# Epic AAA Run-time test (low level only!)



## Beacon of Light (Aug 13, 2010)

​ 
It's midnight, Friday the 13th, so let's do the run-time test of AAA lights. *In search of the AAA run-time king!!!* 

I've always been frustrated no one ever tested/reviewed lights on low, well I am taking care of that here. Inspired by scout24's excellent runtime tests, we may see some familiar faces, but I wanted to add a few new contenders. 

The test itself will start tomorrow as I should be getting a few AAA lights delivered and it would be a shame to start the test without them.

You can ponder who the contenders will be and I will reveal that tomorrow evening. I will mention a few new lights and a couple of ideas like a Zebralight H50 using AAA in a AA shell as well as a Gerber Infinity Ultra in same manner. I got my Peak Eigers so they will be running as well as a couple of other Peak AAA lights.

I will use scout24's idea of using a Quark AA on moon mode as the baseline of when to end the test for a light once it drops equal to that level of light.

Stay tuned, this should be fun!!!

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Group A* AAA runtime (low mode) test results:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Ray S20 *1 hour* @ ??v
Maratac (al) *< 8 hours* @ 1.12v
Liteflux LF2XT *< 8 hours* @ .97v **** unknown reason it turned off prematurely *** (retested in **Group B)*
Fenix E01 *< 11 hours* @ .89v
4Sevens Preon *< 11 hours* @ .91v
Titanium Innovations IlluminaTi XP-G *< 11 hours* @ .91v (strobing slow) 
Maratac (cu) *17-20 hours* @ .86v
4Sevens Preon II *17-20 hours* @ .86v & .60v
Zebralight H50 *20.5 hours* @ 1.10v
Peak Eiger #0 *24+ hours* @ .97v (light dim)
Peak Eiger #Subzero *24+ hours *@ 1.19v (light dim)
iTP A3 *24+ hours* @ 1.10v (light dim)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Group B* AAA runtime (low mode) test results:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Gerber Infinity Ultra **** AAA>AA adapter broke so Infinity Ultra was not tested *** (Retest scheduled)*
Inova Radient 2xAAA *6 hours* @ 1.22v & 1.19v (light dim)
iTP H-01 *< 11 hours* @ .87v
Peak Matterhorn 3-LED SP *11+ hours* @ .99v (light dim)
Peak Eiger #3 *15+ hours* @ 1.14v (light dim)
Peak Matterhorn 3-LED HP *15+ hours* @ 1.16v (light dim)
Peak Matterhorn 1-LED HP *16+ hours* @ 1.16v (light dim)
LumaPower Connexion *14-19 hours* @ 1.13v
Peak Matterhorn 1-LED SP *37+ hours* @ 1.07v (light dim)
Peak Eiger #0 *37+ hours* @ 1.10v (light dim)
Peak Eiger #Subzero *37+ hours* @ 1.11v (light dim)
Liteflux LF2XT *42+ hours* @ .93v (stopped short *LF2XT was the first/earliest winner*)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Group C* AAA runtime (low mode) test results:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Maratac SS *4-9 hours* @ 1.09v 
Gerber Infinity Ultra (Silver) *< 10 hours* @ 1.14v (light dim)
Gerber Infinity Ultra (Black) *< 10 hours* @ 1.15v (light dim)
CMG Infinity (amber LED) *10-16 hours* @ 1.09v
CMG Infinity (black) *43 hours* @ .86v (light dim *CMG Infinity was the previous winner*)
4Sevens Preon ReVO (SS) *43.5 hours* @ .89v (*ReVO is the official AAA Runtime King!!!!*)


----------



## Burgess (Aug 13, 2010)

:sleepy:

(repeat as needed)


----------



## gunga (Aug 13, 2010)

This shoudl be interesting. I'm very curious about these new eigers, looks like a nice higher end alternative to the E01.

To bad peak doesn't make an AA tube for the Eiger eh? Would make a lot of sense...


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 13, 2010)

gunga said:


> This shoudl be interesting. I'm very curious about these new eigers, looks like a nice higher end alternative to the E01.
> 
> To bad peak doesn't make an AA tube for the Eiger eh? Would make a lot of sense...



That would be cool, an Eiger AA battery tube. Kind of what we are waiting for with Neoseikan making an AA tube for the Fenix E01. Maybe we can get Curt to make one for the Eiger since they do all the machining at Peak?


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 13, 2010)

I'll be doing this test using Duraloops so I may have to do a group A and a group B after the first group is done testing, since I have only 12 Duraloop AAAs and I don't want to mix say 12 lights with Duraloops and the other with Tenergy R2U AAAs for obvious reasons.


----------



## gunga (Aug 13, 2010)

Were the last tests done with alkaline or eneloop?

You do risk damage to the cell running it that low you know...


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 13, 2010)

They are new Duraloops and I'll "take one for the team" so to speak if that's the case. I think scout used alkies.


----------



## defloyd77 (Aug 13, 2010)

gunga said:


> This shoudl be interesting. I'm very curious about these new eigers, looks like a nice higher end alternative to the E01.
> 
> To bad peak doesn't make an AA tube for the Eiger eh? Would make a lot of sense...



If I'm not mistaken, the Peak AAA's have identical threading to the Arc AAA, so the Valient Concepts AA body for the Arc should work, it's like 35 dollars though.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 13, 2010)

Was still awake so here's a pic of the *Group A* lights. I have to find my iTP H01 headlamp as I want to see how it compares to the EOS and Maratacs. It will be in *Group B* by default. A few other Peak lights coming tomorrow will be in the second test. Will be able to add the 2xAAA tube to the Peak Eiger #Sub Zero for that in the next test. Should be fun.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 13, 2010)

Any predictions on who will win *Group A*


----------



## PeaceOfMind (Aug 13, 2010)

Looking forward to the results Beacon - it's great when someone is willing to put in the effort to do runtime testing :thumbsup:


----------



## Lumenz (Aug 13, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> Any predictions on who will win *Group A*



I think it will be a close match. However, I think it will be the Peak SubZero that comes out on top. I will check back in a few weeks to see the progress.


----------



## Dances with Flashlight (Aug 13, 2010)

gunga said:


> To bad peak doesn't make an AA tube for the Eiger eh? Would make a lot of sense...



It's called the El Capitan! Same emitter, electronics & range of power levels as in the Eiger - just a larger head and optic sized for the AA tube. I have not yet seen an El Cap in the newer low, low levels but this test is certainly going to raise questions about the runtime that can be had with an AA.


----------



## MWClint (Aug 13, 2010)

defloyd77 said:


> If I'm not mistaken, the Peak AAA's have identical threading to the Arc AAA, so the Valient Concepts AA body for the Arc should work, it's like 35 dollars though.



I have one of those and yes, it works for the Peak Matterhorns, Eigers, Arc AAA and Mcgizmo Sapphire heads. The eigers are sick on 14500 with the valient concepts AA body. It's also VERY easy to turn the Valient Concepts body
into a 2 mode AA twisty. reverse the tailspring and tie it into a resistor. get any low level power u want. it's worth the 35$...very versatile with the eigers. Peak's circuit is great, go tritium like lows with a resistor or run it hi-po with a li-ion.



Dances with Flashlight said:


> It's called the El Capitan! Same emitter, electronics & range of power levels as in the Eiger - just a larger head and optic sized for the AA tube. I have not yet seen an El Cap in the newer low, low levels but this test is certainly going to raise questions about the runtime that can be had with an AA.


El Cap low power runtimes are going to be wicked! no point of ever turning it off. just keep feeding it.


----------



## Flying Turtle (Aug 13, 2010)

Thanks for doing this, Beacon. I very much look forward to your results.

Geoff


----------



## Schuey2002 (Aug 13, 2010)

Like TO, I am getting my  ready....


----------



## bltkmt (Aug 13, 2010)

Cool!


----------



## nanomu (Aug 13, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> Any predictions on who will win *Group A*



Like many of us, I'll be cheering for the new "Subzero", but I have a feeling it's going to be the Fenix E01. Time will tell, I suppose.


----------



## Christoph (Aug 13, 2010)




----------



## Kestrel (Aug 13, 2010)

gunga said:


> Were the last tests done with alkaline or eneloop? You do risk damage to the cell running it that low you know...





Beacon of Light said:


> They are new Duraloops and I'll "take one for the team" so to speak if that's the case.


*IIRC* SilverFox did a little deep-discharge abuse testing of Eneloops/Duraloops not too long ago and concluded that there appeared to be minimal damage from single-cell overdischarge. Two cells in series were considered to be at significantly greater risk due to the possibility of reverse charging the lower of the two cells. FWIW, :shrug:


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 13, 2010)

Good to know but I wasn't worried one bit as I have done several deep discharges in the past without any incidence. heck I still have Eveready Nicad cells from 1991 still usable and they have been through hell over the years.



Kestrel said:


> *IIRC* SilverFox did a little deep-discharge abuse testing of Eneloops/Duraloops not too long ago and concluded that there appeared to be minimal damage from single-cell overdischarge. Two cells in series were considered to be at significantly greater risk due to the possibility of reverse charging the lower of the two cells. FWIW, :shrug:


----------



## defloyd77 (Aug 13, 2010)

nanomu said:


> Like many of us, I'll be cheering for the new "Subzero", but I have a feeling it's going to be the Fenix E01. Time will tell, I suppose.



I have a red Eiger in level 1, it outruns my E01 on NiMH, I'm going to say the Subzero's going to come out on top.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 13, 2010)

defloyd77 said:


> I have a red Eiger in level 1, it outruns my E01 on NiMH, I'm going to say the Subzero's going to come out on top.



I know the Zebralight H50 on AAs will do around 3 days on low. Doing the math that AAA= 1/3 of AA, would mean 24-30 hours on the AAA but Zebralights tend to shut off before batteries are drained, so other than that I'd say the Liteflux LF2XT or the Eiger #Subzero.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 13, 2010)

peak peak peak peak peak!!!!!


----------



## RAGE CAGE (Aug 13, 2010)

locking in on Sub Zero....will check next month for results.


----------



## wyager (Aug 13, 2010)

I'm voting for the peak....


----------



## Darvis (Aug 13, 2010)

My guess is that Curt, Robyn and Mark had better brace themselves for an influx of zero and sub-zero Eiger orders... Just a guess, of course...


----------



## scout24 (Aug 13, 2010)

Beacon-:bow::bow::bow: You da Man!!! Can't wait to see the zero and sub zero times... Is there any way we can see something of a comparative beamshot of the peaks together? Mine were on Coppertops, these should be interesting... off to research Valiant concepts and ElCaps...


----------



## fisk-king (Aug 13, 2010)

scout24 said:


> Beacon-:bow::bow::bow: You da Man!!! Can't wait to see the zero and sub zero times... Is there any way we can see something of a comparative beamshot of the peaks together? Mine were on Coppertops, these should be interesting... off to research Valiant concepts and ElCaps...



Scout let me know if you decide to do a test. I have a El Cap. #0 that I can let you borrow for the test.

Beacon I have an extra Mako that you can borrow for your test as well. PM me if you guys want to include it or not.


----------



## Schuey2002 (Aug 13, 2010)

It would be nice to have a Peak #1 in there just as a comparison....

Just sayin'.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 13, 2010)

Fisk is the Mako a low lumen light? I thought it was a high dollar super bright light.


----------



## fisk-king (Aug 13, 2010)

Nah, it's ~3Lm:thinking:. I think?


----------



## jabe1 (Aug 13, 2010)

My $ is on the sub-zero, but I'd love to see an old single LED Kilimanjaro in there!


----------



## copperfox (Aug 13, 2010)

LF2XT will win.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 13, 2010)

jabe1 said:


> My $ is on the sub-zero, but I'd love to see an old single LED Kilimanjaro in there!



Kilimanjaro is AA though. I will be getting a single LED Matterhorn HP (high power) and single LED Matterhorn SP (standard power) in *Group B*.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 13, 2010)

Run-time test starts @ 10pm!


----------



## jabe1 (Aug 13, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> Kilimanjaro is AA though. I will be getting a single LED Matterhorn HP (high power) and single LED Matterhorn SP (standard power) in *Group B*.



Yeah, I know...AA. Just curious, they have the same light engine as the Matty.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 13, 2010)

Ok and they're off!!! *Group A* got started right at 11pm and hour later than I said, but it's on! 







1 - Eiger #0
2 - Eiger #Subzero
3 - Ray S20
4 - IlluminaTi
5 - Maratac (cu)
6 - Maratac (al)






Q - Quark 1xAA moon mode 

7 - 4Sevens Preon 2
8 - 4Sevens Preon
9 - Fenix E01
10-Liteflux LF2XT
11-Zebralight H50 (AAA)
12-iTP EOS 3-mode upgrade


----------



## Schuey2002 (Aug 13, 2010)

The suspense is killing me!


----------



## linty (Aug 13, 2010)

Wow, I can't wait for the results of this, I was actually in the neighbourhood for a candle style of light to put in my tent as a "on all night" sorta night light. The Zebra looks intriguing.

Maybe off topic, but what are the lumen levels for the low mode for each light? How many lumens would be useful for the scenario above? (sorry is that is jacking a thread, if it is, just disregard)


----------



## Dances with Flashlight (Aug 14, 2010)

linty said:


> Wow, I can't wait for the results of this, I was actually in the neighbourhood for a candle style of light to put in my tent as a "on all night" sorta night light.



A nightlight for a tent! This sounds WAY better than citronella candles.


----------



## Flying Turtle (Aug 14, 2010)

Of course I'm rooting for my beloved LF2XT, but another possible future contender might be the QMini AA using a AAA. It seems to be a good vampire and doesn't suffer from low voltage shutdown as soon as the Zebra H50.

Geoff


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

12AM









1 - Eiger #0
2 - Eiger #Subzero
3 - Ray S20
4 - IlluminaTi
5 - Maratac (cu)
6 - Maratac (al)
Q - Quark 1xAA moon mode 








Q - Quark 1xAA moon mode 

7 - 4Sevens Preon 2
8 - 4Sevens Preon
9 - Fenix E01
10-Liteflux LF2XT
11-Zebralight H50 (AAA)
12-iTP EOS 3-mode upgrade  






Few minutes later the Ray S20 was lower than Quark so I ended it for that so one gone!


----------



## hoongern (Aug 14, 2010)

Nice fingerprints 

Just curious, is over-discharge-protection enabled or disabled on the LF2XT? If you're going to deep discharge the dumb lights (as opposed to the programmable/smart/ODP ones), I guess it should be disabled?


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

Didn't think of that hoongern, I'll have to wait and see, I forget if I have it enabled or not. Actually not sure how deep discharged some will get as I am ending it in the same fashion scout24 did, once the light output is dimmer than the Quark Moon mode.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

Well last night before bed I had to isolate the IlluminaTi as it was making a high pitched whine that got quite annoying. 

This morning when I got up at 7am the LF2XT was out so I think the low voltage cut off was engaged as I was able to turn the light back on and the voltage read .79v which is odd. I will mention the LF2XT was acting flakey with me not able to get the light programmed consistently so the pill may be loose. Question is would something loose like that run down the battery faster than normal even though it was set at minimum?

The other odd thing was the Maratac (al) was out. I put the battery on the LaCrosse charger and it read 1.12 volts which shouldn't have drained that far from 1.33v and more odd is that it would have shut off the light at that voltage level as it should have still been running. 

My other theory is since these are brand new Duraloops that were only topped off in the charger, maybe since they haven't been broken in/cycled, their consistency will be hit or miss, but my experience with Eneloops/Duraloops have been they don't fluctuate that drastically... Comments on this would be appreciated. Not sure if I stop the test now and do the battery refresh cycles on the Duraloops and try again?


----------



## mcnair55 (Aug 14, 2010)

I am eager to see how the Zebra performs,as it has been suggested it maybe my perfect EDC for me.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

So 7am was 8 hours so here are the pics. NOTE: I inadvertently switched the Ray S20 and IlluminaTi on the board as when I removed the IlluminaTi last night due to the whine, when I placed it back up on the board for a pic this morning probably due to me still being half asleep, I put it in the wrong spot, so just reverse the tags.


----------



## mcnair55 (Aug 14, 2010)

See my little bomb proof EO1 is performing like a good un.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 14, 2010)

Man, this is good stuff! 

BOL, I'll bet the batteries that went down in the first few lights would still fire up a few of the contenders here. I'd save them in state for now and put them in some of the long runners here to eliminate the batteries as causers; just for kicks... That said, I would keep the test going unless all lights start to appear to cut out earlier than expected and the batteries are at the same voltage levels as the other ones.

Ayway (insert disclaimer here, bacause I don't know much about a few of these lights, like the liteflux, etc. and I am NOT bashing any lights!!!) one thing that I'm taking away right off the bat is that, for a "when the chips are down" light, I want the most basic twist on/off one level simple circuit light there is. Three levels, clickies, programmability, all great things and all work incredibly well, but they can and do impact reliability from time to time. Now, I am NOT saying that single level twisties don't fail, but the lights I've always had to send back for issues have been ones with extra do dads that make them nice to use lights, but don't necessarily improve the power to LED pathway. So, GO SINGLE LEVEL TWISTIES!!!!

I also think that running a test like this on my own personal stock might be the way to go to ensure the lights I have can go the distance... I've never really tried to see how far my own personal lights have gone... A good smoke test before I get one out for camping and it goes TU on me.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

Darvis said:


> Man, this is good stuff!
> 
> BOL, I'll bet the batteries that went down in the first few lights would still fire up a few of the contenders here. I'd save them in state for now and put them in some of the long runners here to eliminate the batteries as causers. Just for kicks...



You mean put aside those batteries as they may be clunkers? I did recharge them already but they are put to the side.


----------



## nanomu (Aug 14, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> Not sure if I stop the test now and do the battery refresh cycles on the Duraloops and try again?



Maybe throw fresh batteries in the failed lights and put them in a separate group (after diagnosing the LF2XT)? The Maratac at least _should_ be running longer than overnight. From what I've read, the ITP should have exactly the same driver. My eye is on the Cu now to get a sense of what runtime should be for this. 

I do agree that the duraloops should not need breaking in, but I second that I'd love to hear from some battery experts here as to what may be going on with the sudden voltage drops.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

Just checked the lights @ 10am and noticed the IlluminaTi was strobing slowly... Not sure if this is a normal low battery warning or what as I never saw this before.

The Fenix E01 was out as well as the Preon. Something wasn't right so I checked battery voltage levels on my LaCrosse, and the Illuminati was .91v, Preon was .91v, and the Fenix was .89v. Do new LSD NiMh batteries of the Eneloop/Duraloop type normally exhibit this behavior early on until they are broken in? Just seems strange they would drop off this quickly at such a low current. The thing that points me to the batteries is that both Preon and IlluminaTi both had same exact .91 voltage reading and they are fairly similar as far as the emitters and lumens on low.

I just put the Duraloops on a 200mA charge. This is weird and frustrating...

I will mention these Duraloops were from the Schnoop hot deal a month or so ago 12 for $19.99 or something like that. They are the white top Japanese cells, so unless they do need a break in period then I am at a loss.


----------



## hoongern (Aug 14, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> This morning when I got up at 7am the LF2XT was out so I think the low voltage cut off was engaged as I was able to turn the light back on and the voltage read .79v which is odd. I will mention the LF2XT was acting flakey with me not able to get the light programmed consistently so the pill may be loose. Question is would something loose like that run down the battery faster than normal even though it was set at minimum?



HMm, weird, my LF2XT definitely performs better - I've run it for 30hrs+ continuous at 7% level, on a 10440. But I don't know what caused your premature shut off on yours...


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

hoongern said:


> HMm, weird, my LF2XT definitely performs better - I've run it for 30hrs+ continuous at 7% level, on a 10440. But I don't know what caused your premature shut off on yours...



I know I have used the LF2XT as a night light several hours over night on a nightly basis for over a week before. I think the loose pill may have something to do with it as well as the Duraloops not being cycled/broken in?


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

I checked the cardboard packaging and it has a 2008 copyright. Anyone know if there is a date code on Duraloops like Eneloops have?


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

Took pics at 10:30 just to make sure none others died yet. So they are still going but now the battery issue concerns me and I will likely have to redo this whole *Group A* again once I figure out what's going on with the batteries.






L-R: Eiger #0/Eiger#Subzero/Maratac (cu)/Quark






L-R: Quark/Preon 2/ZL H50/iTP EOS


----------



## Darvis (Aug 14, 2010)

I can't imagine why you would need to break in the batteries as I think these LSD's have already gone through a factory refresh before shipping... At this point, I'd let the contenders run, but would definitely think about another test with Alkalines, just to eliminate the batteries as a causer. Maybe they are clunkers, but all of them? That would be really odd. I can see one or two, but all? Maybe they've added some over discharge circuitry?

And yes, I was thinking that you should set aside the batteries that appeared to quit (without recharging them) early to see if they fire up lights like the peaks and others that run longer.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

Darvis said:


> I can't imagine why you would need to break in the batteries as I think these LSD's have already gone through a factory refresh before shipping... At this point, I'd let the contenders run, but would definitely think about another test with Alkalines, just to eliminate the batteries as a causer. Maybe they are clunkers, but all of them? That would be really odd. I can see one or two, but all? Maybe they've added some over discharge circuitry?
> 
> And yes, I was thinking that you should set aside the batteries that appeared to quit (without recharging them) early to see if they fire up lights like the peaks and others that run longer.



maybe this is why they were so cheaply priced, and if they are 2008 batteries they were sitting for over 2 years prior to being used.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 14, 2010)

You got you some Dura-poops...


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

Darvis said:


> You got you some Dura-poops...



haha funny guy~~!~


----------



## RAGE CAGE (Aug 14, 2010)

Beacon- I have read many of the eneloops threads on cpf - I seem to recall individuals have found that the cells reach optimum performance after cycling them approx. 5 times- not sure why- just seems to be the concensus of most observations.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

@1pm (14 hours)







L-R: Eiger #0/Eiger#Subzero/Maratac (cu)/Quark







L-R: Quark/Preon 2/ZL H50/iTP EOS 

I am wondering if perhaps I took out 2 pkgs of AAA's and set them on the floor near the charger and they got mixed in with the ones I charged? That would explain why 4 of the lights died prematurely considering 2 pkgs of Duraloops come 2 to a pkg. All the rest in the test seem to be holding stable and some of the ones that died SHOULD have still been going. Would this be possible if the ones that died were just running on the initial Duracell factory pre-charge that may have been sitting in the packaging for 2 years?


----------



## syncytial (Aug 14, 2010)

Duraloops have an embossed date code, just like Eneloops. See this post.

If your batteries are genuine, I doubt they are defective. The reported stability and consistency of Eneloops/Duraloops has been remarkable, even after years of service or even being stored unused.

If there is a real chance you mixed up cells that were charged with ones that were only partially charged, then the test should be re-run with fully charged cells. If any lights drop out prematurely, isolate the suspect cell and re-run the test on that light with a known good cell, such as one that ran a different light well beyond expectations. The point is to isolate the component that is failing - it could be the light, it could be the battery, it could be your charger, or it could be your methodology.

This is a worthwhile exercise - thanks for doing it!



- Syncytial.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

Thanks for the date code info, it's 8B 02 RV so Feb 2nd of 2008 pretty old for a just bought set of Duraloops. On 200mAh charge level first one charged 814mAh and the others are still on and are around 820 mAh now so it's making more sense these may have gotten mixed up prior to test and didn't get topped off on the charger like I thought they did.


----------



## Schuey2002 (Aug 14, 2010)

I wonder how things would've turned out if you had used alkaline or lithium AAA's??


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

I don't know as I don't use either alkies or lithium sorry. And the lights are still on so hopefully it was just that the light that died prematurely had the batteries that were mixed up that didn't get charged, so I will start those lights tonight at 11pm I will call that *Group AII*


----------



## Linger (Aug 14, 2010)

just a +1 for running the test on Eneloops. Possible methology issues aside, I think its a great battery choice and I appreciate your selecting them.


----------



## Dances with Flashlight (Aug 14, 2010)

Always knew tests such as this, and that by Scout24, were an awful lot of work... but add in all these details and complications, and Wow!

It really is appreciated.


----------



## PoliceScannerMan (Aug 14, 2010)

Dances with Flashlight said:


> Always knew tests such as this, and that by Scout24, were an awful lot of work... but add in all these details and complications, and Wow!
> 
> It really is appreciated.



+1

Love these fun threads!! :thumbsup:


----------



## Burgess (Aug 14, 2010)

to Beacon of Light --


Good work, and thank you for all yer' time and effort.

:thumbsup:



For one bit of comparison data, i can tell you that my* Fenix E01*, 
running an Energizer L92 Lithium Cell, lasted *14 hours* before "dropping".
(i used a Minolta light meter)


Very interesting thread here !

_


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

Thanks guys, this isn't so much work as it is fun. I've been wanting to do this for a long time since I have always wanted to know runtime on low of any lights that are just released and no one ever does the tests on low. Here's hoping guys like Selfbuilt will reconsider and do this crucial test in future reviews.


----------



## ASheep (Aug 14, 2010)

Thanks Beacon for running this test, threads like this are truly great!
I think the reason Selfbuilt doesn't do tests on low very often is because of the time they take, he only has one lightbox setup, and he has too many reviews to do to wait for days of runtime testing on low. I think he has done a few unofficial low runtime tests though, just leaving them on a desk until they die. 

I'm really interested in the Preon 2's runtime, as I have a WW version, and it seems to last forever on low with occasional bursts of high. 

I think those Duraloops were probably not charged properly, I recently got a free pack of duraloops from a supermarket (they had them mis-labelled in stock, and I complained, so the manager gave them to me free with the rest of my order), they were marked as 2008 production, and performed quite badly for the first 2 cycles, now they are the same as my other eneloops... go figure...

Thanks again for doing this excellent test!


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

ASheep said:


> I'm really interested in the Preon 2's runtime, as I have a WW version, and it seems to last forever on low with occasional bursts of high.
> 
> I think those Duraloops were probably not charged properly, I recently got a free pack of duraloops from a supermarket (they had them mis-labelled in stock, and I complained, so the manager gave them to me free with the rest of my order), they were marked as 2008 production, and performed quite badly for the first 2 cycles, now they are the same as my other eneloops... go figure...
> 
> Thanks again for doing this excellent test!



Well the Preon 2 bit the dust. So did the Maratac (cu). Batteries on Maratac was .86v as well as one of the other Preon, but one of the other Preons were at .60v (Preon II takes 2xAAA batteries for those not familiar with the light)... 

Asheep you may be right about needing a few cycles for them to perform optimally, as I said I havent even done a complete cycle I basically took them fresh out of the packaging and put it on the Lacrosse charger till it read FULL, and it was charged at 700mAh to get them done quicker which was another reason why the test was an hour delayed initially.

Here they are at 7pm (20hours)






Eiger #0 and #Subzero are hanging in there even with the Duraloops not performing optimally. The iTP looks ok so I will check on the hour to see if it bit the dust.






Preon 2 bit the dust and it is definitely something with the batteries as one read .86v and the other .60v once put on the charger. 

The Zebralight seems to be running strong, so we will call this first test an unofficial test and will wind up re-doing the whole batch once I get the Duraloops refreshed.


----------



## fisk-king (Aug 14, 2010)

Schuey2002 said:


> I wonder how things would've turned out if you had used alkaline or lithium AAA's??




the lithium would be better because of the maH capacity I think. here


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

With batteries being iffy I am checking every half hour now. At 7:30pm The Zebralight was off (AAA in the H50 read as 1.10v which seems pretty high for shutoff but maybe that's Zebralight's way of protecting the battery) and the Eiger #0 is dimmer than the Eiger #Subzero now. Ironically the iTP EOS is still running and still as bright as the #Subzero.






L-R: Eiger #0/Eiger #Subzero/iTP EOS/Quark


----------



## RAGE CAGE (Aug 14, 2010)

good look at the diffusing material used in the Eiger #0 - medium head correct?- def. does not look to me like the narrow or wide.
Sub 0 is looking like a good EDC low low consideration.
Thanks for using the Duraloops.


----------



## Schuey2002 (Aug 14, 2010)

How many lumens do the Eiger #0 and #Subzero put out on fresh bats?


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

Schuey2002 said:


> How many lumens do the Eiger #0 and #Subzero put out on fresh bats?



In my thread in the Peak subforum I have pics comparing the Zebralight H50 which seems fairly close in beam size and brightness on low as the #Subzero, the #0 is brighter and I didn't actually compare it to other lights but I would say maybe a little brighter than the others tested here in low like the iTP A3 EOS, IlluminaTi, Maratacs etc.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

Well it's 11pm 24 hours since the test started, albeit without me breaking in the batteries but anyways here they are 24 hours later:






L-R: Eiger #0/Eiger #Subzero/iTP EOS A3/Quark

I think I will stop this now so I can charge up the batteries and start a new test.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 14, 2010)

Voltages were 1.19 for the Eiger #Subzero, 1.10 for the iTP A3 and .97 for the Eiger #0


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 15, 2010)

Well I was asked to compile results since this was 4 pages (I have mine to show maximum amount of threads per page so I only see this thread as 2 pages) so here it is.

Ray S20 - 1 hour - ??v
Maratac (al) - < 8 hours -1.12v
LF2XT - < 8 hours - .97v
Fenix E01 - < 11 hours - .89v
Preon - < 11 hours -.91v
IlluminaTi (strobing slow) - < 11 hours - .91v
Maratac (cu) 17-20 hours - .86v
Preon 2 - 17-20 hours - .86v & .60v
Zebralight H50 - 20.5 hours - 1.10v
Eiger #0 - 24+ hours (ended test prematurely) - .97v 
Eiger #Subzero - 24+ hours (ended test prematurely) - 1.19v 
iTP A3 - 24+ hours (ended test prematurely) - 1.10v


----------



## Darvis (Aug 15, 2010)

Beacon, this is great! I'm really thinking I need an Eiger subzero now. I was on the cusp as the #1's have been doing me fine, but this has me convinced.


----------



## scout24 (Aug 15, 2010)

Beacon- :twothumbs I've always been curious about the performance of rechargables, much appreciated!!! :goodjob:


----------



## mcnair55 (Aug 15, 2010)

Thanks for your efforts from Bill in the UK,glad to see my every day EDC the A3 EOS doing so well.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 15, 2010)

I was just looking through some of the runtimes on this test and then going back over my notes for when I was getting ready to order my set of #1 Eigers. I had used the data that Curt had posted on RMSK and calculated runtimes based on using a 1.2v Eneloop AAA.

My math showed the #1 running 13hrs to 50% @ an average of 5.25 lumens

Annnndddd: The *#0 running* *18hrs to 50%* @ an average of 3 lumens: This appears to be pretty close to when the #0 in your test started to look much dimmer.

That said, I ran the numbers on the AA's (El Caps) and found that a #2 would run 23hrs to 50%, the #1 would do 38hrs and the #0 would do 53hrs @ 12, 8, and 3 lumens respectively.

I add that in as I think the VCE Arc AA adapter would yeild the longer runtimes with the Eiger heads...

Man, I love these low level runtime tests!


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 16, 2010)

What I didn't mention is I redid the entire test and still saw some flakey results with the LF2XT dying quickly again but the voltage was higher this time, same with the Maratacs not reaching near their 50 hour runtime, and the odd thing is the iTP sort of kicked the Maratacs *** both times. I basically started the 2nd retest at Midnight Saturday evening/Sunday morning. The iTP was still on last night at 2AM before I went to bed. At 7am it was flashing, while the Maratacs were off completely by 7pm the night before. 

The Preon was disappointing being off before reaching 12 hours, the Preon 2 lasted a bit longer, the Fenix E01 is either a dud or coincidently gets the funky cells both times as it was also off within 12 hours. 

The H50 with AAA cell lasted about the same as the first time 20-21 hours before it shut off. It would power up though surprisingly enough and stay lit. I believe it had 1.19v but don't quote me.

After these frustrating results I decided to do a refresh cycle on the Duraloops with 2 of my Lacrosse chargers. I will do another test but won't spend the time posting here especially if I still get funky results. I may post the conclusion though like this time. 

I may only test the lights that are not making sense, like the Preon (unless these really only get about 11 hours instead of the 22 hours they are supposed to get), the Maratac falling well short of half their advertised runtime on low, which is odd as the iTP is at least resembling it's advertised runtime on low, and it is odd that the iTP and Maratacs aren't performing similarly based on reports they are the same lights manufactured by iTP with just cosmetic differences in knurling etc, the LF2XT should be running near a week and I can't get it to get past 12 hours even, and the Fenix E01, where 11 hours is a stretch and scout24 got over 100 hours with the thing. 

The Eigers were the longest running though even in this flakey test. They were both still running this morning but the #0 was pretty dim, while the #Subzero still looked brighter at 7am than the #0 looked at 7pm last evening.

I also ordered 2 Maha C9000 Wizard One chargers from Thomas Distributing, so I will see if using that charger may help cycling these batteries to obtain more consistent results. If after cycling with both Lacrosse and the Wizard One and if I STILL get flakey results, it would mean either the batteries are trash, or the manufacturers are making crap up with runtimes on low. If the latter I will go ballistic!!!


----------



## Darvis (Aug 16, 2010)

Beacon, I have a few E01's, a preon and a a few #1 peaks. Just to corroborate what you're seeing, I'll run a refresh on some eneloops and run an unofficial runtime test on those units. I have quark, so I'll use the moonlight as a check. I can't upload pictures for some reason, but will keep track of what I see, etc. I'll get that rolling tomorrow after i charge up the eneloops.


----------



## crizyal (Aug 16, 2010)

I wanted to express my gratitude for your efforts here. :thumbsup: Even with hiccups you have incountered, I find this very interesting. I have most of the lights you are testing in group A, and have always wondered if the low runtimes were accurate. I am also glad to see the Duraloops being used, as that is my primary power source for these lights with the exception of the LF2XT which I use Li-Ion. I wil continue to follow this thread with great interest.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 16, 2010)

I also took off 4 Duraloops that completed the refresh cycle. Since that involved it charging to full and then doing a slower discharge and charge and discharge repeatedly till it was optimized, that should have formed the batteries properly, effectively getting them broken in correct? They all read 800+ mAh so they should be good to go correct? I will test the problem lights and see if their results change. I'm most interested in the E01, Maratacs, Preons and the LF2XT since they seem so off from what they are "supposed" to be able to do on low mode. The other 4 Duraloops are still being refreshed and I am at work now but they should also be done when I return later tonight.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 16, 2010)

Beacon,

At 4:30 pm ET, I had 4 refreshed eneloops reading 1.46 volts off the charger @ 800+ mah each

I fired up the following:

Fenix E01
Peak Eiger #1 Luxeon
Peak Eiger #1 XP-G
Ti Preon on low
Quark on moonlight for comparison

I'm doing this to see if I at least get similar results on the E01 and Preon as you did with the same batteries. The Peaks are for kicks, but it will be interesting to see how the Luxeon does vs. the Cree.

Will keep you posted


----------



## Zendude (Aug 16, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> I also took off 4 Duraloops that completed the refresh cycle. Since that involved it charging to full and then doing a slower discharge and charge and discharge repeatedly till it was optimized, that should have formed the batteries properly, effectively getting them broken in correct? They all read 800+ mAh so they should be good to go correct? I will test the problem lights and see if their results change. I'm most interested in the E01, Maratacs, Preons and the LF2XT since they seem so off from what they are "supposed" to be able to do on low mode. The other 4 Duraloops are still being refreshed and I am at work now but they should also be done when I return later tonight.




I too, want to say thanks for doing this.:twothumbs

I think part of the discrepancy is est. runtime for some of those lights are based on Alkies(which I believe are rated at ~1200mAh).


----------



## defloyd77 (Aug 16, 2010)

Zendude said:


> I think part of the discrepancy is est. runtime for some of those lights are based on Alkies(which I believe are rated at ~1200mAh).



This is exactly right. The E01, which you got 11 hours from sounds textbook for NiMH, if you want those insane moon mode runtimes, you have to do alkaline, NiMH and lithiums will give you better sun mode, but then drop like a brick. The simple sad fact is, your results reflect exactly what I thought was going to happen and why I don't give lights like the iTP much credit when they boast these ludicrous "50 hour" runtimes. I don't at all feel your tests were flawed due to the Duraloops, between your 2 tests, the numbers look consistent, I don't think you did anything wrong here.

I think the lessons to be learned, don't believe in stated runtimes, simplicity reigns supreme (the simple 1 mode unregulated Eigers) and although they suck in high drain applications, alkalines are going to give you really huge runtime numbers in lights such as these.

Thanks for doing these tests and also for your part in bringing the #0 and Sub Zero into the flashaholic world.

Now, where's that Mortal Kombat guy? "Sub Zero wins. Flawless victory."


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 16, 2010)

The Duraloops I took off tonight were at 1.49v 868mAh/1.49v 861mAh/1.48v 833mAh so I will try these in the E01 with ther 833mAh and the 861 and 868 in the 2 Maratacs.



Darvis said:


> Beacon,
> 
> At 4:30 pm ET, I had 4 refreshed eneloops reading 1.46 volts off the charger @ 800+ mah each
> 
> ...


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 16, 2010)

I guess the alkie vs NiMH is the area I overlooked. I didn't realize alkaline AAAs were rated at 1200mAh. That would explain the extra runtimes then. I thought it was odd though as I thought NiMH had longer runtimes in general at least for AA lights, but maybe that applies to high modes which would make sense as high modes are high drain and that is where NiMh batteries should excell.

I think I will let the Eigers both go until they die so I can get an idea of total runtime before failure. Very impressed that they are the runtime leaders so far. 



defloyd77 said:


> This is exactly right. The E01, which you got 11 hours from sounds textbook for NiMH, if you want those insane moon mode runtimes, you have to do alkaline, NiMH and lithiums will give you better sun mode, but then drop like a brick. The simple sad fact is, your results reflect exactly what I thought was going to happen and why I don't give lights like the iTP much credit when they boast these ludicrous "50 hour" runtimes. I don't at all feel your tests were flawed due to the Duraloops, between your 2 tests, the numbers look consistent, I don't think you did anything wrong here.
> 
> I think the lessons to be learned, don't believe in stated runtimes, simplicity reigns supreme (the simple 1 mode unregulated Eigers) and although they suck in high drain applications, alkalines are going to give you really huge runtime numbers in lights such as these.
> 
> ...


----------



## wyager (Aug 16, 2010)

defloyd77 said:


> simplicity reigns supreme (the simple 1 mode unregulated Eigers)


One particularly important reason for this is that a PWM regulation microcontroller sucks anywhere from 6-10mA most of the time (that's with an ideal picoPower AVR, which are essentially the most efficient at 8mhz. If they're using a different micro at high speeds, it could suck even more.). As I said, depending on the design it could suck even more than that. That means that it's sucking as much as the LED, maybe more, on low mode. With the peak, you don't have to worry about that as it's only 1 mode, linear regulated (or not regulated at all?).


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 16, 2010)

This give me reason to want an Ultra Low dedicated light even further. One of the reasons I have several E01s were based on the fact it gives 11 sun and 10 moon mode hours. I guess I recharge batteries more frequently to never get to moon mode in that light, so I never noticed until this test it just dies on NiMH before it ever gets to moon mode (that's disappointing in itself). I like the Eigers and how they slowly dim, which is what I was expecting from the E01.



defloyd77 said:


> The E01, which you got 11 hours from sounds textbook for NiMH, if you want those insane moon mode runtimes, you have to do alkaline, NiMH and lithiums will give you better sun mode, but then drop like a brick.


----------



## Sir Lightalot (Aug 16, 2010)

Ya, the LF2XT seems off as Im pretty sure that someone tested the preceding LF2x and got 2 weeks or something crazy like that. But it was probably with alkies. At theses low drive currents, they would prevail. 

Also the FUI of the LF2XT defaults at 1% low not .2%. It looked like minimum from the pics though so its probably good.

PS, If you haven't changed it yet low voltage cutoff on the LF2XT is 4C+H.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 16, 2010)

This has been extremely educational. I had never really considered the different discharge curves between the types of batteries before, as well, and had always thought I wanted heavily regulated lights-but that's not the case anymore. 

It's not to say I'll stop using NIMH, no way! It's just that I'll make sure to have a healthy supply of lithium primaries on hand for the times when I may need light for a loooonnng time without any surprises. I'll keep some alkaleaks around as well since these are not high drain lights...

This also endears my peaks to me even more... I now have a valiant concepts Arc AA conversion body enroute for really insane runtimes and I'm glad to have scored some of the last Matterhorns from RMSK! I'll be ordering me a pair of those Eiger/Beacon specials as well (subzero!!!)

Anyhow, 5 hours into my runtime test and all 4 lights are holding steady. The 2 peaks are at simlilar brightness levels to each other and both the E01 and Preon are looking good. Not much has changed at this point.

One last thing to mention, not one of the lights is even the slightest bit warm to the touch, even after 5 hours of continuous on....


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 16, 2010)

yeah the only one out of the lights that got incredibly hot was the Ray S20, but that thing is putting out like 180 lumens or something crazy from a single AAA. I told them if they made that light with a moon mode instead of 180 lumens I'd buy it, or at least a 2 mode moon/low or medium


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 16, 2010)

Sir Lightalot said:


> Ya, the LF2XT seems off as Im pretty sure that someone tested the preceding LF2x and got 2 weeks or something crazy like that. But it was probably with alkies. At theses low drive currents, they would prevail.
> 
> Also the FUI of the LF2XT defaults at 1% low not .2%. It looked like minimum from the pics though so its probably good.
> 
> PS, If you haven't changed it yet low voltage cutoff on the LF2XT is 4C+H.



perhap I am remembering incorrectly as I thought minimum on the LF2XT was .2% or perhaps I am thinking of reading someone that said it may be equivalent to .2 lumens?


----------



## Darvis (Aug 17, 2010)

Well, I'm 8 hours into my run at this point and all 4 lights are still where they were at the onset (I've been comparing visually and through side by side photos as well) I really don't expect much action until they start to hit the 10-13 hour mark anyway.

Going to call it a night for now, we'll see what morning brings.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 17, 2010)

Darvis, great and here's hoping they're still going in the morning.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 17, 2010)

So here's what I have:

11 hours in:

*The Preon has shut* down and the battery is at 1.15v (I find this a bit high voltage-wise, but it's definitely off at the 11 hour mark as was yours)

The E01 is definitely in moon mode

The Eiger #1 XP-G is still at full brightness

The Eiger Luxeon has dimmed but is noticably still brighter than the E01




So, I head back to bed and now it's 15 hours in:

*The E01 has shut down*. My guess is that it did not go much longer than 12 hours tops like yours, the battery measures .87v

Both Eigers are still going

The Luxeon has dimmed slightly since the 11 hour mark

The XP-G is now at half brightness and is noticably brighter than the Luxeon.

I'll let these two guys keep going.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 17, 2010)

Ok so this is confirmed then the difference is that Fenix did use specs from alkies to to quote runtimes. I guess I learned something out of this and I guess I'm disappointed in NiMH batteries low performance compared to alkies.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 17, 2010)

Darvis said:


> So here's what I have:
> 
> 11 hours in:
> 
> ...



Isn't the Preon rated for 23 hours on low? 11 hours is a huge difference. 

It's good to see the Eigers performing so well. They are becoming my new favorite.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 17, 2010)

Ok since the Connexion and Connexion 2 were one of the first multi-mode lights I purchased, their quoted specs were burned into my head:


Output/Runtime(_100% to 50%_): 
(Alkaline): 100 lumens/35 minutes, 25 lumens/7+ hours, 4 lumens/*71+ hours*. 
(Energizer E2 Lithium): 100 lumens/94 minutes, 25 lumens/8 hours, 4 lumens/80 hours.
(NiMh 2700mah): 100 lumens/110 minutes, 25 lumens/7 hours, 4 lumens/*70 hours*.
(Li-Ion 14500): 120 lumens/95 minutes, 28 lumens/7+ hours, 6 lumens/40+ hours 

I know the alkie shows 1 more hour +, but I guess when I was a newbie I saw those figures as being roughly the same output, so I always thought with the ever increasing higher capacity NiMH cells, they were superior in capacity to regular alkies. Would this be a case where Lumapower is rating the 71 hours + fairly conservatively and not including say 20-30 more hours on moon mode?


----------



## Darvis (Aug 17, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> Isn't the Preon rated for 23 hours on low? 11 hours is a huge difference.
> 
> It's good to see the Eigers performing so well. They are becoming my new favorite.


 
It appears that all of the long ratings are alkaline based... either long declining, or run in regulation then long moon mode.

The moral to me is that if you're running nimh's in your low level EDC, do your own tests as the runtimes will not match the advertised specs!

The Eigers appear to be regulated somewhat, not sure if it's true regulation, or just the flatter dischare curve of the eneloops, but they definitely have a nice smooth run to them!


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 17, 2010)

yes it is a flatter curve. I prefer this to straight regulation and then DEAD, which is what I don't care about with Zebralights since I use those the most often.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 17, 2010)

I am now 17.5 hours into the run.

The Luxeon Eiger is now dimmer than the the Quark in moon mode, but not by much

The XP-G is just slightly brighter than the Quark in moon mode. The greater efficiency of the XP-G is now apparent to me at the bitter end of this run test

Both would still be of value in any pitch black environment

I'm going to let them go to off and measure voltage frome there. My guess is that they'll get to about 19-20 hours total run with the eneloops

I am VERY impressed with the Eigers, primarily because I feel these lights will give one some very useful runtime with no surprises... on any chemistry!

The E01 definitely had some moon mode runtime after it dropped out of regulation, but not much before it shut down. Overall, a very impressive run from the E01, though. I will always have a few of these on tap.

The preon appears to have simply shut off once it hit whatever limit with the nimh. I'm curious if alkalines would allow it to run and then decline gracefully? Might have to try this next.

Beacon, I think with these results, we can confirm your tests were a valid representation of performance on NIMH's and it looks like your duraloops are not faulty at all. This has been a real eye opener for me, thanks again for you efforts!!! I can't wait to see what the next test batch shows.

*Edit:* I just dropped a fresh alki into my preon for kicks, (10am ET) I won't give the blow by blow, but will report back on whether it surpasses the 11 hour mark. I think Scout24 may have already tested this, I'm just curious to see if mine goes the distance.


----------



## Zendude (Aug 17, 2010)

Ok, I've decided to jump in with you guys.:wave:

The difference is I'm using Kirkland Signature AAA Alkies dated March 2014.

The contenders:

Fenix E01
Quark MiNi AA
ZL H50b
ZL H501

At the 14hr mark all lights are still running. The E01 is going into moon mode.

As an aside, IIRC there were two different flavors of the E01. It had to do with the emitter output. I don't recall if this affected runtime but I know mine has a lower output than the two I got for my girls.:shrug:

UPDATE:

By the standards set by BOL the E01 light output fell below the moon mode of a Quark AA @ ~15hrs and the Quark mini was starting to dim.

At 15.5hrs the mini matched the E01. 

At 16.25hrs the mini was BARELY on so I stopped it. The battery was at .61V.

ZL lights still going strong.

UPDATE#2: 

At 24hrs the E01 is still putting out some useful light(easily enough to read a map). I checked the battery: 358mV! Voltage was rebounding as I measured it. I put it back in and it fired right up.

ZL lights are still going strong.


UPDATE#3:

ZL H50b: At ~27hrs I found it doing a slow irregular strobe. It looked like SOS spaced far apart. I checked the battery and it showed 1.07V, called it done.

ZL H501: I checked at 34hrs and it was still good. At 36hrs it was dead. Battery was at 1.08V.

E01: Still kickin in moon mode at 42.5hrs! Voltage is holding steady at .37V


----------



## scout24 (Aug 17, 2010)

Darvis, Yes I did, but I'm curious as to what brand of cell you are using. I have followed this enthusiastically, I just do not have any smaller rechargable cells. Only 123's. I may have to remedy that, I like some of these times... I'm going to call for a Sub Zero and try my favorite coppertops in there... Thank you guys for all the work on this!


----------



## Darvis (Aug 17, 2010)

So here's my final update @ 23 hours with the 2 Eigers left standing.

Both are clearly below the Quark on moon mode at this point.

The Eiger #1 Luxeon is what I would call at tritium level. You can clearly see the glow in dark room and maybe get some super dim light in a totally dark environment, maybe even read a map, but it would be a stretch. I think this thing would glow for a few more hours, but I'm counting it out @ 21 hours to be honest. The last two hours were really just interesting to watch.

The Eiger #1 XP-G... Downright impressive. I'd say it's about 0.01 lumens at this point. I took into a completely dark room, and I could make out rough detail. Would this thing perform in any type of ambient light? No way, but I'd say it went an honest 22.5 hours on the eneloop.

Both eneloops were at exactly .97 volts when I pulled them at the 23 hour mark!!! These things are literally just sipping from those AAA's, the sub zero must be a battery camel!!! Can you imagine what these things will do with an arc adapter and a AA? Man....

Scout, I've got an energizer AAA alkaline in the Preon at the moment *Update: See post #117 for results*

Here's my summary (all lights tested with fresh AAA eneloops)

Fenix E01 <12 hours @ .87v final (light off)
Ti Single AAA Preon <11 hours @ 1.15v final (light off)
Eiger #1 Luxeon <21 hours @ .97v final (light dim)
Eiger #1 XP-G <23 hours @ .97v final (light dim)

Both Eigers were at a lower output level than the Quark (18hrs Luxeon) & (20hrs XP-G) based on the original outlines for the test. If the quark on moon happens to be the lowest low that you can live with, then the #1 Eigers will only get you this far with an eneloop.


----------



## Sir Lightalot (Aug 17, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> perhap I am remembering incorrectly as I thought minimum on the LF2XT was .2% or perhaps I am thinking of reading someone that said it may be equivalent to .2 lumens?



The lowest it can go is indeed .2% but its not set to it by default in the FUI.
If you were using the CUI though, then you're on minimum for sure.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 17, 2010)

Sir Lightalot said:


> The lowest it can go is indeed .2% but its not set to it by default in the FUI.
> If you were using the CUI though, then you're on minimum for sure.



I was in CUI and I did have it programmed for minimum. Don't recall if I had the low voltage cut off engaged or not I don't remember changing that.


----------



## defloyd77 (Aug 17, 2010)

Darvis said:


> he Eigers appear to be regulated somewhat, not sure if it's true regulation, or just the flatter dischare curve of the eneloops, but they definitely have a nice smooth run to them!



The Eigers are actually unregulated, what you're seeing is behavior in NiMH cells. That's truly the secret behind the long runtime of these Eigers and other runtime greats such as the Gerber Infinity Ultra, 1 mode, no regulation, nothing more than what's needed to boost voltage. This is why lights like the Preon failed, the complexity of their circuits hinders their performance with all of those modes, PWM etc.

I'd like to go somewhat off topic and mention a thread on the Marketplace, the "4Sevens E01 style light" thread, you will notice how much I emphasize the importance of such a light being only one mode, I really hope now it's clear as to why.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 17, 2010)

defloyd77 said:


> The Eigers are actually unregulated, what you're seeing is behavior in NiMH cells. That's truly the secret behind the long runtime of these Eigers and other runtime greats such as the Gerber Infinity Ultra, 1 mode, no regulation, nothing more than what's needed to boost voltage. This is why lights like the Preon failed, the complexity of their circuits hinders their performance with all of those modes, PWM etc.
> 
> I'd like to go somewhat off topic and mention a thread on the Marketplace, the "4Sevens E01 style light" thread, you will notice how much I emphasize the importance of such a light being only one mode, I really hope now it's clear as to why.


 
defloyd, thanks for confirming that and I'm going to have a look at that thread. I can sincerely say that I'm now a true convert/believer in single mode simple!!!

On that note, at exactly 11 hours, the Preon shut down. It was feeding on an energizer alkaline AAA... And that folks, is all she wrote.


----------



## wantsusa (Aug 17, 2010)

hrm now that you guys have tested the AAA lights...and found the big difference in NiMH vs Alkies I wonder if that holds true for the AA lights like Quark AA and it's runtime of 10 days stated in moon mode. (someone had to have tested this before right?)


----------



## wyager (Aug 17, 2010)

wantsusa said:


> hrm now that you guys have tested the AAA lights...and found the big difference in NiMH vs Alkies I wonder if that holds true for the AA lights like Quark AA and it's runtime of 10 days stated in moon mode. (someone had to have tested this before right?)


With two AAs, it claims 30 days moonlight mode.

Has this been tested?


----------



## ama230 (Aug 17, 2010)

wyager said:


> With two AAs, it claims 30 days moonlight mode.
> 
> Has this been tested?



I'd also love to see this as I have been eye'n this for my first XP-G light as the claims are out right crazy... Also like the modes and the form factor as the tactical looks awesome. Also would like to see the one of the Icon lights in this test, maybe the Icon Rogue 1AA as Paul Kim has definitely done a great job on design but would like to know the claims. Hell I'll do and post it, just to see as a comparison to the field.

Change as I hope you guys don't mind me adding to this.

I am going to be testing three lights:

Here's is the beam shots @ the start... The Icon Rogue 1AA(Left) Icon Solo 2AAA(Middle) Fenix E01 1AAA(Right)






Test with 1aa Icon rogue 1AA - Semi fresh (charged approximately 20days ago) Tenergy 1AA R2U LSD 2300mah battery.
Running on low mode (battery measured 1.30V before test started)

Test started @ 8:21Pm on 08/17/2010

Test Ended @ ??:?? on 08/??/2010



Test with Icon Solo 2AAA - Semi fresh (charged approximately 20days ago) Tenergy 2AAA R2U LSD 1000mah batteries
Running on low mode (batteries measured 1.31V before test started)

Test started @ 8:21PM on 08/21/2010

Test Ended @ ??:?? on 08/??/2010


Test with Fenix E01 1AAA - Semi fresh (charged approximately 20days ago) Tenergy 1AAA R2U LSD 1000mah battery.
Running on single mode (battery measured 1.31V before test started)

Test started @ 8:21PM on 08/21/2010

Test Ended @ ??:?? on 08/??/2010

Thanks for all the great work guys as this is really helpful and educational.lovecpf


----------



## Darvis (Aug 17, 2010)

I'll tell you what, I own about 5 quarks and have the 2xAA and 1xAA tubes. I have both the R2 and XP-G versions as well. I have an Arc AA Adapter on the way for the peak head. I'll open a new thread in a few days and kick off a test... I gotta figure out why I can't upload pictures as well. I may have just have to do this the same way I ran the AAA tests and old school describe it. Anyway, I can drop some eneloops in and let's say single AA R2 vs XP-G vs Eiger AA XP-G? I don't have any other AA lights I would consider contenders for super duper runtimes... Anyway, like I said, a few days and I'll take this one on.


----------



## Dances with Flashlight (Aug 17, 2010)

Judging by the intense interest in these great tests, this thread will have a very, very long life. But in the interest of clarity - since some readers may not realize which particular lights take which particular batteries - might it not be best if a new thread were started for the AA testing?


----------



## Darvis (Aug 17, 2010)

Agreed.


----------



## defloyd77 (Aug 18, 2010)

Well, it seems as if everyone's pitching in with tests, I am working (mentally as of right now, don't know when I'll have the time) on a AAA test for me to do, but it'll have a curveball. Peak Eiger, level 1 with a red rebel, Fenix E01, iTP EOS, 4Sevens MiNi AA on AAA, Gerber Firecracker on AAA, I think that's all I have that'll do 1AAA, I'll add more if I find it. I don't have a camera, so I will be doing comparisons to the Quark AA on both moon and low. Now for the fun but somewhat difficult curveball I spoke of earlier, throughout the entire test, I will at random times (I'm hoping hourly, I don't know) turn each light off for 15 seconds and switch it back on, failing to light back up gets the light a disqualification. After all, who leaves their lights on for the entire runtime?

I'll be doing NiMH first, alkalines, due to the nature of my test, will be a PITA with the long runtimes and the (hopefully) hourly on off elimination test, but I do have chronic insomnia


----------



## Burgess (Aug 18, 2010)

to Darvis --


http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/faq.php?faq=vb3_reading_posting#faq_vb3_attachments



This oughta' answer yer' questions about Posting Photos on CPF.


_


----------



## Dances with Flashlight (Aug 18, 2010)

defloyd77 said:


> I do have chronic insomnia



You're going to need it!


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 18, 2010)

Ok so since my first *Group A* batch turned out more sucessful than I first thought, I bring to you *Group B*.







The picture is self explanatory with the lights chosen. The Matterhorn SP=Standard Power (think of it as low) and HP=High Power. Only the top 2 Matterhorns have 3-LEDs.

On the right side is a blast from the past with a plastic Inova T-I forget the name of it. It runs 2xAAA but I seem to remember the claims of only 11 or 13 hours. The Connexion original should be interesting. It is running on an AAA cell. The Infinity Ultra is also running on a AAA cell. Then we are going to try the LF2XT again, and to round up the group is the new iTP H-01 headlamp.

The test started right around 1:45am


----------



## defloyd77 (Aug 18, 2010)

Inova Radiant. Looking forward to your results, thanks again.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 18, 2010)

Burgess, thanks!!

Beacon, you da man!!!


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 18, 2010)

Radient is right. I still thought it was an R-## to differentiate it from other Radient series.


----------



## RAGE CAGE (Aug 18, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> Ok so this is confirmed then the difference is that Fenix did use specs from alkies to to quote runtimes. I guess I learned something out of this and I guess I'm disappointed in NiMH batteries low performance compared to alkies.


 

I still will prefer NiMH because I don't worry about leakage....unlike the dreaded alkaline leaking cell suprise that will really f up a light (I know- don't store your lights with the cells in them) but sometimes you just have to- like in the car BOB etc.

Kudo's to you and Darvis for this test.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 18, 2010)

Also here are the pics of when the test started @ 1:30-1:45am:






L-R: High Power 3-LED Matterhorn / Standard Power 3-LED Matterhorn / High Power 1-LED Matterhorn / Standard Power 1-LED Matterhorn






L-R: Eiger #3 / Eiger #0 / Eiger #Subzero






L-R: Inove Radient / Lumapower Connexion / Gerber Infinity Ultra / Liteflux LF2XT / iTP H-01 headlamp






Groupshot L-R is same sequence as above.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 18, 2010)

Last night when I checked last I disqualified the Infinity Ultra just because it had a defective AAA to AA adapter. The bottom fell out of the plastic shell and it works intermittently. 

*[Side Note: If anyone knows of a place to get them cheap let me know. DX used to have 8 packs of them but it says out of stock, and when they are out of stock they NEVER get the item back.]*

Well this morning at 7:45 all lights (except Infinity Ultra) were running. The Inova Radient was dimmer than the Quark AA on moon mode (not shown) so I called it at 6 hours for Radient. The 3-LED SP was dimmer and getting close to the Quark. Everything else seemed pretty bright. It's good to see the flaky results of the LF2XT is behaving itself this time. I loosened & tightened the tail section so not sure if that made a difference or not?

Here are the pictures at 7:45am:






L-R: 3-LED HP Matterhorn / 3-LED SP Matterhorn






L-R: 1-LED HP Matterhorn / 1-LED SP Matterhorn






L-R: Eigers #3 / #0 /#Subzero






L-R: Radient / Connexion






L-R: LF2XT / H-01


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 18, 2010)

Darvis said:


> defloyd, thanks for confirming that and I'm going to have a look at that thread. I can sincerely say that I'm now a true convert/believer in single mode simple!!!
> 
> On that note, at exactly 11 hours, the Preon shut down. It was feeding on an energizer alkaline AAA... And that folks, is all she wrote.



Don't forget to check out the thread I started asking 4Sevens for an Ultra Low dedicated low level AAA light and a poll so you can give input.

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=233237


----------



## Darvis (Aug 18, 2010)

Thanks Beacon, I went ahead and put my vote in for an endurance champ. 

I don't know what has happened to me... When I first joined CPF, I was a regulated lumen chaser and now... I think you've damaged me forever.

All I'm intersted in are low level runtime champs. These "watch the grass grow" tests are awesome. I find myself rushing home to catch the latest status.

That said, my brand new old stock matterhorn grab bag package arrived from RMSK last night. I now have a nice selection of single and triple Matty's in the stable. And he even had the old style triples with the individual housings for each LED, plus a sweet stainless single!! Man, are they nice lights!!!


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 18, 2010)

Yes, Darvis, when I joined here the hype was bigger and brighter and that was back when the Infinity Ultra and Ultra G's were fairly new. I bought a few lights based on hype before I realized I want longer runtime and I prefer lower output for outdoors even. It's great for watering my plants and checking my plants at night for bugs as I can get in really close without alerting the bugs. I kept coming back to lights like the Infinity Ultra (no surprise I own several of them as well as the couple of different generations of the CMG Infinity Task Lights. 

Well it's good to see your interest in low level / long runtime lights Darvis, I know there are a bunch of people that share those views as well. Spread the word, as I want at least some company that will take notice of this demand even if it is a small niche, but I'd say it's a GROWING niche if anything.

The 3-LED SP Matterhorn I got from Bob @ RMSK has the old style with individual housings for the LEDs. Pretty cool to say the least. 1 of the Matterhorns has a stuck battery and I tried WD-40 and hot water soak to remove it as per Bob's advice to try those things first, and it won't budge. I'm going to have to call Bob back today with the news. :-(


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 18, 2010)

Well I checked at 12:45pm and I stopped the 3-LED SP at 11hours as it was very dim. It measured at .99v so I could have left it longer but it was a bit dimmer than Quark moon mode so I stopped it. Oddly the 3-LED HP is still running and not overly dim. Anyone want to take a stab at how this can be? The HP 3-LED should draw more current than the SP 3-LED so I wonder how this occured the way it did?

The 2 single LED Matterhorns are still going and the HP is quite a bit dimmer than the SP. 

The H-01 was off completely and measured .87v. Pretty disappointing this is that much different than the iTP A3 EOS. It comes in at under 11 hours.

The Eigers are still pretty good with the #3 getting very dim (dimmer than any of the remaining Matterhorns).

The Connexion is still looking bright on the AAA in the adapter.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 18, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> Yes, Darvis, when I joined here the hype was bigger and brighter and that was back when the Infinity Ultra and Ultra G's were fairly new. I bought a few lights based on hype before I realized I want longer runtime and I prefer lower output for outdoors even. It's great for watering my plants and checking my plants at night for bugs as I can get in really close without alerting the bugs. I kept coming back to lights like the Infinity Ultra (no surprise I own several of them as well as the couple of different generations of the CMG Infinity Task Lights.
> 
> Well it's good to see your interest in low level / long runtime lights Darvis, I know there are a bunch of people that share those views as well. Spread the word, as I want at least some company that will take notice of this demand even if it is a small niche, but I'd say it's a GROWING niche if anything.
> 
> The 3-LED SP Matterhorn I got from Bob @ RMSK has the old style with individual housings for the LEDs. Pretty cool to say the least. 1 of the Matterhorns has a stuck battery and I tried WD-40 and hot water soak to remove it as per Bob's advice to try those things first, and it won't budge. I'm going to have to call Bob back today with the news. :-(


 
I had the same issue with two of them as well (alkaleaks!!!!) I resorted to lighter fluid and then kinetic energy (smacked the light, opening down, hard against a towel on top of the counter). Took a few whacks, but they came out and the lights were not damaged. Had replace the foam washer thingy though.


----------



## Zendude (Aug 18, 2010)

Conclusions on my alkie AAA tests:

Quark MiNi AA: ~15.5hrs .61V

ZL H50b: ~27hrs(it was in strobe) 1.07V

ZL H501: +34hrs 1.08V

E01: is still going at 42.5hrs(low moon mode) .37V


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 18, 2010)

zendude, did you use AAA>AA adapters for those or do AAAs work in them without them? Odd I never tried to see if a AAA without an adapter would work in my H50 or H50b. I think I remember AAAs working in the older CMG Infinities though without adapters.

Also did you stop the E01 to test voltage and then start her back up or do you have a way of testing voltage as the light is running?


----------



## fugleebeast (Aug 18, 2010)

Figured I'd chime in.

I ran a couple year old Eneloop AAA through a conditioning cycle and then put it in my LF2XT (Q4 neutral).

I'm at 11.5 hours now and it's still going strong. Battery voltage at 1.29.


----------



## Zendude (Aug 18, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> zendude, did you use AAA>AA adapters for those or do AAAs work in them without them? Odd I never tried to see if a AAA without an adapter would work in my H50 or H50b. I think I remember AAAs working in the older CMG Infinities though without adapters.
> 
> Also did you stop the E01 to test voltage and then start her back up or do you have a way of testing voltage as the light is running?




I stretched the spring a little and that was it. Normally I wrap the battery in some paper to hold it in the center of the tube but not this time.

I did interrupt the test(maybe 1min. tops)to check voltage on the E01. I wanted to do that anyway just to see if it would fire back up. There was a slight delay but it fires up every time (with a slight bump in brightness).

I found it strange that with the Quark and E01 I could see the voltage rebound as I tested the batteries. The ZL batteries held steady at ~1V.:shrug:

Thanks for all your work dude!


----------



## Darvis (Aug 18, 2010)

Intersting! Thanks Zendude! There should be little doubt after this around what results the different batteries produce in these light with so many of us correllating the results.

That said, My Arc AA adapter arrived today and I'm refreshing the batteries for the launch of the Quark vs Quark vs Eiger AA test. Once I get that new thread fired up, I'll let the folks know here as well.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 18, 2010)

I'm away from my lights at the moment but I took the 3 dimmest with me.

The Eiger #3 was dimmer than the Quark around 4:45pm we will say (15+ hours). It's still glowing but I was in a closet shut the door in pitch black and I could barely read the lettering of the old Electrolux beater attachment. Still usable if you were in dire needs, but I will stop it now and report voltage later.

The next dimmest is the Matterhorn 3-LED HP. I'm going to call that one too even though it is a bit brighter than the #3 still, but it is dimmer than the Quark (15+hours).

The Matterhorn 1-LED is still going so I will end that later.

I forget if I called the other 3-LED Matterhorn SP but I ended it earlier at 12:45pm (11+hours).

I will update as things proceed. Thanks everyone else for doing independent runtime concurrent to this one. Job well done!!!


----------



## Dances with Flashlight (Aug 18, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> Well I checked at 12:45pm and I stopped the 3-LED SP at 11hours as it was very dim. It measured at .99v so I could have left it longer but it was a bit dimmer than Quark moon mode so I stopped it. Oddly the 3-LED HP is still running and not overly dim. Anyone want to take a stab at how this can be? The HP 3-LED should draw more current than the SP 3-LED so I wonder how this occured the way it did?



Older Peak lights were labeled - in order of increasing draw: XLR (Extra Long Run), HP (High Power), UP (Ultra Power), and SP (Super Power).


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 18, 2010)

Mine are unlabeled heads and Bob said that meant standard power. If you say super power that's a new one for me.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 19, 2010)

Well the remaining lights LF2XT, Matterhorn 1-LED SP, Eiger #0 and Eiger #Subzero are still going past the 24 hour mark with ease (1:45am). So in 20 minutes we are coming upon 32 hours. The way they are going it looks like they will cruise right into 48 hours no problem.


----------



## Zendude (Aug 19, 2010)

E01 update: At 63hrs light output was pretty dim. Battery voltage was .29V! 
I tried to fire it up again but no luck. I rechecked voltage and watched it creep back up to .41V. I put it back in and it fired up again.:thumbsup: I'm still calling it done.

BRAVO little guy!:twothumbs


----------



## mcnair55 (Aug 19, 2010)

Zendude said:


> E01 update: At 63hrs light output was pretty dim. Battery voltage was .29V!
> I tried to fire it up again but no luck. I rechecked voltage and watched it creep back up to .41V. I put it back in and it fired up again.:thumbsup: I'm still calling it done.
> 
> BRAVO little guy!:twothumbs



Indeed very well done little fella :thumbsup:


----------



## ama230 (Aug 19, 2010)

Test with 1aa Icon rogue 1AA - Semi fresh (charged approximately 20days ago) Tenergy 1aa r2u lsd 2300mah battery. Just for comparison as I didnt want to add the light but need it for calibration.
Running on low mode 1.30V

Test started @ 8:21Pm on 08/17/2010

Test Ended @ 12:35PM on 08/18/2010

total runtime = 16hrs & 14 min

Test with Icon solo 2AAA - Semi fresh (charged approximately 20days ago) Tenergy 2AAA r2u LSD 1000mah batteries
Running on low mode 1.31V

Test started @ 8:21PM on 08/17/2010

Entered moon mode @ 12:25AM on 08/19/2010

Test Ended @ 6:38AM on 08/19/2010

total runtime = 34hrs & 17min


Test with Fenix E01 1AAA - Semi fresh (charged approximately 20days ago) Tenergy 1AAA r2u LSD 1000mah battery.
Running on single mode 1.31V 

Test started @ 8:21PM on 08/17/2010

Entered moon mode @ 3:33AM on 08/18/2010

Test Ended @ 9:20AM on 08/18/2010

total runtime = ~13hrs

This is just for comparison.

My conclusion is that the threshold voltage of the LSD AA's and AAA's are that much lower than the alkalines and lithiums. Then the light seems to be picky where the working voltage of the transistor is too high to actually run the battery lower.

As seeing the quark aa, this is awesome as it is the lowest ive seen on a light. All my lights typically only run to .81v and then quit. 

You would think that with spending above fifty bucks on a light would get you some transistors with a better tolerance and wider threshold. I know there is the scare of running an alkaline this low would make it leak but, who puts an alkaline in a nice light, other than testing?


----------



## fugleebeast (Aug 19, 2010)

My LF2XT with eneloop is still going strong. I'm at just about 36 hours now.


----------



## ama230 (Aug 19, 2010)

fugleebeast said:


> My LF2XT with eneloop is still going strong. I'm at just about 36 hours now.



What battery are you using?

Is the over dis charge off?


----------



## fugleebeast (Aug 19, 2010)

I'm using a 2 year old Eneloop AAA. I ran it through a conditioning charge on a Maha MH-C800S right before the test. 

The Over Discharge Protection is off.


----------



## Flying Turtle (Aug 19, 2010)

fugleebeast said:


> My LF2XT with eneloop is still going strong. I'm at just about 36 hours now.



This sounds more like the LF2XT's we know and love. Thanks for making this run. Might have to try one of these tests myself.

Geoff


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 19, 2010)

Yeah my LF2XT is still running and it is at 39 hours will no signs of dimming, although it is at minimum brightness whatever lumen value that happens to be, I know it's lower than .5 lumens, pretty close or maybe a little less than Quark moon mode of .2 lumen.

Here are the last 4 lights in the running at 3:35pm @ 38 hours: 







L-R is Matterhorn SP / Eiger #0 / Eiger #Subzero / LF2XT


----------



## ama230 (Aug 19, 2010)

fugleebeast said:


> I'm using a 2 year old Eneloop AAA. I ran it through a conditioning charge on a Maha MH-C800S right before the test.
> 
> The Over Discharge Protection is off.



Thats definitely a cool feature for a nice light. Thats going to be a winning recipe for this. 

What version of the light do you have? XP-G?


----------



## fugleebeast (Aug 19, 2010)

My LF2XT is the XP-E Q4.

Beacon, are you using an alkaline for this round with your LF2XT?


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 19, 2010)

fugleebeast said:


> My LF2XT is the XP-E Q4.
> 
> Beacon, are you using an alkaline for this round with your LF2XT?



No, Duraloop. I guess I didn't have the low voltage protection engaged as I came in and saw it blink off every 5 or 10 seconds, but then it would return to the minimum level. Is this what normally happens? In any event I checked the voltage using 5C, and it was at .99v so I turned off the protection feature (it stopped the blinking), and let it go down to .93v before I stopped it at 42+ hours. I probably could have let it run down to about .87v and perhaps another hour would have been obtained.


----------



## Zendude (Aug 19, 2010)

So check this out. 3.5hrs after I stopped the E01 test I checked that poor battery to see if it rebounded at all. Low and behold it was at .91V. Sooooo, I popped that sucker back in and got FIVE more hours out of it! Not super low mode either, we're talkin about 4-5 lumens for several hours before it dropped.


This has got me thinkin(never a good thing) about how many hours I can get out of an alkie with a 50% duty cycle test. Say 12hrs on 12hrs off? 

This was being debated about by several others in rookiedaddy's E01 thread. I think I'm going to have to try it.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 19, 2010)

Well *Group B* testing is complete. LF2XT is the hands down winner at 42+ hours @ .93v. It was @ .99v when I realized the blinking was due to the Over Discharge Protection was enabled, and I disabled it. It seems like it went from .99v to .93v in less than an hour so I didn't want to leave it unattended to come back and it be at .70v or something. 

Here is the LF2XT @ 42 hours when I stopped it:






The Eiger #0 and #Subzero brings up a question. I was expecting the #Subzero to perform much longer than the zero, and to be honest the regular Matterhorn 1-LED SP held in just as long. The voltages weren't much different between the Matterhorn @ 1.07, the Eiger #0 @ 1.10v and the Eiger #Subzero @ 1.11v, so:

1) Why are the Eigers with a more efficient XP-G emitter not outlasting the older Matterhorn SP?

2) Why isn't the #Subzero with a 80ohm resistor not seeing extra runtime over the regular #0 that has a 56ohm resistor? 

I was told by Mark that the higher resistor not only would produce a dimmer output, but also realize a longer runtime. My results aren't seeing that. 

What is weird is that the regular #0 was brighter than the #Subzero for a while before they sort of evened out, but even at the end, they were pretty close in output, so does the higher resistor regulate both lumen output as well as runtime or is it like many have said about lights with microprocessors that any light like say a Quark, that the low mode is not efficient even though it does see large runtimes, but the efficacy is the same as if the light was running in high mode. You would have thought since the #0 was burning much brighter than the #Subzero for hours in the beginning there would be a bigger discrepancy between remaining voltages and there really isn't (0.01v difference)


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 19, 2010)

Well I will run the Infinity Ultra on AAA now that the test is done and update the results in first post when GIU is finished. Starting the light at midnight in 15 minutes.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 20, 2010)

L-R: Gerber Infinity Ultra (Silver) / CMG Infinity Ultra? (IIRC latest generation CMG with the black carbon dot on head) / CMG Infinity Tasklight - Amber LED / Gerber Infinity Ultra (Black) / Maratac AA (Polished SS)

All these have AAAs in them. I had one AAA>AA adapter in the Amber CMG, the regular CMG Infinity I balled up some tinfoil on the bottom. The other GIUs have springs so cranking down the head will hold the AAAs in by themselves.

Started test at midnight. This should be interesting and may give the LF2XT a run for it's money.


----------



## fugleebeast (Aug 20, 2010)

My LF2XT finally died. It was still going at 7pm but was dead when I got back at 10:30pm. That puts it at 42-45 hours on an Eneloop. Battery read .93 volts. Seems pretty consistent with Beacon's results. 

Not bad. I'm repeating the test with an alkaline to see how it compares.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 20, 2010)

I stand corrected. My LF2XT was 42+ hours @ .93v. I added the hours wrong so I need to change all threads to represent 42+ hours instead of 41 hours.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 20, 2010)

*Group C* @ 3 hours and 21 minutes:






L-R: Quark AA / Gerber Infinity Ultra (Silver) / CMG Infinity (newer/newest gen.) / CMG Infinity Task Light (older/first gen.) in amber / Gerber Infinity Ultra (Black) / Maratac AA (Polished SS)


----------



## Flying Turtle (Aug 20, 2010)

Thanks, Beacon, for continuing the testing. I was about to ask if you had some clever way to adapt AAA's to AA lights. The methods I've used generally involve duct tape, nuts, bolts, etc., and are less than satisfactory. Specific adapters for this job would be great.

Geoff


----------



## Darvis (Aug 20, 2010)

I can confirm that the Valiant Concepts AA adapter worked perfectly for the Peak AAA lights. Imagine that Sub Zero and a AA!!!

I tried the E01 head and it did not work...


For those that requested it and are interested in following the Quark AA moonlight madness runtime test, go here for details: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/288379


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 20, 2010)

At 9:20 am or 9 hours and 20 minutes both Gerber Infinity Ulras were pretty dim which correlates to those reporting only 10 hours, but I thought they were referring to the CMG IUs? The CMGs looked the same as they did when they started, but due to lack of sleep I forgot to bring them with me to work, so hopefully they are still running.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 21, 2010)

The CMG with amber LED was off when I returned but the newer CMG white LED was still running. Odd as I thought the amber LEDs were run lower as it is dimmer than the other CMGs I have. 

In any event the CMG is still running and the output looks pretty much the same as when it started. So right now it is at 35 hours. We might have a new winner for longest runtime on a AAA.


----------



## Lumenz (Aug 21, 2010)

The CMG that is still running is the one that is connected with an aluminum ball, right? Do you think that had anything to do with the extended runtime? The light did seem dimmer so maybe it wasn't able to pull as much current.


----------



## wyager (Aug 21, 2010)

Does anyone know the output efficiency of LEDs, in terms of watts input and watts output (of light)? Not 100% relevant, but I was just thinking maybe you could replace the LED with a laser diode for EXTRA RUNTIME :rock: (in only one color )


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 21, 2010)

Lumenz said:


> The CMG that is still running is the one that is connected with an aluminum ball, right? Do you think that had anything to do with the extended runtime? The light did seem dimmer so maybe it wasn't able to pull as much current.



It is the one with the aluminum folded spacer in it. It isn't dimmer than the amber one, but the pic does seem to look like the amber one was more intense but that wasn't the case as the amber in person does seem dimmer. I'm guessing the CMG still running is just the evolution of the CMG Infinity and they made it more efficient over time? It's at 38 hours and still going, which if you do the math of AAA being 1/3 the power of an AA, then this would be over 100 hours if an AA was in it.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 21, 2010)

Well the CMG Infinity with AAA has surpassed the LF2XT. It's at 42.5 hours now and it has dimmed but still very useable light. I would think it may last another 4-5 hours before getting very dim.

EDIT: Just compared to the Quark on moon mode and the Infinity is dimmer. This was taken at 7:15pm but we will call it 43 hours. I think it would still be usable for some hours but since it is lower than the Quark I will end it for the test. I will check voltage and put cell back in and see how long before the light is not usable brightness.


----------



## Mikellen (Aug 21, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> Well the CMG Infinity with AAA has surpassed the LF2XT. It's at 42.5 hours now and it has dimmed but still very useable light. I would think it may last another 4-5 hours before getting very dim.


 
Can you confirm if this is the CMG Infinity Ultra or lower powered CMG Infinity?

Thanks.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 21, 2010)

Just checked and it is @ .89v so the Duraloops went back in the Infinity. Pretty amazing actually. Makes me hope 4Sevens (or someone else really) will put out an Ultra low light with amazing run-time like this. Just to remind everyone, this was a Infinity with a AAA running in it not the regular AA.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 21, 2010)

Mikellen said:


> Can you confirm if this is the CMG Infinity Ultra or lower powered CMG Infinity?
> 
> Thanks.



What are the differences? It just says CMG Infinity. Do the Ultras have the labeling that says so right on the body?


----------



## Mikellen (Aug 21, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> What are the differences? It just says CMG Infinity. Do the Ultras have the labeling that says so right on the body?


 
From the very limited research I've done by searching through some threads, the CMG Infinity Ultra is suppose to be about twice as bright with half the runtime of the CMG Infinity. I don't know how to tell the difference by looking at the flashlight though. :shrug:


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 21, 2010)

Mikellen, I googled CMG Infinity Ultra and it actually does say ULTRA on it where mine doesn't so mine is the regular Infinity. Also I wouldn't expect this kind of run-time even with a AA in it if it were an CMG Infinity Ultra. I think that's why I never bought one even back then as I saw the runtime was advertised as only 25 hours compared to 40 for the regular Infinity and my main criteria for a light is always run-time. That said I have several regular CMG Infinity lights in black and smoke blue.


----------



## Mikellen (Aug 21, 2010)

Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## fugleebeast (Aug 23, 2010)

My LF2XT ran approximately 68 hours on the lowest setting using a Duracell Alkaline AAA. Using an Eneloop AAA, it ran approximately 42 hours. That's a pretty big difference!

I'd run the test again with an Energizer Lithium but I've been missing my Liteflux too much. :thumbsup:


----------



## Flying Turtle (Aug 23, 2010)

Thanks for donating your LiteFlux time, fugleebeast. I've been curious how it does with alkalines.

Geoff


----------



## wantsusa (Aug 25, 2010)

heh now someone needs to test the Preon ReVO!


----------



## ama230 (Aug 26, 2010)

wantsusa said:


> heh now someone needs to test the Preon ReVO!



+1


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 26, 2010)

wantsusa said:


> heh now someone needs to test the Preon ReVO!



I'm interested in the Revo just for the low mode at 67 hours. I'm wondering if it will do 40 hours at least on a Duraloop/Eneloop? Who is getting one here? If it was cheaper I'd buy one.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 27, 2010)

Well, I said I wouldn't buy one, but I did... when it gets here (SS version) I'll fire it on up in low mode...


----------



## wantsusa (Aug 27, 2010)

Darvis said:


> Well, I said I wouldn't buy one, but I did... when it gets here (SS version) I'll fire it on up in low mode...



:thumbsup:


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 28, 2010)

Darvis said:


> Well, I said I wouldn't buy one, but I did... when it gets here (SS version) I'll fire it on up in low mode...



Haha, same here (SS version), I am a sucker for long run-times on low. I'm intrigued if it can pull off longer run-times than the Eiger #0/#Subzero and LF2XT. Still wish they offered a true moon mode on this ReVO.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Sep 16, 2010)

Just an update on the ReVO SS running a Duraloop AAA:

At 7:30am @ 42.5 hours there is no difference to speak of. I will take a beamshot pic after this test is over to show the brightness should be the same due to the regulation of the light. Do we know if this light falls out of regulation at some point or does it just turn off? I guess I will find out soon enough barring some kind of mishap.

Here are the 2 beamshots:












Stay tuned for the conclusion of this runtime test on low. Hope we break the advertised specs for low. Very impressive as this is surpassing even the Liteflux LF2XT with a Duraloop AAA. Stay tuned, as this is getting interesting!


----------



## Beacon of Light (Sep 16, 2010)

At 9am it was off so I will call it at 8:30am or 43.5 hours. Still impressive as it is among the highest AAA runtimes I have tested. I turned the light off and back on and it would not light. Popped the Duraloop into the Lacross for a second or two to get the voltage and iut was .88v then hit .89v and I took it out. Popped it back in the ReVO to see how it dims. It was sort of regulated initially but it dimmed gradually and in about 30 seconds it dimmed to off gradually. So for the runtime threads purpose the runtime for the ReVo is: *43.5 hours* @ .89v


----------



## TwinBlade (Sep 16, 2010)

What's funny is iTP rates the A3 EOS at 50 hours on low. You didn't get half that. Gotta wonder where these guys get there data from...:shakehead

I am really impressed with that Revo. Unless I missed it, would it be too much to ask for a comp pic to the A3?

Thanks for all the work on getting all this data together. I see a big boost in ReVO sales after this...


----------



## Beacon of Light (Sep 16, 2010)

Twinblade, yes the failure to achieve the advertised specs for most lights do seem disappointing, but they quote them for Alkalines mostly since they will run longer and have higher capacities than NiMH batteries for the most part. I only use NiMH as I cannot see peeing away $$$ on disposable batteries in the year 2010. I am surprised they still sell them in this day and age with all we know about rechargeable batteries and also the landfill impact.

Here's a pic and the iTP is the smallest of the 3 pictured here.

L-R: 47's ReVO / Fenix E01 / iTP EOS 3 mode upgrade (L-M-H) user interface


----------



## TwinBlade (Sep 16, 2010)

Hey, thanks for that pic man. I carry the A3 every day. That ReVO looks all of a millimeter or 2 longer. Negligible at best. Great stuff.:thumbsup::thumbsup:


----------



## saabgoblin (Sep 16, 2010)

gunga said:


> This shoudl be interesting. I'm very curious about these new eigers, looks like a nice higher end alternative to the E01.
> 
> To bad peak doesn't make an AA tube for the Eiger eh? Would make a lot of sense...


J.S Burly's carries a ARC AAA-AA body by Valiant Designs and if Peak threads are compatible with ARC threads, then the solution may already be available.


----------



## scout24 (Sep 16, 2010)

Saabgoblin- I just got my mail, Valiant AA body is here!!! Eiger, Matterhorn and Arc AAA threads all work fine, as well as McGizmo Sapphire. EO1 and Revo, not so much. Has anyone run the Matty or Eiger level 1 on an AA yet, or should I be warming up a Duracell??? Here's a pic or two, very nicely made... Eiger level 1 head, and some others to compare sizes with.


----------



## Coyote302 (Sep 17, 2010)

Just curious why people are using the Valiant adapter to use an Eiger head with a AA instead of just using the El Capitan from Peak. Is it just for the smaller head even if the body is AA sized? Is it for the wider beam pattern? Or is this just a case of reusing existing pieces instead of buying a new light?

Thanks,
Rich


----------



## paulr (Sep 17, 2010)

The Eiger is available with more led and reflector configurations than the El Capitan.


----------



## Flying Turtle (Sep 17, 2010)

I think the Valiant adapter was originally designed with the Arc AAA in mind. It's just an added benefit that a number of other "heads" will also work.

Geoff


----------



## Coyote302 (Sep 17, 2010)

Got it. Thanks for the replies.


----------



## cave dave (Sep 25, 2010)

Great job on an informative thread. 

Say, can you update the results for the Liteflux LF2XT in Group A to make a note that something went wrong and expected performance is seen in Group B.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Oct 3, 2010)

cave dave said:


> Great job on an informative thread.
> 
> Say, can you update the results for the Liteflux LF2XT in Group A to make a note that something went wrong and expected performance is seen in Group B.



Just updated thread. Thanks for the heads up. Also posted the 4Sevens ReVO as the official AAA runtime king!!!


----------



## fnj (Oct 3, 2010)

A great thread and a great service done!

I must say the results are a bitter disappointment, and the only thing stopping me from calling it a pathetic performance is the fact that almost certainly none of these lights was designed with a moon mode as a strong design component. I would have hoped the LF2XT would have done a darn sight better than it managed, though.

Strictly from an energy standpoint, a single alkaline AAA cell contains sufficient energy to maintain moon mode (let's arbitrarily call it 0.07 to 0.3 lumens), with a perfectly efficient driver running the right emitter, for at least 800 hr. Even allowing for a fair to middling driver efficiency, there's got to be a bare minimum of 300-400 hr there, if not more. And I want it. And I don't think I'm the only one.

*Someone should do it!*

Just pulsing an LED at 100% maximum current at a high rate for 0.2% duty cycle, however, won't cut it. This is a miserably inefficient way to run moon mode. I, for one, would readily accept a dedicated optimized moon mode single setting single AAA light to get the target of 300-400 hr runtime. It's an achievable target, given that 0.07 lumens is plenty). A single AAA contains at least 1/4 the energy of a CR123A at low drain rates, and the old HDS 60 Ultimate was capable of well over 1000 hr I believe in moon mode.


----------



## wyager (Oct 3, 2010)

fnj said:


> A great thread and a great service done!
> 
> I must say the results are a bitter disappointment, and the only thing stopping me from calling it a pathetic performance is the fact that almost certainly none of these lights was designed with a moon mode as a strong design component. I would have hoped the LF2XT would have done a darn sight better than it managed, though.
> 
> ...



Where are you getting these numbers? You're grossly overestimating the capacity of an AAA alkaline IMO...


----------



## fnj (Oct 3, 2010)

wyager said:


> Where are you getting these numbers? You're grossly overestimating the capacity of an AAA alkaline IMO...


Actually, I am using a conservative estimate. An alkaline AAA has at least 900 mah to 0.8 volts at 100 ma, and at least 1200 mah to 0.8 volts at 25 ma (ref. http://data.energizer.com/PDFs/E92.pdf). Moon mode does not require more than 2 ma with a 2x mean voltage step-up in the driver, at which rate the energy would certainly be more than 1200 mah. Take the average voltage during discharge to be 1.0 v (1.5 -> 0.8), and 1200 mah gives 1200 mwh. You can get at least 100 lumens per watt, or 0.1 lumens per mw. That gives you 1200 hr right there for 0.1 lumens, before taking driver efficiency into account.

A miserable 33% driver efficiency then gets you 400 hr, while only 25% gets you 300 hr.


----------



## wyager (Oct 3, 2010)

You are aware that the driver µC needs power too, right? At 1.5v on moon mode, I believe the current draw at the tailcap is 6-8mA. More at lower voltages.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Oct 3, 2010)

fnj, sounds like we think alike. I started a Ultra low level only thread in the 4Sevens subforum on the marketplace site. I think if you havent, you should check that out. You'd fit right in as I am looking for a dedicated moon mode type light with the maximum efficiency. I know the standard LEDs arent efficient at low levels, but that sounds like a cop out and the right circuit could make that theory a myth once technology gets past where we are now. Only 10 years ago were they trying to break the 1ghz barrier for cpus and every year thereafter they were claiming they will hit the ceiling sooner and with the size of the wafers getting smaller and smaller there was a threshold that would be hit.


----------



## Darvis (Oct 3, 2010)

scout24 said:


> Saabgoblin- I just got my mail, Valiant AA body is here!!! Eiger, Matterhorn and Arc AAA threads all work fine, as well as McGizmo Sapphire. EO1 and Revo, not so much. Has anyone run the Matty or Eiger level 1 on an AA yet, or should I be warming up a Duracell??? Here's a pic or two, very nicely made... Eiger level 1 head, and some others to compare sizes with.


 

Scout- check put my Quark AA thread, I ran the Eiger #1 with the VC adapter


Peak Eiger XP-G #1 (Eneloop AA, VC AA adapter)

*25.5 hours to 50%*
*30.75 hours to less than Quark moon mode* (The Eiger "moon" mode lasted 3.5 hours)
*47 hours* to tritium brightness and .97v

*Conclusion:* A very nice steady, predictable and utterly usable decline over the course of 47 hours. This light will not just turn off on you and the VC AA adapter is extremely well made and makes for a great camping/survival rig. (I still prefer the AAA format for EDC given its compactness)


----------



## wyager (Oct 3, 2010)

OK, I see what you're saying, Beacon, but you have to choose. Do you want a "smart" light with most of the energy going to the regulator and microcontroller that can change modes and whatnot, or do you want a "dumb" single mode light? Perhaps what you want is possible ATM with single mode.


----------



## fnj (Oct 3, 2010)

wyager said:


> You are aware that the driver µC needs power too, right? At 1.5v on moon mode, I believe the current draw at the tailcap is 6-8mA. More at lower voltages.


Understood. I think that says a lot how far that circuit could be improved. Just compare the best AAA's to, say, a Quark AA. The AA cell has about twice the capacity of an AAA, but the Quark lasts 10 times as long. That just ain't right.

Even at 6-8 ma (which is terrible efficiency), you should be getting well north of 100 hr on an AAA, not 40-odd.


----------



## fnj (Oct 3, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> fnj, sounds like we think alike. I started a Ultra low level only thread in the 4Sevens subforum on the marketplace site. I think if you havent, you should check that out. You'd fit right in as I am looking for a dedicated moon mode type light with the maximum efficiency. I know the standard LEDs arent efficient at low levels, but that sounds like a cop out and the right circuit could make that theory a myth once technology gets past where we are now. Only 10 years ago were they trying to break the 1ghz barrier for cpus and every year thereafter they were claiming they will hit the ceiling sooner and with the size of the wafers getting smaller and smaller there was a threshold that would be hit.


Thanks, I'll be checking that out. As for LED efficiency: LED efficiency peaks at far below max rated current. It is poor at max rated, gets better and better as you turn down the current, then drops again at very, very low current. An XR-E actually gets best efficiency down around roughly 20 ma, where it is well north of 100 lumens per watt. I'm sure you could tailor a LED to peak at lower current than that, at the sacrifice of high brightness capability and efficiency, but that's not even needed ...

To get the absolute best LED efficiency in moon mode, your design would set the current to that best value, then pulse modulate it to get the lower required brightness. Your emitter efficiency would be essentially preserved right down to moon mode.

I don't want to make light of the problem of making a high efficiency boost driver operating down to well below 1 volt, but unquestionably you could do better than we're getting now. The Quark AA is within a factor of 2 of where you need to be to meet my target.


----------



## wyager (Oct 3, 2010)

fnj said:


> Understood. I think that says a lot how far that circuit could be improved. Just compare the best AAA's to, say, a Quark AA. The AA cell has about twice the capacity of an AAA, but the Quark lasts 10 times as long. That just ain't right.
> 
> Even at 6-8 ma (which is terrible efficiency), you should be getting well north of 100 hr on an AAA, not 40-odd.



That 6-8mA figure is on moon mode, not low mode. Obviously, the ReVo lacks a moon mode. And this additional 4-6mA current draw is basically unavoidable with any kind of intelligent driver circuit. Keep in mind that every aspect of regulation and switching has to be controlled by a microcontroller-that includes voltage boosting/bucking, voltage monitoring, waiting for user interface commands, timekeeping, and more. As I said earlier, unless you want a "dumb" light barely capable of boost or buck regulation, with no sort of UI at all, you need to deal with at least a few mA of additional draw. I admit that it might be possible to further optimize a "smart" UI for super low power draw, but everything I can think of seems a bit impractical.


----------



## Darvis (Oct 4, 2010)

wyager said:


> That 6-8mA figure is on moon mode, not low mode. Obviously, the ReVo lacks a moon mode. And this additional 4-6mA current draw is basically unavoidable with any kind of intelligent driver circuit. Keep in mind that every aspect of regulation and switching has to be controlled by a microcontroller-that includes voltage boosting/bucking, voltage monitoring, waiting for user interface commands, timekeeping, and more. As I said earlier, unless you want a "dumb" light barely capable of boost or buck regulation, with no sort of UI at all, you need to deal with at least a few mA of additional draw. I admit that it might be possible to further optimize a "smart" UI for super low power draw, but everything I can think of seems a bit impractical.


 
Here's my counterpoint, just playing Devil's advocate:

Look at the current landscaoe out there and then look at the ReVo... So here's a AAA light that hits close to 90 hours on 1.5 lumens of low with a lithium and close to 50 hours with a NiMh- fully freakin' regulated!!! 

Given these specs, I would have to question what we would gain in practical terms by getting a anything more efficient? I ask this because I think we would start to hit the limits of battery performance as well.

Granted, there are those of us that will, from time to time, need to run these lights flat out on low for the full charge of the cell. But for the rest of the masses out there:

1) I would NOT keep an alkaleak in any light for any length of time in an EDC scenario unless I had to, so these batteries are relegated to the drawer until needed for low mode emergency use

2) As we're seeing, Lithium primaries are light-weight, have great long term storage potential, and good performance on the highs and mediums, but for us low junkies, they gain almost nothing on low and cost a TON!!!

3) That brings me to the NiMh's: The fact of the matter is that you start to hit the self discharge limits of current technology- even with LSD cells when looking at the practical runitmes of these lights where "practical" means 30 minutes to an hour a day over the course of the stated runtimes... and that 's being generous on runtime. For most, it's what? Maybe an hour a week? These lights will run close to a year based on that usage curve....


Don't get me wrong, I want .2 lumens for 200 hours on a AAA...

But I'm pretty darn happy at the moment with my ReVo and the most excellent Eigers...


----------



## coyote (Oct 6, 2010)

wonderful test! thnx for doing it.

only wish you had included a *Mako*. its maker Endeavor stated: _"...The runtimes for the Mako come in at 21 Hours on High Mode, and *60 Hours on Low Mode*...using brand new, store-bought Duracell alkalines..."_, so i'd like to know if it can beat the ReVO.


----------



## fisk-king (Oct 16, 2010)

To Darvis, Beacon, or Scout:

Any plans in the works of doing a runtime test using the ReVo(nevermind ) or E05? I've read in one post that the E05 apparently has less runtime than the E01?

Also, keep up the good work.


----------



## fisk-king (Oct 16, 2010)

coyote said:


> wonderful test! thnx for doing it.
> 
> only wish you had included a *Mako*. its maker Endeavor stated: _"...The runtimes for the Mako come in at 21 Hours on High Mode, and *60 Hours on Low Mode*...using brand new, store-bought Duracell alkalines..."_, so i'd like to know if it can beat the ReVO.


 

I tested mine a couple of months back with a energizer lithium aaa and got ~64 hours. Maybe tonight I will try with a NiMh battery (i'm assuming it should be close to 30hr. give or take).


----------



## Darvis (Oct 16, 2010)

fisk-king said:


> To Darvis, Beacon, or Scout:
> 
> Any plans in the works of doing a runtime test using the ReVo or E05? I've read in one post that the E05 apparently has less runtime than the E01?
> 
> Also, keep up the good work.


 
Fisk-king; check out our ReVo results here:

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3519028#post3519028

Does the E05 have a low mode? I thought it was fixed at about 30 lumens... jury's out for me on if I'll buy one yet.


----------



## scout24 (Oct 16, 2010)

No EO5 for me, personally... 3 hour runtime at much brighter than I would like from an AAA keychain light? Love the smaller form factor, and the upgraded emitter, though. When available in a 3-5 lumen version with EO1 runtimes, I'll be all over it.


----------



## coyote (Oct 16, 2010)

fisk-king said:


> I tested mine a couple of months back with a energizer lithium aaa and got ~64 hours. Maybe tonight I will try with a NiMh battery (i'm assuming it should be close to 30hr. give or take).




thnx FK. 
interesting result 'cause guesses for lithium were closer to 80 hrs. but not bad regardless!!!
i look forward to hearing your results!


----------



## fisk-king (Oct 16, 2010)

Darvis said:


> Fisk-king; check out our ReVo results here:
> 
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3519028#post3519028
> 
> Does the E05 have a low mode? I thought it was fixed at about 30 lumens... jury's out for me on if I'll buy one yet.


 

oh I didn't know that it was 30lms. My bad, I thought it was a low output light.


----------



## fisk-king (Oct 16, 2010)

Well at 8:25p.m. I started the runtime test using my ti Mako. Battery used is a duracell NiMh(800maH) at 1.490 VDC. Afterwards, I will run it with a lithium primary.


----------



## coyote (Oct 17, 2010)

fisk-king said:


> Well at 8:25p.m. I started the runtime test using my ti Mako. Battery used is a duracell NiMh(800maH) at 1.490 VDC. Afterwards, I will run it with a lithium primary.



fantastic FK. thnx!!!


----------



## fisk-king (Oct 19, 2010)

I had to start the test over again due to a visiting parent shutting it off for me ("...your wasting the battery..."):duh2:.

Anyhoot, test was started again Sunday at 5:13p.m. Central time & concluded today after 1:15p.m. I'm calling the official time at 44hrs if my math is right. Not bad for a NiMh. After I leave the gym I will start another run with the Mako but this time using a Lithium. 


Later


Edit: voltage of the battery prior to test was 1.467Vdc


----------



## coyote (Oct 19, 2010)

fisk-king said:


> I had to start the test over again due to a visiting parent shutting it off for me ("...your wasting the battery..."):duh2:.
> 
> Anyhoot, test was started again Sunday at 5:13p.m. Central time & concluded today after 1:15p.m. I'm calling the official time at 44hrs if my math is right. Not bad for a NiMh. After I leave the gym I will start another run with the Mako but this time using a Lithium.
> 
> Later



hahahahahha! 
44 hrs on NiMH? amazing. thnx for that info FK!

you had said: _"...I tested mine [Mako] a couple of months back with a energizer lithium aaa and got ~64 hours...."_ so are you re-testing it again just for the fun of it? have you done a alkaline yet?


----------



## Darvis (Oct 19, 2010)

fisk-king said:


> I had to start the test over again due to a visiting parent shutting it off for me ("...your wasting the battery..."):duh2:.
> 
> Anyhoot, test was started again Sunday at 5:13p.m. Central time & concluded today after 1:15p.m. I'm calling the official time at 44hrs if my math is right. Not bad for a NiMh. After I leave the gym I will start another run with the Mako but this time using a Lithium.
> 
> ...


 
FK, was that a fully regulated run in that the Mako was the same brightness until off, or did it gradually dim over time?


----------



## fisk-king (Oct 19, 2010)

coyote said:


> hahahahahha!
> 44 hrs on NiMH? amazing. thnx for that info FK!
> 
> you had said: _"...I tested mine [Mako] a couple of months back with a energizer lithium aaa and got ~64 hours...."_ so are you re-testing it again just for the fun of it? have you done a alkaline yet?



For some reason i keep thinking that the runtime should be more:thinking: with a lithium battery. I started another run at 8:10p.m using a lithium battery at a voltage of 1.766 Vdc.



Darvis said:


> FK, was that a fully regulated run in that the Mako was the same brightness until off, or did it gradually dim over time?



I had the light in my pocket at work checking every hour or so. At 1:15pm the brightness level was equal to the output at the beginning of the test from what I could tell.


----------



## fnj (Oct 20, 2010)

fisk-king said:


> For some reason i keep thinking that the runtime should be more:thinking: with a lithium battery.


The lithium/iron disulfide cells only beat alkalines in runtime at high discharge rates. For low rates, good alkalines last as long or longer. Either one beats the pants off a nickel metal hydride piece of crap (except an alkaline at really high rate).


----------



## vali (Oct 20, 2010)

fnj said:


> The lithium/iron disulfide cells only beat alkalines in runtime at high discharge rates. For low rates, good alkalines last as long or longer. Either one beats the pants off a nickel metal hydride piece of crap (except an alkaline at really high rate).



That's the reason you should buy quality cells. NiMH beats alkalines unless you are testing them at low rate (plus will not leak). Just check runtime graphs (plenty on this forum) of 2000 mAh NiMH cells vs alkaline (usually rated at 3000 mAh). 

If the runtime is less than 10 h or so, NiMH wins. For really low rates, alkaline is the one with more capacity.

Of course, if you buy some "4000" mAh AA cells or use regular NiMH without charging it just before use you will end with a lower runtime (some cells are known for insane self discharge).


----------



## cave dave (Oct 20, 2010)

fnj said:


> For low rates, good alkalines last as long or longer. Either one beats the pants off a nickel metal hydride piece of crap (except an alkaline at really high rate).



Well except for at the end of the run you can charge that Nimh right up and run it again, and again, and again. Or you can top it off at any time. With Alkaline there is a good chance it will leak, and with Li you have to throw it away and shell out $2 for another one.

NiMh FTW! :thumbsup:


----------



## fisk-king (Oct 22, 2010)

70hrs 35min & still going strong. Brightness level is still the same.


----------



## fisk-king (Oct 22, 2010)

^I forgot to state that the Lithium test was started on Tues. at 8:10p.m. with a voltage of 1.766Vdc.


----------



## fisk-king (Oct 23, 2010)

The light was off between 3:15am & 3:30am so I will say it officially ended at 79hrs. Not bad. The 63hrs I reported earlier was from an alkaline battery. Also, the brightness level remained pretty much the same throughout the entire test.:tired:


----------



## cave dave (Oct 23, 2010)

fisk-king said:


> The light was off between 3:15am & 3:30am so I will say it officially ended at 79hrs. Not bad. The 63hrs I reported earlier was from an alkaline battery. Also, the brightness level remained pretty much the same throughout the entire test.:tired:


It's been so long I forgot what light we were even talking about. The mako?


----------



## Beacon of Light (Oct 23, 2010)

How much are those Mako Ti lights like +$200 give or take?


----------



## fisk-king (Oct 23, 2010)

cave dave said:


> It's been so long I forgot what light we were even talking about. The mako?


 

Muyshondt Mako


----------



## fisk-king (Oct 23, 2010)

Beacon of Light said:


> How much are those Mako Ti lights like +$200 give or take?


 

I paid $110 for the regular version and $150 for the flood version (rare model).


----------



## swxb12 (Oct 23, 2010)

Makos have been discontinued for a long time, yea?


----------



## scout24 (Oct 23, 2010)

Sadly, yes.


----------



## Notsure Fire (Oct 23, 2010)

I wish they didn't...


----------



## coyote (Oct 26, 2010)

fisk-king said:


> The light was off between 3:15am & 3:30am so I will say it officially ended at 79hrs. Not bad. The 63hrs I reported earlier was from an alkaline battery. Also, the brightness level remained pretty much the same throughout the entire test.:tired:



great job FK! really appreciated!!!!

ok, to sum it up, here are the Mako runtimes:

*Mako* Ti 1xAAA (by Muyshondt)
...with *NiMH (800 mA)*: 44 hours
...with *Alkaline*: 63 hours
...with *Lithium*: 79 hours

.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Jun 18, 2011)

Ok I just read that there are QTC Peaks that should enable longer runtimes. Who's got a QTC Eiger and willing to do a runtime on NiMH?


----------



## scout24 (Jun 18, 2011)

Beacon- I saw this thread back up after 8 months and thought we had a new runtime champ!  I'm personally waiting for a review or two before diving into the QTC pool, but am looking forward to checking one out.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Jun 19, 2011)

I couldn't help myself so I ordered a brass Logan and Eiger QTC.


----------



## scout24 (Jun 19, 2011)

I was chatting via the website with Bob last night around midnight about a #4 Eiger QTC, hoping he has one. JWritchie's video was the final nail for me.


----------



## jabe1 (Jun 19, 2011)

Beacon of Light said:


> I couldn't help myself so I ordered a brass Logan and Eiger QTC.



I hate when that happens! 

I've managed to hold off so far, I think I'll jump when there's a 17500 QTC Logan body available. 

I wonder if I got a few Neutral XP-Gs to Curt soon, the bodies will be there when he gets time to do a special order....:thinking:


----------



## Beacon of Light (Jun 25, 2011)

Started testing an Eiger XP-G with the QTC pill for variable output on Thursday 8:12pm so now on Saturday @ 12:47pm it is *40.5* hours. We may have a new winner folks. 3 more hours we will see.


----------



## fw870119 (Jul 1, 2011)

it is really cool!


----------



## shelm (Jan 18, 2012)

you testing only low mode?
you dont have any budget AAA lights?


----------



## coyote (Jan 18, 2012)

shelm said:


> you testing only low mode?
> you dont have any budget AAA lights?



to the best of my knowledge, the current budget runtime 1xAAA king is the Thrunite Ti (Firefly model on low) with 125 hours.


----------



## JJohn (Jan 13, 2013)

I don't know if that is true. The Thrunite is impressive in this category. But, my LF2XT ran over 135 hours before I accidently shut it down. Now, this was with an Energizer lithium primary so maybe that doesn't count. It also has a really low lowest level.


----------



## kreisl (Jan 13, 2013)

Here my own measurements from repeated(!) tests. i published the repeated runtime test results in detail on some other forum, so here you get the summary and with Eneloop AAA only:



kreisl said:


> Klarus *MiX6* XP-G R5, *45h*
> Fenix *LD01* XP-G R4, *32h*
> ITP *A3* Upgraded Edition XP-G R5, *18h*
> Tank007 *E09* XP-E R3, *17h*
> ...



For more details of the repeated runs and repeated 10440 runtime tests please google to find my original post


----------



## jb-lite (Aug 28, 2013)

I know it's not very scientific, but I'm running a little test with my ARC-P to see how it compares on run-time. I came across some old Duracell batteries (nothing special; never been used, but the battery shows an expiration of 2008) and figured one could be sacrificed to run this test. This is my EDC flashlight, so I simply turned it on and put it back in my pocket.

Initial start: Using batteries 5 years past their shelf-life doesn't seem to be a problem
6 hours: I don’t notice any difference from when it started (perception only since I don’t have any true light measuring equipment)
12 hours: Noticeably less bright than when it started, but still a good amount of light. I doubt I would notice my light is dimmed if I didn’t have the fresh memory of the starting point
20 hours: Much dimmer. When I go into a dark room without giving my eyes any extra time to adjust, I can easily see a light spot on the wall 10 feet away and/or read a book at normal reading distance
30 hours: Based on my perception, it's the same as 20 hours
38 hours: I think the light spot on the wall 10 feet away is getting smaller/dimmer, but I can still read a book with no problem
42 hours: It has a very dim glow. I can see it projected on the wall from about 4 inches. It is no longer what I would consider a usable flashlight.
43 hours: No detectable light.

I don’t know how much light comes from a Quark AA on moon mode, so I can’t offer a fair comparison. My independent conclusion is that I still had a good, usable, although weak flashlight at 38 hours which isn't bad coming when using a battery that was 5 years past its shelf life before I started.


----------



## Etsu (Aug 29, 2013)

jb-lite said:


> 38 hours: I think the light spot on the wall 10 feet away is getting smaller/dimmer, but I can still read a book with no problem I don’t know how much light comes from a Quark AA on moon mode, so I can’t offer a fair comparison.


 The Quark AA moon mode is about what you describe at 38 hours. You can read with it, but I wouldn't want to use less light to read, and I choose to use much more. It's kind of, "I can read with it if I have to, but I don't want to for very long."


----------



## gurdygurds (Feb 18, 2017)

Rise.....RIIIIIIIISE! Let this thread live! Bringing back an oldie but goodie because I love it and because I'd like to know if the old single 5mm LED Matterhorns can be run on the newer Eiger bodies with QTC? Also is anyone running one of these sub zero Peaks with qtc?


----------



## sbslider (Feb 18, 2017)

Hey gurdygurds, thanks for digging this one up. 

I am a pretty new to the flashlight hobby, so my light collection is pretty small. But I do have 2 AAAs that could be candidates for the run time test. I have seen one of my lights, the Fenix LD01, mentioned above at 32 hours. Best I can tell from the SN my emitter is a XP-E R4, not sure how that measures up to the xp-g R4. I am going to run white eneloops and alkaline batteries, as that is what I have. Oh, the second light is the Manker E01, which a electron sipping 0.1 lumen firefly mode that advertises 100 hours. I would be shocked if I got that with the eneloop, but I will be curious to see what happens with the alkaline.

While not a AAA light, for comparison I am going to run my petzl e+lite as well here. It runs on two lithium coin cells and boasts 70hrs on low. I will start the Manker E01 and the Petzl tonight before bed, and just start the Fenix tomorrow. I will likely start it mid day so if it does last 30 hours ish it will be darker when I am observing its final moments. My threshold light will be my Thrunite Archer 1A V3 in moonlight mode, which works for the petzl and Fenix, but not the Manker. Likely won't post pictures, just what happens. Hoping to start at 9pm PST, but waiting for my eneloop charge to complete . . .


----------



## gurdygurds (Feb 19, 2017)

Slider......you're a good person. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Thanks for adding to the fun. I'm going to do the same but a few of the lights won't be in until Tuesday.


sbslider said:


> Hey gurdygurds, thanks for digging this one up.
> 
> I am a pretty new to the flashlight hobby, so my light collection is pretty small. But I do have 2 AAAs that could be candidates for the run time test. I have seen one of my lights, the Fenix LD01, mentioned above at 32 hours. Best I can tell from the SN my emitter is a XP-E R4, not sure how that measures up to the xp-g R4. I am going to run white eneloops and alkaline batteries, as that is what I have. Oh, the second light is the Manker E01, which a electron sipping 0.01 firefly mode that advertises 100 hours. I would be shocked if I got that with the eneloop, but I will be curious to see what happens with the alkaline.
> 
> While not a AAA light, for comparison I am going to run my petzl e+lite as well here. It runs on two lithium coin cells and boasts 70hrs on low. I will start the Manker E01 and the Petzl tonight before bed, and just start the Fenix tomorrow. I will likely start it mid day so if it does last 30 hours ish it will be darker when I am observing its final moments. My threshold light will be my Thrunite Archer 1A V3 in moonlight mode, which works for the petzl and Fenix, but not the Manker. Likely won't post pictures, just what happens. Hoping to start at 9pm PST, but waiting for my eneloop charge to complete . . .


----------



## jabe1 (Feb 19, 2017)

gurdygurds said:


> I'd like to know if the old single 5mm LED Matterhorns can be run on the newer Eiger bodies with QTC?


Gordy,
i just tried an old single led Matty head on an Eiger QTC body with momentary...the threaded section of the head is just a bit short, but it does work! Rediculously low lumen output.


----------



## gurdygurds (Feb 19, 2017)

Nice Jabe! Appreciate you trying it out. I'll be giving it a go with a Matty head and a pocket Eiger with QTC.


jabe1 said:


> Gordy,
> i just tried an old single led Matty head on an Eiger QTC body with momentary...the threaded section of the head is just a bit short, but it does work! Rediculously low lumen output.


----------



## gurdygurds (Feb 19, 2017)

Nice Jabe! Appreciate you trying it out. I'll be giving it a go with a Matty head and a pocket Eiger with QTC. Should get crazy long runtime with the low powered 5mm and QTC!!C


jabe1 said:


> Gordy,
> i just tried an old single led Matty head on an Eiger QTC body with momentary...the threaded section of the head is just a bit short, but it does work! Rediculously low lumen output.


----------



## archimedes (Feb 19, 2017)

gurdygurds said:


> Nice Jabe! Appreciate you trying it out. I'll be giving it a go with a Matty head and a pocket Eiger with QTC. Should get crazy long runtime with the low powered 5mm and QTC!!C



Thanks for confirming, and yes, runtime should be epic [emoji317]


----------



## scout24 (Feb 19, 2017)

I-m curious to see how the e+lite does. I've got one in my truck bag...


----------



## sbslider (Feb 19, 2017)

scout24 said:


> I-m curious to see how the e+lite does. I've got one in my truck bag...


 Not sure how many lumens the e+lite is on low, high is 26 for 55 hours and low ?? lumens for 75 hours, so really not much lower. I will say now that I have the 3 lumen LD01 started as well it appears the brightest of the bunch. I think the e+lite has dimmed a bit in the day of running thus far though. The instructions say the distance on low at 0 hours is 15m, at 10 hrs is 6m, at at 30 hrs is 4m. We are at 22 hours presently. Not sure if lumens scale linearly or otherwise? 

I have taken a couple pictures but I think I will wait to post, as I don't want to hassle uploading then linking, what a pita . . .


----------



## sbslider (Feb 20, 2017)

47 hr update. I am figuring this out as I go, and I don't have any fancy equipment. I am using my cell phone camera and a DVM. 

By all data I have the LD01 is still running the same brightness as when I first took data, which is about 7 hours in to that light being on. According to this the output is regulated down to about 0.5V. I took the battery out today after ~29 hrs and it is at 1.21V. The LD01 has now been running for 32 hrs and looks the same in pictures as it did at 7 hours. I am thinking/hoping it will go all night without killing the eneloop, time will tell. *Nope, it was out cold at 1:40 am. Verified 32 hrs and a few minutes. Not sure when it died. *

The e+lite has dimmed from when I started the test, but not much if at all from the 24 hour mark. It puts out more than enough light to find my way around my darkened bedroom without dark adjusted eyes. If I used it as a head lamp it is easy to read by. *56 hours so far on the e+lite and it looks iike it did at 24 hours, still fairly bright. *

And the Manker E01 is very steady, even though somehow it got into medium mode for ~10 minutes yesterday. A few hours ago the battery was at 1.29V. This will go for a couple more days I suspect easy. Good thing, as I am leaving on a business trip in the morning. I likely won't bring my DVM, but I will bring the lights in the on state packed away in my bag somewhere. I will do a check of the Manker again before I pack up. Measuring the e+lite is a bit of a pita, so I will just monitor with my cell phone camera. *At 56 hours no change in brightness of the Manker E01, or should I say dimness, at 0.1 lumen. This 0.1 is not as bright at my thrunite archer 0.1 lumen, and was not on a new battery either. No change in 56 hrs. *


----------



## sbslider (Feb 22, 2017)

91 hours into Manker E01 and e+lite runs. They are about the same brightness now. The E01 battery is still at 1.27V. If I was not measuring this myself I would not believe it. The light intensity of the E01 has not changed from the test start. The e+lite started dropping off in intensity between 56 and 70 hours. At 78 hours it was still brighter than the E01. It will produce usable light I suspect at 100 hours. It definitely lives up to the specified ratings up to 30 hours, not much is said after that other than a 75 hr life.


----------



## gurdygurds (Feb 22, 2017)

Thanks sbslider! Crazy good runtimes. I've misplaced my Eiger QTC right now so I can't contribute. Hopefully I find the darn thing and can run it super low super long.


----------



## scout24 (Feb 22, 2017)

:thumbsup:


----------



## sbslider (Feb 23, 2017)

LD01 on energizer alkaline battery 38.5 hours. After several hours of sitting in my pocked, I measured the battery at 1.15V, turned it back on low for 40 more minutes. Starting to wonder if using cheap alkaline batteries is a better way to go on these little guys.


----------



## sbslider (Feb 25, 2017)

Today I pulled the plug on the e+lite after 154 hours. While the LEDs are still producing light, it is too dim to be of any use. The two lithium coin cell batteries in series measured 2.9V together. All in all, I would say I got around 100 hours of useful continuous light out of the new batteries. 

Meanwhile the Manker E01 is still going strong. Last time I measured the battery it was at 1.25V. I used the light in the middle of the night a few hours ago to navigate through the house in the dark, plenty of light for that. The light as dimmed only slightly since the battery was new a week ago . . .


----------



## scout24 (Feb 27, 2017)

Thanks for the e+lite info in particular. Now I just need some fresh coin cells!


----------



## sbslider (Feb 27, 2017)

scout24 said:


> Thanks for the e+lite info in particular. Now I just need some fresh coin cells!


 You can get them pretty cheap on ebay, I got 20 for about $6 a couple years ago.


----------



## sbslider (Feb 27, 2017)

200 hours 1.16V of light out of the Manker E01 on a 750 mAh eneloop, test over. The light was still usable in the middle of the night for navigating around a dark house. I don’t want to keep discharging the eneloop, and also want to start investigating the current vs voltage profile. I put a new alkaline in it today and found that it is as bright as the AA Archer which also claims 1 lumen on moonlight. I don't think the eneloop was never that bright, even fresh, but I need to charge it and compare, as early on my pictures were direct into the camera instead of wall bounce.


----------



## gurdygurds (Sep 11, 2018)

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...n-Yuji-Warm-amp-Neutral&p=5242009#post5242009
The next contender.....


----------



## gurdygurds (Sep 13, 2018)

Received the low power Yuji E01 from Vinh today and started a runtime test today at 5pm. We shall see how long it will run on a standard Eneloop.


----------



## this_is_nascar (Sep 14, 2018)

gurdygurds said:


> Received the low power Yuji E01 from Vinh today and started a runtime test today at 5pm. We shall see how long it will run on a standard Eneloop.


I don't fully understand the battery chemistries, buy why would you use a rechargeable for a runtime test, draining it down so low?


----------



## gurdygurds (Sep 14, 2018)

I’m testing runtime on an Eneloop......because I use Eneloops. If you go to the beginning of this thread Beacon of light, the OP, did his series of tests on Duraloops. He gave the same answer. Maybe we can see what it’s able to do on a lithium primary afterwards.

edit: 14 hours and lookin good 👍🏼


this_is_nascar said:


> I don't fully understand the battery chemistries, buy why would you use a rechargeable for a runtime test, draining it down so low?


----------



## gurdygurds (Sep 14, 2018)

Almost 21.5 hours and still motoring along. No drop in output.


----------



## sbslider (Sep 14, 2018)

good stuff, how many lumens of output, 1 or ~10? If 1, you'll likely get at least 100 hours. If 10, I am surprised it is still going. Hoping for a similar light from the BLF group buy.


----------



## gurdygurds (Sep 14, 2018)

1.7 lumen yuji’d e01 courtesy of Vinh 👍🏼


sbslider said:


> good stuff, how many lumens of output, 1 or ~10? If 1, you'll likely get at least 100 hours. If 10, I am surprised it is still going. Hoping for a similar light from the BLF group buy.


----------



## sbslider (Sep 14, 2018)

looking forward to seeing how long it will go, keep us updated.


----------



## gurdygurds (Sep 15, 2018)

I was out longer than I had planned and the light is definitely now in moon mode. 31.5 hrs. Not sure if it will jack up my eneloop but I’m going to let er’ ride.


----------



## this_is_nascar (Sep 15, 2018)

gurdygurds said:


> I was out longer than I had planned and the light is definitely now in moon mode. 31.5 hrs. Not sure if it will jack up my eneloop but I’m going to let er’ ride.


Of course it will. That's why I was asking in the 1st place. I'd be curious to see the ending voltage of the cell, once the test is over.


----------



## sbslider (Sep 15, 2018)

knowing the current before the test and the battery capacity gives you a pretty good idea of how long to expect it to run. Are you able to measure the current on that light?


----------



## gurdygurds (Sep 15, 2018)

I don't have any equipment to measure voltage or current or anything. Wish I could've give y'all more info, sorry about that. I let it run for another hour and a half until it was pretty dim and then shut it off, so about 33 hours on a standard Eneloop. Pretty cool. I'll see if I can grab a lithium primary today and let it run on that. Anyhow, many thanks to Vinh for building this light. When I grab a lithium primary I'll let it run on that.


----------

