# Nitecore EA41 2015 (XM-L2 U2, 4xAA) review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, VIDEO and more!



## selfbuilt (Dec 27, 2014)

Nitecore has updated their recently released EA41 to a new "2015" edition featuring a higher output bin emitter. The official specs have also been updated, suggesting a significantly higher drive level on some output modes. 

How does this new 2015 model compare to the original 2014 that I reviewed a little while ago? 






Well, there is certainly no change in external styling. 

Let's put this new sample through its paces to find out what has changed "under the hood" … 

*Manufacturer/Dealer Reported Specifications:* 
(note: as always, these are simply what the dealer/manufacturer provides – scroll down to see my actual testing results).


Emitter: 1 x Cree XM-L2 U2 (note: the 2014 edition was a T6)
Output/Runtime: Turbo Mode: 1020 lumens (1hr 45mins), High Mode: 580 lumens (2 hrs and 45 mins), Mid Mode: 160 lumens (12 hrs), Low Mode: 50 lumens (30 hrs), Micro Mode: 1 lumen (400 hr)
Beam Intensity: 28,276cd
Beam Distance: 335m
Battery Type/Quantity: 4 x AA Battery (not included)
Modes: 8 (Turbo; High; Middle; Low; Micro; SOS; Strobe Mode; Location Beacon)
Waterproof: IPX-8 Standard Waterproof (Underwater 2m)
Reflector: Aluminum Smooth Reflector
Lens: Toughened Ultra-clear Glass Lens with Anti-reflective Coating
Impact Resistance: 1.5m
Aerospace Grade Aluminum Body with Anti Scratching Type III Hard Anodization
Body Material: Aluminium Alloy
Available Color: Black
Product weight: 0.151 kg (without battery)
Package weight: 0.4 kg
Product size (L x W x H): 11.7 x 4 x 4.18 cm / 4.6 x 1.57 x 1.65 inches
Package size (L x W x H): 15 x 6 x 13.5 cm
Package Contents: 1 x Flashlight, 1 x Quality Holster, 1 x Lanyard, 1 x Spare O-ring 
MSRP: ~$65
_Note that there are some discrepancies in how output and throw measures are reported for the 2014 and 2015 editions. For example, reported output has increased significantly at sub-max levels since the 2014 edition, with oddly no reported change in runtime. Also, the initial 2015 specs reported a large beam intensity increase to 35,594cd (376m), which has subsequently been revised down to what is currently reported above (28,276cd, 335m). Please see the actual measures later in this review for a discussion. _:wave:














External packaging for the EA41 has been updated with the new "2015 VERSION" banner, revised emitter output bin (U2) and revised max output and beam intensity measures. Note that the printed beam intensity measures are wrong, and have since been revised down on the Nitecore website (see current official specs above).

Inside, the packaging is the same as the 2104 edition. Along with the light, you will find a holster with closing flap, decent wrist lanyard, extra o-ring, manual, and warranty card. 

Note that the light looks exactly the same as the previous 2014 edition. There are no identifying labels anywhere on the light to indicate it is a new edition. As such, I will re-use the body pictures from my 2014 review below.













From left to right: Panasonic Eneloop Pro (2550mAh) NiMH; Nitecore EA41, EA4; Fenix E41; Sunwayman D40A, F40A; Eagletac GX25A3.

All dimensions directly measured, and given with no batteries installed (unless indicated):

*Nitecore EA41 2015 4xAA*: Weight: 147.9g , Length: 118.4mm, Width (bezel): 40.1mm
*Nitecore EA41 2014 4xAA*: Weight: 149.9g , Length: 118.2mm, Width (bezel): 40.1mm
*Nitecore EA4 4xAA*: Weight: 161.6g , Length: 117.9mm, Width (bezel): 40.2mm
*Eagletac GX25A3 3xAA*: Weight: 151.4g, Length: 109.2mm, Weight (bezel): 38.6mm
*Fenix E41 4xAA*: Weight: 204.1g , Length: 115.9mm, Width (bezel): 44.1mm
*JetBeam PA40 4xAA*: Weight: 184.0g, Length: 183mm, Width: 40.8mm (bezel), 42.1mm (max width)
*JetBeam SRA40 4xAA*: Weight 236.0g, Length: 126.1mm, Width (bezel): 48.5mm
*Lumintop SD10*: Weight: 117.6g, Length: 120.3mm, Width (bezel): 40.1mm
*Olight S35 3xAA*: Weight 177.3g, Length: 127.7mm, Width (bezel): 38.7mm
*Sunwayman D40A 4xAA*: Weight: 167.9g, Length: 120.4mm, Weight (bezel): 40.0mm
*Sunwayman F40A 4xAA*: Weight: 182.0g, Length: 109.3mm, Weight (bezel): 42.0mm

There is some very minor fluctuation is dimensions between my samples, but I expect that is just normal natural variation.






























Again, there is no significance difference in the physical appearance of the light, between the 2014 and 2015 editions. The EA41 series is generally cylindrical, with thick ridges along the body to help with grip. There is no knurling per se, except on the tailcap (but is fairly mild here). Anodizing on my 2014 edition is even more matte finish (flat black) than my previous 2014 edition, but that is again likely just natural variation between samples.

As before, body labels are rather extensive. What I previously thought was a serial number turns to be just a model number – all labels are the same on both my samples. Labels remain very legible and clear.

The EA41 uses two square buttons, located one above the other, as before. The lower button is the power button, and the upper is the mode changing button (see my User Interface section for more info). Button feel is fairly "grippy", and they are slightly raised. That said, the lights do have a tendency to roll away from you. 

As before, there is also a single faint blue LED located underneath the switch area. This is used to signal the state of the light (i.e., battery status, standby). Scroll down for an explanation of the interface. 

Battery handle is quite compact, but easily houses 4xAA (alkaline, NiMH or L91). The battery compartments are molded right into the aluminum, with the cells in a series arrangement as before.

Screw threads are square-cut and anodized as before, but it doesn't really matter – there is no physical lock-out, because the connection is carried by the contacts in the tailcap and not the body. You would need to loosen almost all the way off to break this contact.

The light can tailstand as before. There is a cut-out on the base to allow you thread a wrist-lanyard through.










The EA41 reflector is smooth finish, and relatively deep – unchanged from before. As I noted in my review of the 2014 edition, the reflector seems somewhat deeper on the EA41s compared to the EA4. The XM-L2 emitter was again well-centered on this sample. Scroll down for beamshots.

*User Interface*

The user interface is unchanged from the 2014 edition of the EA41. Note that it is significantly updated from the EA4, thanks to the use of two separate switches on the EA41.

Activation is controlled by the lower power switch – press and release (i.e., click) to turn the light on at the previously memorized constant output level. Click the power switch again to turn off.

While on, click the upper mode switch repeatedly to cycle between the five main output levels in the following repeating sequence: Lower > Lo > Med > Hi > Turbo, in a repeating loop. Note that my EA41 manual still incorrectly states you should "half press" the mode switch to change levels (in fact, you need to do a proper click). The light has mode memory, and will return to the last level used when turned back on from off. 

Note that Lower/Lo/Med/Hi output levels have changed somewhat from the 2014 edition EA41 - see my direct measures later in this review.

There are a couple of shortcuts available - you can jump directly to Lower or Turbo mode from Off. Press and hold the power switch from Off for more than 1 sec to activate in Lower. Press and hold the mode switch from Off for more than 1 sec for Turbo. Cycle through modes or turn off as before. You can also jump directly to strobe from Off by a double-click of the mode switch.

For the special modes (i.e., blinking modes), these are normally accessed from On. With the light on, press and hold the mode switch for more than 1 sec. The light will enter into Strobe. To advance to Location (aka beacon mode), press and hold the mode switch again. To advance to SOS, press and hold the mode switch again. A click of the mode switch exits back to constant output modes. Note that there is no memory for the blinking modes.

The light will read-out the voltage of the cells when you first connect the tailcap, by a series of blue flashes under the switch cover. 3 flashes means there is >50% battery life remaining. 2 flashes indicate <50%, and 1 flash means the batteries are almost dead. You can also check the voltage at any time (when Off) my a single click of the Mode switch.

To activate the "special" standby feature, press and hold the power switch when turning Off the light. The faint blue locator LED will flash every ~3 secs in this standby mode. This standby flash is disabled by default.

To lockout the light, you need to start with the light On. Press and hold both buttons for more than 1 sec to electronically lock-out the light. The light will flash once to confirm the lockout. The same sequence (from Off) is required to unlock the light.

*Video*: 

For more information on the overall build and user interface, and direct beam/output comparison of the 2014 and 2015 editions, please see my new video overview:



As with all my videos, I recommend you have annotations turned on. I commonly update the commentary with additional information or clarifications before publicly releasing the video.

As an aside, if you want to get an instant notification for every new review that I post here on CPF, you can subscribe to my YouTube channel (the vids go public at the same time). Just mouse over my logo watermark on the top right-hand corner of the video for the subscribe feature to open up. You may need to tap or click, depending on the platform you are using to watch. :wave: 

*PWM/Strobe*

There is no sign of PWM that I can see, at any output level – the EA41 is fully current-controlled, as before. 

On the 2014 edition, I reported that strobe was a very high frequency of ~22 Hz, with an altered pulse duration duty cycle (i.e., not the typical 50:50 on/off). This differed from the original EA4, with had a true variable strobe (with a variable overall frequency and pulse duration). My 2015 edition sample brings back the variable pulse duration seen on the EA4, although at the higher frequencies observed in my 2014 EA41. 
















What you are looking at above are a few screen grabs from my oscilloscope, showing that the strobe speed (frequency) varies from between ~18-25Hz, with varying pulse durations.

The above analysis doesn't matter much in use – all models are extremely disorienting. :green:

SOS:





SOS mode is a typical SOS mode.

Location/Beacon:





Beacon is a brief full power flash, once every 2.1 secs (as before).

*Standby Drain*

A standby current drain is inevitable on the EA41, due to the electronic switch in the head. Unfortunately, I'm not able to easily measure it, as the batteries are arranged in series (i.e., I would have to connect everything under tension, without the tailcap in place, to get a reading). There have been reports that the drain is different before and after activation on the EA41 (at least for the 2014 edition). But that would require a much more complex arrangement with high current jumpers (to bypass the risk of damaging the uA port of the DMM), in order to accurately measure. As a result, I have not measured the standby drain here.

For the other single-cell members of the Nitecore Explorer series, I found this current to be in the in the low uA range, with occasional spikes up to the low mA range when the indicator would flash. For the parallel multi-cell Li-ion TM-series lights, I typically found these to be in the high uA range, with low mA spikes for the indicator flash. The end result was that most of those related lights would give you several months of runtime before the batteries would be exhausted, under normal Standby usage. 

_*UPDATE JANUARY 14, 2014:* I describe a quick indirect test to estimate battery drain in fresh cells in post #22 below. The results suggest Eneloop Pro (2500mAh capacity) would be fully drained in under 9 months in this light. It may be faster than that though, as I haven't tried testing partially depleted cells._

Note that you cannot easily break this current by unscrewing the tailcap - it needs to be nearly completely unscrewed to reliably block the current. As with many other models in this class, it is the tension on the springs that maintains the connection (i.e., it has nothing to do with the anodized threads).

The EA41 does include an electronic lock-out mode. I don't know how much this lowers the standby current, but it may. I recommend you make use of it. 

*Beamshots:*

And now the white-wall beamshots.  All lights are on Sanyo Eneloop NiMH (4x). Lights are about ~0.75 meter from a white wall (with the camera ~1.25 meters back from the wall). Automatic white balance on the camera, to minimize tint differences.





























































There really isn't much difference between the max output or throw of my 2014 and 2015 editions of the EA41. I did notice some tint variation (especially in the hotspot/corona), but this is to be expected between any two samples of a given light. Scroll down for direct measures of output.

In terms of comparisons to other lights, the deep reflector of the EA41 certainly makes this one of the "throwier" examples of this class, with a relatively well defined hotspot. 

*Testing Method:* 

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

I have devised a method for converting my lightbox relative output values (ROV) to estimated Lumens. See my How to convert Selfbuilt's Lightbox values to Lumens thread for more info. 

*Throw/Output Summary Chart:*

My summary tables are reported in a manner consistent with the ANSI FL-1 standard for flashlight testing. Please see http://www.flashlightreviews.ca/FL1.htm for a discussion, and a description of all the terms used in these tables. Effective July 2012, I have updated all my Peak Intensity/Beam Distance measures with a NIST-certified Extech EA31 lightmeter (orange highlights).






Consistent with the beamshots, there is no real significant difference in the max output or throw of the 2015 edition of the EA41.

There was some confusion with the initial release of the 2015 edition as to whether or not output was significantly increased on all levels, compared to the 2014 model. Although Turbo output specs have increased only nominally (consistent with a single output bin step), there was initially a huge increase reported for max beam intensity/distance (i.e., 35,594cd, as printed on the 2015 edition box). This has recently been corrected on the Nitecore website to 28,276cd – which is much closer to what I actually found on my sample. 

But what about the output at the sub-max levels? Here you can see a more significant increase in the output specs (although oddly with no reduction in official runtime). Let's do a comparison of my direct output measures for these two editions.

Before we start, please be advised that the Turbo step-down feature on the EA41 is a dual step. As I showed in my 2014 edition, there is a gradual reduction in Turbo output over the first 7 mins – at which point, it levels off at a new set level for another ~13 mins. There is a second abrupt step-down at ~21 mins into the run, where the light drops to a new flat-stabilized level. I will report output at all of these levels below: 






What I am showing above are the current official specs for the 2014 and 2015 editions, and my direct measures in my calibrated lightbox. In the last column, you will see a comparison of the percent change; reported followed by measured.

As you can see, the reported max output has only increased by the estimated output difference between the U2 and T6 bins (i.e. ~6%). At the lower levels, there is a larger reported increase – which implies that Nitecore has increased the drive levels at the Lo/Med/Hi compared to the 2014 edition.

My testing above bear this out. Generally, I get pretty good concordance with Nitecore output specs – except on the Turbo level of both models, where I find initial output to be lower than reported. My 2015 sample is only ~2% brighter initially on max than my 2014 sample. But that is the nature of output bins - any single bin step is on average ~6% brighter, but any two specimens could be anywhere from ~1-13% brighter, depending where each fell within its defined bin. :shrug:

The take home message is that Nitecore is accurate in its _relative_ reported increases in output, at all levels. But those hoping to see a significant increase in max output will be disappointed - the 2015 edition is definitely not driven any harder on max.

Of course, something that doesn't make sense is why the official runtime specs haven't changed. :thinking: The output at sub-max levels have increased by more than one output bin step, indicating Nitecore has increased drive current on all sub-max levels on the 2015 edition. There is no free lunch here – you cannot raise drive levels without it negatively affecting total runtime. So let's see how that looks …

*Output/Runtime Graphs:*

I have been moving my NiMH AA testing to the newer Panasonic Eneloop Pro NiMH (2550mAh typical capacity). Panasonic acquired Sanyo a little while back, and the new Panasonic-branded Eneloop Pro cells are an updated version of the former Eneloop XX cells (i.e., Panasonic Pros are basically 3rd generation XX cells, with improved charge holding ability). For more comparisons of the 2014 edition EA41 to other lights in this class on standard 2000mAh Sanyo Eneloops, please see my 4xAA Round-up Review.
























Although initial max output is not changed much on my sample, there are noticeable output increases across all the other levels (including the two step-downs from Turbo). Otherwise, regulation pattern looks very similar (i.e., flat regulated, with identical Turbo step-down timings). 

What this means is that absolute runtimes are shorter on the 2015 version, as expected. There is no way around that – when you increase the drive levels, runtimes will be lowered proportionately. The single output bin step does help here (i.e., raises output/runtime efficiency slightly). Note that overall output/runtime efficiency remains very good on the EA4/EA41 series lights.

*Potential Issues*

Due to the electronic switches in the head, the light has a stand-by current when batteries are installed. I have not measured it in this case, but on most Nitecore lights it tends to be in a range that will drain fully-charged batteries over a course of months. There have been reports that the standby drain is higher when first connected, so you may want to activate/deactivate the light at the switch after a battery change. 

You cannot easily lock out the light physically, so I recommend you use the electronic lock-out in regular use, to prevent accidental activations. 

There are a couple of timed step-downs from Turbo on the EA41, similar to the EC20 that I recently reviewed. 

*Preliminary Observations*

The take-home message is that the 2015 edition of the EA41 is very similar to the 2014 edition, with slightly higher output on the sub-max levels only. On Turbo, I see no significant initial differences between my samples (although the step-down levels are marginally higher on the 2015 edition).

There was some confusion with the initial release of the 2015 edition as to whether or not output was significantly increased on the Turbo level. Unfortunately, the initial 2015 beam distance/intensity measures (as printed on the box) are wrong, and have since been revised by Nitecore. Please check out the video overview for a side-by-side comparison of the two editions, as well as the direct measurements above for more information.

Overall output/runtime efficiency remains very good as before, consistent with a good current-controlled circuit.  Note the regulation pattern of the 2014/2015 EA41 on Turbo is a bit different from some competing lights (i.e., two sets of step downs). Please see the runtime section of this review for more info.

Build-wise, the 2015 edition is unchanged from the 2014 model – you can't tell them apart. Personally, I am a fan of the implementation of the two-switch design here. :thumbsup: General operation is intuitive, and Nitecore has included a number of additional shortcuts.

Beam pattern is also unchanged. The EA41 series has a slightly deeper reflector than the earlier EA4, making this series one of the throwier members of the 4xAA class. Check out my 4xAA Round-up Review for a discussion of various diffuser options, to further increase the versatility of the light.

Personally, I don't consider these 2015 updates to be significant. Although they have a small effect on output and runtime, I would really consider the 2015 edition to be a minor incremental change from the 2014. While a step-higher output bin is always nice (i.e., from T6 to U2), it is certainly not worth "upgrading" for, or paying a significant price premium. To me, the EA41 series (any version ) remains a top pick in the 4xAA space. :thumbsup:

----

EA41 2015 was purchased from an authorized Nitecore dealer


----------



## Capolini (Dec 27, 2014)

:santa:Thanks for another great review!! I have taken over RYP's # 1 post!! lol!

I had the EA4 and liked it w/ the exception of the battery configuration and sold it! It seemed to have a more than average parasitic drain w/ the Enloops that I used. The light itself was nice and pretty impressive for its size! :santa:


----------



## Ryp (Dec 27, 2014)

Thanks for the review!



Capolini said:


> :santa:Thanks for another great review!! I have taken over RYP's # 1 post!! lol!



I refuse to accept this, I was sleeping so I have an excuse  Also, time zones.


----------



## Capolini (Dec 27, 2014)

Ryp said:


> Thanks for the review!
> 
> 
> 
> I refuse to accept this, I was sleeping so I have an excuse  Also, time zones.



No excuses! Go to bed earlier! lol! :devil:


----------



## roberta (Dec 27, 2014)

Good Day Selfbuilt, 

Great review!

I think You have a mistake in the runtime in the Output/Runtime Graph on Hi (Eneloop Pro):
For the Nitecore EA41 2015 on Turbo the time of 1hr 37m to 50% does NOT correspond to your runtime graph (should be more than 2hr).

Thank You very much,
Best Regards,
Roberta


----------



## KiwiBlue (Dec 27, 2014)

Thank you SB for another useful review. :thumbsup:

Based on your review, I've decided not to upgrade from the 2014 to the 2015 version of the EA41.


----------



## KiwiBlue (Dec 27, 2014)

Hi SB,

Just one more question, when you said;

"The take home message is that Nitecore is accurate in its _*relative* reported increases in output, at all levels"
_
What do you mean when you said 'relative reported increase in output'?


----------



## selfbuilt (Dec 27, 2014)

roberta said:


> For the Nitecore EA41 2015 on Turbo the time of 1hr 37m to 50% does NOT correspond to your runtime graph (should be more than 2hr).


Yes, you are right - I'll re-check the data file and update the legend tomorrow.



KiwiBlue said:


> What do you mean when you said 'relative reported increase in output'?


Ah, what I mean is the proportionate increase that Nitecore reports. So, for the example of Turbo, they report a 6% increase (1020 vs 960 lumens). For Med, they report a 33% increae (160 vs 120 lumens). The percent increase gives you the right idea of what to expect (i.e., the relative reported increase).

The problem with the absolute reported values (in lumens) is that they don't seem to be accurate at all levels. So while the Med mode probably is ~160 lumens now, the Turbo is definitely not 1020 lumens on my sample. But proportionately, the relative increase is correct. I


----------



## UnderPar (Dec 27, 2014)

Thanks for this great review SB. :twothumbs


----------



## KiwiBlue (Dec 28, 2014)

selfbuilt said:


> Ah, what I mean is the proportionate increase that Nitecore reports. So, for the example of Turbo, they report a 6% increase (1020 vs 960 lumens). For Med, they report a 33% increae (160 vs 120 lumens). The percent increase gives you the right idea of what to expect (i.e., the relative reported increase).
> 
> The problem with the absolute reported values (in lumens) is that they don't seem to be accurate at all levels. So while the Med mode probably is ~160 lumens now, the Turbo is definitely not 1020 lumens on my sample. But proportionately, the relative increase is correct. I



I see! Thanks for the explanation SB. 

What a shame, I really am looking forward to the 2015 upgrade too! Looks like I will wait around for a bit longer.


----------



## Geoffrey (Dec 28, 2014)

Thank you for another impressive review!


----------



## tobrien (Dec 29, 2014)

thanks a lot for this incredible and in-depth review SB! 

I think now, based on your report, I won't have a problem picking up a 2014 edition of the EA41 if it's cheaper. 

I definitely want to buy an EA41 for sure because I've been nothing but impressed with my 8xAA Nitecore EAX Hammer. I'm now a Nitecore fan for sure


----------



## TheBelgian (Dec 30, 2014)

Great review (I hesitate to mention "as always", since that kind of goes without saying).
Off-topic with this light, but on-topic with retesting incremental updates: Dou you have a test for the updated Fenix PD35 2014 960-Lumen model in the pipeline?


----------



## selfbuilt (Dec 30, 2014)

TheBelgian said:


> Dou you have a test for the updated Fenix PD35 2014 960-Lumen model in the pipeline?


Sorry, no current plans for that one - but you never know. :shrug:


----------



## CelticCross74 (Dec 30, 2014)

Nitecores marketing wins again. Now I have both the 2014 and 2015. I do like how the lower modes are higher though. Now I wonder how the 2015 P12 holds up against the original lol


----------



## dizrack (Dec 31, 2014)

Got my 2015 ea41, went out and bought a size 5 butler creek blizzard scope cap for it. Took the lense out of the scope cap and beadblasted it. Works very well for diffusing the beam. I was surprised how good 1.4 lumens throws out of this light.


----------



## roberta (Dec 31, 2014)

roberta said:


> Good Day Selfbuilt,
> 
> Great review!
> 
> ...





selfbuilt said:


> Yes, you are right - I'll re-check the data file and update the legend tomorrow.
> 
> ...
> .......


Good Day Selfbuilt, 

Any update on this?

Thank You very much,
Roberta


----------



## selfbuilt (Jan 1, 2015)

roberta said:


> Good Day Selfbuilt,
> Any update on this?


Yes, graph is fixed - it was 2hr 5min to 50% on Turbo on Eneloop Pro in the 2015 version, in my testing.


----------



## KrisC (Jan 7, 2015)

Hello,
First post here. Thanks for the review. Because of it, I opted for the 2014, 960lm version that's ~$15 cheaper than the 2015 version ($50 v $65). Also, because I wanted to thank you for the review, I also am the newest CPF member (as off 10:28a PST).

Kris


----------



## selfbuilt (Jan 7, 2015)

KrisC said:


> Hello, First post here. Thanks for the review. Because of it, I opted for the 2014, 960lm version that's ~$15 cheaper than the 2015 version ($50 v $65). Also, because I wanted to thank you for the review, I also am the newest CPF member (as off 10:28a PST).


Glad it was helpful for you. And :welcome:


----------



## selfbuilt (Jan 8, 2015)

Sorry, just realized the old 2014 edition video was still linked in this review. Corrected to include the new comparison video, showing both the 2014 and 2015 models. :wave:


----------



## selfbuilt (Jan 14, 2015)

Just an update on the issue of the standby drain. 

As I mentioned in the review, it is complicated to try and directly measure the standby drain on the EA41. So I thought I would try an indirect method.  Using my Maha C9000 charger, I charged two relatively new sets of Eneloop Pro until "done" was shown on the display (note that the Maha tends to continue trickle charging beyond this point, so these may not be considered "fully charged", only consistently charged). I placed one set of four into the EA41 2015, activated the light, and immediately turned off (with no standby flash). The other set of four sat on the shelf. After 16 days with no interference, I removed the batteries and ran them all through a discharge cycle on the Maha.

The batteries that were left alone had an average discharge capacity of 2405mA (note as well that the Maha may not "fully discharge" in this mode, but it should be consistent). The batteries in the light, which were subject to a standby drain, had a discharge capacity of 2276mA. That means the batteries inside the light lost 127mAh over 16 days, or 8mAh/day.

Based on this very limited test, and taking into account the typical self-discharge rate of eneloops, I would tentatively conclude that you should expect less than 9 months lifetime for unused Eneloop Pro (2500mAh capacity) cells in this light, and less than 7.5 months for regular Eneloop (2000mAh capacity). Note the it could be worse than that - I haven't measured the drain of partially depleted cells. But you could take these as a guideline for approximate upper limits. As these are fairly significant standby drain levels, you should probably store the light fully disconnected when not in use.


----------



## Utew (Jan 14, 2015)

Good information, thanks for taking the time and effort to shed some light on that issue. I had the sneaking suspicion that there was a fairly significant amount of parasitic drain occurring with my "2015" ver. I have been keeping my EA41 manually locked out, when idle... and the tailcap really has to be unscrewed almost to the falling off point to do it. 

You really are the Gold Standard, when it comes to flashlight testing.


----------



## Lite_me (Jan 15, 2015)

Utew said:


> Good information, thanks for taking the time and effort to shed some light on that issue. I had the sneaking suspicion that there was a fairly significant amount of parasitic drain occurring with my "2015" ver. *I have been keeping my EA41 manually locked out, when idle... and the tailcap really has to be unscrewed almost to the falling off point to do it.*
> 
> You really are the Gold Standard, when it comes to flashlight testing.



This is what I've been doing with my EA4 as well. It just sits there by the door without much use for weeks at a time. I got tired of recharging the batteries without even using the light all that much. And sometimes finding them nearly dead.


----------



## UnderPar (Jan 15, 2015)

Utew said:


> Good information, thanks for taking the time and effort to shed some light on that issue. I had the sneaking suspicion that there was a fairly significant amount of parasitic drain occurring with my "2015" ver. I have been keeping my EA41 manually locked out, when idle... and the tailcap really has to be unscrewed almost to the falling off point to do it.
> 
> *You really are the Gold Standard, when it comes to flashlight testing*.



I second to this! :twothumbs

Back to EA41 2015 Edition. Whenever I know that I will not be using it for day, I just remove the batteries and store it in the battery case.


----------



## maxl96 (Jan 30, 2015)

I got a new EA41 2015 and noticed that in SOS mode the blue Powerbutton LED randomly blinks after a few seconds..
Anyone noticed the same?


----------



## selfbuilt (Jan 30, 2015)

maxl96 said:


> I got a new EA41 2015 and noticed that in SOS mode the blue Powerbutton LED randomly blinks after a few seconds..
> Anyone noticed the same?


Hmmm, neither of my two EA41 samples do that. May be a quirk with yours?

:welcome:


----------



## maxl96 (Jan 31, 2015)

Hmm I think I should just not bother since it´s working perfectly beside of this "issue"


----------



## TimTx1 (Apr 27, 2015)

Thank you selfbuilt for your detailed reviews.

I picked up the 2014 (not the 2015) version of this flashlight based on your review. I decided I would rather have the longer battery life at the lower levels (mainly mid) instead of 40 more lumens on medium.

I was curious though if you had an opinion of the difference in battery efficiency between the EA4 and EA41. It appears that the older EA4 had much better battery usage at the same light level.

Per your testing:
nitecore ea41 (2014) XM-L2 T6 -- Med Light Level -- 120 estimated lumens, 110 measured lumens = 9:12 on 2000 mAh Eneloops
nitecore ea4 XM-L U2 -- Low Light Level -- 135 estimated lumens, 115 measured lumens = 10:59 on 2000 mAh Eneloops

So, the EA41 (2014 version) lasted almost two hours less at a decreased light level, over the EA4.

Since you never did a 2015 test using 2000 mAh Eneloops I was unable to do a comparison there. But, it makes no sense that a more efficient LED (XM-L2 vs XM-L) driven at a lower lumen level (110 vs 115) would last substantially less time. I would use mainly medium and it is disappointing that my new EA41 2014 edition is less efficient at that level than the older version of this flashlight (the EA4).

Do you have any thoughts?


----------



## SuLyMaN (Apr 30, 2015)

When I see this review SB, I am totally unimpressed by the Nitecore for its 'claimed' specs and failure to deliver the 1000 lumens...This makes me still believe the Sunwayman D40 is the one to beat in this class. Being a relatively old model, it has ultra low modes and nearly best max output...Great ceiling bounce too.
Of course, if you think its a great choice to the 4AA class, so be it  I'd still choose the Sunwayman D40 or the Thrunite TN4A which you reviewed, gave excellent feedback but which you did not mention in the graph comparison. Its priced at $49.95. A much better deal in my humble opinion.


----------



## selfbuilt (May 1, 2015)

TimTx1 said:


> Per your testing:
> nitecore ea41 (2014) XM-L2 T6 -- Med Light Level -- 120 estimated lumens, 110 measured lumens = 9:12 on 2000 mAh Eneloops
> nitecore ea4 XM-L U2 -- Low Light Level -- 135 estimated lumens, 115 measured lumens = 10:59 on 2000 mAh Eneloops
> So, the EA41 (2014 version) lasted almost two hours less at a decreased light level, over the EA4.
> ...


If you look at the runtime graphs, you will see the reason for the discrepancy. Although both my EA41 2014 and earlier EA4 sample have about the same ANSI FL-1 output, my EA41 gradually increased in output over the course of the extended run on NiMH. By the point just before the light drops out of regulation, output is about 150 estimated lumens. This is why the total runtime is less than the the more consistently flat ~115 lumens on my EA4.

It is hard to know what would happen in a light that is restarted frequently - but I expect you would not see much of a difference between output and runtime. Beyond that, there are always going to be small variances in output and runtime between samples, due to the nature electronics, etc.



SuLyMaN said:


> I'd still choose the Sunwayman D40 or the Thrunite TN4A which you reviewed, gave excellent feedback but which you did not mention in the graph comparison.


The TN4A is not here because that review was posted more recently than this one (i.e., was written after).  All three are good lights.


----------



## SuLyMaN (May 3, 2015)

I guess I'm stupid. Sorry SB.


----------



## TimTx1 (May 6, 2015)

Thank you SB! That makes a lot of sense. I didn't realize that the EA41 had a different run pattern than the EA4. Now I see what you mean. The EA41 increases over time while it runs which drains the battery more.

My EA41 2014 edition had switch issues (it skipped modes sometimes) so back it goes. I went with a different flashlight, the Fenix LD22 instead which is on the way. I realized that I don't want to carry around a light the size of a coke can (or try to pocket one), I don't need to light up a house down the block (which the Nitecore could do), and around 200 lumens is more than enough for what I would use the flashlight for.

Thanks again for clearing that up!


----------



## selis (Oct 3, 2015)

Thank's for another impressive review and the update for the 2015 version.


----------



## CelticCross74 (Oct 3, 2015)

hey its the 2015 EA41 thread again! I am pleased to report that despite the lights very overrated output claim I really like this light despite having had it since its release. The beam profile is clean, bright and well defined. Love the switch. Love the blinky modes. Above average sheath. I run the new Eneloop Pros in it now and it runs considerably longer and stronger than the supposedly 2700 mah Powerexs I had in it before. I now own basically the entire "stubby" 3/4xAA class and the 2015 EA41 has held its own despite being down on output versus the rest of the class especially the D40A and TN4A.


----------



## creegeek (Nov 2, 2015)

I've owned this light a while also - and its a great performer. I measured standby drain at 0.55mA which means a set of Eneloop Pro will be 50% after 91 days.

So... I am testing a lockout solution for long term storage (hunting bag)... I took a foam earplug, cut about 1/2 off leaving the flat base and my flat cut (its now a mini-marshmallow). I put this on the negative terminal of a battery and screwed the end-cap down - not all the way - but enough so that its secure. I test the buttons to make sure there's no juice - and store. I'll report back if there's any unexpected drain or other side effects.


----------



## selfbuilt (Nov 3, 2015)

creegeek said:


> So... I am testing a lockout solution for long term storage (hunting bag)... I took a foam earplug, cut about 1/2 off leaving the flat base and my flat cut (its now a mini-marshmallow). I put this on the negative terminal of a battery and screwed the end-cap down - not all the way - but enough so that its secure. I test the buttons to make sure there's no juice - and store. I'll report back if there's any unexpected drain or other side effects.


Cute solution - let us know how it works out.


----------



## 1LL1 (Nov 7, 2015)

The alky inside my ea41 leak and eat into the wall, every thung still work, but it's ugly, will probably get the 2015 and run Eneloop in it


----------



## UnderPar (Nov 7, 2015)

A lot better to use Eneloops rather than the alka"leaks".


----------



## hammerjoe (Nov 22, 2015)

Ive watched a few videos of for this light and it looks like it has a strong spot.
Is there anything in 4AA range that has a good flood lighting instead at a reasonable distance?


----------



## selfbuilt (Nov 26, 2015)

hammerjoe said:


> Ive watched a few videos of for this light and it looks like it has a strong spot.
> Is there anything in 4AA range that has a good flood lighting instead at a reasonable distance?


You can check out my 4xAA Round-up Review for a greater comparison. But as you will also see in that review, any light can be made into a flooder using a simply DIY flip-top diffuser.


----------



## CelticCross74 (Dec 19, 2015)

....now all the sudden NC is putting the XP-L HI into near any model they can. There is the new EA45S XP-L HI which I believe has the same reflector size? I greatly like the EA41's compactness. Like between a TN4A and GX25A3. Come on NC lets see a EA41GT!! My TN TN4A HI is in the mail and needs some competition.


----------



## Swedpat (Dec 9, 2016)

I am late to reply in this thread but anyway. A few years ago I ordered EA4 NW and I really liked it. I like the design and the hold comfort is excellent. The switch is on the right place. Unfortunately the switch annoyed me: now and then it jumped over levels or when I shut it off it went into strobe mode. Very annoying. So when it finally found EA41 in NW I grabbed it at black friday sale.

Opinion/impression:
The double switch works good without any issue. But it can be hard to find in darkness, and using the light with gloves on hardly works at all. I have not much to say about the modes spacing, it's pretty good. The direct access to low and turbomode is good but there is one serious drawback here: even when you use this function these levels are memorized. It should not be, really stupid!

Otherwize I very much like EA41NW. Nice tint and good throw. I consider it as a good allround light with pretty stable tailstanding.

When it comes to brightness: according to my lightmeter the brightness at turbomode definitely is ~1000lm and this with alkalines. For a short time of course but it really is. I have not yet tried with NiMh or Lithiums cells, though.


----------



## Colosus01 (Jan 28, 2017)

I have the Nitecore EA41 2015 model and i am noticing the buttons starting to swell up. Is that common with this model? I purchased it in may of 2016 if it makes any difference.


----------



## RollerBoySE (Jan 28, 2017)

Colosus01 said:


> I have the Nitecore EA41 2015 model and i am noticing the buttons starting to swell up. Is that common with this model? I purchased it in may of 2016 if it makes any difference.



The ballooning button problem is supposedly only affecting the previous model (EA4).


----------



## Timothybil (Jan 29, 2017)

RollerBoySE said:


> The ballooning button problem is supposedly only affecting the previous model (EA4).


The EA4 had the two stage camera style button, which did not have the rubber cover. The early EA41s did have a problem with some of them ballooning, but Nitecore redesigned the cover from a different material and no more problem. If I recall correctly, they would send you a replacement cover if one asked.


----------



## RollerBoySE (Jan 29, 2017)

Timothybil said:


> The EA4 had the two stage camera style button, which did not have the rubber cover. The early EA41s did have a problem with some of them ballooning, but Nitecore redesigned the cover from a different material and no more problem. If I recall correctly, they would send you a replacement cover if one asked.



I think you might be mixing it up: 

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...ore-EA4-Pioneer-Updated-Switch-Cover-Material


----------



## Timothybil (Jan 30, 2017)

RollerBoySE said:


> I think you might be mixing it up:
> 
> http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...ore-EA4-Pioneer-Updated-Switch-Cover-Material


You are correct. I checked the E4 manual before, and apparently confused the statement about the two stage switch with the original two stage switch on the TM11. My mistake, and sorry for contributing to the confusion.


----------

