# ThruNite Catapult Review (SST-50): RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, and more!



## selfbuilt (Dec 11, 2009)

_*Reviewer's Note: *The ThruNite Catapult was provided by ThruNite and BatteryJunction.com for review. Please see the Battery Junction website for more info. _

_*UPDATE 6/4/10:* *A new V2 Catapult is now out, with a revised interface and greater voltage range/battery support. Please see my new V2 review for more info.*

*UPDATE 12/20/09:* Added 1x18650 runtimes and additional comments from replacement sample._

*Warning: exceptionally pic heavy*

*Manufacturer Specifications: (taken from BatteryJunction's website)*

World-class super bright Luminus SST-50 emitter 
Maximum of 950 emitter lumens on high (~700 OTF)
3 Output Levels and Strobe: (using 2 x 18650 batteries)
High 900 Lumens / 1.4 hours
Medium 520 Lumens / 3 hours
Low 125 Lumens / 13.5 hours
Strobe 900 lumens / 2 hours 
Cutting-edge reverse polarity protection
Operating voltage between 2.7V to 8.4V
Drive Current to LED:High 3A, Medium 1.5A, Low 750ma
Mil-Spec Type III Hard Anodized
Constructed of 7075AL for superior durability Length: 185mm; Head diameter: 58mm; Body diameter: 31mm; Weight: 390g. (Extended tube excluded)
Tactical momentary-on forward click switch
IPX-68 Water/Dust Resistane
Tail cap design allows the light to tail stand
Anti-shatter ultra clear lens with double-sided multilayer AR coating
smooth reflector for throw BATTERY OPTIONS: 1x 18650 / 1 x 17670 / 2 x 18650 / 2 x 17670 (2 x 18650 recommended for optimum performance!) 
Note: Do not use CR123 or RCR123A / 16340 batteries in the Catapult!
Voltage cut-off occurs at 2.7V to protect rechargeable batteries. It will flash at 5.2V to indicate low battery voltage for two Rechargeable batteries. 
CPF price: $150
The ThruNite Catapult has the distinction of being the first Luminus SST-50 light I have reviewed (although I am sure it won’t be the last ). Simply put, the SST-50 is capable of slightly higher max output than current common Cree MC-E and SSC P7 output bins. But what makes it truly distinctive is that it is a single large die (the MC-E/P7 are four dies placed together in a grid). The result is that the SST-50 is capable of being focused to a much finer hotspot, with none of the centre-beam “donut” or cross-hatching issues common with the quad-die lights. And of course, everyone is eagerly awaiting the even high luminous flux SST-90 emitters from Luminus … :naughty:

To date, ThruNite is best known for its small titanium keychain light, the TiKey. The Catapult is a new direction for the group - a high-end, high-output thrower.
























The light comes with a fairly standard set of extras, in a hard cardboard box with magnetic closing flap. Inside, you will find the light, extension body tube, warranty card, wrist lanyard, spare o-rings and extra tailcap clicky switch.

Here is how it looks in my hands, and compared to a couple lights of its class: 










And in comparison to other lights:





From left to right: Duracell AA battery, AW 18650 protected battery, ITP A6, ThruNite Catapult, Olight M30, JetBeam M1X, EagleTac M2XC4, JetBeam M1X (all in base configuration, no extenders)





From left to right: AW 18650 protected battery, ThruNite Catapult, Tiablo ACE-G, Lumapower MVP, JetBeam M1X.

Catapult Weight (no battery): 339.3g (no extender, 410.5g (with extender)
Catapult Dimensions: Length: 185mm (no extender) 250mm (with extender), Width (bezel) 59.0mm, Width (tailcap) 34.4mm

As you can tell from above, this is a substantial light. oo: It is one of the heaviest of its class, and probably has the thickest aluminum walls I’ve ever seen on a light. When I handed it over to Mrs Selfbuilt, she swung around it around a few times – getting the weight of it - and then smacked it into her open palm before pronouncing she liked this light :devil: (and I hadn’t even turned it on yet ). 

It also has some of deepest cut checkered patterning that I’ve ever seen on the surface of a light (again, thanks to the thicker walls). I found this greatly helped with grip – no worries about accidentally letting this light slip through your fingers. 

Lettering and anodizing were excellent on my sample, although the writing could be a bit brighter. Personally, I prefer it more subtle like this. The bezel crown is made of aluminium like the rest of the light.






As you can see, the light can tailstand thanks to the raised ridges (which also serve as attachment points for the wrist lanyard). Personally, I find these to be low-profile enough not to get in the way of the forward clicky switch. The width of the tailcap is also sufficient to give most thumbs ample space. The switch has fairly standard forward clicky traverse and feel.






There are gold-plated springs in both the tailcap and mounted on the positive contact board in the head, so flat top cells should work fine. Screw threads in the tailcap and on the corresponding battery tube are anodized, allowing for lock-out. :thumbsup:






*UPDATE 12/15/09:* O-rings are thick, and of apparent good quality. However, the one in the head of my light was broken when I opened the head after all the runtime testing (replaced with one of the spares for the pic above). ThruNite believes the damage to mine may have come from all the heat of extensive runtime testing. :shrug: FYI, most of the o-rings on my light were quite dry - I recommend you lube them, to insure a good waterproof seal.

*UPDATE 12/20/09:* My replacement Catapult came with a much thicker and more opaque insulating disc around the emitter (i.e. you can no longer see the star undernearth, and it is build up higher around the emitter frame). :thumbsup:

An interesting the feature – the extender portion goes between the head and the main body tube, not between the main body tube and switch (as is the case on most other lights). This might give you a moment’s pause the first time you install it – if you try to force it the other way, you likely won’t be able to make contact given the anodized screw threads intended for the tailcap.










Now this is a lovely sight – the smooth reflector is extremely deep, and the lens is remarkably clear (with a noticeable purplish-tinged anti-glare coating). Together, this makes for a very impressive business-end to this light. Get the feeling it’s going to be a thrower?  

To start, here are some comparison beamshots against my best MC-E thrower, the JetBeam M1X. Both are done on Max on 18650 AW protected Li-ion. Distance is about 0.5 meters from a white wall. 














As expected, the throw of the Catapult is within the same range as the M1X – but bonus, there is no sign of the MC-E donut/cross-hatching. :thumbsup: The spillbeam width is a bit narrower, but correspondingly also brighter. There is some slight color distortion around the hotspot (i.e. a bit of blue/yellow in the rings, similar to - but less pronounced - than what you see with Golden Dragon emitters)

*UPDATE 12/20/09: * The replacement emitter module I received was not quite as well centered as my original sample. This introduces greater colour and pattern variations in the corona around the hotspot in the beam, but doesn't seem to affect max throw.

To give you a better feel for how the beam really looks, I’ve done some additional shots are just over 5 meters against the M1X, EagleTac M2XC4 and Tiablo A10-G. Again, all are on 2x18650 AW cells. I’ve kept the exposure low (1/100sec, f3,5) to better show you the hotspots (my apologies for the drywall spackle marks, these are from my unfinished basement ).














The point here is that the Catapult has a remarkably smooth and well-defined hotspot. It really makes a uniform spot-beam – I’ve never see anything quite like it. It is wider than most tightly-focused throwers, and very uniform in its appearance. However, if you look closely, you’ll see some thin dark rings near the centre of the beam. To be honest, I find these look rather like a nipple in the centre of the beam.  :laughing:

I haven’t done any real outdoor testing here (snow on the ground, and too many houses around ), but I’ve tried to give you another idea of what to expect from the hotspot at a medium range distance. These are indoor beamshots of a target “gremlin” at 10m from the lights (1/5sec exposure, f2.7). Click on the images to bring up higher resolution photos.














Honestly, I think this emitter/reflector combo is one of the most interesting things I’ve seen in awhile. It should do very well as a search-and-rescue style light.

*User Interface*

The Catapult uses a very simple interface – it always comes on in Hi, and you can soft-press the forward clicky to cycle through Med > Lo > Strobe. There is no mode memory.






Strobe was measured at a very annoying 16Hz. :green:

I was unable to detect any sign of PWM at any output level with my home-made sound card-oscilloscope setup. :thumbsup: So either the light is current-controlled, or the frequency is incredibly high and undetectable.

 Note the voltage range of the circuit: 2.7V – 8.4V. This means you cannot run the light in 4xCR123A or 4xRCR configurations – you will blow the circuit. The light is clearly meant to run best on 2x18650. 

I note the manual states that 2xCR123A and 2xRCR are supported, but then goes on to warn that they “never suggest” you use it this way, as the high current may be dangerous for these batteries. Battery Junction’s website specifically warns not to use CR123A or RCR at all in the light!

In practical terms, I think 2xCR123A/RCR would be fine as long as you limit yourself to Lo or Med only, and not Hi or Strobe. Remember again that the light always comes on in Hi mode first. I have tested these 2x configs on Med/Lo (see runtimes for more info).

One interesting additional feature – the circuit has a low voltage flash and cut-off feature. When cells go below ~5.2V, the light will give you two series of rapid flashes to warn you. It does not continue to flash beyond this. It will also cut-off completely at 2.7V. I mention this because I noticed the warning flash was triggered immediately when I tried 2xCR123A primary cells. As the cells neared depletion, the light also abruptly cut-off (again, scroll down for runtime traces).

As a side note, I found inductor whine (i.e. the high-pitch hissing) to be quite loud on Hi and Strobe on my sample, on all batteries. This is a common feature for many modern lights, and is quite variable in its presentation, so I don’t normally comment on it. But the Catapult has to be one of the loudest ones I’ve ever heard, so I’m curious as to what other users experience is. :shrug:

*UPDATE 12/20/09:* ThruNite thinks my original sample was defective, hence the loud inductor whine and eventual shorting out. The replacement sample has a barely audible whine on Hi/Med, far more in keeping with other lights.

*Testing Method:* All my output numbers are relative for my home-made light box setup, a la Quickbeam's flashlight reviews method. You can directly compare all my relative output values from different reviews - i.e. an output value of "10" in one graph is the same as "10" in another. All runtimes are done under a cooling fan.

Throw values are the square-root of lux measurements taken at 5 meters from the lens, using a light meter, and then extrapolated back to estimate values for 1 meter. This will be my standard way to present throw on these types of lights from now on. The beams don't really have a chance to fully converge until typically several meters out

Some of the other lights take a couple of minutes to settle into their regulated output state (i.e. their initial output is higher, but not for long). As such, all my output and throw numbers are taken after 2 mins of continuous runtime (on 2x18650 AW Protected cells).

*Throw/Output Summary Chart:*






Consistent with what you saw in the beamshots, the Catapult’s throw (as measured at centre-beam at 5m) is right up there with the M1X and M2XC4. But these numbers don’t really tell the whole story. At greater distance, I believe the Catapult and the M1X both out-throw the M2XC4. 

*Output/Runtime Comparison*

All 18650 runtimes were done on AW protected cells (2200mAh).
*
2x Battery Configurations:*





The manufacturer’s specs in terms of output levels and runtimes appear to be fairly accurate. I suspect they were using sligthtly higher capacity 18650s in their testing (I use 2200mAh AW protected cells).

As you can see, 2xCR123A and 2xRCR both worked fine at Med/Lo levels – despite the low voltage cut-off on CR123A. Again, do NOT attempt to run this light on Hi on these cells – you would be greatly exceeding their specified current drain levels.

Output levels are well-spaced, but I wouldn’t consider any of them particularly “low”. 

*1x and 2x18650 Configurations:*





*UPDATE 12/20/09:* I've added 1x18650 runs to the graph above. Note these runtimes are a little different from the other ones shown here, since they are based on a replacement Catapult that had slightly greater output (but slightly lower runtime) than the one I originally tested. The difference isn't great (and well within emitter variability), but I re-did some of the 2x18650 runs in the graph above so that you could directly compare outputs.

As you can see above, the light runs on 1x18650, but at lower - and non-regulated - max output. Med/Lo are the same output levels as 2x18650 configuration, with just lower regulated runtime.

Here is how they compare to the MC-E/P7 competition:




























In general terms, the Catapult holds its own well enough, but overall efficiency doesn’t seem to quite match most of the more recent MC-E/P7 lights.

*Potential Issues*

*UPDATE 12/20/09:* On my first sample, it was possible to over-tighten the reflector/head housing and come into physical contact with the emitter (in fact, I may have shorted out my first sample this way). The replacement emitter module ThruNite sent me had a thicker insulating disc, so this no longer seems to be a problem. 

Unlike a lot of the MC-E/P7 competition, the Catapult has a narrower voltage range that doesn’t allow 4x cell configurations. Also, max output on 2xCR123A and 2xRCR are not recommended, as the current draw on Hi/Strobe would greatly exceed what those cells are capable of providing (and risks damaging the cells). You can run the light on 1x18650, but Hi mode is lower output and not regulated. This is basically a 2x18650 light, with the potential to run 2xCR123A/RCR or 1x18650 in a pinch (and ONLY on Lo/Med).

The user interface is pretty basic, and lacks a memory mode. The light always comes in Hi mode,

Although output levels are reasonably well spaced, the light lacks a true Lo mode.

As with many lights of this size and class, no belt holster is provided (to date).

*Preliminary Observations*

The beam profile of this light is very unique – and frankly, very appealing. Given all my testing, it’s rare to come across a light that make me go oo: when I first turn it on. This is definitely one of those lights: huge output, great throw, and a remarkably uniform hotspot free of surrounding rings. 

Much of this has to do with the large single-die emitter and extremely deep reflector, producing a wonderful true "spotbeam". The M1X was another example of a light that made me sit up and take notice upon arrival – but in playing with both of them, I find I prefer the much more uniform spotbeam produced by the Catapult. Either would do very well for you as a search-and-rescue light, but Catapult’s beam is definitely "prettier". :kiss:

Of course, there’s more to a light than optics alone. Build-wise, I certainly have no complaint with the Catapult. It is solid like a tank, well-balanced with good hand-feel and grip. The anodized screw threads, forward clicky switch, and tail-standing and head-standing features also all speak well for it. The overall impression is one of quality construction on fairly beefy scale. In contrast, I would rate the M1X (also a quality light) as having a more elegant and refined feel. Different strokes for different folks.

Output and runtime efficiency are certainly acceptable – performance is definitely within the same class as my higher-end MC-E/P7 lights. But this is where I start to have some concerns. First is the more restricted voltage range, limiting your battery options (i.e. no 4x configurations possible). Coupled with the excessive current draw on Hi/Strobe, you are basically reduced to 2x18650 for full feature/performance (i.e. CR123A/RCR can’t safely handle those discharge rates, 1x18650 is not as bright or regulated on Hi). The heavy current draw also make me wonder about the long-term stability of the clicky switch – but it is thoughtful of ThruNite to throw in a spare switch into the package. 

The UI also seems a little too basic to me – I can understand and accept the Hi > Med > Lo > Strobe sequence for a thrower light, but why no memory feature? While I know some members here don’t like mode memory, it seems to me it would at least provide greater flexibility for the rest of us. Similarly, I know a lot of people may not see the need for a truly low Lo mode on a thrower light, but I would have liked to have seen something a bit lower here. This is one area where the continuously-variable M1X is hard to top, although I can at least commend ThruNite on keeping the PWM at undetectable levels. 

As previously mentioned, this is my first review of a Luminus SST-50 equipped light. I am impressed with the tint and beam profile of this specimen, and am looking forward to seeing further examples (note that if your emitter is not perfectly centered, you may experience some color/pattern distortions around the hotspot periphery). Simply put, it’s nice to be able to get the equivalent output of a quad-die MC-E/P7 (and potentially more!) without the visual limitations of the quad-die (i.e reduced focusing ability for throw, centre-beam donut/cross-hatch, etc). 

At the end of the day, ThruNite has done an excellent job of matching this emitter with a deep reflector for a truly spectacular spotlight beam - Catapult is a good name for it! :laughing: They also impress with their ability to produce a solid, well-crafted body with good build features. The one area where I think some refinement is needed is in the circuit – both for feature set and battery flexibility. But as always, it comes down to what you are looking for in a light – and there is already a lot to commend in this offering.

_*UPDATE 6/4/10:* A new V2 Catapult is now out, with a revised interface and greater voltage range/battery support. Please see my new V2 review for more info._


----------



## csshih (Dec 11, 2009)

aha! there it is! :thumbsup:


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 11, 2009)

Thanks Eric. Good Job


----------



## NWdude83 (Dec 11, 2009)

Oh man I still cant decide between the Tiablo Ace-G and the Thrunite Catapult.


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 11, 2009)

NWdude83 said:


> Oh man I still cant decide between the Tiablo Ace-G and the Thrunite Catapult.


 
No mattery which light you choose. hope you can enjoy ,both are good products


----------



## Liteskr42 (Dec 11, 2009)

wow, interesting reply from Thrunite. 

I dont know if I expected then to reply with the more obvious "go with a Catapult!!" and their response just caught me off guard in that they complimented a competitor in this market .

I think I am impressed in their sportmanship:thumbsup:

If I could scrape togehter the moolah for this light and the 2x18650s from AW to run it, it would be mine!!! I like the size and solid looks. Beam seems very good and Brite with decent runtimes.


----------



## strinq (Dec 12, 2009)

Good one. :thumbsup:


----------



## csshih (Dec 12, 2009)

Liteskr42 said:


> I think I am impressed in their sportmanship:thumbsup:



indeed! the company has followed all the threads/reviews regarding the catapult, and they help whoever has a problem. :twothumbs


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 12, 2009)

SInce we alwasy care for user's feeling and help them to purchase a light they need! Since the economic problems. CR123A will spend more. so we use 18650 as our first choice. considering the high output current of battery.


----------



## Rod911 (Dec 12, 2009)

selfbuilt said:


> It is one of the heaviest of its class, and probably has the thickest aluminum walls I’ve ever seen on a light. When I handed it over to Mrs Selfbuilt, she swung around it around a few times – getting the weight of it - and then smacked it into her open palm before pronouncing she liked this light :devil: (and I hadn’t even turned it on yet ).


Yup, it's damn heavy. As others have said who purchased this light, you can give someone a good whack with it and know that you can go blind them straight after. 



> As a side note, I found inductor whine (i.e. the high-pitch hissing) to be quite loud on Hi and Strobe on my sample, on all batteries. This is a common feature for many modern lights, and is quite variable in its presentation, so I don’t normally comment on it. But the Catapult has to be one of the loudest ones I’ve ever heard, so I’m curious as to what other users experience is.


This is my only light where I have noticed this sound coming from the light engine. This sound only comes on at high and just a bit on medium, but it's not loud enough for me to hear it unless it's the dead of the night and it's an arm-length away from my head.



> The UI also seems a little too basic to me – I can understand and accept the Hi > Med > Lo > Strobe sequence for a thrower light, but why no memory feature? While I know some members here don’t like mode memory, it seems to me it would at least provide greater flexibility for the rest of us. Similarly, I know a lot of people may not see the need for a truly low Lo mode on a thrower light, but I would have liked to have seen something a bit lower here. This is one area where the continuously-variable M1X is hard to top, although I can at least commend ThruNite on keeping the PWM at undetectable levels.


Count me in as one of those members that don't like memory mode on this type of light. If I need some low light action, I always have my Preon clipped on me to use. I believe this light was built foremost as a bright search light with its highest mode always readily accessible, with step-down switching modes just in case you don't need the brightest or you're conserving power or you don't have another light you can use for low-light situations.

This is a great light, and from the few lights I have, it is definitely my favourite. 

BTW, selfbuilt, have you tried the light with just one 18650? I compared it to a T20C2-NW, and found the Catapult to be both brighter and throwier. But as you said in your review, it truly shines with two 18650 cells.

I'd like to re-iterate a suggestion made by another member - can we please have a stainless steel bezel option?


----------



## PhantomPhoton (Dec 12, 2009)

Will the light run at all on 1x18650?
If so I'd love to see a runtime graph of that. I was led to believe it will work but with lower output on high. I'm curious to see exactly what kind of performance it gets on all three levels.

Thanks.  As usual an outstanding review.


----------



## berry580 (Dec 12, 2009)

ANOTHER great review from selfbuilt.

awesome comparison between this and the M1X.
So the point is clear, if you want a wall of light without a hole in the middle, SST-50 is the way to go.


----------



## BlueBeam22 (Dec 12, 2009)

Nice beamshots and review, selfbuilt; what an awesome thrower!


----------



## ZRXBILL (Dec 12, 2009)

PhantomPhoton said:


> Will the light run at all on 1x18650?
> If so I'd love to see a runtime graph of that. I was led to believe it will work but with lower output on high. I'm curious to see exactly what kind of performance it gets on all three levels.
> 
> Thanks.  As usual an outstanding review.




The review from light reviews.com here, http://light-reviews.com/thrunite_catapult/, shows it will run on 1 18650 cell but output is less than half what it is with 2 so there is no point to using anything bit 2.
Please note Merv reviewed a previous version with many more outputs but I don't believe the difference between 1 or 2 cells would have changed.


----------



## davidt1 (Dec 12, 2009)

Thanks for the review. +1 for mentioning the need for memory. I used to hate memory and argued against it. However, after using a 3-mode twisty light at work for a few days, I have completely changed my mind. I needed to use the light on high repeatedly. To get to high, I had to twist 5 times each time. It got annoying real fast. Memory is kind of like emergency modes (only more useful). Those who don't need it don't have to use it. For those who need it, it is a godsend.


----------



## selfbuilt (Dec 12, 2009)

Rod911 said:


> This is my only light where I have noticed this sound coming from the light engine. This sound only comes on at high and just a bit on medium, but it's not loud enough for me to hear it unless it's the dead of the night and it's an arm-length away from my head.


Hmm, yes, I also noticed the hum on the Med as well, but it's barely audible there. As I said, I only mention it here because of how pronounced it is. While true that it can affect all lights, I've noticed in the past that certain lights seem to be more prone to it than others (likely due to circuit board layout). I'm curious if that's the case here, so I appreciate hearing your experience. 



Rod911 said:


> BTW, selfbuilt, have you tried the light with just one 18650? I compared it to a T20C2-NW, and found the Catapult to be both brighter and throwier. But as you said in your review, it truly shines with two 18650 cells.





PhantomPhoton said:


> Will the light run at all on 1x18650?
> If so I'd love to see a runtime graph of that. I was led to believe it will work but with lower output on high. I'm curious to see exactly what kind of performance it gets on all three levels.


Yes, I've been meaning to test it on 1x18650, but haven't gotten around to it yet. 

From initial impressions, I can tell you initial max output on 1x18650 is lower - somewhere between Hi and Med on 2x18650 (and closer to Med than Hi). I will update here with runtime graphs within the next couple of days.



berry580 said:


> awesome comparison between this and the M1X.
> So the point is clear, if you want a wall of light without a hole in the middle, SST-50 is the way to go.


I try to stay away from direct comparisons in my reviews, but I have to admit I do prefer the Catapult beam over the M1X (although I wouldn't really call it a wall of light - more of a spotlight with good spill). That being said, I vastly prefer the UI and circuit of the M1X. I'm also a fan of the more refined style and look of the M1X (but that's just personal preference - the Catapult is more of a bruiser! :nana. 

To be honest, I don't think the smooth beam alone would make a compelling reason to "upgrade" from a M1X (i.e. for many, you would also be "downgrading" in features and flexibility). But if you were trying to decide between the two of them, you would need to carefully weight each one's design and features.



davidt1 said:


> +1 for mentioning the need for memory. I used to hate memory and argued against it. However, after using a 3-mode twisty light at work for a few days, I have completely changed my mind. I needed to use the light on high repeatedly. To get to high, I had to twist 5 times each time. It got annoying real fast. Memory is kind of like emergency modes (only more useful). Those who don't need it don't have to use it. For those who need it, it is a godsend.


That's my feeling as well - although I carry enough lights not to need it in every new one I receive, I find I still miss it when its not there. It's something more conspicuous in it absence than its presence!


----------



## EngrPaul (Dec 12, 2009)

Great review. I appreciate having the runtimes. I'm using 2600 mA*h, which are designed for higher current and work great in the light, even with the flat top cells. :twothumbs

I really don't like the 1-cell configuration, not because of the output performance, but because the light is too front-heavy while holding the light in the knurled region.

I don't mind the heft. It's probably lighter than a similar length D-cell maglight when loaded with cells.

The tubes work smooth, even though they were supplied relatively dry. The o-rings are very nice quality. I got out the Krytox, not an issue. 

A shortcoming is no belt holster. Not sure how they wanted us to carry the light, other than in the hand or flailing at the end of a rope.

I skipped by all those other multiple-die lights until this one came out. Glad I did!


----------



## selfbuilt (Dec 12, 2009)

EngrPaul said:


> The tubes work smooth, even though they were supplied relatively dry. The o-rings are very nice quality. I got out the Krytox, not an issue.
> 
> A shortcoming is no belt holster. Not sure how they wanted us to carry the light, other than in the hand or flailing at the end of a rope.


Excellent points Paul - I've just updated the review with some comments around them. I agree completely - good o-rings and no lube on my sample either (but screw action was still quite smooth). 

As for the holster, a common problem for this class of light. In some cases, my old Stallion half-holster (designed for Innova T3) works well - but not here, since the tailcap and body walls are just too thick. I'm curious to hear what solutions others have come up with.


----------



## berry580 (Dec 12, 2009)

selfbuilt said:


> I try to stay away from direct comparisons in my reviews, but I have to admit I do prefer the Catapult beam over the M1X (although I wouldn't really call it a wall of light - more of a spotlight with good spill). That being said, I vastly prefer the UI and circuit of the M1X. I'm also a fan of the more refined style and look of the M1X (but that's just personal preference - the Catapult is more of a bruiser! :nana.
> 
> To be honest, I don't think the smooth beam alone would make a compelling reason to "upgrade" from a M1X (i.e. for many, you would also be "downgrading" in features and flexibility).


Agree with absolutely *everything* said there.

That's a reason why I'd be getting neither the Catapult (ugly looking and unsophisticated functions) nor the M1X (massive hole in the beam where it counts the most- dead centre).
I'll be waiting for the RRT-3 rumoured to have a SST-50, that should be closer to a perfect long range spotter, although no IBS UI.:shakehead

What do you think of a round up for MC-E lights? I'm sure many are looking forward to that.


----------



## LUPARA (Dec 12, 2009)

Thanks for all the effort Thrunite; this is a great offering and you should be proud. I love the "shorty" one cell version, and the overall substantive feel of the light, in any configuration, makes me feel like I have a "hand cannon". I hope this light does well wherever it goes. 

Well, I'm off to celebrate!!! Merry Christmas to the Thrunite crew and I hope to see your name on more and more lights! Once again; great job!!!!


----------



## selfbuilt (Dec 12, 2009)

berry580 said:


> I'll be waiting for the RRT-3 rumoured to have a SST-50, that should be closer to a perfect long range spotter, although no IBS UI.:shakehead
> 
> What do you think of a round up for MC-E lights? I'm sure many are looking forward to that.


That is a good point to keep in mind - although ThruNite is first out of the gate with a Luminus-equipped spotter light, I'm sure it won't be long before we see examples from the other makers.  But this build is likely to remain as one of the most substantial for this class of light, and I'm hard-pressed to imagine anyone producing an even deeper reflector. 

On a side note, the Olight M21 (SST-50) should be en route to me for testing ... 

As for a MC-E round-up review, I definitely plan to (along with updates to my other round-up ones). Problem is too many new lights coming in right now! But I'll see what I can do.


----------



## Rod911 (Dec 12, 2009)

EngrPaul said:


> I'm using 2600 mA*h, which are designed for higher current and work great in the light, even with the flat top cells. :twothumbs


Is it safe to say that you're using AWs here? Do you mind running a quick DMM test to determine current draw from the tailcap? I only have DX bought cells, and I may not be getting the most out this light. My results are as follows:


TrustFire 2400mah (black and red) - 1.71A
TrustFire 2500mah (blue) - 1.67A
SoShine 2800mah - 1.72A



> A shortcoming is no belt holster. Not sure how they wanted us to carry the light, other than in the hand or flailing at the end of a rope.


AndrewP recommended a holster in here. I've got one on the way and it should be here either tomorrow of Tuesday. I'll let you know if it works out.


----------



## Olef (Dec 12, 2009)

Hi all, my first CPF post...

Thank you selfbuilt for an excellent review and photos. Currently I have a Catapult hidden from me somewhere in the house and I am on pain of severe punishment from herself if I go looking before the 25th. Your review has done nothing to lessen my anticipation... 

Like others I compared the Cat to the M1X but for me the Cat won. I went for the big bruiser rather than the dainty ballerina! :thumbsup:

One point - if you check the Cat's specs on ThruNite's site http://thrunite.com/productsweb/Catapult.html the sixth item down states - "*〇 Memory mode for last output level used, with four-second separation time between clicks* ". I know the Cat is a new light and that it has gone from a complex UI to a very simple one following feedback from CPF'ers - but unless I am misreading ThruNite's site there should still be a memory in there? Can anyone clarify?

Not that it's a deal breaker for me either way!


----------



## ateallthepies (Dec 12, 2009)

Thanks for again doing a superb review. 

I am still waiting for my Catapult but reading your review it makes me feel I made the right choice.
I don't have a problem with the weight or size of a search light as it isn't a EDC light.
I would have liked a lower low as usual and no strobe but I am happy it comes on in high each time as this is really a long range searching light at heart.


Steve.


----------



## Flashlites R Us (Dec 12, 2009)

" I found inductor whine (i.e. the high pitch hissing) to be quite high on Hi and Strobe on my sample"

I just held up mine (turned on Hi mode) next to my ear and could not detect any "hissing" whatsoever.

BUT I did hear a faint whinny "inductor" voice pleading 
" pleeeeeeeease do not overtighten my reflector housing or you will injure meeeeeeeeeeeee.............pleeeeeeeease do not overtighten my reflector hous.........................................................................

;-)))


----------



## 300winmag (Dec 12, 2009)

Great Job as always!!!


----------



## AndrewP (Dec 12, 2009)

Rod 911, the holster I recomended was in relation to use with the Olight M30. I have not used it on other lights. Are you trying it out on the Cat??


----------



## Vesper (Dec 12, 2009)

Nice review - thanks! I like the lack of memory (always comes on high) on a light of this type, but yes, a programmable low is always nice.


----------



## Rod911 (Dec 12, 2009)

AndrewP said:


> Rod 911, the holster I recomended was in relation to use with the Olight M30. I have not used it on other lights. Are you trying it out on the Cat??


Yeah I sure am. I checked the dimensions on the M30 and they're quite comparable to the Catpult if you to give it a couple of millimetres here and there.

Biodarren mentioned of finding a possible holster in his thread here, but I thought I'd give the TT a crack first.


----------



## Harry999 (Dec 12, 2009)

Another excellent review. I received my Catapult on Thursday and have fallen in love with it. I am using a Maxipedition Universal Flashlight Sheath to carry the Catapult. Because it is adjustable you can basically adapt the sheath to carry it as you would a baton or just have the sheath gripping the shaft with the head stopping it falling through. I don't have access to a digital camera at present so apologies that I cant show you my solution. 

Anyway Thrunite I am very impressed by your product. Looking forward to seeing what you bring out next! :twothumbs


----------



## stallion2 (Dec 12, 2009)

selfbuilt said:


> Excellent points Paul - I've just updated the review with some comments around them. I agree completely - good o-rings and no lube on my sample either (but screw action was still quite smooth).


 
thanks for the review. inspite of how well machined the threads are they still need a lot of grease to protect the o-rings. i just installed my two spares last night because a couple had been partially cut even though i greased them when i first got it...i went a little overboard this time.


----------



## AndrewP (Dec 12, 2009)

Rod911 said:


> Yeah I sure am. I checked the dimensions on the M30 and they're quite comparable to the Catpult if you to give it a couple of millimetres here and there.
> 
> Biodarren mentioned of finding a possible holster in his thread here, but I thought I'd give the TT a crack first.


 
I think a fair bit of the Cat head will stick out. If you look at the pics in Self builts review. The smaller set of the cooling fins at the M30 head fit neatly into the holster, the larger set closer to the front do not. That will give you some idea. I think the shaft of the Cat should fit quite snugly but Im only guessing. The retaining flap may not fit over the Cat head. ALso the bottom of the holster is sewn together. I reckon if you cut off the retaining flap and slice the sewntogether bit it will work. If your not using the extension then I think it will be long enough as is. Let me know how you go!


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 12, 2009)

stallion2 said:


> thanks for the review. inspite of how well machined the threads are they still need a lot of grease to protect the o-rings. i just installed my two spares last night because a couple had been partially cut even though i greased them when i first got it...i went a little overboard this time.


 

Stallion:

Actually I put somuch grease on the O ring. but we make it more water proof. so when you screw more times. the Grease removed..


----------



## pee10755 (Dec 13, 2009)




----------



## DM51 (Dec 13, 2009)

Great review! I see Size15s has already moved it to the Reviews section for you. 

This light has already attracted a lot of interest in other threads, and now we can see why. That beam looks terrific, and it seems a good solid performer.


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 13, 2009)

DM51 said:


> Great review! I see Size15s has already moved it to the Reviews section for you.
> 
> This light has already attracted a lot of interest in other threads, and now we can see why. That beam looks terrific, and it seems a good solid performer.


 

Thanks for your support. we have a long way to go. make better products. and serve you. we always consider the feeling of users. and hope you can send us your commens and your suggestions.


----------



## selfbuilt (Dec 13, 2009)

Flashlites R Us said:


> BUT I did hear a faint whinny "inductor" voice pleading
> " pleeeeeeeease do not overtighten my reflector housing or you will injure meeeeeeeeeeeee.............pleeeeeeeease do not overtighten my reflector hous.........................................................................;-)))


I am afraid I should have logged in and read about your little voice before I continued my testing ... it appears that I may have shorted out my Catapult's circuit by over-tightening the reflector housing. 

I was setting up to do the 1x18650 runtimes, when I noticed the beam pattern seemed a little unfocussed. Thinking the head was unscrewed, I started tightening it and the light suddenly cut-off. The light now runs in direct-drive only, with no regulation or control circuit. :sigh:

My best guess is that the aluminum reflector was able to short the contacts around the emitter, despite the plastic insulating disc. ThruNite was quick to respond, and a replacement is being sent out to me by courier. :thumbsup: So I should be able to get those 1x18650 runs done for everyone in a couple of days. And bonus - I will be able to compare to see if there's any sign of inductor whine on the replacement (ThruNite thinks the first one may have been faulty, as they are not generally experiencing any whine issues).

For now, I suggest that everyone be careful not to over-tighten the head! 

I'll keep you posted - thanks for the quick replacement ThruNite!



stallion2 said:


> thanks for the review. inspite of how well machined the threads are they still need a lot of grease to protect the o-rings. i just installed my two spares last night because a couple had been partially cut even though i greased them when i first got it...i went a little overboard this time.


An interesting point - I noticed when I opened the head of my light that the o-ring here was broken (despite a lot grease being present). Of course, my over-tightening could have contributed. Thrunite also suggests that the o-rings may also be weakened by excessive heat, so it's probably a good idea to keep an eye on the one in the head.


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 13, 2009)

selfbuilt said:


> I am afraid I should have logged in and read about your little voice before I continued my testing ... it appears that I may have shorted out my Catapult's circuit by over-tightening the reflector housing.
> 
> I was setting up to do the 1x18650 runtimes, when I noticed the beam pattern seemed a little unfocussed. Thinking the head was unscrewed, I started tightening it and the light suddenly cut-off. The light now runs in direct-drive only, with no regulation or control circuit. :sigh:
> 
> ...


 

I Think if the light are damaged by ship you,during the long trip, the single light maybe drop easy. so the inductor damage. As you all know ,the inductor is magnetic core. So if the loud is very big. should the inductor damged. but I think very little loud is accept because of so high current. but this rate is very very low. If the inductor is damaged, that will cause what selfbuit said without regulated. 

not because the over tighten on the head. 

As O ring damged. because the light has been done test, so it will work more than 70minutes. so the temperature on electronic parts is very high. it will be more than 80 degree after 70 minuts working time. So the O ring damged.As you know ,We never continually on for more than 70 minuts. so this will not happen. O ring just for waterproof. no other application.


I'll send you one replace ment, today!


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 14, 2009)

beam 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qp2KU7tdd2U


----------



## Olef (Dec 14, 2009)

Olef said:


> One point - if you check the Cat's specs on ThruNite's site http://thrunite.com/productsweb/Catapult.html the sixth item down states - "*〇 Memory mode for last output level used, with four-second separation time between clicks* ". I know the Cat is a new light and that it has gone from a complex UI to a very simple one following feedback from CPF'ers - but unless I am misreading ThruNite's site there should still be a memory in there? Can anyone clarify?



Thrunite, could you answer this from my earlier post please? Does the Cat have a memory at all?

Thanks,

Olef


----------



## Rod911 (Dec 14, 2009)

AndrewP said:


> I think a fair bit of the Cat head will stick out. If you look at the pics in Self builts review. The smaller set of the cooling fins at the M30 head fit neatly into the holster, the larger set closer to the front do not. That will give you some idea. I think the shaft of the Cat should fit quite snugly but Im only guessing. The retaining flap may not fit over the Cat head. ALso the bottom of the holster is sewn together. I reckon if you cut off the retaining flap and slice the sewntogether bit it will work. If your not using the extension then I think it will be long enough as is. Let me know how you go!


Well it didn't go too well. The TT holster was just delivered (10 minutes ago), and lo and behold, the Catapult doesn't fit into the holster with or without the extension tube in place. The Catapult's finned head is too big to be pushed down into the rest of the holster's space (without the extension tube). 

No biggie. I might put it up for sale here for someone who has an M30.  I have got to admit though, this TT holster (surprisingly, is a German based company despite the Tasmanian Tiger's origins), is very well built. The body fits snug to it, but the massive head of the Catapult, just won't allow me to close the damn thing.

I'll give myself a week to think about possibly modding/ruining a perfectly good holster, or get a Ripoffs CO-166.


----------



## Rod911 (Dec 14, 2009)

Olef said:


> Thrunite, could you answer this from my earlier post please? Does the Cat have a memory at all?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Olef


There's no memory mode at all. The light will always start on high, but once on, you can cycle down to the medium, low and strobe settings before going back on high again.


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 14, 2009)

Dear All:

Do not worry. we have listed the holster to our plan, We'll release after *Christmas*


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 14, 2009)

Olef said:


> Thrunite, could you answer this from my earlier post please? Does the Cat have a memory at all?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Olef


 

Dear Olef:

We have upated to no memory. since we design it for a search and rescue light, it is preared for on!!!!!!


----------



## Olef (Dec 14, 2009)

Thank you Rod911 and Thrunite :twothumbs

How refreshing to be able to get a fast reply direct from a manufacturer. I haven't got the Cat yet and I am impressed!

Regards,

Olef


----------



## PsychoPilot (Dec 14, 2009)

Catapult is such an epic name. I think half the reason I want this light is to ogle the engraving "ThruNite Catapult." Im even saddened by the thought that the Catapult will eventually be overtaken by brighter LED lights with lesser names. I hope future ThruNite lights will also be Catapults


----------



## Rod911 (Dec 14, 2009)

Beamshots taken by the folks from www.selected-lights.de:


----------



## berry580 (Dec 14, 2009)

by the looks of the photo, it seems like M1X has the greatest throw.


----------



## Direwolf (Dec 14, 2009)

Great review from selfbuilt. I made the right choice in getting the Thrunite Catapult :twothumbs I have not encountered any inductor whine, but then again my hearing is'nt 100% and I have tinitus. Compairing the beamshots above, the Fenix TK40 was one light I might have gone for but I chose the Cat because it was new, looked good, new led type, and strong construction with some heft, and boy, it has some heft. Keep up the good work ThruNite, how about an Every Day Carry light a bit bigger than the Tikey!


----------



## hron61 (Dec 14, 2009)

hi. i have a catapult on order from matt at batteryjuction and they are back ordered till 12/20. i was wondering what upgrades or options will be made to the shipment he is expecting on that date. 
i am eagerly awaiting my light. i also have the fenix tk 40 and will be taking both to play with at the waters edge in a couple of weeks. i will shine them both at the tacoma narrows bridge from below. should be fun and yes, i will be bringing my camera. quick ? what would be the best camera setting to use? 
thanks and it looks like a fine light. cant wait till she arrives home. ron :thumbsup:


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 15, 2009)

Direwolf said:


> Great review from selfbuilt. I made the right choice in getting the Thrunite Catapult :twothumbs I have not encountered any inductor whine, but then again my hearing is'nt 100% and I have tinitus. Compairing the beamshots above, the Fenix TK40 was one light I might have gone for but I chose the Cat because it was new, looked good, new led type, and strong construction with some heft, and boy, it has some heft. Keep up the good work ThruNite, how about an Every Day Carry light a bit bigger than the Tikey!


 

Thanks Eirewolf. It's very difficulty in finding a new idea for a good light, I am looking for idea for a new EDC.Maybe Ti AA. but ou target is to make solid flashlights.


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 15, 2009)

berry580 said:


> by the looks of the photo, it seems like M1X has the greatest throw.


 

Hi Berry580. Could you tell me where I can find the photo, I always can not find the photo,


----------



## csshih (Dec 15, 2009)

the Jetbeam M1X has the most noticeable donut I've ever seen in my life.

...just sayin.


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 16, 2009)

csshih said:


> the Jetbeam M1X has the most noticeable donut I've ever seen in my life.
> 
> ...just sayin.


 
M1X is also good products. donut is becaused by the MC-E LED, But I like M1X as well.


----------



## 01GTB (Dec 16, 2009)

I almost bought an M1X, but this thread changed my mind. I'll be getting a Catapult for Christmas :twothumbs


----------



## jon bohy (Dec 16, 2009)

hey everyone. this is my first post to CPF.

i want to start by giving a huge thank you for the excellent review!

i am extremely close to ordering a thrunite catapult. the only thing stopping me is the fact that i cannot find a light diffuser (for "white" light) to fit the head. the olight m30 has a diffuser/filter that is included. does thrunite offer anything similar? if not, are there any 3rd party diffusers/filters that will work with the 58mm head?

if i can find a diffuser/filter that will work, i'll order one ASAP! :twothumbs

thanks again!


----------



## berry580 (Dec 16, 2009)

ThruNite said:


> Hi Berry580. Could you tell me where I can find the photo, I always can not find the photo,


what do you mean?
Its in post #47.


----------



## selfbuilt (Dec 16, 2009)

jon bohy said:


> i am extremely close to ordering a thrunite catapult. the only thing stopping me is the fact that i cannot find a light diffuser (for "white" light) to fit the head. the olight m30 has a diffuser/filter that is included. does thrunite offer anything similar? if not, are there any 3rd party diffusers/filters that will work with the 58mm head?


Good point - I would also recommend a diffuser as an included/optional accessory. I am not aware of any off-hand that would fit, but it would be great if there were one.


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 16, 2009)

berry580 said:


> what do you mean?
> Its in post #47.


 

Hi berry, I can not find the beam photo. refresh some times. but failed. Could you post some link here. Thanks


----------



## madmook (Dec 16, 2009)

That Jetbeam photo that ThruNite cannot seem to see:


----------



## BigT504 (Dec 16, 2009)

Can you use unprotected cells (18650) in this light since the light has a voltage cutoff? I am a little new to CPF and I just got some 18650's (Samsung 2200mah) out of a laptop battery pack. I am pretty sure these batteries are good they are holding a good charge, but I am little confused on what the protection circuit does since the flashlight has it built in...


----------



## Flashlites R Us (Dec 16, 2009)

Yes you can use your 18650 Sanyos in the Catapult.

The "protection circuit" in the Cat will protect whatever batteries are installed from overdischarging them while the light is in use.


----------



## selfbuilt (Dec 17, 2009)

Hi all,

My replacement Catapult module arrived today. First impressions are positive - inductor whine is much less (although still present on Hi/Med, it is no more obtrusive than any other light).

Interestingly, output is about 8% higher according to my lightbox and ceiling bounce. I've started the 1x18650 runs, but may need to redo some of 2xcell configs as well, to compare. I'll keep you posted.

Oh, and the plastic insulating disc around the emitter seems to be thicker on the replacement (can't see the star underneath, and it rises higher on the side the emitter frame). Very unlikely you would be able to over-tighten this one.


----------



## Dioni (Dec 17, 2009)

very very nice review! 

Thanks :thumbsup:


----------



## Arnulf (Dec 17, 2009)

Great review.


----------



## BigT504 (Dec 17, 2009)

selfbuilt said:


> Hi all,
> 
> My replacement Catapult module arrived today. First impressions are positive - inductor whine is much less (although still present on Hi/Med, it is no more obtrusive than any other light).
> 
> ...


 
Can you tell much of a visual difference between Hi and Med?


----------



## berry580 (Dec 17, 2009)

Everything here from post #47

Hope everyone can see the beams shots now. =)


----------



## Arnulf (Dec 18, 2009)

Awesome picture Berry.....thats brighter than the high beams on my pickup....you probably burned Yowies retina's if he is out there. j/k :thumbsup:


----------



## selfbuilt (Dec 20, 2009)

*UPDATE*





I've added 1x18650 runs to the review (graph above). Note these runtimes are a little different from the other ones shown earlier, since they are based on a replacement Catapult that had slightly greater output (but slightly lower runtime) than the one I originally tested. The difference isn't great - max 8% more according to ceiling bounce, a bit less in my lightbox - and well within emitter variability. But I re-did some of the 2x18650 runs in the graph above so that you could directly compare outputs. I have also updated the summary table in the review.

As you can see above, the light runs on 1x18650, but at lower - and non-regulated - max output. Med/Lo are the same output levels as 2x18650 configuration, with just lower regulated runtime.

One other observation - the emitter isn't quite as perfectly centered on the replacement, introducing some color/pattern distortion around the hotspot. Not an issue at any distance, but you will see it up-close on a white wall. Max throw doesn't seem to be affected.

:wave:


----------



## picard (Dec 20, 2009)

does the Catapult gets hot after 20min?

Would the light shut down when it gets hot?


----------



## berry580 (Dec 22, 2009)

efficient of 1x18650 on medium looks like rubbish, especially when compared to its low mode.


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 22, 2009)

berry580 said:


> efficient of 1x18650 on medium looks like rubbish, especially when compared to its low mode.


 
Berry,We think the light are best fit for 2 18650 battery. for 1 18650 ,it can fit. this is our target.Hope you can understand


----------



## selfbuilt (Dec 22, 2009)

picard said:


> does the Catapult gets hot after 20min?
> Would the light shut down when it gets hot?


Hard to say, since all my runtimes are done under a cooling fan. In handling it, I can't say I noticed it getting any hotter than any of my other lights. I doubt it has any sort of thermal shut-down protection, though - that's very rare, and it would likely have shown up in the runtimes.



berry580 said:


> efficient of 1x18650 on medium looks like rubbish, especially when compared to its low mode.


One thing to keep in mind is that milk carton lightbox is hardly a perfect integrating sphere (i.e. the output levels are not completely linear - 120 is more than twice as bright as 60, in my experience). And in any case, lights are usually far more efficient at lower levels anyway.

Probably best to stick with the comparison to other lights shown here:






Keeping the mind the Legion II is 3x18650 light, the overall efficiency of the Catapult seems consistent across both its Med and Lo levels. 

It also performs as expected on 1x18650 compared to 2x18650, which is good to see.


----------



## ThruNite (Dec 25, 2009)

Merry Christmas. and happy new year! everyone. wish you all have a good life```````````


----------



## Rod911 (Dec 25, 2009)

selfbuilt said:


> *UPDATE*


Ending up spending Christmas with three families over the past two days, and I couldn't sleep despite the amount of eating that has occurred, so I decided to run a quick current draw test on the 1*18650 cell configuration.

In the high and medium modes, the current draw from the tailcap was 1.20A. However, it seemed to fluctuate between 1.17A and 1.24A and never did settle down in the two minutes or so that I had the prongs on the battery and light body. Unlike its low mode, it was pretty much dead on at 0.30A and never fluctuated compared to the other two modes. 

The above could probably be the reason why there was little to no difference in high and medium modes in a 1*18650 configuration on a Catapult.

Note that, the DMM I used was quite cheap, but the results are still usable me thinks.


----------



## dlrflyer (Dec 26, 2009)

Impressive light, but sadly not for me. I don't do 18650, so the limited voltage range makes this a non-starter for me. Perhaps in a later version, I'll buy one if it supports 4 CR123 primaries.


----------



## EngrPaul (Dec 26, 2009)

selfbuilt said:


> However, if you look closely, you’ll see some thin dark rings near the centre of the beam. To be honest, I find these look rather like a nipple in the centre of the beam.  :laughing:


 
Aw, shucks. I must have the PG-13 version. Mine has a small 5-petal flower, it must be your nipple covered with a pastie.

Note: Attached picture has been contrast-enhanced for better viewing of the (ahem) central feature.


----------



## Light11 (Dec 26, 2009)

EngrPaul said:


> Aw, shucks. I must have the PG-13 version. Mine has a small 5-petal flower, it must be your nipple covered with a pastie.


LOL :laughing:


----------



## Charles L. (Feb 27, 2010)

Hi all,

First post on this forum. I'm quite new to the *real* flashlight experience, having bought a Nitecore Extreme a month ago when our old 2AA light died. Since then I've purchased 2 Jetbeams -- RRT-1 and RRT-0 -- and a Thrunite Catapult. The Nitecore and Jetbeams are really nice, but the Catapult.... WOW! I love the heft, build quality and the idiot-proof UI. I even love the quasi-retro aesthetics; it seems to go perfectly with the 1940's rotary phone on my night stand  But most of all I love the amount and quality of the light this beast produces. My wife actually got comments from the neighbors when she used the Catapult to walk our dog oo:

Lately I've been reading battery posts, both to keep me from drooling over more lights and also to make sure I do everything possible to prevent a  I'm really enjoying this forum!


----------



## syntax (Feb 28, 2010)

Charles L. said:


> Hi all,
> 
> First post on this forum. I'm quite new to the *real* flashlight experience, having bought a Nitecore Extreme a month ago when our old 2AA light died. Since then I've purchased 2 Jetbeams -- RRT-1 and RRT-0 -- and a Thrunite Catapult. The Nitecore and Jetbeams are really nice, but the Catapult.... WOW! I love the heft, build quality and the idiot-proof UI. I even love the quasi-retro aesthetics; it seems to go perfectly with the 1940's rotary phone on my night stand  But most of all I love the amount and quality of the light this beast produces. My wife actually got comments from the neighbors when she used the Catapult to walk our dog oo:
> 
> Lately I've been reading battery posts, both to keep me from drooling over more lights and also to make sure I do everything possible to prevent a  I'm really enjoying this forum!


+1

Yeah, I love my Catapult. The throw, beam quality, etc... are amazing. That's not even mentioning the actual build quality of the light which is equally impressive. I love the knurling.


----------



## ThruNite (Mar 2, 2010)

Thanks very much. We'll do our best to get more and better products for you. thanks very much again


----------



## recDNA (Mar 6, 2010)

Rod911 said:


> Beamshots taken by the folks from www.selected-lights.de:


 

Is it just me or does it appear that the Catapult is aimed AT the car whereas the others are aimed BEHIND the car at the asphault? It makes the Jetbeam look MUCH brighter than the Catapult to my eye but comparison cannot be made if the Jetbeam is aimed to a shorter distance.


----------



## CampingLED (Mar 6, 2010)

recDNA said:


> Is it just me or does it appear that the Catapult is aimed AT the car whereas the others are aimed BEHIND the car at the asphault? It makes the Jetbeam look MUCH brighter than the Catapult to my eye but comparison cannot be made if the Jetbeam is aimed to a shorter distance.


 
ur right. nice observation.


----------



## Rod911 (Mar 6, 2010)

recDNA said:


> Is it just me or does it appear that the Catapult is aimed AT the car whereas the others are aimed BEHIND the car at the asphault? It makes the Jetbeam look MUCH brighter than the Catapult to my eye but comparison cannot be made if the Jetbeam is aimed to a shorter distance.



I think they were aiming for the car, it's just that the Catapult has such a narrow beam and not much spill that it doesn't give a true indication of its throwing capabilities.

Let's just say they were aiming at the car. From the pictures, it seems that the car in the Catapult shots are reflecting more light compared to the other flashlights. To me, this would indicate that the Catapult is the better thrower out of the either lights pictured.


----------



## MTL-TL (Mar 8, 2010)

Not all the shots were taken the same night. Look at the trees all green, with leaves and the ground is covered by grass in the M1X shot. Now if you look at the catapults shot, the trees are striped. Different season, and if you look closely, the amount of ambient light is not the same. You can see it in the sky and over the city on the right. I'm not an expert photographer, I wonder how much that can affect the outcome of the shots. IMO, the subject in the M1X shot is in a covered and more darker area than the one of the catapult.


----------



## Rod911 (May 2, 2010)

I was playing around with the Catapult tonight and noticed something strange. For some reason or another, the light would change modes when the tailcap (not switch) is hit. For example, if I were to tailstand the light on a hard surface and I were to set it down hard, it would change modes.

I have cleaned the threads again and checked the orientation of the extender is correct, but it still does it. Note that it does not change modes when in singkjf cell configuration.


----------



## selfbuilt (May 2, 2010)

Rod911 said:


> I was playing around with the Catapult tonight and noticed something strange. For some reason or another, the light would change modes when the tailcap (not switch) is hit. For example, if I were to tailstand the light on a hard surface and I were to set it down hard, it would change modes.


This is likely due to the height of the cells not being quite long enough to fully compress the springs (causing a momentary lack of current upon shaking the light). I had something similar happen once, and the problem was solved by adding a small magnetic space between the 18650s. Of course, I don't recommend that as a permanent solution. Maybe try another set of 18650s? :shrug:


----------



## Igor Porto (May 2, 2010)

Maybe stretching the spring works


----------



## Jack Reacher (May 2, 2010)

Good point...



MTL-TL said:


> Not all the shots were taken the same night. Look at the trees all green, with leaves and the ground is covered by grass in the M1X shot. Now if you look at the catapults shot, the trees are striped. Different season, and if you look closely, the amount of ambient light is not the same. You can see it in the sky and over the city on the right. I'm not an expert photographer, I wonder how much that can affect the outcome of the shots. IMO, the subject in the M1X shot is in a covered and more darker area than the one of the catapult.



I note that some of the shots were taken in Dec 2009 and some in May 2009. If that's ice on the road in the December shots (mid winter?) it may affect the overall saturation and colour temperature of the pics due to the reflective nature of ice versus asphalt.

I'm certainly no tech head, but could that be an issue with the apparent discrepancies in exactly where the hot spots seem to be located?

BTW selfbuilt, another excellent review! Although I'm only a newbie, I've read many of of your reviews here, and I'd like to commend you on the time and effort you put in to producing them in such detail. I also appreciate your subjective opinions on all these flashlights, and your "asides" about some of their peculiar little quirks too. :laughing:

—Cheers, Jack.


----------



## forexer (May 2, 2010)

Hi,

Which has higher OTF lumens m2xc4 or the catapult?

Which can throw further? Which has better regulation? 


Forexer


----------



## Rod911 (May 3, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


> This is likely due to the height of the cells not being quite long enough to fully compress the springs (causing a momentary lack of current upon shaking the light). I had something similar happen once, and the problem was solved by adding a small magnetic space between the 18650s. Of course, I don't recommend that as a permanent solution. Maybe try another set of 18650s? :shrug:


Tried a different set (Trustfire black/red compared to SoShine 2800mah originally) and found it happening to that set as well. As for the magnetic spacer, I don't have one, but I might give it a crack in my next DX order.



Igor Porto said:


> Maybe stretching the spring works


Thanks for the suggestion, but I don't really want to do this to my light.

The inadvertent switching of modes is rather annoying, but seems to happen less when using the Trustfire batteries (ie. it takes more force to change modes).


----------



## selfbuilt (May 3, 2010)

Jack Reacher said:


> GBTW selfbuilt, another excellent review! Although I'm only a newbie, I've read many of of your reviews here, and I'd like to commend you on the time and effort you put in to producing them in such detail. I also appreciate your subjective opinions on all these flashlights, and your "asides" about some of their peculiar little quirks too. :laughing:


Thanks. Although my goal is to provide consistent and reliable objective data for comparison purposes, I realize a lot of people seem to like the asides. 



forexer said:


> Which has higher OTF lumens m2xc4 or the catapult? Which can throw further? Which has better regulation?


Umm, have you tried looking at the actual review at the start of this thread?  Not to spoil the surprise, but at close range they are roughly equivalent in all of the above

One additional point for context - although the throw values at 1 or 5 m are comparable, at greater distances the single-emitter Catapult will indeed throw further than the 3XCree M2XC4.



Rod911 said:


> Tried a different set (Trustfire black/red compared to SoShine 2800mah originally) and found it happening to that set as well.


While I realize stretching the spring may not seem ideal, you probably only need a slight tweak in order to improve the fit. This would be a better fix than the magnetic spacer (they are dangerous, since if they dislodge and connect the positive battery terminal to the battery tube, you will short the cell!).


----------



## CM2010 (May 6, 2010)

Got a nice beamshot with my Catapult last night:


----------



## Scuderia (May 6, 2010)

Are you sure that is not from SS Enterprise? :laughing::laughing:
"Beam me up, Scotty"


----------



## CM2010 (May 6, 2010)

Was a foggy night so came out great


----------



## Jack Reacher (May 6, 2010)

CM2010 said:


> Was a foggy night so came out great



Hi there CM2010...

The Catapult is on my (first-timer's) short list.

Can you let me know your (the torch's) location relative to this shot? Distance and direction out of frame?

— Cheers, Jack.


----------



## selfbuilt (May 6, 2010)

FYI, I notice a thread in CPFMP's Dealers forum that a new V2 of the Catapult is due to come out soon:
http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=225422

I don't have any more info than that. Dunno if Thrunite plans to send me one to test ... I typically leave those decisions in the hands of the manufacturers/dealers.


----------



## HIDblue (May 6, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


> FYI, I notice a thread in CPFMP's Dealers forum that a new V2 of the Catapult is due to come out soon:
> http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=225422
> 
> I don't have any more info than that. Dunno if Thrunite plans to send me one to test ... I typically leave those decisions in the hands of the manufacturers/dealers.


 
I hope they do send you one selfbuilt. I'm curios to see the difference, if there is any, between the old Catapult at 900 lumens and the new Catapult at 1000 lumens. Would 100 lumens make much of a perceivable difference? 

IMO, I do like the fact they simplied the UI into a simple, 2-mode light. Tightening the head for max output and loosening the head for low.


----------



## CM2010 (May 6, 2010)

Jack Reacher said:


> Hi there CM2010...
> 
> The Catapult is on my (first-timer's) short list.
> 
> ...



I was just holding the torch above my head pointing it out of the window,its about 55 - 60ft to the tree i was pointing it at.

If you do get one make sure you get the newer version which is about to be released.


----------



## Jack Reacher (May 6, 2010)

CM2010 said:


> I was just holding the torch above my head pointing it out of the window,its about 55 - 60ft to the tree i was pointing it at.
> 
> If you do get one make sure you get the *newer version* which is about to be released.



Thanks for the heads-up on both those points CM2010.

Man..... there's always a newer version just when you've nearly made up your mind ain't there LOL.

Although I've also decided against waiting for the TK45 — can't see the point of three emitters when one will do, _à la_ the SST-50.

At the moment the Catapult is _numero uno_ on my list, with the TK40 second and the iTP Polestar A6 a distant third.

— Jack.


----------



## CM2010 (May 6, 2010)

Well ive just bought my Catapult so i'm abit cheesed off to hear there is a new version out but none the less its still a great light.


----------



## Jack Reacher (May 6, 2010)

CM2010 said:


> Well ive just bought my Catapult so i'm abit cheesed off to hear there is a new version out but none the less its still a great light.



I don't know much about this sort of stuff from a purely technical viewpoint, but will an extra 100 _emitter_ lumens (=65 OTF lumens) make all that much difference over the "old" Catapult?

Aren't we looking at roughly 700L (old) versus 765L (new) OTF ? Not even 10%.

Although with an apparently broader hot spot.

— Jack.


----------



## Rod911 (May 7, 2010)

Here are the details of the Catapult v2.

Personally, the things I like about v2 are as follows:


SS bezel. I'm hoping that these can be bought separately and fit on v1.
The high mode is now 3.5a compared to v1's 3.0a.

What I don't like about v2:


Mode switching via twist. I believe that this method no longer allows one handed operation of the light as I find it already difficult to twist the head of my v1 light with just the one hand. 
Only two modes, a high '1000 lumen' mode and a low '250 lumen' mode. I like medium mode a lot in the v1. I find the light that this mode produce is a great balance between run-time and brightness. 

At the end of the day, I would prefer v1 over v2 because of its well spaced out brightness levels and functionality.


----------



## nodoubt (May 7, 2010)

Rod911 said:


> Here are the details of the Catapult v2.
> 
> Personally, the things I like about v2 are as follows:
> 
> ...


with you 100% on the twist thing and keeping the 3 levels....just seems like a crappy way to have to adjust a 160 dollar flashlight LOOSENING the head of the thing......like how loose does it have to be..........id like to keep everything tight on a flash thats supposed to be submersible to 30 feet for several hours.......


----------



## Jack Reacher (May 7, 2010)

Rod911 said:


> What I don't like about v2:
> 
> 
> *Mode switching via twist*. I believe that this method no longer allows one handed operation of the light as I find it already difficult to twist the head of my v1 light with just the one hand.
> ...





nodoubt said:


> *with you 100% on the twist thing and keeping the 3 levels*....just seems like a crappy way to have to adjust a 160 dollar flashlight LOOSENING the head of the thing......like how loose does it have to be..........I'd like to keep everything tight on a flash that's supposed to be submersible to 30 feet for several hours.......



Yep... as an _almost_ buyer of the Catapult, I'm disappointed that the second version has (to me at least) these shortcomings you guys have already noted.

Why did Thrunite change the original all-clicky modes? Why did they do away with _any_ mid-level output?

I'm guessing the 250L _low_ mode ain't gonna be low enough for a lot of people. That should've been around the "mid" level, and with an extra _true_ low of around 12L. 

The only "advantage" for me could be that it's gonna sell at the same price, so a bit more bang for your buck?

— Jack.


----------



## orbital (May 7, 2010)

Jack Reacher said:


> I don't know much about this sort of stuff from a purely technical viewpoint, but will an extra 100 _emitter_ lumens (=65 OTF lumens) make all that much difference over the "old" Catapult?
> 
> Aren't we looking at roughly 700L (old) versus 765L (new) OTF ? Not even 10%.
> 
> ...



+

Please provide the source where you read the hotspot is broader,..
because the reflector has not changed for the new version.

_~ Regarding the amount of twist needed to change modes, 
in all the lights I'v had that twist to change modes, it's a very small amount,
....only millimeters of twisting to get from one mode to the other._


----------



## selfbuilt (May 7, 2010)

nodoubt said:


> just seems like a crappy way to have to adjust a 160 dollar flashlight LOOSENING the head of the thing......like how loose does it have to be..........id like to keep everything tight on a flash thats supposed to be submersible to 30 feet for several hours.......


There are plenty of twisty lights out there that maintain perfectly adequate waterproofness. There is a long history to show that this is not likely to be a problem - from Surefire tailcaps to Fenix, JetBeams and other head twists, etc. 

It's really just a question of preference. Many prefer it because it allows true momentary signaling at the tailcap (i.e. don't have to worry about accidentally advancing modes), and there is no uncertainty as to what mode the light will come on in (i.e. no memory needed - you can tell before turning on). 

To each their own ... :shrug:


----------



## nodoubt (May 7, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


> There are plenty of twisty lights out there that maintain perfectly adequate waterproofness. There is a long history to show that this is not likely to be a problem - from Surefire tailcaps to Fenix, JetBeams and other head twists, etc.
> 
> It's really just a question of preference. Many prefer it because it allows true momentary signaling at the tailcap (i.e. don't have to worry about accidentally advancing modes), and there is no uncertainty as to what mode the light will come on in (i.e. no memory needed - you can tell before turning on).
> 
> To each their own ... :shrug:


will you still be able to the the old model after the new one is out ??


----------



## JB (May 9, 2010)

Hi selfbuilt, the throw and output numbers in your chart are based on 2x 18650s right? Did you happen to test the throw and output on a single 18650?


----------



## skyfire (May 9, 2010)

Jack Reacher said:


> Yep... as an _almost_ buyer of the Catapult, I'm disappointed that the second version has (to me at least) these shortcomings you guys have already noted.
> 
> Why did Thrunite change the original all-clicky modes? Why did they do away with _any_ mid-level output?
> 
> ...




ive had my catapult for about 2 weeks now, and then heard about version 2 from goinggear. i knew about the problems of the original design, and still bought it. i really like the light, but its too heavy for me at work, since i have to move around so much, as well as carry other tools. its definitely the best self-defense light i have though:twothumbs blind them and then bash'em! 

the blinding part is really easy, ive realize to be very careful where im pointing this light, as the spill is bright enough to cause people to think you are aiming at them.

the version 2 seems to be an improvement in all areas. although the outputs of the original design had 900L. 500L, 120L, and strobe. i can do without the strobe but 3 brightness settings are ideal for me. i also liked that i dont have to twist anything. but i have read about switch problems, so probably in the new version, a better, simpler switch was used. and most importantly a better driver, that doesnt require cooling grease.

if i didnt already have a catapult, i would definitely buy the version 2.

only thing i dont like, is the cool (purplish) tint of the spill. but the hotspot and corona will make you :twothumbs


----------



## selfbuilt (May 9, 2010)

JB said:


> Hi selfbuilt, the throw and output numbers in your chart are based on 2x 18650s right? Did you happen to test the throw and output on a single 18650?


Relative outputs on all levels, on both 1x18650 and 2x18650 were tested and are shown with the runtimes here:







Allthough I didn't measure throw at those levels, you can estimate on the basis of the output drop by comparing proportionally the square root of lux throw. For example, a 30% drop in output is likely close to a 30% drop in "throw" (square root lux) - just work backwards to get estimate acutal lux at the lower levels.

Not a perfect correlation, but I've found it works pretty well to get estimates


----------



## Purrkieset (May 18, 2010)

Scuderia said:


> Are you sure that is not from SS Enterprise? :laughing::laughing:
> "Beam me up, Scotty"



lolz


----------



## JB (May 21, 2010)

Ah, thanks!



selfbuilt said:


> Relative outputs on all levels, on both 1x18650 and 2x18650 were tested and are shown with the runtimes here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## desertrat21 (May 23, 2010)

Just a quick FYI and some observations on the V2...

The V2 is a tad bit longer. The finishing is very nice. The anodizing is a bit darker and was done very well. The machining is excellent. The newer stainless bezel is a very nice addition.

The hotspot/spill are identical but in a side-by-side, quick, and far from scientific test with freshly charged 18650s the V2 version does have (to my eye) a slightly brighter beam and spill (although you'd have to have them side-by-side to see it).

The UI is actually a pleasant surprise. The shift from mode 1 to mode 2 requires a simple quick turn. The light suffers no fit compromise in the "loose" mode. 

Hopefully selfbuilt gets his hands on one... I'd love to see the runtime and relative brightness graphs.


----------



## kj2 (May 24, 2010)

I am going to buy this light :twothumbs.
What a light. The question now is, where can I get it ?


----------



## Sasuke (Jul 29, 2010)

My next flashlight... I'm sure!
:devil: :devil: :devil:


----------

