# 13V Rattlesnake or SF with Turbo-head?



## BoomerSooner (Jul 31, 2007)

I'm considering buying a Wolf Eyes Rattlesnake, 13V version. I'm also considering adding a Turbo-head w/ MN16 to my 2 x 17670 9P. I'm curious to the difference in size of the reflector/head/bezel between the following three: Rattlesnake, standard 9P, and SF Turbo-head. 

Does anyone have a Pic of a WE Rattlesnake next to a SF 9P, 6P, etc; and possibly a SF TH too?

Also, does anyone have any insight on the difference in light output and beam characteristics between a SF TH and the Rattlesnake.

Here are specs...I just am not sure of what to expect out of the end of them? I'm wanting to throw a ton of light a pretty decent distance.



> Cell configuration: 2x17670
> SF MN16: 20W, 330 - 175 lumen in 31 minutes
> SF 9P with 1 cell extender


 


> Cell Configuration: 3x18650
> LF EO-13: 25.5W, 480 - 284 lumen in 36 minutes
> Rattlesnake 13V


 
I could also add two more extenders, 1 more 17670 and go this route as well. 


> Cell Configuration: 3x17670
> SF MN61: 32W, 728 - 435 lumen in 27 minutes (bulb life very short, but incredible)
> LF HO-M6R: 23W, 503 - 336 lumen in 41 minutes (best drop-in solution available for this config)
> SF 9P with 3 one cell extenders and TH


----------



## mdocod (Jul 31, 2007)

My understanding is that the SF turbo heads quite a bit larger. 2.5 inches on the outside diameter I believe. Compared to about 1.77 inches on the Wolf Eyes style turbo heads. As I understand it, you could expect a WolF-Eyes Turbo to actually slip into a pocket a little easier, but I'd have to assume that the Larger Surefire heads provide a more intense focusing effect. Just by looking at various pictures of these online (on PTS and Surefire.com) it's pretty apparent that the *head* on the Rattlesnake isn't as girthy as a SF turbo, which looks downright ridiculous on a little CR123 tube..

I see you are definitely looking at the "heavy hitters" of the tactical arena... But keep in mind that many people have mentioned that a 6xCR123 length configuration (3x18650, 3x17670, etc) feels too long and awkward, making tail-switch operation difficult, as the weight of the front has a lot of leverage over your wrist... The Wolf-Eyes M300 Lion looks like the solution to that problem, with a length that a coat pocket will swallow, and a girth supporting 3 18650s. Only trouble there is, it appears to use it's own proprietary bulb, I was hoping they would build it around a standard D36, but I don't think that's the case...

I see a KT2 over in BST for about $60.... inside of the budget of a rattlesnake I think there's almost room for a 2x18650 leefbody body to run a MN16 or EO-M3T. The rattlesnake would be a hair brighter with the EO-13, but I think the leef-bodied SF with the MN16 or EO-M3T might have similar throwing power even though it has less overall lumens...


----------



## sysadmn (Jul 31, 2007)

IIRC, the M100 has the 2.5" bezel vs. the M90's 1.77" (45mm). You can also buy an M90 or M100 bezel to fit the other (M100/M90) body. The M100 also does not have extenders listed.

Let us know what you decide - I'm trying to figure this out as well!


----------



## mdocod (Jul 31, 2007)

M100 would be great if there were more options available for it. As it stand now, it's a 2 trick pony. 9V or 12V lamp, 2x18650 or 4xCR123, with no significant upgrades available... Accept maybe slapping a LRB-150 extender on it and running the 12V lamp on 3x18500s. Which would certainly be bright, but bulb life would be less than ideal for a dependable tool.


----------



## DM51 (Jul 31, 2007)

Don't rule out using the Rattlesnake and EO-13 with 3 x 18500s instead of 3 x 18650s. It is a neater size, IMO. You need the short half-cell '150' extender for this, instead of the long 2-cell '168' one.


----------



## Glen C (Jul 31, 2007)

Boomer sooner, 
Just for accuracy, you had misquoted Mdcods figures in your first post, where you have 3 x 18650, it is actually 3 x 18500 in Mdocod's post.

Here are the 3 x 18650 figures from his post:

Cell Configuration: 3x18650

Bulb Options:
WE D36 13V: 18W, 354 - 237 lumen in 81 minutes
LF HO-13: 17W, 325 - 218 lumen in 89 minutes
LF EO-13: 25.5W, 525 - 350 lumen in 54 minutes

Body Options:
Wolf-Eyes M90 series RattleSnake +LRB168 extender +++




The 18650 is generally around 2200mah with the 17670 generally around 1400mah. So the 17670 has onlt 2/3rds the capacity and in your first comparison you are only using 2/3rds the number, so you would expect a substantial difference. Good luck in your choices.


----------



## BoomerSooner (Jul 31, 2007)

Thank you for catching that, I sure did. I was actually going back and forth between the two, tossing and turning each option, I ended up posting a little of each. 

The 18500 option is definitely on the table.

I ran into a Fivemega offering too. Damn flashlights, I like em all. It's a sickness. 

mdocod, I posted asking Mike @ PTS when they may have an optional HOLA for the M-300 but I haven't heard back yet.


----------



## Glen C (Jul 31, 2007)

Boomer, no HOLA for the M300 yet


----------



## Norm (Aug 1, 2007)

Glen C said:


> LF EO-13: 25.5W, 525 - 350 lumen in 54 minutes


D36 EO-13 is 700 lumen's Glen


----------



## softfeel (Aug 1, 2007)

That is bulbs lumens, Norm. Glen is talking about lumens out of the front.


----------



## LED61 (Aug 1, 2007)

Glen C said:


> Boomer, no HOLA for the M300 yet


 
Glen, since you are a dealer you probably know this better than me, but I figured I´d post it anyway.

Most manufacturers don´t really like to offer a flashlight with rechargeables that will drain the batteries much faster than 1.5 C. Even at that rate, the chance the batteries would become unbalanced well before their life cycle is increased dramatically and it is potentially dangerous.

So, I think the chances are we wont see a HOLA for the M300 and if we do it would be something around 450 lumens for 50 minute runtime instead of 65 minutes at 380 lumens, but no big increase.


----------



## BoomerSooner (Aug 1, 2007)

Maybe so?

I was hoping for an EO-13 type offering. Maybe since the batteries are not run in series you can't do that?


----------



## LED61 (Aug 1, 2007)

BoomerSooner said:


> Maybe so?
> 
> I was hoping for an EO-13 type offering. Maybe since the batteries are not run in series you can't do that?


 
Boomer, please keep in mind my opinion is just that, I have nothing to do with the light aside from ordering one. I just don´t think the factory per se will make such an offering. It MIGHT be possible to get something like that aftermarket from Lumens Factory some day, and yes it could be a very powerful bulb with something like 35 minutes runtime. Also, the three 18650´s in the M300 do run in series.


----------



## BoomerSooner (Aug 1, 2007)

No, no, no, I understand and I greatly appreciate your input. I'm asking questions, not debating. 

Does the battery holder for the M300 not make the batteries act, perform, or produce any differently than if they were butted up end to end?


----------



## mdocod (Aug 1, 2007)

the battery holder in the M300 should behave the same as 3 cells butted end to end... however... since the carrier also happens to be the main method of charging (cells in series), I would be leery of cells coming out of balance regardless of the lamp Used... Without a balancing charger, I would take the cells out and charge them on independent channel charging at *least* 1 in every 3 times I charged it up... As I understand though, the M90 also has a tailcap charging option... I would treat the tailcap charging on the M90 the same as the M300 and take extra precautions.


----------



## BoomerSooner (Aug 1, 2007)

Good advice! 

I have neighbor that's gotten into RC stuff pretty big lately. Dang you can spend a ton of money fast in that field.  Anyway, he has to use a balancer when charging his LiPo batteries, for the reasons you just described. LiPo charging is not cheap.


----------



## Glen C (Aug 2, 2007)

Boomer, totally agree with LED61 & mdocod. I don't think the factory will come out with, or need to, another incan option for the M300. I would guess it would be aftermarket if it happened, but I would imagine it will be some time away till volumes got up. I don't think the US even has the M300 yet.


----------



## BoomerSooner (Aug 2, 2007)

Thanks guys!

Well, if I can't jack with it, I don't want it. LOL 

Yesterday I bought one of FM's custom TL-3's that run 3 x 18500 with a 22w Axial bulb. I guess I'll wait a few days and see what it's like before I jump on a Rattlesnake or convert my 9P. A turbo head for the Surefire is sounding good though. I can play lego's with it and have pretty good versatility.

This may be a stupid question but, here goes. What is the difference between the different SF turbo heads? What makes a KT1 and KT2 different? Is it just the supplied bulb? Can I use a KT4? Do I buy an adapter from M to C body to make it work? I don't fully understand, I don't think?


----------



## mdocod (Aug 3, 2007)

KT1 and KT2 are, for all intents and purposes, the exact same housing and reflector, and, like you said already, they just ship with different bulbs. The KT4 is slightly different in that it uses larger threads to mate with the larger threaded business ends of the M3. As it just so happens, the M3T, M4, and M6 ship with a KT4 installed. leef makes a C to M adapter that allows you to take a C style threaded body, and adapt up to an M style thread for use with a KT4 or M3 bezel....


----------



## BoomerSooner (Aug 3, 2007)

mdocod,

Thanks for the clarification. That's what I figured but I wasn't sure since Surefire list the Heads as different model numbers. I appreciate the response.


----------



## Size15's (Aug 3, 2007)

mdocod said:


> KT1 and KT2 are, for all intents and purposes, the exact same housing and reflector, and, like you said already, they just ship with different bulbs. The KT4 is slightly different in that it uses larger threads to mate with the larger threaded business ends of the M3. As it just so happens, the M3T, M4, and M6 ship with a KT4 installed. leef makes a C to M adapter that allows you to take a C style threaded body, and adapt up to an M style thread for use with a KT4 or M3 bezel....


Technically the "KT4" is "TurboHead Kit No.4" rather than just a TurboHead.

The TurboHead used by the KT4 kit is the "Millennium TurboHead"
(The Millennium TurboHead is used by the M3T, M4, M6 etc)

The TurboHead used by the KT1, KT2 & KT5 kits is the so-called "KT" TurboHead.


----------



## pete7226 (Aug 3, 2007)

KT1/2 also have a much bigger spillbeam than the KT4 which has a narrower beam profile.


----------



## Size15's (Aug 3, 2007)

pete7226 said:


> KT1/2 also have a much bigger spillbeam than the KT4 which has a narrower beam profile.


...the Millennium TurboHead's reflector being located deeper inside the bezel compared to the KT TurboHead due to the shock isolation system. The same phenomenon is evident with the M2 shock isolated bezel vs the standard bezel.
The reflectors are the same though.

I have quite a few TurboHeads and the difference in beam profile is not at all significant in my experience. There is some variation from TurboHead
I guess I have about 7 or so more Millennium TurboHeads since I took this photo...


----------



## BoomerSooner (Aug 3, 2007)

Nice!


----------



## Size15's (Aug 3, 2007)

Kinda useless without bodies though... 
I've just counted up in my head - I think I can field about 20 SureFires with TurboHeads at the same time.


----------



## MorpheusT1 (Aug 3, 2007)

Yikes!!


You ahould take a pic of all your stuff someday Al.



Lots of great stuff for sure


----------



## mdocod (Aug 3, 2007)

guess that's what I get for assuming what people tell me is true...

Some discussions awhile back (can't remember if it was in a PM or in a thread, can't remember who with)... But what I do remember, was that this SF owner told me that the Millennium TurboHead and the KT4 were the exact same hunk of metal, with a different name. Much like the MN15 and N2, different label, same thing.

So.... to clarify, the KT4 does NOT have shock isolation? and the Millennium TurboHead DOES?


----------



## Size15's (Aug 4, 2007)

mdocod said:


> the Millennium TurboHead and the KT4 were the exact same hunk of metal, with a different name.


No. The Millennium TurboHead is a TurboHead.
The KT4 is a TurboHead KIT (No.4).
TurboHead Kits feature a TurboHead, Lamp Assembly(ies) and an adapter collar if necessary.
The KT4 _which is a kit_ features the Millennium TurboHead, both the MN15 and MN16 Lamp Assemblies (for three-SF123A bodies such as the 'M3').
[The Millennium TurboHead as featured in the KT4 kit does not need any adapter collar to attach to the M3 (etc) bodies]



mdocod said:


> Much like the MN15 and N2, different label, same thing.


No. The MN15 is NOT the same Lamp Assembly as the N2.
The MN15 has effectively replaced the N2.
The MN15 (instead of the N2) is now being supplied with the KT2 (TurboHead Kit No.2)
The MN15 uses different spring contacts and a different bulb with a different filament and a different mixture of gases.



mdocod said:


> So.... to clarify, the KT4 does NOT have shock isolation? and the Millennium TurboHead DOES?


The KT4 is a TurboHead KIT featuring the Millennium TurboHead.
The Millennium TurboHead does have shock isolation and is the only TurboHead that does.

The "KT" TurboHead is the one supplied with the KT1 (TurboHead Kit No.1), KT2 (TurboHead Kit No.2) and KT5 (TurboHead Kit No.5). 
The 9AN's TurboHead is also in this style and is part of KT3 (TurboHead Kit No.3).

Back in the olden days before the "KT" [style] TurboHead there was the "T" Series Extended Range TurboHead. This was sold as part of kits:

T1 (kit No.1) replaced by KT1 (N1 Lamp Assembly)
T2 (kit No.2) replaced by KT2 (N2* Lamp Assembly) (*KT2 now uses MN15 instead)
T3 (kit No.3) replaced by KT3 (N3 Lamp Assembly) [Note: T3 and KT3 are not interchangeable]
T4 (kit No.4) (N4 Lamp Assembly) - not replaced. KT4 inserted into 'KT Kit list'.
T5 (kit No.5) replaced by KT5 (N5 Lamp Assembly)

The N4 Lamp Assembly is used by the B65 rechargeable NiCad battery stick for the 6R / 7Z flashlights.

The KT-Series of Kits:




[Note that the N2 has since been replaced by the MN15]
The KT4 Kit:





The T-Series of Kits:




[Note that the T5 adapter collar is not the same style as the KT5 adapter collar I have used in this photo]

I hope I've been able to explain things a bit more clearly?

Al


----------



## Paul_in_Maryland (Aug 4, 2007)

BoomerSooner said:


> I ran into a Fivemega offering too. Damn flashlights, I like em all. It's a sickness.


Once you discover Fivemega's designs, resistance is futile. He is the DaVinci of custom flashlight designers, forever surprising us with designs that make us go, "Why didn't I think of that?" and a build quality second to none. There's a rumor that several U.S. states whose divorce code is strictly No Fault will soon allow wives to divorce on the grounds of FiveMega Addiction.


----------



## Paul_in_Maryland (Aug 4, 2007)

Glen C said:


> Boomer, no HOLA for the M300 yet


And if such a HOLA were to come from Lumens Factory, it would be a thrower, totally changing the light's character.


----------



## BoomerSooner (Aug 5, 2007)

Paul_in_Maryland said:


> Once you discover Fivemega's designs, resistance is futile. He is the DaVinci of custom flashlight designers, forever surprising us with designs that make us go, "Why didn't I think of that?" and a build quality second to none. There's a rumor that several U.S. states whose divorce code is strictly No Fault will soon allow wives to divorce on the grounds of FiveMega Addiction.





Yea, and this little rat *******  and I are becoming way too close of friends.


----------



## mdocod (Aug 6, 2007)

Size 15's....

I feel like I'm going round in circles with this... 

OK... so a KT4 "KIT" (as much sarcastic emphasis on the word "kit" as possible) includes a hunk of metal, that is identical to the hunk of metal that is attached to the business end of an M3T, M4 and M6.... The whole time I thought you were trying to say that the "KT4" is different than the business end of a M3T/M4/M6. When, all you were trying to clarify is the fact that it is a kit containing more hardware and some specific bulbs (adapter collar and LOLA/HOLA lamps designed for use on 3xCR123)..... 

The point that I thought I understood before, and am now back to understanding now, is that if you buy a M3T, a M4, a M6, and a KT4 kit, you own 4 hunks of metal within each that are identical.


----------



## Size15's (Aug 6, 2007)

mdocod said:


> Size 15's....
> 
> I feel like I'm going round in circles with this...
> 
> The point that I thought I understood before, and am now back to understanding now, is that if you buy a M3T, a M4, a M6, and a KT4 kit, you own 4 hunks of metal within each that are identical.


Yes - if you were to have an M3T, an M4, an M6 and a KT4 kit you would indeed have four Millennium TurboHeads in total.

My emphasising 'kit' was not intended to be sarcastic - I apologise if my attempt to be clear gave that impression.

Al


----------



## mdocod (Aug 6, 2007)

no, I was being sarcastic to make more fun of myself for not originally comprehending what you said plain and simple, It just wasn't "clicking" upstairs at all. I thought the KT4 was the name of a turbo head that happens to ship with accessories, I now understand that the term KT4 refers to the accessories in conjunction with a millennium turbo head all sold together in the same box. 

Basically, I misunderstood the labeling structure, but thought I was misunderstanding the product itself, so I was looking for where I "misunderstood" on the wrong side of things. 

Some day, I'll be able to afford some of this stuff and see it in person, lol.


----------



## Owen (Aug 6, 2007)

I believe I contributed to your confusion(edit: not my intention) by referring to the KT4 as the head that came on my M3T in another thread. 
KT4 is simpler than "Millenium TurboHead" so we can expect to see it used as such, regardless of the proper terminology. I know I'm guilty of using it generically.


----------



## Size15's (Aug 6, 2007)

Owen said:


> I believe I contributed to your confusion(edit: not my intention) by referring to the KT4 as the head that came on my M3T in another thread.
> KT4 is simpler than "Millenium TurboHead" so we can expect to see it used as such, regardless of the proper terminology. I know I'm guilty of using it generically.


I feel quite strongly that it is better to use the correct terminology once aware of it.


----------



## BSBG (Aug 8, 2007)

Size15's said:


> I feel quite strongly that it is better to use the correct terminology once aware of it.



I concur - proper terminology / nomenclature reduces confusion, in the end .


----------



## pizzajoe62 (Sep 4, 2007)

size 15's,

if i had the KT1 & the right body(voltage) configuration, will i be able to use any of the LA's (MN15&16, MN20&21, & MN60&61) in it w/out modifications?

joe


----------



## Size15's (Sep 4, 2007)

pizzajoe62 said:


> size 15's,
> if i had the KT1 & the right body(voltage) configuration, will i be able to use any of the LA's (MN15&16, MN20&21, & MN60&61) in it w/out modifications?
> joe


Joe,
The "KT" TurboHead as used by the KT1 TurboHead Kit has the same reflector (although not shock isolated) as the Millennium TurboHead so yes, if you could power them correctly, you could use the MN15/16 (three-SF123A), MN20/21 (for the M6/M500B) and MN60/61 (four-SF123A).

FYI, In fact the KT2 TurboHead Kit is supplied with the MN15 Lamp Assembly.

Al


----------



## pizzajoe62 (Sep 4, 2007)

thanks Al...

i have been researching a lot about turbo set-ups...w/ this possibility, i'll be able to create a more cost friendly one hopefully.
its the reflector design & flexibility that draws me back to SF.
the WE M100 looks formidable but less flexible.
thanks again.

joe


----------



## sysadmn (Sep 7, 2007)

mdocod said:


> The Wolf-Eyes M300 Lion looks like the solution to that problem, with a length that a coat pocket will swallow, and a girth supporting 3 18650s. Only trouble there is, it appears to use it's own proprietary bulb, I was hoping they would build it around a standard D36, but I don't think that's the case...


 

As far as I can tell (and your list confirms), Wolf-Eyes and Pila are the only ones using the D36 form factor. I'm glad that's a big enough market for Lumens Factory to develop for. It would be great if future Wolf-Eyes incans standardized their turbo config at D36. The real question is, "Will Wolf-Eyes bring out more incans, post M300?" They don't have many gaps in the current incan offerings, and seem to be putting money in new LED lights and drop-ins.


----------

