# SPARK SP6 Review (5 x XM-L T6 | 6 x 18650 / 12 x CR123A)



## turboBB (Aug 2, 2012)

*S*PARK, unlike most other manufacturers, got their start in the high-end flashlight world via headlamps. In late 2010 they launched their first products, the ST6 series headlamps, which were very well received by enthusiasts. They eventually intro'd their first flashlights in mid-April of 2011 which came to fruition two months later. In spite of the critical acclaim for their flashlights, there was no steady stream of new ones. It wasn't until April of this year that they released two new EDC lights but a month prior, the forums were abuzz due to a certain dealer thread proclaiming a pretty special light forthcoming from SPARK. Although it hit some delays, without further ado, here is the SP6:





*MFG SPECS
* MSRP: $399 USD

LED: 5x Cree XML Cool White T6 (this review) or Neutral White T5
Output and Runtime
5 Modes

Max: 3500 lumens, 1.3 hours
Med2: 1800 lumens, 2.6 hours
Med1: 500 lumens, 14 hours
Low: 80 lumens, 100 hours
Strobe
 
Battery
6 x Panasonic CGR18650CG 2250mAh Rechargeable Li-Ion battery (included) or 12xCR123A (not Included)

SCHOTT Ultra clear anti-reflective coated lens
IPX-8 waterproof
Weight

Without batteries: 780g
With batteries: 1050g
Dimensions

Lengths: 270mm
Width: 87mm



*PACKAGING / CONTENTS
*The SP6 arrived in a pretty large cardboard box w/magnetic flap:



(18650 battery for comparo purposes)




Additional accessories included were:
1 x 25.2V 1A charger
6 x Panasonic CGR18650CF 2250mAh LiIon batteries
1 x large & 1 x small o-ring's
1 x shoulder strap
1 x flexible key ring
1 x instructions/specs sheet

*[EDIT 8/8: *I was mailed the finalized User Manual for the SP6 which features specs/instructions in English on one side and Chinese on the other:


 

*]*


*CONDENSED VIDEO SUMMARY
*In order to provide you with timely info, I've created this quick high-level review of the light and will be fleshing out the rest of the review in the coming days:


And here is a deep dive of the quad-flector and emitter array:



*DESIGN / FEATURES*
Ostensibly, the SP6 looks just like any other large turbo-head flashlight:




While it features multi-emitters (five to be exact) they are arranged unlike any other light currently on the market; in a significant departure from the norm only one of its five emitters is forward-facing:




The single emitter with a small reflector is housed centrally at the tip of the emitter stalk:





Despite it's forward-firing position, it actually contributes to the flood and not throw as the tiny reflector doesn't collimate much of its output.

The other four emitters are arranged in a N, E, S, W pattern at the base of the stalk:




These side-firing emitters have their output directed via the "quad-flector".

They make up the bulk of the throw in addition to providing great flood as well.


 



It is really a piece of functional art:


 

 




 

The bezel on my sample was not glued down and removable allowing relatively easy access to the lens, reflector and o-ring: 


 






The lens and o-ring are both reasonably thick.

However, it is worth mentioning that _*due care must be taken not to dedome any emitters during reflector removal.*_

Some additional shots of the front of the reflector from various angles:


 

 

 

The OD of the reflector measures 76.3mm (3") and is about 42mm (1.65") in depth:





The two machined grooves in the reflector fit into two prongs that helps center it perfectly:


 

 

Here is a head-on shot of the emitter stalk with the reflector removed:



I would've liked to have seen some thermal compound applied on the surfaces where the base of the reflector mates with the light since the reflector is a decent chunk of aluminum and should contribute to helping draw heat away from the stalk. I'll be adding some and running some thermal testing.

Here are various shots of the stalk:


 

 


 

 
I used a paper to surround the stalk in bottom-left shot to better illuminate it. Bottom-right shot is the stalk self-illuminated (but not color corrected).

Getting back to the bezel, there are fine threads on the inner diameter at the tip which can accomodate 82mm camera filters:




This can be useful to apply different tints and perhaps even diffusers.

There are three "fins" (counting the ends) that serve as the first set of heat-shedding elements right after the bezel; the six milled grooves also provide some anti-roll capability (albeit not the best). The throat of the light features additional heating "fins":


 

 


 

 
There are two flat surfaces around the throat on which one side features the battery indicator and the other, a rubber cover w/SPARK's logo that covers the electronic switch.

The body features six circumferential grooves with eight grooves that are milled perpendicular to them:


 

 


 

 
While there is rhombic texturing, it really isn't necessary as fingers fit between the circumferential grooves so well creating a very solid grip. 

*[NEW 8/18: *There is no spring in the base of the head, rather it's incorporated into the battery carrier (more on this later):


 

 




 
While the (trapezoidal-cut) threads are identical on both ends of the tube, it was only designed to fit one way w/the longer end of the tube towards the head. If reversed, the o-ring on the head end would be exposed with the tailcap fully threaded, although the head end would now sit flush.*]*

The tailcap also features some machined grooves that aid with grip. There are four oblong holes to accomodate a lanyard (none is included) or (just barely) the included shoulder strap (more on this later):


 

 

 
The base of the tailcap is perfectly flat allowing reasonably good tailstanding.

*[NEW 8/18: *The included strap is mounted to either end of the light via large lobster claws:


 

 

 
The strap attachment clip at the head can be removed if desired.

The strap features SPARK's logo and is reasonably heavy duty; it can be extended from a minimum of 27" (68.6cm) to a maximum of 52" (132cm):


 

 

Before we get to the charging, it's worth doing a deep dive on the battery carrier, after all, it's what contributed to the delay of the release of this light. The initial carrier had plastic screws at its base:


 

 

 
They were intentionally used since the carrier's structural stalks are part of the electrical path in the carrier and metal screws would've created additional exposure points for the positive path. These were deemed to be brittle thus SPARK redesigned the carrier to use metal screws that are recessed to reduce the risk of shorting on them or with the central plates in the based of the carrier (where the center contact point carries the positive path and the outer circle the negative).

With the top removed, it's easy to see the electrical paths in the PCB:


 

 
The exposed brass circles (bottom-left one has screw in it for easier identification) are what mates w/the exposed ends of the carrier stalks. This is what allows the cells to all be inserted in the same direction, however, care should be taken not to nick these stalks.

There is one stalk in particular that carries the positive path from the charger up to the head:


 

 
It's identified with a small rounded white rectangle symbol on all three PCB's (center one not shown) and helps ensure that the electrical paths are correctly aligned.

The new carrier arrived w/the cells shrink-wrapped:


 

 
Per my reply below (#11), these were confirmed to be Panasonic CGR18650CG's that are considered good quality (but unprotected).

As previously mentioned, the battery carrier featues a spring on the positive side which is necessary due to the flat contact point in the base of the head. Those screws (which aren't recessed like in the base) are also potential points of contacts for shorts:


 

 

 
The end of the carrier features a central negative contact point with the outter circle carrying the positive path from the charger. These match to the corresponding springs in the tailcap.

While there were no fit issues w/my shortest or longest cells, I did note that in certain cases (as can be seen below) only the very tip of the springs were making contact w/the Panny cells as they didn't compress the springs as much:


 

 
L: PNSC CGR18650CG @ 65mm | R: XTAR 18700 @ 69.2mm


*CHARGER/CHARGING
*There is a charging port in the base of the tailcap that is protected from water ingress with an o-ring and cover. The cover features rhombic texturing that provides very good grip (and reminds me fondly of Gamera's shell;  any other Kaiju fans out there?):


 




 


The plug from the charging adapter simply plugs right in.

As mentioned earlier, charging of the SP6 is handled solely by the external adapter and not through any internal electronics (the voltage indicator in the head of the SP6 isn't required to complete the charging circuitry):





The charging indicator in the corner of the charger will be green when it's first plugged in to the outlet, it will turn red while charging and back to green once charging is completed:


 

 

The charger puts out approx. 25.3v but charging will not initiate above a certain voltage threshold (see charging section for details)


 

 
There is no addiitonal circuitry in the base. It simply passes the voltage straight-through from the adapter with the larger outer spring carring the positive path and the smaller center spring carrying the negative.

As such, I elected to conduct the graphing outside of the SP6 as it simplified the connections I needed to make:





The caveat here is that the graph doesn't take into consideration the draw from the battery indicator; which at 2.1mA (stabilized) actaully isn't all that trivial during standby but not really impactful during charging:



The charger exhibits a very good CC/CV charge curve. The current starts off at a hair above 1A and will begin to decrease once voltage hits 25.04v (roughly 4.17v each cell). I had a camera on intervalometer mode taking pics every 5min and I indicated the 5 minute section (via the two vertical lines in the Voltage curve) where the indicator was last red and first turned to green which the charge time of 176min reflects and is a reasonably quick way to charge up the six Panny cells. The current at this point was roughly 80mA but doesn't terminate immediately and will continue a gradual decline until the end of my recording (which ended early since the computer went into sleep mode) where it reached 1.8mA. This is just barely enough to offset the draw from the battery indicator so it would actually start a very minute draw.

The ending voltage was 25.32v with each cell charged to 4.22v despite having different starting voltages. While it's above the suggested 4.2v, it's still within mfg specs (with allowance of +/- .05v):




This should also reinforce the notion that as long as one uses good quality matched cells (via internal resistance measurement), it should greatly reduce the likelihood of unbalanced cells during charging.

To test whether charging would reinitiate after a full charge, I conducted some "cut-off" testing whereby I either unplugged the charger from the SP6's base (but w/the charger still plugged into AC outlet) OR I cut off the voltage to the charger altogether (to simulate a power outage) and I wasn't able to induce it to charge under multiple tries using either method:



I graphed a 12 minute test whereby I used either method to see if the charger would reinitiatie charging but as can be seen above, the current never rose above 1.1mA when plugged in. As a matter of fact, it even registered a current draw of roughly 11mA once power was cutout. The perfectly vertical bars indicate where I unplugged/replugged the charger from the SP6's base and the curved increase indicates where the power was cutoff completely to the charger and it was almost as if it was charging some kind of internal capacitor before the current stabilized (the slowly fading LED charging indicator lends support to this hypothesis). Again, keep in mind that this is with the carrier out of the light so not taking into account the 2.14mA draw from the batterty indicator so overall, I feel that this is a very good and safe charger.

However,as discussed in multiple replies to this review, given charging is done in series there is a chance for unbalanced cells but as I mentioned in reply #51, and especially now seeing the charging algo (CC/CV), I feel pretty comfortable using this charger with any cells capable of handling a 1A charge rate (and again with the other caveats mentioned).*]*


*SIZE & HANDLING
*




L to R: NITECORE TM11 | Sunwayman T60CS | APEX 5T6 | ThruNite TN30 | XTAR S1 | SPARK SP6

The SP6 is easily the largest light in my collection but despite the extra length required to accomodate 2 x 18650's in a row, it only eclipses the XTAR S1 by a few inches. The is due to the relatively shallow reflector (by comparison to the S1).

While the SP6 is definitely head-heavy, thanks to the fantastic grooves, it creates a very solid grip helping to offset the weight bias.


[*NEW 10/31*: rdrfronty sent me his SR90 for testing so I decided to take a size comparo shot to give an idea of how the SP6 stacks up:



L to R: L3 Illumination K40 | ThruNite TN31 | XTAR S1 | SPARK SP6 | Olight SR90 Intimidator


*UI
*The SP6 features four output levels (Low, Med1, Med2, Max) as well as a hidden strobe mode that is all controlled through an electronic switch that operates quite similarly to the T60CS. Below is a chart indicating operation:




The lower output levels are controlled via PWM (which I'm sensitive to but I couldn't detect) and not by means of turning on individual/combinations of LED's. All 5 LED's are always on regardless of the output level selected.
*

[NEW 8/18: **FIT & FINISH
*The SP6 feels extremely substantial in the hands. However, upon closer inspection, there are minor issues that betray the feeling of utmost quality that the heft may convey. While the threads were amply greased, there was some minor grittiness; this was easily resolved on the head end of the tube w/some cleaning and new grease. On the tail end, I notice there were some minor residual burrs that contributed to the gritty feeling. Even a cleaning and decent amount of grease didn't make it fully go away.

There was anodizing missing on various areas of my sample, in which some cases were applied over with a sharpie around the switch. It's also not perfectly matched between the head, tube and tailcap:





Despite this, I do feel it's reasonably tough as I only incurred minimal markings while trying to attach the strap with the plus-sized lobster claws that was fairly difficult to install:


 

 
The same can't be said for the painted finish on the lobster claw. I suppose this is why they supplied the flexible key ring.

The laser engravings were all very nice and sharp w/out any blotchiness:







 

 
I am however concerned with the fine threads being right at the tip of the bezel which may potentially be easily damaged. It would've been neat had SPARK created a custom double-sided AR coated 82mm UCL filter in lieu of the standard lens so as to cover these threads and still have a lens in place.

The electronic switch doesn't feel as crisp as the ones I've grown accustomed to on my Zebralight's:




They have an ever so slight mushy feel that might be due to the particular rubber used but regardless of the cause, this is just my personal preference so it's totally subjective.

I did notice that occasionally when changing modes, the light would almost go into a two step change for the two medium modes. It's almost as if it went: High -> Med2(High) -> Med2 -> Med1 (High) -> Med1 -> Low. It would still stop at the correct Med2 and Med1 levels but just that it's a little confusing seeing the two-step change as I'm counting the distinct changes to determine which mode I want. Last but not least, there also appears to be a very brief pre-flash on High when activating Low mode with the SP6 off.

On the plus side I didn't encounter any issues during full-out runtime testing with or w/out the use of a fan, in which the latter case, I created this video based on carl's request to test the SP6's heat management past 5 minutes without a fan:

(please read reply #23 down below for my thoughts on this testing)*]*


*BEAMSHOTS
Indoors (5m)
*Max






 







Med2


 

 

 

Med1


 

 

 

Low


 

 

 
For details of the above indoor shots and comparo vs. many other lights, please check Epic Indoor Shots Trilogy

*Whitewall Hunting
*Here are two quick shots to get an idea of the beam profile:


 

 


*RUNTIME
*The relevant battery stats are provided above each runtime graph along with: 
- Voltage of the battery at the start and end of the test
- Current draw as taken right before the test
- Actual runtime using ANSI FL1 (first in HR and then in M so for the OEM batteries on Max, read this as 1.9hrs _OR_ 111min)
- NEW (as of May 2012): Lumens measured on PVC LMD @ 30 seconds
- Also for Max, captured the temperature: ambient, the head at start and the max it reached (fan was used for all bats)




The interesting thing about the SP6 is that there is a slow "ramp up" period of about two minutes or so. As you can see, it actually turns on at about 500+ lms and shoots up to around 3K (in about 2 seconds) and then slowly climbs to a max of 3180lms (on this run) over a period of about two minutes before slowly decreasing. There are distinct step downs at various stages of battery depletion. At the end of the run, I measured the ending voltage to be 16.86v which would equate to 2.81v for each cell (if all were equally discharged). There is no flashing to indicate low voltage rather the SP6 will just abruptly shut off. However, given the multiple step down's and corresponding reduction in output, not to mention the battery indicator itself, there should be ample warning when the batteries are running low. The SP6 will get fairly hot around the fins surrounding the button/battery indicator with max temp reached of nearly 133F! However, given the ample material in both the head and tube, it doesn't really transmit fully down so it can still be held comfortably if a bit warm. I didn't encounter any issues with flickering during this run but more testing to come.

*[EDIT - 8/6: *Just wrapped up runtime on Max w/6 x XTAR 18700's (2600mAh) and on this run, the temp nearly hit 140F at the fins (however, check the video below for testing w/out fan). Incidentally, one of the cells tripped ending the test a little prematurely thus the total time achieved was less than with the Panny cells despite the higher capacity of the XTAR's. Lumens achieved was slightly higher but still short of claims.

The interesting bit is that despite the tripped PCB on one cell, the light was still able to run. While the carrier seems to be wired in series (6S1P) there is a redudant positive path in the base of the carrier. Further more, upon removal of the cells, I measured the voltage of the five non-tripped cells to be: 3.23, 3.4, 3.25, 3.27, 3.3 for a total of 16.45 which is close to the ending voltage for the Panny with 6 cells (on a subsequent run, I measured ending v of the 6 cells to be: 2.96, 2.66, 2.79, 2.59, 2.91 & 2.87 for a total of 16.78). I will do a deep dive on the carrier to figure out the exact routing path since the tripped cell was coincidentially in the one slot that allowed it to still run on 5 cells (more to come on this).*]*


*[NEW 8/18: *The Med2 run features one of the more unusual graphs on a LED light as it continues the trend of a long drawn out gradual ramp:



It'll turn on at roughly 1600lms and then increase to about 1700 at the one minute mark and then continue this slow increase up to a max of 1870 at the 25min mark. This very slow 170 lumen increase will not be visible to the naked eye (especially when drawn out over that duration) however, given it's not touted as a feature, I'm not certain what to make of it. It does earn the distinction of being able to pump out 1800+ lumens for nearly three hours while only running moderately warm.


*INITIAL CONCLUSION
*The SP6 has been an absolute delight performance-wise. It offers an outstanding combination of output and throw created by it's unique "4+1" quad-flector which is a marvel to look at. It accomplishes this in a form factor that's not terribly large (however it's on the edge of what I'd personally consider carrying around). Based on what I graphed, the charger utilizes very good CC/CV charge algo and is reasonably safe in that I wasn't able to get it to reinitiate charging after the cells were fully charged. It's also convenient and reasonably quick, charging up all six included cells in roughly three hours. While the issues I highlighted may be nitpicky, I feel it's warranted considering the luxury light designation its price commands. Hopefully the issues were just limited to my early sample as I'm aware SPARK has made some changes already (e.g. the threads are now square-cut). On paper, it is without a doubt the highest ouput light in my collection but I haven't gotten outdoors for actual real-world testing. That should be happening in a few weeks w/my upcoming camping trip so for now, here are my initial impressions:


*turboBB-licious*


piece of art reflector that performs as good as it looks
outstanding combo of output and throw
no issues encountered during runtime testing w/out fan
electronic switch allows easy access to output levels or instant strobe
included charger very convenient to use and allows reasonably quick and safe charging of all six cells


*turboBB-cautious*


potential for unbalanced cells over time after charging
no protection built-in to the carrier
drain from "always-on" battery indicator is not trivial and would potentially kill the cells in over a month's time (lock out when not in use)
fine threads in bezel might be easily damaged (inconsequential though if you never plan on using a filter)
missing anodizing on my sample
*

turboBB-wishes*



attachment for charging cover to reduce likelihood of losing it
revision to carrier and charging system to allow balanced charging
smaller lobster claws for the strap that actually fit (and preferably nylon/metal like the Nite-ize s-clips)*]*



*SPARK SP6 ALBUM

*

=======
Disclosure: SP6 provided by sbflashlights for review.


----------



## kj2 (Aug 2, 2012)

Thanks  nice looking light


----------



## gopajti (Aug 2, 2012)

thanks turbo,

Spark lights use Matsushita/Panasonic electronic switch. More than 200.000 switching lifetime. I think that's impressing. The Spark SL6S-740NW is one of my favourite light.


----------



## Bigmac_79 (Aug 2, 2012)

Looking forward to the rest of this review! Very nice pictures of the reflector/emitters :thumbsup:


----------



## rufus001 (Aug 2, 2012)

If you compare the indoor shots of the SP6 to the TM11 and the T60CS you get an idea of just how good this light is. It beats them up close and will easily beat them at a distance. It feels really good to carry too.


----------



## MichaelW (Aug 2, 2012)

How does this light work?
low & medium: center xm-l
medium2: 4 side firing xm-ls
max: all xm-ls
Don't have time to watch video, will watch later.


----------



## turboBB (Aug 2, 2012)

Thx guys! 

@rufus - even though I haven't been able to match the claimed output, it's still the highest output light in my collection with the TN30 coming in a close second.

@MichaelW - no, all LED's are always on regardless of the output level. I'll have the UI section up later with more details.


----------



## tobrien (Aug 2, 2012)

Bigmac_79 said:


> Looking forward to the rest of this review! Very nice pictures of the reflector/emitters :thumbsup:



This. Those are some damn good shots


----------



## sbbsga (Aug 3, 2012)

Finally, a review, a brilliant one at that. Thank you! Can't wait for the rest.

Good to know that they bundled it with six matching 18650. The batteries alone would burn another hole in the wallet if purchased separately.

The beam pattern is really cool, it looks like a spinning propeller!


----------



## baldo21 (Aug 3, 2012)

Could You Please, verify if the included batteries consist of 6x Panasonic CGR18650-2250mAh?
Thank You


----------



## turboBB (Aug 3, 2012)

Thx guys! With the weekend ahead, I'll have some time to flesh out this review and hopefully grab some outdoor comparo shots as well.

@baldo - confirmed, they are CGR18650CG's (spec sheet here):





Cheers,
Tim


----------



## carl (Aug 3, 2012)

Did you say in your video that you can visibly detect PWM? I thought all Sparks and ZLs were current controlled.


----------



## turboBB (Aug 3, 2012)

Not visiually with my eyes but I noticed it on the camera. While they have claimed full current control for their other lights, I'm not certain if they've ever stated so for the SP6, let me find out.


----------



## carl (Aug 4, 2012)

Thanks turboBB.

Also, is there a way to measure the temp of the center post (the mounting post for the 5 LEDs) after, say, 5 minutes on high? Maybe running it without the front lens and taking a measurement using a standard infrared laser thermometer.


----------



## turboBB (Aug 4, 2012)

Not sure but I'll give it a shot as soon as I can remove the lens. 

EDIT: UI section and chart added.


----------



## carl (Aug 4, 2012)

Thanks again turboBB! If its not possible, no worries. This light seems to be the king of output and throw right now.


----------



## jasonck08 (Aug 4, 2012)

Nice review so far, looks like a crazy bright light! 

Also I'm curious about the battery pack, does it appear to have any kind of a balancing circuit?


----------



## rufus001 (Aug 4, 2012)

jasonck08 said:


> Nice review so far, looks like a crazy bright light!
> 
> Also I'm curious about the battery pack, does it appear to have any kind of a balancing circuit?


Sadly no. Unless it's been updated since I purchased mine.


----------



## turboBB (Aug 4, 2012)

@carl - I got the lens & reflector off so I'll conduct a temp test tomorrow.

@Jason - rufus is correct, ,no balacing circuit. The only real difference I can see between the original carrier and new is the steel screws at the base. However, interestingly enough on a test with 6 x XTAR 18700's, the PCB tripped on one of the cells yet the light was still running! This would indicate there is some time of redundancy built into the carrier but I haven't figured out what/how yet. I'll have more details tomorrow along with updated runtime on Max.

Cheers,
Tim


----------



## carl (Aug 5, 2012)

Thanks turboBB. You'll be answering the question many of us have been wondering about. I assume each LED is running at around 2.8 amps or so on max so it will be interesting.


----------



## turboBB (Aug 5, 2012)

Still working on the review but in the meanwhile here is video deep dive of the reflector and emitter stalk as well as UI:


----------



## rufus001 (Aug 5, 2012)

Great video! Spark have really done a good job with this light.


----------



## turboBB (Aug 5, 2012)

Thx! Here's the one covering heat testing w/out the use of a fan:


carl (and others) hope this addresses any concerns you have with heating issues. However, I must caveat as such:

This test was easier on the SP6 because:
- the SP6 was pointed straight up and there was no lens covering the heat allowing it to escape better (however keep in mind that air is actually a very poor medium for thermal exchange)

This test was much harder on the SP6 because:
- there wasn't a use of a fan and the reflector (which is actually a substantial chunk of aluminum) was not in place to further help draw heat away from the stalk (and as we all know, aluminum is a very good medium for thermal exchange)

Between the two, I'm leaning towards the latter but I'd like to hear your opinions on this.

Strangely, there wasn't any thermal compound on the base of the reflector. Personally, I feel this would've further aided heat dissapation. Of course, this has got my curiosity piqued so I'll do some add'l testing in the future to see what the heat on the reflector is without any compound and then again after Arctic MX-4 compound is added.

More testing to come! ;o)

Cheers,
Tim


----------



## rufus001 (Aug 5, 2012)

I have a question but I don't know how to phrase it so you'll have to guess. :thinking:  I think if the heat sink gets hot then that is good as it is meant to be drawing the heat away. But away from what? What part of the light causes flickering/failure due to overheating? And can that be measured to see how close it is getting to failure.


----------



## turboBB (Aug 5, 2012)

Typically it's the circuit as LED's; and more specifically the XM-L's; have a max. junction temp of 150C/302F so theoretically a single XM-L can operate to that temperature before overheating. This is why LED manufacturers always suggest positioning the driver circuitry away from the LED's. Unfortunately I don't know enough about the specifics of the chips involved with each circuit and which specifcially is prone to heat failure so I'll defer to someone more knowledgeable to pipe in.


----------



## NorthernStar (Aug 5, 2012)

A great review as always!

I like that the 18650´s batteries is included with the flaslight.If one could see some outdoors longdistance beamshots also it would be great!


----------



## carl (Aug 6, 2012)

turboBB - can't thank you enough for running that temp check. Thank you very much! The SP6 seems to run up to roughly 200F which is not enough to damage the LEDs - awesome light!


----------



## rufus001 (Aug 6, 2012)

Any idea of how the charger knows when to cut out? If it's based on an overall voltage then surely the batteries wouldn't get too much out of sync?


----------



## turboBB (Aug 7, 2012)

I'll graph the charging algo when I'm done with the bulk of the review but based on my initial testing, the carrier wires the batteries in series (6S1P) for a total v in the neighborhood of 25.2V (4.2V x 6). There is no balacing done so this is precisely why SPARK decided to include quality matched cells. Matched here means they are all of the same brand and labeled capacity (albeit I'm not certain if they actually conducted any internal resistance and real capacity testing). I believe charging is solely controlled by the adapter and not due to any circuity within the SP6 itself. When the charger (with a rated output of 25.2V @ 1A) is first plugged in, a small green LED will illuminate in the corner of the adapter. It will change to Red during charging and back to green when the batteries are fullly charged. 

All, updated runtime chart on Max and some material added to Design & Features section.

Cheers,
Tim


----------



## rufus001 (Aug 7, 2012)

So if I use 6 identical high quality batteries I should be fine to simply use the charger? Don't worry, I'll treat the answer as "All care. No responsibility."


----------



## phips (Aug 7, 2012)

I would use the internal (unbalanced) charging system only when in a bind.
When you use protected cells theoretically you should be fine, however I feel the individual cell protection should be a last line of defense an not used on a regular basis.

I have a lithium battery pack for a rc-car where one of the cell exhibits a significantly higher self-discharge rate.
Using a balanced charger the pack works absolutely fine, however if I were to charge it unblanced results would most likely be catastrophic.
While this is not 100% applicable here (no individual cell protection, cheaper quality) it highly discourages myself from handling any lithium rechargeables carelessly.
Although it is probably already careless enough to be still using this particular pack...


----------



## rufus001 (Aug 7, 2012)

So what does the balancer actually do? I thought the problem was it would shut off charging before all batteries were fully charged if there was no balancer. But from the previous post it appears the balancer alters the current to each battery depending on how discharged it is? Therefore preventing to much current going to a deeply discharged battery resulting in ?


----------



## turboBB (Aug 8, 2012)

Balance charging (a feature thus far found only hobby chargers) is able to monitor the voltage of each cell and manages the charge of each individual battery that is charged in series through the means of balancing leads. What it does is to ensure that no individual cell is overcharged by actually discharging any that exceeds the preset limit (and this can vary depending on the chemistry of the batteries in question). It's a bit heavy to go over in a reply so just do a search for balance charging and you can read up on it.

For the record, there is NO balance charging on the SPARK SP6. The charger plugs to the end of the light and charges all 6 cells in series. As such, there is a potential for each cell to be mismatched. The easiest way to understand this is to think in terms of resting voltage not matching between all cells; ie: you can end up with 3 cells at 4.19 and 3 cells at 4.21 as a simple example OR you can end up with any combination of under/over charge for each cell as long as it equals to 25.2V (or whatever is the terminating voltage that the charger is programmed at - I don't know yet since I haven't graphed the charging algo yet). This typically happens as cells age and their internal resistance builds up thus the cells with higher resistance takes longer to charge thus staying lower in voltage while those with lower resistance charge more quickly and thus are prone to overcharging. It's a bit ironic that the one bad cell will actually be safe from overdischarging in this scenario while the healthy cells will take a hit.

So let's say that of 6 cells, 5 are identical in IR and 1 is a bad cell with pretty high IR. Now imagine a scenario where by the time the 5 healthy cells reach 4.2v each (for total of 21v) the bad cell is just at 3.9v thus representing a total of 24.9v. Now let's say that the charger has been programmed to terminate at 25.2v exactly, so the charger at this point will continue to charge all cells since it's programmed for just that and isn't aware of what each cell is at. To make things easy, let's pretend that it'll continue to charge all 6 cells equally to reach 25.2v so that means each cell will get an additonal .05v at which point you now have 5 cells at 4.25v and that one bad cell at 3.95v for a total of 25.2v. Again, as far as the charger is concerned, it's done its job and will terminate charging regardless of what each cell may be at. While 4.25 is overcharged, it's actually still within specs for many cells (which typically state 4.2 +/- .05V). However, now imagine that there were actually 5 bad cells and a single good cell, you can imagine how fast that single cell would fill up and be overcharged badly leading to very undersirable outcomes! This is the potential danger of charging batteries in series without a balancer.

What the use of protected cells will do is that each cell features a protection circuit that will trip in the event the cell is over-charged/discharged. Since each cell features this circuit, you basically have six times the safety redundancy in the event one of these cells has a faulty/bad circuit.

This is why SPARK chose to pick 6 "matched" cells (again, note my caveat in previous reply) of the same type and brand since IR typically has less variation. However, while these Panasonic cells are indeed good quality, they are not protected cells (they lack a protection circuit). They do however feature a PTC thermistor (strangely the spec sheets directly on Panny's site doesn't mention this but I found this one that does) which provides a mechanical safety in the event of high current surge or temperatures.

Please read this great article on Battery University for a full explanation of the safety considerations when using Li-Ion cells (or just pop over to the Electronics sub-forum for many great detailed threads):
http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/lithium_ion_safety_concerns

In the end, since I'm typically risk averse, I usually like to use protected cells in my lights. However, I ALWAYS check the individual voltage of cells after charging (regardless protected or not) thus do not have any concerns with using unprotected cells as well especially when they are new since the likelihood of them being unbalanced is very low.

I have now run the Panny cells through two cycles and both time all cells were 4.20 (+/- .01) after charging regardless that their ending voltage were not all the same after runtime testing.

However, as they say, YMMV so you'll need to make your own judgement call on whether you feel comfortable/safe using non-protected cells as well as the included charger.

Cheers,
Tim


----------



## phips (Aug 8, 2012)

turboBB said:


> However, while these Panasonic cells are indeed good quality, they are not protected cells (they lack a protection circuit).


I honestly think the internal charger should not be used with these cells at all.
Basically there is not one protection system and 6 links that can break in the chain (7 if you count the charger).

I guess there a two possibilities that could happen:
1) Spark's idea is probably that if single cells get overcharged slightly, the system will balance itself naturally.
2) My scenario though: The lowest capacity cell of the six (the one which will reach over 4.2V first) will get overcharged.
Being overcharged a little every time, this cell will age faster and loose its capacity quicker than the rest and as a result will reach ever higher voltages with every charging cycle.

My first instinct is that Spark must have thought this through, I mean they even shrink-wrapped the cells as to say that this system requires no further intervention by the user.
However I think if you insist on using this charging system I think you should check the individual cell voltage after charging at least every couple of cycles (which is basically what a balancing system does every second).


----------



## rufus001 (Aug 8, 2012)

Thanks Tim!


----------



## IMSabbel (Aug 9, 2012)

Also not a fan of unbalanced in-series charging, here.

Not to mention that 6 batteries is a lot, and you are charging them in a metal pipe without burst valves.


----------



## Albert56 (Aug 9, 2012)

*The "interesting" thing is that it starts out at 500 lumens and then "slowly" ramps up to 3K lumens over a span of 2 minutes???


*Unless I'm misunderstanding you here, this is not "interesting", it's a major flaw and a deal breaker. Forgive me, but at this price point, I expect an led flashlight to turn on at or very near it's full rated output _when I press the switch_, not 2 minutes later! I don't need to wait for my TN-31 or RRT-3 to warm up. I could buy a cheap HID light for a lot less if I wanted a delay in achieving full output. I'm surprised that no one else has commented on this. I think I'll be passing on this light.


----------



## turboBB (Aug 9, 2012)

You're taking the statement out of context... If you look at the runtime chart, the ramp up is not linear over that span. It goes from 500lms to about 3000lms in 2 seconds and then ramps from there to about 3200.

SPARK has not touted this as a feature so I'm uncertain if it's a flaw or by design, in which case if it was the latter, I'm not surprised as a few of the high output multi-emitter lights feature this (e.g. XTAR S1, TN30...).

Besides most of us would never notice the ramp up (at least on the SP6) if it were not for test equipment to capture this. Let's think of it pragmatically, at night if your eyes were dark adapted, you'd actually appreciate a slow ramp up especially at these output levels. 

I'll find out if this was in fact by design or a flaw on my sample, in the meanwhile, I'd like to hear back from current owners on whether or not they notice this ramp up.

Cheers,
Tim


----------



## warmurf (Aug 9, 2012)

That ramp up time isn't a flaw and really isn't any issue. I am concerned thought about the unbalanced charging potential, however as someone said above, take them out every second charge and check them should work? So far I'm not seeing anything against buying this light, except the price. I may need to list some lights for sale.......


----------



## IMSabbel (Aug 9, 2012)

Well, the review was not conclusive in terms of ramp-up speed. It just mentions that it takes "2 minutes" to go from 500 lumen to 3000+ lumen.

And yes, 2 seconds would be tolerable (if not optimal), but it is still a flaw. 2 Minutes would be a disaster. 

The instant on (allowing the use of intermediate light) is one of THE advantages LEDs have in very high output lights like these compared to HIDs (I own a HID that takes about 20s to get to full power and thats really annoying).


----------



## rufus001 (Aug 9, 2012)

It's a non issue for me. I haven't even noticed it before or after Tim mentioned it.


----------



## turboBB (Aug 9, 2012)

@warmurf - as mentioned, I've not experienced any issues but then again, I've only gone through two cycles and the cells have all been within +/- .01v of each other. If one takes extra precautions (not overdischarging, checking cells after charging, being around and monitoring while charging) then I feel the risks should be reasonably low, although not completely gone. For additional safety, you may elect to swap out the unprotected cells with protected ones of the same brand and age as an added safety measure. However, in spite of this, you should still check the voltage of each individual cells after every few charges. I've been pretty swamped but I hope to graph the charging algo shortly.

@IMSabbel - I'll update the review to clarify but thanks for bringing it up.

@rufus - thx for your feedback.


----------



## warmurf (Aug 10, 2012)

Thanks Tim. I couldn't wait any longer for the full review- I've pulled the trigger....


----------



## baldo21 (Aug 10, 2012)

The inclusion of Good quality but *unprotected and low capacity* batteries,
combined with the *unbalanced and unreliable* charger is a clever camouflage to justify the high price tag.
I am sure the SPARK SP6 would sell much better if *optionally* offered without the batteries and charger but at a more realistic price.


----------



## turboBB (Aug 10, 2012)

For those not interested in the SP6 due to the packaged arrangement, I'd suggest you voice it over on CPFMP or to contact SPARK directly. Perhaps if there is enough of a response they may consider it so it couldn't hurt to ask.


----------



## Albert56 (Aug 10, 2012)

"You're taking the statement out of context..."


Sorry, my bad... I glossed over the "2 second" part. However, charger/battery issues aside, what kind of throw does it have? I'm not looking for another high power area light. It's reflector doesn't seem particularly deep and I've seen the phrase "wall of light" applied to it. Personally, I think the manufacturers should start concentrating more on throw vs raw lumens. I considered the SR95UT, but it's really large and out of my price comfort zone. I'm looking forward to some outdoor beamshot comparisons of the SP6 against other lights. Thanks for the nice review.


----------



## turboBB (Aug 10, 2012)

All, bulk of Design/Features section now added (I'll wrap up battery carrier and charger next).

@Albert56 - nope, that would actually be _my_ bad. I should've been a bit more clearer but thanks to the follow up questions here, I've updated the review. Not sure if you've seen my Memorial Day Camping Thread but the SP6 would slot between the TN30 and XTAR S1 in throw but will have the brightest spill. Take a look at the beach shots and if you think you like the output on the XTAR S1 or TN30, you will likely be impressed by the SP6.

Again, this is why I think SPARK is on to something with these side firing emitters as it allows pretty decent throw despite having a relatively shallow reflector.

I'll be back at that same camp spot in a few weeks after which I'll have a massive comparo thread again.

Cheers,
Tim


----------



## warmurf (Aug 11, 2012)

OK,

So I've decided I'm going to swap out the batteries it's comin with, if for no other reason but for extended run time (looking at the graph with the Xtars- a 10 minute difference on high) but need to
decide what to replace them with. I have 2900AWs already so that would be an easy choice.

Any recommendations for the best suit for this light, for both output and running time?


----------



## rufus001 (Aug 11, 2012)

turboBB said:


> I'll be back at that same camp spot in a few weeks after which I'll have a massive comparo thread again.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tim



Woohoo!


----------



## Jabberwocke (Aug 11, 2012)

O.K. returning member that forgot his password. Last seen here with 2006 Surefire U2 (still works). Ordered SP6 and am worried about using included unprotected batteries. Plan to buy some Xtar 3100 and replace the originals. Are the originals safe to use in a parallel light such as a TM11 ? Would use external charger such as Pila. Any thoughts ?


----------



## turboBB (Aug 11, 2012)

@warmurf - given the high voltage, the draw is actually very reasonable. I measured roughly 1.6A draw on Max so I'd recommend using HKJ's excellent cell comparator:
http://lygte-info.dk/review/batteries2012/Common18650comparator.php

and selecting the 2A button then clicking through various cells to see which gives you the best runtime (longest line) or highest v output (tallest line overall) depending on your needs. I used to think that just 'cuz a cell was higher in capacity and was able to best another cell at a higher draw that it'd naturally beat it at lower draw but as you play around with his tool, you'll come to see that's not always the case.

@Jabberwocke - welcome back from your hiatus! The cells feature button tops so can be used in the TM11 but again, with the usual caveats that go along with using unprotected cells. Despite its parallel arrangement, there still is a chance (even if a reduced one) that one cell can be discharged disproportionately from the others. If you follow safe LiIon handling practices (monitoring voltage of each cell after charge, not overdischarging, etc.) then I don't see why these cells can't be used. If however, you'd rather not take a chance at all then I'd recommend just selling them and getting protected cells for your TM11 as well.

Likewise with the charger, per the past few previous replies, if you don't feel comfortable with the potential risks of unbalanced cells then best to remove the batteries and charge them individually with an external charger.

My bottom line on this is that I personally feel comfortable using the supplied charger as well as the unprotected cells since I'm pretty careful about checking cells, etc. but in this litigious society, one would be foolish to recommend that unconditionally to another in case something does happen so ultimately, you'll need to make that decision for yourself.

Cheers,
Tim


----------



## warmurf (Aug 12, 2012)

Thanks for the info Tim, very helpful! I'll run the supplied batteries for a while and will decide on a secondary set for longer running after reviewing HKJ's data. Cheers!!

Ricky


----------



## f22shift (Aug 12, 2012)

I think the built in charger has its purpose. For example you are on vacation or work and you want a simple solution to top off the cells. Then at home you should individually charge the cells. 
I mean it's a plus rather than a minus to have this feature. It doesnt affect the water resistance . It's there when you need it but shouldn't be relied on.


----------



## warmurf (Aug 12, 2012)

Yep, totally agree.

The only down side I'm seeing with this light is the performance sag when it get's hot, which looks to be within 15 minutes of start-up on turbo. Un-cooled the drop in output is very significant, and was one of the concerns around this light from concept. That said, there would hopefully not be too many occasions where you'd need to be running the light at full bore for durations such as that, and if you drop it down in output for durations it will probably hold full output for 5-10 minute runs (from the data I'm seeing) and that looks to me to be great for normal use. 

The one stand-out for this light is it appears to be one of the best lights for sustained output over duration within the high power class of lights.


----------



## NorthernStar (Aug 12, 2012)

turboBB said:


> I'll be back at that same camp spot in a few weeks after which I'll have * a massive comparo thread again. *
> 
> Cheers,
> Tim



That sounds great! 

I look forward to see that massive comparo. Hopefully that means that one can finaly see some good longdistance beamshots on the SP6. I am very curious to see how the SP6 compares to the Olight SR92(and the Olight SR95 as well) and the Xtar S1 when it comes to throw and flood.

Edit: I now saw in this thread that some comparsions have been done: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?342542

The SP6 looks like it has a broader beam than the SR95 by judging from those pics at the distance of 100 yards,but it would be great to see more comparsions and at even longer distances.


----------



## Jabberwocke (Aug 12, 2012)

I know that I am getting off topic from the SP6 review, but how much unprotected cell voltage imbalance is acceptable ? I understand that the current flow due to imbalance will not be limited by the missing protection PCB, but instead by cell and path resistance. If the resistance is on the order of tens to hundreds of milliohms, then it seems an imbalance of 100mV when charged would be unsafe. Is there a thread on this topic ?


----------



## turboBB (Aug 18, 2012)

Short of the whitewall/outdoor shots (and potentially some add'l runtime testing), this review is now wrapped up. Tons of new material added along with full Charging graph and details (search multiple instances of 8/18). If you can't be bothered to go back to OP, my opinion on the charger is that it's quite good, exhibiting a very good CC/CV charge curve.

Cheers,
Tim


----------



## jake25 (Aug 18, 2012)

Very interesting a good CC/CV curve.


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 19, 2012)

turboBB said:


> Tons of new material added along with full Charging graph and details (search multiple instances of 8/18). If you can't be bothered to go back to OP, my opinion on the charger is that it's quite good, exhibiting a very good CC/CV charge curve.


Hi Tim, outstanding review. Very thorough and detailed, nice job. :thumbsup:

I'm glad to see you did the detailed charging current/voltage testing. I haven't bothered, given that you need to set everything up outside the light (as you thoughtfully did). And as you pointed out, the ~2.1mA drain from the battery indicator shouldn't be an issue for this kind of testing. I too am glad to see the CC/CV pattern.

However, I'm disappointed to see that the charger doesn't terminate when the light goes green. I suspect as much in my review, where I noted that when I left my AW 2200mAh cells connected to the charger for an extra couple of hours they came out at higher voltage. Typically, my charger read just under 25.4V when first green (with all cells < or = 4.23V). But on that extended charge, it came out at just over 25.5V, with all cells between ~4.25-4.26V. So it looks like my unit is willing to charger a little higher than yours. >= 4.25V per cell is definitely beyond my personal comfort level, so I will be recommending people pull the charger as soon as it goes green. 

Anyway, great that you actually confirmed it directly. I agree that it's not really an issue at the tail-end of charging, as it should be more than balanced out by the battery indicator drain normally. 

Good job! :wave:


----------



## turboBB (Aug 20, 2012)

Thx selfbuilt! I plan on doing another graph of the charging in the future but in the light just need to figure out how to do it w/out shorting it since the pos/neg contact points are right next to each other. Will post results whenever I get to that.

Cheers,
Tim


----------



## turboBB (Oct 31, 2012)

rdrfronty sent me his SR90 for testing so I decided to take a size comparo shot to give an idea of how the SP6 stacks up:



L to R: L3 Illumination K40 | ThruNite TN31 | XTAR S1 | SPARK SP6 | Olight SR90 Intimidator


----------

