# SUNWAYLED M40A Review (MC-E 4xAA): RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!



## selfbuilt (Aug 6, 2010)

_*Reviewer's Note: *The M40A was provided for review by SUNWAYLED. Please see their website or BatteryJunction.com for more info. _

*Warning: pic heavy, as usual *

*Manufacturer Specifications: (taken from the SUNWAYLED website)* 

CREE MC-E LED
Three modes constant output, one strobe mode 
Output and runtime using 4*AA 2600mAH Ni-MH batteries): 500 Lumens (1 hrs)- 150 Lumens (5 hrs)- 15 Lumens (60 hrs) - Strobe mode:500 Lumens (1.5 hrs)
Digital Sensor Magnetic Control system, slightly twist the Rotator Ring to select from different modes
Digitally regulated output - maintains constant brightness
Effective range of 250 meters
Using 4*1.5V AA(Alkaline, Ni-MH, Lithium) batteries
Working voltage:3.3~7V
Reflector of good quality maintains both great throw distance and spread
Dimension:144mm (length) x 57 mm (head diameter) x 40 mm (body diameter)
Weight:237.8g（battery excluded）
Aerospace-grade aluminum alloy
Military Specification Type III hard anodized
Waterproof accords with IPX-8 standard
Ultra-clear toughened glass lens resists scratches and impacts
Tail stand and can be used as a candle
Accessories: lanyard, O-ring
Estimated MSRP: ~$140
The M40A is part of a new series of lights launched by SUNWAYLED. This is the first shipping sample I have reviewed – I have previously reviewed engineering samples of the M10R, M20C and M40C. The M40A is a high-output MC-E light that runs on common AA batteries.



















The light comes in a solid cardboard box with cushioned packing foam. Included inside the package were the light, wrist strap/lanyard, manual, warranty card, promotional insert, and extra o-rings. Note that no holster is included.













From left to right: Duracell AA, SUNWAYLED M40A, M40C, ITP A6 Polestar, Fenix TK45.

*M40A*: Weight: 247.0g (no batter), Width (bezel) 57.0mm, Length: 145mm
*M40C*: Weight: 258.5g (no battery), Width (bezel) 57.1mm, Length 156mm

As you can see, the light bears something of a resemblance to the 2x18650 M40C reviewed previously. I will point out key differences as we go along …  










First of these is the styling – note the location of heatsink fins has moved, and the M40A features traditional knurling around the body/battery tube/handle. Knurling is reasonably aggressive compared to most made-in-China lights.

One comment about the anodizing – while I would consider my M40A sample to be excellent overall, but there is some mottling of the head of the light near the bezel, and a few fine concentric rings around the base of the head near the heatsink fins. While these are minor cosmetic blemishes, the earlier M40C/M20C/M10R I reviewed were all outstanding in comparison (i.e. flawless). The color has also changed slightly to more gunmetal gray appearance on my M40A sample.

The control ring is similar to the M40C, but with more pronounced detents at every level. :thumbsup: As before, there are no identifying labels on the control ring. One small note – there is a bit of small gap between the control ring and the area containing the heatsink fins. And it looks like one of the control ring magnets is visible at the top of the ring (near the heatsink fins). Not necessarily a problem per se, but not something that was visible not on the M40C.

The M40A lacks the low-battery LED warning indicator present on the M40C.

Something that hasn’t changed – high quality machinist square-cut screw threads, anodized for head lock-out. 














The light comes equipped with a MC-E emitter inside a fairly deep reflector. Shown above is a comparison to the M40C – although hard to tell in the pics, the M40A reflector is both wider and deeper than the main M40C reflector. The overall front opening width is similar on the two lights, but the M40A doesn’t have the ring of colored 5mm emitters.






Here’s another significant change – no clicky switch. On/off and mode switching is now controlled entirely by the control ring in the head. The M40A can tailstand.














This is where the light gets interesting – note the high quality 4xAA carrier. Unlike a number of competitors, the carrier is all metal. :thumbsup: It is also reversible - you can insert it either orientation into the light handle. oo: So as long as you put the batteries in correctly (well labeled inside the carrier), there’s no chance of accidentally reversing polarity. This is a creative design, and something I hope other makers pick-up.

*Beamshots*

I’ve recently moved, and haven’t had a chance to set up a proper beamshot closet yet, but here’s a quick comparison to the M40C, about ~1 meter from a white ceiling (both lights on Hi).


















The deeper-cut bezel ring introduces the slight peripheral edging effect you see above, but this is not noticeable at regular distances. Overall spillbeam widths are similar, but the M40A has a more focused hotspot than the M40C (consistent with the deeper reflector).

_*UPDATE SEPT 19, 2010:* I've added some additional lights to my 100-Yard Outdoor Beamshot Round-up, including the M40A. Check out that round-up thread for more details. Here is an animated GIFs of the relevant comparison to the M40C:_






Scroll down for some throw and output numbers.

*User Interface*

On/off and mode switching is controlled entirely by the magnetic control ring in the head (i.e. there is no clicky on-off switch). As such, there needs to be a “standby” mode on the ring (i.e. where no light is produced, but a standby current is being drawn so the electronic circuit knows when you are switching modes).

The five control ring levels on the M40A are Standy - Lo – Med – Hi – Strobe, arranged clockwise if you have the light in hand pointed away from you. Like the M40C, the total traverse of the ring is ~1/2 the circumference of the light, and you can switch back and forth with ease one-handed. As mentioned previously, the detents feel more pronounced on my M40A than my M40C, increasing your confidence here of not accidentally switching modes.

As an aside, there is occasionally a brief flash of the emitter when the battery carrier makes contact upon tightening of the head – but only in standby mode. A similar flash was noted on my JetBeam RRT-2 Raptor, but in that case was present on all modes and all the time.

Thanks to the anodized threads, you can lock-out the light by a simple quarter-turn loosening of the head. This is very useful if storing the light for a period of time, or to prevent accidental activation. There are plenty of screw threads, so no risk of the head falling off by this slight loosening.

_Standby/Parasitic Current_

The parasitic drain of standby modes is always a concern, so I measured it on my sample: 96.5uA. Given the 4xAA batteries are in series, for 2000mAh Eneloops, that would translate into 2.4 years before fully charged batteries would be drained.

Not really a problem, but good to have the easy head lock-out anyway. 

_No PWM_

I could detect no signs of PWM flicker by eye or with my sound-card oscilloscope setup. I believe the M40A is current-controlled on Lo/Med. :thumbsup:

_Strobe_






Strobe was measured at a “tactical” (and nauseating :green 15.7 Hz.

*Testing Method:* All my output numbers are relative for my home-made light box setup, a la Quickbeam's flashlight reviews 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.

Throw values are the square-root of lux measurements taken at 5 meters from the lens, using a light meter, and then extrapolated back to estimate values for 1 meter. This is my standard way to present throw on these types of high output lights. The beams don't really have a chance to fully converge until typically several meters out.

*Throw/Output Summary Chart:*






As previously mentioned, the M40A out-throws the higher-output M40C. Overall, I would say throw and output of the M40A are quite typical for this class of light.

*Output/Runtime Comparison*






Although the outputs and runtimes are a bit less, the overall pattern of the M40A is remarkably similar to the 2x18650 M40C. Both lights have excellent flat regulation on Med and Hi (Lo not tested, but I expect the same there). :twothumbs

Despite the differing battery sources, both lights go into a continuous flashing/strobing mode once the batteries fall out of regulation. On the M40C, you get some advance warning from the LED warning light. On the M40A, you instead get a few warning flashes of the main emitter a couple of minutes before dropping out of regulation. These flashes rapidly increase in frequency until they become continuous strobing as the output drops. 

Like the M40C, you can switch to a lower output mode to temporarily restore constant light. But typically, there isn’t much battery life left at this point, and the low-battery flashing will begin again soon.

_*UPDATE:* Just added the L91 lithium (Energizer e2) runtime on Hi. An impressive run - nearly 2 hours, well regulated. :thumbsup:_
How does the M40A stack up to the competition?














The closest comparables are really the other AA-powered lights: the ITP A6 and the Fenix TK45. 

On Hi, the M40A does remarkably well in one sense – comparable in output to the ITP A6, the M40A manages to squeeze almost as much regulated runtime on 4xAA Eneloops as the A6 does on 6xAA. oo: Of course, the difference is what happens after the lights fall out of regulation – the A6 has a slowly decreasing output that continues for quite some time, while the M40A drops quickly into low-output strobing. And as expected, the much larger 8xAA Fenix TK45 remains the output and runtime champ on Hi.

On Medium, you can see the effects of the lower number of batteries on the M40A. Although impressively regulated, it can’t match the runtime of the 6xAA ITP A6 or the 8xAA Fenix TK45. Still, this performance is impressive from just 4xAA cells.

*Potential Issues*

Like the M40C, there is no slow drop-off in output once the batteries fall out of regulation – the main light starts flashing with increasing frequency over a couple of minutes, and then drops to low output strobing. 

There is a parasitic standby current, although this is minimal in my testing (i.e. 96.5uA – or ~2.4 years). The light can also be easily and reliably locked-out with a simple twist of the head if you are concerned.

*Preliminary Observations*

As expected – based on my earlier testing of the other SUNWAYLED lights - the M40A is a well-made and impressive light.

Like the other early releases, build quality and attention to detail are excellent. The only minor point is that the anodizing has a few minor blemishes on my M40A sample – but not enough to detract from the overall appearance of the light. As mentioned earlier, the other samples I tested were all outstanding, while this one is merely excellent. 

I’m particularly impressed with their 4xAA battery carrier – solid metal construction, clear labels, and reversible polarity (i.e. fits in either way). This is the best AA carrier I’ve seen so far. Probably the only thing extra I would have liked to see is a clicky switch option like the M40C.

The beam is similar to the M40C (i.e. nice wide spillbeam), but with a more defined hostpot with greater throw. The centre-beam “donut” effect is of course present on all MC-E lights, but it is less noticeable on the M40A than most lights I’ve tested in this class. Definitely a good job on the reflector as well.

Personally, I quite like the overall size and styling of the light. It fits comfortably in the hand, and is reasonably compact for the output. The control ring is similar to the M40C, but with more noticeable detents on my M40A sample. The standby current is negligible, and the light is easily locked-out by a simple head twist. Spacing of output levels is good IMO.

As with the M40C, the regulation and output/runtime profile is very good, consistent with a current-controlled light. :thumbsup: The only drawback for me is at the end of the run – I don’t see the point for the constant flashing when the batteries fall out of regulation. A low-voltage warning flash feature is fine, but why loose constant output at this stage? :thinking: I would think the low output is enough of a signal that it's time to change the batteries - I recommend SUNWAYLED remove this "feature."

In terms of performance, one thing I would like to highlight – the M40A actually exceeds the manufacturer’s specs (a pleasant change for me ). I find their emitter lumen estimates for each level to be very believable, and runtime on Sanyo Eneloops (2000mAh) matched or exceeded their specs for 2600mAh NiMH. 

As with the other SUNWAYLED offerings, this is a well made light that shows considerable design and manufacturing expertise. I suspect the design, feature set, and performance will find favor with many here – especially as it based on commonly available AA batteries (and in a convenient 4x configuration).


----------



## Colorblinded (Aug 6, 2010)

You noticed the same thing in your review that I did with mine. The little magnet that is visible. At least that settles that it isn't just mine but it's peculiar that the M40A is the only one that exhibits this so far.

Good to have confirmation of my runtime suspicions. It seemed like it was doing better than their rated specs when using eneloops.


----------



## Illumination (Aug 7, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


>



oops. falshlight? :hahaha: 


well it appears the light is very good, making up for the sloppy packaging.


and great review, selfbuilt (as usual!)


----------



## Geoffrey (Aug 7, 2010)

I have read both of your reviews now, great work guys.

I have been watching this light for a while and after reading the reviews I think I will add it to my growing inventory of lights.

Thanks to both of you.


----------



## Colorblinded (Aug 7, 2010)

Illumination said:


> oops. falshlight? :hahaha:
> 
> 
> well it appears the light is very good, making up for the sloppy packaging.
> ...


I never noticed that, I didn't look at the packaging for long. There are some quirks I had noticed in the reviews of the other lights before I got mine... the packaging could use a little tidying up and error checking to match the quality of the light within... but fortunately it doesn't actually reflect on the quality of the lights.


----------



## swxb12 (Aug 7, 2010)

The lack of blue/red leds and tail switch are a plus for me. Keeps the design more simple. 

This looks like a solid choice for those looking for a monster AA light, but find the 8xAA requirement of the Fenix to be a little overwhelming.

I wonder if there are any 3rd party holsters that can fit this light.


----------



## Colorblinded (Aug 7, 2010)

swxb12 said:


> I wonder if there are any 3rd party holsters that can fit this light.


I picked up a Maxpedition universal flashlight & baton holster for mine and it works well.


----------



## driven (Aug 7, 2010)

Nice review as usual. I just ordered one of these yesterday and am really looking forward to getting it. It will be my first "falshlight".


----------



## qtaco (Aug 7, 2010)

Great review mate.

I'm amazed at the perfect regulation on max on alkaline (not that I'd run it that way), but it is a sign the circuit is gentle on the batteries. It also shows there is further headroom to increase the output on 4xAA NiMH with an appropriate emitter down the road.

I think this is an impressive light, and shows that 4xAA is a great platform to build a light around: good size and output on easily available batteries.


----------



## don.gwapo (Aug 7, 2010)

Great review as always selfbuilt. :twothumbs.

Looking forward for the beamshots.

Looks like i'm getting $140 bucks poorer after reading your review. But that would be fine coz I just received the eneloop power pack from bj so I can used it for this light. .


----------



## skyfire (Aug 7, 2010)

thanks for another great review!

been wondering about this light as it looks very interesting.


----------



## Essexman (Aug 7, 2010)

Great review, thanks. I've got one of these on it's way to me soon on a pass around here in the UK. I can't wait now!

I'm very impressed by the regulation. I'd love to know more about the technical side to this torch, like the current to the LED at each level, how they have the MCE wired to run on 4AA etc?

I hope other manufacturers are looking at the battery holder, it looks very well made, much better than some others I could mention.

cheers


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 7, 2010)

Colorblinded said:


> You noticed the same thing in your review that I did with mine. The little magnet that is visible. At least that settles that it isn't just mine but it's peculiar that the M40A is the only one that exhibits this so far.


Yes, I noticed it right out of the box - it jumped out at me only because the M40C has no such gap (so of course, got out my trusty EDC to look further. ). 

But as you noted in your excellent review, it doesn't seem to cause a problem.

Oh, and BTW, you can let Burgess know that a compass will get thrown off by the control ring magnet - but you have to be within about an inch or so for it to happen.  



Illumination said:


> oops. falshlight? :hahaha:
> well it appears the light is very good, making up for the sloppy packaging.


Yes, I noticed that too (not immediately, but when preparing the pics for posting). I'm sure Sunway will work to correct it for future batches. 



Essexman said:


> I'm very impressed by the regulation. I'd love to know more about the technical side to this torch, like the current to the LED at each level, how they have the MCE wired to run on 4AA etc?


Don't know about current to the LED, but I believe Fenix runs their TK40 as two pairs of 4xAA in series (so likely something similar here).

BTW, in terms of OTF lumens, I think people can be reasonably assured ~400 OTF. Based on how my lightbox reports values compare to those with integrating spheres (for light models we have in common), that sounds reasonable.


----------



## driven (Aug 7, 2010)

What would be the pros and cons of running this with Lithium primaries? I picked up quite a few from Loews and was wondering what the run time and usage would be for this light. Alkalines are clearly not optimal from your charts as I infer they can't handle the draw. 

For rechargeable Lithium, the 3.7 voltage would fry the light, correct?

For primary lithium I think the voltage is fine and within range, and I would have a lighter weight light, but what would the general effect be on run time and output? 

Non withstanding the cost issue versus Enloops, would using lithium primaries be a bad idea?


----------



## Johnyjackpot (Aug 7, 2010)

I really want this light but need a coupon. Anyone??
Thanks, John


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 7, 2010)

driven said:


> For rechargeable Lithium, the 3.7 voltage would fry the light, correct?
> For primary lithium I think the voltage is fine and within range, and I would have a lighter weight light, but what would the general effect be on run time and output?


Correct, 3.7V Li-ion would fry the circuit. But L91 lithium (i.e. Energizer e2 lithium) should be fine. In fact, Sunway's specs specifically allow these.

Runtime should be a lot longer on L91 than alkaline, with similar output. I would have tested these before, but my supply is running low and they are rather expensive. :sweat:

Ah, what the heck. I've just started a run on L91 on Hi .... I'll post the results later this evening. :wave:


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Aug 7, 2010)

Excellent review as always selfbuilt. Between you and Colorblinded, I am really feeling the love for this light.


----------



## Burgess (Aug 7, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


> . . . . you can let Burgess know that a compass will get thrown off by the control ring magnet -
> but you have to be within about an inch or so for it to happen.


 

Thank you, Selfbuilt ! ! !

:goodjob::thanks:

_


----------



## candle lamp (Aug 7, 2010)

Very nice review, Selfbuilt 

Did you ever see that the light wink on when metal or magnet is very near it? And I heard other flahlight show the pre-flash with the max. brightness when turning the magnetic control ring to turn on the light. How about M40A?
Thank you.


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 7, 2010)

driven said:


> For primary lithium I think the voltage is fine and within range, and I would have a lighter weight light, but what would the general effect be on run time and output?


Jus updated the main review with the Hi mode L91 run:






Very nice regulation and runtime on primary lithium - basically 4x longer than alkaline, or 2x longer than Eneloops (on Hi).

And no, I don't plan to do the Med mode ... out of batteries.  



candle lamp said:


> Did you ever see that the light wink on when metal or magnet is very near it? And I heard other flahlight show the pre-flash with the max. brightness when turning the magnetic control ring to turn on the light. How about M40A?


Hmmm, haven't noticed it any other time. It only seems to occur in standby mode when first making contact with the battery carrier (and not every time either). On the Jetbeam RRT-2 you could see it every mode when pressing the switch - the circuit here seems to be different.


----------



## driven (Aug 8, 2010)

Thank you very much for running the test with the primary lithium. I'll try to help out with a battery fund donation next week. :goodjob::thanks:

I think for some applications, having two hour run time in a light this size will be a great selling point for the flashlight. The weight issue will change the load of the light as well, particularly if you are carrying spare batteries with you in your pack.

I think I am going to really like this light.


----------



## candle lamp (Aug 8, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


> Hmmm, haven't noticed it any other time. It only seems to occur in standby mode when first making contact with the battery carrier (and not every time either). On the Jetbeam RRT-2 you could see it every mode when pressing the switch - the circuit here seems to be different.


Thanks for your reply. M40A takes my fancy. :thumbsup:


----------



## Swedpat (Aug 8, 2010)

Thanks for the review and Output/Runtime Comparisons,

Nearly 2 hours stable output at high with lithiums and nearly 5 hours at mid with alkalines makes this light very interesting. :thumbsup:


----------



## woodrow (Aug 9, 2010)

Selfbuilt... I have been wanting a cool AA light..and almost bought the Fenix TK45 this week. Thanks very much for this review... I would have been very sad if I had bought the TK45 and then looked at this. I will give up a little output to have a smaller light running on 4 AA's. Thanks for the lithium AA graph as well!


----------



## MattK (Aug 9, 2010)

A fantastic review as always!


----------



## ergotelis (Aug 9, 2010)

Selfbuilt, do you have a good charger to test your eneloops?Your AA Lion results look much better compared to the eneloop ones.As far as i am concerned, good eneloops against good energizers won't have that much of difference. I think it is good to check your batteries! Else, it clearly seems that the circuit of the flashlight works better with higher voltage batteries!


----------



## driven (Aug 9, 2010)

ergotelis said:


> As far as i am concerned, good eneloops against good energizers won't have that much of difference.



They do have a BIG difference, the Lithium batteries work much better at high draw than eneloops. I am sure that Selfbuilt will reply with more detail on his ability to test battery voltage and such, but I think many of us expected a big jump in run time with the Lithium, and the one hour for the eneloops matches the manufacturer specs so I think they seem to be fully charged. As just one example, Lithium batteries in my flash camera work for thousands of flash pictures versus hundreds with eneloops, months versus weeks.

There is most definitely a big difference between 2000 mAh eneloops and 3000 mAh lithium primaries.


----------



## MattK (Aug 9, 2010)

I'd also add that NiMh's in general work so well in flashlights (and other high drain devices) because of their resistance to voltage sag. Lithium primaries are also highly resistant to voltage sag AND have 40%+ more capacity so these numbers really should not be so surprising.


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 9, 2010)

ergotelis said:


> Selfbuilt, do you have a good charger to test your eneloops?Your AA Lion results look much better compared to the eneloop ones.As far as i am concerned, good eneloops against good energizers won't have that much of difference. I think it is good to check your batteries! Else, it clearly seems that the circuit of the flashlight works better with higher voltage batteries!


Although it depends on the circuit, L91 does typically give much better performance than Eneloop. I am not surprised by these results - they are consistent with my other multi-cell testing on NiMH/L91.

But it is a good question to ask anyone who does a lot of testing. Damaged batteries would skew rechargeable results. Here's my regimen:

All my Eneloops are charged on a Maha C9000 charger - one of the best you'll find. I always start new cells on a break-in cycle,and I periodically do discharge/charge cycles to confirm capacity (plus additional break-in cycles at least one or twice a year to maintain optimal health). 

New out of the package, most Eneloops show up as 2000-2200 mAh capacity on my charger (most ~2100-2150 mAh). Within a few discharge cycles, typical capacity is ~1900-2000 mAh, where it stays stably for quite some time. If the cells drop below ~1800mAh capacity on a discharge/charge cycle, I "retire" them from active use. 

Before starting a run, all batteries are topped on the Maha charger to full capacity. They are pulled from the charger and immediately placed in the light to start the run.

Note also that I manually stop all my Eneloop runs shortly after the light falls out of regulation (or drops to ~25% of original output), and immediately begin a charge cycle on the Maha. This is to insure the long-term health of the batteries. NiMH (particularly LSD like Eneloop) are very susceptible to the damage from over-discharge. Although the main effect of over-discharge is damage to the LSD characteristics of the cell (and not total capacity), I don't want to chance it. This is why I won't do Lo-mode Eneloop runtimes - I can predict when the run will end, and I will damage the cells if I let fully discharge.

I rotate cells through testing, to make sure all my sets of Eneloops have consistent number of discharge/recharge cycles. All batteries are labelled, and I record which cell ran on which test. I also insure that cells from the same batch are consistently used in any given light. And again, because I periodically check capacity, I toss any cell that drops below ~90% rated capacity.

I thus believe my cells give you a fair representation of what a "typical" Eneloop in the hands of a regular user would be like. Probably better in fact, since I treat the cells with more care than most do. 

:wave:
_
*EDIT:* I've just crunched some numbers from my max output 1xAA and 2xAA tests for comparison: 

On 1xAA, 1xL91 very consistently gives ~50-55% extra runtime over 1xEneloop (as measured by time to 50%). On 2xAA, the results get a lot more variable - 2xL92 gives anywhere from ~40-80% more runtime on 2xEneloop. I presume the circuit design explains part of this variance, but there are also difference in how heavily driven the cells are on different lights. In any case, you will note that much greater runtime is possible when you increase the cell number. Thus, the 85% increase in runtime for 4xL91 over 4xEneloop on the M40A doesn't seem so unreasonable - especially when you consider the M40A is driven fairly hard (i.e. the absolute runtime on 4x here is typically less than that seen 1x or 2x on other lights). _


----------



## arek98 (Aug 9, 2010)

Is there any information how waterproof is it? 

Seems like getting rid of clicky (and tailcap) the only potential leak points are lens and head threads. This could go in direction of diving light but I don’t think single o-ring supports this case. Still, I wonder if they specify anywhere depth rating for IPX-8 claim.


----------



## ergotelis (Aug 9, 2010)

Selfbuilt, you are a real professional reviewer. You covered my question completely. With that answer you prove that good reviews is not only what we see. It is all the work needed to be done to have the best results that are the most close to the reality. I have nothing to add other than well done, all the procedure that you follow is the best possible to be done for a variety of reviews.
I am used to the fact that, L91 most of the times get about 50% more runtimes. This is about right considering that L91 cells seem to have 50% more capacity compared to eneloops. I think that your test here proves that this circuit is more energy efficient with higher voltage batteries.Even alkalines have good results, considering their poor performance in high amp drain.


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 9, 2010)

arek98 said:


> Is there any information how waterproof is it?


My only concern here is that the single o-ring is only partially engaged when you tighten the handle against the head (i.e. you can still see part of it). The same happens on my M40C. Probably not a problem for waterproofness, but I'd ideally like to see it travel further.



ergotelis said:


> Selfbuilt, you are a real professional reviewer. You covered my question completely. With that answer you prove that good reviews is not only what we see. It is all the work needed to be done to have the best results that are the most close to the reality.


Thanks for the compliment. I do strive to lower variability as much as possible (and measure it continuousy, to insure I have been successful). 

This is part of the reason why I know I don't need to do repeated runs of a given light - with a well-matched battery (for capacity) there is remarkably little variability in the performance of any given sample (i.e. curves are the same). Of course, multiple specimens of each light would be ideal to determine "natural variability" of shipping samples. Doesn't happen often, but I do sometimes get to test more than one sample of a light - which is always instructive.

FYI, I do the same for my Li-ion cells. While I don't have a charger capable of giving me readout like the Maha, I do charge the cells to a consistent voltage level, and measure performance in specific tester lights. I use a bunch of old JetBeam Jet-I, II and III lights (that all use the original IBS circuit) on Max to compare performance of 14500, RCR, and 18650 batteries. I only use AW cells that perform around the average of what I've measured on various AW batts. Keeps the results consistent over time, as I purchase new cells. 

BTW, I just completed a discharge/recharge of the 4 cells used in the M40A runtimes. Two of them had indeed reached ~1800mAh (the other two were ~1850 and ~1900mAh), so the first two will be tossed now. So a brand new pack of Eneloops could indeed squeeze out an extra ~10% or so more runtime than what I report here.

:wave:


----------



## GarageBoy (Aug 11, 2010)

What's the street price?
I wonder why they didn't do away with the carrier. Maybe easier to machine a cylinder?


----------



## octaf (Aug 12, 2010)

This light looks very attractive.

Compact in size and bright enough with 4 AA.

Is this company gonna be next Jetbeam or Nitecore ???

We'll see !!!


----------



## octaf (Aug 12, 2010)

One question, selfbuilt.

Are the battery tubes interchangeable btw M40A & M40C ?


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 12, 2010)

octaf said:


> Are the battery tubes interchangeable btw M40A & M40C ?


Now that's an interesting question - I presume you mean are the heads interchangeable on the other light's battery/body tube?

The answer is no - I just checked, and the M40A head is slightly smaller in diameter than the M40C at the screw thread level. Probably just as well, since the circuit voltage ranges are different for the two lights.


----------



## octaf (Aug 12, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


> Now that's an interesting question - I presume you mean are the heads interchangeable on the other light's battery/body tube?
> 
> The answer is no - I just checked, and the M40A head is slightly smaller in diameter than the M40C at the screw thread level. Probably just as well, since the circuit voltage ranges are different for the two lights.


 
Hmm... Thanks.

I thought maybe M40C could be used with 4 AA.


----------



## Paul_in_Maryland (Aug 12, 2010)

GarageBoy said:


> What's the street price?
> I wonder why they didn't do away with the carrier. Maybe easier to machine a cylinder?


about $160 U.S.


----------



## boomanbb (Aug 12, 2010)

Hello,

This is my first post after lurking for months. My brand new M40A is sitting on my desk in front of me right now. Having come from a Inova Tactical T1 LED (35 lumen) flashlight and assorted no name walmart models, I have these excellent reviews to blame my purchase on. WOW, I am impressed!

Ben

BTW - Yes I a grown man... grandfather 7 times over and given that wisdom... I looked into the beam. 

The spots are beginning to clear. I should have no problems driving home.


----------



## MattK (Aug 12, 2010)

:welcome:

Welcome to the addiction Ben.


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 12, 2010)

boomanbb said:


> BTW - Yes I a grown man... grandfather 7 times over and given that wisdom... I looked into the beam.


:laughing: Hope you at least started on the low level.  

Let's face it, we've all done it - it's just most of us don't admit to it.  

:welcome:


----------



## boomanbb (Aug 13, 2010)

Thanks for the welcome. It finally got dark in Richmond, Va. I really like the way the M40A lights up the night! I can see these flashlights are going to be a problem for the wallet. Thanks to batteryjunction for fast delivery!

Ben


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Aug 13, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


> :laughing: Hope you at least started on the low level.
> 
> Let's face it, we've all done it - it's just most of us don't admit to it.
> 
> :welcome:


I'm a little surprised I don't have permanent damage by now.


----------



## octaf (Aug 13, 2010)

boomanbb said:


> Hello,
> 
> This is my first post after lurking for months. My brand new M40A is sitting on my desk in front of me right now. Having come from a Inova Tactical T1 LED (35 lumen) flashlight and assorted no name walmart models, I have these excellent reviews to blame my purchase on. WOW, I am impressed!
> 
> ...


 
Congrats, grandpa 

Big leap from walmart to M40A, you should definitely blame selfbuilt for it. :twothumbs


----------



## octaf (Aug 13, 2010)

Is Catapult V2 much brighter than M40A ?


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 13, 2010)

octaf said:


> Is Catapult V2 much brighter than M40A ?


From the review:






As you can see, my lightbox and ceiling bounce only give an extra 10-15% to the catapult (although I know the lightbox always underestimates). Still, you'd only notice the difference side-by-side.

Throw is certainly better on V2 - no mistaking that.


----------



## tab665 (Aug 14, 2010)

it seems these sunways might just take these forums by storm. nothing but great reviews about them.


----------



## scot (Aug 14, 2010)

As always, great review selfbuilt. I bought a M40A to use as an "around the house" light. I did a runtime test on high with eneloops and got 61 min before the light started flickering.

What surprised me was my runtime with duracell 2450mah cells, these test out for me at 2350mah on my maha c9000. The M40A only ran for 3 min more on these cells than it did with the eneloops. I was expecting more!!

I have some Powerex 2700mah that have been sitting around for months. I did one conditioning cycle on my C808M, let the cells rest for an hour, put them in the M40A and got 1hr 24min before the light started flickering. Great runtime, I just hope these cells will have some durability to them.

Nice light, I think it would be better if a tailswitch were added though.


----------



## arek98 (Aug 16, 2010)

Does M40A preflash when turing on on low, kind of like Quark? I just received M30A and it does that (and I'm one of people that are annoyed by that ).
Thx.


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 16, 2010)

scot said:


> Nice light, I think it would be better if a tailswitch were added though.


Agreed. 



arek98 said:


> Does M40A preflash when turing on on low, kind of like Quark? I just received M30A and it does that (and I'm one of people that are annoyed by that ).


No signs of a preflash on mine - either going from standby to low, or when tightening the battery tube to make contact when set to low.

There is a slight lag when first connecting the battery tube and the light turning on, but no preflash.


----------



## arek98 (Aug 16, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


> No signs of a preflash on mine - either going from standby to low, or when tightening the battery tube to make contact when set to low.
> 
> There is a slight lag when first connecting the battery tube and the light turning on, but no preflash.


 
Thank you for info.


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 19, 2010)

Just updated the main thread - I've added some additional lights to my 100-Yard Outdoor Beamshot Round-up, including the M40A. Check out that round-up thread for more details. Here is an animated GIFs of the relevant comparison to the M40C:[/I]


----------



## chiphead (Sep 20, 2010)

I've got to save my pennies, where did you get it?

chiphead


----------



## Dioni (Sep 20, 2010)

Very nice review! I like this light. :thumbsup:


----------



## wacbzz (Sep 28, 2010)

Any owners notice any heat issues with this light when it is run for an extended time period?


----------



## scot (Sep 28, 2010)

Never noticed any heat issues, but I've used my M40A every night for 3 weeks or so....one evening after using it in the yard I turned the ring to off and the light wouldn't shut off. Stayed on low, I essentially had two low beams, medium then high!! Sent the light back and the replacement ( I'm assuming) that arrived yesterday did the same thing right out of the box!!! 
I wonder if this is common with Sunwayled lights?


----------



## richardcpf (Sep 30, 2010)

I love how these new sunway flashlight look and perform. But as a new brand, I think it needs more attention to details, like packaging and spelling. In the box it almost reads False light. These little cons gives the product a cheap feeling.


----------



## selfbuilt (Oct 1, 2010)

scot said:


> Stayed on low, I essentially had two low beams, medium then high!! Sent the light back and the replacement ( I'm assuming) that arrived yesterday did the same thing right out of the box!!!
> I wonder if this is common with Sunwayled lights?


That's odd, sounds like maybe the ring magnet isn't detecting the final detent. Also wonder if you didn't just get the same light back? :thinking: 

All my SUNWAYLED lights are still working fine, but they have generally received only light intermittent use since the reviews went up. The M40A and M40C have probably gotten the most use, as I've taken them on a few night outings.



richardcpf said:


> I love how these new sunway flashlight look and perform. But as a new brand, I think it needs more attention to details, like packaging and spelling. In the box it almost reads False light. These little cons gives the product a cheap feeling.


FYI, SUNWAYLED was quite embarrassed when I pointed out the flashlight label misspelling. They asked me if it had shown up anywhere else in the documentation of this light or any of the other lights they sent me, and it hadn't. They promised to fix that one and work harder to prevent it from happening again.

Certainly happy enough with the lights - I keep the M40C charged and on my desk for emergency use.


----------



## scot (Oct 1, 2010)

Selfbuilt, I also thought that maybe I just got the same light back, but when I talked to the supplier they told me that the body was the same and they put a new head on it and that it worked fine. Kinda weird. So now I need to send it back again, a pain, but I realize that sometimes these things just happen.

This situation won't keep me from buying a Sunway again, I like them, and the dealer has been great to deal with!


----------



## selfbuilt (Oct 2, 2010)

scot said:


> Selfbuilt, I also thought that maybe I just got the same light back, but when I talked to the supplier they told me that the body was the same and they put a new head on it and that it worked fine. Kinda weird.


Hmmm, weird. Have you tried cleaning all the contact surfaces on the battery carrier and changing the batteries? I would have thought the problem was with the switch, but maybe something else is causing some sort of interference.


----------



## LeifUK (Mar 10, 2011)

Deleted.


----------



## LeifUK (Mar 10, 2011)

Nice review. I have used both Eneloops and Panasonic Infiniums and I get about 1 hour 5 minutes continuously on high before it starts to flash. In practice the light is fairly throwy, which I 'cured' using some d-c-fix on the front of the lens. The only criticism I have (apart from in my opinion the useless strobe) is that the bezel is fairly deep, and it cuts out some of the spill. 

As an aside, I would not use these rotary switch torches, or falshlights (sic) if you prefer, in an environment with very fine dust as it would get under the rotary switch, which seems to be lubricated. I think it would be okay with sand, and grit.


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 10, 2011)

LeifUK said:


> As an aside, I would not use these rotary switch torches, or falshlights (sic) if you prefer, in an environment with very fine dust as it would get under the rotary switch, which seems to be lubricated. I think it would be okay with sand, and grit.


A fair point of concern.

Incidentally, this is one of the few threads I won't be updating with search engine cache data - I was unable to find a cache hoard for the missing posts from p.3. :shrug: I don't think much was lost, but I recall some discussion of the clear plastic Nikon lens cap fitting the M40A (i.e. could be used as diffuser).


----------



## LeifUK (Mar 11, 2011)

selfbuilt said:


> but I recall some discussion of the clear plastic Nikon lens cap fitting the M40A (i.e. could be used as diffuser).


 
Yes, old Nikon 35mm film camera bodies sometimes came with a translucent body cap which just happens to clip onto the M40A bezel. It stays in place, but it is easily knocked off i.e. it is not securely held. The result is a very diffused beam, a bit like Fenix diffusers. Unfortunately some modern Nikon cameras, if not all, come with a black plastic body cap.


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 12, 2011)

I've managed to find the cache for the missing posts from p.3 - both were by LeifUK, and reproduced below. 



> Written by *LeifUK* on 01-21-2011 11:39 AM GMT
> 
> Good review. I bought the light on the strength of reviews, especially this one. No I won't be coming after you with a big stick and an angry expression. The light is excellent, and the build quality is superb. Clearly the Fenix TK40 can be seen as a direct competitor at a similar price, but this one is shorter, and lighter. I wish the bezel was less prominent as it does shade peripheral light which would be helpful for cross country running. Not a big deal though. And it would be nice to have a diffuser like the Fenix one for the L2D etc which consists of little microprisms or a clip on plastic negative lens. And as you indicate the absence of a case is surprising. I like the presentation which consists of a cardboard box with sponge padding, much better than thick plastic in my opinion if only for environmental reasons but it is easier to open. Oh and I got 1 hour 9 minutes on max using 2xEneloop + 2xPanasonic Infinion. The torch got pretty warm. 4 x Panasonic 2600mAh cells gave just under 1 hour but I think they are worn out.
> 
> These people make very good falshlights (sic). Shame about the smelling pistake.


 


> Written by *LeifUK* on 01-23-2011 01:33 AM GMT
> 
> For what it's worth, a translucent Nikon 35mm camera body cap of the kind that was supplied with a new camera body makes an effective diffuser. It clips on although it is not held very tightly so I would not recommend it for outdoor use. Mine came from an old film camera body and unfortunately it looks as if more recent cameras have non translucent body caps if my D200 is anything to go by.




And that brings this thread back up to being *fully-restored*! :wave:


----------

