# Regalight WT1 - A Massive Performer! With beamshots & Runtimes!



## StefanFS (Nov 2, 2007)

This came to me in the mail. This review will be a work in progress for a period of time....








Contents of the box. A decent lanyard, a rather flimsy holster reminiscent of Fenix holsters, spare silicone o-rings, spare rubber boot for the swithces, one low - high two level switch (with 10 Ohm resistor) and one OP-reflector.







Here with one of my EDC lights.







Disassembled into the major parts.







Threads on the battery tube tailcap end. Very good threads, lubricated, deep and smooth.







Emitter module in the battery tube top. Module doesn't seem to screw out of the tube, either threadlocked or it's a press fit. Threads are smooth and lubricated, again double o-rings.







The head. Very faint traces of machining marks in the scalloped parts of the head, otherwise perfect finish. In close scrutiny the head part is a fraction lighter in colour than the bezel. Took me a while to notice it.







Inside threads that connects with the battery tube. Very nice fit and finish, smooth threads.







The bezel. Glow in dark o-ring keeps the lens in place. One o-ring between bezel and head. The glow ring stay in its place when the bezel is fully tightened. Outstanding finish and machinework on the bezel.







Tailcap with the forward click switch installed (standard). The switch seem to be of high quality, it has a rather short travel length and it is smooth when pressed.







The forward click switch assembly. It's not possible to disassemble the module, it's a complete unit. The spring could be a bit stiffer and longer to avoid battery movement in the tube.







The two level reverse click switch module disassembled. It's the same switch that LumaPower and Tiablo use in their products. The low level is acheived via one 10 Ohm resistor. The sequence is: Low - High - Off. A good switch, but with a bit higher resistance than the forward switch.







A size comparison with some common pocket items. Here with one Swisstool Spirit two blade version and one Victorinox Mini Champ.







A bilingual manual comes with the WT1. It states warranty terms, frequently asked questions, and most importantly; it tells you to put the battery anode towards the head. In other words: _*Positive end of the battery towards the head. Which is important since Regalight warns about reverse polarity in the manual.*_








*Specifications from Regalight*

_1. Cree 7090 XR-E WC Q5 LED at 220 lumens._
_2. Step down constant current driver, High efficiency with dual mode DC-DC regulator (PWM / PFM),working voltage is 2.7V to 8.4V. Replace battery when the light is too dim._
_3. Supports three sizes battery, one 18650 Li-ion battery, two pcs CR123A or RCR123A battery._
_4、Long runtime for high output.use a 18650 for 4 hours；use two CR123A for 3.5 hours_
_5. Durable Type III hard anodized finish. Aircraft aluminum T7075._
_6. Water proof to 5m/15ft._
_7. Toughened ultra clear glass lens with AR coating._
_8. Tactical clicky switch_
_9. Two stage module:focusing-->focus _
_10. Length 154mm, Head diameter:36mm, Weight: 125g (battery excluded)_
_11. Anti-falling ring to make it safer to put on desk or table._
_12. Accessories: Instructions, three pcs O-ring, one pcs black and one pcs glow press button cap. Includes a holster _

The Regalight WT1 is available here or here.



*White wall beamshots* 

Beam distribution with the smooth reflector at 1 metre.







Beam distribution with the orange peel/textured reflector at 1 metre.







Comparison between Regalight WT1, Tiablo A9 and LumaPower D-mini. At 50 centimetres. The Regalight WT1 compares favourably to my two favourite EDC lights! All with smooth reflectors.









*Outdoor beamshots at 95 and 40 metres* 

The lights used in the outdoor beamshots






*Number one*, Regalight WT1. CREE Q5 WC. Stock version. 14 580 Lux in throw at one metre. AW 18650 LiION cell.
*Number two*, Tiablo A9 with CREE Q5 WC, FluPic driver on burst 1200 mA. UCL-type lens. 30 500 Lux in throw at one metre. One AW 18650 LiION cell.
*Number three*, MRV with CREE Q5 WG, stock driver. UCL-type lens. 21 050 (RCR 123) /13 630 (18650)Lux in throw at one metre. 
*Number four*, 3D Mäg with SSC P4 USOXH and five mode driver with max at 1000 mA. UCL lens. 20 150 Lux in throw at one metre with NiMH cells.
*Number five*, D-mini. CREE Q5 WG. 1000 mA driver. UCL-type lens. 14 200 Lux in throw at one metre. AW RCR123 LiION cell.

The lights in reverse order for size comparison in the picture below.








*The first setting.* Hotspots are at 95 metres on the trees, spill and general ability to light up a space is closer. The house is at 50 metres.







A composite of the set.













































*The second setting.* Here against the lights used in the first series of outdoor beamshots. The Regalight WT1 is always on the left. The trees are 40 metres away.








































*Lux readings, Battery draw etc.*


The WT1 seem to have a very good driver circuit, output on all three cell types are very similar. 






It seems that the reverse two level switch has higher resistance on the high level than the forward switch.


*The lens*
The WT1 has a high quality lens, manufacturer claim antireflex coating. If there is coating it's a clear type. However, I did test the lens against some UCL glass lenses I have. UCL glass have a transmission rate of 98% if I remember correctly. That is, I measure throw at one metre while holding first the stock lens against the reflector with the bezel off, then I do the same with the UCL-lens. Ordinarily most manufacturers go cheap on the lens, which is really stupid. Not in this case, the stock lens perform very well against the UCL glass. The difference is only 730 Lux. In my other throw lights, MRV/Tiablo/D-mini, I have had new lenses of UCL-type made since the difference was dramatic, in the 2000-3000 Lux range. The WT1 lens is 31.75 mm in diameter and 2 mm in thickness.


*Battery draw:*
18650: 860 mA.
RCR123: 660 mA.
CR123: 790 mA.


*Weight:*
Empty: 140 grams.
With AW 18650: 186 grams.



*Runtimes*

Runtime on CR123 primary cells. Impressive regulation up until 96 minutes. The light gets warm, so my recommendation is to hold it in the hand while running it over periods exceeding 30 minutes.







Flat output for exactly 45 minutes on two RCR123 cells. Abrupt shutdown at 45 min.







Good regulation on 18650 LiION for two hours.








*Conclusion*

A very nice flashlight that's built like a tank and with very good regulation on all cell types. Recommended for those who need a good one level light with a forward click switch. The solid construction implies that it will survive a lot of abuse.


*Postitive remarks.*

The machining and finishing is very good on my specimen, not perfect but as close it can be with a mass produced item. Overall a very high standard.
Very good output for it's size. the WT1 outperforms both stock LumaPower MRV and Tiablo A8 with CREE Q2 emitters. The WT1 performs well compared to my modded versions of these lights with CREE Q5 and other drivers. It clearly outperform all existing versions of LumaPower D-mini. On paper it compares well with stock MRV Q5 SE & Tiablo A8/9 Q5, not quite as bright but just below these. And that's amazing with the WT1 having ~half the reflector area.
My WT1 has a very high quality smooth aluminium reflector with flawless coating. One OP reflector is included with the light. (It's a bonus in this package, I think that later on only one reflector will be included.) The OP reflector performs well, it's lightly structured.
The forward switch is very good, nice feeling and tactile response in it. It seems to be of high quality, but time will tell if it's not.
Excellent regulation on primary cells. Excellent performance on RCR123 LiION cells. Good regulation on 18650 LiION. Output numbers suggest that current to the emitter is very close to 1000 mA on all cell types, few production lights accomplish this.
Excellent heatsinking. Since the emitter seem to be run near its maximum current (~1 A) a lot of heat is produced, the whole light gets warm when it's on for extended periods. I haven't noticed any decrease in output due to heat.
There is a massive feeling to the light, it's bulit like a safe, or an armoured vehicle.
Accepts all cell sizes I own, including the bigger silver Ultrafire RCR123 LiION cells.
Sleek and stylish design, it's actually more pocket friendly than my D-mini, even though it's longer than the D-mini.
*Negative remarks.*

The light shares it's weakest point with Tiablo A8/9 and LumaPower MRV: The unprotected glow in dark o-ring securing the lens, how this will hold up over years of use is anyones guess. I hope it will last
The fact that the led pill seem to be permanently installed, that will be a problem for those who want a quick upgrade path as new emitters emerge. I expect it will be no more difficult to swap emitter than it is in an MRV or Tiablo, but it is not as easy as for example with Dereelight DBS/CL1H.
The fact that the tailcap and lower battery tube threads are not anodized, that excludes lockout for transport etc.
Lack of knurling on the body. The bigger tailcap and the structured head provide good grip, but in some situations knurling on the battery tube might be needed.
The switch could use a longer and stiffer battery spring to hold the cell/s more securely.
I will update this review for a while. 

Stefan


----------



## StefanFS (Nov 2, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*

*Additional beamshots*

I wasn't satisfied with the first batch of beamshots in post #1. It was done with a borrowed camera since mine was being serviced. Now my favourite camera is back and I decided to do another few sets with better manual control over whitebalance and shutter speed etc. White balance is sunlight and exposures are 8 sec.

This time the Regalight WT1 is up against one stock Tiablo A9 I got in a trade recently, my MRV with stock driver and CREE Q5 WG and my favourite 3D Mag SSC mod. I think the pictures speak for themselves.


*First setting. 50 meters to the trees.*
































*Second setting. 70 meters to the trees. A pond in the woods..*

































*Torture testing*

I also decided to do a torture test, I used the WT1 to smash a hole in the ice on the pond seen above. Then I put the light down under the ice, in the water, and left it for 1 hour and 30 minutes on high (with an AW 18650 cell in it). It didn't leak or turn off. The water had frozen over when I got back to get it!
















Stefan


----------



## whc (Nov 2, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*

Very nice review, looks like an pretty good deal for the WT1 ...

BTW how is the grip of the WT1, no knurling at all on that body, is it slippery. Would be nice if some o-rings would fit those grooves below the head...


----------



## WadeF (Nov 2, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*

Thanks for the review! I had my eye on that light, but wanted to hear some feedback. I don't think it does anything special compared to the other lights I have. What makes it "A Massive Peformer!" ?  The overal quality?


----------



## StefanFS (Nov 2, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*



WadeF said:


> Thanks for the review! I had my eye on that light, but wanted to hear some feedback. I don't think it does anything special compared to the other lights I have. What makes it "A Massive Peformer!" ?  The overal quality?


 
The output and the build. It compares favourably with lights that have more output and bigger reflectors. And it's really solid when I hold it. Also, the review is a work in progress. Runtimes on 18650 & RCR 123 will come the next few days.
Stefan


----------



## WadeF (Nov 2, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*

It would be interesting to compare it with a Dereelight CL1H 3-Stage Q5. They seem similar in size.


----------



## selfbuilt (Nov 2, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*

Looking good Stefan - appreciate all the work you are putting into this! :twothumbs

 Can't wait to see the rest of the review. My WT1 should be here early next week, so I'll post my throw and output values then to compare.


----------



## SaVaGe (Nov 2, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*

wonder how its compared to deree light............


----------



## swxb12 (Nov 2, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*

StefanFS, this is a high quality review. Thank you for your efforts. I love those outdoor beamshots. :thumbsup:


----------



## Mr. Blue (Nov 2, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*

one of the best reviews I have seen in 6 years


----------



## JKL (Nov 2, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*

Thank you StefanFS :twothumbs.
High quality review, as usual .
It seems to be builded with high quality,probably the grip could be improved, at any rate we wait next runtime tests and your additional info.


----------



## Rob187 (Nov 3, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*

A lot of effort has gone into this review - great work. Thank-you.

Not a bad light either...


----------



## StefanFS (Nov 3, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*

Post #1 updated with runtimes on 18650 & RCR123.
Thank you all for your comments.
Stefan


----------



## StefanFS (Nov 3, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*



whc said:


> Very nice review, looks like an pretty good deal for the WT1 ...
> 
> BTW how is the grip of the WT1, no knurling at all on that body, is it slippery. Would be nice if some o-rings would fit those grooves below the head...


 

You mean something like this? Yes, that works well and it improves grip with 3 mm thick ones. One (2 mm thick) even fits the tailcap groove. O-rings are 26-28 mm in outer diameter and 2 or 3 mm thick.






Stefan


----------



## StefanFS (Nov 5, 2007)

I think that the led pill is a press fit (down into the battery tube). It doesn't move with brute force and my biggest wrenches. Lifting the plastic cover is required to get access to the emitter.






Stefan


----------



## whc (Nov 5, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*



StefanFS said:


> You mean something like this? Yes, that works well and it improves grip with 3 mm thick ones. One (2 mm thick) even fits the tailcap groove. O-rings are 26-28 mm in outer diameter and 2 or 3 mm thick. Stefan


Very nice, thanks for the info .

Hmm in the background, is that like o-ring heaven or what ?


----------



## WadeF (Nov 5, 2007)

*Re: Regalight WT1 - A Massive performer!*

Stefan, what LUX meter are you using? Do yo have a LUX reading for the Tiablo A9S Q5?


----------



## StefanFS (Nov 6, 2007)

I'm using a CEM DT 1300 mostly. It's pretty well calibrated.
In Sweden the CEM meters are available in some shops (the kind you visit in person), as well as in web shops, for ~$40-45.

This is what my stock A9 Q5 put out before modding it.

*Output, throw in Lux @ one metre, high/low:* 

AW 18650 LiION: 18 500/2790 Lux.
AW RCR123 LiION: 21 500/12 700 Lux.
CR123 Energizer Primary cells: 20 700/7240 Lux.
Stefan


----------



## selfbuilt (Nov 9, 2007)

Hi Stefan - great review, extremely thorough - very well done! :thumbsup:

Could you confirm for me which way you placed the battery in the light? Following the common interpretation of anode as negative terminal (which is technically only correct on a discharging cell, but that's another matter), I tried installing a 18650 with the negative terminal toward the head and the light won't come on. I've contacted Regal for a clarification, but thought I'd check with you too.

One possibilty that occurs to me is the spring doesn't seem to be applying a lot of pressure on the 18650, so this may be a contact issue. But before I monkey around with it, I want to make sure I've got the battery orientation correct!

Thanks!


----------



## ernsanada (Nov 9, 2007)

+ve towards the emitter. -ve towards the tailcap.


----------



## StefanFS (Nov 9, 2007)

selfbuilt said:


> Hi Stefan - great review, extremely thorough - very well done! :thumbsup:
> 
> Could you confirm for me which way you placed the battery in the light? Following the common interpretation of anode as negative terminal (which is technically only correct on a discharging cell, but that's another matter), I tried installing a 18650 with the negative terminal toward the head and the light won't come on. I've contacted Regal for a clarification, but thought I'd check with you too.
> 
> ...


 
Thank You.

I guess I wasn't thorough enough, I hope you didn't fry the driver in your light. In a general way in everyday life Anode means positive (I think??). It's just that for more specialised people the LiION cell (battery) in this case isn't technically this way, which lead to confusion sometimes. I also should have mentioned the fact that this light does not have any reverse polarity protection that I am aware of!

Stefan


----------



## selfbuilt (Nov 9, 2007)

Thanks guys - I've reversed the battery and it worked fine. The circuit was not fried by my one attempt to ignite the light in reverse orientation (mind you, I only gave it ~1 sec before cutting the switch). I also used a partially depleted 18650 cell for my initial attempt, reasoning that the lower voltage would be less likely to blow a circuit without reverse polarity protection.

The problem here comes from the inappropriate application of the terms anode/cathode to a battery. I have a background in electrophysiology, and these terms have very definite meanings in terms of flow of current. Using standard current conventions, for any battery the anode is the negative terminal when discharging (which is what you do in flashlight). The anode is only the positive terminal if you are re-charging a battery (which is hard to imagine doing inside a flashlight!). This is why these terms should be avoided at all costs when referring to battery terminals.

BTW, I don't think I am the only potential victim of my specialized education . Popping in "battery anode" into google, the first hit that comes up clearly says the anode is the negative (-) terminal of battery, with an illustration to match: 
http://www.qrg.northwestern.edu/projects/vss/docs/Power/2-how-do-batteries-work.html

Although I disagree with the supposedly clear-cut description that site gives, it is the first google hit you will find - and is the exact opposite interpretation to what Regal meant. FYI, a search of wiki for "anode" will give you the more accurate charging/discharging description.

On plus side, most people don't read instructions anyway, so would probably just proceed to pop the batteries in the standard orientation of the positive to the head :ironic:. But that instruction needs to be changed - I noted as much in their CPM thread.

Thanks again for the prompt reply guys! :thumbsup:


----------



## selfbuilt (Nov 9, 2007)

I figured there was no point in creating another review thread, so I thought I'd add some of my numbers and observations here (if that's ok with Stefan).

I agree completely with Stefan's assessment of the build quality of this light. Machining and anodizing are excellent, very substantial feel in the hand. I'd say overall build quality-wise, it's around the level of an MRV (which is higher than the DBS, but not as high as the Tiablo). Excellent marks all around. :thumbsup:

Only negative on mine is the beam pattern. With the smooth reflector, the beam is ringier than my LP, Tiablo and DBS lights similarly equipped (the DBS was the previous "ringiness" winner among my lights ). More importantly, the emitter, while well-centered, doesn't seem to be lying completely level. The result is that the major rings in the beam are not exactly centered around the hotspot, but rather slightly off to one side. The OP reflector helps hide this somewhat, but doesn't completely remove the effect. Note that the actual tilt of the emitter is subtle, and the lopsided effect of the rings is only really noticeable on a white wall and not in actual use. But it is there, and this is not something I've seen on my LP, Tiablo, or DBS lights. 

My light meter typically reports lower values than Stefan's, but here's what I got with the original smooth reflector

*Regal WT1 - Q5 Throw Lux @ one meter:*
18650 x 1 on high: 10,200 Lux
18650 x 1 on low: 1,650 Lux
RCR x 2 on high: 11,200 Lux
RCR x 2 on low: 6,200 Lux
CR123A x 2 on high: 10,650 Lux
CR123A x 2 on low: 3,800 Lux

Note that unlike Stefan, my 2-stage switch has exactly the same output readings as the single-stage on Hi, so I've only reported the 2-stage results above. Here's how those results compare to my MRV and D-minis:

*MRV 1st Generation (Light Gray) - P4 Throw Lux @ one meter:*
18650 x 1 on high: 9,600 Lux
18650 x 1 on low: 6,200 Lux
CR123A x 2 on high: 11,800 Lux
CR123A x 2 on low: 5,900 Lux
*MRV 2nd Generation (Dark Brown) - Q2 Throw Lux @ one meter:*
18650 x 1 on high: 10,400 Lux
18650 x 1 on low: 7,100 Lux
CR123A x 2 on high: 14,200 Lux
CR123A x 2 on low: 7,200 Lux
*D-mini 1st Generation (Black) - P4 Throw Lux @ one meter:*
RCR x 1 on high: 6,900 Lux
RCR x 1 on low: 590 Lux
CR123A x 1 on high: 5,650 Lux
CR123A x 1 on low: 985 Lux
*D-mini Digital 2nd Generation (HA-III Natural) - Q2 Throw Lux @ one meter:*
RCR x 1 on high: 6,900 Lux
RCR x 1 on med: 1,950 Lux
RCR x 1 on low: 510 Lux
CR123A x 1 on high: 6,650 Lux
CR123A x 1 on med: 1,850 Lux
CR123A x 1 on low: 530 Lux

The conclusion here is that my Regal WT1 throws as far as my MRV-Q2 on 18650, and about as far as my MRV-P4 on primaries. It certainly throws much further than either version of the D-mini. It also has a very nice low mode (except on RCR, where it is similar to the MRV low). It's hard to estimate overall output on such throwy lights, but I'd say it seems to at least match that of my Q2 lights overall.

I've done only one runtime test on Hi on 18650, and my results are actually a bit better than Stefan's: I got *2hr 59mins to 50%*. The difference likely just reflects the variability of Vf in Q5 emitters. If you look at my thrower review, this puts the WT1 with an output curve similar in initial throw to the MRV-Q2, but with the runtime of the DBS-Q2. Certainly very respectable.

All in all, I'm happy with the light. Seems to be good value for the money. You basically get original P4/Q2 MRV output - with similar build quality - but in a smaller, more portable form-factor. 

Cheers, and thanks again Stefan for all the excellent work in this thread! :wave:


----------



## Patriot (Nov 9, 2007)

Awesome review and pics as usual Stefen! Very impressive and comparative results. Thank you for all of the hard work.

BTW the MRV Q5 on RCR's looks like it's kicking butt....? Am I seeing things? I know mine throws really well but I don't have anything to compare it to except the mags with P4s. 

Anyhow, thanks again.


----------



## StefanFS (Nov 10, 2007)

Patriot36 said:


> BTW the MRV Q5 on RCR's looks like it's kicking butt....? Am I seeing things? I know mine throws really well but I don't have anything to compare it to except the mags with P4s.


 
Thanks,
You are right, my brown MRV kicks butt. There are several factors that possibly contribute to this. I used an Q5 WG emitter which seem brighter to the eye and the camera outdoors since it's a tiny bit warmer in tint. The reflector which is very balanced, a strong defined hotspot and generous amounts of spill, the reflector maximizes the MRV so to speak with its outstanding performance. The stock MRV driver supplies the led with higer voltage and current on RCR123. It also has a UCL-type lens which increases flux a bit.This is my last MRV with the stock driver, I'm looking for another driver. Not satisfied with the stock one.


Thanks Selfbuilt,

About the build quality on my Tiablo lights, my A8 is flawless in every detail and aspect. But my A9 is the opposite to this, all parts are mismatched in anodizing, plenty of machining marks, tailcap threads are a bit off etc. But the A9 is still one of my favourites.

Stefan


----------



## Sharpy_swe (Nov 10, 2007)

Great review as usual


----------



## selfbuilt (Nov 10, 2007)

StefanFS said:


> About the build quality on my Tiablo lights, my A8 is flawless in every detail and aspect. But my A9 is the opposite to this, all parts are mismatched in anodizing, plenty of machining marks, tailcap threads are a bit off etc. But the A9 is still one of my favourites.


Interesting, good to know. Personally, my dark brown MRV remains my favourite build of all the thrower lights I have.

But the Regal is pretty nice too - my wife saw me playing with it last night, and asked to examine it. She quite like the build and hand feel as well. Her conclusion: "manly yes, but I like it too!" :laughing:

BTW, here's a pic of the rings in my beam. Although slightly distorted by the camera angle, the hotspot is indeed in the center of the beam - it's the rings that are off-center.







Although it's not too pretty up close on a white wall, you don't really notice it in practical use.


----------



## StefanFS (Nov 17, 2007)

Post #2 updated with better beamshots and a torture test of the WT1. This is the toughest light I own, hands down.
Stefan


----------



## Mercaptan (Nov 17, 2007)

Considering it's not really meant to compete with the MRV and A9 thrower class... it does a pretty good job.

Stefan, I don't suppose you have access to a CL1H for comparison?

Good review, thanks for the hard work! Love the torture test - glad someone is willing to put a brand new toy into an icy pond.


----------



## StefanFS (Nov 17, 2007)

Mercaptan said:


> Considering it's not really meant to compete with the MRV and A9 thrower class... it does a pretty good job.
> 
> Stefan, I don't suppose you have access to a CL1H for comparison?
> 
> Good review, thanks for the hard work!


 
Yes, it's just a fraction below the bigger lights. In real life they might be comparable since they perform about the same on distances up to 70-80 meters, which is a realistic distance to work at in the dark with unaided eyes.

Sorry, no Dereelights for me yet. I do have a first generation CL1H, but that one is modded beyond recognition.

Stefan


----------



## Tubor (Nov 17, 2007)

I had to buy this after your review. Prefer it's looks to the other lights tested.


----------



## StefanFS (Nov 17, 2007)

Tubor said:


> I had to buy this after your review. Prefer it's looks to the other lights tested.


 
I had my doubts about it! But it turned out very well in the end. It's pretty slim, pocketable and very tough. It's not as easily upgraded as the Dereelights, but not harder than it's on Tiablo & MRV to swap in new generations of emitters. 
Stefan


----------



## Anders (Nov 19, 2007)

Wow, a very good review, as usual Stefan :goodjob:

Thanks for all your work.

Anders


----------



## sb_pete (Nov 19, 2007)

Wow. I don't want to clutter up the thread, but I just wanted to say thanks Stefan.I am always impressed at how thorough and nicely done your reviews are.
Thank you
-Pete


----------



## StefanFS (Nov 21, 2007)

Thank you Anders & sb_pete,
as always there is room for improvement. But this is quite a nice light in it's class. Add a firmer battery spring, some knurling on the body and an easy upgrade path, and it would be even nicer.
Stefan


----------



## JKL (Nov 24, 2007)

Which is the dimensional rapport of the Regalight WT1 in the hand ?
(I think it could be the same as Lumapower M1 Tactical). 

Pictures available?
:thanks:


----------



## StefanFS (Nov 25, 2007)

Regalight WT1.







Tiablo A9.






Stefan


----------



## JKL (Nov 25, 2007)

Thank you very much StefanFS for your kind reply.:twothumbs


----------



## prsimons1 (Dec 8, 2007)

Hi everyone,

I've looked at both flashlights and have to say that the A9 is very comfortable to use and the beam patern and light intensity is in my opinion truly BRILLIANT (sorry  ).

A very popular flashlight with our customers in the UK through http://www.inovatech.co.uk/shop/product.php?productid=3&cat=1&bestseller=Y

When used with CR123A batteries x2 = 6V, it is slightly brighter than when a single 18650 LiOn battery 3.7V in used even though the unit is very well regulated. Quite acceptable though and clearly much more ecconomic to run on 18650.

Have you guys seen the new Tiablo holster for the A8/9? We've just got them in. Not on the site yet but I'll try and sort that out this weekend with images. Also has 2 compartments to hold spare batteries alond side the central pouch for the flashlight.


----------



## garfieldso (Dec 8, 2007)

prsimons1 said:


> Hi everyone,
> 
> I've looked at both flashlights and have to say that the A9 is very comfortable to use and the beam patern and light intensity is in my opinion truly BRILLIANT (sorry  ).
> 
> ...



I saw the photo that the light level seemed to be done by the resistors inside the tail cap; not sure that is it having a regulating circuit to step down the voltage from 2 x 123a at 6V?


----------



## StefanFS (Dec 8, 2007)

This light is best used with the very good, one level, low resistance momentary switch installed. The driver is very similar to the one Tiablo uses for the A9.
Stefan


----------



## zerafull (Dec 8, 2007)

and what is your lumens estimation for this WT1 stefanFS ?

220 lms claimed by the brand seem's to be respected ?

again thx you for this fabulous review !


----------



## prsimons1 (Dec 9, 2007)

Regarding the voltage regulation of the A9, the working voltage is rated is 2.75v - 10v and is acheived through regulation.

The units power condumption is as follows;
High Output: 1A at max 256 lumens for approx 3.5 hours
Low Output: 300mA at 60 lumens for 8 hours


----------



## patryk79 (Dec 10, 2007)

nice review.... purdy beamshots...... solid light..... good work


----------



## Tubor (Dec 10, 2007)

Regal are doing a promotion if any one is interested. It's supposed to have a new circuit as well - 10% brighter I think.  

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?p=2095039


----------



## JKL (Dec 10, 2007)

Why not to get both? :devil:
Pics from my collection .

jkl-klm12


----------



## cmichael (Dec 10, 2007)

Just order WT1 for $60.00


----------



## moses (Dec 11, 2007)

Greetings,

Pardon my ignorance - but where do you get the D-Mini at 1000 ma current? The only dealer I saw listed something like 550ma or something like that.

I assume the D-Mini has a shallower reflector than the Regal?

Thanks,
Moses


----------



## StefanFS (Dec 11, 2007)

moses said:


> ....Pardon my ignorance - but where do you get the D-Mini at 1000 ma current? .....
> ....I assume the D-Mini has a shallower reflector than the Regal?


 
I modded mine with an CREE Q5 WG, 5 mode AMC7135 driver, forward switch and UCL-type glass lens. Like this: D-mini + Q5 + 5 mode driver

I believe that the WT1 reflector is slightly deeper. The WT1, unlike lot of other lights that claim it, actually deliver ~1 A to the led even with 18650.
Stefan


----------



## kboy25 (Dec 11, 2007)

Stefan...great review...loved the under the ice test!
ordered one! :twothumbs


----------



## moses (Dec 11, 2007)

Thanks.

Yes, an incredible review. Can't imagine what a labor that must have been! THANKS!

Moses


----------



## Tiny86 (Dec 11, 2007)

Will newer version of this light out throw the Fenix T1 with a smooth reflector?


----------



## kboy25 (Dec 12, 2007)

Tiny86 said:


> Will newer version of this light out throw the Fenix T1 with a smooth reflector?



I'm no expert (a relative noob).
but according to the lux readings...this will out throw the fenix t1
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/181629

that link has the lux for the fenix t1


----------



## selfbuilt (Dec 12, 2007)

Tiny86 said:


> Will newer version of this light out throw the Fenix T1 with a smooth reflector?


Do you mean a Fenix T1 with a smooth reflector, or a Regal WT1 with a smooth reflector? :thinking:

AFAIK, the reflector can't be changed in the T1. And the current WT1 version with the OP reflector already slightly out-throws the T1 (with built in OP reflector). The current WT1 with smooth reflector considerably out-throws it. See my comparison review here for lux numbers:

Fenix T1 vs. Regal WT1: RUNTIMEs, lots of pics.

Given that the new version of the WT1 should have higher output, I would expect it's current throw advantage to be further improved.


----------



## Tiny86 (Dec 13, 2007)

Sorry, should have made myself clearer! 


I saw a post by 4sevens that there were going to be T1s with smooth reflectors. So my question is, If the T1 has a Smooth reflector will it out throw a Rega light with a smooth reflector?

The reason I ask this is because from what I have noticed is that lights have higher lux reading with a smooth reflector then they do with an OP reflector. So I was wondering since the T1 has more output overall, would it (the T1) have a higher lux reading with a smooth reflector and out throw the Rega?
I hope that makes more sense!

BTW, Great review!


----------



## Steve L (Dec 13, 2007)

If the size of the reflectors are the same, the one with more overall output(T1) would throw further.


----------



## kboy25 (Dec 13, 2007)

yeah...but i think the fenix has a smaller reflector...from what i've seen 
but the fenix is pretty impressive as well.


----------



## moses (Dec 28, 2007)

Tiny86, 

Here are my lux reading normalized using one of the brightest Fenix P2D Q5 I have come across with fresh batteries. 

Fenix P2D Q5 = 1

Fenix T1 w. Orange Peel = 2.5

Regalight with Orange Peel = 3.8

Regalight with Smooth Reflector = 4.5

Please note that my number doesn't fully agree with other reviewers and I'd trust theirs more as they have more experience than I. I'd also note that the Regalight OP is not as aggressive OP as the Fenix T1. Hence, the gain of Fenix T1 going to smooth should be larger than the Regalight going from OP to smooth. 

That said, the Regalight has substantially larger reflector than the T1. Physics being what it is, I'm not sure that the smaller reflector of T1 can throw as well as the Regalight. T1 has more spill and larger hotspot - which makes it much more practical as the only light one has for daily use. 

Of cource, I think the P2D type reflector is more suited for daily use with even more flood.

Hope this helps.

Mo


----------



## IKE (Jan 23, 2008)

Thanks for a great review, it made my decision to purchase a Regalight a lot easier.


----------



## CandleFranky (Jan 24, 2008)

IKE said:


> Thanks for a great review, it made my decision to purchase a Regalight a lot easier.


But it will be hard to find a Regalight WT1, because they have stopped the production of this wonderful light. :mecry:


----------



## RichS (Jan 24, 2008)

CandleFranky said:


> But it will be hard to find a Regalight WT1, because they have stopped the production of this wonderful light. :mecry:


Where did you see that? I just went to Regalight's website and they still have the PayPal link to purchase the WT1 for $85. http://www.regalight.com/shopping.html

It would be a shame to end production on this light already. I just got mine a couple of weeks ago and am extremely impressed with it! It is one if the best built and brightest lights I own.


----------



## StefanFS (Jan 25, 2008)

I believe this might be the classic language barrier problem. Last I heard the Regal WT1 was being redesigned to be easier to upgrade, and they were trying to source an even better switch. I might be wrong, maybe they dropped this model. But I don't think so.
Stefan


----------



## CandleFranky (Jan 26, 2008)

RichS said:


> Where did you see that? I just went to Regalight's website and they still have the PayPal link to purchase the WT1 for $85. http://www.regalight.com/shopping.html


Somewhere in the Regalight sales thread @CPFMarketPlace. I hope you will get your light.


----------



## xevious (Jan 26, 2008)

Hopefully the "stopped production" statement doesn't mean that they've discontinued the light. Maybe they churned out a huge inventory and will manufacture more as the inventory begins to dry up?

Btw, I was wondering if the 18650 cells used in the tests are protected or unprotected. The WT1 has circuitry regulation, but the spec sheet says it runs from 2.7v - 10v. So, if it's not sensitive enough to cut off once dropping below 3.0v, I'm guessing it would damage an unprotected 18650... is that correct?


----------



## CandleFranky (Jan 27, 2008)

xevious said:


> The WT1 has circuitry regulation, but the spec sheet says it runs from 2.7v - 10v. So, if it's not sensitive enough to cut off once dropping below 3.0v, I'm guessing it would damage an unprotected 18650... is that correct?


Good question, who knows the answer? :thinking:


----------



## Stereodude (Jan 27, 2008)

xevious said:


> The WT1 has circuitry regulation, but the spec sheet says it runs from 2.7v - 10v. So, if it's not sensitive enough to cut off once dropping below 3.0v, I'm guessing it would damage an unprotected 18650... is that correct?


Most battery protection circuits kick in around 2.5-2.7V, so it seems unlikely that the light would damage a unprotected 18650 by over discharging it. However, I personally don't want to mess with all the other risks associated with unprotected cells, so I've only bought protected 18650 cells.


----------



## CandleFranky (Jan 27, 2008)

Stereodude said:


> Most battery protection circuits kick in around 2.5-2.7V, so it seems unlikely that the light would damage a unprotected 18650 by over discharging it. However, I personally don't want to mess with all the other risks associated with unprotected cells, so I've only bought protected 18650 cells.


Can the protection mechanism of a (protected) Li-Ion cell get a defect, if the protection is triggered too much times? :candle:


----------



## Stereodude (Jan 27, 2008)

CandleFranky said:


> Can the protection mechanism of a (protected) Li-Ion cell get a defect, if the protection is triggered too much times? :candle:


I don't think so. Keep in mind Lithium-Ion batteries are different in that taking them all the way down to dead is more harmful to the cells than recharging them after each use. Obviously charging them after each use isn't necessarily practical, but if you use the light a few minutes a day maybe charging once a week is (even if the batteries aren't dead).


----------



## CandleFranky (Jan 27, 2008)

Stereodude said:


> I don't think so.


Stereodude, you cost me money but your advice is always helpful. :thumbsup:


----------



## Stereodude (Jan 28, 2008)

I got my WT1 v2 today in the mail. I have to say this is a fantastic light. oo: The threads were very clean with no grit. The anodizing is top notch. The beam is bright and white with good focus. :thumbsup:


----------



## BillD (Jan 30, 2008)

I received mine as well on the 28th, and I agree that this is a great light, especially for the price. I would like to order a few more, and hopefully Regal will continue production in the future.:twothumbs


----------



## Tiny86 (Jan 31, 2008)

Dose else anyone get a very slight doughnut hole in their hot spot?


----------



## darkknight49 (Feb 1, 2008)

I bought my WT1 on on the 28th and apparently they are now sold out. Tho I did find the light here: http://www.lighthound.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=3427
:thumbsup:


----------



## 1 what (Feb 1, 2008)

Thanks for the photos Stephan. I loved the "lake test". Remind me never to go walking in the woods with you in winter!


----------



## StefanFS (Feb 3, 2008)

1 what said:


> Thanks for the photos Stephan. I loved the "lake test". Remind me never to go walking in the woods with you in winter!


 
I tend to avoid the area around that pond after dark, I often get bad vibes there. When I took these beamshots I had the dog in my avatar circling around. He doesn't like it either. But it's a good place for beamshots.
Stefan


----------



## maxilux (Feb 3, 2008)

Anyone knows what is going on with regalight? Have you any contact to them in the last 2 weeks, i got no answers to my questions.


----------



## StefanFS (Feb 3, 2008)

maxilux said:


> Anyone knows what is going on with regalight? Have you any contact to them in the last 2 weeks, i got no answers to my questions.


 
Natural disaster is going on. Regalight is in the middle of the snowstorm of the century. No electricity or transportation. The chinese new year is also coming up.
Stefan


----------



## maxilux (Feb 3, 2008)

thanks StefanFS, then i will wait some time to get answer.


----------



## Monocrom (Feb 5, 2008)

Be sure to post the responses they give you.


----------

