# The ArmyTek 120 day Challenge!!!



## subwoofer (May 9, 2013)

...And it has started. Official start time 21:00 (GMT+1) 9 May 2013.

One of Armytek's claims is a fantastically long runtime on the lowest firefly mode. This mode is also the reserve output circuit should the main driver fail.

The latest V2.5 Predator Pro's specifications mention a maximum runtime of 130 days. The earlier Predator V1.2 had this at 100 days.

I've decided to see if these incredible runtimes are possible, so have taken all three Predators that I have out of service, and have dedicated them to an endurance challenge.

There are a total of four lights entering this challenge. The Predator V1.2 XP-G R5, Predator X V2.0 XM-L U2, Predator V2.0 XP-G2 R5 (which appears to be the same as the latest V2.5 XP-G2 version) and a mystery contender.

The target is 120 days, but I will run this endurance runtime test to its conclusion to see just how long they will go.







The conditions of the test are that all three Predators are set to the default 18650 power source with 2.8V cut-off.

A set of 6 Xtar 3100mAh 18650 cells which have undergone a similar numbers of power cycles, were charged on a Xtar WP6 charger and then left a day to rest.

All resting voltages were measured and the closest four were chosen to run the test. As it happens all four measured 4.17V.

The lights were all pre-set to their firefly modes using another cell and once confirmed, the test 18650s were installed.

At the chosen start time, the two Predator V2.0s were simultaneously switched on immediately followed by the Predator V1.2 and mystery contender.

All the lights will be kept together so that ambient conditions will be identical.

The 120 day challenge has begun!

So can the do it....how far will they get?


----------



## subwoofer (May 9, 2013)

Reserved for updates....







Day of
Challenge - Date
10 ---------- 19/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
20 ---------- 29/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
30 ---------- 08/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
40 ---------- 18/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
50 ---------- 28/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
60 ---------- 08/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
70 ---------- 18/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
80 ---------- 28/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
90 ---------- 07/08/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
100 -------- 17/08/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
110 -------- 27/08/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
120 -------- 06/09/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:


With the challenge now complete and all final tests completed, here are a list of thread highlights:

120 Day Challenge complete

Success!

First light out

Second light out

Last light out + Summary

Cell test


----------



## kj2 (May 9, 2013)

Cool


----------



## AnAppleSnail (May 9, 2013)

Your mystery contender appears to be a bullet-style ("5mm") LED. I'm curious, but I suppose we'll be in the dark until the end? Neat test! Good luck.


----------



## PocketBeam (May 9, 2013)

Yes, neat test. I hope this inspires others to test the moon or firefly modes of lights they aren't actively using.

Fours months to find out the mystery contender? Should it last shorter or shorter?


----------



## subwoofer (May 9, 2013)

AnAppleSnail said:


> Your mystery contender appears to be a bullet-style ("5mm") LED. I'm curious, but I suppose we'll be in the dark until the end? Neat test! Good luck.



I've been a little misleading with the second photo, but check the challenge, it is for four 18650 powered lights.

The mystery contender is not pictured. The two lights in the middle are the V2.0 Predators and the other two in this photo are not 18650 lights.


----------



## subwoofer (May 9, 2013)

PocketBeam said:


> Fours months to find out the mystery contender? Should it last shorter or shorter?



I suspect it will be revealed much sooner (as soon as it goes out), but for now this fact may safely be made the subject of suspense since it is of no significance whatsoever


----------



## BLUE LED (May 9, 2013)

I think the Predator X, XM-L U2 will last the longest.


----------



## gianetics (May 9, 2013)

this is going to be a looooong thread. i thought about doing this but i couldnt be without my V2 for so long. good luck ill check back in half a year.:wave:


----------



## GotDogs (May 9, 2013)

*This challenge is a GREAT idea. Great in that now I will looking at my friggin calendar for at least the next 100 days. It's like being in jail counting the friggin days. All kidding aside this test is a great idea and I will follow the progress / process. It is like being in jail though, counting the days.*


----------



## SCD (May 9, 2013)

Hey Subwoofer,

Somewhat related....but do you know if all "micromodes" are available on the reserve circiut? According to armyTek's literature I believe that the reserve circuit is capable of 0.1lm/0.5lm and 1.5lm? Can you shed any light?

I let a 1500mah K2 LiFePo4 loose at full stabilization and got ~49 minutes at max output in a V2.0 X-PG 5500k model predator.....seems to be right in line with their stated runtimes. They also switched from 2900 Panny's to 3100's for the firefly rating on the new lights. Interested in the outcome for sure!


----------



## thedoc007 (May 9, 2013)

Cool test, subscribed so I'll get an update when it finally produces some results.


----------



## subwoofer (May 10, 2013)

gianetics said:


> this is going to be a looooong thread. i thought about doing this but i couldnt be without my V2 for so long. good luck ill check back in half a year.:wave:



I know I am going to miss them (even though I'll be checking in on them probably twice a day) knowing I can't touch them.



GotDogs said:


> *This challenge is a GREAT idea. Great in that now I will looking at my friggin calendar for at least the next 100 days. It's like being in jail counting the friggin days. All kidding aside this test is a great idea and I will follow the progress / process. It is like being in jail though, counting the days.*



Absolutely, the 'sentence' I am now serving is just stating to sink in, but I'm determined to get through it.

I've put the challenge lineup in a drawer which I open at least twice a day. This is so I can keep them out of the way, but regularly monitored.



SCD said:


> Hey Subwoofer,
> 
> Somewhat related....but do you know if all "micromodes" are available on the reserve circiut? According to armyTek's literature I believe that the reserve circuit is capable of 0.1lm/0.5lm and 1.5lm? Can you shed any light?
> 
> I let a 1500mah K2 LiFePo4 loose at full stabilization and got ~49 minutes at max output in a V2.0 X-PG 5500k model predator.....seems to be right in line with their stated runtimes. They also switched from 2900 Panny's to 3100's for the firefly rating on the new lights. Interested in the outcome for sure!



The micromodes are the set of three firefly modes available during normal operation and as far as I know, the idea of the reserve circuit is to give only the lowest output mode 0.1lm, if and when the main circuit is damaged.

I don't fancy trying to blow the main circuit to test the function of the reserve circuit.


----------



## Tulip bush (May 10, 2013)

Nice one.


----------



## sinnyc (May 10, 2013)

This is great. Subwoofer, I salute you, your lights, and your poor batteries


----------



## reppans (May 10, 2013)

Subwoofer, you have the ability to measure the output right? Would you mind measuring the modes you are testing, including some benchmarks sub-lumen lights like Quarks and Zebralights (if you have them)?

I find the low and sub-lumen specs of some manufacturers off by multiples (SC52 for example), which has a huge impact on spec'd runtimes.


----------



## subwoofer (May 10, 2013)

reppans said:


> Subwoofer, you have the ability to measure the output right? Would you mind measuring the modes you are testing, including some benchmarks sub-lumen lights like Quarks and Zebralights (if you have them)?
> 
> I find the low and sub-lumen specs of some manufacturers off by multiples (SC52 for example), which has a huge impact on spec'd runtimes.



Unfortunately at the moment my integrating sphere's (IS) sensitivity means I cannot measure below 2lm. These sub lumen outputs are very difficult to measure accurately.

I am considering a redesign of the IS sensor to include an ultra sensitive setting, but calibrating this to actual lumens will be next to impossible. I'm also not convinced it will have a linear response.

During my IS design and testing I did have a sensor design which picked up a dim table lamp being turned on in the room and was impossible to use during the daytime as the background light levels were too high. It was so sensitive that even the light from the meter's display affected the reading it was showing. As long as I can achieve a constant ambient light level I can take off the background reading and get a measurement.

This challenge thread may well inspire me to revisit a sub-lumen sensor for the IS (as an add-on sensor module). If I do I'll post some readings from this.

The photo in post 2 of this thread shows the Quark Regular AA on the left of the two Predator V2.0 with a Photon Freedom Micro on the right. The idea was to use the photo to show the relative brightness of these firefly modes.


----------



## Shooter21 (May 10, 2013)

Awesome cant wait to see the results of this. Only light i know of that reached 100 days of runtime is a quark so this should be interesting.


----------



## reppans (May 10, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> Unfortunately at the moment my integrating sphere's (IS) sensitivity means I cannot measure below 2lm. These sub lumen outputs are very difficult to measure accurately.
> 
> I am considering a redesign of the IS sensor to include an ultra sensitive setting, but calibrating this to actual lumens will be next to impossible. I'm also not convinced it will have a linear response.
> 
> ...



I feel I can quite accurately measure down to 0.10 lumens (from a 125 lumen calibration, btw) with a DSLR and bounced ambient light only - it's a dead linear measurement as well. Through a second stage measurement, I can read down to 0.01 lms easily. I took a look at one of your reviews and believe you to be using a DSLR as well... if you're interested in discussing the methodology, please PM me - would love add another tool to your toolbox, esp. since you're a CPF reviewer.

Which Quark emitter BTW... my XPG-S2 measures ~0.17 lms and my XML ~0.33 lms - and not surprisingly, in my own moonlight mode runtime tests, the S2 ran about exactly 2x longer.


----------



## subwoofer (May 10, 2013)

reppans said:


> I feel I can quite accurately measure down to 0.10 lumens (from a 125 lumen calibration, btw) with a DSLR and bounced ambient light only - it's a dead linear measurement as well. Through a second stage measurement, I can read down to 0.01 lms easily. I took a look at one of your reviews and believe you to be using a DSLR as well... if you're interested in discussing the methodology, please PM me - would love add another tool to your toolbox, esp. since you're a CPF reviewer.
> 
> Which Quark emitter BTW... my XPG-S2 measures ~0.17 lms and my XML ~0.33 lms - and not surprisingly, in my own moonlight mode runtime tests, the S2 ran about exactly 2x longer.



Thanks for the offer, but I have read your thread on this subject and I'm not keen to employ this method myself.

I am intending to build the second sensor array for sub-lumen readings. Just have to find the time.....


----------



## reppans (May 10, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> Thanks for the offer, but I have read your thread on this subject and I'm not keen to employ this method myself.
> 
> I am intending to build the second sensor array for sub-lumen readings. Just have to find the time.....



Fair enough... good luck on your sensor array.


----------



## subwoofer (May 13, 2013)

So, the sensitive sensor array is now well and truly rattling around in my brain.

In the mean time though, as a visual ranking in lowest output:

Lowest
Predator v1.2 (this one may be a surprise contender)
Predator X V2.0
Predator V2.0 XP-G2
Mystery light
Brightest


----------



## BLUE LED (May 13, 2013)

Your results are not a surprise to me and in accordance with what I was expecting. The low of the XP-G R5 Predator is very low in my unit due to the lack of efficiency of the XP-G. I moded one of them to a XP-G2 and it was instantly much brighter. This was then confirmed in the lab in Kensington.


----------



## tobrien (May 14, 2013)

this'll be nice


----------



## subwoofer (May 17, 2013)

Update:

Between 23:00 16/5/2013 and 06:00 17/5/2013 the output of the mystery contender has dropped significantly.

This gives approximately (average of the two times) 7.2 days of runtime. However, there is still output, so this one is not quite over yet. Even at 7.2 days, this is still more than its specification, so is not doing badly at all.

It is now the dimmest of the four.

There is no apparent change to the output of any of the ArmyTek lights.


----------



## Sukram (May 17, 2013)

nice pictures!


----------



## subwoofer (May 17, 2013)

Well it was always only a three horse race, and the mystery light is now well and truly out. The protection circuit has been tripped and the test cell completely depleted.

Following the drop in output there was not much runtime left, so I'm going to call it 7.5 days and out.

The three Predators are only just getting into their stride.


----------



## sinnyc (May 17, 2013)

Are you going to reveal the identity of the mystery light now that it has flamed out or are you going to wait until the end of the test?


----------



## JethroL (May 19, 2013)

This test is a great idea, I'm receiving my ArmyTek Predator Pro v2.5 very soon I hope. Ill keep checking this thread


----------



## Sukram (May 21, 2013)

Share your thoughts about your Armytek Predator Pro with us


----------



## subwoofer (May 21, 2013)

Sukram said:


> Share your thoughts about your Armytek Predator Pro with us



I already have done  :

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...dator-G2-V2-0-and-Predator-X-V2-0-dual-Review

Well OK, since then Armytek have updated to V2.5 and dropped the Predator X instead releasing the Viking Pro (review coming soon on the Viking and Viking Pro).


----------



## subwoofer (May 23, 2013)

This is the full line up:

From left to right - FOURSEVENS Maelstrom X7, Predator X (v2.0), Predator V1.2, Predator V2.0 XP-G2







As mentioned before, only the Predators remain in the challenge. The X7 managed an over specification result of 7.5 days (compared to a specified 6 days).


----------



## bluemax_1 (May 23, 2013)

Interesting challenge. Curious to see if the claims hold up



BLUE LED said:


> I think the Predator X, XM-L U2 will last the longest.


Unless I misread, I believe the XP-G2 should take this challenge. IIRC, the XM-L puts out more light at higher drive levels, but is less efficient at lower levels. I asked a similar question regarding the ratings on 4/7's Quark QPAs with the XP-G2 vs XM-L (the XP-G2's have longer runtime ratings in the lower modes than the XM-L versions).


Max


----------



## Shooter21 (May 23, 2013)

Yeah the XPG2 should definitely win this challenge.


----------



## BLUE LED (May 23, 2013)

bluemax_1 said:


> Interesting challenge. Curious to see if the claims hold up
> 
> 
> Unless I misread, I believe the XP-G2 should take this challenge. IIRC, the XM-L puts out more light at higher drive levels, but is less efficient at lower levels. I asked a similar question regarding the ratings on 4/7's Quark QPAs with the XP-G2 vs XM-L (the XP-G2's have longer runtime ratings in the lower modes than the XM-L versions).
> ...



I am aware of this, but I have additional information which tells me that the Predator X stands a fair chance of winning.


----------



## Sukram (May 24, 2013)

Shooter21 said:


> Yeah the XPG2 should definitely win this challenge.



+1


----------



## Sukram (May 24, 2013)

Thank you, subwoofer! great job!


----------



## subwoofer (May 24, 2013)

Progress monitor added to post 2:


Day of
Challenge - Date
10 ---------- 19/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
20 ---------- 29/05/2013 21:00 
30 ---------- 08/06/2013 21:00 
40 ---------- 18/06/2013 21:00 
50 ---------- 28/06/2013 21:00 
60 ---------- 08/07/2013 21:00 
70 ---------- 18/07/2013 21:00 
80 ---------- 28/07/2013 21:00 
90 ---------- 07/08/2013 21:00 
100 -------- 17/08/2013 21:00 
110 -------- 27/08/2013 21:00 
120 -------- 06/09/2013 21:00

We are only on day 14, so there is a long way to go.


----------



## martinaee (May 24, 2013)

lol it looks like you need a streaming web cam feed for this challenge. People can check in and watch an unmoving image of flashlights--- or moving if you decide that you are actually watching moving light lol.


----------



## subwoofer (May 24, 2013)

martinaee said:


> lol it looks like you need a streaming web cam feed for this challenge. People can check in and watch an unmoving image of flashlights--- or moving if you decide that you are actually watching moving light lol.



Great idea, it will be like the 'Pitch Drop' experiment - http://smp.uq.edu.au/content/pitch-drop-experiment :laughing:

It makes me think this is like a TV series that I really like, but hate waiting a week for the next episode. So instead I forget about it and then get the box set and watch them all at once!

Sometime in September or October some people will find this thread and be able to do just that.


----------



## RI Chevy (May 24, 2013)

...........lovecpf..........:goodjob:


----------



## subwoofer (May 30, 2013)

Day of
Challenge - Date
10 ---------- 19/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
20 ---------- 29/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
30 ---------- 08/06/2013 21:00 
40 ---------- 18/06/2013 21:00 
50 ---------- 28/06/2013 21:00 
60 ---------- 08/07/2013 21:00 
70 ---------- 18/07/2013 21:00 
80 ---------- 28/07/2013 21:00 
90 ---------- 07/08/2013 21:00 
100 -------- 17/08/2013 21:00 
110 -------- 27/08/2013 21:00 
120 -------- 06/09/2013 21:00

1/6th of the way there and rather unsurprisingly there is no change to report.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (May 30, 2013)

This is fantastic! I love these tests. This is one of the only places that manufacturers have to really watch what they claim, because we'll find out!


----------



## subwoofer (Jun 10, 2013)

Day of
Challenge - Date
10 ---------- 19/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
20 ---------- 29/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
30 ---------- 08/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
40 ---------- 18/06/2013 21:00 
50 ---------- 28/06/2013 21:00 
60 ---------- 08/07/2013 21:00 
70 ---------- 18/07/2013 21:00 
80 ---------- 28/07/2013 21:00 
90 ---------- 07/08/2013 21:00 
100 -------- 17/08/2013 21:00 
110 -------- 27/08/2013 21:00 
120 -------- 06/09/2013 21:00

And a little observation, mainly about the efficiency of a hot LED - 

I'm testing the new Viking Pro and had this running on maximum output until it become very hot. I then switched it onto the lowest firefly mode and decided to visually compare it to the Predators on test here. It appeared significantly dimmer maybe a quarter of the output. Wondering if the lowest firefly mode on the Viking Pro was really that much lower it struck me that the LED would still be very hot. After leaving it to cool, the Viking Pro's firefly output returned to a visually similar level to the Predator X (unsurprisingly as the Viking Pro is the replacement for the Predator X). So the temperature of the XM-L2 LED did have a significant effect on the low level output of the Viking Pro.


----------



## Kaban (Jun 11, 2013)

updates on this?


----------



## subwoofer (Jun 12, 2013)

Kaban said:


> updates on this?



I posted an update 2 days ago as we have passed day 30. How often do you want them?

For a 120 day challenge, we are not really talking edge of the seat stuff here are we.


I was considering some sort of daily update, with maybe a thought for the day thrown in as well, but it seemed a bit excessive.

Currently my intention was to post the 10 day milestone updates and any 'changes' such as a challenger dropping out.


----------



## Kaban (Jun 12, 2013)

HAHA my apologies ^^^ I didn't look at the second page of thread when I posted that last night. I feel stupid.


----------



## Cereal_Killer (Jun 12, 2013)

Subscribed.

So with this new Viking pro is there any talk of the predators being discontinued anytime? I want to pick one up but I can't choose...


----------



## subwoofer (Jun 13, 2013)

Cereal_Killer said:


> Subscribed.
> 
> So with this new Viking pro is there any talk of the predators being discontinued anytime? I want to pick one up but I can't choose...



No, the Viking Pro replaces the Predator X, not the Predator. The Viking Pro uses XM-L2 LEDs and the Predator with its tighter beam uses a smaller emitter the XP-G2.

The choice you need to make is over the tighter or wider beam.


----------



## bluemax_1 (Jun 13, 2013)

Cereal_Killer said:


> Subscribed.
> 
> So with this new Viking pro is there any talk of the predators being discontinued anytime? I want to pick one up but I can't choose...





subwoofer said:


> No, the Viking Pro replaces the Predator X, not the Predator. The Viking Pro uses XM-L2 LEDs and the Predator with its tighter beam uses a smaller emitter the XP-G2.
> 
> The choice you need to make is over the tighter or wider beam.


Couple of clarifications plus a couple of questions

- clarification, the XM-L2 has a wider hotspot than the XP-G2 (10-degrees vs 5-degrees), but the spillbeam angle is still the same 40-degrees for both, so when you decide between tighter or wider beams, it's just the hotspot and intensity, as the the XM-L2's beam is not wider than the XP-G2's.

Questions:
- Is the Viking Pro simply a renaming of the Predator X Pro? At one point in time IIRC, the Predator Pro and the Viking had different UI's (with the Predator Pros having a more customizable UI). Do they both have the same UI but just different names now to differentiate the models by emitter/reflector? Their website claims that the Predator Pro UI has 5 modes vs the Viking Pro's 4 modes, but the website could need updating or have a typo (such as the Viking Pro Warm XM-L2's 620 lumens for 20h, where they obviously made a mistake with an extra 0. It should have read 62 lumens for 20h).
- Does this mean that the Predator Pros are now only going to be the XP-G2 models (OR at least till a another emitter comes out)?


Max


----------



## subwoofer (Jun 14, 2013)

bluemax_1 said:


> Couple of clarifications plus a couple of questions
> 
> - clarification, the XM-L2 has a wider hotspot than the XP-G2 (10-degrees vs 5-degrees), but the spillbeam angle is still the same 40-degrees for both, so when you decide between tighter or wider beams, it's just the hotspot and intensity, as the the XM-L2's beam is not wider than the XP-G2's.
> 
> ...



Indeed the total spill angle is in fact the same, with only the hotspot being wider with the XM-L2. Much of this information is available on the Armytek website.

The Viking was a much simpler UI, but that was before Armytek decided to keep the Predator as XP-G2 only and move the XM-L2 into the Viking range only. They then upgraded the Viking to the Viking Pro by using the same programmable driver as the Predator (Pro). So the Viking Pro is fully programmable like the Predator Pro and both models also have a simpler version without the programming without the Pro suffix.

I have a forthcoming Viking/Viking Pro review where the differences will be made clear. Armytek could have made it clearer that the Viking Pro had this fully programmable driver and so far have not included instructions that explain the programming, instead you need to use the Predator programming guide.


----------



## bluemax_1 (Jun 14, 2013)

Thanks for the info. Good to know that the Viking Pro has the same programmability as the Predator Pro (so the 5-modes vs 4-modes on the ArmyTek website is another typo?). I'm still wondering about the possibility of swapping out the reflector on the Viking Pro for a beam profile that better suits my preferences, simply because I like the build and powerful UI of these lights.


Max


----------



## subwoofer (Jun 19, 2013)

So we have sailed past day 40. No visible change in outputs or relative outputs, but then again my eyes can't measure sub-lumen outputs. Frustratingly, I cannot measure the battery voltage as I do not want to disturb the experiment to take a measurement. 

Day of
Challenge - Date
10 ---------- 19/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
20 ---------- 29/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
30 ---------- 08/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
40 ---------- 18/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
50 ---------- 28/06/2013 21:00 
60 ---------- 08/07/2013 21:00 
70 ---------- 18/07/2013 21:00 
80 ---------- 28/07/2013 21:00 
90 ---------- 07/08/2013 21:00 
100 -------- 17/08/2013 21:00 
110 -------- 27/08/2013 21:00 
120 -------- 06/09/2013 21:00


----------



## subwoofer (Jul 1, 2013)

Day 50 has passed us by and there is no visible change to any of the Predators or change to their relative outputs.

As Armytek have kept me busy with other test samples, I've not had time to build my sub-lumen IS sensor however I do have a reference light to compare them with visually, the Viking Pro.

Day of
Challenge - Date
10 ---------- 19/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
20 ---------- 29/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
30 ---------- 08/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
40 ---------- 18/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
50 ---------- 28/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
60 ---------- 08/07/2013 21:00 
70 ---------- 18/07/2013 21:00 
80 ---------- 28/07/2013 21:00 
90 ---------- 07/08/2013 21:00 
100 -------- 17/08/2013 21:00 
110 -------- 27/08/2013 21:00 
120 -------- 06/09/2013 21:00


----------



## subwoofer (Jul 9, 2013)

I've started to use a Viking Pro on firefly as a visual reference to compare the outputs. All the Predators are brighter than the Viking Pro so I will be able to see if they start to dim.

We are half way through the challenge and no change to report! Even if they failed now 60days or 1440 hours is mighty impressive, however they are still going, and with no apparent change in output.

Day of
Challenge - Date
10 ---------- 19/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
20 ---------- 29/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
30 ---------- 08/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
40 ---------- 18/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
50 ---------- 28/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
60 ---------- 08/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
70 ---------- 18/07/2013 21:00 
80 ---------- 28/07/2013 21:00 
90 ---------- 07/08/2013 21:00 
100 -------- 17/08/2013 21:00 
110 -------- 27/08/2013 21:00 
120 -------- 06/09/2013 21:00


----------



## subwoofer (Jul 19, 2013)

Past day 70 now, that is now 1691 hours and counting.....

Day of
Challenge - Date
10 ---------- 19/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
20 ---------- 29/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
30 ---------- 08/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
40 ---------- 18/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
50 ---------- 28/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
60 ---------- 08/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
70 ---------- 18/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
80 ---------- 28/07/2013 21:00 
90 ---------- 07/08/2013 21:00 
100 -------- 17/08/2013 21:00 
110 -------- 27/08/2013 21:00 
120 -------- 06/09/2013 21:00


----------



## WilsonCQB1911 (Jul 19, 2013)

I love this thread. Keep up the good work!


----------



## pjandyho (Jul 20, 2013)

I couldn't wait for you to finish the test. Just ordered a Predator Pro V2.5 in warm tint.

EDIT to add: I do appreciate you taking the time and effort here. Thanks!


----------



## dajabec (Jul 20, 2013)

Thanks for doing this, I enjoy it. I think I might start timing one of mine to see if I can beat your record


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jul 21, 2013)

I`ll place my bet that it fails between 100 and 110 days.


----------



## pjandyho (Jul 21, 2013)

Badbeams3 said:


> I`ll place my bet that it fails between 100 and 110 days.


What makes you say that? Based on some expert calculations? Or just pessimistic guess work? I think even if it lasts 100 days it would be great enough. In a survival situation, you won't care if it lasts 10 days if you can't find food, water, shelter and fire.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jul 21, 2013)

pjandyho said:


> What makes you say that? Based on some expert calculations? Or just pessimistic guess work? I think even if it lasts 100 days it would be great enough. In a survival situation, you won't care if it lasts 10 days if you can't find food, water, shelter and fire.



It`s a highly technical formula, based on the length of some hairs sticking out from my ears after a bath...very complex. Whats your bet?


----------



## subwoofer (Jul 29, 2013)

Past day 80 and right now 1931 hours of runtime.

In another thread about the lowest low, and the longest runtime, I mentioned that the Armytek lowest firefly is still a usable output level. There are lights that go lower and lights that have ultimately longer runtime (like the PAL light with 1-2 years), but they are not much use.

In the recent CPF-UK meet, we went into a mine and at one point switched off all the lights. It actually felt like someone was pushing on my eyes as the blackness was total. Switching on the Viking Pro I had with me on lowest firefly, and it was enough light to see by even after only 5 minutes of allowing our eyes to become adjusted. OK you wouldn't be running around, but you could see enough. To me this is pitched just right.

Day of
Challenge - Date
10 ---------- 19/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
20 ---------- 29/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
30 ---------- 08/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
40 ---------- 18/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
50 ---------- 28/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
60 ---------- 08/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
70 ---------- 18/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
80 ---------- 28/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
90 ---------- 07/08/2013 21:00 
100 -------- 17/08/2013 21:00 
110 -------- 27/08/2013 21:00 
120 -------- 06/09/2013 21:00


----------



## RI Chevy (Jul 30, 2013)




----------



## WilsonCQB1911 (Jul 30, 2013)

So are you going to do this test with 2 x CR123s next? 

I expect that you'd get longer runtimes with the primaries.


----------



## LowFlux (Jul 31, 2013)

WilsonCQB1911 said:


> I expect that you'd get longer runtimes with the primaries.



1500 mah typical for CR123
2100-3400 mah for 18650


----------



## Wiggle (Jul 31, 2013)

LowFlux said:


> 1500 mah typical for CR123
> 2100-3400 mah for 18650



*2 CR123*: 3V * 1500 mAh = 4.5 Wh * 2 = 9 Wh
*18650*: 3.7V * 3000 mAh = 11.1 Wh

These numbers are just an approximation, you'd need to do a proper "area under the curve" type assessment to get the more exact values but they are pretty close overall (especially a lower capacity 18650 around 2600 mAh). 18650 has the advantage of having a voltage closer to the LED Vf but will also suffer some self-discharge in this kind of time frame. I'd bet they come out quite comparibly.


----------



## bluemax_1 (Jul 31, 2013)

Wiggle said:


> *2 CR123*: 3V * 1500 mAh = 4.5 Wh * 2 = 9 Wh
> *18650*: 3.7V * 3000 mAh = 11.1 Wh
> 
> These numbers are just an approximation, you'd need to do a proper "area under the curve" type assessment to get the more exact values but they are pretty close overall (especially a lower capacity 18650 around 2600 mAh). 18650 has the advantage of having a voltage closer to the LED Vf but will also suffer some self-discharge in this kind of time frame. I'd bet they come out quite comparibly.


Assessing it from a logical standpoint, if I were trying to conduct a maximum runtime test, why wouldn't I use the highest capacity battery available?

That would mean 12.2wh vs 9wh. I also don't really see much self discharge in my 3400's over a 4 month period. That and considering the efficiency of the buck circuit vs the 18650 being close to the Vf, I don't really see 2xCR123's beating a 3400? Are there some other potential factors I'm missing?


Max


----------



## Wiggle (Jul 31, 2013)

Without knowing exact driver efficiencies for 6V versus 3.7V it is hard to know for sure but I agree, my gut feeling is the 18650 (especially if it is one of the 3400s) would win out on overall runtime though the results would be not far off from each other


----------



## subwoofer (Aug 1, 2013)

WilsonCQB1911 said:


> So are you going to do this test with 2 x CR123s next?
> 
> I expect that you'd get longer runtimes with the primaries.



My reaction to that suggestion in pictures:

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


Though in all seriousness, there are actually a few variables that can be tried and some doubts I have had since starting this off.

These Predators all use 18650 as the default power source and as mentioned in the first post this is how this test is being run. However the default has a 2.8V cut-off, but we know that the NNP type 18650s which 3100mAh are, will still give power down to 2.5V.

For the new Viking Pro, Armytek have changed the default to the LiFePO4 (with a cut-off of 2.5V), not because they think you will use this type of cell, but because the newer high capacity 18650s will provide usable power down to 2.5V. The newer Predator Pros will probably go this way too.

The LiFePO4 power source has a cut-off of 2.5V, so to get the most runtime out of these 3100mAH cells I should have chosen that. Alternatively if I had chosen 2xCR123 as the power source, the cut-off is 2V, so this would effectively use the 18650's power right until the protection kicks in. 

I did choose 18650 as the overall capacity should be higher.

Re-running the test....maybe if I get in the right mood:drunk:


----------



## Tiresius (Aug 1, 2013)

So far, the light's getting close to what they're claiming. Lets hope you don't have to fight the dust bunnies once this challenge is completed


----------



## subwoofer (Aug 7, 2013)

Day 90! - Now it is getting interesting. Previously my checks on the condition seemed to be an unnecessary formality, now I feel that the two checks per day are worthwhile.

There is no change in the relative brightnesses to each other or the reference Viking Pro.

No dust bunnies so far....

Day of
Challenge - Date
10 ---------- 19/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
20 ---------- 29/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
30 ---------- 08/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
40 ---------- 18/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
50 ---------- 28/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
60 ---------- 08/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
70 ---------- 18/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
80 ---------- 28/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
90 ---------- 07/08/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
100 -------- 17/08/2013 21:00 
110 -------- 27/08/2013 21:00 
120 -------- 06/09/2013 21:00


----------



## pjandyho (Aug 7, 2013)

So far so good on the run time test.

I received my Predator Pro in warm flavor and have been very pleased with it.


----------



## Wiggle (Aug 9, 2013)

Thanks for doing this test. I was playing around last night with the lowest moon mode and was surprised how useful it can be with a diffuser in near complete darkness. I initially thought I had programmed a brighter moonlight by accident but confirmed my eyes had just adapted when I turned my Quark on to .2 lumen which was noticeably brighter.


----------



## subwoofer (Aug 19, 2013)

Day 100 has passed us by (was a bit busy so missed the day itself) and today there is still no visible change when comparing to the reference Viking Pro (which is not part of this challenge itself).

Which will go first? Theoretically the Predator v1.2 as Armytek have improved and updated their S-Tek Driver since it was produced, but it is still in there right now.

Day of
Challenge - Date
10 ---------- 19/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
20 ---------- 29/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
30 ---------- 08/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
40 ---------- 18/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
50 ---------- 28/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
60 ---------- 08/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
70 ---------- 18/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
80 ---------- 28/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
90 ---------- 07/08/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
100 -------- 17/08/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
110 -------- 27/08/2013 21:00 
120 -------- 06/09/2013 21:00


----------



## WilsonCQB1911 (Aug 19, 2013)

Do you think the test results would be different if one were to use the light intermittently on moonlight? As in, would one still get a combined total runtime of... whatever it is going to be... if turning the light off and on rather than using it continually for the 100+ days?


----------



## subwoofer (Aug 19, 2013)

WilsonCQB1911 said:


> Do you think the test results would be different if one were to use the light intermittently on moonlight? As in, would one still get a combined total runtime of... whatever it is going to be... if turning the light off and on rather than using it continually for the 100+ days?



That is a good question. I think if the light were turned on for 8 hours a day in one stretch each time you would probably get the full 'continuous' runtime out of it, but I have come across drivers that won't start once the voltage reaches too low a level, but if they were running already they will go to a lower voltage (therefore giving you a longer run). I don't know which of these will be the case with the Predator, and that is one test, I am not prepared to do


----------



## bluemax_1 (Aug 19, 2013)

That and batteries seem to recover slightly from short intermittent use. There is another factor of how the driver circuit acts though, and it's related to what subwoofer mentioned about some drivers not being able to reignite a light that's been shut off when the battery level is too low, even though it was running fine before it was shut off.

The problem is if there's a potential for the driver circuitry to draw more power at turn on than it takes to keep the light running, in which case, turning it on and off more frequently may possibly flatten the battery faster than if it was turned on and kept on for longer periods.

This is all moot anyway. From subwoofer's tests, it appears the lights can live up to their claims of running continuously for 120 days, in which case, using the lights for only 8 hours each day, it would run for a whole year on one battery! If you used it only for the typical 4-5 hours per night that most people do in power outages (they just go to bed earlier), it would potentially run for 2 years.

I don't know about anyone else, but if I'm stuck in some kind of last ditch situation where I'm so unprepared that I don't have any additional batteries or a way to charge the battery I DO have for even 120 days, much less a year, I think I'm probably screwed.


Max


----------



## WilsonCQB1911 (Aug 19, 2013)

Yeah, that's what was I was thinking of. I've seen lights that would keep going so long as you didn't turn them off, but once you turned them off, they wouldn't come back on if they were at a low enough level. 

subwoofer, I'm just trying to help :nana:. You can do a CR123A test, a turn on and off test with 18650... and then one with CR123A. And then the second-lowest level... with all the above iterations.....

But regardless, as bluemax noted, this things has an incredible runtime in addition to all its wonderful features. I bought 2 cause I liked it so much and may get an XML version to boot.


----------



## Etsu (Aug 28, 2013)

Badbeams3 said:


> I`ll place my bet that it fails between 100 and 110 days.



No update for August 27th (110 days). Looks like you were right!


----------



## subwoofer (Aug 29, 2013)

Etsu said:


> No update for August 27th (110 days). Looks like you were right!



 glad to know someone is paying attention, but no, they are all still going strong (or in fact weak)! (I just have had a busy couple of days)

No relative change in output is yet noticeable. Comparing to the reference Viking Pro everything looks the same.

What I am curious to find out is if there will be any sort of low battery warning, or it will just finally cut out when the protection circuit kicks in, if of course it kicks in before the S-Tek driver stops the output due to its cut off voltage.

Day of
Challenge - Date
10 ---------- 19/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
20 ---------- 29/05/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
30 ---------- 08/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
40 ---------- 18/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
50 ---------- 28/06/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
60 ---------- 08/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
70 ---------- 18/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
80 ---------- 28/07/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
90 ---------- 07/08/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
100 -------- 17/08/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
110 -------- 27/08/2013 21:00 :thumbsup:
120 -------- 06/09/2013 21:00


----------



## buds224 (Aug 29, 2013)

Holy Crap, it's gonna make it!


----------



## RI Chevy (Aug 29, 2013)

Cool.


----------



## sinnyc (Aug 29, 2013)

buds224 said:


> Holy Crap, it's gonna make it!



I think it's going to beat it comfortably. 

- Tim


----------



## subwoofer (Aug 30, 2013)

We are now halfway through the 113th day (112.5 days completed) and no change.

I'm wondering if I should now do an update every day for these last few days leading up to the end of day 120. However this might mean everyone watching just getting a 'still going' message.

I will of course update the thread with any definite change as soon as I find it.

Not sure if I will have time, but I am also curious to see if the 18650 cell used suffers any damage as a result of this long drawn out run. If I can, I'll do a capacity test on it once fully recharged and compare it to a sibling cell which was not used in this challenge.


----------



## pjandyho (Aug 30, 2013)

I think sticking to your original 10 days plan is good. Just update us should any light in the test stop working.


----------



## Etsu (Aug 30, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> Not sure if I will have time, but I am also curious to see if the 18650 cell used suffers any damage as a result of this long drawn out run.



You don't think the protection works at very low currents?


----------



## subwoofer (Aug 30, 2013)

Etsu said:


> You don't think the protection works at very low currents?



That, and as the current draw is so low, the actual cell voltage will really reach that cut-off threshold. If you are driving a protected cell harder, the voltage will drop to cut-off, but then recover once the load is removed. In this test, the cell is being taken right down to the minimum over a long period. Two things that are bad for li-ions - full discharge and being left in a fully discharged state.


----------



## pjandyho (Aug 30, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> That, and as the current draw is so low, the actual cell voltage will really reach that cut-off threshold. If you are driving a protected cell harder, the voltage will drop to cut-off, but then recover once the load is removed. *In this test, the cell is being taken right down to the minimum over a long period. Two things that are bad for li-ions - full discharge and being left in a fully discharged state.*


I hadn't thought of this. Makes sense after you said it.


----------



## WilsonCQB1911 (Aug 30, 2013)

This is truly awesome. Makes me proud to own one. I'm up for a daily update .


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 3, 2013)

And we are into day 117 - still no visible change in output.


----------



## pjandyho (Sep 3, 2013)

Will you continue with the test if the lights are still running pass 120 days?


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 3, 2013)

pjandyho said:


> Will you continue with the test if the lights are still running pass 120 days?



Absolutely. We can't come this far without seeing how long they can really keep going.


----------



## pjandyho (Sep 3, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> Absolutely. We can't come this far without seeing how long they can really keep going.


Thanks! I was kind of concerned about your batteries.


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 3, 2013)

pjandyho said:


> Thanks! I was kind of concerned about your batteries.



These are the sacrifices we make in search of the truth...


----------



## pjandyho (Sep 3, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> These are the sacrifices we make in search of the truth...


Was kind of inspired by what you did and currently contemplating on doing a similar test on the warm white Predator Pro V2.5 but I don't think I can live without it for a few days. LOL!


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 3, 2013)

pjandyho said:


> Was kind of inspired by what you did



'did' - It is not over yet...


----------



## LEDburn (Sep 3, 2013)

I have had my Warm Predator Pro for about two weeks now and I am absolutely loving it!

Even on the lowest output level this thing is a beast! Due to such a sweet reflector it throws amazingly well for the middle of the night check ups on the baby; I can see all the way down the hallway with the firefly on the Armytek; with my Zebralight, due to it's floody nature, I have to have it on a brighter setting which sometimes also wakes up the birds and subsequently, the baby :slaphead: 
Even though it is a lot larger than the sc52, it seems to be finding its' way onto my bedside table for night duty more often than not!


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 3, 2013)

LEDburn said:


> I have had my Warm Predator Pro for about two weeks now and I am absolutely loving it!
> 
> Even on the lowest output level this thing is a beast! Due to such a sweet reflector it throws amazingly well for the middle of the night check ups on the baby; I can see all the way down the hallway with the firefly on the Armytek; with my Zebralight, due to it's floody nature, I have to have it on a brighter setting which sometimes also wakes up the birds and subsequently, the baby :slaphead:
> Even though it is a lot larger than the sc52, it seems to be finding its' way onto my bedside table for night duty more often than not!



Are you running your Predator on default settings? If so your firefly mode will be the brightest 1.5lm output.

To get the 0.1lm firefly you need to program it, and there is a big difference in output between 1.5lm and 0.1lm.

This challenge is running on 0.1lm.


----------



## sinnyc (Sep 3, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> These are the sacrifices we make in search of the truth...



:lolsign::lolsign::lolsign:

We appreciate your valiant and selfless efforts, subwoofer!


----------



## RI Chevy (Sep 3, 2013)




----------



## davyro (Sep 3, 2013)

The suspense is becoming overwhelming i'm finding myself being drawn to this thread 3 to 4 times a day in the past few days,subwoofer you sir are a credit to our fine country:bow:


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 5, 2013)

davyro said:


> The suspense is becoming overwhelming i'm finding myself being drawn to this thread 3 to 4 times a day in the past few days,subwoofer you sir are a credit to our fine country:bow:



Very kind of you to say so :thanks:

It is the fine community that is CPF that inspires me to have contributed the content I have over the last few years.


We are now over halfway through day 119, and no visible change. All three still going steady.


----------



## LEDburn (Sep 5, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> Are you running your Predator on default settings? If so your firefly mode will be the brightest 1.5lm output.
> 
> To get the 0.1lm firefly you need to program it, and there is a big difference in output between 1.5lm and 0.1lm.
> 
> This challenge is running on 0.1lm.



There sure is a difference! I can use 1.5 lumens to walk comfortably on most paths around here!!

Mine is programmed - Line1: two modes with memory and constant output; Max/~20%
Line2: three modes, no memory; 0.1/1.5/bit more than 6

I will admit 0.1 lumens is used rarely other than for checking on the baby in the middle of the night but compared to other lights at such low levels, the sheer concentration of the beam allows it to shine much further and hence is more useful to me than the same levels on the other brands/models.


----------



## LEDburn (Sep 5, 2013)

Double post.


----------



## AVService (Sep 5, 2013)

LEDburn said:


> There sure is a difference! I can use 1.5 lumens to walk comfortably on most paths around here!!
> 
> Mine is programmed - Line1: two modes with memory and constant output; Max/~20%
> Line2: three modes, no memory; 0.1/1.5/bit more than 6
> ...



I have noticed the same thing.
The quality of throw from the Predator lets even the lowest modes do real work when needed!
I am amazed each time I carry this light.


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 6, 2013)

All three are still running with no apparent change and there are just 12 hours left until we get to the finish line.


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 6, 2013)

And we have a result...


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 6, 2013)

Left to right:

Reference Viking Pro - Tritium keyring and Nite HAWK T100 watch to show the time - Predator V2.0 XP-G2 - Predator X v2.0 - Predator V1.2







As you can see we are just a few seconds past 21:00 and the 120 day finish line.


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 6, 2013)

Success!






Trying to stay cool – like Spock







It's no Good!













































Or is it?…


----------



## markr6 (Sep 6, 2013)

LOL! I just sucked half the bandwidth at work loading this thread


----------



## sinnyc (Sep 6, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> Success!



Nice work, subwoofer! I'm really interested to know how long they'll actually last and which one will take the crown.

- Tim


----------



## davyro (Sep 6, 2013)

Great stuff subwoofer:thumbsup:


----------



## 0000001221 (Sep 6, 2013)

davyro said:


> Great stuff subwoofer:thumbsup:


+1 cheers....


----------



## RI Chevy (Sep 6, 2013)

Excellent. Thank you for taking your personal time to do this for all of us! :thumbsup:


----------



## pjandyho (Sep 6, 2013)

Great! They all made it pass the finish mark! Great job!


----------



## bluemax_1 (Sep 6, 2013)

Definitely curious to see just how long they'll run and it's incredible to think that you're using 3100mAh batteries, so there's potentially even a little more runtime to eke out of 3400mAh cells.


Max


----------



## Quelalumieresoit (Sep 8, 2013)

:wave:Greetings from BELGIUM.
Thanks for this very interesting test.
I own an old Predator model. Running it with a AW 3100 mAh. I use the firefly every night. Fantastic, when your eyes are well adapted to darkness. Glad to know that it would last more than 120 days...:thumbsup:


----------



## Wiggle (Sep 8, 2013)

Thanks for the test subwoofer! Very impressive that they are all still running. Even though some people have worried that the deep discharge could be hard on the cells, honestly I think it's worth it. I'm willing to bet that if you were running the cells that long without checking them or recharging it is probably an emergency and the health of the your cells probably isn't nearly as much a concern as keeping the light going as long as possible and I'd rather squeeze every last joule out than be stuck in darkness with a healthier cell.


----------



## AZPops (Sep 8, 2013)

Found it!


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 9, 2013)

It's not out yet, but I think the Predator X may become our first to drop out, as it now looks dimmer (122.5 days).

There is no flashing, and it is still on, but to the eye the output appears to have dimmed.

If the end of runtime for these lights turns out to be a gradual fading out rather than sudden cutting out, I will judge this as the point at which I cannot see the output on a surface positioned 2cm in front of the light. I will not take it to the point of staring directly at the LED to look for a hint of glow, but instead to the point the output has dropped below being usable (in my judgement).

For the duration of the testing, these lights have been sitting in a drawer next to each other (to ensure identical environmental conditions and easy side by side comparison. The output check is based on the light shining onto the drawer front. This was done intentionally so that I did not look directly into the reflector to attempt to judge the output level.


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 9, 2013)

The Predator X is definitely on the way out. It is now significantly dimmer.


----------



## bluemax_1 (Sep 9, 2013)

As I'd assumed, the XP-G is more efficient at low drive levels.

It's pretty amazing how accurate the 120 day rating was for the X. Now I wonder how much longer the XP-G can run? I'll guess ~10%, so another 10-12 days?


Max

P.S. actually, if the Quark runtimes are any indication (and they're generally on the conservative side), the XP-G might run as much as 25-30% longer... That's crazy. Potentially another 30 days?


----------



## spankone (Sep 9, 2013)

Epic long haul test, good work SW. Keep going. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 10, 2013)

MULTI-EVENT Update

Time interval 09/09/2013 (DD/MM/YYYY) 23:50 - 10/09/2013 07:20

Predator X has shut off completely during this time.
Predator XP-G2 has dimmed significantly (very nearly off, but not quite).


Cell condition for the Predator X - The protection circuit has kicked in, as the initial measurement was effectively 'open circuit' (the reading wanders between + and - a small voltage when this voltmeter is open circuit). However once the circuit was reset the terminal voltage returned to 2.5V.

So, for this Xtar cell it appears that the protection circuit does still operate at very low current, and the cell appears to have been taken down to approximately 2.5V. (I will run a series of capacity tests once all three lights are out).

With both Predator V2.0 models coming to the end of their run so close together I suspect this has nothing to do with emitter efficiency (as this will really affect only the brightness) and more to do with the fact the driver is running at a specific current. The slight difference in runtime will be due to slight difference in actual cell capacity.

EDIT: issues with a voltmeter mean I have updated the above.


----------



## bluemax_1 (Sep 10, 2013)

Your conclusions appear to be sound. I agree that the lights all running out this close together imply similar drive levels with individual cell capacity being the factor.

So, I guess getting 120days of runtime really is a last ditch thing as you're apparently guaranteed a dead battery at the end. Lucky for me, I have numerous off-grid recharging options. Being able to have continuous illumination for that long will be the least of my worries.


Max


----------



## bluemax_1 (Sep 10, 2013)

Dbl post


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 10, 2013)

bluemax_1 said:


> Your conclusions appear to be sound. I agree that the lights all running out this close together imply similar drive levels with individual cell capacity being the factor.
> 
> So, I guess getting 120days of runtime really is a last ditch thing as you're apparently guaranteed a dead battery at the end. Lucky for me, I have numerous off-grid recharging options. Being able to have continuous illumination for that long will be the least of my worries.
> 
> ...



Apologies, faulty voltmeter means I have updated my previous post. The protection did work and the cell was only taken down to 2.5V.


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 10, 2013)

NEW MULTI-Event

The Predator v2.0 XP-G2 is now out as of 10/09/2013 09:00

Its LED was still lit, but barely. I had to hold it to my eye, cupping my hands to cut out ambient light, and use averted vision to see the LED still just on.

CELL CONDITION - the cell measured 2.53V


Predator v1.2 now appears to be dimming.


----------



## Wiggle (Sep 10, 2013)

Having both of the 2.0s quit at roughly the same time is good to see. It gives some more faith that other users should see comparable runtimes provided similar cells are used.


----------



## bluemax_1 (Sep 10, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> Apologies, faulty voltmeter means I have updated my previous post. The protection did work and the cell was only taken down to 2.5V.



That's good news, to hear that it doesn't kill the battery to do that. I still can't see myself needing to run one light off the same battery without recharging it for 3 months though, (realistically even longer than that, since the light would be shut off during the day/sleeping hours).

Could you try one more thing, and that's to see if these low voltage cells can reignite the LED after a brief rest period? I'm still curious about the issue pondered earlier in the thread about lights that could remain on with nearly dead batteries, but would not be able to turn back on if shut off.


Max


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 10, 2013)

bluemax_1 said:


> Could you try one more thing, and that's to see if these low voltage cells can reignite the LED after a brief rest period? I'm still curious about the issue pondered earlier in the thread about lights that could remain on with nearly dead batteries, but would not be able to turn back on if shut off.



The v1.2 is still fading but is not out yet.

Assuming the protection does not kick in, once at the end of the V1.2 run, I will see if I can use the cell to light up the LED again (and try the v2.0 Predators as well). Consider though that in this instance we are not going to gain any 'rest-recovery' as the drain has been slow and extended. The other test cells have now been recharged.


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 11, 2013)

The V1.2 Predator is now out as well as of 11/09/2013 09:00.

The LED was still lit, but again required looking directly into the reflector blocking out all ambient light with my hands.

So in this final state of barely being lit, operating the power switch does re-light the LED (though with about a very slight delay).

Taking the depleted cell (in this case measuring 2.6V) and using this in the Predator X and Predator XP-G2, it will re-light the LED, and again with a very slight delay.


So after 124.5 days, the last Predator has come to the end of its epic runtime.

Summary of events:

122.8 days Predator X dims
123.25 days Predator X off
123.25 days Predator XP-G2 dims
123.5 days Predator XP-G2 off
123.5 days Predator V1.2 dims
124.5 days Predator V1.2 off

This is a very small variation of around only 1% in runtime which is more likely to be due to the individual cells performance rather than the lights themselves.
(Xtar 3100mAh 18650 used for all lights)

The efficiency of the XP-G2 is clear as throughout the entire test this provided more light than the other versions.

What is left to do? Well considering the cells have only been brought down to 2.5-2.6V and only one has had the protection kick in, hopefully they have not been damaged. However it is not good to leave a li-ion at less than 3V for any significant time. If you use a light and trigger the protection, you will charge it again immediately. In this test, the cells could have been at around 2.5V for weeks. I am intending to check the capacity of the cells after a full recharge to see if there is any significant change. Results to be posted when I can.


----------



## Mathiashogevold (Sep 11, 2013)

Sooo...time to do a 2*CR123 test?


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 11, 2013)

Mathiashogevold said:


> Sooo...time to do a 2*CR123 test?



Wow that is very kind of you to offer to do that test. Let us know how you get on


----------



## Mathiashogevold (Sep 11, 2013)

Sure, i'll PM you my adress and you'll send me the Predators to do runtime tests


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 11, 2013)

Mathiashogevold said:


> Sure, i'll PM you my adress and you'll send me the Predators to do runtime tests



Having been deprived of the use of these awesome lights for 120 days, I'm afraid, that is extremely unlikely.

As Gollum would say "We wants it, we needs it. Must have the precious."

"Mathiashogevold wants the precious. Always he is looking for it. But we mustn't let him have it." :devil:


----------



## candle lamp (Sep 11, 2013)

Excellent challenge. Excellent lights. :thumbsup: The result is a surprise.

Thanks a lot for your time & effort. subwoofer! :twothumbs


----------



## bluemax_1 (Sep 11, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> So in this final state of barely being lit, operating the power switch does re-light the LED (though with about a very slight delay).
> 
> Taking the depleted cell (in this case measuring 2.6V) and using this in the Predator X and Predator XP-G2, it will re-light the LED, and again with a very slight delay.



Thanks for taking the time to do that test. That's good news. It means even with depleted cells at very low battery voltages, these lights can and will light up. Theoretically, that would mean it's potentially possible to use one of these lights in Moonlight mode for practically a year for 8 hours a day. That's insane.


Max


----------



## WilsonCQB1911 (Sep 11, 2013)

Who is the anonymous challenger that went out early?


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 11, 2013)

WilsonCQB1911 said:


> Who is the anonymous challenger that went out early?



Seek and ye shall find - post 32 will enlighten you - http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...Challenge!!!&p=4210821&viewfull=1#post4210821


----------



## sinnyc (Sep 11, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> So after 124.5 days, the last Predator has come to the end of its epic runtime.
> 
> Summary of events:
> 
> ...



I'm really impressed by the near uniformity of the results for all of the Predators.
Thanks for doing this, Subwoofer. Great job! :thumbsup:

- Tim


----------



## Wiggle (Sep 11, 2013)

Yes normally I see more variation model to model in extreme long runtimes, seems to speak highly of Armyteks circuit design.


----------



## BobK (Sep 12, 2013)

Subwoofer, first I must say kudos to you for performing this test. The offering up of your time, lights, and potentially batteries is part of what makes this community such a wonderful place. Furthermore, it is part of what makes members like yourself such an important addition to said place.

I know that speaking from personal perspective, while I gaze with wonder at all the new and surprisingly bright offerings made by many quality flashlight companies, it is the lower modes that interest me the most in the long run. 120 days is perhaps a bit on the long and low end of the spectrum, but it is precisely the lower levels and longevity of said light availability that is the most useful in an emergency situation. During those short lived needs for a ton of light, most lights will seriously outperform anything that we grew up with. Furthermore, when we are outside, working on the car, mending a fuse, etc... as long as we have a couple of hours of bright light, we are pleased. We have the option of simply changing the batteries (most, if not all of us have at least a few spares, or can "borrow" from a different light if required) and that solves that. But it is when the power fails, we are aiding a search and rescue, or mother nature comes along and demonstrates her unstoppable force that we are faced with the overwhelming unknown of just how long we are to face an existence of no electricity. It is precisely times like these that we are forced to make assumptions and judgments (usually based solely on manufacturer's claims, as most reviewers don't have the time or resources to perform long runtime tests) about just which modes to use. It is nice to know that at least some of the published runtimes are, at the very least somewhere in the ballpark of their claims and that our assumptions of usable light, and the associated length of availability of said light can be relied on. (again, we are talking ballparks here)

Again, kudos to you and thank you for your willingness to share your knowledge with this fine community.


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 23, 2013)

BobK said:


> Subwoofer, first I must say kudos to you for performing this test. The offering up of your time, lights, and potentially batteries is part of what makes this community such a wonderful place. Furthermore, it is part of what makes members like yourself such an important addition to said place.



Thank you for your kind words 

UPDATE: I've now run the capacity tests to see if the long drawn out draining of the cells used had any negative impact on their performance.

Tests were run at a [email protected] load and a cell which had measured the closest in capacity prior to the 120 day challenge was included as a control.



Cell used in:Capacity (mAh) @2A - 2.5V cut-offRunttime @2AControl Cell28361h24mPredator X29011h26mPredator XP-G228631h25mPredator V1.228321h24m


It would seem that the cells have not suffered at all during this test.


----------



## bluemax_1 (Sep 23, 2013)

That's great news.


Max


----------



## Kaban (Sep 23, 2013)

Great findings. I love my Predator.


----------



## sinnyc (Sep 23, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> It would seem that the cells have not suffered at all during this test.



A battery vampire that won't harm rechargeables. Excellent.

- Tim


----------



## Wiggle (Sep 23, 2013)

Glad to hear there wasn't measurable damage done to the cell with the long discharge, this thread is all good news


----------



## HaileStorm (Sep 23, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> The V1.2 Predator is now out as well as of 11/09/2013 09:00.
> 
> The LED was still lit, but again required looking directly into the reflector blocking out all ambient light with my hands.
> 
> ...



What a grear test, thanks for taking the time!  The Predator continues to impress me even after a year of owning it. It remains as my favorite and go-to light in my collection for long trips in which I'll need a rugged light. If only I could edc this light... Can't wait for Armytek to release the Predator V3. I skipped the Pro 2.5 since I have the V2 XP-G2. I wonder what improvements the V3 will have. Would be nice if they call it Mk. III though, sounds much nicer


----------



## subwoofer (Sep 24, 2013)

HaileStorm said:


> What a grear test, thanks for taking the time!  The Predator continues to impress me even after a year of owning it. It remains as my favorite and go-to light in my collection for long trips in which I'll need a rugged light. If only I could edc this light... Can't wait for Armytek to release the Predator V3. I skipped the Pro 2.5 since I have the V2 XP-G2. I wonder what improvements the V3 will have. Would be nice if they call it Mk. III though, sounds much nicer



Every since I saw and bought one of the Predator V1.2 lights, I was convinced Armytek were one to watch. The Predator V2 XP-G2 (pre 'Pro' and 'standard' versions) and Viking Pro are my go-to single 18650 lights and one or both are kept by the bed for night time wanderings lit by the lowest firefly. I am interested to see what the V3 will be. As long as none of the Predator's key qualities are lost I will be happy, but how much more function can possibly be included!


----------



## HaileStorm (Sep 24, 2013)

subwoofer said:


> Every since I saw and bought one of the Predator V1.2 lights, I was convinced Armytek were one to watch. The Predator V2 XP-G2 (pre 'Pro' and 'standard' versions) and Viking Pro are my go-to single 18650 lights and one or both are kept by the bed for night time wanderings lit by the lowest firefly. I am interested to see what the V3 will be. As long as none of the Predator's key qualities are lost I will be happy, but how much more function can possibly be included!



I have a lot of faith in the brand. Their video of the V1 sold me a Pred. I was really amazed how the bezel actually functions (shown by the guy digging on pavement using the strike bezel) and how they shot it and threw it around! After purchasing the V2, I was amazed by the programmability of the light.

Few improvements they could make to the Pred (I hope Armytek is listening) are:

1. I wish the light could tailstand without the anti-roll ring. Maybe like the tailcap of the Nitecore SRT3 with a slightly taller clicky?
2. A menu system/UI that would confirm that your setting has been saved. 
3. A different low battery warning so we can tell it from the temperature warning. 
4. a better beacon mode (preferably a programmable one); a very brief flash that is spaced 2 seconds apart would be more useful (somewhat like those wingtip lights on airplane wings). Well, just make it programmable like the strobe frequency :-D
5. Square-cut threads at the head? Or is the current cut more durable?
6. In the battery voltage indicator, instead of having a long pause to indicate the decimal figure, I think a rapid flash (like a brief strobe) would be clearer. Let's say my voltage is 3.8v, the light would blink 3 times and strobe to indicate the decimal and then blink 8 times. 

Don't get me wrong, the Predator is already perfect as it is. But there's always room for even a slight improvement. These are minor quibbles but these would make the light absolutely perfect, imho. 

Sorry to be a little off topic, not sure if this post is appropriate for your thread. Hope you don't mind


----------

