# Inexpensive little AA light Sipik68 & Clones.



## KiltedMP

Purchased an inexpensive little Cree AA light which was advertised at 300lumen (not likely), but is a decent little light. High, low and strobe. Very useful for when the larger 960 lumen light is not needed.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B006VPPERC/?tag=cpf0b6-20

For $5, it was a surprising nice and useful little light.


----------



## sol-leks

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Lol,

You basically just came here and told us all we should check out this great little music player called the ipod.

This is one of the most popular flashlights around. Everyone here probably owns half a dozen.

Glad you like it though.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



KiltedMP said:


> ...For $5, it was a surprising nice and useful little light... [excerpted]



I agree 100%. But, as *sol-leks* says, it is a well known item. If it says Sipik on it, and some of them do, then they are called a Sipik 68. If they are "no-name" then I call them a "Sipik clone". They all look very similar, but you will find small differences in design and construction. Some are simple On/Off and others are multi-mode.

Enjoy the light. Unless you were real unlucky and just happened to "get a bad one," it should provide you with years of useful service.

And, by the way, "$4.40 + Free Shipping" is a good price. About the cheapest I have seen.

(Update: I just happened to notice that this Seller has changed his pricing to $2.90 + $1.50 Shipping.)


----------



## KiltedMP

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Little did I know. Mine has no name on it. Good little light, though. Won't cry for loosing this one, like I would my Surefire, Fenix, Klarus or Nitecore, etc...


----------



## T45

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

I bought mine from Shiningbeam, a single mode version. I bought a 2 mode version, med & high, and just didn't care for having those 2 levels that seemed so close together in the amount of light produced. Gifted that one away. If someone came out with a ~40 to ~50 Lumen version that ran about 4 to 5 hours, THAT would be a real winner.


----------



## okeenu

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

To me, the ideal configuration for a Sipik clone would be a Hi, a true Low and No Strobe..

Are any of you Chinese mfg. listening ? Also some new colors.....


----------



## Remnant

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Hmm... OP's flashlight shows that it takes 14500 cells. 

It there a similar spec'd, priced, and available light that is has:

No zoom head
OP reflector/SMO without the optic

Seems like less moving parts and a simple design would make for a less expensive manufacturing process...?


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



sol-leks said:


> Lol,
> 
> You basically just came here and told us all we should check out this great little music player called the ipod.
> 
> This is one of the most popular flashlights around. Everyone here probably owns half a dozen.


So where's the current thread devoted to it?


----------



## Norm

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



sol-leks said:


> Lol,
> 
> You basically just came here and told us all we should check out this great little music player called the ipod.
> 
> This is one of the most popular flashlights around. Everyone here probably owns half a dozen.
> 
> Glad you like it though.


Not everyone owns this light, I have handled several versions all do nothing for me, definitely not on my to buy list.

Norm


----------



## buds224

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



KiltedMP said:


> Purchased an inexpensive little Cree AA light which was advertised at 300lumen (not likely)



Have you tried it with a 14500 battery? You'd be surprised at the lumen increase.


----------



## mikekoz

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

I have four of these (They are cheap!!). Two are single mode and 2 are multi mode. They are a good value for the dollar, but I do not understand all the "publicity" they get on the forum. I cannot comment of how long they will last. I only use the multi mode model and it is gently used inside our home. Any light should work a long time under those conditions. They physically seem to be pretty robust but will probably not do well if they get real wet. They also are nowhere near 300 lumens like all these webpages and Amazon (where I bought mine) advertise. I have even seen them advertised at 400 lumens! All four of mine are probbaly around 60 lumens on high, maybe 20 on low. I do not use lithium ions in them, so I cannot comment on that, but they were advertised as SINGLE AA lights! I am not trying to turn anybody off from buying one, I am happy with mine, but just be aware they are not as advertised! :devil:


----------



## buds224

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mikekoz said:


> They also are nowhere near 300 lumens like all these webpages and Amazon (where I bought mine) advertise. I have even seen them advertised at 400 lumens! All four of mine are probbaly around 60 lumens on high, maybe 20 on low. I do not use lithium ions in them, so I cannot comment on that, but they were advertised as SINGLE AA lights! I am not trying to turn anybody off from buying one, I am happy with mine, but just be aware they are not as advertised! :devil:



The listing shows compatibility with both AA and 14500 batteries. AA is 1.5v whereas 14500 is 3.7v. So the max lumens advertised can only be achieved with lithium ions since it will drive the light harder.


----------



## mikekoz

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



buds224 said:


> The listing shows compatibility with both AA and 14500 batteries. AA is 1.5v whereas 14500 is 3.7v. So the max lumens advertised can only be achieved with lithium ions since it will drive the light harder.



The vendors I purchased them from did not specifically state that you would only get 300 lumens from a 14500 cell. I was well aware that the light would not get bright with a 1.5v AA, but not all people will be. I just read a few of the current posts on Amazon, and they are the same way. I wish I had a 14500 to try on one, but I do not feel like buying another charger for a cell I would not use very often.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mikekoz said:


> ...They are a good value for the dollar, but I do not understand all the "publicity" they get on the forum...
> 
> ...I am not trying to turn anybody off from buying one, I am happy with mine, but just be aware they are not as advertised!...[excerpted]



I am not such a "_huge_" fan of the Sipik68. In fact, you happen to own more of them than I do. (Unless, of course, I decide later this year to purchase a "quantity" of them for Christmas "stocking-stuffers.") However, I cannot think of a better light currently available at such a low price point. I think that explains all the so-called "publicity" that they get on the forum. This is, after all, the Budget Light section.

Is there is a "better" light out there at a similar price point? If so, I would like to hear more about those, too.

As far as max lumens not being advertised: That has got to be the first thing that anyone interested in low cost lights has got to learn. Perhaps they will learn the "hard way" but hopefully they will learn by "word-of-mouth". (Or, "word-of-forum" ) And, hopefully, before they get too badly burned by the rampant false advertising that is the reality of most "direct from China" lights.

But, that still doesn't mean that the Sipik68 isn't _an excellent value. 
_
Think about it. They are currently priced at around $4 with free shipping! That's pretty amazing. And, unless you get the random "bad-one" they seem to be highly capable of providing years of useful service, even under relatively harsh conditions. (Although, I agree: probably not a good idea to drown one underwater. While reasonably water resistant, they do not appear to be at all waterproof.)

(If you were to get the random "bad-one" most vendors will make a fairly serious effort to provide you with replacement, credit or some other form of compensation. But, even if you do end up losing money, I suggest you simply throw it away, or give it to your grandson as a toy, and buy another one --from a different vendor.)

It might be worth noting here, however, that there do seem to be some "fly-by-night" Chinese vendors who actually seem to specialize in selling true "junk." (By "junk" I mean items literally taken from manufacturers' recycle bins.) Oddly enough, however, such truly unscrupulous vendors rarely sell at the very lowest prices. 

Unscrupulous vendors have learned that many people, if not most people, tend to believe that higher prices naturally translate into better quality. Of course, this is often simply not true, but many people are fooled by it all the time. (Usually, all a hgher price means is that when you do get the random "bad-one" you have risked more money than if you had purchased at the lowest possible price. Higher prices do not even necessarily translate into better service from the vendor.)

The other day, I decided I wanted a low cost camera tripod. I knew didn't need a really good one, and did not want to spend that much money, so I kept my expectations moderated. But, I did do a fairly careful search until I found a particular model that appeared likely to satisfy my needs. Interestingly enough, I found that this exact same model was being sold a prices that ranged all the way from nearly $50.00 + Shipping to $9.80 + Free Shipping. (Dozens of different vendors appeared to be selling them in the $20-30.00 range.)

Needless to say, I went for the $9.80 and never looked back. It does everything I wanted it to do. And, I cannot imagine how the other, more expensive ones, could have been in any way "better." After all, they are listed as the exact same item (by model number) and the photographs all depict the exact same tripod. I suspect that they are all literally manufactured in the same factory.

Granted, this tripod is pretty flimsy, but what do you expect for $9.80? ("Real" camera tripods typically cost around a hundred, or even hundreds, of dollars. And, I had already decided that, for my current application, I did not need a sturdier one.) 

But, the point that I am trying to make here, is that I am certain that the more expensive ones, of the same model number, would not have been any more sturdy. (I just cannot see how that could be possible based on the design and construction. I am certain they would be the same.) Therefore, if I had spent more money, I would simply have gotten the same flimsy tripod, but would have paid more money for it.

Sorry, I think I have gotten "off-topic." My point is, if you want a Sipik68, buy one and buy it as cheaply as you can. If you don't need, nor want, such a low cost flashlight... then buy something else. *To each their own.*


----------



## mikekoz

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Good points. I do not think the actual Sipik would be any better than the knockoffs. I remember seeing an article a while back that showed a "brand name" version of this light, so I think they are all knockoffs of something else anyhow! I paid a bit more than $4.00 a pop for mine, but I will not buy from an offshore vendor, so I probably paid a few more dollars ($9.00 maybe) for mine. Still pretty cheap!


----------



## El Camino

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Does anyone know offhand if there is a forward click version of this light?


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mikekoz said:


> ...I do not think the actual Sipik would be any better than the knockoffs...[excerpted]




I agree. I should have written "Sipik68, or its many clones." I believe that the "clones" are generally just as good, but cheaper. If nothing else, it costs them money to silk-screen the "Sipik" name on there.


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Everyone qualifies this light as being pretty good "for the money". Granted, I'm not an expert, but if price were no object, what single AA/14500 light with a zoom, this size (or smaller would be OK) is better, and in what way is it "better"?


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> Everyone qualifies this light as being pretty good "for the money". Granted, I'm not an expert, but if price were no object, what single AA/14500 light with a zoom, this size (or smaller would be OK) is better, and in what way is it "better"?



I am not sure that I know of any, off hand, that come with a zoom. But, zoom is not an important feature for me. (I never use it on my Sipiks. I just turn them on and use them to peek into dark nooks and crannies in the house. Often, I use the one I that I keep in the kitchen to peek inside my bread baking machine to see how brown the bread is.)

As far as a really nice AA/14500 light, the *Sunwayman V11R* is my favorite. (Others will certainly have their own opinions.)

It is a CR123 flashlight, but with the optional extender, it turns into an excellent little AA/14500 light. (And, of course, it is even smaller when running on a CR123)

In my opinion, fit and finish is nearly perfect, and there is something about the fully variable output control that really "punches my ticket." To me, it is a truly very "sweet" little flashlight. But, such things are purely a matter of personal taste. And, you will probably spend nearly $100.00 on a V11R with extender. 

Furthermore, it will still not be any more useful for peeking into your bread machine than a $4.00 Sipik clone!


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Zoom is certainly important to me. The added throw is useful in some situations. I also like that by unscrewing the front lens off, you get a tremendously wide, super flood light. You are effectively using the raw LED without any optics or parabolic reflector. This is the only light I own that instantly allows for this without major disassembly or modification. [I'm *not *including this undocumented, bonus feature in my challenge to find me a "better" version of this kind of light, price no object, but the normal zoom feature is not negotiable. Any "better" contestants must have at least _some_ zoom.


----------



## Norm

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

This has to be a bargain alternative for the 18650 crowd. Find it on ebay.

12W 1800Lm CREE XM-L T6 LED Zoom Zoomable Flashlight Torch Light Lamp 18650/AAA *8 bucks* and *1800 lumens*.

Norm


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



Norm said:


> This has to be a bargain alternative for the 18650 crowd. Find it on ebay.
> 
> 12W 1800Lm CREE XM-L T6 LED Zoom Zoomable Flashlight Torch Light Lamp 18650/AAA *8 bucks* and *1800 lumens*.
> 
> Norm



Well, there you have it *mzil*. Looks like an excellent flashlight. I may get one myself.

Best price I could find today on eBay was $10.99 + 0.99 shipping, which is three times the cost of a Sipik clone, but who's counting?! Looks like an excellent value to me.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> ...I also like that by unscrewing the front lens off, you get a tremendously wide, super flood light. You are effectively using the raw LED without any optics or parabolic reflector... [excerpted]



I've actually used this "undocumented, bonus feature" myself, too. Please take a look at the following photos of some "Ping Pong Ball Diffusers" that I made:








The smaller light is a Tank007 E09, and the "Ping Pong Ball Diffuser" doesn't work all that well on it, because its lens in combination with a rather "throwy" emitter concentrates too much light on a small area at the very top of the ping pong ball.

But, the Sipik, with its front lens removed and replaced with a ping pong ball, works _wonderfully_ as a small table lamp!


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> Everyone qualifies this light as being pretty good "for the money". Granted, I'm not an expert, but if price were no object, *what single AA/14500 light with a zoom, this size* (or smaller would be OK) *is better*, and in what way is it "better"*?*


----------



## fields_mj

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

From what I understand, the zoomable lens is what really kills you on such a search. Most reputable mfg don't make one that's zoomable because it cuts down on the quality of the beam produced. They are all trying to make a top quality product that people are willing to pay good money for. My personal favorite is my Quark. I run it on a 14500 because it's cheaper than feeding it AA cells. I don't care that it doesn't have a zoom feature because it doesn't need it. Even with a AA cell, on max it puts out considerably more light than a Sipik and it does so with a very useable beam pattern. On top of that, it's smaller than the Sipik and the lack of a zoom feature contributes to the size difference. I use my Quark several times a day, every day, and to me it's worth the extra $$. Having said that, I only have 2 Quarks, and I have about 10 of the Sipiks. One quark stays in the drawer as a back up, and one stays in my pocket. I have the sipiks stuck everywhere except my pocket. They're just a tad too big for me to carry in my pocket comfortably. All in all, I don't think you'll ever see anyone try to develop a light that competes with the Sipik. Their's just no profit in it.


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

I love the zoom! I think it's great and key to why I like the light so much. It certainly could be better and that's why a "better version" intrigues me. [I doubt this light is very water resistant, for example]. I own several different 4Sevens mini lights, (although they are various CR123 and AAA lights, none are single AA). I love the zoom on my Sipik clone and find that the beam pattern, including the square (not round) spot, even when tightly focused such that the visible line structure of the actual LED surface is evident (at least against a white wall) to be perfectly useable in real world use, when I need as much throw as I can get from a tiny light.


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Oh, and I forgot to add, I must not be alone in my appreciation of this configuration of light. Amazon currently ranks this light as the #1 best selling *product* in their "Tools and Home Improvement" category. No, not just the best selling _flashlight (of any size/shape/configuration)_, mind you, but rather the best selling _item_ in this _entire _category! That's pretty impressive and for only $3.90 USD with free shipping, to boot. [At the time of this posting, the lowest price I have seen.]


----------



## fields_mj

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

I agree that on this light, the zoom is rather handy. However, if it were a true 200~300 LUM light, I probably wouldn't need the zoom. My favorite thing about the light is that when the lens is pulled all the way back, you get a VERY wide flood beam that's handy for working on things up close. 

Certainly the light has some flaws, but IMHO it far exceeds anything that costs twice the price. Best price I found was around $3.40 delivered earlier this past spring. Actually, I wish they made some that only had the "low" setting. That would be ideal to give to the kids while camping without having to worry too much about them blinding each other.


----------



## Mike_TX

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Add me to the list of those who don't understand the appeal of this mediocre light - even for 4 bucks. Yes, I broke down and got one awhile back, and it is really ... mediocre. You get the image of the die at full zoom and circles and circles of halos at full wide. In between there's too sharp a cutoff on the beam (i.e., no spill to smooth out the pattern), and just so-so illumination. 300 lumens? Bwahahahaha!


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Your opinion is well noted. And, I know that many agree with you. Believe it or not, despite all my recent posts on this thread and other threads, I really do not have a truly strong opinion about it, one way or the other.

But, I guess I am a bit of a "champion of the underdog" and I think people should be open minded about such things. At the moment, I happen to have two such lights. (Until I give one away to someone, for some reason.) 

One of them tends to stay in the kitchen and get used almost exclusively for peaking into the oven on occasion. I never use the zoom. Halos are not important. All I need is something that can help me see how brown the bread is. I cannot justify a $50.00 (or more) flashlight for such an application. Not even a $20.00 flashlight. This $4.00 one works just fine for what I need it to do.

Others that I know of, have used this same type flashlight on a daily basis (at construction sites, etc.) and it is my understanding that these lights are usually quite robust. They seem to be able to take a fair amount of abuse. And, if you happen to drop one into a hole (where you can't get it out again) you haven't lost much.

I say again. *To each their own.* These lights are certainly not something you bring out to "show off" to your friends. They are lights that work (reasonably well) and that you can hand to a complete stranger and say "_Keep it, you should always have some kind of flashlight with you._"


----------



## mccririck

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

I've been using one at work for 2 1/2 years and completely disagree with you. These are great budget lights. 

"you get an image of the die at full zoom" - boo hoo so what? Pull it back from full zoom a smidge and you dont.

Nobody is saying it has the most perfect beam but to say it has too sharp a cut-off is a bit strange - you can use the full beam area to look for things under a uniform brightness - that is a big plus point over a light with a hot spot and spill, especially indoors where the hot spot is invariably too bright to be comfortable and creates a distraction when looking in the spill area.


----------



## buds224

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



Rosoku Chikara said:


> They are lights that work (reasonably well) that you can hand to someone and say "Keep it, you should always have some kind of flashlight with you."



:thumbsup: I'm always looking for lights that can be loaned / given to help others.


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mccririck said:


> Nobody is saying it has the most perfect beam but to say it has too sharp a cut-off is a bit strange - you can use the full beam area to look for things under a uniform brightness - that is a big plus point over a light with a hot spot and spill, especially indoors where the hot spot is invariably too bright to be comfortable and creates a distraction when looking in the spill area.


 I agree and will take it one step further. If I was inventing the concept of a "compact, handheld, electronic illumination device akin to a burning torch to provide illumination in dark environments", _from scratch_, it would have a completely uniform output, no hot spot _at all_, no light fall-off towards the edges, and would have user designable flood/zoom. As far as I'm concerned the traditional output of our more common parabolic reflector flashlights, with a gradual light fall-off into the spill area, is a _compromise_ we are forced to work with, due to the known technology at the time of their development.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> ...it would have a completely uniform output, no hot spot _at all_, no light fall-off towards the edges, and would have user designable flood/zoom... [excerpted]



Go for it! I suspect such a thing might be conceivably possible if you used something similar to the micro mirror technology employed in DPL projectors in conjunction with modern LED emitters. No telling what such a device might cost, but I would like to see one in action, some day.


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

My point was this Sipik clone light, thanks to its zoom mechanism, comes closer to achieving this ideal than any traditional reflector based flashlight I own. Could it be better still? Sure, but as far as I know, there_ is_ no superior *single AA/14500, zoom *flashlight, at any price. That's what makes this flashlight a stand out. It has no direct competition [single AA/14500, zoom], _regardless_ of price.


----------



## fields_mj

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Agreed. To me these lights are disposable. Not that I throw them away if the battery dies, but if one gets lost or destroyed, I don't care. I purchased my first 4 after loosing a Quark out in the field one night during deer season. I had killed a deer, and had a really good idea where it was laying. Due to the lay of the land, and some known wet spots in the ground, I wanted to walk over to it so that I could plan where I was going to drive the truck. Used my Quark to light the way there. Planed my trip. Truck was close enough that I didn't need the light to get back to the truck so I stuck it back in the pocket of my jeans, under my bibs, or so I thought. Last time I ever saw that light making that one of the more expensive deer I've killed in my life. I ALWAYS have my quark with me, but now in situations like that, it stays in my pocket as backup and I use the cheap light that I don't mind destorying or loosing or giving away. I took one to work with me just to have an extra. After having a maintenace guy try to light up a robot cabinet with his AA mag light while I was moving the taps around on the transformer, I gave it to him. A week later his manager had purchased one for everyone in maintenance. Most of them were carrying some version of the old 2 cell AA mag light in their tool pouch, and this little thing BLOWS those away performance wise, and at aprox 1/4 the cost. 

So yeah, in terms of beam quality, total light output, and over all build quality they kind of suck.... in comparison to a fenix, 47s, or any other quality light that costs over $20. Yes, there are even a few small lights that run in the $12~$15 range that some could say are "better" because they are smaller, or have a smoother beam pattern, or run a little longer, or look a little nicer. However, those little lights are not as flexable as the Sipik, and they still cost at least 300% more, so it all comes down to how you clasify "better". At the end of the day, I pretty much always reach for my Quark unless there's a reason not to. But if the wife or kids need a light while we are camping, or even around the house, they get a Sipik clone because more than once that light never made it back to it's home on the shelf/drawer. They're like a pair of jersey gloves. They don't keep your hands real warm, they're not very durable, and they don't hold up to water at all, but everyone I know has several pair because in most applications they are sufficient and they are cheap enough to buy by the dozen.


----------



## JacobJones

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Have to admit that this light has got me intrigued, gonna order an ultrafire one to see what all the fuss is about.


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

^If you have no use for a single AA/14500 light with a variable zoom, then I would advise against buying one, especially if you prefer a typical light output pattern found in almost all other lights with a reflector, casting a beam pattern with a markedly brighter center spot area which then dims gradually as you move out to the spill. [I don't fit that description which is why this light is so good for me. I just wish there was a more refined version of this single AA/14500 zooming flashlight, made by a higher end company, but there aren't any.]


----------



## mccririck

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> I just wish there was a more refined version of this single AA/14500 zooming flashlight, made by a higher end company, but there aren't any.]



I agree, it doesnt even have to be high end, just a better quality lens so the beam is clean, and 2 modes - high or low - very useful when using a 14500.


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

My particular version, but I guess they vary, has 3 modes: High, medium, and strobe. I wouldn't call the medium mode "low", it is way too bright for preserving night vision, for example, and the strobe isn't "hidden" [having to cycle through all the modes, TWICE, until you finally reach it], which I prefer and have on my 4sevens flashlights.


----------



## mccririck

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> My particular version, but I guess they vary, has 3 modes: High, medium, and strobe. I wouldn't call the medium mode "low", it is way too bright for preserving night vision, for example, and the strobe isn't "hidden" [having to cycle through all the modes, TWICE, until you finally reach it], which I prefer and have on my 4sevens flashlights.



I have the 3-mode as well. Using a 14500 the medium mode is like high mode with an AA. And yeah I dont like the strobe, I'd prefer if it wasnt there at all. High medium low would be much better.


----------



## mikekoz

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> My point was this Sipik clone light, thanks to its zoom mechanism, comes closer to achieving this ideal than any traditional reflector based flashlight I own. Could it be better still? Sure, but as far as I know, there_ is_ no superior *single AA/14500, zoom *flashlight, at any price. That's what makes this flashlight a stand out. It has no direct competition [single AA/14500, zoom], _regardless_ of price.



At some point I am going to pick up a Coast HP5TAC or HP8405. Both are single AA focusing lights. I own a few of their lights, and nobody makes a focusing mechanism that comes close to the quality of Coast. In flood mode, they are as you say, have a uniform output, but when you push the head out of flood mode, the beam is almost like a standard flashlight. They are not $4.00 each , but should be better quality. A lot of folks on this forum do not like Coast lights, but their lower end models are nice.


----------



## mikekoz

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> ^If you have no use for a single AA/14500 light with a variable zoom, then I would advise against buying one, especially if you prefer a typical light output pattern found in almost all other lights with a reflector, casting a beam pattern with a markedly brighter center spot area which then dims gradually as you move out to the spill. [I don't fit that description which is why this light is so good for me. I just wish there was a more refined version of this single AA/14500 zooming flashlight, made by a higher end company, but there aren't any.]



I still remember seeing a photo of a light that looked like the Sipik, but was made by one of the big flashlight companies. This was about 6 months ago or so, but I cannot remember where I saw the article. I am pretty sure the Sipik is a knockoff of a more expensive light. I am going to research this a little more this evening when I get off work.


----------



## Yorgi

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mikekoz said:


> I still remember seeing a photo of a light that looked like the Sipik, but was made by one of the big flashlight companies. This was about 6 months ago or so, but I cannot remember where I saw the article. I am pretty sure the Sipik is a knockoff of a more expensive light. I am going to research this a little more this evening when I get off work.


The Sipik SK68 is a knockoff of the Nitecore Extreme.


----------



## mccririck

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Has anyone tried the LED Lenser P5? It seems to be 1AA, it's a bit pricey for me at full price though I'm waiting for reductions...


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

The Nitecore Extreme may have the body shape the Sipik clones are indeed copying, however it is internally a* very* different light than the one this thread is devoted to. The Nitecore differs in that it uses a CR123 (not a AA/14500 battery) and it has a more traditional orange peel reflector, hence it has the typical hot spot center (dimming into the spill) light output (instead of a uniform illumination in wide mode), in fact it has no user selectable zoom pattern at all. It is fixed. http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...eme-Review-RUNTIMES-BEAMSHOTS-COMPARISONS-etc


----------



## mesa232323

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mccririck said:


> Has anyone tried the LED Lenser P5? It seems to be 1AA, it's a bit pricey for me at full price though I'm waiting for reductions...



I had the early version of the p5r which was the rechargeable version around 100 lumen. As a non flashaholic, it was the best light I EDC at the time. It surely had a unique beam pattern. If I didn't have so many lights, I'd have one again. That's my experience with a similar light.


----------



## david57strat

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



Yorgi said:


> The Sipik SK68 is a knockoff of the Nitecore Extreme.



What ever became of the Nitecore Extreme? I have a SK-68, and couldn't be more pleased with it, for the price (I paid eight bucks for it). Granted, it's not a main go-to light for me, but I've bought far less lights for far more money, and the use of the 14500 battery raises the output of the light, substantially. The only issue is with heat, but for short bursts, not bad.


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mikekoz said:


> At some point I am going to pick up a Coast HP5TAC or HP8405. Both are single AA focusing lights. ...They are not $4.00 each , but should be better quality.


 I agree they aren't $4 each, but how do you know they are better quality? The_ price_? I can't find detailed reviews on either of them, with for example beam shots or comparisons to the Sipik SK68 clones, _anywhere_, not just here in our forum. A couple of quick blurbs on Amazon and that seems to be about it.


----------



## jorn

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

The extreme is a old old light. Looks identical to the sipik in looks and size. The biggest difference is the clicky, and one is a zoom and the other is a reflector light. The extreme got a e series tube so you can lego it with surefire e series heads.


----------



## mccririck

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> I agree they aren't $4 each, but how do you know they are better quality? The_ price_? I can't find detailed reviews on either of them, with for example beam shots or comparisons to the Sipik SK68 clones, _anywhere_, not just here in our forum. A couple of quick blurbs on Amazon and that seems to be about it.



Well the HP8405 is an LED Lenser P5, and LED Lenser make good quality lights with nice beams.


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

The LED Lenser P5 wont take a 14500 battery so I doubt any potential refinement in its beam quality would override that brightness advantage for my needs, plus it is larger, and if anything I wish the Sipik SK68 clone was smaller, not larger.


----------



## mccririck

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> The LED Lenser P5 wont take a 14500 battery so I doubt any potential refinement in its beam quality would override that brightness advantage for my needs, plus it is larger, and if anything I wish the Sipik SK68 clone was smaller, not larger.



Good point about it not taking 14500, but the P5 is still a nice light. If it were cheaper I would snap one up. I wish Fasttech had them, they have P7 and T7 and P3 (1AAA)


----------



## mikekoz

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> I agree they aren't $4 each, but how do you know they are better quality? The_ price_? I can't find detailed reviews on either of them, with for example beam shots or comparisons to the Sipik SK68 clones, _anywhere_, not just here in our forum. A couple of quick blurbs on Amazon and that seems to be about it.



The price would be one reason, but not that by itself. I own several Coast lights and all of them are better quality than the "Sipik." First of all, these lights are good for what you are paying for them, no doubt! But how long have they been around? A lot of people buy stuff and they go by how well the item works initially when they review them. Will it work a year or two from now? Most of these lights are not even made by real companies!! They are knockoffs of knockoffs! How much quality control do you think goes into a light that retails for 4 dollars?? Would you really take one of these and use it as your only light in an emergency situation? You probably will not hear too much bad things about these lights because at $4.00 a pop, they are disposable, and are not worth fussing about. That is also why there are so many reviews here and on places like Amazon. Lots of folks (me included!) are willing to pay that much for a light, and if they work halfway decent like these, buy many more. I guess my whole point is they are a good deal for what they cost, but you cannot compare them to your major brands of lights like Coast, Fenix, Maglite, etc.


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

"It's cheap so it's gonna break" is an easy card to play but I see no actual evidence to support it. The body, clip, and switch on mine I would describe as "sturdy". The reason this light is so cheap is because it is mass produced by the millions, not because they use thin aluminum, flimsy switches, or bend-if-you-look-at-them-funny clips. That's my take.


> The price would be one reason, but not that by itself.


 I never did catch what your _secondary_ reason was.:thinking:


----------



## mikekoz

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> "It's cheap so it's gonna break" is an easy card to play but I see no actual evidence to support it.



True! But how often do you think you will purchase a light for $4.00 that will last years compared to one that is say, $40.00? If you have not used one of the more recent Coast lights that focus, you should look into them. One of them may be the more high end and refined version of a light like the Sipik that you mentioned in a previous post. You can find them on Amazon and some brick and mortar stores, so they are easily returnable if you do not like them! ;p).


----------



## RIX TUX

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

I got one for 400 pennies - love it.
Its great to loan or use if there is a risk of damage ( protecting my zl sc52 )
I've got another one ordered.


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

The cosmetic finish probably wont last, granted, but I strongly suspect this light will last well over a year, in my use. *None* of us have a crystal balls though, but please, don't anyone try to insult our intelligence with a Jedi mind trick of "Well being an expert in the field, I can tell you that their durability blah-blah-blah".


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

[I have another one order too.] The Coast/LED Lenser seems a poor choice for me: too big in length [ a want_ smaller_, not bigger light, (heck, isn't that the whole _point_ of using a _single_ battery flashlight, to make it as small as possible?)], they wont take 14500 batteries like the Sipik clonees, and there's no roll guard, so if a gust of wind rolls it off the road while I'm changing a tire, and it tumbles down a cliff, I'm out $30 -$40, not $4.  A superior beam would indeed intrigue me, true, but not at the expense of losing all these other attributes. The beam of my light isn't perfect but it is livable.


----------



## RIX TUX

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> The cosmetic finish probably wont last, granted, but I strongly suspect this light will last well over a year, in my use. *None* of us have a crystal balls though, but please, don't anyone try to insult our intelligence with a Jedi mind trick of "Well being an expert in the field, I can tell you that their durability blah-blah-blah".


MZ ILL.........I dont think people buy this light to be a shelf queen, dont insult our 4 dollars


----------



## mikekoz

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> The cosmetic finish probably wont last, granted, but I strongly suspect this light will last well over a year, in my use. *None* of us have a crystal balls though, but please, don't anyone try to insult our intelligence with a Jedi mind trick of "Well being an expert in the field, I can tell you that their durability blah-blah-blah".



Never said I had a crystal ball and never said I was an expert, and I am not trying to insult anybody's intelligence. I am also not going to get into a stupid argument over a $#@[email protected]#$% flashlight! I am just giving my opinion of the light like others here, so please try to respect that.


----------



## mikekoz

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> [I have another one order too.] The Coast/LED Lenser seems a poor choice for me: too big in length [ a want_ smaller_, not bigger light, (heck, isn't that the whole _point_ of using a _single_ battery flashlight, to make it as small as possible?)], they wont take 14500 batteries like the Sipik clonees, and there's no roll guard, so if a gust of wind rolls it off the road while I'm changing a tire, and it tumbles down a cliff, I'm out $30 -$40, not $4.  A superior beam would indeed intrigue me, true, but not at the expense of losing all these other attributes. The beam of my light isn't perfect but it is livable.


 The Sipik is one of the largest single AA lights I have ever owned! The only one I can think of off the top of my head that is larger was made by Icon (Rogue 1) a while back. I do not use 14500's so cannot comment there. I also like the Sipik's beam, but mostly in flood mode which I how I use it 90% of the time.


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mikekoz said:


> The Sipik is one of the largest single AA lights I have ever owned!


It is the smallest single AA light you own, _with a zoom._


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mikekoz said:


> ...A lot of people buy stuff and they go by how well the item works initially when they review them. Will it work a year or two from now? Most of these lights are not even made by real companies!! They are knockoffs of knockoffs! How much quality control do you think goes into a light that retails for 4 dollars?? Would you really take one of these and use it as your only light in an emergency situation?...[excerpted]



_Would you really take one of these and use it as your only light in an emergency situation?_

The answer to this last question is (at least for me) a clear and unequivocal "*No*."

However, I do not think anyone is seriously suggesting anything even close to that. For example, if I am headed "into the wild," I always take nothing but the very best (or at least the very best that I can afford), and even then, (despite all claims of high quality) I always make sure I have backups for my backups.

_Will it work a year or two from now?_

The answer to this first question is a bit more tricky. The solution to this statistical "problem" depends upon many unforeseeable factors and difficult probabilities. But, I would suggest that, as a practical matter, since we clearly must factor "cost vs. performance" into the equation, we should we try thinking of the "problem" in this way:

Person "A" buys 1 x $40 flashlight = 1 flashlight
Person "B" buys 10 x $4 flashlights = 10 flashlights

Now, after several years... who is more likely to still have a functioning flashlight?

I would be willing to place my money on Person "B" with the 10 flashlights: 2 may die a sudden death, 2 may get stolen, 2 may get lost, 2 may die a slow death, etc. etc. 

But, at the end of the day, I suspect Person "B" is more likely to still have at least one functioning flashlight for their $40 investment, since they bought 10 rather than just 1.

Believe it or not (and I just happen to personally know a first rate Rolls-Royce mechanic), even brand new Rolls-Royce automobiles (under factory warranty) _do_ still break down every now and then (and occasionally in such a manner as to be highly embarrassing for the Rolls-Royce corporation)... and they also certainly _do_ get stolen on occasion (especially, when parked in the wrong location for even a few minutes). 

So, paying top dollar is no certain guarantee that you will truly _always _have the use that product when you truly need it. (Granted, however, that better quality products from respectable manufacturers, _do_ usually have a demonstrable track record of lower failure rates. And, any manufacturer who is willing of offer a true "lifetime" guarantee, clearly has high confidence in their product.)

Yet, this little inexpensive light is also well proven (by many who have used them for years) to be of "reasonably" good quality. They are certainly not an absolute "piece of junk," like many other extremely cheap flashlights. (And, make no mistake, there is a huge difference between an absolute "piece of junk" and a flashlight of "reasonably" good quality.)

As I wrote in a post on a different thread:

1) *Cheap Flashlight* - Unreliable, so it is essentially junk, however low the price.

2) *Budget Flashlight* - Reliable enough to be useful, so it can easily "save you" in times of real need; but, still at a very low cost.

("Times of real need" meaning a very dark situation where you would be happy to have even a candle and a pack of matches.) 

However, according to this definition, a Budget Flashlight should truly be within almost everyone's "budget." Meaning that it must be priced at such a low price that almost anyone can easily afford one, if they ever wanted or needed one. 

(Once again, here is where we are likely to always have trouble agreeing on just what that price point should be. But, for the sake of discussion, I will choose "Less than $20" as a guideline.)

3) *Value Flashlight* - An excellent "deal" (cost/performance ratio) at any price. 

Given this definition, a solid gold flashlight priced at $5,000 (or whatever fantastic number you prefer) could logically be considered a "Value Flashlight," so long as it compared favorably (in cost/performance) with other solid gold flashlights.


----------



## Etsu

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



Rosoku Chikara said:


> 2) *Budget Flashlight* - Reliable enough to be useful, so it can easily "save you" in times of real need; but, still at a very low cost.



If the OP is looking at inexpensive budget lights, Costco usually has reasonable AA or AAA flashlights in packs of 2 or 3. Usually under $10 per light. They're always changing the models, but ones I've bought in the past are still working, despite some abuse.

I don't think I'd want to rely on them in a life-or-death situation, but I'd probably rather have two of them in an emergency, rather than a single good light. As pointed out, a single good light can be lost, stolen, broken, borrowed-not-returned, etc. Tougher to lose 2 lights than 1.

And cheap lights aren't that bad for occasional use. They do tend to wear out, but they seldom completely fail without warning. Usually, they start to flicker well before you have to throw them out. A few knocks and the beam comes back on. They make good "horror film" flashlights.


----------



## mikekoz

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> It is the smallest single AA light you own, _with a zoom._



Gotcha! :thumbsup:


----------



## mikekoz

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

All good points! Trust me, I am not a flashlight "snob!"  I am somebody who, as a general rule, will not spend more than $150.00 for a light. I have only broken that "rule" of mine once when I bought a Fenix TK70. One of my favorite lights right now was only $12.50 from Costco, a 3C Feit Electric focusing light. It has a feel and finish if a much more expensive light. The Rolls Royce analogy is a good one. Spending more does not always get you a better product. The "get what you pay for" saying has exceptions. There is also the law of diminishing returns when it comes to a lot of things. At some point you are not paying for more quality, just more things you do not need! You should not have to spend a lot of money to get a good light since most I think are pretty simple devices. To me, I have found that the really good quality high end lights I own cost me about $50.00 to $100.00 a piece. A budget light for me would be below $30.00 or so, but I know everybody has a different definition of what budget means.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Despite my many words on the subject, I really believe that this is all a matter of personal opinion. *To each their own*. Some people like this little $4 flashlight, others don't. To me, that's pretty much the extent of it. Although, I _do_ happen to like it (for what its worth).


----------



## Norm

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

He's saying he now understand the quote above his "Gotcha" = got you. I understand what you meant.

Now you cam say Gotcha Norm 

Norm


----------



## mikekoz

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



Rosoku Chikara said:


> Frankly, mikekoz, I don't "get" your "Gotcha!"



LOL...In other words, I was talking about the size of other AA lights I own, but mzil made a point that he meant AA lights with a zoom. He is saying the Sipik is the smallest single AA with a zoom. I should have realized that was what he was referring to a few posts up since this thread is about a focusing light anyway. I was just acknowledging my mistake. *In short, what Norm just said!"  *


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



Norm said:


> He's saying he now understand the quote above his "Gotcha" = got you. I understand what you meant.
> 
> Now you cam say Gotcha Norm
> 
> Norm



Sorry, I figured this out for myself and edited my post so quickly, I didn't realize that anyone had had a chance to read it.

Anyway, I took it the wrong way, until I figured it out. Once again, I do apologize.

(In my defense, I would suggest that "Got it" is the unambiguous phrase of similar meaning.)

Anyway, I "gotcha" *Norm*, and sorry *mikeoz*!


----------



## mikekoz

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



Rosoku Chikara said:


> Sorry, I figured this out for myself and edited my post so quickly, I didn't realize that anyone had had a chance to read it.
> 
> Anyway, I took it the wrong way, until I figured it out. Once again, I do apologize.
> 
> (In my defense, I would suggest that "Got it" is the unambiguous phrase of similar meaning.)
> 
> Anyway, I "gotcha" *Norm*, and sorry *mikeoz*!



No problem Rosoku! I never took it as offensive anyway.


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

There was a thread here in the forum [I think] that talks about, and shows, how various people have baked this flashlight in the oven, to change the color to orange/gold, but I now can't find it because not only do we not have a good, agreed upon, working name for this light ["Sipik SK68 clone" ?], but I also forget what they _call_ this process so I don't know what search terms to use. Anyone?


----------



## buds224

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> There was a thread here in the forum [I think] that talks about, and shows, how various people have baked this flashlight in the oven, to change the color to orange/gold, but I now can't find it because not only do we not have a good, agreed upon, working name for this light ["Sipik SK68 clone" ?], but I also forget what they _call_ this process so I don't know what search terms to use. Anyone?



Could it be this?

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...ize-coloring&p=4134718&viewfull=1#post4134718


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Oh yes, thanks! I guess there is more talk about it in the EDC forum and I was confused about where I had read about it.  I think it looks cool and whereas I'd be afraid I'd do something wrong and botch it on a $40 light, the good thing about this one is it would only be a $4 mistake and I can live with that.


----------



## Norm

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> There was a thread here in the forum [I think] that talks about, and shows, how various people have baked this flashlight in the oven, to change the color to orange/gold,


There are plenty of coloured sipiks available.

Norm


----------



## okeenu

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Most people( non Flashaholics) are not aware of of what a small "Cree Bulb" flashlight can do, because they won't buy an expensive light..

I Do show it off to my friends, then give it to them.. they usually think its worth a lot more than it cost...

There are a few other designs, which I have sampled ,similar to the Sipik design. none are close to the Sk68..for the price in this size...

The sipik is not perfect,and I for one Love that it projects the "Cree image " at zoom...But , Ive found it helps you learn what you really want and need, in a Quality light when you are ready..


----------



## Rob Babcock

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*



mzil said:


> It is the smallest single AA light you own, _with a zoom._




Hahaha! I must be the only dope in the world that didn't notice that it was supposed to have a zoom! Initially I thought it was broken until I realized it changed focus. The light is just flat-out weird. The beam on mine is almost indigo and the outline of the die is clear as a photo. I didn't really detect much more output with a 14500, either. For $4 I wasn't gonna complain but I don't have many uses for it, either. The one purpose it works well for is to keep by my bed. The throw is so wide it illuminates half the room and the batteries are pretty cheap, so I leave it on my night stand. I turn it on LOW, set it down and go turn off my bedroom light- the diffuse light is perfect to get back to bad, check my sidearm, etc.


----------



## J-Dub74

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

I have two of these little lights. A search for "Cree 300lm" will turn up tons of them from different Chinese suppliers. I ordered each from a different supplier. These were my first step into the light obsession and what led me to this forum. I agree with many others that these (so far) are an amazing value. One of mine has the Ultrafire logo on one side and Cree on the opposite side. The other is just plain black. The "Ultrafire" has a 3 mode switch that works most of the time until it warms up at which point it will no longer switch modes. The default is the bright setting so I'm not too concerned. The other just has an on off switch. I can confirm that at least in mine the light output is almost double with a fully charged 14500. I read some reviews from people who had testing equipment. If I remember correctly they reported the actual output was around 90 lumens on AA and up to 180 lumens on a 14500. Based on the little I know I'd guess that's fairly accurate. Being my first Cree lights I was blown away the first time I took these out on a dark night. I live in the country so it gets really dark at night. The flood light up my yard nicely and zoomed in I was lighting up 100 foot tall tree tops 300 feet away. The run time on high with a 14500 on high was only about 15-20 minutes before it started dimming and they got pretty warm but I was using junk fake Ultrafires. I didn't know any better at the time. I returned those batteries and charger. I'm running on AA's until I have better rechargeable batteries and a good charger. For $4 I don't see how you can go wrong with these lights as long as you don't use cheap dangerous 14500's.


----------



## mhanlen

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

I've had this light for well over a year now, and it's operated without a hitch. It was the first pocketable high powered flashlight I owned, and it's probably the reason I'm posting here. I alternate between EDCing this and the other light in the picture. I like the zooming part, because it operates sort of like a laser pointer light beam. I like that it's a thrower (sort of). It's the only zooming light I like- and it's mostly due to it's size. 

I've found that sometimes multi-modes over complicate things, and especially if it has next mode memory. I would not prefer to own this light than any other than single mode. It scorches (for it's size) on 14500s and I keep a 4 pack of trustfire flames in a backpack. About the only thing I dislike about this light is the runtimes, and there's nothing I can do about that. Also it has a much more even output on protected flames- brightness until the end and it just shuts off. If you just ran this on alkalines, I could see how you'd be indifferent about it, because they get dim fast. Once I finally took the plunge to Li-ions it made me appreciate the light a whole lot more- and I began to EDC it. I also get how people hate the die outline, but if I throw it out of focus a bit, problem solved.

Until I can justify spending $60 on a ZL SC52 then this will be my most carried light. That and it seems the ZLs don't throw very well and the flexibility and throw is sorta what I dig about this.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

*Re :Inexpensive little AA light Sipik68 & Clone.*

I have noticed that some posters have asked just where the "Official Sipik68 & Clone" thread is to be found. Perhaps we should create one?

In the meantime, I have found this "Inexpensive AA Flashlight" thread to be very interesting and even entertaining, but it does have the draw-back of not mentioning the Sipik68 anywhere in its title. Because of this, people who are searching for information about the Sipik68 are less likely to find it on this thread, or on this site.

After reviewing the many comments posted on this thread, it is quite clear to me that some people like this flashlight, while other people don't. _That seems normal. _But, I was also highly impressed by the number of recent posters who have posted here who say that this little "cheap" flashlight was their first introduction into modern LED flashlights. (*So, the Sipik68 appears to have been their "entry level drug" into Flashalcoholism!*)

I have posted that, in my opinion, this is not a flashlight to "show-off" to your friends, but someone else has posted that they actually enjoy "showing it off" their friends, because after those friends are duly impressed by how bright such a little flashlight is, this poster is then able to give that Sipik68 away to that friend, and make that friend very happy with their new, extremely bright, little flashlight. (Something that is much easier to do with a $4 flashlight than with a $40 flashlight. _Depending on your "budget," of course_.)

Several have also posted about how much they dislike the fact that the Spiki68 projects a clear image of its Cree LED emitter die, but others have replied that this phenomenon is easily resolved by changing focus, and some have even stated that this is a potentially attractive feature. (I guess, that if you are used to incandescent flashlights, then the very concept of a LED die can be both "interesting," and "hi-tech." So, projecting the image of the LED die is not necessarily "bad" in such cases.)

Optical performance can vary (greatly?) from each individual Sipik68 to another, but from my experience these flashlights do all tend to cast a range of undesirable "halo" patterns. For some people, this is a "deal killer," and for others it is not. Likewise, the LED tint can vary from each individual Sipik68 to another, but this is a kind of "luck-of-the-draw" sort of thing. If you end up with a tint that you truly cannot live with, I suggest you give it away, and buy another.

So, while I think that there is still much disagreement about this little flashlight, I think many would agree that it warrants its own "real" thread where people can post real life reviews, and other aspects about its design and performance. (What I am suggesting is that we create a new thread where the topic has more to do with "learning about" and "getting the most from" your Sipik68, rather than whether or not you like this light or not.)

I don't mind starting such a thread myself, but I thought I might see if anyone else is interested. I would also like to see some suggestions as to what exactly to call such a thread. And, if anyone else is willing to take it upon themselves to start such a thread, I will certainly be happy to post my thoughts on the subject onto that thread.


----------



## Norm

Rosoku Chikara said:


> I have noticed that some posters have asked just where the "Official Sipik68 & Clone" thread is to be found. Perhaps we should create one?
> 
> In the meantime, I have found this "Inexpensive AA Flashlight" thread to be very interesting and even entertaining, but it does have the draw-back of not mentioning the Sipik68 anywhere in its title. So, others who are searching for information about the Sipik68 are less likely to find it.


Surely this thread is too far along to start a new thread, "Sipik68 & Clones" added to the thread title. 

Threads can be searched not just thread tiles.

I've always wondered what make a thread *"Official"*

Norm


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

Norm said:


> Surely this thread is too far along to start a new thread, Sipik68 & Clone added to the thread title.
> 
> Threads can be searched not just thread tiles.
> 
> I've always wondered what make a thread *"Official"*
> 
> Norm



Good enough!

Once again, *Norm*, your response time amazes me! I thought I was the only one posting on this thread at this hour. Also, I didn't realize how easy it was for you to change an existing thread title.


----------



## mzil

I like the new title and think it makes more sense. My only addition would be that I think it should be "clone*s*", plural. I have just receive my second Sipik SK68 clone, intentionally bought from a different vendor, and now can see that there are definitely at least two distinct clone versions on the market (maybe there are even more?). There are distinct differences in the body, pill, spring, beam artifacts (rings), o-ring placement (water resistance?), mechanical smoothness to the zoom slide, power button color/size/depth (hence ability to table stand), and tint. These aren't "luck of the draw" minor variations, mind you, but rather significant alterations which shows that there must be more than one plant producing these, or there was at some point a significant change to the design and the parts used, if they do happen to come from the _same_ master production plant. [I hope to have some time later in the week to post a detailed video explaining these differences, up close, for those who might be interested.]


----------



## mccririck

mzil said:


> I like the new title and think it makes more sense. My only addition would be that I think it should be "clone*s*", plural. I have just receive my second Sipik SK68 clone, intentionally bought from a different vendor, and now can see that there are definitely at least two distinct clone versions on the market (maybe there are even more?). There are distinct differences in the body, pill, spring, beam artifacts (rings), o-ring placement (water resistance?), mechanical smoothness to the zoom slide, power button color/size/depth (hence ability to table stand), and tint. These aren't "luck of the draw" minor variations, mind you, but rather significant alterations which shows that there must be more than one plant producing these, or there was at some point a significant change to the design and the parts used, if they do happen to come from the _same_ master production plant. [I hope to have some time later in the week to post a detailed video explaining these differences, up close, for those who might be interested.]




I'd be very interested. I have a single mode and a 3-mode and the 3-mode is not quite as well put together and has a blue tint.


----------



## Norm

mzil said:


> I like the new title and think it makes more sense. My only addition would be that I think it should be "clone*s*", plural.


Done - Norm

I noticed a 26650 Sipik clone on ebay, very expensive at around $40.


----------



## JacobJones

Got mine today and I am very impressed, absolutely nothing bad about it for £2.98 (approx 4.58 usd, less when I bought it). The plastic lense in mine is surprisingly good quality, certainly projects a cleaner, sharper beam than some cheap glass lenses I've got from various places.

What impressed me more though is that I've had 3 separate orders from diferent Hong Kong sellers arrive exactly ten days from date of dispatch, HK and China post have seriously got their act together. Up untill a few days ago I'd never received a Chinese parcel in less than 3 weeks with the slowest a ridiculous 6 weeks.

You know what else is strange, the HK seller I bought this light from wrapped it in foam to protect it in transit.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

mzil said:


> ...These aren't "luck of the draw" minor variations, mind you, but rather significant alterations which shows that there must be more than one plant producing these, or there was at some point a significant change to the design and the parts used, if they do happen to come from the _same_ master production plant...[excerpted]



I have also noticed such variations. And others on CPF have posted about these common differences between clones. Can't even guess how many different Sipik Clones exist, but it sometimes seems that almost every clone is "_ever-so-slightly_" different from the next clone (each made from slightly different molds and jigs) while maintaining a general similarity to the Sipik68 in quality and build.

If anyone with several different clones is up to the task, perhaps we should try to "catalog" these differences. As you say, these are not "luck of the draw" minor variations, but slight variations in actual design.


----------



## RIX TUX

I have 2........
seems to be the same body,
one - just black , other has cree and ultrafire on it.
leds seem different - one has larger square on zoom and little warmer.
both work fine and $4 each


----------



## Etsu

JacobJones said:


> What impressed me more though is that I've had 3 separate orders from diferent Hong Kong sellers arrive exactly ten days from date of dispatch, HK and China post have seriously got their act together. Up untill a few days ago I'd never received a Chinese parcel in less than 3 weeks with the slowest a ridiculous 6 weeks.



Same here. It look me longer to get a Quark light I ordered from the US (to Canada), than to get a cheap light from DX in Hong Kong (with free shipping!). I don't understand how Chinese post can be so quick, and USPS be so slow!


----------



## passive101

Does anyone make one of these lights that has different brightness settings such as high medium low?


----------



## climberkid

passive101 said:


> Does anyone make one of these lights that has different brightness settings such as high medium low?



If you read the whole thread you can see that some people have found multi level versions, intentional or not. So, yes, they are out there. You just almost have to get lucky. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 4 Beta


----------



## mccririck

climberkid said:


> If you read the whole thread you can see that some people have found multi level versions, intentional or not. So, yes, they are out there. *You just almost have to get lucky. *



We're up all night to get lucky.


----------



## mzil

There are no known versions with_ three_ brightness levels. Some are one mode only, and the two that I have , both bought recently but from different vendors, are two brightness levels, high then medium, followed finally by a fast strobe. Those are the only two kinds I know of and I have read _many_ on-line reviews of these things. P.S. With a 14500 battery in one of mine, its lower mode is about as bright as a lithium AA in the other on "high". "High" on the 14500 one is impressively bright.


----------



## jorn

Removed the metal centering/retaining ring around the led on my sipik68 (got a dedomed xp-e), mutch better beam with no funky rings. I glued the xp-e with thermal paste, so it wont fall off. Zoom is looking great from flood to full focus with no rings. The shiny metal ring on the xr-e will always give some rings, and the centering ring made another ring pattern in the beam. Getting rid of all the shiny stuff fixed the beam alot. And the dedomed xp-e turns the sipik into a little monster thrower for it's size when using a 14500. Its somewhere between my ~20K lux hound dog and the ~50K lux solarforce masterpice pro1. But way smaller. I love this little thing, but i wish it accepted 17mm drivers. Finding a more powerful driver for it is hard.. 
Got lots of small lights, similar in size, but not even close when it comes to throw


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

jorn said:


> ...Getting rid of all the shiny stuff fixed the beam alot. And the dedomed xp-e turns the sipik into a little monster thrower for it's size when using a 14500...[excerpted]



This is very interesting information. I took a look inside of one of mine, and I do see "all that shiny stuff." Does it have to be removed, or could you (in theory) protect the LED with tape or something, and spray a little flat black paint into there to remove the "shinyness"?

Also, I have heard about "dedoming" on this forum, but have not researched it at all yet. So, I have only a very rough idea of what you are talking about. Is "dedoming" something anyone can learn to do?


----------



## mccririck

Yeah I might use some matt black paint on my shiny bits.


----------



## jorn

Using matte black paint worked fine on a reflector i onced used as a spacer for a heavy but crappy dx glass asperic lense for my p60. Removes the funky stuff from all the "internal reflections" that hits the lense and goes out the front in the end. You loose some lumens, but i dont mind loosing the lumens that ends up as rings and funky patterns.

I potted mine with black tec7, and put a fat oring on the pill so no water should be able to get into the electronics or battery tube. Used too mutch and used all the tec7 that was coming out of the wire holes to blacken out the rest of the shiny pill. 
(I actually tried to clean up the mess, but the tec7 got everywhere into the pill and i worried about the fragile dedomed led. The plan was to mask the led die and spray paint. But i ended up smudging tec7 over the few clean and shiny spots left  )

Dedoming is removing the tiny dome over the led die. It makes the led die look smaller and gives a tighter beam with more throw. (You loose lumens but gain throw) I dedome leds with my fingernail, just ripp the dome off. The xr-e is really simple because it got some soft gelly stuff barly holding the dome. The harder part is cleaning it witout breaking the microscopic wires. The dedomed xr-e did not look as good as the dedomed xp-e.
You can break the wires when dedoming. So make sure you got a spare. I like to swap the stock cool leds for neutral leds in my lights. Got a little pile of different cool white leds to pick from if a dedome attempt goes wrong


----------



## jorn

Gave it some water torture. Pumped it full of water in the shower. Dunking it and really tried to pump some water into this thing and drown it. Was really agressive pumping on the zoom when submerged. My fingers are wrinkeled up, but the light runs fine. Even with water filling the head submerging the exposed wires on the dedomed led, it kept running like a champ. Wonder if salt water will short it, or if the tiny wire still will be the way with the least resistance? The silicon potting and oring on the pill worked like a charm. Keeps the water away from the protected 14500 and driver


----------



## WriteAway

I just received two of the cloned models with Hi, Lo and Strobe settings from Amazon for $4 each. Good light for the money, but I can not figure out how the zoom feature is supposed to work. Do you turn the bezel or do you just pull it in or out to get the beam profile you want? I do not want to destroy any threading it may have. Many thanks for any pointers.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

> Do you turn the bezel or do you just pull it in or out to get the beam profile you want?



Sometimes they can be a little tight, but all that I have ever seen simply "pulled out." (No "turning" involved.)


----------



## WriteAway

Rosoku Chikara said:


> Sometimes they can be a little tight, but all that I have ever seen simply "pulled out." (No "turning" involved.)



Fantastic! That's what I needed to know! I tried turning it first, with no effect, but pulling it out does the trick. Many thanks!


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

The other day, I happened to see Sipik clones for sale in Japan. I have never seen Sipiks, nor clones sold here before. They were being sold by a relatively legitimate "Home Center" (similar to a Walmart) and I got curious to know how they would be packaged for the Japanese market. (Japanese consumers tend to be fairly demanding in this respect. And, I doubted that they would accept the typical "direct from China" packaging.) 

So, even though I spent twice as much as I should have (based on the current "market price"), I ended up buying two (one black and one silver). They were advertised as being the "3-mode" (High -> Low -> Strobe) type. (I personally prefer the single mode type, but I decided to buy these anyway, just to check them out. I was curious to learn more about them.)

The product description on this Home Center's website was quite elaborate, and included these photos:





(The following beamshots were taken at a distance of 65 feet, on a very dark night. That is a white metal post in the foreground.)








There were many other details, but the following provides a good idea of the size.





Well, they arrived the next day after I placed the order. (The speed of Japanese delivery services can be amazing.) They are typical Sipik clones. Nothing special about them. Instead of "Sipik" they are silkscreened with "CREE." 

There were, however, these differences in packaging (to keep the Japanese consumer happy):

- The nice little white boxes were in pristine condition. (Not crushed like they usually are when they come from China.)

- Each little white box had a small sticker that in Japanese reads: "This is an ecologically friendly package." (Apparently, this sticker is an attempt to justify or explain why there is nothing printed on the boxes.)

- Each flashlight came with a battery. (Cheap alkaline, made in Thailand.)

- Each flashlight came with a lanyard. (Actually, a fairly elaborate "adjustable" lanyard, not the cheapest kind. But, still not particularly interesting to me.)

- There was a detailed "Instruction Sheet" or "User Manual" included in the package with the two lights. (These instructions were clearly written on a computer, and printed on a color laser printer. But, they are adequate to satisfy the Japanese consumer who would expect some kind of instructions to always be included.)

So, I really got nothing that I wanted, except the lights. And, the lights themselves are no better and no worse than what you would get for $4.00 direct from China. I knew that this would be the most likely outcome, but I was curious enough that I spent the extra money anyway, just to satisfy my curiosity.

Well, now I have two Sipiks (silkscreened with "Sipik") and two clones. And, they are clearly the "same thing," whether they say Sipik or not. But, when I examine them in detail, I can see that these new two are ever so slightly "different" from my previous two. (And, I recently had another Sipik that I gave away to a friend. It was even more "different" than any of these four.)


----------



## mzil

Thank you for the review. I am curious if the "silver" one is a better choice to buy to not show dings and scratches, because the color that shines through when scratched is just more of the same color. Your thoughts? .... I bought a Maratac AAA "natural" color under that premise and indeed after many years of hard abuse on my key chain, next to many scratching metal objects, it still looks almost new, like it did on day one [AT LEAST FROM A CASUAL INSPECTION].


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

mzil said:


> Thank you for the review. I am curious if the "silver" one is a better choice to buy to not show dings and scratches, because the color that shines through when scratched is just more of the same color. Your thoughts? .... I bought a Maratac AAA "natural" color under that premise and indeed after many years of hard abuse on my key chain, next to many scratching metal objects, it still looks almost new, like it did on day one [AT LEAST FROM A CASUAL INSPECTION].



I think a true "natural" color (meaning bare metal) might hold up better. Or, at least not show dings and scratches so easily. However, this Sipik finish appears to be a silver colored anodization or similar coating (not bare metal). So, I am guessing that black, silver, and even red and blue, are probably all about the same. But, I am no expert on anodization.

Edit: Sorry, I missed your "main point" until I re-read my own post. Since this silver coating is, a little darker, but much closer to the raw aluminum color than the other colors, I agree when you say that "the color that shines through when scratched is just more of the same color." So, in that sense, you are certainly correct. This silver coating would quite likely appear to hold up much better than black.


----------



## mzil

Thanks.


----------



## mhanlen

In case anyone is interested here is an animated Gif comparing the light on 14500s and Eneloops. Here's a daylight shot of the objects in the beamshot, with a distance guide first.




And here's a Gif. These beamshots approximate what I see with my eyes.



Oh, and you'll have to excuse the XM-L error. This light is not an XML. I'm surprised no one caught it yet.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

As I mentioned in a previous post, I now have four Sipiks and Clones. I have had more in the past, but I had two (call them "A" & "B") black ones with a Sipik logo (from different Chinese vendors) on hand. And, then I recently purchased two (call them "C" & "D") without Sipik Logos, from a store here in Japan. At first glance, they are the same, but as I examined them closely, I found differences. 

So, I have decided to document those differences, so that others can compare them to their own Sipik clones. For some reason, I have grown curious to know how many "types" are known to be out there in the market.

To this end, I made a sketch. The dimensions are as accurate as I could get, using my "cheap" ($10.00) Chinese digital calipers.





The above sketch is of "Sample A." Here is a chart showing the differences between all four lights.





As you can see, I think it may be safe to call "C" & "D" the same. "B" is similar, but more different, and "A" is quite different. However, until recently, I had another sample that was much more dramatically different. (I may try to reclaim it long enough to take measurements.)

Perhaps someone with knowledge of machining can help explain these "minor" differences. Is it possible that the same machine is being set-up slightly differently by different operators? Could that account four this level of difference?

Edit: *mzil* has pointed out a potential problem with some of these lights not tail-standing properly (due to the fact that the silicone orange power button protrudes a bit beyond the aluminum switch assembly). Just for the record, all four of my samples tail-stand just fine.

However, when I took a look at the other end ("front-standing"), I noticed that on both Samples C & D the lens actually touches a flat surface. (Just barely, but it does touch before the aluminum bezel. So the flashlight does "rock" ever so slightly. And, of course, it would be very easy to scratch the lens, in the very center.)

-----------

Edit: Ability to "tail-stand" seems to be showing up as a significant determining factor of a quality clone (not an oxymoron). The Sipik performs so well as a candle (when the front bezel is removed) that it seems a shame that some do not "tail-stand" well, or at all.

In addition, protruding lenses also seem to be showing up as a fairly common "defect." While the ability to "front-stand" is a lot less of an issue, a protruding lens is more susceptible to damage.

-----------


----------



## mzil

The two I have differ in what I believe you are calling "middle collar" and "clip collar", by a millimeter or two. Also the screw in battery cap collar differs... A difference which actually adds up to a difference in real world use is that the silicone orange power button protrudes a bit beyond the aluminum on one of mine, hence the light teeters and wobbles a bit when attempting to tail stand. On the other light I have it is nicely recessed, just enough such that it tail stands _solidly_, which is of coarse much more desirable when using it in this way. [For anyone who might not know], after removing the lens by screwing it off, this light makes for a _fantastic_ "room candle" since you can expose the bare LED, with a nearly 180 degree flood pattern, so table standing is probably more important to me on _this_ light, more so than any other I own. Thanks for the detailed measurements, by the way.


----------



## bshanahan14rulz

I have one silkscreened "uinfire" Curious if any of you with multiple versions have noticed a difference in lens quality, i.e. any of them have a distinct lack of fuzziness in the focusing?
.


----------



## cxg231

$3.65 shipped on amazon right now, I just bought 5 for stocking stuffers...

Even if they are just "passble" by my standards, I'm sure the people in my life who just need a light in their glovebox will be happy.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

bshanahan14rulz said:


> I have one silkscreened "uinfire" Curious if any of you with multiple versions have noticed a difference in lens quality, i.e. any of them have a distinct lack of fuzziness in the focusing?
> .



So far, I am focusing (pun intended) on strictly physical characteristics. I figure once I can figure out how many different "types" there are, then perhaps we can determine if there are any consistent differences between those types when it comes to things like build quality and performance (such as beam quality).

I did, however, take a real close look at all four of my lenses, and they all look exactly the same to me. However, I did notice some tiny numbers that were extremely hard to read (they are reversed when looking at them from the back of the lens.)





As it turned out, the best way for me to read them was to photograph them, and then reverse the images. Have no idea what the numbers may mean. (They don't appear to be dates, since "D" reads "X - 4 - 5")

------------

Edit: Well, "data" is still coming in, but so far, I also suspect *Norm* was correct when he suggested that the final number indicates the location of the lens on a "tree" of parts. I suspect we will eventually see every number from 1 to 12. 

Still not sure what this means, except for the interesting(?) fact that, so far, every Clone seems to use the same plastic lens, taken from the same mold.

------------

Anyway, I figured that since I had already taken the photos, I might as well upload them for others to see.

The numbers are far more crisp in "A" due, I guess, to a better ("crisper"?) mold. But, that could perhaps also indicate "better" plastic material. While not at all visible to my naked eye, the photos do seem to show the other three lenses with a slightly yellowish tint.

(Because of the oblique light angle that I used, dirt showed up extremely well in the photos. So, I took the opportunity to clean these lenses.)


----------



## mccririck

What did you use to clean the lenses? A lens cleaner or an ultrasonic cleaner?


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

mccririck said:


> What did you use to clean the lenses? A lens cleaner or an ultrasonic cleaner?



Neither. I have some relatively good quality Japanese "wet-wipes" designed to clean plastic surfaces such as notebook computer screens. I first gave them a shot of dry compressed air to blow any loose stuff off, and then I just wiped them.

(I know this is not the best way to clean a lens, but they were extremely dirty. And, I figured I could do very little harm.)


----------



## Norm

Just a guess here, plastic parts often are manufactured on a tree of the same part, the X- 4 could be the part number and the other digit relates to the parts position on the tree.

Norm


----------



## tobrien

Rosoku Chikara said:


> So far, I am focusing (pun intended) on strictly physical characteristics. I figure once I can figure out how many different "types" there are, then perhaps we can determine if there are any consistent differences between those types when it comes to things like build quality and performance (such as beam quality).
> 
> I did, however, take a real close look at all four of my lenses, and they all look exactly the same to me. However, I did notice some tiny numbers that were extremely hard to read (they are reversed when looking at them from the back of the lens.)
> 
> [IG]http://imageshack.us/a/img849/5379/k1ro.jpg[/IMG]
> 
> As it turned out, the best way for me to read them was to photograph them, and then reverse the images. Have no idea what the numbers may mean. (They don't appear to be dates, since "D" reads "X - 4 - 5")
> 
> Anyway, I figured that since I had already taken the photos, I might as well upload them for others to see.
> 
> The numbers are far more crisp in "A" due, I guess, to a better ("crisper"?) mold. But, that could perhaps also indicate "better" plastic material. While not at all visible to my naked eye, the photos do seem to show the other three lenses with a slightly yellowish tint.
> 
> (Because of the oblique light angle that I used, dirt showed up extremely well in the photos. So, I took the opportunity to clean these lenses.)



nice job finding that! i was gonna say date codes but i bet norm is correct


----------



## JacobJones

I've just examined my ultrafire branded one, it has an X - 4 - 2 on the lense the same as your example B. The lense in mine was clean of dirt/manufacturing debris.

Mine also has a rather funky pill design with no obvious way to remove it, I see some threads but no holes for a tool.

Edit: My lense and orange cap protrude too far for comfortable tail or head standing.


----------



## jfrey123

Thanks for the screen shots from the various members so far. I bought one of these little things before I found the forum, still waiting for it to ship from China. By the looks of it, I probably should've bought 10!


----------



## Revolvr

JacobJones said:


> Mine also has a rather funky pill design with no obvious way to remove it, I see some threads but no holes for a tool.
> 
> Edit: My lense and orange cap protrude too far for comfortable tail or head standing.



I have two clones, labeled UltraFire and HWA/WYS, and CREE on the other side.

Both have the front lens protruding ever so slightly beyond the focusing ring. And both have protruding orange tail switches.

The front lens unscrews from the focusing ring, but I'm not sure how to remove the focusing ring. One of these days I want to open it up and see what driver they are using.

The focusing ring is itself a little wobbly, but it has a solid feel moving forward and aft.

Not bad for 4 bucks a pop really.

EDIT: Both mine have the X-4-4 inside the lens.


----------



## DenBarrettSAR

The Sipik SK68 ( and all its various copies & clones) is probally the most popular light by far here and everywhere on the planet for its design, output, capabilities, and usefulness. Im suprised the Sipik SK lights don't have their own forum for their adventures, mods, and uses ! 
Among my thousands of dollars of lights i have now in my collection, - a used & battered 3-mode Sipik 68 still resides in my jacket pocket as my favourite EDC, and dozens more make home to my various tool boxes, glove compartments, camping & hunting bags, etc., and still make the most appreciated gifts to family and friends, and still Ooo and awe non-flashaholics for a single-AA light that blows their Walmart multi-D Cell light out of the water, 
These lights are the best 7 bucks i ever spent on each and everyone one of them. 
i believe the SK68 deserves an award.


----------



## mccririck

My lenses:

Uinfire 3 mode: X - 4 - 3
Ultraok ZS2: X - 4 - 10


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

Thanks, *mccririck* (and others) for reporting this information.

Hopefully, more "data" will still come in. But so far, I think *Norm* was correct when he suggested that the final number indicates the location of the lens on a "tree" of parts. I suspect we will eventually see every number from 1 to 12. 

Still not sure what that means, except for the interesting(?) fact that, so far, every Clone seems to use the same plastic lens, taken from the same mold.


----------



## JacobJones

Today I received another Ultrafire in the post from a different ebay seller (who I suspect is actually the same person), and it is completely different to the first.

Overall the build quality isn't as good, smooth flat knurling, uneven and slightly scratched anodising, rougher threads, zoomy head very loose.
The lense in this one has no markings and the bezel sticks out further so it can head stand, the orange clicky is smaller and recessed so it can tail stand as well.
The pill is different, it has notches for a tool to remove it and a white plastic thing on top of the pill instead of the silver in the other one.
The body has different proportions.
The writing on the body is different too (still says HWA WYS Ultrafire and CREE but in different locations and different font and with different logos). The beams look almost identical on green walls, the new one has a warmer tint.

Of course this brings up many questions, are Ultrafire making them differently? Is one of them genuine and the other a knock off? Are they both knock offs? Is there even such thing as a genuine Ultrafire sk68 clone?

Comparing the quality and location of the writing leads me to believe that the second is just a generic that's had the brand etched onto it to to get a few pence/cents more on each sale.

I'm going to have to try and figure out this image hosting thing so I can post some pictures.


----------



## mccririck

I dont think the real Ultrafire company has anything to do with these lights.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

JacobJones said:


> ...I'm going to have to try and figure out this image hosting thing so I can post some pictures...[excerpted]



Not difficult, once you figure it out. I had trouble too, so I am going to try to "spell it out" for you (and others who might also be wondering).

First thing to realize is that you don't use any of this forum's tools. Instead you use the code provided by the picture hosting site you decide to use. 

I started with ImageShack, and so far, it works for me. They offer a free "Basic Account" that allows you to store all your photos together in "My Images." 

(ImageShack keeps trying to get me to sign up for a Premium Account, but so far the free account works just fine. There may be limits to storage and/or bandwidth, but no problems so far.)

Anyway, in a nutshell, you can upload your photos to Imageshack, and then in the upper righthand corner (under "ACTION") you will find "Get code for Forums." Click on this and you will get a small window with code. 

Once that window is open you can then select "Image size: Thumb | Small | Medium | Large | Fullsize" at the bottom of that window. (I always resize my photos before I upload, so I use "Fullsize.") The code changes according to your selection, and two different types of code are available. (I will call them "upper code" and "lower code" based on their location in the window.)

Finally, cut and paste the code into your post. (The "upper code" works for me. Try testing this in the "Practice Posting" section.)


----------



## DenBarrettSAR

I dont' see any of the Sipik Clones on their site here: http://www.ultrafire-shop.net/

But the real Sipik SK68s can be found here: http://translate.google.com/transla...uk&sl=zh-CN&u=http://suofulan.cn.alibaba.com/




mccririck said:


> I dont think the real Ultrafire company has anything to do with these lights.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

Excellent find, *DenBarrettSAR*! 

I never knew there was even a "real" Sipik company! Now we know that the Sipik is actually manufactured by the "Ninghai Suofulan Electric Co., Ltd." (Who could have guessed it?)

Interestingly enough, according to the site you found, the manufacturer is offering wholesale pricing of 21 Yuan for orders of more than 5,000 pcs. (and 23 Yuan for 100-999). 

At the current exchange rate, 21 Yuan is about $3.43... and, we can currently buy clones delivered worldwide for about $3.60? 

Wow. I would say we are getting a pretty good price.

Edit: The "official" Sipik site is "www.sipik.com" (Duh? I feel pretty stupid for never having looked for it before.) Some English is available, but mostly it is in Chinese. Looks like the 3-mode SK68 is standard (perhaps the only "real" ones, and the other "on/off only" type are all fakes or clones?). By the way, the manufacturer "officially" claims 120 lumens for the output on High and SOS.


----------



## DenBarrettSAR

Here is the various "clones" along side the real SIPIK SK68 3 Watt, ( *The red one to the far left in the pic.)

*From left to right:*

-SIPIK SK-68 3W (Single Mode, XR-E / EZ900)
-UltraOK Z8-2 (Single Mode XR-E EZ1000)
-Ultrafire Clone (3-mode, XP-E)
-SK68 Clone (From DX) (3-Mode, XR-E )
-SK68 Clone (from Ebay, no brand or engravings, (Single Mode, XP-E)
-SK68 Clone (From FT) ( Single mode, XR-E)

-> I also have a number of moddified SK68s, Warm White XR-E, Neutral White XM-L2, and soon a 4-mode with firefly, plus a MT-G2 "Super-Flooder SK68.


----------



## DenBarrettSAR

Rosoku Chikara said:


> Excellent find, *DenBarrettSAR*!
> 
> I never knew there was even a "real" Sipik company! Now we know that the Sipik is actually manufactured by the "Ninghai Suofulan Electric Co., Ltd." (Who could have guessed it?)
> 
> Interestingly enough, according to the site you found, the manufacturer is offering wholesale pricing of 21 Yuan for orders of more than 5,000 pcs. (and 23 Yuan for 100-999).
> 
> At the current exchange rate, 21 Yuan is about $3.43... and, we can currently buy clones delivered worldwide for about $3.60?
> 
> Wow. I would say we are getting a pretty good price.
> 
> Edit: The "official" Sipik site is "www.sipik.com" (Duh? I feel pretty stupid for never having looked for it before.) Some English is available, but mostly it is in Chinese. Looks like the 3-mode SK68 is standard (perhaps the only "real" ones, and the other "on/off only" type are all fakes or clones?). By the way, the manufacturer "officially" claims 120 lumens for the output on High and SOS.



I forgot to add the Sipik.com site with all the chinese text on it.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

Anybody seen (or already own) one of these? 

It appears to be a "sleeker" version of the Sipik SK68. All the manufacturer's specifications appear to be identical to the SK68, including overall size. It also has zoom, but it appears to be a bit more restrained (meaning it won't focus all the way into a sharp image of the emitter die).





Seems like it might be interesting, even though it is being sold for about $10.00 rather than $4.00 for a "clone" that does all the same things.


----------



## mzil

http://img02.taobaocdn.com/bao/uploaded/i2/T1pEtOXittXXc0TDo8_102005.jpg

*Image tags removed, see Rule #3 Do not Hot Link images. Please host on an image site, Imageshack or similar and repost – Thanks Norm*


It certainly seems from this "artist's rendering" that it will focus tightly to show the emitter die.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

Sorry, I may have been wrong. 

But, I didn't see the picture you posted anywhere on the www.sipik.com website where I was looking. (Where did you find it?)

I based my possibly erroneous statement on the following beamshots that I found on a vendor's site:





Maybe they just didn't extend the zoom out all the way when they took this picture. Anyway, I guess we will know for sure as soon as we find someone who owns one.


----------



## mzil

[OOps, sorry Norm for originally posting the image as a hot link. My bad.] The image I simply stumbled upon by doing an google image search for "Sipik SK-78". The image you posted, Rosoku, I suspect is simply overexposed, so the LED emitter is "blown out" [I believe imaging/photography people call it]. Note too how the normally dim "corona" is clearly visible in the photo, more indication of over exposure. It looks like an interesting variation. I suspect all the "heat sinks" on the SK-68 body, which we know is simply stolen from an earlier (non-zooming) light from another company, is really just for show/style in this case. Owning this SK-78 variant and leaving both lights on for 5 minutes, to assess their heat, would test my theory [if anyone is up for it].


----------



## jorn

Starting to get dark at night up here. So need to bring some lights on the outdoor trips from now on  Used the dedomed xp-e sipik on the way down from a fishing trip some days ago. My friend didnt bring a light, so he got the options on lending my w malkoff mdc 14500, or a beat up old solarforce L2 with a overdriven xp-g2. (3,04A 3 mode neutral xp-g2 on cu mpcb. Something i build from leftover parts that i had no real home for.) He wanted the throwy L2... This thing throws like a champ for a drop in module. But the dedomed sipik blew it away when i comes to throw/intensity. The two lights looks close when "wallhunting" indoors at 2-10 meters. But when ouside, well above the treeline, where they both could stretch their legs.. No contest at all  Now im really, really impressed with this thing. Im always using a h51fc headlamp, so i want a really throwy 14500 light as a handheld. After spending som time modding it, the sipik will fill that role just fine. and then some. 

My "sipik" is silver and says: "sipik sk68-3w 1AA" on the side. Looks like the red one shown in the great sipik lineup picture.
Mine dont like AA alkaleaks. Far from able of draining a alkaleak. After my sipik have "drained" the cell, i can use the "drained" cell in any aa light i got,
and use it for quite a while. Even got a pretty decent high mode if i put it in my zebra.. Thats far from drained.. Zoom head was pretty loose, but its a easy fix. Unscrew the pill and widen/bend the metal string around the pill a little. Gives friction for the head. Now the zoom stays firm where i put it.

No one with a silver sipik that want to spend some trits on the sipik? I think the silver one will make a exellent "budget 7-trit 3D tail"?


----------



## RIX TUX

Sorry if this has been answered before but what kind of runtimes will the one mode clone get on the white eneloop aa battery?


----------



## DenBarrettSAR

RIX TUX said:


> Sorry if this has been answered before but what kind of runtimes will the one mode clone get on the white eneloop aa battery?




I got about 1 hour with the one mode original Sipik on a AA eneloop.


----------



## DenBarrettSAR

jorn said:


> Starting to get dark at night up here. So need to bring some lights on the outdoor trips from now on  Used the dedomed xp-e sipik on the way down from a fishing trip some days ago. My friend didnt bring a light, so he got the options on lending my w malkoff mdc 14500, or a beat up old solarforce L2 with a overdriven xp-g2. (3,04A 3 mode neutral xp-g2 on cu mpcb. Something i build from leftover parts that i had no real home for.) He wanted the throwy L2... This thing throws like a champ for a drop in module. But the dedomed sipik blew it away when i comes to throw/intensity. The two lights looks close when "wallhunting" indoors at 2-10 meters. But when ouside, well above the treeline, where they both could stretch their legs.. No contest at all  Now im really, really impressed with this thing. Im always using a h51fc headlamp, so i want a really throwy 14500 light as a handheld. After spending som time modding it, the sipik will fill that role just fine. and then some.
> 
> My "sipik" is silver and says: "sipik sk68-3w 1AA" on the side. Looks like the red one shown in the great sipik lineup picture.
> Mine dont like AA alkaleaks. Far from able of draining a alkaleak. After my sipik have "drained" the cell, i can use the "drained" cell in any aa light i got,
> and use it for quite a while. Even got a pretty decent high mode if i put it in my zebra.. Thats far from drained.. Zoom head was pretty loose, but its a easy fix. Unscrew the pill and widen/bend the metal string around the pill a little. Gives friction for the head. Now the zoom stays firm where i put it.
> 
> No one with a silver sipik that want to spend some trits on the sipik? I think the silver one will make a exellent "budget 7-trit 3D tail"?




Trits would be cool on a modded sipik.


----------



## bshanahan14rulz

Uinfire single mode from fasttech

looked like X-4-2.

Lens' output is very ringy when trying to collimate output of a point source, but preliminary testing shows it can be done. Output is very ugly, though.


----------



## JacobJones

Got another one, this is simply marked Cree and is from tomtop (ebay seller). Knurling is fairly good but not as good as the first 'ultrafire', anodising is about the same, lense has no markings (same as second 'ultrafire'), head and tail stands, pill design is different again, beam is ringier because this one has an XR-E rather than the XP-E's in the 'ultrafire' ones, this one has a metal ring in the zoomie mechanism instead of the rubber o-rings that the 'ultrafires' have.

Should add that all 3 of mine are single modes.


----------



## mccririck

bshanahan14rulz said:


> Uinfire single mode from fasttech
> 
> looked like X-4-2.
> 
> Lens' output is very ringy when trying to collimate output of a point source, but preliminary testing shows it can be done. *Output is very ugly, though.*



Same with mine. I'm not sure if paining the shiney metal around the emitter black would help maybe?


----------



## Imon

Like someone said before this is one of the more common flashlights on CPF (although I remain convinced that the Minimag 2xAA is still the most common).

I've owned a few of these lights on and off throughout the years - mostly as cheap loaners.
My main issues with these lights are tint and ring artifacts although at $3-5 each that criticism doesn't seem too fair. Other than that they're great little lights!


----------



## someidiot

I'm definitely a noob here, but I love these little lights so much I had to make a post. I love that I can have a total investment of ~$4 including battery and have something that will provide me with enough light for my purposes (finding my way to the candles / lanterns / flashlights when the power goes out). I think this is about everything I could hope for in this price range that fits what I need it for. I'll spend more for a light that does more and fits a different role, but for being a CHEAP light with decent output, this is just great.

I know absolutely nothing about lights, but now you guys have me interested in 14500s and dedoming this light... a new sickness begins?


----------



## alex21

Yes I agree. Imagine if every single person on the planet had one of these cheap tiny versatile little lights 
For more people its really the only light they'll ever need.
As for dedoming I think it is possible to get better throw and for the die image to be tighter or smaller. 14500 definitely makes it brighter :devil:
Oh and :welcome:


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

Well, you never know until you try... there was some discussion on how to remove the "zoom" from an SK-98 on the "*XM-L-sized SIPIK98 clones; any good?*" thread, and I got curious about the SK-68.

I took a SK-68, held it by the bezel/zoom section, and just kept "unscrewing it" and it finally came apart in my hands... And, here is what I found. While I was at it, I took the switch assembly apart as well. (If I have made any gaffs in naming these parts, or if someone can suggest more appropriate names, I would welcome any corrections and/or suggestions.)





I intend to take some more pictures to show this in detail. With this particular SK-68 clone, the LED Emitter Pill threads into the Main Body, but there are no "slots" to help you turn it. And, the only thing providing any "tension" between the Knurled Zoom and the LED Emitter Pill is an O-Ring on. In my case, it was that slight contact (tension) between this O-Ring and the Knurled Zoom that ended up allowing me to eventually unscrew the LED Emitter Pill.

Edit: Here are some more pictures. This is what I first saw when I finally got finished unscrewing it...





Then when you actually remove the Pill from the Knurled Zoom, you will see the O-Ring itself. (Which I presume needs to be well lubricated for smooth Zoom function.) But, as in this case, if your Pill has no "slots" to help you turn it, then it is only the tension between this O-Ring and the inner surface of the Knurled Zoom that is allowing you to remove the Pill by unscrewing the bezel/zoom.





If that tension were less (or the LED Emitter Pill were screwed in more tightly), then I assume that you could turn the bezel/zoom section forever and never succeed in unscrewing the LED Emitter Pill. In such a case, I assume you would need to use some kind of sharp tool (fine chisel?) to "tap" on the LED Emitter Pill and get it to start turning.

In any case, I am very happy to see all the parts and finally understand how they are all put together. Frankly, I am impressed with how simple (yet "efficient"?) this little light is. No wonder they can be sold for less than $4.00 and seem to last forever... There really isn't that much to them.

I am not yet brave enough (even at $4.00) to try digging into the LED Emitter Pill itself, but I am sure that others on this forum understand what is going on inside there... Basically, this flashlight consists of 8 simple parts, plus a Switch Unit, and the LED Emitter Pill.

Additional Comment: It seems to me that someone could make a small fortune offering "after market" SK-68 LED Emitter Pill upgrades! Not sure what all the various options might be, but one that comes immediately to my mind is being able to select between single mode and multi-mode. And, in the case of multi-mode we could get rid of that relatively useless strobe and have more useful brightness levels. Anyone ready to start selling such "pills" for a few dollars each? If that were possible, there are literally millions of SK-68s out there just waiting to be "upgraded." (Might also be able to get rid of most, if not all, of those ugly "halo" optical artifacts.)


----------



## Revolvr

Rosoku Chikara said:


> Additional Comment: It seems to me that someone could make a small fortune offering "after market" SK-68 LED Emitter Pill upgrades! Not sure what all the various options might be, but one that comes immediately to my mind is being able to select between single mode and multi-mode. And, in the case of multi-mode we could get rid of that relatively useless strobe and have more useful brightness levels. Anyone ready to start selling such "pills" for a few dollars each? If that were possible, there are literally millions of SK-68s out there just waiting to be "upgraded." (Might also be able to get rid of most, if not all, of those ugly "halo" optical artifacts.)



If one were to eliminate the requirement to run off AA batteries and use the 14500 only, then there are lots of options. Assuming it uses a standard 17mm driver that is. Probably a 3,4, or 6x AMC7435 would do, though I forget off-hand what current I can draw from a 14500. 

I have several of these but all have one mode. Three brightness modes would really help these flashlights.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

Revolvr said:


> If one were to eliminate the requirement to run off AA batteries and use the 14500 only, then there are lots of options. Assuming it uses a standard 17mm driver that is. Probably a 3,4, or 6x AMC7435 would do, though I forget off-hand what current I can draw from a 14500.
> 
> I have several of these but all have one mode. Three brightness modes would really help these flashlights.



I think one of the nice features of the "standard" SK68 is that it runs well (quite bright) on even an Alkaline AA. So, I think it would be a mistake to eliminate that "feature" entirely (at least for the "general population)... However, anyone interested enough to purchase such an custom Pill would probably be willing to consider 14500 only. (Just out of curiosity, why would "14500 only" be that much easier? Simpler circuitry? Sorry, I am completely out of my depth here...)


----------



## Revolvr

Rosoku Chikara said:


> I think one of the nice features of the "standard" SK68 is that it runs well (quite bright) on even an Alkaline AA. So, I think it would be a mistake to eliminate that "feature" entirely (at least for the "general population)... However, anyone interested enough to purchase such an custom Pill would probably be willing to consider 14500 only. (Just out of curiosity, why would "14500 only" be that much easier? Simpler circuitry? Sorry, I am completely out of my depth here...)



An AA battery provides at most about 1.5 volts, decreasing to 1 volt as it nears end of life. Meanwhile the LED typically requires around 3.1V. So the driver has to boost the voltage to provide the current and often will provide up to around 500mA.

The Li-Ion 14500 provides about 3.6V or more dropping to 3V near end of life. So the driver is a simpler linear constant current driver that can provide 1A or more from the battery and keep that relatively constant as the battery voltage drops.

I don't know what drivers they use in these 68's, but there are drivers that will output around 500mA if it senses 1.5V or less, but output more like 800mA if it senses 3V or more. That's probably what these have. But the few of these I can find often have only 1 mode.

Most Li-ion drivers use the AMC7435, a constant current regulator which outputs 350mA. The driver will contain several of these in parallel to multiply the current in increments of 350mA. So a 3xAMX7435 driver would provide 1050mA, probably about right for a 14500. These are cheap and common with all kinds of modes.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

Thanks, *Revolvr*.

Can't yet say that I "understand" what you have written, but the words make sense to me. (I am not an electronics guy.)

For what its worth, the sipik.com website shows the SK68 (and most of their other flashlights) all with 3 modes Hi - Med - Strobe. The last two SK68s that I purchased here in Japan work like that. (My other 3 are single mode.) Personally, I prefer the single mode for its simplicity, but it would be nice to have some way to select lower levels when desired. (I dislike having to cycle through two modes to get to Hi again, since that is generally the one I want.)

Seems a little crazy to spend too much time, effort or money to "upgrade" such a low cost flashlight... But, as I said there are lots and lots of them out there... The basic parts do not appear to be particularly prone to failure. So, who knows... perhaps it would be interesting to offer a variety of custom pills that allowed the enthusiast to select between many different options. For example, some might prefer colored LEDs for certain applications? (I am just speculating aloud.) I suspect others will have many better ideas as to what kind of custom pill might "sell." But, if you could offer a wide variety of such custom pills at a reasonable cost, people could end-up with the flashlight of their choice (by selecting just the "right" pill that they want) for an unusually low cost.

There will always be plenty of room for high-end flashlights. (Personally, I am a big fan of the V11R with AA extender.) But, low cost "fun toys" are also nice to have. "Mix-and-Match SK68 Pills" may just be "_the thing of the future!_"

**UPDATE**

I just took a look at the www.sipik.com website to verify my above statement about the 3 modes and discovered that they have greatly improved their SK68 page. Still in Chinese, but many more and "better" pictures. Check it out.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

Well, when I first started posting on this thread I only had two SK68s. But, since then I have purchased two more, and I also "recovered" (temporarily) one that I had given a away to a friend (so that I could measure and photograph it). Here here are the measurement results:






"Sample E" (the one I recovered from my friend) is considerably longer than the other four. (The red numbers indicate the differences between SAMPLE A and SAMPLE E.)

Except for the longer length of SAMPLE E, I can find very little significant physical differences between these five lights (even though they are all ever so slightly different). All five tailstand and "front stand" (although the plastic lens does just barely touch on two of them). SAMPLE B happens to be missing the O-Ring at the Removable Bezel, but I assume that that was just an oversight during assembly.

Here is a photo comparison of their LED Emitter Pills and Switch Assemblies. (I do not think there is much to be learned by looking at the differences in Swtich Assemblies, but... what the heck, I had the pictures.)





I would say that the most notable aspect of this comparison is the fact that all but SAMPLE E have "grooves" that allow relatively easy removable of the LED Emitter Pill. (It was just a coincidence, but the SK68 I picked up to unscrew in my post above was SAMPLE E.)

Also, SAMPLE A appears to use a different LED. Can anyone tell from this photo what it is? (If necessary, I can post a better picture.)


----------



## mzil

Rosoku, thanks for the updates. Sipik has a new one called SK51, http://www.sipik.com/html_products/-35.html Is that a lantern mode in the center part? What does the 1x-4x control do. Zoom? Brightness? Could you please translate for us? [edit: I'm an idiot, you live in Japan and they are China, not Japan. OOps. Sorry. My mistake. The English translate function at their site doesn't seem to work well in my browser settings, which I can't figure out.]


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

mzil said:


> Rosoku, thanks for the updates. Sipik has a new one called SK51, http://www.sipik.com/html_products/-35.html Is that a lantern mode in the center part? What does the 1x-4x control do. Zoom? Brightness? Could you please translate for us?



Edit: I decided to remove my lengthy posts about the SK51 in the interests of "cleaning up" this thread. Please see the following link to the SK51 thread.

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?369699-The-quot-New-quot-Sipik-SK51


----------



## Revolvr

Rosoku Chikara said:


> Also, SAMPLE A appears to use a different LED. Can anyone tell from this photo what it is? (If necessary, I can post a better picture.)



The one on the left looks like a Cree XP-G. I don't recognize the others.

I have 2 of these, one branded UltraFire, the other Sipik. My UltraFire has the same LED as the one on the left. The Sipik has the other.

I've see the Sipik web page, and I'm convinced my Sipik isn't a real Sipik. The quality isn't any better than the UltraFire, and the labeling/logo is slightly different. And I'm not sure UltraFire actually makes this flashlight at all; I don't see it on their web site.


----------



## RoGuE_StreaK

Rosoku Chikara said:


> Also, SAMPLE A appears to use a different LED. Can anyone tell from this photo what it is? (If necessary, I can post a better picture.)


XP-something, most likely XP-E, which is what my Ultrafire clone came with. Needs closer photo to tell for certain, but XP-E would be the best bet.
My UF clone also seems to have a different pill assembly method again, but I'll confirm that when I get home.


----------



## DenBarrettSAR

From the observations i can see in the photo and the various SK86 clones i have, the pic "A" is a XP-E, pic "B" & "C" is a XR-E / EZ1000 series, pic "D" is a XR-E / EZ900 Series, and pic "E" is a XR-E / EZ1000.


----------



## Revolvr

Rosoku Chikara said:


> Seems a little crazy to spend too much time, effort or money to "upgrade" such a low cost flashlight... But, as I said there are lots and lots of them out there... The basic parts do not appear to be particularly prone to failure. So, who knows... perhaps it would be interesting to offer a variety of custom pills that allowed the enthusiast to select between many different options. For example, some might prefer colored LEDs for certain applications? (I am just speculating aloud.) I suspect others will have many better ideas as to what kind of custom pill might "sell." But, if you could offer a wide variety of such custom pills at a reasonable cost, people could end-up with the flashlight of their choice (by selecting just the "right" pill that they want) for an unusually low cost.



You're right of course, who would mod a cheap $4 flashlight?

Well probably a lot of us, just for the fun of it. 

I wouldn't mind making an UV version if I could find a decent high powered UV LED. For scorpion hunting.

BTW, like the pop pop boat. I had not heard of these until I saw your sig.


----------



## RoGuE_StreaK

Rosoku Chikara said:


> It almost appears to show a variable output level from 4x to 1x


Getting slightly OT here, but anyway... my take on interpreting a possible method is that the head only has the pull-to-lantern, and the tail somehow adjusts the LED position to provide the zoom function? I've found a couple of these designs on various sites but could never find any details on what exactly was happening, and couldn't find any reviews.
Also seems to have some bizarre TIR-looking lens, but I'm guessing it's actually a small aspheric suspended in an angled clear plastic holder?



Revolvr said:


> BTW, like the pop pop boat. I had not heard of these until I saw your sig.


Ditto, I'm thinking of trying to make one this summer for my son to use in our pool


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

RoGuE_StreaK said:


> Getting slightly OT here, but anyway... my take on interpreting a possible method is that the head only has the pull-to-lantern, and the tail somehow adjusts the LED position to provide the zoom function? I've found a couple of these designs on various sites but could never find any details on what exactly was happening, and couldn't find any reviews.
> Also seems to have some bizarre TIR-looking lens, but I'm guessing it's actually a small aspheric suspended in an angled clear plastic holder?
> 
> Ditto, I'm thinking of trying to make one this summer for my son to use in our pool



Edit: I decided to remove my lengthy posts about the SK51 in the interests of "cleaning up" this thread. Please see the following link to the SK51 thread.

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?369699-The-quot-New-quot-Sipik-SK51


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

Well, I am going to attempt to get this thread "back on topic" by discussing some of the new design changes in the SK68. As for the SK51, we should probably start a new thread to discuss it. 

(But, in any case, I am not certain that any of these flashlights are actually going to be available for individuals to purchase... at least not necessarily any time soon. In the past, I had noticed many Sipik models that they "advertise" but don't seem to actually sell... Probably due to the lack of a customer/distributor who is willing the place the large quantity that they probably require as a minimum production order. Once any given model is in actual "production" they can sell in smaller quantities.)

Yet, it is interesting to see what Sipik is doing. And, it makes perfect sense to me. If I were the manufacturer of what is arguably "The World's Most Popular LED Flashlight" I might decide to upgrade my image as well.

At first glance, I thought that they had completely redesigned the pill by using some kind of white plastic (thus eliminating all that "shiny" stuff), but I have since decided that my eyes were simply playing tricks on me, and all it was, was that their photos are somewhat washed out, making things appear to be white. So, there may be no actual design changes whatsoever. The "shiny stuff" is easy to see in this photo:






And, as you can see, they are making clear claims of 150 ANSI lumens from a CREE XP-E R3... But, the biggest difference for me is the new packaging. Apparently, SK68s will eventually be available in a nice printed box:





But, what's more... The contents of the box will include flashlight, Sipik branded single cell Li-Ion charger, Sipik branded Li-Ion cell, Sipik branded Alkaline cell, and Owners Manual with Warranty Card.






Sipik is attempting to go "mainstream," folks. (The days of the $4 Sipik clone, may be numbered!) This might get "interesting" in the (unlikely?) event that this Li-Ion battery and charger actually turned out to be any good:


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

So, assuming that I have a SK68 with "two slots" in the Pill. The obvious solution is to use a pair of fine point needlenose pliers, or perhaps a strong pair of tweezers to get in there and turn that Pill. However, what is the real tool for this task? For example, here is a photo:





Unfortunately, this happens to be a "2-Pin Adjustable Horotec Watch Case Back Opener Wrench" that costs $98.00! Anyone know of any other "less pricey" tools that are designed for this task?


----------



## RoGuE_StreaK

Rosoku Chikara said:


> Anyone know of any other "less pricey" tools that are designed for this task?


An "adjustable watch back case opener" looks pretty similar. $2.30 on ebay.

Had a look at my UF clone tonight, no apparently easy way to remove the pill. Had a few attempts at unscrewing using various methods, with no luck.
On a side note, my tail cap is being extremely uncooperative, for some reason it's seizing up when screwed on; need pliers to start it unscrewing, which has wrecked the anodising on it. I've tried diagnosing it but can't figure it out; screws on and off smoothly, lubed with silicone grease, but for some reason even when lightly screwing to the end it flat out refuses to unscrew.


----------



## jorn

Just use a old rusty nail and grab one hole at the time. Pointy scissors etc. Not that hard. Opening a bottle of cola one handed while driving is harder. Use your imagination, and you got hundreds of "tools" to open a sipik with.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

RoGuE_StreaK said:


> An "adjustable watch back case opener" looks pretty similar. $2.30 on ebay.
> 
> Had a look at my UF clone tonight, no apparently easy way to remove the pill. Had a few attempts at unscrewing using various methods, with no luck.
> On a side note, my tail cap is being extremely uncooperative, for some reason it's seizing up when screwed on; need pliers to start it unscrewing, which has wrecked the anodising on it. I've tried diagnosing it but can't figure it out; screws on and off smoothly, lubed with silicone grease, but for some reason even when lightly screwing to the end it flat out refuses to unscrew.



Thanks! I guess that was exactly what I was asking for. Not sure I am really going to buy one yet, but you can't beat the price.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

jorn said:


> Just use a old rusty nail and grab one hole at the time. Pointy scissors etc. Not that hard. Opening a bottle of cola one handed while driving is harder. Use your imagination, and you got hundreds of "tools" to open a sipik with.



I understand what you are saying. I am not so sure about an "old rusty nail," but do I know how to improvise when necessary. (I once knew a old Russian guy who could open non-screw-type, old-fashioned "hard-to-open" beer bottles by pushing the bottle way up into his eye socket, and then catching the edge of the bottle cap with the inner ridge of his eyebrow bone. Appeared to be a bit painful, but it worked. )

If you read my post, you will see that I said "The obvious solution is to use a pair of fine point needlenose pliers, or perhaps a strong pair of tweezers to get in there and turn that Pill. However, *what is the real tool for this task?*" (Emphasis added)


----------



## mzil

Thanks for the translations Rosoku, and once again I apologize for my earlier blunder [Which I already apologized for in the edited version of my last post, but I'm not sure you've seen that since you quote the original version, with my faux pas intact, in your post]...Also, I can't remember where, but I recall seeing a post that someone says s/he has an SK68 {or a clone} with a white plastic pill, so that picture might not just be washed out after all! White plastic instead of a reflective mirror finish might correct for the ring problem, since it acts as a diffusing surface, maybe? [I'm not all that concerned with that ring "problem", personally, since this is just a cheap "beater" flashlight to me.]


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

mzil said:


> Thanks for the translations Rosoku, and once again I apologize for my earlier blunder [Which I already apologized for in the edited version of my last post, but I'm not sure you've seen that since you quote the original version, with my faux pas intact, in your post]...Also, I can't remember where, but I recall seeing a post that someone says s/he has an SK68 {or a clone} with a white plastic pill, so that picture might not just be washed out after all! White plastic instead of a reflective mirror finish might correct for the ring problem, since it acts as a diffusing surface, maybe? [I'm not all that concerned with that ring "problem", personally, since this is just a cheap "beater" flashlight to me.]



No apology needed. I didn't even realize that you had done anything but compliment me. (I guess I thought that you thought I also knew Chinese, not just Japanese. And, I wish I did.) And, I guess I assumed that you might also know that the two written languages share the same roots (the Japanese "borrowed" their written language from the Chinese). So, I often can "decypher" words written in Chinese at a glance. I felt the need to say in my "disclaimer" that even my Japanese reading and writing ability is not that great... (In other words, please don't get your expectations too high.) Still, I was pretty confident that I could probably figure out most of what was on the site. Or, at least the parts that seemed important to know.

But, it turned out to be a more difficult task than I had anticipated. I ended up staring at long strings of Chinese characters of which I could recognize only one, such as "light" (光). And, browser translation is of no help because the pertinent writing is not text, it is merged into the photographs. (My solution was to hand-draw the characters with the mouse, so that I could then get them into text form. This is something that would be extremely difficult to do, unless you at least understood how the characters are constructed from sub-characters, and the proper stroke order in which they should be drawn. Those aspects are the same in Japanese, so it gave me a head start.)

Anyway, I think I finally figured out the important (mysterious) part. (Actually, I should have paid more attention to your suggestion that the 4x - 1X might be related to the zoom adjustment. It took me a long time to finally figure that out, and just as I did, *RoGuE_StreaK *also suggested the same thing in his post.)

Now, about the white plastic Pill. I am now pretty certain that the photos on the Sipik website do not show white plastic, but maybe there are some plastic ones out there? I also got to thinking that while plastic might be good for "diffusion" of light, it might be terrible for dissipating heat. Anyway, now that I know how to get the Pill out, I may play around with various methods to reduce the "halo effects." But, as you say, those halo effects never really bothered me before, so I don't know why I am suddenly so worried about them now. In the past, I just figured "What to you expect for $4.00?" And, the flashlight works just fine as a light source, with or without them.


----------



## mzil

Based on another poster in some forum somewhere, I have now covered the silver back surrounding area around the LED with GITD tape made by JVCC. Not sure how heat resistant it is, so this might be dangerous, kids. Do not attempt. It does give off a faint glow once extinguished and I guess sort of works as a map reading light, but only for a few moments before it dims down to an unusable reading level, but you can still see it. It is sort of a novelty and my overall conclusion is that it is not worth it unless you happen to have the tape lying around already, like I do. Don't waste your money and buy a roll unless you have other reasons to need/want GITD tape. [I bought the roll to construct my key chain sized emergency fire kit/glowfob]:


----------



## someidiot

jorn said:


> Removed the metal centering/retaining ring around the led on my sipik68 (got a dedomed xp-e), mutch better beam with no funky rings. I glued the xp-e with thermal paste, so it wont fall off. Zoom is looking great from flood to full focus with no rings. The shiny metal ring on the xr-e will always give some rings, and the centering ring made another ring pattern in the beam. Getting rid of all the shiny stuff fixed the beam alot. And the dedomed xp-e turns the sipik into a little monster thrower for it's size when using a 14500. Its somewhere between my ~20K lux hound dog and the ~50K lux solarforce masterpice pro1. But way smaller. I love this little thing, but i wish it accepted 17mm drivers. Finding a more powerful driver for it is hard..
> Got lots of small lights, similar in size, but not even close when it comes to throw


I decided to remove the inner shiny ring because of this post. It definitely changes the way the light looks. When you zoom all the way in (when you'd normally just see the outline of the LED) I'm seeing a round spot now. It seems less bright than the LED shape, but that always annoyed me so I'll see how I like it over time.


----------



## RoGuE_StreaK

De-doming will change the focal point a little, try unscrewing the bezel a little bit and you should see it come back into focus.

After successfully de-doming the XM-L on my SK98 clone, I'm sorely tempted to try de-doming the XP-E, just to see how it goes. Except I can't figure out how to remove the pill on mine, I guess I could try an in-situ de-dome...


----------



## jorn

Just put a o-ring on the bezel. Fixes the focus after dedome.


----------



## JacobJones

That would have been me who had the white plastic bit on the pill.

Pic: http://imageshack.com/i/0nksfij Apologies for the image quality, taken with an iPad camera.

I can confirm that the beam is a little better than one with a shiny pill, the light outside of the main beam is dimmer and more diffuse. I'll try and get some comparative beamshots later.


----------



## ThrowerLover

So, at this point in time, where is the least expensive place to buy any version of this light? I see it on amazon for $3.60 with free shipping. Any better deals out there? I might buy 2 dozen or more for Christmas presents. 


Tapatalk via iPhone.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

ThrowerLover said:


> So, at this point in time, where is the least expensive place to buy any version of this light? I see it on amazon for $3.60 with free shipping. Any better deals out there? I might buy 2 dozen or more for Christmas presents.
> 
> 
> Tapatalk via iPhone.



Others may have a different opinion, but I would say that "$3.60 with free shipping" is a _very_ good price. I wouldn't count on the price going down any further, and in fact, I think it might possibly start going back up, due to all the new things going on at Sipik.) 

Many of us spent $5-6 each for clones. I spent nearly $9 each for two (from different vendors) that actually said "Sipik" on them, just to see if there was any differences between the "real" Sipik and the clones. (There were none.) And, I spent even more for the the last two "clones" that I purchased from a "brick-and-mortar" store here in Japan. (I knew I could get them for less, but once again, I was curious to know if there were any differences.)

Edit: If you are thinking to buy "2 dozen or more" you might want to look into some of the Chinese wholesale sites, such as Alibaba. This can be a time consuming process since you are looking for "clones" which by definition have no name. At a quick glance I found "3W CREE Flashlight" (Min. Order: 1000 Pieces, FOB Price: US $2-3.5 / Piece) and "high power rechargeable aluminium cree flashlight" (Min. Order: 200 Pieces, FOB Price: US $2.3-3.2 / Piece)

But, in the end, I think you will find that the current Amazon price is hard to beat. The last time I looked at buying 30 or 50 pcs. wholesale, I found the "product price" to be very attractive, but you ended up spending a fair amount on shipping... The "total price" was still good enough at the time (around $4.00 each), but that was before these recent "blow-out" prices on Amazon.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

JacobJones said:


> That would have been me who had the white plastic bit on the pill.
> 
> Pic: http://imageshack.com/i/0nksfij Apologies for the image quality, taken with an iPad camera.
> 
> I can confirm that the beam is a little better than one with a shiny pill, the light outside of the main beam is dimmer and more diffuse. I'll try and get some comparative beamshots later.



Thanks *JacobJones*, mystery now solved... (Actually, there never really was any _real_ mystery; I was simply "confused.") As it turns out, four of my five Sipik samples that I currently have on hand, all use a "plastic pill" that is very similar to the one you show in your photo. And, I believe that that is probably exactly what is being shown on the Sipik website.

When I was saying "plastic pill" I was thinking in terms of a pill made entirely from plastic. (Thus my concern about heat dissipation.) However, what your photo shows, and what I think their website shows, is a plastic insert inside of an aluminum pill "housing." (And, that is exactly how four of my current samples are made.) So, I think that is likely the standard construction.

What is unusual in your case is the fact that your pill does not seem to have any metal "reflector" disk. Perhaps it was never designed to have such a disk. Or, perhaps it accidentally got left off at the factory, or somehow it came off later. In any case, now that I have looked more closely at four of my five samples, I can see that if I removed that "metal reflector disk" (as others have done), I too would have a "plastic pill," similar to yours.

I suspect some reading this thread may be chuckling at my "confusion" (and I feel pretty stupid myself), but in my own defense, let me say that until today, the only LED Emitter Pill that I ever held in my hands was from "SAMPLE E." And, as you can see, it has a different kind of metal "reflector" disk that makes the whole thing look like it is made from metal. (Perhaps this particular Pill actually is made entirely from metal?).





For comparison, I have just removed the Pill from SAMPLE C. (It was the nearest one handy.) So far, I think that this design is more "standard" for a Sipik and/or clone. Note that it has slots for removal, a plastic "insert," and uses a smaller metal "reflector" disk placed inside the plastic "insert."

It may also be worth noting that where SAMPLE E uses an O-Ring for tensioning the zoom function (and has no other O-Ring), SAMPLE C uses some kind of metal C-Clip Spring to tension the zoom, and has an O-Ring to provide a better seal between the Pill and the Main Body.


----------



## RoGuE_StreaK

Has anyone spied a ~$3.60 amazon one with an XP-E and in a colour other than black or silver?

PS. ThrowLover, the "FordEx" ones seem to be $3.37 if you are wanting to save a few cents. XR-E though, but seems that most of the $3.60 ones are (no emitter pics on some, and none have emitter details)


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

RoGuE_StreaK said:


> Has anyone spied a ~$3.60 amazon one with an XP-E and in a colour other than black or silver?
> 
> PS. ThrowLover, the "FordEx" ones seem to be $3.37 if you are wanting to save a few cents. XR-E though, but seems that most of the $3.60 ones are (no emitter pics on some, and none have emitter details)



Good work, *RoGuE_StreaK*! Now, we have an even lower price-point available on Amazon ($3.37). Maybe my guess is wrong... maybe the price is going to continue to keep going down?

If you don't mind though, please kindly take the time to "enlighten" me. Some time ago, I did a kind of "summary" on CREE emitters (in the attempt to understand what was going on), and my notes from that time state:

*XR-E*: Unprecedented lighting-class brightness, efficacy, lifetime and quality of light, enable the XR-E LED to replace many traditional light sources and save money with energy-efficient light and long lifetimes.

7.0mm x 9.0mm 1.0 A & 4.0 Watt (Max)
251 lumen @ 4.0 W (Max) 3.3 V @ 350 mA (Typical)

*XP-E*: The smaller package extends Cree’s award-winning LED performance into new LED lighting applications.

3.45mm x 3.45mm 1 A & 3.5 Watt (Max)
291 lumen @ 3.5 W 3.1 V @ 350 mA (Typical)

Please don't misunderstand me (this is s truly honest question, probably stupid question), but why should I care whether my Sipik has an XR-E or and XP-E?


----------



## RoGuE_StreaK

Not a stupid question, and I'm by no means the most knowledgeable about XR-E vs XP-E. From how I understand it, XP-E is roughly the same die as the (later) XR-E but in a smaller package, without the metal ring which created the "dreaded Cree ring effect". Note that there were several updated versions of the XR-E, so I guess one thing about going for an XP-E is that at least you know which version you are getting, which you probably can't tell by looking at an emitter photo of an XR-E.

I'm just going on your quoted figures here, so could be way off, but according to those figures the XP-E uses 0.5W less to achieve 40lumens more in output. That means more brightness with less heat, and the lower forward voltage at the same current level (3.1V vs 3.3) means the driver can stay in regulation longer = longer runtimes.

For aspheric zoomers like these, you get a cleaner beam when you get rid of the metal ring, and additionally remove or matt up any reflective surfaces around it (the "white pill")

Not a deal breaker, but the XP-E is essentially the newer "better" version, so if you can get it for the same price then it's the one to go for. Of course XP-E2 is an even better choice, but you won't be seeing them in $4 lights for a while...


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

Thanks for the kind reply. And, having gotten this far... Let me go ahead and expose further ignorance. What exactly is the "dreaded Cree ring effect"? Is that something different (over and above?) the halo-like optical effects that are so common on Sipiks? The reason I ask is that I have never really noticed any similar "rings" or "halos" on other Cree flashlights.


----------



## RoGuE_StreaK

I dunno, I'm just regurgitating stuff I've read around the place  Searching CPF will give you much better answers than anything you'll get from me, in fact it seems like some say that the XR-E may be better for aspheric throwers...
Sounds like there were two types of negative ring effect, one being the halo in lensed designs from reflections off the metal ring, the other being dark rings in reflectored designs due to mismatch of design and the metal ring blocking portions of the light from reaching the reflector.
Try this thread as an example. Probably hundreds of similar threads in the dedicated LED sub-forum

But for a $4 torch, probably nothing worth delving into. I just figure if you can get the updated emitter, go for it, but most likely there won't be an earth-shattering difference.


----------



## mccririck

Any links to XP-E versions with the white plastic insert?


----------



## ThrowerLover

RoGuE_StreaK said:


> the "FordEx" ones seem to be $3.37 if you are wanting to save a few cents. XR-E though, but seems that most of the $3.60 ones are (no emitter pics on some, and none have emitter details)



Thanks, RoGuE_StreaK. I ordered 10 black @ $3.37 and 10 silver @ $3.50. I really don't care about the color - just thought I'd see if there's any differences. The description says they have Cree Q5 LEDs, whatever that is. These will go to non-flashaholics, i.e., normal people, so if they work at all they'll probably be well received. I plan on putting an Energizer Advanced Lithium AA in each one. The three I own already have held up well for nearly a year. A 14500 really increases the brightness, but I won't be putting those in gift lights.


----------



## RoGuE_StreaK

(feels like I'm spamming here, obviously I have nothing better to do )

@mccririck: I know banggood's got some XP-E ones, but no plastic insert (search "14500"). Mine doesn't look like any of the pills shown here, closest to "Sample A" but no notches and a badly centered reflective ring thing. If I can figure out how to remove this pill, I'll get rid of that and try to make a ring of matt black plastic to cover everything bar the emitter.

@ThrowLover: Q5 is the brightness bin, it doesn't tell you whether it's an XR-E or XP-E but it doesn't really matter as the brightness binning should be the same between them. It also has no relevance to the tint, you can get one Q5 that's really yellow and the next Q5 could be really blue, unless a tint bin is specified eg. 5C, 4B, 1A etc., then it's luck of the draw. If you see something like XM-L2 U2 1A, then you know exactly which emitter, brightness and tint you should be getting, but it tends to be more expensive.
I was looking for other body colours just for some flavour, eg. a "his" and "hers" 
That's the beauty about these as gifts, anyone can just use the AAs they have lying around, but the "not normal" people like us can boost 'em with a li-ion.


----------



## JacobJones

I managed to take a decent beam comparison photo, both lights are zoomed in and directed under a wardrobe so that only the spill is visible (bright hotspot makes it hard to see the spill). Both XP-E LEDs. http://imageshack.com/i/n1i2d0j

I shall try and get a comparison shot with an XR-E one when my eneloops have charged up.


----------



## mzil

Thanks Jacob. That was interesting. "Shiny" means the area surrounding the LED is that reflective metal stuff and "white" means no metal, just the raw, white plastic pill material, right?


----------



## mzil

I may not get to it any time soon, since I have a lot on my plate, but an interesting experiment would be to cover the area surrounding the LED with a black matte material like felt or black gaffer tape, but do so only on _half_ of the circle, like a half moon. This would verify [upon viewing the results] that the outer rings in the "spill" area are coming from that surface. If anyone wants to run with this test, before I get a chance, by all means, please do.


----------



## jorn

All the shiny or reflective stuff inside the head is making funky rings. Blackening out a reflector on a homemade p60 asperic is a old trix. Removes most of the funky patterns from internal reflections. Just try to hold the light and twist the lense. The rings will not rotate, and some smaller funky patterns in the beam will rotate with the lense. The tiny funky stuff that rotates when you twist is from imperfections in the lense. All the static rings etc in the beam are from internal reflections. Blackening out everything with matte black paint will kill most of the reflections. I wouldent try painting a xr-e version. The tiny metal ring around the dome is impossible to mask and paint without making a mess. Should be easy to mask and spraypaint a xp-e version with some matte black spraypaint. 

All good optic got a matte black layer inside to prevent internal reflections. Scopes, camera lenses etc. I saw someone invented super black. Some nano tec that totally absorbed light. optics and millitary was the targeded marked. They said scope optics and camera lenses could benefit greatly from this light absorbing nano black.


----------



## JacobJones

mzil said:


> Thanks Jacob. That was interesting. "Shiny" means the area surrounding the LED is that reflective metal stuff and "white" means no metal, just the raw, white plastic pill material, right?



Both have aluminium pills but the material surrounding the LED varies, one has some sort of shiny chromed plastic whilst the other has plain white plastic. This can be seen in this photo http://imageshack.com/i/0nksfij that I linked to on the previous page.

Edit: Pics are back now.


----------



## tubed

Quite an interesting (and long) thread for a $3 light but that's why i love this forum.
Quick question for you all....any versions of this light (or similar) with a normal reflector?
It seems that this should be even less expensive to manufacture. I've been looking at these lights for a long time but I'm one who really doesn't like the focus thing.


----------



## jorn

The sipik68 is a "clone" of a old light called nitecore extreme. This one has a reflector, not budget, ramping ui. But the look of it and sizes are almost 100% identical.


----------



## mzil

The Nitecore Extreme had no zoom and didn't use AA/14500 batteries, it used CR123 instead. It is a very different light, IMHO, but was undoubtedly the inspiration for the Sipik's outer body design.


----------



## jorn

I know, i have owned the extreme. I was refering to the (or similar) part.


----------



## someidiot

Are there any comparable budget lights that use a CR123?

I'm looking at the Fenix PD22 but if there's one that's really cheap, I'd give it a shot.


----------



## J_C

JacobJones said:


> I managed to take a decent beam comparison photo, both lights are zoomed in and directed under a wardrobe so that only the spill is visible (bright hotspot makes it hard to see the spill). Both XP-E LEDs. http://imageshack.com/i/n1i2d0j
> 
> I shall try and get a comparison shot with an XR-E one when my eneloops have charged up.



Wow, I was thinking about getting some of these but those beam shots look horrible. Are the rings this pronounced through most of the focal range or is this only their worst at a particular focus to make them prominent, or ??

Do you think that etching the back of the lens in the right spot(s) might diffuse some of the rings together?


----------



## mzil

His photos are of the lights used in full telephoto zoomed mode [a tight spotlight used for the greatest throw possible]. You don't see the very bright spotlight center in the pic because he is purposefully concealing it under the furniture, so the brightness doesn't overwhelm the camera's exposure metering. When used this way the dim outer rings aren't really what you are focusing on or using. The wide angle modes luckily _don't _have these prominent rings; instead it has a rather unique, uniform disc of light without the typical hotspot in the center, with a fading corona spilling off from the center, one would see from nearly any other parabolic reflector based light. From my perspective this is exactly how a flashlight _should_ be, since both the sun (and a camera light/flash) illuminate the scene uniformly as well. P.S. Have you ever tried shoolting a video (or illuminate a scene for a still camera) with a typical (parabolic) flashlight? It looks horrendous.


----------



## RoGuE_StreaK

I believe those rings are reflections off the various metal parts inside the head, _should_ be able to get rid of them or reduce them by covering everything in a matt black paint/material. I haven't bothered trying yet, they aren't massively noticeable outdoors, and I'm not using mine to hunt bears/zombies.


----------



## RIX TUX

J_C said:


> Wow, I was thinking about getting some of these but those beam shots look horrible. Are the rings this pronounced through most of the focal range or is this only their worst at a particular focus to make them prominent, or ??
> 
> Do you think that etching the back of the lens in the right spot(s) might diffuse some of the rings together?


if you adjust the beam the rings might go away .......*and it is a $ 3.60 light
*


----------



## Zorzi

I have some of these clones ordered from various ebay sellers, let's see what I get.. This thread is really long now, so if it is not asking too much, what are roughly the best run times of these lights in the single mode and 3-modes version, with AA and 14550? Thank you!


----------



## BarryG

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Has anyone tested the output of the single mode version with AA vs 14500? I would guess that they would go inti direct drive and get hot pretty quick.




Barry


----------



## cistallus

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Just tested one, with charged (4.17V) Efest 14500 IMR. At 5 minutes it was warm but not that warm. At 10 minutes it was pretty hot but I could still hold it continuously. At 15 minutes about the same. Ditto 20 minutes. At 30 minutes a bit hotter but could still hold it. Stopped the test.

It is certainly a lot brighter on 14500 than on Eneloop.


----------



## markr6

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

This thread reminded me...I ordered one about a month ago!! Should be here anyday now. It was just a total impulse buy being only $3 or so. Not expecting much.


----------



## BarryG

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

Got a 14500 and tried it in mine, great little light!!! I have EDC it for a few days and it is small enough not to notice and if you drop it, no big deal!

Thanks, cistallus for the side-by-side test!




Barry


----------



## Plato112

I received 2 of these last week and they are my first LED-flashlights. I have to say I'm impressed by their performance!
That impressed that I already have to stronger flashlights on the way, oh and some batteries and charger.
(I never knew that shopping for flashlights could be that addictive)


----------



## RoGuE_StreaK

Plato112 said:


> (I never knew that shopping for flashlights could be that addictive)


_Once you start down the light path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will _


----------



## buds224

^ Exactly.


----------



## markr6

Bought one on Amazon. Forgot about it and ended up waiting about 45 days and still no delivery. When I asked Amazon, they said the seller no longer existsed. Dammit!


----------



## mzil

^If you did the payment process _through_ Amazon, I'm pretty sure they will refund you.


----------



## markr6

mzil said:


> ^If you did the payment process _through_ Amazon, I'm pretty sure they will refund you.



I'm guessing they did. For $2.xx I didn't even bother to check my credit card.


----------



## mzil

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

I've bought these before for <$5 from US distributors, so I didn't have to wait for weeks, but now I can't find any. I'm glad I got them when I did, but if I see such a deal again I think I'll get one more for oven experiments.


----------



## 5S8Zh5

KiltedMP said:


> Purchased an inexpensive little Cree AA light which was advertised at 300lumen (not likely), but is a decent little light. High, low and strobe. Very useful for when the larger 960 lumen light is not needed.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B006VPPERC/?tag=cpf0b6-20
> 
> For $5, it was a surprising nice and useful little light.



The price has dropped in the year and a half since the op:

Price: $3.99 & FREE Shipping 
You Save: $16.01 (80%)


_


----------



## mzil

If you click on the "ships and sold by" retailer, and then on that page click on "detailed seller information", you can discover the ETA to one's country in particular. "17 - 28 business days" pretty much always means it is coming from China.

I've ordered goods this way and it works, but it often comes by way of a weird carrier, a month later, no tracking in some instances, and since the delivery person doesn't know me they at times insist on a signature and I'm often not home to provide that, so it ends up being a big hassle all to save a couple of bucks compared to a US dealer.

Thing is, there used to be a few US dealers selling it for only $5 or so, shipped, but no longer.


----------



## BarryG

I checked over on the 'Bay for these in the US and item # 291281781066 has 2 for $8.85, so they can still be found under $5 per light............ and now 1000 lumens!!! LoL!
#291123105028 has 5 for $19.99 but only 300 lumens :-(


They do make great loaner lights and most people are impressed with them. Great stocking stuffers as well.







Barry


----------



## mzil

Thanks Barry. Just looking for one, but didn't think to check the 'bay with it's "US only" option. Good one.


----------



## BarryG

mzil said:


> Thanks Barry. Just looking for one, but didn't think to check the 'bay with it's "US only" option. Good one.



No problem, glad to help!





Barry


----------



## C.M.S

Sounds like a nice lil craptastic light that is a must for the glovebox


----------



## Mondak

I have a couple of these and even though they are cheap, I think you could spend your money better. I don't like how the zooming lens feels on the ones I have. It is way too loose to be really useful if you ask me.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

Mondak said:


> I have a couple of these and even though they are cheap, I think you could spend your money better. I don't like how the zooming lens feels on the ones I have. It is way too loose to be really useful if you ask me.



There are several different "varieties" of Sipik68s and their clones. The "better" ones use an O-ring for tensioning the zooming lens, others use a wire C-clip. The O-ring "feels" much better. If you wanted to, it is easy enough to replace the C-clip with an O-ring.


----------



## mzil

I would think an o-ring, that's constantly under friction each time you zoom, will wear thin and eventually fail though, so whereas it may have a nicer feel to it in the first year or two, you may be disappointed that it eventually fails and flat out breaks. I would also think finding a replacement o-ring, including the shipping charge, would cost almost as much or more than simply buying a brand new $4 flashlight!


----------



## mzil

On Amazon there are now versions of this light advertised as three colors, with an image showing three lights, one with red light, blue light, and green light coming out the front. Search there for:
Ultrafire 7w 300lm Cree Q5 LED 3-mode Mini Black Shell Flashlight Torch (Red/Green/Uv Light)
or for the UV one:
UltraFire 7w 300lm Cree Q5 LED 3-mode Mini Black Shell Portable Uv Flashlight Torch Adjustable Focus Zoom Lamp -Uv Light

Click the box "more choices" and you'll see these new beam colors I mean [not to be (easily) confused with alternate color _bodies_, which are also listed under "more choices"]
Anyone know more info, like do they simply have filter discs or are they color LEDs? I guess for the UV one that _has_ to be the case since you can really make true UV light simply by filtering white, at least not well.


----------



## more_vampires

Lol! 7 watts and 300 lumens in RED and GREEN? Hmm. I don't believe. What emitter? Oh wait... *ULTRAFIRE!* 

If this is true, I want a box of ten of each r, g, uv. I feel pretty confident that it is not so.

When I buy Sipik 68 clones, I basically disregard all stated specs. If they say it's 3 mode, maybe that part is true. IF they say it also takes 14500, that's also probably true.


----------



## reppans

more_vampires said:


> When I buy Sipik 68 clones, I basically disregard all stated specs. If they say it's 3 mode, maybe that part is true. IF they say it also takes 14500, that's also probably true.



haha.... I bought a 300 lm, 3 mode, CW, Ultrafire version, I think from the same link above, just for sh*** and grins. It maxes ~50 lms on a NiMh and ~135 lms on a 14500 in my lightbox (HDS/Malkoff/47s scale). Nasty PWM and very crude build quality, but it works, and might even make a good loaner light.


----------



## more_vampires

Like a box of chocolates, you never know what you'll get.

It's a great excuse to have a stack of decent drivers sitting around. The host bodies are unbelievably nice for the extremely low price. Definitely not Surefire quality, but most lights aren't.

I don't actually understand how Sipik 68 and clones get made and sold for that price.


----------



## JerryM

I would not be without several. I gift them and use them in my cars. I have not had one fail. If I could choose only one AA light it would not the the Sipik, but it would be in the top 5.
Jerry


----------



## desmobob

I just received my first Sipik SK68 a few days ago. I popped in an L91, played around with it for a few minutes, and was satisfied with it. A couple of nights ago, I took it outside for the first time. The throw in "zoomed" position blew me away... I was very surprised!

The quality of these lights obviously doesn't measure up to the high-end brands, but take a look at the light and think about it... I don't think you could buy an aluminum blank and pay someone to chuck it up into a CNC machine for that price, let alone have a completed light. Amazing, really.

I ordered another half-dozen for gifting.

Take it easy,
Bob


----------



## mzil

> A couple of nights ago, I took it outside for the first time. The throw in "zoomed" position blew me away... I was very surprised!


If you want a real treat, try a 14500 battery.


----------



## desmobob

mzil said:


> If you want a real treat, try a 14500 battery.



I have a couple in my shopping cart at Ilumin. I picked 700mAh Efest protected, as they were the only ones Ilumin had that were as short in length as the Energizer lithium primary I'm using now. Do you happen to know the max length 14500 that will fit in the Sipik light?

Take it easy,
Bob


----------



## mzil

Not sure of the max length but the Sipik 68 clone I have {and in theory there might be differences} takes an IC protected Li-ion 14500 made by AW [Part Number AW14500P] I think I bought from Lighthound, IIRC. It claims on the label it is 750 mAh but I have no idea if that is true. 

By a quick visual inspection only, it appears to be at most .5 to 1mm longer than a standard, copper top Duracell AA I have lying around.


----------



## desmobob

Thanks. I'll play it safe and buy a short one. I don't have any other 14500 lights (that I know of).

Take it easy,
Bob


----------



## Capolini

I bought one 2 1/2 years ago. It was my first torch!! So I went from this to my TK61vn V4!! lol!


I have an AW 14500. I am guessing w/ a AA alkaline it was ~ 100/150 max,now it seems ~ 300/350 lumens! It was $7 and is built very well! It has an XR-E LED.
Mine is a NO-NAME torch that the seller called, "Mini-Cree"!


----------



## Capolini

mzil said:


> Not sure of the max length but the Sipik 68 clone I have {and in theory there might be differences} takes an IC protected Li-ion 14500 made by AW [Part Number AW14500P] I think I bought from Lighthound, IIRC. It claims on the label it is 750 mAh but I have no idea if that is true.
> 
> By a quick visual inspection only, it appears to be at most .5 to 1mm longer than a standard, copper top Duracell AA I have lying around.



I am using the same exact AW in mine and it works/fits perfectly,,,,,,bought it at the same place also! I have had the AW 14500~ 2 years and still going strong.


----------



## mzil

In the questions and comments section at Amazon, there's more than one person claiming that recent batches of these aren't just dimmer with a 1.5V AA but fundamentally won't work, meaning you HAVE to use a 14500 3.7V batt. Anyone know any details if that's true?

Search for this question for example:
"AS of mid dec 2014, got 6 of these, NONE work with 1.5v AA batteries as stated, ALL work with 3.7v 14500 rechargeable batteries. FALSE ADVERTISING?"


----------



## Rosoku Chikara

mzil said:


> In the questions and comments section at Amazon, there's more than one person claiming that recent batches of these aren't just dimmer with a 1.5V AA but fundamentally won't work, meaning you HAVE to use a 14500 3.7V batt. Anyone know any details if that's true?
> 
> Search for this question for example:
> "AS of mid dec 2014, got 6 of these, NONE work with 1.5v AA batteries as stated, ALL work with 3.7v 14500 rechargeable batteries. FALSE ADVERTISING?"



Sounds to me like a "bad batch" of drivers. In the past, there were a few which would only work on 14500 and reputable eBay sellers would "replace" them (send you another one for free). But, it was always an occasional thing. The www.sipik.com website still shows the SK68 spec as either 1.5V or 3.7v, so the "real" Sipik is still supposed to run on both.

The problem is with the "clones." Judging from the wide variations I have seen, it seems that they sometimes get put together in batches from whatever parts happen to be available (and/or are the cheapest) at the time. So, while the overall flashlights are always very similar, they can vary quite a bit in detail.

Of course, the driver is hardly a "detail." But, I can certainly imagine a large batch of clones getting put together with drivers that for whatever reason will only run on 3.7v. Depending on the size of that batch, you may have a wait a while for them to sell through the system.

You might try eBay. That is where I have purchased most of mine.


----------



## mzil

Does anyone know of a study which measured the battery life in strobe mode, for a typical alkaline AAA like Duracell?


----------



## mzil

I have just now received from "Colorful Lighting", fulfilled by Amazon, the "UltraFire® 7w 300lm Cree Q5 LED 3-mode Mini Black Shell Portable Uv Flashlight Torch Adjustable Focus Zoom Lamp -Uv Light"

I am happy to report:
- it works as expected [but I doubt "300lm" in any sense.]
- works from just an ordinary 1.5V AA {some reports say there are recent ones being shipped, in normal full spectrum light at least, which _insist_ on 3.7V 14500 batts}
- the LED is truly UV+purple [not just purple], it fluoresces "neon" objects in my room, i.e. it is not just a purple filtered light. (The LED has a little clear dome over it my other Sipik clones don't)
- 3 modes, as advertised
- like my white ones, the lens screws off giving a nearly 180 degree, full front hemisphere output. "super flood light" good as an ALS for CSI wannabees looking for bodily fluids
-the screw threads are more gritty than my others but I'm not picky, as long as it works, which it does


----------



## Capolini

^^^^ Good luck w/ your new torch.

I sent mine a few days ago to Vinh to see about "Mod options"! He got it today! Mine is pictured in post #227. It is single mode and took both AA and 14500.


----------



## Capolini

mzil said:


> Does anyone know of a study which measured the battery life in strobe mode, for typical a typical alkaline AAA like Duracell?



I do not know of a study. However, I asked Selfbuilt and strobe is usually twice the run time as MAX. I believe because it is on/off, on/off ect and usually on high power.


----------



## mzil

Thanks. That would make sense assuming there isn't a surge of battery consumption in changing from the off to on state. With incandescent bulbs I believe there is, but with LEDs not nearly as much, but maybe a little? I don't really know.


----------



## lumentia

Capolini said:


> ^^^^ Good luck w/ your new torch.
> 
> I sent mine a few days ago to Vinh to see about "Mod options"! He got it today! Mine is pictured in post #227. It is single mode and took both AA and 14500.


I enjoyed your update on this light on Vinh's subforum. Those reading this thread who don't venture over there might like to see how that little monster turned out ⬇

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?401874-MiniCreeVN


----------



## mzil

The big river retailer has a new version of it called: "1 Pcs Keychain Flashlight", which is a color option on their main entry for this Sipik clone light, which looks like a similar rear body where the AA goes but a smaller lens. Anyone know more details?


----------



## mzil

They have retracted the entry of the light I inquired about in the post, above, perhaps seeing the error in lumping it with a description which promises zooming.

The similar entry called "Ultrafire® 3 Mode Miniature Key Chain LED Flashlight" on another page of theirs, unrelated to this Sipik SK68 clone family, makes no mention of zoom capability, for instance.


----------



## mzil

Does anyone know the first year this Sipik SK-68 clone came out or what was the first year of the Sipik SK-68 itself?


----------



## mzil

Anyone know if a Keeppower (said to be Sanyo with added protection chip) 14500P PROTECTED cell will fit? One source says they are 52.5mm long with the protection circuit but I'd like to hear from actual owners as to their experience.


----------



## maukka

mzil said:


> Anyone know if a Keeppower (said to be Sanyo with added protection chip) 14500P PROTECTED cell will fit? One source says they are 52.5mm long with the protection circuit but I'd like to hear from actual owners as to their experience.



A Keppower 840 mAh Sanyo one fits my SK68 clone (http://www.gearbest.com/led-flashlights/pp_183970.html) no problem.


----------



## Lynx_Arc

For fun I ordered a "zoom" cree 1AA light off ebay and was surprised by the construction of a sub $3 light but am irritated by the "mode memory" which remember the last mode when you turn it off and goes to the next mode when you turn it back on so the only way to have it turn on in the mode you want it to is to cycle it before you turn it off to the mode BEFORE what you want. I just wish I could figure out which lights don't have mode memory at all instead of this perverse mode memory. I'm guessing all these cheap High/Low/Strobe lights have the same stupid circuit in them.


----------



## Lynx_Arc

Lynx_Arc said:


> For fun I ordered a "zoom" cree 1AA light off ebay and was surprised by the construction of a sub $3 light but am irritated by the "mode memory" which remember the last mode when you turn it off and goes to the next mode when you turn it back on so the only way to have it turn on in the mode you want it to is to cycle it before you turn it off to the mode BEFORE what you want. I just wish I could figure out which lights don't have mode memory at all instead of this perverse mode memory. I'm guessing all these cheap High/Low/Strobe lights have the same stupid circuit in them.


I found out how to fix the mode memory problem, now the light will always revert to high when you have it off for more than about 5 second instead of coming on in the next mode. I use the light often in low mode and have turned it on several times in strobe which was extremely annoying. Seems this is a problem with a lot of these cheap lights.


----------



## Cleck

Ever since I received one of these as a gift, I've loved the performance for the price. Someone scoffed at the 300Lm performance, but from a single 14500, not bad. I currently have this particular one in my coat pocket and since I've started CC'ing, I've had this in a pocket. To me, it's a tool and it does it's job well, and it's cheap. This also inspired me to buy the Coast HP1. Having these little lights is really handy. It's nice to have a wide range of sizes for whatever comes up.


----------



## mzil

@Cleck So what's your opinion on the HP-1 compared to the Sipik clone? Any smaller? Brighter? Tougher? Beam pattern difference?
I love the cheapie but the Coast isn't too expensive so if it truly has some advantages I'd try that too.


----------



## light-modder

Lynx_Arc said:


> I found out how to fix the mode memory problem, now the light will always revert to high when you have it off for more than about 5 second instead of coming on in the next mode.



Please share! I have come to prefer the single mode because I dislike the other so much.


----------



## Lynx_Arc

light-modder said:


> Please share! I have come to prefer the single mode because I dislike the other so much.


You have to take the light apart and get to the circuit board and use a pencil to draw a line of graphite across a capacitor. This bleeds off the charge that is held on the capacitor that "remembers" the mode the light is in allowing it to forget. If you get too much it will only be a one mode light as it will essentially not remember at all what mode it was in when off between modes. Mine takes about 5 to 10 seconds off to forget so it always comes on high now. 

Here is one page that discusses it. 
http://www.canbike.org/information-technology/flashlight-modification-remove-multi-modes.html
Most likely the circuit in your light isn't the same. I had to pencil through the tops of 3 capacitors and it still didn't work so I had to wipe them off with alcohol and the second time it worked. If you knew which capacitor was responsible and had super duper soldering skills to replace the tiny smd cap with the correct one you could probably fix the right way.


----------



## Cleck

mzil said:


> @Cleck So what's your opinion on the HP-1 compared to the Sipik clone? Any smaller? Brighter? Tougher? Beam pattern difference?
> I love the cheapie but the Coast isn't too expensive so if it truly has some advantages I'd try that too.



Definitely different. The clone focuses to the point where you can see the emitter loud and clear, with a little halo of light around it. The Coast focuses down, but not to the point of seeing the emitter. It's still a round spot, surrounded by a brighter and bigger spot. I should post a side by side later to show you.

The clone is also brighter, even if you zoom out just a little bit to get the emitter unfocused. With a 14500, it's 300 lumens iirc, and the HP1 is anywhere between 190-220 lumens with a 14500. 

Either way, can't go wrong with whatever you order. I love them both. If you want overall brightness, go for the clone. If you don't like the emitter and you want a brand name, go for the Coast. They both zoom and are both plenty bright, for their size.


----------



## JerryM

*Re: Inexpensive little AA light*

I have 8 on order now with eBay sellers none has cost over $3.25 and most less than $3
Jerry


----------

