I received my T20C2 II a couple of weeks ago. I love the beam pattern and UI. Still I have two problems with the light:

1. Using a totally 'objective' ceiling bounce test, it doesn't light up the room more than my old Fenix TK11 XR-E Q5 that has 225 lumens. Shouldn't a 75 lumen increase be noticeable? The hotspot of the TK11 is brighter (more focused but known difference between XR-E and XP-G), the spill is larger but the T20C2 has a slightly brighter area around the spot.
2. After a while the light seems to lose contact during turning the head. E.g. when switching from turbo to medium the light goes off and on again and therefore thinks you have twisted the light (turbo-->medium) and it switches to low (without doing turbo-->medium-->turbo) . Cleaning the contacts and taking the parts apart and together again helps for maybe a day, sometimes only a couple of minutes.

Are other people experiencing this kind of behaviour and might the not-perceived increase in lumens have something to do with it losing contact?


----------



## Proflash (Oct 28, 2010)

mac1987 said:


> I received my T20C2 II a couple of weeks ago. I love the beam pattern and UI. Still I have two problems with the light:
> 
> 1. Using a totally 'objective' ceiling bounce test, it doesn't light up the room more than my old Fenix TK11 XR-E Q5 that has 225 lumens. Shouldn't a 75 lumen increase be noticeable? The hotspot of the TK11 is brighter (more focused but known difference between XR-E and XP-G), the spill is larger but the T20C2 has a slightly brighter area around the spot.
> 2. After a while the light seems to lose contact during turning the head. E.g. when switching from turbo to medium the light goes off and on again and therefore thinks you have twisted the light (turbo-->medium) and it switches to low (without doing turbo-->medium-->turbo) . Cleaning the contacts and taking the parts apart and together again helps for maybe a day, sometimes only a couple of minutes.
> ...



Just the other night my T20C2 MKII started flickering when changing modes. I tried switching tailcaps, cleaning contacts, etc. but to no avail. There was also a 'gritty' feel when twisting the head.

After unscrewing the head completely and rubbing a q-tip around the threads on the body, I removed some of the blue grease/lubricant that was on there. After replacing the head, the flickering disappeared. I think there may have been some dust or other material on the threads which was interfering with the contact. The funny thing is, that I had never actually removed the head from the light before, and it had always been more of a "drawer king" up until then. I have no idea how anything could have gotten in there...

I can't speak for brightness, but last night was the first time I used it outdoors after the threads were cleaned, and the light seemed to shine both brighter and farther than before .


----------



## mac1987 (Oct 28, 2010)

Thanks for the advice, I have cleaned the threads before but tomorrow i'll clean them again. Hopefully this will work for me as well as it did for you 

Update: didn't work unfortunately


----------



## Kevin1322 (Nov 2, 2010)

Kevin1322 said:


> I have the Olight M20 Warrior Premium R2 and think I have finally decided on pulling the trigger on the T20C2 Mark II. Before I get the RGB kit or the extra tail standing tailcap, I was wondering if anyone can answer these questions: Do the filters for the M20 fit the T20?


Well I did pull the trigger and I did get the light, so I'll answer my own question in case it helps someone else. The filters for the M20 will fit over the head, but they fit very loose and would fall off quite easily.

Man, I really love this light. :twothumbs Just got it today but I am really impressed with, well, pretty much all of it. I know the question was asked earlier about where to attach the lanyard. I took the hook and ring off of the lanyard and just looped it under the belt clip. By pulling it between the back of the clip and the cigar grip it stays in place and should work pretty well. One criticism though, I do like the holster for the M20 better. It would be great if they developed that holster, but instead of two battery holders, have one on one side and have a place for the filters on the other side so you could always have them with you. That would be perfect IMO.


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 13, 2011)

> Written by *mac1987* on 11-02-2010 07:00 AM GMT
> 
> @Kevin1322:
> 
> ...


 
Written by *selfbuilt* on 11-02-2010 07:21 AM GMT



Kevin1322 said:


> Well I did pull the trigger and I did get the light, so I'll answer my own question in case it helps someone else. The filters for the M20 will fit over the head, but they fit very loose and would fall off quite easily.


Confirmed, just tried in on mine as well. The T20C2-II Mark II head is just a little too small for the Olight M20 filers. Confirmed, just tried in on mine as well. The T20C2-II Mark II head is just a little too small for the Olight M20 filers.




> Written by *Kevin1322* on 11-02-2010 03:49 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *mac1987* on 11-03-2010 06:49 AM GMT
> 
> Thanks for the info! You can never have too much of it IMO



Written by *selfbuilt* on 11-03-2010 08:32 AM GMT



mac1987 said:


> Thanks for the info! You can never have too much of it IMO


True enough - and I encourage people to share the experiences and perspectives in these review threads. True enough - and I encourage people to share the experiences and perspectives in these review threads. 

One point for clarification - both the M20 and Eagletac T20C2-II come in XR-E R2 and XP-G R5 versions. It's difficult to compare across emitter types, but there are beamshots in my 100-yard round-up of all the lights I have on hand. Note that the lights I've reviewed have come in at different times, and there may be update/upgrades to specific models over time.

I haven't tested the Olight M20 XP-G R5 version yet, so cannot comment on how it compares. However,in practice, I doubt you would find any noticeable difference in output between the Eagletac and Olight models of the same emitter. I think the choice really comes down to the user interface, build preference, and extras.




> Written by *Kevin1322* on 11-03-2010 02:54 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *wwp1* on 11-04-2010 01:21 AM GMT
> 
> I love my eagletac t20c2 only problem I have is finish is not sturdy





> Written by *Kevin1322* on 11-04-2010 12:19 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *speedster* on 11-04-2010 12:54 PM GMT
> 
> Im sorry if this has been asked before but has anyone ever noticed the red lights in the outdoor pictures? What are they?





> Written by *Kevin1322* on 11-04-2010 01:57 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *selfbuilt* on 11-04-2010 03:05 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *buwuve* on 11-17-2010 04:49 PM GMT
> 
> I have a small question about the 18650 batteries and the max. lenght of them, which can be used. I want to use the flame (black and red) trustfire 2400 mAh_*link removed by Greta*_
> 
> Has anyone tested them in the EagleTac T20C2 Mark II?





> Written by *Richwouldnt* on 12-17-2010 07:57 PM GMT
> 
> It looks like an interesting light. Has anyone tried the red or green LED modules that are available for it? Light Junction lists them as available. The red version should be good for night adaptation preservation purposes.





> Written by *Kevin1322* on 01-02-2011 06:08 PM GMT
> 
> Illumination Gear appears to be selling the light with the new XM-L, and the site says the replacement module with the XM-L is coming soon. Does anyone have one or have more information on it? I was waiting for them to offer a SST-50 module, but I've heard the XM-L is pretty comparable, offering similar output but a less defined hotspot.


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 13, 2011)

> Written by *Richwouldnt* on 01-06-2011 01:59 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 


> Written by *Nico_LED* on 01-06-2011 02:11 AM GMT
> 
> With the XM-L you'll have a little more throw than the SST-50 and with better runtime.
> 
> Anyway I don't know what it's going to be in a small reflector, I found the XP-G R5 very floody and I can't imagine how the XM-L will be !





> Written by *Kevin1322* on 01-10-2011 07:13 PM GMT
> 
> Illumination Gear now has the XM-L module up for sale, though they have a note on the page that says modules will ship mid to end January. I ordered one, as everyone seems to be so impressed with this new LED, so it seems like it would be hard to go wrong with it. I received an immediate email confirming my purchase. Never in the ordering process did anything indicate that shipping would be delayed as they don't have them in yet (other than the note on the T20C2 page itself), so maybe l will have it soon and be able to give everyone my thoughts here. Hopefully, also, it will arrive with some information on it as well!





> Written by *mac1987* on 01-29-2011 08:09 PM GMT
> 
> I Just received my Neutral White XP-E Q4 LED module. It has a nice tint and beam pattern. I was playing a bit with it when I discovered that the beam pattern is almost 100% identical to the Cool White XP-G R5 module. When I look at the LED itself, it has 4 yellow 'lanes' like the XP-G and not 3 like the XP-E. However, it says XP-E Q4 on the module itself. When comparing the beam pattern and the LED itself with other lights with XP-G and XP-E LED's, it looks identical to the XP-G and not the XP-E. Also, the light output using sealing bounce seems identical to a Fenix TA21 with 225 Lumens. The XP-E Q4 NW reportedly has 190 Lumens. Has anyone else noticed this?





> Written by *Phaserburn* on 01-30-2011 08:54 AM GMT
> 
> First I've heard, but if it could be confirmed that you have a NW XP-G R4 or R5, I'd be the first in line to grab the next one! Perhaps a note to the seller? If you post a pic, it would be easy for us to tell you if it's an XPE or XPG.





> Written by *mac1987* on 01-30-2011 05:03 PM GMT
> 
> I will try to make some decent pictures of the LED's tomorrow. In the meanwhile, I'm interested in knowing if the other people with NW LED's in their T20C2 MK.II's see 3 or 4 yellow 'lanes' ?
> 
> ...





> Written by *psdx* on 01-30-2011 07:30 PM GMT
> 
> I see several comparisons between the Tc20C2 and the TK12. I compare them as well. I like the UI and the "look" of the ET but I can't seem to get past the fact that the Fenix has regulation that is so much better than that of the EagleTac. I can't imagine the driver to provide better regulation would cost that much more. AM I wrong - and it does in fact cost a lot more to manufacture a light with full regulation than one that's got a output curve that looks the the EagleTac? Are all EagleTac lights regulated similar to this one? I'm just surprised that a relatively new offering would not be regulated better. Any thoughts or other things I should be aware of?



Written by *selfbuilt* on 01-31-2011 07:19 AM GMT



psdx said:


> I like the UI and the "look" of the ET but I can't seem to get past the fact that the Fenix has regulation that is so much better than that of the EagleTac. I can't imagine the driver to provide better regulation would cost that much more.


Eagletac actually has fine current-controlled regulation, consistent with other makers in this category. It is just that Fenix is a special case - for some reason, it usually has the most efficient driver. The difference is not necessarily huge though. In this case, my TK11 seems to be stand-out performer - but that may not be indicative of the model as a whole (i.e. it is only n=1 sample, after all). Eagletac actually has fine current-controlled regulation, consistent with other makers in this category. It is just that Fenix is a special case - for some reason, it usually has the most efficient driver. The difference is not necessarily huge though. In this case, my TK11 seems to be stand-out performer - but that may not be indicative of the model as a whole (i.e. it is only n=1 sample, after all).




> Written by *psdx* on 01-31-2011 08:48 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *jhc37013* on 01-31-2011 08:58 PM GMT
> 
> Anyone heard when the XM-L drop-ins for the T20 will ship?





> Written by *psdx* on 02-01-2011 04:11 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *mac1987* on 02-01-2011 05:34 PM GMT
> 
> If I show you this picture, which LED do you think it is?
> 
> ...





> Written by *dwminer* on 02-01-2011 07:28 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *jhc37013* on 02-02-2011 06:33 PM GMT
> 
> I hope those that want the XM-L have pre-ordered it, I think it's going to be a really bright module and could get really popular. It could be another new beginning for the T20C2 MKII as well, being as how small of a XM-L light it really will be.





> Written by *psdx* on 02-02-2011 07:14 PM GMT
> 
> The Lumintop TD-15x has more output and is slightly shorter, though it has a slightly larger bezel. I think the best selling point is the dropin capability. I have the TD-15x - waiting for the new R5 version of the T20C2.





> Written by *recDNA* on 02-03-2011 11:33 AM GMT
> 
> The drop in won't work in the old original T20C2 right?





> Written by *jhc37013* on 02-03-2011 06:16 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *tights24* on 02-04-2011 07:17 AM GMT
> 
> Probably a stupid question and i may have missed the answer, but is there that much of a difference between the P20C2 II model and the "tactical" model? I.e, can all of the drop ins available for the T be used as well in the P? Sorry for the ignorant question.


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 13, 2011)

> Written by *lebox97* on 02-04-2011 07:24 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *German Max* on 02-05-2011 12:04 PM GMT
> 
> http://www.taschenlampen-forum.de/ea...20c2-xm-l.htmlhey, here first review from T20 XM-L!





> Written by *jhc37013* on 02-06-2011 03:26 AM GMT
> 
> Today I got my XM-L drop-in for my T20C2 MKII from illuminationgear and I'm very satisfied. It came packaged in a plastic container with no dust or fingerprints to be seen and I was pleased to see it was a LOP texture instead of smooth. Install is easy and certain with the T20 just remember the threads are reverse and if you find it to tough to loosen by hand it does have the knurled textured on the outside of the module to put a wrench to if needed.
> 
> ...





> Written by *psdx* on 02-06-2011 05:55 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *offthetrail* on 02-06-2011 08:15 AM GMT
> 
> There is an Eagletac youtube video showing the changes. They updated the clip design to add a locking ring since so many people complained about the old design with the clip falling off.
> 
> ...





> Written by *Nico_LED* on 02-06-2011 12:33 PM GMT
> 
> I don't know why they made a shorter tailcap ??





> Written by *jhc37013* on 02-06-2011 05:08 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *infinus* on 02-06-2011 06:13 PM GMT
> 
> I put no lube on my threads and I get this same thing from time to time. I also find that if I pulse the light at just the right frequency that it'll actually activate the tactical modes. If I let it turn off for more then about 2 seconds though it always works right.
> 
> ...





> Written by *offthetrail* on 02-06-2011 06:27 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *jhc37013* on 02-06-2011 10:35 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *infinus* on 02-06-2011 10:42 PM GMT
> 
> Yeah, it sounds like this behavior must be expected if so many of us are seeing it.





> Written by *Phaserburn* on 02-07-2011 06:19 AM GMT
> 
> Anyone have these issues with the XP-G module? I never have.


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 13, 2011)

> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *Nico_LED* on 02-07-2011 06:21 AM GMT
> 
> Not any problem for me !






> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *infinus* on 02-07-2011 07:50 AM GMT
> 
> Nico Led,
> ...





> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *Nico_LED* on 02-07-2011 08:19 AM GMT
> 
> 
> ...





> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *infinus* on 02-07-2011 09:38 AM GMT
> 
> Oh, gotcha, yes, I don't ever see this on my XP-G. I got confused,
> ...






> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *Nico_LED* on 02-07-2011 02:31 PM GMT
> 
> You're welcome
> ...





> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *Nico_LED* on 02-07-2011 02:34 PM GMT
> 
> You're welcome
> ...





> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *psdx* on 02-07-2011 03:05 PM GMT
> 
> 
> ...





> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *Nico_LED* on 02-07-2011 03:12 PM GMT
> 
> 
> ...





> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *psdx* on 02-07-2011 03:45 PM GMT
> 
> It's possible that while we've commented about differences that are
> ...





> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *jcalvert* on 02-07-2011 05:48 PM GMT
> 
> I have the 2011 updated MKII host that came with the XM-L and
> ...





> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *jhc37013* on 02-07-2011 08:52 PM GMT
> 
> 
> ...





> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *jcalvert* on 02-07-2011 09:39 PM GMT
> 
> Hi jhc,
> ...





> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *Kevin1322* on 02-08-2011 09:14 PM GMT
> 
> Got my XM-L drop in today and thought I would share my thoughts. It
> ...





> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *offthetrail* on 02-09-2011 04:39 AM GMT
> 
> 
> ...





> *Re: EagleTac T20C2 Mark II (XP-G R5) Review: BEAMSHOTS, RUNTIMES and more!*
> Written by *Kevin1322* on 02-09-2011 08:15 AM GMT
> 
> 
> ...





> Written by *recDNA* on 02-09-2011 08:25 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 13, 2011)

The thread discussions for the last few months have been *fully restored* from the search engine cache data (thank you tandem!).

Please carry on!


----------



## mac1987 (Mar 27, 2011)

Hey guys,

just receiver my XM-L T6 drop-in. It has a nice beam, very large hotspot with a bright spill. The hotspot seems about as bright as the XP-G R5 drop-in, only about twice the size. At the outer edges of the spill it shows a "double edge". It's nothing like the old CREE-rings, but it's not totally smooth either. This only shows up when white-wall hunting and disappears when using the light in real-life situations. The transition from spot to spill is pretty smooth. Overall I'm very satisfied with the beam-pattern and output, especially considering the price I paid for the module vs. buying a complete new XM-L light. 
The only disappointment is in the color of the beam. It's very cold and with a slight tint of purple. although I have to admit I'm used to the XP-G Neutral White module now. But it's definitely a bit more purplish than the XP-G Cool White R5 that I also have.

Edit: After playing with the light for a while I came across the same problem as the one others have reported: sometimes the light doesn't switch 'hidden' modes and sometimes it won't turn on. However, I found out that it won't change 'hidden' modes when starting from the High position (tightened). After quick loosening-tightening it won't change to low/strobe/beacon/sos without turning the light off first. Sometimes, when turning the light on again immediately, it won't turn on at all. When changing to hidden modes from the loosened position and tightening-loosening quickly, it will work without a problem. 
It seems there is a bug in the driver when changing to hidden modes and starting from the tightened position. Luckily so far it does seem to work correctly when starting from the loosened position, so using the flashlight in the correct way seems to cause no problems. 
I find this a bit of a disappointment from a QC perspective (don't tell me nobody tested this?), but considering the small price I paid for the module, the quality and quantity of the light it produces and the price a new XM-L flashlight from e.g. Fenix (no drop-in modules so forced to buy a complete flashlight when switching to a newer LED type) would cost me, it seems a small price to pay.
I'm really amazed that they keep updating the modules. I now have a XP-G R5 Cool White, XP-G (R4?) Neutral White and XM-L T6 Cool White for the price of not even 1,5 other (complete) flashlights. Usually companies make 1 update to satisfy the customers who bought the light for upgrade-ability. This light already has seen 4 (XR-E R2, XP-E Q4 NW, XP-G NW and XM-L T6).


----------



## kreisler (Nov 18, 2011)

Any chance to add the measurements and graphs for the XML version? There are 2 XML versions, the original release and the current "720 lumens" release:


Feb 2011 said:


> EagleTac T20C2 MK II XM-L T6
> 
> Dimensions:
> Length: 5.5 inch (14cm)
> ...





Sep 2011 said:


> EagleTac T20C2 MKII High OutPut XM-L
> 
> Runtimes:
> Low/General/Turbo: 100+/10/1.2 hours(3.5mins)
> ...



That would be a great update to this thread! And thanks for the review!!


----------



## selfbuilt (Nov 19, 2011)

Sorry, haven't heard from eagletac. I typically leave it up to manufacturers to suggest lights for review.

Sent from my handheld device


----------



## kreisler (Dec 5, 2011)

i managed to separate the drop-in module (720 lumens!!) and divide it into its 2 parts. you only have to apply some good force  and that's it 

hope you enjoy my scans: 





best wishes
kreisler (the :banned


----------



## madecov (Dec 6, 2011)

I received the XML-T6 updated version of this light. It works great on primary 123's but will not light up with AW or Redilast 2900 mah 18650's.

Any recommendations as to a decent quality cell ?


----------



## kreisler (Dec 6, 2011)

madecov said:


> with AW or Redilast 2900 mah 18650's


the AW and Redilast are afaik flat-top cells. you could remedy this situation by removing the white plastic ring of the drop in module. or you do buy new cells with button-top. personally i use the 18700 XTAR 2600 mah cells. they fit. decent quality? i dunno for sure.

there are not very many button-top cells available .. so you dont have much of a choice anyway. please may others suggest their cells in use, thanks!


----------



## Spartacus001 (Dec 28, 2011)

Thanks for that very informative review.
My ECD is a EagleTac P20A2.
An excellent light but its kinda long so I have been pondering on a single 18650 light.
This might be what I'm looking for


----------



## kreisl (Mar 21, 2013)

wanted to share dis.. have been using the Eagletac aluminum weapon mount on the original plastic rail of my vacuum cleaner's tube. to fit the plastic rail and the aluminum mount perfectly, there was too much play, i had to create an adapter shoe made out of plastic. well i filled in hot glue in the space where the play was and done was the shoe, perfect fit.





i'll upload 2 more documentational pics later..

now cleaning the corners of the ceiling, vacuuming spider webs indoors, spiders, or even hunting mosquitos in a dark room is highly enjoyable work. cleaning the house, the basement is phun?? now yes. you betcha :huh:

i don't own any weapon, gun or rifle, so this is mine now


----------



## bshanahan14rulz (Jul 23, 2013)

Wanted to add my experiences so far with this light.

Mode change instability. As others have said in the past, keep your connections clean!!! The aluminum spring-loaded ring makes contact with a shelf in teh body of the flashlight, so don't forget to clean that shelf too, not just the aluminum contacts on the drop-in. If you are having trouble changing modes, or if modes change by themselves if you look at the flashlight wrong, clean up the contacts.

Greatly reduced output. I had a hair or something that was keeping the aluminum spring-loaded ring from touching the body completely. Result was normal operation, but at greatly reduced output (think on Turbo mode, you could look directly at the emitter from point blank and it looks so dimly lit that you can see all the surface details). This should be noted that this isn't at all a flaw of teh flashlight. Just a symptom that threw me off. 

Re: Mac1987's problem from 2011: only two modes available if you turn on while in turbo mode. I do believe this UI feature was by design.

flat top cells do not work by default. You can remove the plastic ring around the + contact on the spring on the drop-in. I tried to solder a blob to it. I'd recommend just snipping the plastic. The solder melted the plastic, but it resolidified alright. Just would look neater if I had just removed the ring.

Thanks for the pic of drop-in disassembled. Figured it HAD to be two pieces, but couldn't get it to budge. Time to drop the kitten mittens and put on some big cat paws!

Oh, and sorry for bumping old thread. Light is new to me ;-)


----------

