# Orb Raw Ns review



## joema (Mar 9, 2006)

*Pros:* incredibly small, very bright, two-stage output, O-ring sealed, beautiful jewel-like appearance, quality construction, good beam design, 7 hr run time on low, available tritium locator
*Cons:* not regulated, gets warm on high, uncommon Li-ion rechargeable 14250 battery

*Detailed review:*
The Orb Raw Ns (Nickel Silver) is tiny, powerful, unregulated twist switch light using a rechargeable 14250 battery (250 mAH capacity) and T-bin Luxeon III emitter. Nickel silver is a silvery, corrosion-resistant alloy of copper, zinc and nickel (not silver). Run time is about 15 min on high, and 7 hr on low. 

Price is roughly U.S. $95, including battery and Nano charger. It is sometimes called "Son of Raw", as it's a further shrinkage of the already tiny Orb Raw. Manufacturer is The Orb, a U.K. company. http://www.theorb.co.uk/sor.php

Body is non-anodized, but nickel silver alloy is commonly used in tableware and marine fittings due to its hardness, toughness, and resistance to corrosion. The machined constuction appears rugged. Scratch resistance is untested, but nickel silver is generally harder than aluminum (degree varies with different alloys). Size is 45mm x 18mm. Weight (with battery): 44 grams. Bottom is flat so light will tail stand (candle mode). The tail has a machined aperture for attaching a lanyard or small split ring for keychain use.

The Raw Ns has two brightness levels, selected by progressive twisting. Just a few degrees rotation will reliably select off or on. An additional approx. 100 degrees rotation will select high. Feel is very precise -- no backlash, no battery rattle, amount of resistance is just right. Lack of knurling isn't a problem unless your fingers are slippery.

Based on lux meter reflection tests, the Raw Ns on high is very roughly equal to my HDS EDC U60 at the 42 lumen setting (level 2). The Raw Ns on low is about equal to the HDS U60 on level 8 or 7 (5.3 - 7.5 lumens). IOW about equal to an Arc AAA-P.

Beam design is good; hotspot beam angle is about 8 degrees, roughly like a Jil CR2 or Fire~FlyIII. Throw is amazingly good for such a tiny light -- useful range is about 40 yards at night. However spot is softer without distinct edge. The spillbeam is quite wide, about 80 degrees, which is wider than most other small lights. Spillbeam is bright; about 50% brighter than an HDS U60 at 1/2 the spillbeam radius. This gives a floody characteristic at close range, yet hotspot retains decent throw. Beam appearance is good; there were no obvious artifacts or swirls in the pattern. A donut pattern appeared only under four inches distance. Beam color was white on both high and low output.

At high output the light quickly gets warm. Left unheld for 5 min on high, it's hot. This is expected and unavoidable due to the high power and small surface area. 

*Summary:* A very impressive tiny light. It has a jewelry-like appearance, yet is not a novelty light -- it's practical. It's O-ring sealed, so while not a dive light can survive getting wet. It has more run time at about 7 lumens than an Arc AAA-P, yet can be cranked up to 40+ lumens.

Below: FF3, Raw Ns




Below: Raw Ns




Below: FF3, Raw Ns, HDC U60




Below: FF3, Raw Ns, HDC U60




Below: Peak Caribbean, FF3 (max), Raw Ns (max), HDC U60 (max)




Below: Peak Caribbean, FF3 (max), Raw Ns (max), HDC U60 (max)


----------



## LowWorm (Mar 9, 2006)

Thanks, joema - another excellent review.

So, what's your opinion on this little Raw's scratchproof-ness? The bare alu Raw, for me, was a little too prone to scratching (although polishing could do wonders). Any carry wear for you?


----------



## joema (Mar 9, 2006)

LowWorm said:


> ...what's your opinion on this little Raw's scratchproof-ness? The bare alu Raw, for me, was a little too prone to scratching (although polishing could do wonders). Any carry wear for you?


I don't know. Nickel silver is generally harder and more scratch resistant than aluminum, varying with specific alloys. In theory anodized metal is tougher, but as we often see, that's no guarantee. 

I'll probably just carry it in my pocket and see how it does.


----------



## WAVE_PARTICLE (Mar 9, 2006)

Thanks Joema!


EXCELLENT REVIEW. This has all the information I am interested in!!! :thumbsup:

Can't wait to get mine!


WP


----------



## coyote (Mar 9, 2006)

excellent review.
thnx!


----------



## Macaw (Mar 9, 2006)

joema's review describes my NS nearly exactly, except my tint was slightly Purple-lavander, more obvious on low, though not enough to be a hinderance. At first I was disappointed about the percieved brightness but taken into account the floody beam, and of course, the size of the light, It's about right. I agree that the output is ~40+ Lumens out the window.


----------



## colubrid (Mar 9, 2006)

I have a NS on the way. Since I have never handled either Raw in person. How does the NS stand up to the slightly larger aluminum Raw?


I know the O-rings and everything are a plus but how does the lumens and beamshot compare? Can anyone post pictures of the aluminum Raw compared to the NS Raw?


----------



## BobbyRS (Mar 9, 2006)

Yeah I would be interested to see the Raw NS compared to the Orb Raw 3watt; especially in beam shots. According to their website, the Orb Raw 3watt is around 77-100 lumens. The Orb Raw NS around 77 lumens. So far, all that I have read is that most agree it is around the 40-45 lumen range. Both are 3watts. Is the Orb Raw 3watt about the same; 40-45 lumens? Seems like a big difference then what they are claiming. I know pretty much all companies do this, but this seems like a much bigger difference then most.


----------



## Tremendo (Mar 9, 2006)

I also have a RAW NS on the way. I have never seen the RAW, but I knew I'd like something thougher than aluminum. Man does the RAW NS look tiny in those pics....


----------



## joema (Mar 9, 2006)

*BobbyRS:* _"...According to their website, the Orb Raw 3watt is around 77-100 lumens. The Orb Raw NS around 77 lumens. So far, all that I have read is that most agree it is around the 40-45 lumen range. Both are 3watts. Is the Orb Raw 3watt about the same; 40-45 lumens? Seems like a big difference then what they are claiming. I know pretty much all companies do this, but this seems like a much bigger difference then most."_

Keep several things in mind:

- None of us except McGizmo have an integrating sphere to make accurate output measurements. When I posted my Raw Ns looked about like 42 lumens, that was a simple lux meter reflection test compared to an HDS EDC at (what should be) 42 lumens. It's very inexact.

- It is very common for lights to not produce the advertised output, just as it's common for cars to not produce the advertised gas mileage. It doesn't mean the mfg is doing something nefarious (although some are). Rather there are limitations and often false assumptions about the testing process.

- Think about this: when any mfg of any product advertises a statistic (mpg, lumens, horsepower, etc), what does that really mean? That every unit off the line is guaranteed to produce that? Or on average they'll produce that? Or maybe the arithmetic mean of several units will produce that? Or maybe a prototype produced that and hopefully the production units will? Unless the mfg explicitly states a guarantee and defines the exact test procedure, the numbers are at best a rough guide. There are many uncertainties and unless a regulatory or advisory body produces an exact test procedure to ensure uniform results, wide variation is possible without the mfg doing anything tricky.

- The visual difference between 42 lumens and 77 lumens is limited. According to Stevens' Power Law, it's the quotient of the two cube roots. IOW 42^.33 / 77^.33 = 82% (42 lumen light will be visually 82% as bright as a 77 lumen light, assuming identical beam patterns). So you could see a difference but it wouldn't be huge.

Whether the output is 42 lumens or 77 lumens, the Raw Ns is quite bright for any light, and incredibly bright for its size. Maybe McGizmo will test a Raw Ns in his integrating sphere


----------



## pippyd (Mar 9, 2006)

Hope this at least gives ppl an idea of any difference:






Not the most scientific of conditions but should give you an idea. Pics by me, kindly blended in to one by Dreamscape.

Cheers, Phil



BobbyRS said:


> Yeah I would be interested to see the Raw NS compared to the Orb Raw 3watt; especially in beam shots. According to their website, the Orb Raw 3watt is around 77-100 lumens. The Orb Raw NS around 77 lumens. So far, all that I have read is that most agree it is around the 40-45 lumen range. Both are 3watts. Is the Orb Raw 3watt about the same; 40-45 lumens? Seems like a big difference then what they are claiming. I know pretty much all companies do this, but this seems like a much bigger difference then most.


----------



## colubrid (Mar 9, 2006)

The RAW definetly looks a lot brighter to me in the pic than the NS.:shakehead


----------



## PoliceScannerMan (Mar 9, 2006)

colubrid said:


> The RAW definetly looks a lot brighter to me in the pic than the NS.:shakehead



Its smaller! Thats a plus That Raw in the pic could be a U bin....

You will be pleased, if not, you will have no problem selling it for every penny you payed.


----------



## lightlust (Mar 9, 2006)

The average values for the Luxeon III emitter (manufacturer source: Lumileds.com) are 77 lumens for a T-Bin and 100 lumens for a U-bin. Both T and U bin emitters have been used in ORB Raws.

I would like to see the results of an integrating sphere test.
As an example, automobiles have engine horsepower and rear wheel horsepower ratings that vary due to inefficiencies in the drivetrain, so that a 315 horsepower engine may deliver 270 horsepower to the rear wheels. A dynomometer test is needed to determine the actual useful output.

It just "feels" like 300 horsepower may not be as accurate as a measurement. With experience, though, I was able to easily "feel" changes of four or more horsepower in output that were verified by measurement.​We also know that emitter lumens or bulb lumens vary from what comes out the end due to variances in reflector design and efficiency, among other factors.

Again, the results of an integrating sphere test would be nice. Illumination always beats speculation, LOL.


----------



## powernoodle (Mar 9, 2006)

joema said:


> *Cons:* . . . uncommon Li-ion rechargeable 14250 battery



This is the only thing that stopped me from buying one of these lights. There is only one known supplier (one known to me, anyway), and I'm not confident that replacement batteries will be available in perpetuity. The first Raw that eats a RCR2 is as bright or brighter (?) and still small enough to scare non-CPFers. JMO.

A+ review as usual, joema.

peace


----------



## Osprey_Guy (Mar 9, 2006)

I'd be hard-pressed to say that the Raw is "a lot brighter" than the NS... While it's true that the smaller NS is not quite as bright as the Raw, the difference to my eye was not what I would call significant. And because of the two different types of beams (the NS beam is not quite as defined as the Raw's), that made it all the more difficult for me to determine just how much difference I perceived simply by judging with my eyes.

The beam of the NS is much whiter than the Raw's, which leans a bit to the warm side. And although I love my Raw, when it is set on low, I find the Raw's beam to be a quite unattractive brownish color (the NS on the other hand puts out a very nice white on both low and high).

I thought the fit and finish of the NS to be superior to the Raw...no question about it...But while the O ring on the NS is a big plus for water resistanace, it's also a slight hindrance in that it also makes it less easy than the Raw to turn on/off using one hand (but then in fairness, that might only be a matter of the NS requiring some more break-in time). The aluminum Raw is much lighter and easier to carry in my shirt pocket, but then the considerably heavier, jewel-like NS feels like a more important light...something that might be perceived as being of greater value.

I think that for the most part I find the two to have many, many pros and very few cons...Both offer a whole lot of light out of an incredibly small, elegantly simple form. Both are made beautifully...and function wonderfully. Overall, both strike me as being similar enough that I thought the NS to be somewhat redundant. It's a sweatheart of a light, but I'm not big on shelf queens and could think of no reason to carry both my Raw and the NS. 

Consequently....My NS arrived yesterday, I admired it (greatly) throughout the day, and then promptly sold it that evening. I shipped it out today. I know it's going to a great home. 


Dennis Greenbaum


----------



## Tremendo (Mar 9, 2006)

I did a search 2 weeks ago and found a primary 14250, non-rechargeable. It was over 1000mAh, and like $7 or so. I sent the link to Rob @ Orb (RAW), he said he'd check it out and see if it could take the 700-900 Ma draw from the RAW NS on high. The specs we've found show that it will come up short, but it wasn't very clear. Hopefully we'll hear good news that something is available at some point. I would be pumped for a battery like that, even with the high price. It would be a great spare or long runtime battery for such a tiny light.


----------



## BobbyRS (Mar 9, 2006)

joema said:


> None of us except McGizmo have an integrating sphere to make accurate output measurements. When I posted my Raw Ns looked about like 42 lumens, that was a simple lux meter reflection test compared to an HDS EDC at (what should be) 42 lumens. It's very inexact.



 

I understand. I believe I have read in the NS order thread that there are others that think it is around 40-45 lumens, including myself just by comparison to other lights around the same lumens. 

 




joema said:


> It is very common for lights to not produce the advertised output, just as it's common for cars to not produce the advertised gas mileage. It doesn't mean the mfg is doing something nefarious (although some are). Rather there are limitations and often false assumptions about the testing process.



 

Yeah, that is what I was trying to say above. I don't know.... 42 lumens instead of 77..... seems to be a bit much of a stretch. 

 




joema said:


> The visual difference between 42 lumens and 77 lumens is limited. According to Stevens' Power Law, it's the quotient of the two cube roots. IOW 42^.33 / 77^.33 = 82% (42 lumen light will be visually 82% as bright as a 77 lumen light, assuming identical beam patterns). So you could see a difference but it wouldn't be huge.



 

I can see a good difference in the beam shots below. I don't know, maybe it is just me, but I think if you can see that much of a difference and one is 42 lumens and the other 77, then maybe it shouldn't be advertised as so. Maybe the RAW below is a U-bin and closer to 100 lumens and that is why you can see that much of a difference. 

 




joema said:


> Whether the output is 42 lumens or 77 lumens, the Raw Ns is quite bright for any light, and incredibly bright for its size. Maybe McGizmo will test a Raw Ns in his integrating sphere



 

Don't get me wrong, I really appreciate this light. It is a very nice piece of work and craftsmanship. I like everything about it and all the hard work that went into it. It really is amazing to see the amount of light that comes out of this little light. But for some reason I can't help but feel a little let down by the brightness buzz that surrounded it before I received it to when I got it and actually saw what it can do; and now to see others sort of agreeing with the brightness levels, doesn't really make things better. 
 
Big thanks for your review and your comments.


----------



## BobbyRS (Mar 9, 2006)

pippyd said:


> Hope this at least gives ppl an idea of any difference:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Thanks for posting these! That to me seems like a big difference; between the NS and RAW. Does your RAW have a U-bin? That VB-16 is crazy bright.:rock:


----------



## BobbyRS (Mar 9, 2006)

Two more questions...... Anyone know where to buy a U-bin RAW? Also, Rob, if you are reading, any plans on making a NS with a U-bin to get it brighter?


----------



## tsask (Mar 9, 2006)

Thanks for this thread. i have ben a fan of the RAW sine Rob first announced its arrival last year I recall the Ubins and the accolades attesting to its RAW POWER!!!:rock: The addition of a 2 stage brightness switch makes a nice light even nicer!!! Then I began admiring the Ns Son of Raw. I was thinking that with the addition of a key ring hole my ORB arrival would be future event. Now the RAW no longer has a U bin, but still may be brighter than the Ns with TYOJ? bin. I' d like to get the RAW but with a keyring capability, I learned from Rob at ORB that the Ns will soon have this feature, how about the RAW??? sounds good. it may be inevitablle . Should I wait for a k2 in a RAW etc???:thinking:


----------



## thesurefire (Mar 10, 2006)

BobbyRS said:


> Two more questions...... Anyone know where to buy a U-bin RAW? Also, Rob, if you are reading, any plans on making a NS with a U-bin to get it brighter?



As far as I know there were only 100 made, so you have to ask very nicely 

Any chance of a picture comparing the bodies of the lights?

Cheers


----------



## sideman7 (Mar 10, 2006)

I bought a RAW from Rob at the end of November and ended up returning it because I thought there was something wrong with it... It was nowhere near as bright as I was expecting. As others have said here, it appeared to be about the same as the 42 lumen setting on my HDS on high, and about half as bright as an ARC AAA-P on low. When Rob got it back, he said it was as bright as it should be for that emitter. I believe the NS uses the same one. I picked up an original U-bin Raw on B/S/T in January, and that is a completely different beast! I would say at least twice as bright (it put out quite a bit more light than my HDS U60XRGT on max), and the color looks whiter! It really is a ridiculous amount of light coming out of something so small...


----------



## sideman7 (Mar 10, 2006)

Also, someone mentioned the difference between 42 and 77 lumens not being that much different visually, I'm not sure I agree with that... I just took a few shots comparing my HDS at 42 lumens and my U-bin RAW (which I guess could be over 100, so I'm not sure this is a valid comparison), but the difference is quite a bit.

Both shots taken at 1/30", f3.5 ISO 3200. I held the lights over my head, shining on the table, and took the photo with the other hand.

HDS at 42 lumens (about the same brightness as the new RAW I bought a few months ago):






U-bin RAW:


----------



## BobbyRS (Mar 10, 2006)

thesurefire said:


> As far as I know there were only 100 made, so you have to ask very nicely Cheers


 
If anyone has one for sale, please pm me. :thanks:


----------



## powernoodle (Mar 10, 2006)

sideman7 said:


> I picked up an original U-bin Raw . . . I would say at least twice as bright [as a T-bin Raw] . . . .



I have U bin and T bin Raws, and am hard-pressed to tell any difference in brightness. Both are pretty dang bright. There is probably some substantial variation within bins (I may have a strong T and a weak U), plus my eyeballs may very well just perceive things differently than the next guy. I think that a Stinger is a lot brighter than a Strion, for example, and others think not.

cheers


----------



## orb (Mar 10, 2006)

Here is the email I have just sent to Bobby :

Hi bobby,

I have read the CPF review & see that a few & yourself are disappointed with the brightness from the ns.
I would have posted a response sooner but its silly busy here ATM.

Any way there are reasons:
The Reflector being smaller (16mm Vs 18mm on the Original Raw) this gives more flood which is why the Ns spot is not as intense.
The Reflectors are designed for the Original SLug Height D shape Slug. The Leds however are the new Slug Height, (Joker) see this thread for more Detail http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=94722&page=1
Basically the focal point is different & results in less Lumens moving forwards.

The lumens quoted on the Web site are from the Lumileds Specs for a TWAJ Bin Led.

Also, there is a small 1 ohm SMD Resistor in this Batch of 200 Raw Ns. This is because the Forward voltage on the twaJ Bin is more like that of a twaH. I could not risk DD (Direct Drive) with such a Low forward voltage.
So from as fresh battery the LED is pulling between 700 - 750 Mah. Not as much as an Original Raw 900Mah.
The benefits are longer run time (25-30 Mins high) Remaining cooler.

there are things we can do, to get the brightness you expected, I have new batch of TWAJ bin LEDs which can handle DD (No 1 ohm Resistor) & move the Reflector closer to the LED. You will still have more flood, Brighter Spill than the Original Raw (18mm Vs 16mm Ref).
I would have to charge for this & Postage.

Hope this all makes sense.
The Alu Raw with the TWAJ Leds ATM is just as bright as the original U bins.


----------



## joema (Mar 10, 2006)

*sideman7:* _"Also, someone mentioned the difference between 42 and 77 lumens not being that much different visually, I'm not sure I agree with that... I just took a few shots comparing my HDS at 42 lumens and my U-bin RAW (which I guess could be over 100, so I'm not sure this is a valid comparison), but the difference is quite a bit."_

As you said, you're likely comparing 42 lumens vs 100+ lumens, so you'd naturally see more of a difference there. Re 42 vs 77 lumens, assuming they are really those values you can see a difference but not to the degree the numbers would imply.

E.g, you can step your HDS U60 from 42 to 60 lumens (a 42% increase), and it only appears slightly brighter. A lux meter shows a 42% increase, but your eye visually perceives only a slight increase. 

By contrast if your car had a 42% horsepower increase it would feel hugely faster. Light and sound are different, due to the eye and ear's logarithmic sensitivity.

This is a key item in flashlight design, as you rapidly encounter a diminishing law of returns if chasing output. The cost is large in terms of power consumption, battery life and heat, and the benefit is relatively small.

Personally I think the Raw Ns is fine with the T bin, but of course a U bin would be better yet. But whether it would make a major _visible_ difference isn't clear. McGizmo posted some integrating sphere results for a recent high-bin emitter and it had less measured output than you'd expect. Sorry, can't find the post for some reason.


----------



## pippyd (Mar 10, 2006)

No problem. 

First off, my orb Raw was a relatively recent purchase new from Rob in Nov/Dec so therefore I believe it not to be a U-bin but a T-bin instead (I think only the lucky early purchasers were U-bins?). 

Second, to the eye there is a small difference in brightness from raw to NS but it's very slight, as usual the photos seem to show the difference more clearly. Also to my eyes my NS has more of a pink tint whereas my raw feels very white, perhaps this accounts for a little of the difference along with the differences in reflector size/geometry.

I am extremely happy with the NS and the raw 

Cheers, Phil




BobbyRS said:


> Thanks for posting these! That to me seems like a big difference; between the NS and RAW. Does your RAW have a U-bin? That VB-16 is crazy bright.:rock:


----------



## pippyd (Mar 10, 2006)

thesurefire said:


> As far as I know there were only 100 made, so you have to ask very nicely
> 
> Any chance of a picture comparing the bodies of the lights?
> 
> Cheers


 
Raw with keyring adapter -- Raw NS


----------



## thesurefire (Mar 10, 2006)

Awsome pics, thanks!


----------



## orb (Mar 10, 2006)

Any chance of a picture comparing the bodies of the lights?

Cheers

Here are some more:














:thanks:


----------



## DreamScape (Mar 10, 2006)

What a Great Thread!!
Great Pics Phil. :naughty: 

Phil sent me the pics over and I just put them together for a better comparison.
Here's one of some ceiling pics Phil had done the other day, whilst chillin out on the bed I think :naughty: 
I have increased the contrast and brightness and reduced to gamma to get a better compasion of the hotspots.






Great Pics too Rob and sideman7.


----------



## Macaw (Mar 11, 2006)

I was one of the first to post the perceived output of the RAW NS at around 45 Lumens. I had originally hoped for this to be a true show-off piece that would be truly awe inspiring to those not familiar with the RAW lights. Don't get me wrong, it still is a showpiece for it's beauty and elegant design. Just not qiute the barn burner that I had expected as far as output is concerned.
That said, for me, the output is quite adequate for most tasks that would come up in day to day activities. I like the idea of extended runtime. It's a keeper!


----------



## BobbyRS (Mar 14, 2006)

Deleted.....Sorry duplicate post.


----------



## BobbyRS (Mar 14, 2006)

Tremendo said:


> I did a search 2 weeks ago and found a primary 14250, non-rechargeable. It was over 1000mAh, and like $7 or so. I sent the link to Rob @ Orb (RAW), he said he'd check it out and see if it could take the 700-900 Ma draw from the RAW NS on high. The specs we've found show that it will come up short, but it wasn't very clear. Hopefully we'll hear good news that something is available at some point. I would be pumped for a battery like that, even with the high price. It would be a great spare or long runtime battery for such a tiny light.


 
This would be great! Anyone know any upated information with this? I wonder if the new batch of NS's would be able to handle it....


----------



## BobbyRS (Mar 14, 2006)

Everyone: Very nice pics! :goodjob:


----------



## RayEarth2162 (Mar 23, 2006)

How come the Orb Raw NS isn't discussed very frequently in the forum? When I first saw the little wonder I was immediately impressed! But having browsed through a few pages here, the discussion seems surprisingly little!

If I want a smallest torch to go onto my keyring, is Orb NS the right choice? How does the low setting compare to, say, Arc AAA?


----------



## joema (Mar 23, 2006)

*RayEarth2162*_...If I want a smallest torch to go onto my keyring, is Orb NS the right choice? How does the low setting compare to, say, Arc AAA?_

The Raw Ns would make a good keyring light. My lux meter shows the low setting is about equal to an Arc AAA-P. Mfg says runtime on that setting is about 7 hr. The high setting looks like roughly 42 lumens based on reflection test comparision to my HDS U60 on 42 lumens. Note these are very rough estimates.

The Raw Ns is a little heavy for its size due to the Nickel Silver metal. However that alloy is very tough and looks great. With battery it's about 44 grams, vs 40 grams for a Peak Caribbean and 20 grams for an Arc AAA (by actual measurement). The mfg website says the regular aluminum Orb Raw is about 30 g, don't know if that's with battery.

If you really want the smallest light, I'd suggest a Photon. Output is about equal to an Arc AAA-P, it has decent runtime, the Freedom model has variable brightness, and size is tiny: http://www.flashlightreviews.com/reviews/lri_freedommax.htm

My main problem with the Raw Ns on a keyring is it's so good looking I'd want to better protect it.


----------



## BobbyRS (Mar 23, 2006)

BobbyRS said:


> This would be great! Anyone know any upated information with this? I wonder if the new batch of NS's would be able to handle it....


 
This is what i have found so far:

LS 14250 Lithium 3.6v 1000mAh
http://sprinter2000.ro/en/acumulatoare/elementi.php?c=20030515231507

ER 14250 Lithium 3.0v 1000mAh
http://www.supremebattery.net/catalog.php?catalog=ER14250

Li-ion 14250 3.7V 300mAh:
http://jjjbattery.manufacturer.globalsources.com/si/6008800536875/ProductDetail/product_id-1001492470/action-GetProduct.htm

The 14250's from batterystation and amondotech are both 3.6v Lithiums, but do not list mAh. 

Again, I wonder if the new batch of NS's would be able to handle a Lithium 1000mAh.


----------



## Macaw (Mar 25, 2006)

I sure wouldn't want to run the RAW Ns to the maximum runtime of the 1000mAH 3.7V cell. That thing would get unbelievably hot! It would probably cook the emitter! It would come in handy to heat up a cup of water to make instant coffee though...


----------



## orb (Mar 25, 2006)

I am going to get some of these type of cells in. From memory I did do some tests a few years ago, I believe they are only capable of 100Ma Max discharge & will only power a 3 watt emitter to the low setting on the Raws.
Still I will give them another try.


----------



## HEY HEY ITS HENDO (Mar 25, 2006)

Very nice !! My very shiney, very new, Ns has instantly made a mockery of most of my other torches,
they now appear cheap, sick, anaemic, pale and weak in comparison.... i just love it, but,.......

.............................. has anyone managed to attach theirs to a keyring ??


----------



## Frank Maddix (Mar 29, 2006)

Got my NS today - the output is somewhat less intense than the Raw and has a bit of a tint ( I would say almost a Nickel-Silver colour). But it's a pleasant tint.
Pippyd, that's a scratched up old Raw you have there! Is it your EDC? The NS will be mine (with my U60 as a backup - hehehe)


----------



## roguesoul (Mar 29, 2006)

My Raw NS draws 500mA from freshly charged batteries. 

Li-Ion discharge rate is 2c max.
14250 Li-Ion = 300mA = 600mA max discharge rate.

I'm happy and SAFE.


----------



## cyberhobo (Mar 29, 2006)

Very informative review. I checked Orb's site but I don't see the NS for sale.


----------



## HEY HEY ITS HENDO (Mar 29, 2006)

here ya go cyberhobo .....

http://www.theorb.co.uk/sor.php?PHPSESSID=d3f7f5dd68ca05c5f58a361c3a295a07


----------



## Frank Maddix (Mar 29, 2006)

Nope - you wouldn't want it all scratched, would you?
BTW - The NS is a perfect fit in the Nite-Ize headband, plus it warms up your right eyebrow nicely.


----------



## CLHC (Mar 29, 2006)

Wow. I like it! I really really like it! Nice write up I must say! :thumbsup:


----------



## vortechs (Mar 29, 2006)

BobbyRS said:


> This is what i have found so far:
> 
> LS 14250 Lithium 3.6v 1000mAh
> http://sprinter2000.ro/en/acumulatoare/elementi.php?c=20030515231507
> ...



The info on the 3.6V SAFT lithium primary batteries available at Battery Station is here http://www.batterystation.com/lithium.htm. According to the table, they have several versions of the LS-14250 SAFT available that vary from 1000 mAh to 1250 mAh. They have the version with tabs removed available on their CPF special page (http://www.batterystation.com/cpf.htm). 

The SAFT primary batteries obviously have a very high capacity, but I don't know how much current they can produce. I would be interested in hearing from anybody who knows more about them.


----------



## DaveNagy (Mar 31, 2006)

powernoodle said:


> I have U bin and T bin Raws, and am hard-pressed to tell any difference in brightness. Both are pretty dang bright. There is probably some substantial variation within bins (I may have a strong T and a weak U), plus my eyeballs may very well just perceive things differently than the next guy.


Ditto. 

I was about to post the exact same thing. I also received my new NS, and again it looks, "about as bright." I'll see if I can get you guys a beam shot of all three.

I love my Raw light(s). I love my NS quite a bit more.


----------



## Zarniwoop (Apr 16, 2006)

HEY HEY ITS HENDO said:


> Very nice !! My very shiney, very new, Ns has instantly made a mockery of most of my other torches,
> they now appear cheap, sick, anaemic, pale and weak in comparison.... i just love it, but,.......
> 
> .............................. has anyone managed to attach theirs to a keyring ??


 
I thought of using those elastic Chap-Stick holders as a way you could put the NS on a keyring. Since it's almost the same size as a Chap-Stick anyway, why not?

But seriously, I'd sure like to see a real key-ring adapter made of metal.

Also, the Orb Raw doesn't show a keyring adapter anywhere on the web site that I can find. Is it a 3rd party piece or does the Orb Raw just come with one and not mention it?


----------



## HenryE (Apr 16, 2006)

Just stumbled onto this thread -- great stuff!

A RAW NS is enroute to be used in an experiment, and when it's over that light will be in my pocket. I'm prepared to be impressed...

This thread is a little worrisome, because in our project BRIGHT is everything!
According to the ORB site, the NS generates ~77 lumens -- which my colleagues agree should be able to do the job. The project depends on 10-second periods of ON to penetrate skin-like tissue a few centimeters away, with sufficient illumination to permit videorecording some bio-events. I'm uncertain about 45 lumens. 

We'll have to do some testing without damaging the light.

In any case, there's no doubt at all which product offers the most bang per cc!

Henry


----------



## Zarniwoop (Apr 24, 2006)

HEY HEY ITS HENDO said:


> Very nice !! My very shiney, very new, Ns has instantly made a mockery of most of my other torches,
> they now appear cheap, sick, anaemic, pale and weak in comparison.... i just love it, but,.......
> 
> .............................. has anyone managed to attach theirs to a keyring ??




Here's a keyring option for the Orb-size (including NS) flashlights. It's a leather holder with velcro closure for $8.50 from AW:
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=112729


----------



## dulridge (Apr 24, 2006)

Zarniwoop said:


> Also, the Orb Raw doesn't show a keyring adapter anywhere on the web site that I can find. Is it a 3rd party piece or does the Orb Raw just come with one and not mention it?



Mine didn't, but a Sony Ericsson lanyard from a P800 phone fitted fine and does what I need - a longer one from a Sony Ericsson headset works if I want to hang it round my neck. Working where I do, I don't want to do that though.


----------



## Cliffnopus (Apr 24, 2006)

I just received my RAW ns and I think it's great. Cuteness factor = 10 out of 10. All that light from soemthing smaller than my thumb. I just placed another order for one with three tritium vials (green/pink/blue) equally spaced, I think it'll look cool. It's not, as mentioned, a barn burner but for what it is it's just fine.

As soon as I recieved it I asked our own Matt (Art of the Hide) to make me one of his little "Light Socks" in deerskin for it. I just received the light sock and it fits great, this will protect the ns in my pocket.








Cliff


----------



## orb (Apr 27, 2006)

vortechs said:


> The info on the 3.6V SAFT lithium primary batteries available at Battery Station is here http://www.batterystation.com/lithium.htm. According to the table, they have several versions of the LS-14250 SAFT available that vary from 1000 mAh to 1250 mAh. They have the version with tabs removed available on their CPF special page (http://www.batterystation.com/cpf.htm).
> 
> The SAFT primary batteries obviously have a very high capacity, but I don't know how much current they can produce. I would be interested in hearing from anybody who knows more about them.



I Ordered a few of the 14250 Saft cells.





They fit in the Ns Fine hew: Which is good!
On Low all is the same brightness but with even more run time. 
@ 1000Mah Capacity we should be getting at least 30 Hours :Crazy:
On high the Saft 14250 Will only deliver 150 Ma, Hence the Led will only be able to pull 150Ma Max.
In Turn we get reduced brightness, Approx 25 Lumens. 
Run Time should be 6-7 Hours.

It would of been nice if the saft 14250 could have pushed out 1 Amp & had the 1000Mah capacity. But as it is Li-ions win for me today.
Still a good back up solution & glad there is another battery option for the Ns.


----------



## Codeman (Apr 27, 2006)

Cliff - Matt made a few for me a couple of weeks ago. A great way to pocket-carry the Ns.

Thanks for checking the SAFT's out, Orb. I think I'll order a few to keep for emergencies.


----------



## tungsten (Apr 28, 2006)

orb said:


> I Ordered a few of the 14250 Saft cells.
> 
> They fit in the Ns Fine hew: Which is good!
> On Low all is the same brightness but with even more run time.
> ...



Rob! Could I add a Saft cell to my order? A primary option is GREAT, even with reduced brightness.


----------



## CLHC (Apr 28, 2006)

Now I really can't wait to get one in my hands. Hopefully soon enough though since I'm awaiting response via *flashlover*.

—and those pix posted here sure has SOLD me on it!


----------



## faco (Jun 30, 2006)

Fantastic review, thanks. I got mine the other day and carry it as my EDC. I have freaked a few people out (including myself) with the bright output  

The Raw Ns is #1
now, if only a protected cell becomes available..............


----------



## lightrod (Jul 5, 2006)

I did a rough test for the Saft 14250 LST, rated at 1200 mAh, with the Ns on low. I have no lightmeter :scowl: - so I used my FF3 on various levels and compared as carefully as I could. I do not know the initial output, but am guessing about 7 lumens. Results:

first 20 hours: no noticable dimming
40 hours: ~50% of initial
72 hours: ~25% of initial. Still "usable".
96 hours: very dim. I'd say she's spent.
Pretty amazing for this tiny cell! (1/2 AA size). An extra Saft cell will be part of my "survival package" for sure, to provide usable light for a very long time. (And man could I use that lightmeter....)


----------



## Tightgroup (Jul 11, 2006)

lightrod said:


> I did a rough test for the Saft 14250 LST, rated at 1200 mAh, with the Ns on low. I have no lightmeter :scowl: - so I used my FF3 on various levels and compared as carefully as I could. I do not know the initial output, but am guessing about 7 lumens. Results:
> 
> first 20 hours: no noticable dimming
> 40 hours: ~50% of initial
> ...


Great info, mine has been in transit for 10days, this makes it even more worth the wait!


----------



## lightrod (Jul 18, 2006)

Here's some general info I've compiled on the Raw Ns in terms of beam/output using a Meterman LM631 lightmeter with my two Ns's: a T-bin with Joker reflector and a U-bin with std reflector. Output at the beam center was measured for several light/level/battery combos. At the low level the beam profile was measured from center to 45 degrees in 1.5 degree increments - the "Beam Profile Method" described in the Reviews section was used to estimate total output. 

I'll throw out the caution that I (unfortunately!) have only one light of each description which provides zero basis for statitical comparisons of the lights. If I had another light of each I may get different results. My lights may or may not be representative of the average light of that type. In any case the results give a general description of what type of performance one could expect from the lights, give or take 15% or so.

Jumping right into the results (actual measures in bold - other values calculated or estimated):



 


Interesting that throw from the U bin is (slightly)higher than the T bin at the low level, but at the high level throw is greater on the T-bin. The turned down Joker reflector on the T-bin light definitely concentrates more light in the beam center (see below). 

The output on max is pretty fleeting when the light is first turned on, and just a few seconds can make a big difference in readings. I have not been very successful in getting "repeatable" initial readings. I just (7/25) changed the table above to give output on max as the reading after two minutes instead of trying to get an intial reading. I have gotten inital lux readings over 900 on the T bin; 800 on the U. 

One other note here is that man do these things get hot! I could not hold the lights after a few minutes and had to use my shirt as a "pot holder" to get the things turned off.

The runtime on high for the U-bin is much greater than that for the T bin. Here are the actual runtime plots:





Here are the beam profiles I measured for both lights:




Of interest is the %drop in beam output from the beam center out to the 6 degree angle. I’ve found this metric a useful indicator of flood/spot characteristics with higher percentage drops being spot/throw type beams, low percentage being flood/spill type beams and middle percentages being middle ground. As comparison for drop at 6 degrees:
Orb Raw Ns: 53% (std reflector)
Orb Raw Ns: 69% (Joker/turned down reflector)
Firefly III: 48%
Peak Rainier: 75%
Arc AAA-P: 25%
Peak Caribbean: 71%
Amilite Neo: 62%

Overall I have found I like the U-bin std reflector to be preferred since I like a more gradual/smooth transition from spot to flood which that light/reflector gives. 

The beam angle for both lights is about 48 degrees (where the light output reading dropped to zero.

I prefer the WO tint - more natural looking to me.

One of these days I'll get beam shots to include here (I hope). 

Finally the output from the Saft cells was surprisingly low, albeit with killer runtimes.


----------



## WAVE_PARTICLE (Jul 18, 2006)

lightrod said:


> Interesting that output from the U bin is higher than the T bin at the low level, but that reverses at the high level! Also at the high level throw is greater on the T-bin which I'd attribute to the reflector. However note the runtime on high for the U-bin is much greater than that for the T bin.


 
Very interesting indeed! What a boost in runtime for the U-bin for approximately the same level of output. Thanks for your hard work!

:thumbsup: WP


----------



## MKLight (Jan 11, 2009)

Rob 

Hey! This is an interesting OLD thread I found using the search function. Have there been any updates with using a primary battery with the Raw ti/NS/Al?

Thank,
Mike



orb said:


> I Ordered a few of the 14250 Saft cells.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## MKLight (Jan 11, 2009)

Rib,

Hey! Also, would this only be an option with the 20lm option? I have a 20/200 and 100/200 R2 LE.

Thanks,
Mike


----------

