# Sunwayman T20C (1x18650, 2xR/CR123A, XP-G R5) Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS +



## selfbuilt (Feb 21, 2011)

*Warning: pic heavy, as usual. *
_
*UPDATE APRIL 15, 2011:* My review is based on an early engineering sample of the T20C, which contained the Cree XP-G R5 emitter. Sunwayman has decided to go with a XM-L T6 emitter in the shipping T20C. _







*Manufacturer specifications are unknown at this time*

What you are looking at is an engineering sample of a new Sunwayman light, the T20C. It has some distinctive features, which I will describe below.

To give you a general idea up-front, the light uses a Cree XP-G R5 emitter and takes 2xCR123A, 2xRCR and 1x18650. It is a multi-mode light, with 3 constant output levels and one “hidden” strobe. But the switch is unique – it is silent (i.e. no click) and can do both momentary and constant on.

Also, the final appearance of the light may change for the shipping version. Sunwayman informs me there may be modifications at the mass production stage. 






First off, I have no idea what packaging will be like, but I assume it will be fairly typical to other Sunwayman lights (i.e. you usually get at least a wrist strap, body clip, spare o-rings and boot cover, manual, and warranty card). Also no idea as to price yet. :shrug:








From left to right: CR123A, Redilast protected 18650, Sunwayman T20C, M20C, JetBeam Jet-IIIM, Olight M20-R2, 4Sevens Maelstrom G5, Nitecore IFE2. 





From left to right: AW protected 18650, Fenix TK15, TK12, 4Sevens Maelstrom G5, Sunwayman T20C, Nitecore IFE2, Eagletac P20C2-II. 

*T20C:* Weight: 118.3g (no battery), Length 136.8mm x Width 32.0mm (bezel)
*TK12*: Weight 123.3g (no battery), Length 138.0mm x Width 34.1mm (bezel max)


















Again, the final build of the light may change. 

What is most distinctive about the light is the switch. At first, I thought it was an electronic switch, since it was noiseless (i.e. no click). But it's not that simple, given given how it functions (i.e. half press for momentary, full press for lock-on).

In reality, it is something of a combination of an electronic switch in the head, with a mini-piston and a mechanical tailcap switch. If you look at the interior tailcap picture above, you will see two semi-circular areas on the perimeter of the switch spring that have a "L-shaped" pattern to them. These two areas rise when you press on the switch button. 

So, when you first tighten the tailcap, the outside portion of the switch makes contact with the outer ring of of the body tube. As you press the button, eventually the raised switch areas make contact with the inner part of the body tube (which is actually a spring-mounted interior sleeve). Continue pressing, and sleeve makes additional contact with the head somehow. This is how the light apparently signals the difference between a momentary press, and locked-on. I'm not entirely clear on the circuit specifics, so please check with Sunwayman for more info.

For the current engineering sample, I would say it is a solidly made light. Annodizing is a shiny black instead of the classic Sunwayman natural (Sunwayman confirms the final version will be black). Knurling is reasonable, and the light comes with stainless steel bezel and tailcap rings. The light cannot tailstand. Tailcap threads are anodized for lock out. 

Thanks to the spring in the head, flat-top cells work fine. 

All in all, it is a fairly classic and classy looking build for a light this size.










The T20C apparently features the Cree XP-G R5 Cool White. The reflector is textured to what I would consider a medium orange peel (MOP). Given the overall size of the head, I would expect a fairly typical beam for this class of light.

_*UPDATE:* Again, this review is based on an early engineering sample of the T20C, which contained the Cree XP-G R5 emitter. Sunwayman has decided to go with a XM-L T6 emitter in the shipping T20C. You should therefore expect greater max output and less throw from the XM-L emitter version (given that the build seems otherwise the same). _

Which brings us to the requisite white wall hunting . All lights are on Hi on 18650 (AW Protected where available), about ~0.75 meter from a white wall (with the camera ~1.25 meters back from the wall). Automatic white balance on the camera, to minimize tint differences. 





























































As you can see, a fairly typical beam for this size head. There are a few rings in the beam, but they are not distracting. Scroll down to my Summary Tables for more specifics on output and throw.

*User Interface*

To turn the light on in momentary-mode, depress the switch halfway. Fully depress the switch to lock-on in constant output. When the light is on, fully depress the switch to turn off the light

To change modes (when the light is on), hold the switch fully pressed. Within a second or so, the light will begin to cycle through its output modes in the following repeating sequence: Lo > Med > Hi. Release the switch to select the desired mode. 

Light has memory, and retains the last mode selected next time you turn on the light.

Strobe mode is “hidden” – do a quick double-full-press of the switch to enter strobe. Turn off the light to exist. There is no memory for strobe (i.e. always comes back on at your memorize constant output level).

*No PWM*

I was unable to detect any signs of PWM with my setup. This suggests the light is current-controlled, or it uses a PWM freq beyond my ability to detect. Either way, nothing to worry about visually. :thumbsup:

*Strobe*






Measured at a very high 23 Hz in my testing. :sick2:

*Testing Method:* 

All my output numbers are relative for my home-made light box setup, a la Quickbeam's flashlightreviews.com 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, except for any extended run Lo/Min modes (i.e. >12 hours) which are done without cooling.

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

*Throw/Output Summary Chart:*

*Effective November 2010, I have revised my summary tables to match with the current ANSI FL-1 standard for flashlight testing. Please see http://www.sliderule.ca/FL1.htm for a description of the terms used in these tables.*
















The max output and throw of the T20C are quite reasonable and consistent with its emitter and reflector design. 

_*UPDATE:* Again, this review is based on an early engineering sample of the T20C, which contained the Cree XP-G R5 emitter. Sunwayman has decided to go with a XM-L T6 emitter in the shipping T20C. You should therefore expect greater max output and less throw from the XM-L emitter version (given that the build seems otherwise the same). Runtime is hard to know, but I've noticed on other XM-L based lights that they don't typically seem to be any more efficient than XP-G lights, at lower drive currents. _

*Output/Runtime Comparison:*
























No surprises here – the overall output and output/runtime efficiency for the T20C are quite in keeping with this class of light. 

*Potential Issues*

Switch feel takes a little getting used to – I find you need to fully press fairly hard to insure the light stayed locked-on, or to access strobe (i.e. double-full-press). 

The switch is not absolutely silent (i.e. if you listen carefully, you can faintly hear the piston sliding).

Given the novel electronic switch/piston mechanism, it remains to be seen if additional issues crop up.

*Preliminary Observations*

The T20C is a solidly-built and solidly-performing member of the 2xCR123A/RCR 1x18650 class of XP-G R5 lights. It is a reasonably compact and tough-looking light (reminiscent of the Fenix TK12, but with a few extra design flourishes).

There are no real circuit surprises here – throw, output, and relative spacing of levels is pretty consistent with most lights in this class. Note however that some of the more recent builds in this class are driven harder on max, and have bigger and deeper reflectors for enhanced throw. I'm glad to see strobe is "hidden" by a double-click, the regular mode sequence is Lo > Med > Hi. 

What distinguishes the T20C is the novel switch design – I don’t think I’ve seen this sort on tailcap piston before. I presume the main point of this switch is to insure relatively silent operation (important for all you closet ninjas out there ). But the mechanical piston may also be designed to enhance long-term longevity (i.e. no cheap plastic clicky switch to break). 

Although I can’t comment personally on the need for silent operation, I can see the mechanical piston fitting in well with the other compact and sturdy aspects of the light. After all, clicky switches are often the weakest part of a light. Ultimately, it’s hard to know how well this sort of tailcap piston-drive will perform in comparison, but it has worked reliably in my testing so far.

Given this silent tailcap (and uber-fast strobe), I'm guessing the primary audience for this light is security/law-enforcement (i.e. a duty light). It looks to me like the body tube would fit in a standard 1-inch gun mount. The light certainly has a solid feel. 

_*UPDATE APRIL 15, 2011:* This review is based on an early engineering sample of the T20C, which contained the Cree XP-G R5 emitter. Sunwayman has decided to go with a XM-L T6 emitter in the shipping T20C. You should therefore expect greater max output and less throw from the XM-L emitter version (given that the build seems otherwise the same). Runtime is hard to know, but I've noticed on other XM-L based lights that they don't typically seem to be any more efficient than XP-G lights, at lower drive currents. _

----

T20C was provided by Sunwayman for review.


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 10, 2011)

> Written by *276* on Yesterday 07:35 PM GMT
> 
> Great review!!!
> 
> Kinda wish this was the variable output UI instead.





Budda said:


> Originally Posted by *Budda*
> Finally they added some grip (bisggest complain in my M20C review) and a new interface.





> Originally Posted by *276*
> Kinda wish this was the variable output UI instead.


I agree on the grip - the M20C was a bit too slippery, and this knurling is much more functional. I agree on the grip - the M20C was a bit too slippery, and this knurling is much more functional.

Although Sunwayman seems to have moved to the continuously-variable interface on a number of lights, I think this light shows their commitment to maintaining (and updating) the traditional multi-level design. After all, for a LEO duty light, continuously-variable is not really needed or desired - simplicity of use and predictability of output/runtime seem more highly valued. But I agree it would be nice to see a more "grippy" version of the current V-series.


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 10, 2011)

The main review post has been updated with the final review text.

The thread discussions have been *fully restored* from the search engine cache data (thank you tandem!).

Please carry on!


----------



## Beamhead (Apr 11, 2011)

SWM announced an XM-L version, how well would a 17670 cell fit/do?


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 11, 2011)

Beamhead said:


> SWM announced an XM-L version, how well would a 17670 cell fit/do?


 If the diameter stays the same, there will be no problem (just lower runtime compared to 18650). But all my protected 18650 fit fine in my XP-G R5 sample.


----------



## Beamhead (Apr 11, 2011)

Thanks, I just ordered one and am curious about SWM's statement that the switch is "adjustable"?


----------



## damn_hammer (Apr 14, 2011)

Please share your impression of the T20C w/XM-L emitter when you get a chance. I'm interested, and will almost certainly be getting one soon. Thanks.


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 15, 2011)

Just to clarify, it seems Sunwayman has decided to go with a XM-L T6 emitter in the shipping T20C. My early engineering sample was based on the XP-G R5. 

You should therefore expect greater max output and less throw from the XM-L emitter (given the build seems otherwise the same). Runtime is impossible to know, but I've noticed on other lights in this battery class that XM-L based lights don't seem to be that much more efficient than XP-G lights, at lower drive currents.


----------



## peterharvey73 (Apr 20, 2011)

Hi Selfbuilt,

Would you know how the T20C with the new XM-L T6 compares with a Jetbeam RRT-2 R5?
1) Who is brighter? A little brighter or a lot brighter?
2) Who throws further? A little further or a lot further?

I have compared an RRT-1 R5 with an RRT-2 R5, and I can tell you the bigger deeper lensed RRT-1 R5 throws alot lot further than the smaller RRT-2 R5.
But how does the new T20C XM-L T6 compare??
And also, how does the T20x XM-L T6 compapre with the M20C R5? The M20C is a bit long in the tooth? Or does the M20C R5 throw further than the T20C T6?

Kind regards, Peter.


----------



## juplin (Apr 20, 2011)

Nice review :thumbsup:
After the tailcap has been removed, will the inner tube be moved toward the head when the inner tube is pressed with finger?
In other word, is the inner tube movable or fixed?
Thanks!


----------



## radu1976 (Apr 20, 2011)

According to Selfbuilt's review about the RRT-2 R2 version , that throws 15,000 lux . I would assume that the R5 version would throw around 11,000 lux .
An T20 R5 throws 7,000 lux and a T20 XM-L should be in the 5,000-6,000 lux area . 
So the JETBEAM will throw much better , 2 times more lux probably . But I am quite positive that the T20C will be brighter and personally , I preffer its regulation over the RRT-2 one . 
T20C is a quite compact XM-L thrower but it definetely can't outhrow the FENIX TK21 which is actully 1.5cm longer and it has a 0.8cm larger bezel .
I asked SUNWAYMAN and they confirmed me that the throw will be less on XM-L version comparative to the reviewed R5 .

With the larger and more efficient emitters - considerably more overall output - we have the reverse of the coin : less throw .
Probably the R2 is the best option for those who want throw . Otherwise we should go with much longer and larger flashlight to achieve the same throw with an XM-L .


----------



## peterharvey73 (Apr 21, 2011)

Thanks Radu.

Out of curiosity, given the same identical lenses, why does a brighter, more powerful and more efficient LED have a shorter throw?
I heard that the old R2's have the longest throw, then the newer R5, and now the latest T6 is brightest but has the shortest throw?
Shouldn't the R2, R5 and T6 all throw the same distance, or the newer R5 and T6 throw even further, given that the lenses are identical???


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 21, 2011)

juplin said:


> After the tailcap has been removed, will the inner tube be moved toward the head when the inner tube is pressed with finger? In other word, is the inner tube movable or fixed?


A good question - the inner battery tube sleeve is movable, not fixed. There seems to be some sort of spring-mount in it, as you can move it with you finger. I hadn't thought to test that before, but it does help explain how the switching works in the tailcap.



peterharvey73 said:


> Out of curiosity, given the same identical lenses, why does a brighter, more powerful and more efficient LED have a shorter throw?
> I heard that the old R2's have the longest throw, then the newer R5, and now the latest T6 is brightest but has the shortest throw?
> Shouldn't the R2, R5 and T6 all throw the same distance, or the newer R5 and T6 throw even further, given that the lenses are identical???


Because we are talking about different classes of emitters. The T6 output bin refers only to the XM-L emitter. XP-G emitters are the only ones that come in an R5 output bin. And XR-E, XP-E, and XP-G all come in an R2 output bin.

These different classes of emitters are all quite different from one another. The XM-L has a much larger die than the XP-G emitter, so it is much harder to focus it to a narrow point. This requires a much larger and deeper reflector.

Classically, the XR-E (which maxed out at R2 output bins) has the best throw, due to how the emitter is constructed (also a question of emission angle as well as die size). But XR-Es are also have more rings and distortions in the beam. XP-Gs (which seem to have reached S2 output bins, but R5 are the most common) typically don't focus quite as well.

This is a common source of confusion here - output bin is not the controlling factor for throw, but emitter class.


----------



## juplin (Apr 21, 2011)

selfbuilt said:


> the inner battery tube sleeve is movable, not fixed. There seems to be some sort of spring-mount in it, as you can move it with you finger. I hadn't thought to test that before, but it does help explain how the switching works in the tailcap.


Thanks!
Is it possible that the spring is connected between the frond end of the inner tube sleeve and the negative copper ring of the circuit board (to act as both the conductive path and the buffering mechanism for switching action)?


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 21, 2011)

juplin said:


> Is it possible that the spring is connected between the frond end of the inner tube sleeve and the negative copper ring of the circuit board (to act as both the conductive path and the buffering mechanism for switching action)?


Certainly possible - that in fact seems most likely to me. since the head doesn't open, you would have to check with Sunwayman for specifics.


----------



## peterharvey73 (Apr 22, 2011)

So Selfbuilt, it is very interesting to learn that we are getting more efficient with less energy loss, and therefore more powerful emitters, however because the LED die emitters are larger in size, it requires a much larger reflector to achieve the same throw distance.

(1) At the end of the day, this Sunwayman T20C with XM-L T6 is brighter @ 438 lumens, but it throws a shorter distance than Sunwayman's own M20C R5? Is that right?
(2) Do you prefer the T20C's all clicky switch only, or do you prefer the M20C's traditional combination of clicky switch combined with a magnetic ring?
(3) I know from your reviews that the Jetbeam RRT-2 R2 out throws a Sunwayman M20C R2, but how does the newer RRT-2 R5 compare with the T20C T6 in brightness and in throw? The T20C with the XM-L T6 is brighter but shorter in throw?

Many thanks for your help Selfbuilt et al; I'm just trying to decide between buying the RRT-2 R5, M20C R5, or the T20C T6...


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 22, 2011)

peterharvey73 said:


> So Selfbuilt, it is very interesting to learn that we are getting more efficient with less energy loss, and therefore more powerful emitters, however because the LED die emitters are larger in size, it requires a much larger reflector to achieve the same throw distance.


Well, that's not absolute - the issue of emission angle is also critical, not just die size. But XM-L emitters are quite a bit bigger than XR-E, XP-E or XP-G, so it is clearly going to be a major factor.



> (1) At the end of the day, this Sunwayman T20C with XM-L T6 is brighter @ 438 lumens, but it throws a shorter distance than Sunwayman's own M20C R5? Is that right?


Likely yes. I would have to measure the XM-L version to be sure, but in my experience the increased output of moving to XM-L cannot overcome the drop in throw (when keeping the optics the same).



> (2) Do you prefer the T20C's all clicky switch only, or do you prefer the M20C's traditional combination of clicky switch combined with a magnetic ring?


There are advantages and disadvantages to all methods. But I personally quite like Sunwayman's magnetic control rings.



> (3) I know from your reviews that the Jetbeam RRT-2 R2 out throws a Sunwayman M20C R2, but how does the newer RRT-2 R5 compare with the T20C T6 in brightness and in throw? The T20C with the XM-L T6 is brighter but shorter in throw?


The degree of uncertainty increases as move across lights, models, reflectors, drive levels, etc. I can't really answer this without directly measuring everything. But my experience with lights of this size tell me that the T20C with an XM-L will likely not be a great thrower. Check out my Thrunite Scorpion review for an example of the XM-L in a traditional size reflector.


----------



## peterharvey73 (Apr 22, 2011)

Thanks for your advice above and the quick reply.
However, sorry to bother you again Selfbuilt, but the increase in brightness from the Sunwayman T20C with XM-L @ a whopping 438 lumens seems to be "huge" compared to a Jetbeam RRT-2 XP-G R5 @ 300 lumens and an M20C R5 @ 280 lumens.
However, would the "diminished" throw from the T20C only be "relatively small" compared to the existing throw in the RRT-2 R5 and the M20C R5?

For example, going from M20C R2 @ 240 lumens to M20C R5 @ 280 lumens, and going from RRT-2 R2 @ 240 lumens to RRT-2 R5 @ 300 lumens, how much extra brightness do you achieve, relative to how much fall in throw?
If the gain in brightness is huge, yet the fall in throw is small, then I'll go with the newer emitters.
If the gain in brightness is equal to the fall in throw, then it may be hard to decide.
If the gain in brightness is small, and the loss in throw is large, then I would stay away from the newer emitters altogether...


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 22, 2011)

Well, we have a good "natural experiment" in the Lumintop TD15/TD15X. Lumintop kept the build the same as they went from the XP-G R5 TD15 to the XM-L TD15X (i.e. same reflector).

The XP-G R5 TD15 has estimated ANSI lumens of 335 in my lightbox, and beam distance of 259m.

The XM-L T6 TD15X has estimated ANSI lumens of 750 in my lightox, and bem distance of 243m.

So, in that case, despite a huge increase in output, throw actually drops. FYI, my outdoor beamshots (linked in those reviews) shows the throw drop to be subjectively worse than the numbers indicate (which are based on lux at 5m). 

The Thrunite Scorpion is more in line with your interests, and it has a ANSI estimate lumen count of 460 in my lightbox, and only 167m beam distance.

Those numbers should put it in perspective for you.


----------



## peterharvey73 (Apr 23, 2011)

Thanks Selfbuilt.

Your data shows the newer huge XM-L emitters have a large increase in lumen brightness, but only a small drop in throw.
Your link to the Lumitop TD15 XP-G R5 also shows that the Jetbeam RRT-2 XR-E R2's have est lumens of 210, and beam distance of 216 meters.
While your link to the Thrunite Scorpion also shows that the Sunwayman T20C XP-G R5's have 250 lumens, and beam distance of 164 metres.
Here, the T20C is brighter coz it's a newer R5, but boy Sunwaymen have short throws?

Likewise, I notice from your Lumitop TD15X link data for the Jetbeam M1X and Sunway M60R.
The Olight SR90 which claims 2500 lumens, has an estimated 2500 lumens, and beam distance of 634 meters.
The Jetbeam M1X which claims 750 lumens, has max lumens of 450, and beam distance of 297 meters.
The Sunway M60R which claims 800 lumens, has max lumens of 570, and distance of just 192 meters!
Boy the Sunwaymen have short throws?
The big M60R can't even throw like a little RRT-2?
Like you say - more for flood lighting, than spot lighting.

Thank you very much Selfbuilt for all your help. You are a true expert.
I think I have swung back to the Jetbeams now, esp the TCR2 1 battery [for pocket use], RRT-2 twin batteries [for easy carry], and the big RRT-3 multi-batteries...
I prefer throw.

However, both Jetbeam and Sunwayman are the top two when it comes to delivering a combination of "style" and performance.
The others like Olight and Fenix etc look really bland.
The Olight SR90 is super powerful at 2500 lumens, but it is 30 cm long, and weights 1.5 kg, and uses some 12 CR123 batteries! So not that practical to carry around.
Fenix is very good value for money...


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 23, 2011)

peterharvey73 said:


> Here, the T20C is brighter coz it's a newer R5, but boy Sunwaymen have short throws?


The T20C XP-G R5 has quite resonable throw for the size of the head. The Lumintop TD15 series lights have a much deeper reflector, for greater throw. 

It's true that most of the high-output Sunwayman lights (like the M40C, M60R, etc.) are not particularly throwy. That is because Sunwayman opted to go with shallower reflectors (for wider spill but less throw). :shrug: 

But that's the nice thing about having so many choices to choose from - you can always find something somewhere that matches your needs.


----------



## dalauriano (Apr 29, 2011)

Very interesting this flashlight.


----------



## peterharvey73 (Apr 29, 2011)

I was having a hard time choosing between the Sunwaymen M20C, T20C and Jetbeam RRT-2.
All are compact twin battery; easy to carry around, but more serious than a single battery torch - but not a huge as a multi 6xCR123 RRT-3.
Only Jetbeam and Sunwayman offer a combination of style and performance.
The M20C R5 is only rated at 280 lumens and 1.5 hours run time, whereas the RRT-2 R5 is rated at 300 lumens and 2 hours run time.
The T20C T6 looks a corny black or black brown, is missing a magnetic ring and tail stand, and has a corny looking tactical ring towards the tail.
All three are very good. Very close contest.
Splitting hairs, in the end, I got a Jetbeam RRT-2 R5.

I can tell you the RRT-2 looks great.
Jetbeams actually look very athletic, dynamic, sporty and masculine.
While Sunwaymen look conservative, and gentlemanly, or even feminine.

RRT-2 as a nice magnetic ring and tail switch.
Now having own one, I can tell you that I think manufacturers should have BOTH a magnetic ring AND a tail switch.
This is because we hold falshlights in many different ways.
From a knife stabbing, overhand, "secure" four fingers over the top.
To a cigar-like hold with two fingers over the top for more dexterity and "maneuverability".
While a pen-hold grip with only one finger over the top is difficult for such a big heavy flash light!
Finally, there is the conventional "hand shake" grip with four fingers under the torch like a tenis racket.
The fingers over the top hold all need the tail end switch.
While the handshake grip uses the magnetic ring.
Interestingly, the Jetbeam RRT-0 with strobe, standby, low, medium and high has the best order of sequence for the magnetic ring.
Meanwhile, the Sunwayman T20C's "hold down" the tail end for low, medium and high, and "click twice" for strobe is the finest in tail end switch design!
In my opinion, all flash lights should have both the RRT-0's magnetic ring and the T20C's tail end switch combined!
In future, the standby mode on the ring should be a permanent off! Not just standby.
Btw, the lowest setting on the RRT-2 should be even lower; it is too bright, or maybe have the RRT-0's wonderful continuously variable settings!

They gave me an OP reflector, which is not the best for maximum throw, but gives a beautifully clean beam.
Throw may be slightly diminished, but I'n not exactly sure how much diminished, like 10% loss in throw, or 30% loss in throw - I can't exactly tell you.
I could have gone either way: smooth or orange peel.

The 2xCR123's are a smaller diameter than 1x18650 rechargeable, however there is no battery rattling in the RRT-2 whatsoever.

My only negative with the Jetbeam RRT-2 is that the "head" is huge and heavy!
The RRT-2 is 145 mm long over the M20C & T20C's 132 mm.
Plus 33 mm in head diameter over the other two's 32 mm.
This extra 13 mm is all in the head, for a deep parabolic reflector for long throw!
Because of the head heaviness, the RRT-2 has an uncomfortable cigar hold!
The M20C and T20C I suspect would be much better in this respect with it's smaller heads, and a more comfortable hold?
Can't be sure since I've never held the Sunwaymen before; they may all be head heavy?
However, then some people would say that due to the masculine nature of the Jetbeams, it's just as well that they have a big heavy head for maximum throw..

Had I gotten the T20C, I would have missed out on the magnetic ring for the conventional handshake grip, plus the T20C styling looks so corny compared to the M20C.
The M20C is more attractive, but why only 280 lumens output and 1.5 hours duration; both spec ratings behind and inferior to the other two...


----------



## peterharvey73 (May 1, 2011)

Having almost purchased the Sunwayman T20C and M20C, and having used the Jetbeam RRT-2 R5, I don't find the multi-mode magnetic ring that comfortable and ergonomic to use. The ring is actually rather uncomfortable to use.

The tail end click is also uncomfortable as it forces you to hold the flashlight by the "overhand" with all four fingers over the top, or by the "cigar" hold with two fingers over the top, and these flashlights are so "head" heavy that such a hold is uncomfortable.
Although the T20C and M20C have slightly shorter, narrower and lighter heads than the RRT-2, I don't imagine they'd be much lighter in the heads.
A conventional hand shake grip is more comfortable, but requires either a magnetic ring switch, or a conventional button!

However, I would actually recommend manufacturers either use one (1) conventional button, and in particular two (2) conventional buttons in-line if the flashlight is big enough, rather than the magnetic ring.
The magnetic ring is NOT as comfortable to use as a conventional push button.
The magnetic ring has an advantage in being able to accommodate multiple modes.
However, conventional more comfortable push buttons can also achieve multiple modes if they emulate the superb Sunwayman T20C push button design, where holding the button down alternates between modes like low, medium and high, while double clicking gives the strobe!
Alternatively, if the flashlight body is big and long enough, manufacturers could use two (2) in-line buttons: one to switch on and off, while the other to alternate between modes.
If manufacturers do use the twin push button design, please do not place the switches left and right like certain Fenix models.
They should be place in-line with the main on/off button in front, while the mode button behind.
Note that in-line, the front button further away is more comfortable to press than the button behind, which is too close to the hand, and requires you to uncomfortably curl your thumb up.

On the subject of OP orange peel reflectors, I do note that Selfbuilt in a previous test 
" http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...iew-RUNTIMES-BEAMSHOTS-DETAILED-PICS-and-more! ",
did find that Jetbeam Jet III smooth and OP reflectors had NO difference, or little difference in throw, so he recommended that you may as well go for an OP reflector to rid those untidy artifacts in the beam, as the T20C has also done here, and as Sunwayman have done in most of their models...


----------



## peterharvey73 (May 1, 2011)

Having almost purchased the Sunwayman T20C and M20C, and having used the Jetbeam RRT-2 R5, I don't find the multi-mode magnetic ring that comfortable and ergonomic to use. The ring is actually rather uncomfortable to use.

The tail end click is also uncomfortable as it forces you to hold the flashlight by the "overhand" with all four fingers over the top, or by the "cigar" hold with two fingers over the top, and these flashlights are so "head" heavy that such a hold is uncomfortable.
Although the T20C and M20C have slightly shorter, narrower and lighter heads than the RRT-2, I don't imagine they'd be much lighter in the heads.
A conventional hand shake grip is more comfortable, but requires either a magnetic ring switch, or a conventional button!

However, I would actually recommend manufacturers either use one (1) conventional button, and in particular two (2) conventional buttons in-line if the flashlight is big enough, rather than the magnetic ring.
The magnetic ring is NOT as comfortable to use as a conventional push button.
The magnetic ring has an advantage in being able to accommodate multiple modes.
However, conventional more comfortable push buttons can also achieve multiple modes if they emulate the superb Sunwayman T20C push button design, where holding the button down alternates between modes like low, medium and high, while double clicking gives the strobe!
Alternatively, if the flashlight body is big and long enough, manufacturers could use two (2) in-line buttons: one to switch on and off, while the other to alternate between modes.
If manufacturers do use the twin push button design, please do not place the switches left and right like certain Fenix models.
They should be place in-line with the main on/off button in front, while the mode button behind.
Note that in-line, the front button further away is more comfortable to press than the button behind, which is too close to the hand, and requires you to uncomfortably curl your thumb up.

On the subject of OP orange peel reflectors, I do note that Selfbuilt in a previous test 
" http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...iew-RUNTIMES-BEAMSHOTS-DETAILED-PICS-and-more! ",
did find that Jetbeam Jet III smooth and OP reflectors had NO difference, or little difference in throw, so he recommended that you may as well go for an OP reflector to rid those untidy artifacts in the beam, as the T20C has also done here, and as Sunwayman have done in most of their models...


----------



## supranatural (May 4, 2011)

peterharvey I'm sure whether you like the magnetic ring or not by your two previous posts? Either way I am glad that you brought this up with the Sunway T20C. This has to be one of the biggest contributing factors as to what flashlight to purchase, and I cannot say enough how much I despise programmable lights or head and tail cap twisting of any sort. The only exception to mode switching would be a system like the Fenix TK-15 and others that work in a similar manner. I was very discouraged to see Sunway make this move away from their traditional line of magnetic ring switching. Sunway makes some quality lights IMO and would love to see them keep their traditional modes of operation. 

I had ended up going with the Jetbeam RRT-1 because of their easy access light control ring. I only hope Jetbeam ends up making these torches (RRT-1 & RRT-2) with the XM-L LED's in the future. These lights are so nice to look at as well as being very functional.


----------



## peterharvey73 (May 4, 2011)

Thinking that Sunways are nice, elegant and feminine, I was thinking of getting my missus a Sunway V10R Ti:
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...tbeam-TC-R2-and-Sunwayman-Ti-V10R-PHOTO-HEAVY!
The review here says it's very good, and I agree there's not much difference between the two titanium flashlights Jetbeam TC-R2 and Sunway V10R Ti.
The TC-R2 bigger, more powerful, more masculine, most importantly, the TC-R2 magnetic ring had a "Standby" & strobe, and a proper belt clip secured by two screws!
JB also uses a brighter and more polished Ti surface which my missus liked.
The V10R Ti is generally more feminine, but my missus wanted the TC-R2, so I got her that.
The TC-R2 is just a Ti version of RRT-0 really, but it does have the best belt clip, and a more powerful 310 lumen Cre XP-G S2 emitter.

Supranatural, your RRT-1 with midsize 48mm head, the M1xm & RRT-3 with 63mm heads all have big reflectors and throw superbly.
I wish Selfbuilt would do more reviews on Jetbeams, esp the RRT-0, 1 and 3; I know there are other Jetbeam reviews on CPF, but Selfbuilt's are the best - lately, he even gives you the maximum distance where the flashlight is only delivering 0.25 lumens, so you know how far the maximum throw is.
Besdides, there is nothing wrong with several different reviews with several different opinions.

On this topic of "switch gear".
I can appreciate why only the "big" flashlights use buttons - which are the most comfortable, ergonomic to use.
For a small flashlight, such waterproof rubber buttons are bulky and being rubber, lack longevity.
For compact flashlights with only one or two CR123's, I can understand the love for magnetic rings and tail end switches, plus head and tail cap twisting etc.
Supranatural, you are right about head and tail cap twisting - it often requires two-handed operation - so it's a no no.

I can actually think of another solution for manufacturers - how about a spring-loaded, thin, flat, metal slide? For a compact flashlight, this is more compact than a button.
It could be a one-way slide backwards only, or a two-way slide backwards and forwards.
One-way: sliding backwards will turn on and off, while holding the slide will jump between low, medium and high, back down to medium and low etc, while two quick slides gives you the strobe!
Two-way slide: sliding backwards turns on, and changes between low, medium and high etc, while sliding forwards turns off! For the strobe, we could either hold the slide backwards, or do two quick slides.

If manufacturers want the switchgear to be very compact, then the magnetic ring combined with the tail end switch is still the most compact!
I have a RRT-2, it has standby - that's great - something the Sunways should have.
However, on the RRT2, after standby, comes strobe, then low, medium, high.
Like Selfbuilt said on http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...aptor-(R2)-Review-RUNTIMES-BEAMSHOTS-and-more!, that's quite silly to have strobe there - I don't know if Supranatural agrees on his RRT-1?
Strobe should either be to the left, then standby, then low, medium, and hi like the RRT-0's and TC-R2's.
Or strobe should be to the far right after high, like the RRT-3 and most of the Sunways!
Btw, the standby's on all the Jetbeams should be genuine "off", not just standby, since the tail end switch is uncomfortable to hold overhand/cigar and head heavy, plus the body of the RRT-2 is a little short to hold overhand, but if the magnetic ring is moved forwards, then this will interfere with the head and reflector.

The only disadvantage of the 5 position magnetic ring, is that you cannot "combine" that with Sunways superb T20C tactical tail end switch, which moves from on/off, holds for low medium high, and double clicks for strobe.
We can't combine the five position ring with the T20C tactical tail end switch because the 5 position ring actually "locks in" the mode already!

However, if you think about it, you can combine the T20C's tactical multi-function tail end click with the compact magnetic ring, if that magnetic ring is NOT of the 5 or multi-position type.
How about using a one or two position spring loaded compact ring?
The spring loaded ring can be twisted to the left only, or to both left and right.
Left twist can switch on and between brightnesses.
While a right twist switches unit off etc.
Hold the twist down, or double twist the spring loaded ring, and it turns to strobe!

In the end, the current RRT-0 and TC-R2 design with magnetic ring: strobe, standby, lo, med, hi - modified to a real off [not just standby], and combined with the tail end clicky is very very good.
Also, an innovative one-way left, or two-way left and right spring-loaded compact ring with a tactical multi-function design like one twist on, lo, med, hi, right twist off, hold down or double twist left strobe, combined with the T20C design tactical multi-function tail end clicky here, would also be good.
A spring loaded thin metal sliding switch could be an alternative to ring, but not as compact as ring...

It helps if a flashlight is easy and comfortable to hold, and switch between modes...


----------



## peterharvey73 (May 4, 2011)

Btw, before we think about switches, we should think about hold/grip.

How we hold or grip the flashlight determines what type of switch design we prefer.
A favourite hold for police and military is the overhand grip - it is secure, and has great self defence if using the flashlight as a weapon - however, this overhand grip is more uncomfortable and tiring.
The cigar [or two fingers above] grip is more maneuverable and relaxing at chest height, but is very loose, and often the flashlight is too head heavy to make this grip comfortable.
However, both the overhand and the cigar grip, require the tail end clicky switch.

A very comfortable and relaxing grip, is the conventional four fingers below the flashlight underhand handshake grip - this grip prefers either the big deep waterproof rubber short longevity button, or the thin metal slide, or slightly uncomfortable but flush magnetic ring.

Hence I don't mind the 5 position Jetbeam magnetic rings, provided:
1) standby is re-designed into a genuine "off" [so we're not forced to use the uncomfortable tail end clicky,
2) the strobe should either be to the far left before the standby like RRT0 & TCR2, or the strobe should be to the far right after high mode, eg RRT3 and most Sunwaymen...


----------



## Beamhead (May 4, 2011)

I clicked on a link to a review of the SWM T20C but found a Jetbeam infomercial. :thinking:
BUT WAIT.........call now and.................


----------



## peterharvey73 (May 4, 2011)

Sorry Beamhead - I must have gotten a little carried away. 

But I can't wait till Marshall from www.goinggear.com does a youtube video review on the XML-T6 of the Sunwayman T20C soon....


----------



## supranatural (May 5, 2011)

Totally agreed peterharvey about not only the switch-mode but also considering the hold/grip of the flashlight. I like the setup of the Sunway lights with the strobe being the last clockwise after high/max/or turbo. Haven't had any experience with the Jetbeam RRT-0's operation, but sounds to be a very easy to understand operation like the Sunways. Very nice lights btw, the RRT-0's


----------



## Beamhead (May 7, 2011)

Just got the T20C XM-L, the tail cap switch is very unique, the output is on par with my Turbo X but less throw/more flood.
It fit my Redilast 18650/2900 fattys with ease, and cr123 fit with some rattle.
Mine is the same dark green as my other SWM ano lights.

Overall I really like this light the only drawback I see so far is not being able to lockout the tail cap without nearly removing it, the light may activate if I carry it in one of my cargo pockets.


----------



## Beamhead (May 25, 2011)

Selfbuilt, have you noticed parasitic drain? Mine will wipe a 18650/2900 in 5-7 days just sitting.


----------



## selfbuilt (May 25, 2011)

Beamhead said:


> Selfbuilt, have you noticed parasitic drain? Mine will wipe a 18650/2900 in 5-7 days just sitting.


That's not good.

I am not able to directly measure the standby drain, since the electronic switch interacts the mechanical piston in an unusual way. Always a problem trying to measure it on any light with an electronic switch (e.g. the Novatac/HDS lights), although it's even more complicated here - you would presumably need to jury-rig a complicated setup connecting all the contact points outside the light. 

But I can try popping in a full 18650 battery and let you know how it turns out. I'll report back next week ....


----------



## Beamhead (May 25, 2011)

It's cold and raining yet again so I took apart the tail cap, it is purely mechanical so the drain issue may be in question although studying the way this switch works it may cause some constant contact perhaps on the piston end? 
Let me know your results on yours and I'll check this 18650 cell.


----------



## selfbuilt (May 27, 2011)

Beamhead said:


> It's cold and raining yet again so I took apart the tail cap, it is purely mechanical so the drain issue may be in question although studying the way this switch works it may cause some constant contact perhaps on the piston end?
> Let me know your results on yours and I'll check this 18650 cell.


Hmm, thanks. I suspected the switch was probably all mechanical (with the electronic component at the head of the piston), but wasn't sure.

It has only been 2 days, but I just examined the cell and it is still reading ~4.17-4.18V (was 4.19V fully charged 2 days ago). So that's perfectly normal self-discharge. I'll give it to next week and report back, but so far it doesn't look like standby drain is an issue on mine.


----------



## Beamhead (May 27, 2011)

I measured mine after 2 days and it is 3.79V down from 4.18V.


----------



## gunga (May 27, 2011)

I'm unsure, since I don't have this light, but is it similar to a large d10? If so, perhaps like the new d11's, some samples have large parasitic drain? Circuit defect perhaps?


----------



## selfbuilt (May 27, 2011)

Beamhead said:


> I measured mine after 2 days and it is 3.79V down from 4.18V.





gunga said:


> I'm unsure, since I don't have this light, but is it similar to a large d10? If so, perhaps like the new d11's, some samples have large parasitic drain? Circuit defect perhaps?


Could be. In any case, that rate is awfully high - no wonder your cells were dead in a week. I would contact Sunwayman or your dealer.

P.S.: I'm assuming you've done a control experiment to make sure your cell isn't damaged (i.e. self-discharge when left on the shelf outside a light for 2 days?)


----------



## Beamhead (May 27, 2011)

Different cell, the first is sitting in my Turbo X idle and reading 4.18v after 2 days.


----------



## Midnight_Flasher (Jul 20, 2011)

I bought T20C since I am always looking for a lights than can handle snow and in general winter conditions. Well, I have yet not a chance to try out how the switch works at -30 celsicus temperature, but at least I can guess that it did _not_ not solve issues caused by wet snow that falls from the trees and sometimes gets switch to stuck. Sure bad news is that the switch dont work with 2 X UltraFire 18350-cell configuration that othewise gives reasonable runtime and good voltage boost. They are just too tall: cells fit into light, but the switch works badly, modes dont change properly ans sometimes the light is impossible to switch off. Similar lights that I have are Klarus XT10, Maelstrom X7 and Fenix TK21 U2. Fenix is the lumens king, I guess, but Sunwayman feels like a tool that gets work done. I think it will be used a lot during next winter season..


----------



## John Spartan (Aug 20, 2011)

I received a T20C this past week and found a few issues:

a) The tail switch feels mushy, not crisp. As Selfbuilt said, one really has to push to fully depress the tail switch to get constant on consistently. On the other hand, this tends to reduce accidental activations. Unfortunately, one cannot adjust tail switch activation pressure to one's preference, similar to adjusting a rifle trigger's break point and let-off crispness.

b) The ring to which one can attach the lanyard tended to unscrew easily - not something I like. Wound up using non-permanent loc-tite to lock it in place.

c) The knurling on the tail cap and body could have been more aggressive and the number of length-wise smooth planes on the body reduced from 4 to none for better "grippy-ness". 

d) Really would have liked a suitable MOLLE/PALS capable holster for it rather than looking for a generic holster or getting one custom made.

Other than the above, I look forward to using it during hunting season this fall.


----------



## Roood (Mar 4, 2012)

Beamhead said:


> It's cold and raining yet again so I took apart the tail cap, it is purely mechanical so the drain issue may be in question although studying the way this switch works it may cause some constant contact perhaps on the piston end? Let me know your results on yours and I'll check this 18650 cell.


 the mechanical tail cap looks nice. would you happen to know if the internals fit a surefire or solarforce tailcap?


----------



## jrandom (Mar 7, 2012)

I picked one of these up last week, I really like 90% of it. Although I seem to be having some issues with the tail switch. 

Firstly if I shake the light relatively mild ( ie enough you feel the single 18650 move) the light will blink on. Really not that happy about that, has anyone else noticed this?

Secondly the tail switch after I engage it to turn the light on, it turns on as expected and as mentioned a few posts up it feels a little mushy. So hitting the switch again should turn it off, it doesn't, the light does go off after I give it a bit of a shake.

Any ideas would be welcome.

EDIT: Nevermind, I dissassembled the tail switch and stretched the internal clicky spring, seems to be much better now, sorry if that was a rookie question.


----------

