# Budget thrower?



## joeyboy (Aug 24, 2010)

for a $25-35(roughly) thrower, what would be my best bet? I've narrowed it down to just the few models below, anyone had personal experience with them?

UF HS-802 R2-WC
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.16538

Aurora WF-600 Q5
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.8672

WF-800 3W Q2
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.6965

Obviously the last one is going to have a longer run-time with it being 2x18650.


----------



## vickers214 (Aug 24, 2010)

I looked at this for a work mate not long since, and the winner with the most high regard and least problems was a KD RQ Q5 at 33 dollars


----------



## ^Gurthang (Aug 24, 2010)

The 802 has an R2 emitter and the tightest hot spot w/ weak spill. 
The 600 has a lower rated emitter [Q5] and the 800 an even lower rated emitter [Q2] both have good throw but less total output.


----------



## joeyboy (Aug 24, 2010)

^Gurthang said:


> The 802 has an R2 emitter and the tightest hot spot w/ weak spill.
> The 600 has a lower rated emitter [Q5] and the 800 an even lower rated emitter [Q2] both have good throw but less total output.



If I'm reading this right then the choice seems clear..the 802 wins it.

Do you have any personal experience with it, quality wise?(I understand you're just stating facts and may well not own any of them)


----------



## gcbryan (Aug 25, 2010)

I own the Uniquefire HS-802. It seems to be well made and throws well. It has a hotspot and then a little spill. Compared to an aspheric thrower it has a lot of spill. It is not a general purpose light however.

I use it if I'm in the woods and want some spill around the hotspot. If I'm in town and only want the hotspot for illumination then I use an aspheric thrower.


----------



## Freeze_XJ (Aug 25, 2010)

DX sku.18765 might be worth a look as well, i'm thinking about this one myself. Has a good review from Bessiebennie, and seems to need some tinkering if you want maximum power (replacing the circuit), but even without mods it's a decent one. 

@vickers : true, Raidfire Spear-clones tend to come out well


----------



## old4570 (Aug 25, 2010)

Hs 802 = R2 ??????????????

I put a Q5 in mine and output went up , so the claim of a R2 ??????

The HS802 is a great little thrower , has a tight pencil beam ...
Aurora might be a better all rounder ...

WF800 ??? If you want multi battery set up , might be good if you upgraded to R2 emitter ...


----------



## RepProdigious (Aug 25, 2010)

Too bad you aren't considering KD lights and secondary cells or i would have suggested the RQ. Its a great thrower!!


----------



## ^Gurthang (Aug 25, 2010)

4570,

Yep on the R2. Its still an emitter lottery w/ DX or KD. If I didn't already have a "thrower" I'd grab the HS802 or the KD RQ. Either might make a fun experiment for an XPG, less "throw" but plenty of mid-range by my guess-timate. 

Re-reading some of the DX comments about the 802, it does mention marginal drive current w/ the stock driver.


----------



## Hrvoje (Aug 25, 2010)

Another excellent thrower for cheap ($18.10). Search for MRV on Everbuying.

Hrvoje


----------



## rekd0514 (Aug 25, 2010)

WF-504B


----------



## vickers214 (Aug 25, 2010)

+1 for RepProdigious 

I posted when i had little time so, when i looked i saw all the flashlights mentioned here, trawled CPF and DX and KD to find out what really performed, least problems like switches/drivers , more often than not the emitter advertised came in the light, and what THREW!

the KD RQ Q5 was the most consistant performer (not the P7 version) with the best reviews, the DX 'spear' is poorly thought of.
Like i have mentioned in previous posts KD and DX are not the best sellers for customer service, and i have bough a lot from DX as they are a bit cheaper, but im now turning to KD as they ship quicker and the lights seem to have less problems, although not perfect. 

be carefull of 'tight' hot spots as some are too small to be of any use at distance and remember you will be looking at a dot of light far away as opposed to a spread so you dont miss anything, and how far can you see anyway at night in the woods, or any other given location say scrubland where the greens and browns sap the colour/light anyway.

I have a modded 2d mag with no spread and yes it throws, but it is useless so is never used, and i use an aspheric or my P100A2 (which does everything) for the spread at distance to search large areas quickly


----------



## RepProdigious (Aug 25, 2010)

:twothumbs

Since the RQ is basically a spear copy its comfy and pretty as well:







Orange accents were added for looks, no real purpose there.....


----------



## joeyboy (Aug 25, 2010)

wow cheers for the discussion folks. I posted a similar thing over at DX forums and a few people have recommended this as another one to consider, anyone know if it's a contender?

http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.22934

is this the right KD product...

http://kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=5558
http://kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=6459


----------



## old4570 (Aug 25, 2010)

The RQ is very nice , mine had a crap reflector , and the finish just wiped of .
I,ll have to have it chromed and polished one day . 

The WF-008 is a clone ? , of the 007 , and apparently has a lot more problems than the 007 ... Go the RQ from those two ..


----------



## EZO (Aug 25, 2010)

joeyboy said:


> I posted a similar thing over at DX forums and a few people have recommended this as another one to consider, anyone know if it's a contender?
> 
> http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.22934



I own one of these, the Ultrafire WF-008 Recoil Thrower Cree Q5-WC 230-Lumen LED Flashlight - SKU 22934. I really like it and find it to be a very useful and unique light. I live on a large rural property where I can use it to check on my vegetable gardens (maybe 50 yards from my house) and other parts of my acreage at night from up on my deck. It throws a square bright spot a good 100 or more yards out and has a feel like a spotlight on a police cruiser. Really impressive for its size and price. There are two very similar models out there, a black one and another with a rather unique sort of silvery gun metal finish, nicely machined (for the price, that is). It employs a unique design that uses a reverse firing emitter that shoots into a front surface mirrored concave reflector. The output is very similar to that of an aspheric. Has three modes, bright, along with a "medium mode" and strobe that I never use although I imagine you could really disorient an attacker using the strobe with the kind of punch this thing has.

Keep in mind this is indeed a budget light though. I had some problems with flickering and at one point it stopped working altogether but cleaning the contacts and spring really well fixed it. The o-rings could be beefier and mine came with some slight film on the reflector that probably can't be cleaned without scratching the delicate front surface mirror. Still, I consider this a worthwhile purchase and it has a very high "wow" and "fun" factor when you want to impress your non-flashaholic friends. Also, this thing has a surprisingly good run time on a fully charged 18650.

If this light interests you just do a search for Ultrafire WF-008 here on CPF and you'll find other useful threads about this light. Andyw513 posted some good beamshots and photos of the light back in April: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/268791


----------



## RepProdigious (Aug 26, 2010)

joeyboy said:


> wow cheers for the discussion folks. I posted a similar thing over at DX forums and a few people have recommended this as another one to consider, anyone know if it's a contender?
> 
> http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.22934
> 
> ...



Hi JoeBoy!

I own both these lights, and to cut a long story short the RQ beats the recoil hands-down.

Reasons for this are simple; 
-The recoil thrower is built cheap everywhere! The material is thin, the finish looks like [email protected], o-rings are too thin. The RQ however is built like a tank! Everything is made thick, anodising is great, threads are nice, its a very good hommage to the Spear (even the lens on the RQ is 3mm thick glass, just like the spear). Do buy the exact model you posted, the other spear clones on DX and KD are no where close to this model (sucky reflector, thinner material, crappy soldering and anodising).
-The recoil thrower is a bit like an aspheric; You get loads of throw but thats it, everything that cant be turned into throw is lost in the design! The throw on the RQ is almost on par with it imho but on the RQ you also get some very nice flood! Also, the recoil will throw one of those square beams (if you can get it focused properly, mine wasn't) and i just don't like that  You can see the recoil as a wide laser and the RQ like a flashlight with a very tight beam and thats what you want!
-The heat-sinking on the recoil thrower is far from ideal. If you run the light for prolonged periods on high i think the led could suffer some damage due to heat build-up. So either dont use it on high too much or modify the light so it can sink more heat in the body (like i did) but even then there's simply not that much body to sink heat into.
-The recoil has a glass mirror and quite a thin glass lens that can both shatter when dropped.... The RQ is just a tank period!

For those $6 there's simply no discussion on which light to get.... Go RQ or go home!


----------



## joeyboy (Aug 26, 2010)

thanks for that, seems I'm getting the KD RQ!

Do you know if protected cells fit? I only have 14500's and AA's here but wanted a 18650 light, these seem to have the best reviews..

http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.20392

I have this charger, seems it will work fine...

http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.22577


----------



## EZO (Aug 26, 2010)

RepProdigious said:


> Hi JoeBoy!
> 
> I own both these lights, and to cut a long story short the RQ beats the recoil hands-down.
> 
> ...




I certainly wouldn't disagree with your recommendation or opinion about the RQ here but I think you are selling the Recoil Thrower a bit short. I think you may have drawn a short stick in the DX -KD budget light lottery. The one I received has a perfect (and unique) anodized finish on it and it's one of the things I enjoy about the light in part because it has an unusual look to it that Ming the Merciless might have enjoyed. (It is Chinese after all.) Mine has a very sharp focus that reveals the fine details of the emitter to a high degree when projected on a suitable surface and it does what it says it will do, it throws. Soldering looks OK - (good worker on a good day, I guess). When using a fully charged 18650 I can let the light run as long as I like and it does get warm, but not excessively hot. I've dropped it on a wooden floor and nothing broke. Finally, I 'spose not everyone would agree with you about "one of those square beams", especially owners of the DEFT.

I have other larger and more expensive lights that are more "well rounded" regarding their beam profiles, spill and build quality but the recoil thrower is a unique design that delivers a lot for its price and size. As mentioned previously, this is clearly a budget light that has some shortcomings but then I have to remember that I knew when I ordered it that it was an oddball Chinese made budget flashlight and for what it cost it's been highly useful and fun to use. I guess that's the bargain one strikes when buying a light like this from a place like DX rather than spending the big bucks for a true illumination tool.

I've looked at the RQ and found it interesting. Your thoughts about it have me thinking of ordering one.


----------



## RepProdigious (Aug 26, 2010)

Im willing to bet that basically any protected cell will fit in the RQ... The tube on the light is 19mm diam by 70mm length and if you unscrew the top ring on the battery tube (not shown on the KD pics, the light you receive is slightly different) and shorten the springs slightly you could get batteries as long as 80mm in there no problem!!

My fatties (WOW 2600mah protected) fit in the RQ no problem while all the good will in the world coudn't get those in my TK11. Expensive lights only fit nice sleek expensive cells - Cheap chinese lights fit cheap fat cells no problem!


----------



## qwertyydude (Aug 26, 2010)

I own both the recoil and the HS-802. Hands down the HS-802 is a better light. I can say the quality of construction are about on par with each other, though the HS-802 has smoother threads. The places the recoil definitely loses out on is heatsinking, and also beam divergence is worse than the HS-802 which has a nicely collimated beam. Also the recoil has absolutely no spill whereas the HS-802 has a decent amount of spill which makes it a very useful light.


----------



## joeyboy (Aug 26, 2010)

qwertyydude said:


> I own both the recoil and the HS-802. Hands down the HS-802 is a better light. I can say the quality of construction are about on par with each other, though the HS-802 has smoother threads. The places the recoil definitely loses out on is heatsinking, and also beam divergence is worse than the HS-802 which has a nicely collimated beam. Also the recoil has absolutely no spill whereas the HS-802 has a decent amount of spill which makes it a very useful light.



yeah seems it's between the HS-802 and this RQ Q5 one. Might go for the latter seems to have excellent reviews.(well both have good reviews to be fair)


----------



## randomlugia (Aug 26, 2010)

I have those exact Trustfire cells, and they fit fine in the RQ. As you can see, it does have good spill as well as the great throw. I will warn you though, it's ringy. Really ringy. It doesn't bother me at all, but if you want a light with a perfect beam, don't get the RQ. As far as quality goes, mine has an excellent finish, and doesn't have any defects! Probably the best budget light I've ever held.


----------



## old4570 (Aug 26, 2010)

joeyboy said:


> thanks for that, seems I'm getting the KD RQ!
> 
> Do you know if protected cells fit? I only have 14500's and AA's here but wanted a 18650 light, these seem to have the best reviews..
> 
> ...



Xtar 18700's fit no problems


----------



## qwertyydude (Aug 27, 2010)

If ringyness is a problem the HS-802 should be your choice as the ringyness is pretty subdued, only really visible on a whitewall. Plus no dark donut around the hotspot which seems a bit obvious in the pics. Here's a comparison with the c78 aspheric. The beam on top is the HS-802 it's difficult to discern the rings on it and is that way pretty much in real life.

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/246153


----------



## RepProdigious (Aug 27, 2010)

I've considered the hs-802 as my new dedicated thrower but as far as i could find back then with everything else being the same the larger dimensions and 2-way resistor clicky (which is always bad) turned me towards the RQ.... Also the looks on the RQ helped a bit, i just like its design more and as it appears its not only a looker but also feels great in hand!

I didn't really know about the less ringy beam on the HS but until i see some proper side-by-side beamshots i'm not convinced that the lights differ all that much on that aspect... The RQ isnt all that bad, close range on a white wall you can see some artifacts but as soon as you get more than 6 or 7 meters away from the wall it all evens out nicely and lets face it, you aren't going to use a thrower indoors now do you  Outside its great!!!


----------



## randomlugia (Aug 27, 2010)

I've also heard great things about the 802, so I think your main decision is between that and the RQ. And IMO low mode is useless on a thrower, so it's nice to have the one stage switch on the RQ.


----------



## RepProdigious (Aug 28, 2010)

randomlugia said:


> And IMO low mode is useless on a thrower, so it's nice to have the one stage switch on the RQ.



Agreed!!!


----------



## Ian2381 (Aug 28, 2010)

RepProdigious said:


> :twothumbs
> 
> Since the RQ is basically a spear copy its comfy and pretty as well:
> 
> ...





Does anyone know how much Lux it throws?


----------



## joeyboy (Aug 28, 2010)

randomlugia said:


> I've also heard great things about the 802, so I think your main decision is between that and the RQ. And IMO low mode is useless on a thrower, so it's nice to have the one stage switch on the RQ.



Both seem to be two mode though? 802 has low and high, as does this RQ Q5 according to the specs on the page...

http://kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=5558

Ok folks...the RQ Q5 from the above link is in my basket...these batteries from DX are in that basket...

http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.20392

TO BUY OR NOT TO BUY!?


----------



## gcbryan (Aug 28, 2010)

I didn't care for the 2 mode resistered clicky so I replaced it with a forward clicky so now it's 1 mode and IMO it's much better.


----------



## joeyboy (Aug 28, 2010)

right well It's on it's way! Hopefully this thing will let me see my shed at the back of the garden in the middle of the night and not trip over on the way to it!

You think it would be be ok in a zombie apocalypse?:nana:


----------



## RepProdigious (Aug 28, 2010)

joeyboy said:


> Both seem to be two mode though? 802 has low and high, as does this RQ Q5 according to the specs on the page...



Yup, both are two mode, big difference is that on the RQ you can ignore the second mode (it remembers mode after you turn it off) but on the 802 you ALWAYS need to cycle through the modes to turn the light off.... ANd the low mode, if you intend to use it, is stupid on the 802 (it basically throws some precious battery power away in the form of heat to dim the light) whilst the RQ will do this all nice digitally and stuff with very little losses.


----------



## RepProdigious (Aug 28, 2010)

Ian2381 said:


> Does anyone know how much Lux it throws?



There's a pretty decent review on the forum here somwhere that does some number crunching.... Too late and too much alcohol for me to find it for you right now, so wait till tomorrow or search a bit yourself :thumbsup:


----------



## joeyboy (Aug 28, 2010)

well cheers for all the info and recommending me a model I wouldn't have even found.

I'll have to make another thread in the near future when I get something better for use in a power cut then the absolute sorry excuses for a torches I have here bought from the local supermarket, total BS they are.


----------



## Nalapombu (Aug 31, 2010)

So...which one is the winner here? Is it the RQ Q5 or the UltraFire WF-008? With all the back and forth I lost track.

Does anyone have both of these and can tell which one will throw a beam farther and more concentrated? Forgive me as I am a mere novice at lights and am not up on all the lingo and terms....

PM me if you don't mind as I might well forget this post.

Thanks

Nalajr


----------



## vickers214 (Aug 31, 2010)

joeyboy said:


> wow cheers for the discussion folks. I posted a similar thing over at DX forums and a few people have recommended this as another one to consider, anyone know if it's a contender?
> 
> http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.22934
> 
> ...


 

we


----------



## vickers214 (Aug 31, 2010)

Sorry for the double post

I have just got a Wf-008 recoil thrower today for a work buddy as he would not spend the extra on the RQ and what can i say....................ITS JUNK!

there seems to be a batch of Green ones with GITD green blob in the front which are good, but the new batch (what i have got) is silver with no blob!

It has 3 modes with no memory, the emitter was wonky, and the brightness is say 80-100 lumens tops, throw is hardly any better than my aspheric Torchlight C78 (awesome little thing) running on a AA battery!
With a 14500 it would destroy this light! It is very good looking but it does not do what it says on the tin:shakehead

RQ all the way for me


----------



## joeyboy (Sep 1, 2010)

whew good job I asked here eh?

I see from reviews KD takes a tad longer then DX to get the item shipped. Seems so, two DX orders have shipped since. I'm not in a hurry for it though. I'll just have the 18650's sitting around waiting. They've been dispatched.


----------



## Ian2381 (Sep 2, 2010)

Still waiting for someone to test the amount of throw(LUX) of RQ compared to other thrower lights.

Bought the RQ a few days ago and been optimistic that this is the light I'm looking for.


----------



## randomlugia (Sep 2, 2010)

joeyboy said:


> whew good job I asked here eh?
> 
> I see from reviews KD takes a tad longer then DX to get the item shipped. Seems so, two DX orders have shipped since. I'm not in a hurry for it though. I'll just have the 18650's sitting around waiting. They've been dispatched.



Mine took 16 days, as opposed to 4 days with DX. So yeah... pretty big difference. But the wait is worth it!


----------



## Shore08 (Sep 2, 2010)

I have been sorting through trying to decide this exact setup, batteries, charger, light and all. Thank you for the well timed thread and great discussion.


----------



## TEMPA (Sep 3, 2010)

Just picked my Aurora WF-600 from DX up from the post office.

Took about four business days from me receiving the shipping advice from DX to the parcel arriving.

Now I have to wait for it to get dark to check it out!

Quality looks reasonable on it. No damage or ill fitting parts. Lens looks to be dirty, not sure if I can unscrew it or not yet. The only issue is that the head section is a different colour to the body. Nothing significant though.


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 3, 2010)

Ian2381 said:


> Still waiting for someone to test the amount of throw(LUX) of RQ compared to other thrower lights.



UTBS:
Under same conditions (measured by the same reviewer)
Dereelight DBS - ~32 000 lux @ 1m
kd RQ Q5 unmodified - ~18 000 lux @ 1m
kd RQ Q5 w [email protected] - ~29 000 lux @ 1m (just about the lights max potential)

Source 

Also for some comparison shots with the genuine spear check this thread!


----------



## Ian2381 (Sep 3, 2010)

RepProdigious said:


> UTBS:
> Under same conditions (measured by the same reviewer)
> Dereelight DBS - ~32 000 lux @ 1m
> kd RQ Q5 unmodified - ~18 000 lux @ 1m
> ...



Thanks. Now I'm really excited to get my KD RQ.


----------



## joeyboy (Sep 12, 2010)

Just to say folks it arrived Friday and although I haven't had chance to give it a whirl it looks and feels really good, really high quality, nice cold touch because of that solid metal design. I guess you folks call it the machining? Well what ever it is it looks really sturdy and that considering it's price quality parts are used.


----------



## rollcage (Sep 13, 2010)

Great.. after reading this thread I am thinking about ordering RQ as well. 
Is RQ available at alternative retailer?? bcoz KD took a long time when I ordered last from them!

@joeyboy
would like to see the pics and review man.
congrats on your new RQ

regards


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 14, 2010)

rollcage said:


> Great.. after reading this thread I am thinking about ordering RQ as well.
> Is RQ available at alternative retailer?? bcoz KD took a long time when I ordered last from them!



I have a HS-802 on route from DX that should arrive any day now. Ill give it a proper test-run to see if its on par with my RQ. If its just about as good it could be a great alternative if you don't want to order from KD. Ill post back here soon with some results.


----------



## Tally-ho (Sep 14, 2010)

RepProdigious said:


> I have a HS-802 on route from DX that should arrive any day now.


If it has been manufactured recently, you might have one with an XR-E EZ900 die. The new die is brighter but smaller than the old EZ1000, but the average brightness are about the same for both.
With an EZ900 die, you might have a tighter and brighter hotspot for a little bit more throw.


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 14, 2010)

Tally-ho said:


> If it has been manufactured recently, you might have one with an XR-E EZ900 die. The new die is brighter but smaller than the old EZ1000, but the average brightness are about the same for both.
> With an EZ900 die, you might have a tighter and brighter hotspot for a little bit more throw.



And the HS-802 arrived just mere hours ago!!

The good:
-Very nice machined body, bezel ring and tail
-Lens and reflector looking nice and clean (from the outside but read on)
-Hotspot is incredibly tight, way tighter than the RQ but roughly equal in brightness

The bad:
-The hotspot is actually too tight for proper use, the simply doesn't have the output needed to light anything up at the distance where the hotspot would get useful in size...
-The 2-way clicky is very annoying so it will has to be replaced
-Someone did a horrible job assembling the thing. On arrival the light had a huge rattle and after a quick inspection i found out the led-pill wasn't screwed in all the way... No biggy, i wanted to get the thing out to add some thermal paste anyways. Here's some shots what i encountered:

Quite some damage from assembly on the otherwise nice protective ring...






Horrible soldering with long loose blobs that could easily cause a short and overall very dirty (dont know what that red/brown stuff is, dont wanna know it wiped off easy)....





Now, i don't really know what happened here but the outside of the reflector is completely corroded (its way worse irl, its hard to capture on camera)...









The led pill itself is really nice....





Yes, the clicky-seat or whatever you name it really came like this... I guess they were out of the flat types so they had some rat gnaw a bit off....





Now, long story short; This light has some great potential IF you like a wickedly tight hotspot and feel like tinkering with it for about an hour to get everything that went wrong at assembly corrected, to get the most out of this light you have to work for it! I had to clean everything up, resolder the pill and get it back in the body (quite hard because the body is a single piece and the head is too deep to properly handle the pill in place and theres now way of tightening it) and while at it i replaced the clicky:
Before:





After (dont laugh at ny soldering skills, its functional  )





If i had to choose between the HS and the RQ it pick the RQ in a heartbeat, its just more usefull for me (i use my thrower for looking 150m in the distance max and the RQ beats the HS there hands down. Also, the overall quality on the RQ is better and its just looks about a million times more beautiful.


Any questions? SHOOT!

[edit]Before i forget; Its pulling a clean 1A just like the RQ and the light can actually lock-out!! [/edit]


----------



## qwertyydude (Sep 15, 2010)

Wow that is a terrible condition. My HS-802 came clean no corrosion, no rat gnawed plastic, tight fittings, good soldering, EZ-900 die led, and it draws a whopping 1.4 amps at the tailcap. I modified it with thicker wires and a better switch and that went up to 1.6 amps now.


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 15, 2010)

qwertyydude said:


> Wow that is a terrible condition. My HS-802 came clean no corrosion, no rat gnawed plastic, tight fittings, good soldering, EZ-900 die led, and it draws a whopping 1.4 amps at the tailcap. I modified it with thicker wires and a better switch and that went up to 1.6 amps now.



Yeah, don't relly know what happened there... But this is just another one of those indications that UniqueFire isnt the most consistent brand. :shakehead

Does yours also have the incredible tight beam? My hotspot is about 20cm at 9m (can't measure any further than that atm, its day here and you living room just isnt any larger )


----------



## randomlugia (Sep 15, 2010)

Thanks for the review RepProdigious, I was thinking about getting one but I don't need a beam that narrow. Would you prefer this light, or something with an aspheric lens for long distances?


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 15, 2010)

randomlugia said:


> Thanks for the review RepProdigious, I was thinking about getting one but I don't need a beam that narrow. Would you prefer this light, or something with an aspheric lens for long distances?



I really dislike and would never suggest a aspheric for any real life use, its a toy imho. These light have almost no spill so in proper darkness (lets face it, thats exactly when you need your light) you are basically unable to see where you're going because of this. The only proper use i ever got out of one of these is mounting it on a set of binoculars (maybe a gun would also work kind of) but apart from that they're useless.

Now, i think the HS-802 may be one of the best hosts for modification; Toss a bloody high output led in there, the hotspot will widen alot but the shear output might kind of compensate for this making it a great all rounder with loads of actual useable throw... The reflector is incredibly deep and could basically turn everything in somewhat of a thrower. Might be worth a try!

At what kind of distance and to what purpose do you want to light stuff up?


----------



## randomlugia (Sep 15, 2010)

RepProdigious said:


> I really dislike and would never suggest a aspheric for any real life use, its a toy imho. These light have almost no spill so in proper darkness (lets face it, thats exactly when you need your light) you are basically unable to see where you're going because of this. The only proper use i ever got out of one of these is mounting it on a set of binoculars (maybe a gun would also work kind of) but apart from that they're useless.
> 
> Now, i think the HS-802 may be one of the best hosts for modification; Toss a bloody high output led in there, the hotspot will widen alot but the shear output might kind of compensate for this making it a great all rounder with loads of actual useable throw... The reflector is incredibly deep and could basically turn everything in somewhat of a thrower. Might be worth a try!
> 
> At what kind of distance and to what purpose do you want to light stuff up?



I haven't needed one yet, I was just curious in case I ever would need a super thrower. I agree lighting anything up past 150m is useless because you can't even see that far, though I still think that an R5 aspheric would be cool because of the larger hotspot.

And these thrower hosts are really good for large LEDs because of all the heatsink area on the heads, but for some reason this never happens.  The P7 RQ would be really nice if it would only draw more current... I've actually considered buying one and pulling the driver out. What I'd really like to see, is a smooth reflector for the MG X-Thrower! That would be pretty much what you're talking about, right?


----------



## joeyboy (Sep 15, 2010)

just tried it out tonight and...WOW, I'm so not used to anything better then the rubbish plastic stuff you buy from budget supermarkets. This thing is something else! I can clearly see the fence at the back of my garden, can shine to up to a tree like 5 gardens away and still totally see it...

ALSO It can tailstand! I just tried it on my kitchen and it lit the room so well. I compared it to my Akoray K-106 5 mode?(something like that, has a green clicky, 5 mode, takes AA or 14500, bout $13?), still love the Akoray for peering down tarantula burrows on medium but this thing is so good.

Can anyone estimate the lumen output of this RQ because if I can find something which matches or beats it slightly, but is a floody light, it would be great in a power cut indoors.


----------



## randomlugia (Sep 15, 2010)

It's probably somewhere around 230 lumens.

If you're looking for a good floodlight I would definitely recommend the Spiderfire P7 first! It's my favorite of all the budget P7's that I own, about 450 lumens on high and 60 on low with no resistor. It's a little smaller than the RQ, flawless beam pattern and as close to pure white as I've seen. I love it as an EDC because it's just small enough to fit in my pocket. It's $33 from DX.

RQ





P7


----------



## qwertyydude (Sep 16, 2010)

I can tell by the photo the RQ diverges more than the HS-802. Which seems like an almost perfectly parallel collimated beam and my H2-802 diverges about 2 degrees, about the same as the 1.3 as a 20cm diameter at 900cm distance.


----------



## Tally-ho (Sep 16, 2010)

RepProdigious said:


> The good:
> -Hotspot is incredibly tight, way tighter than the RQ but roughly equal in brightness
> 
> The bad:
> -The hotspot is actually too tight for proper use, the simply doesn't have the output needed to light anything up at the distance where the hotspot would get useful in size...






BEAMSHOTS PLEASE !!!

An outdoor beamshot comparison would be very appreciated.


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 16, 2010)

qwertyydude said:


> I can tell by the photo the RQ diverges more than the HS-802. Which seems like an almost perfectly parallel collimated beam and my H2-802 diverges about 2 degrees, about the same as the 1.3 as a 20cm diameter at 900cm distance.



How on earth did you calculate that 2 and 1.3 degrees? Either your math is way off here or mine is.....


----------



## hyperloop (Sep 16, 2010)

i bought the WF-600 maybe a year or so back (could be even longer) and its a thrower alright, tight spot easily 80 - 100m.

And that is with loads of ambient light too.

I must say that the unit i got could have been better made and i am not skilled to take it apart and do the re-wiring etc that would make it better but for its price it's alright, i run mine off 2xRCR123s.


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 16, 2010)

Tally-ho said:


> BEAMSHOTS PLEASE !!!
> 
> An outdoor beamshot comparison would be very appreciated.



Outdoor beamshots will be hard, the day just started over here and tonight im kinda away from home a bit...

Ill make some quickies indoor for you, hold on!

[edit] Okay, indoor beamshots are pointless.... I did a test-run at 2 and 3 meters but i found out that at this distance the RQ actually has a tighter hotspot so there are some focal point issues that come into play here. I need to do some long distance shots for this to make sense.... [/edit]


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 16, 2010)

RepProdigious said:


> [edit] Okay, indoor beamshots are pointless.... I did a test-run at 2 and 3 meters but i found out that at this distance the RQ actually has a tighter hotspot so there are some focal point issues that come into play here. I need to do some long distance shots for this to make sense.... [/edit]



Well, focal issues weren't the problem, my camera was. By eye i could clearly make out the smaller hotspot on the HS even at 2m so i just kept messing with the exposure on my camera until the pics matched what i could see with my eyes, and here's the results!

The first set is how my first pics came out and you can see how the hotspot on the RQ actually apears to be tighter there, but this isn't the case. I did however decide to put the pic in the line-up anyhow to show beam color and artifacts!

The second and third set match what you actually see a bit better. All pics were shot at the same white-balance, ISO value and ambient lighting circumstances (please note that first pic has a different relative aperture then the 2nd and 3rd)





Hope this is good enough of a beamshot pic, i havent done this kinda thing that often before


----------



## Tally-ho (Sep 16, 2010)

RepProdigious said:


> Outdoor beamshots will be hard, the day just started over here and tonight im kinda away from home a bit...



Wait ! I'm not in a rush...take your time, in hours, days or weeks if you need so.
I would like to see a comparison between those two flashlights, but not right now immediately. 

Thank you for indoor beamshots. Nice way to do a "side by side" comparison !
:goodjob:


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 16, 2010)

Tally-ho said:


> Thank you for indoor beamshots. Nice way to do a "side by side" comparison !
> :goodjob:



Thanks for the compliment! Ill try and do some real-life outside in the distance shots when i get to it (those are a way better indication than the 2meter shots above).


----------



## qwertyydude (Sep 16, 2010)

> How on earth did you calculate that 2 and 1.3 degrees? Either your math is way off here or mine is.....


It's called trigonometry. If you make the hot spot radius the far side of a right triangle and the distance the adjacent side then you can either use inverse tangent to calculate the beam radius divergence. Then simply multiply by 2 to get the overall beam divergence.


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 16, 2010)

qwertyydude said:


> It's called trigonometry. If you make the hot spot radius the far side of a right triangle and the distance the adjacent side then you can either use inverse tangent to calculate the beam radius divergence. Then simply multiply by 2 to get the overall beam divergence.



Okay, using your basic trigonometry please calculate for me the divergence of my HS-802 (having a 4.5 cm reflector) if i managed to get the hot-spot exactly 4.5 cm at 5 meters..... I bet you don't get 0 (zero) because you don't take the starting size in account during your calculations. :wave:


----------



## joeyboy (Sep 16, 2010)

randomlugia said:


> It's probably somewhere around 230 lumens.
> 
> If you're looking for a good floodlight I would definitely recommend the Spiderfire P7 first! It's my favorite of all the budget P7's that I own, about 450 lumens on high and 60 on low with no resistor. It's a little smaller than the RQ, flawless beam pattern and as close to pure white as I've seen. I love it as an EDC because it's just small enough to fit in my pocket. It's $33 from DX.
> 
> ...




oh wow nice photos for the comparison. Looks perfect! I mean this thing RQ stood inside works well to light up our kitchen, bright enough to read by for the majority of it, but the spider would help spread that better. 

Just to ask how long does it run for on high and then on low, I assume it takes those protected trustfire cells? Ones with the whole flame design on the cells.


----------



## moonfish (Sep 16, 2010)

Thanks for the thread. I just ordered the clone RQ.


----------



## randomlugia (Sep 16, 2010)

joeyboy said:


> oh wow nice photos for the comparison. Looks perfect! I mean this thing RQ stood inside works well to light up our kitchen, bright enough to read by for the majority of it, but the spider would help spread that better.
> 
> Just to ask how long does it run for on high and then on low, I assume it takes those protected trustfire cells? Ones with the whole flame design on the cells.



I've never fully drained the batteries before, but it would probably last about an hour before it dimmed. Low I have absolutely no idea, but it is a very long time considering it's about 1/7th of high. My guess is 8+ hours but like I said I've never tested it. I also use the Trustfire 'flame' cells, and they work great.


----------



## qwertyydude (Sep 16, 2010)

If you manage to get exactly a 4.5 cm beam at 5 meters with a 4.5 cm reflector check again at a further distance. This means your beam is focusing down and converging at either 5 meters or at 2.5 meters so that it's projecting an inverted image.

If so, your led is not at the focal point of the reflector and the beam will actually diverge faster than if it were focused and were slightly larger. Ideally the projected image's focal point should be at infinity, not 5m and since these lights aren't lasers you can't get a 0 degree divergence.

If you can shine the light in a foggy night look where the beam converges. You may see the beam actually converge at a point in front of the flashlight. This would be your zero point where you can take a measurement of divergence. On a focused light there is no external focal point it's a virtual focal point, I shimmed my light to get my 2 degree beam and it stays tighter for longer.

This is why I don't like 1m lux measurements for throwers because sometimes you get lights that focus down at 1m and give great lux numbers but quickly diverge after that and don't seem to throw as far. Almost like they were designed for it.

So perhaps a general trig function is not perfect but there's no other way to measure beam divergence unless you can take precise measurements of the reflector and led position. The trig function works pretty accurately if you can take several measurements at different distances especially over 5 meters or so which for these thrower lights is nothing.


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 17, 2010)

qwertyydude said:


> If you manage to get exactly a 4.5 cm beam at 5 meters with a 4.5 cm reflector check again at a further distance. This means your beam is focusing down and converging at either 5 meters or at 2.5 meters so that it's projecting an inverted image.



If you take that in account your trigonometric calculations make even less sense! And that's exactly the point i was trying to make, with only one measuring point calculating any angle is impossible..... with two measuring points its still pretty darned useless (while certain approximations are starting to get possible there) and with 3 you're starting to get somewhere when done correctly. That's exactly why i described the beam in the way i did.

And with a proper large parabolic reflector and a small enough die placed just right you can get pretty darned close to a collimated beam.




qwertyydude said:


> So perhaps a general trig function is not perfect but there's no other way to measure beam divergence unless you can take precise measurements of the reflector and led position. The trig function works pretty accurately if you can take several measurements at different distances especially over 5 meters or so which for these thrower lights is nothing.



So let's just not do this... instead of trying to calculate stuff just measure the hotspot at distances you would actually use the light and post those results instead of trying to get some useless mathematical approximation of the beam. Much more useful!


----------



## randomlugia (Sep 17, 2010)

Kai just released another Spear clone: http://www.kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=7577

3.5 amps?


----------



## qwertyydude (Sep 17, 2010)

My mathematical "approximation" of 2 degrees is not pulled out of thin air, it is pretty accurate for mine it' closr to 2.5 degrees but is debatable depending on what you consider the edge of the hotspot. A while ago I made a review of my HS-802 when everyone else thought the HS-802 couldn't possibly be a decent throw contender, people were sceptical, I was skeptical of their scepticism especially with a lot of people disparaging the HS-802 without actually having owned it, I mean I don't even know why the DX recoil light keeps getting recommended by people who don't own it. I own it and don't consider it even as decent a thrower as the 802.

This was when everyone was taking 1m lux readings as completely definitive of a lights throw capability, without taking into account divergence. In that case the recoil at 1 meter beats the 802 but further than about 30 feet lux drops of rapidly with dx aspherics and recoils due specifically to divergence. I took measurements out to about 200 feet and as best I could tell it's darn close to 2~2.5 degrees That's about a 3.5 foot radius beam at 200 feet which is spot on to 2 degrees and the proportion holds up even as close as 8 feet for my light and probably holds up true for most HS-802.


----------



## Ian2381 (Sep 17, 2010)

My RQ just arrived today. Can't wait till dark.:candle:

At the price I paid for it, it is definitely a great deal. the quality is simply superb for a budget light.:twothumbs


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 18, 2010)

Well, ive modified my HS today with a 1400mA driver and now its a little bit more usefull because it now _does _shine far enough for the hotspot to become usefull in size.... however i think ill need binoculars at that distance


----------



## Ian2381 (Sep 18, 2010)

I love my RQ, which just arrived a 2 days ago. 
Is there other budget light that will out throw this at a significant distance? Lets say double the throw?

thanks


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 18, 2010)

Ian2381 said:


> I love my RQ, which just arrived a 2 days ago.
> Is there other budget light that will out throw this at a significant distance? Lets say double the throw?
> 
> thanks



Well, if you dont mind the hot-spot getting unpractically small and if you also domt mind some slight modding you could give the HS-802 a try with a better driver (at least 1400mA) but i don't really like it all that much. The RQ is still just a great combination of design, comfort, built quality and nice usable beam! Hard to beat for the money....


----------



## applevalleyjoe (Sep 18, 2010)

I too ordered the HS-802 a week ago because it seemed to be a *cost-effective* alternative to some of the more higher priced lights such as the Dereelight DBS V3, Tiablo A10/ACE, and others of that ilk. :thumbsup:


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 21, 2010)

Just found some more interesting info on the RQ. After modding my HS to a 1400mA driver i decided that the RQ deserved a similar treatment so now i can share some pics on the driver-board that came with my light and i have to say the driver on the RQ looks way better than the one on the HS:

Here's the nice led-pil





The driver appears to be a triple AMC7135 driver confirming the 1A draw (1050mA if you want to be precise)





And i dont know why i missed this before, but it apears this driver can be set to different modes!! 





I'm not certain if this is functional or just for show but this could mean that you could get useless stuff like SOS or strobes out of your RQ!!


----------



## Ti²C (Sep 22, 2010)

this driver is the nanjg ak47
you can set your group modes easily by soldering a star to the ground :

blink modes are useless on a thrower !



> 1st star: Low and High
> 1st and 2nd star: Low, Medium, and High
> 1st thru 3rd stars: Low, High, Slow Strobe
> The 4th star is connected to the ground ring internally already, so it doesn't do anything.


 
seen at : http://budgetlightforum.cz.cc/node/310


----------



## randomlugia (Sep 22, 2010)

Slow blinkers are useless, but a fast enough strobe with a thrower is preferable for self-defense if the hotspot is big enough. Too bad it's slow...

When you say ground, you mean the negative outside ring right?


----------



## Ti²C (Sep 23, 2010)

randomlugia said:


> Slow blinkers are useless, but a fast enough strobe with a thrower is preferable for self-defense if the hotspot is big enough. Too bad it's slow...
> 
> When you say ground, you mean the negative outside ring right?


 
right, 
for example if you short like this, then you'll get low/high only


----------



## randomlugia (Sep 23, 2010)

Ti²C said:


> right,
> for example if you short like this, then you'll get low/high only



Thanks for the info, I tried them all last night. The modes are very well spread out (med is exactly in the middle between low and hi). I went back to the old mode set-up, because I really only need one mode anyway. It was fun to try though.


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 23, 2010)

Thanks for the info on the board Ti2C!

My RQ now has a 1400mA board but i re-used the AK-47 in a solarforce drop-in that was only pulling 600mA so maybe ill give the strobe stuff a try!


----------



## Tack Driver (Sep 23, 2010)

If $48 is not too much, you can get a Streamlight PolyTac HP. It's a 250 yard thrower with a small amount of usable spill up close.


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 23, 2010)

Tack Driver said:


> If $48 is not too much, you can get a Streamlight PolyTac HP. It's a 250 yard thrower with a small amount of usable spill up close.



Thats quite a bold claim.......


----------



## Tack Driver (Sep 23, 2010)

RepProdigious said:


> Thats quite a bold claim.......


 
Yep. It's pretty impressive, and if I hadn't seen it with my own two eyes, I would have chalked it up to marketing hype.............

Streamlight says 245 meters: http://www.streamlight.com/documents/fact-sheet/212.pdf , which by my math is 267yds, 2.8 feet.


----------



## tpenttil (Sep 24, 2010)

Great thread. I got my RQ yesterday and I'm very impressed. Throw is great and build quality is best what I have seen on budget lights. I'm also planning to change the driver.


----------



## RepProdigious (Sep 24, 2010)

Tack Driver said:


> Yep. It's pretty impressive, and if I hadn't seen it with my own two eyes, I would have chalked it up to marketing hype.............
> 
> Streamlight says 245 meters: http://www.streamlight.com/documents/fact-sheet/212.pdf , which by my math is 267yds, 2.8 feet.



Streamlight can say all they want, doesn't mean its true. Maybe you can see the light from 245 meter away but i'm really having a hard time that a 150 (claimed) lumens light with a plastic lens and a slightly out-dated LED could achieve anything even close to a beam that actually throws any usable light at this distance.


----------



## Tack Driver (Sep 24, 2010)

RepProdigious said:


> Streamlight can say all they want, doesn't mean its true. Maybe you can see the light from 245 meter away but i'm really having a hard time that a 150 (claimed) lumens light with a plastic lens and a slightly out-dated LED could achieve anything even close to a beam that actually throws any usable light at this distance.


 
I understand. We will most likely have to agree to disagree till you get a chance to see it for yourself, because I do understand why you would doubt it. That said, I have seen it, and know it to be factual. I use one mounted on a Saiga .308 rifle, and it lights up my scope's field of view at 250 yards with perfectly useable light. Enough to make a positive I.D. of the target and make a good shot.

If it makes you feel any better, it's a one trick pony. It has almost no spill outside 25 yards or so.

It throws farther than my Surefire weaponlight with a YX2C head, and farther than my 200 lumen E2 Defender, although, those are no doubt better all around lights/weaponlights do to their much larger hot spots at distance.


----------

