# Rebel, Cree, SSC Multi-Stage 1AA Review: RUNTIMES and BEAMSHOTS



## selfbuilt (Aug 17, 2007)

*Rebel, Cree, SSC Multi-Stage 1AA Review: RUNTIMES and BEAMSHOTS!*

*REVIEWER'S NOTE: This thread has been replaced with a new comparison review of the latest multi-stage 1AA lights:
Multi-stage 1AA Review - Part III: Runtimes, beamshots & more!*

This thread is an older Part II update of my original Multi-stage AA review. For single-stage 1AA, please see my Single-Stage 1AA review thread.

_*Update Oct 7/07:*Just posted a review of the new Jetbeam C-LE v2.0 clicky version. I haven't bothered to update the graphs in this review, since *output and runtime are virtually exactly the same as the previous v1.2* shown here, although v2.0 runtime did increase marginally on the low modes._

_*Update Oct 22/07*: Just added Fenix L1Tv2.0 R080 runtimes. See my detailed comparison of the Fenix lights here: Fenix Rebel vs Cree: L1D/L1T/P2D OUTPUT, RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS_

_*Update Oct 31/07*: Added new multi-stage Ultrafire C3 (labelled as C3-5 on graphs, for 5-mode). See my detailed comparison review to old single-stage model here: Ultrafire C3 Multi-stage vs Single-stage: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, detailed pics!_

_*Update Nov 27/07:* Added Fenix L1D with Premium Cree Q5 head results, including 14500 runs for the first time. See my Fenix L2D Q5 vs R100, R80, Q2, P4 Comparison Review: RUNTIMES+ for more comparison of the premium Cree Q5 and Rebel R100 heads on L2D body._

*The contenders*:

From left to right: Jetbeam C-LE v1.2, DealExtreme X.1, Rexlight 2.1, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, Lumapower 301, MTE 5-Stage Cree, Kai 5-Stage Cree, Liteflux LF5 SSC, MTE 5-Stage Rebel R100, Fenix L1D Revel R100 Premium (L2D head). (Fenix L1Tv2.0 and Ultrafire C3 not shown)






*Beamshots:*

On Hi/100% with Duracell Alkaline. 



















*Method:* All my output numbers are relative for my home-made light box setup, a la Quickbeam's FR.com method. My relative overall output numbers are typically similar to his, although generally a little lower. You can directly compare all my review graphs - i.e. an output value of "10" in one graph is the same as "10" in another.

Throw values are the square-root of lux measurements taken at 1m using a light meter. 

*Summary Chart for 2650mAh NiMH on Hi/100%*










*Notes:*
*DX X.1, JB C-LE, Ultrafire C3:* All use PWM for lower modes, freq for the X.1 is 120 Hz, the C-LE v1.2/v2.0 is 317 Hz, and multi-mode C3 is 297Hz. The newer C-LEs also have improved threads over previous versions, is a bit thicker in diameter, and features a "memory mode" that retains last setting used. No memory mode on multi-stage C3. V2.0 comes with a good quality reverse clicky.
*Rex 2.1*: Now has a 2sec memory mode that works on all batteries, and three 3 sets of light sequence states that you can access ("Daily/Tactic/Advanced"). For a full comparison to the Rex 2.0, see my review here.
*L1D & L1T*: Same current-controlled goodness as earlier L1DCE, shown here with the Special Edition Q2 Cree emitter (with textured reflector) and "Premium" Rebel R100 head from the new L2D Rebel. Also added new premium Q5 Cree head and L1Tv2.0 with Rebel R080 head.
*Lumapower 301*: Updated version of this light with SSC emitter. Uses a tailcap resistor for low mode.
*DX/Kai 5-stage lights*: a number of these are offered with different emitters and body styles (3 are shown above), but all the Cree lights at least have the same circuit with same runtime/output characteristics. MTE R100 version has a different body style from previous models.
*Liteflux LF5*: Uses high freq PWM for lower modes - can't measure the freq with my setup, but it is obviously quite high as it produces no noticeable flicker in my testing. Standard mode is 15% and 50% output, and I've set user-defined to either highest (100%) or lowest (<1%) for testing purposes.

*Runtimes:* 
"Hi" mode on NiMH (Duracell 2650mAh), except for Luma 301 (Sanyo 2500mAh)





Hi/Med/Lo modes on Alkaline Duracells













Hi and Medium-Low modes on an AW Protected 14500 (750mAh)









*Key observations:*

_JetBeam C-LE_

Although the runtimes shown above are from v1.2, the new v2.0 output/runtime characteristics are exactly the same. Main improvement is a good quality reverse clicky, which makes it easier to reliably switch modes. See my v2.0 review here.
On Hi, the C-LE v1.2/v2.0 have slightly increased output compared to earlier versions, with similar runtimes, but now with a more rapid drop-off to zero output.
On Medium, C-LE v1.2/v2.0 has greatly improved output and runtime
On Low, C-LE v1.2/v2.0 has about the same runtime as the older versions, but with twice the output.
v1.2/v2.0 C-LE now includes 2sec "memory mode" feature that retains the last setting used
Mode switching and memory feature can have intermittent problems (i.e out of seqeuence errors, missing modes, etc) on v1.2 if you don't keep the contacts/screw threads very clean. No evidence of problems on the new v2.0 so far, thanks to the new reverse clicky.

_DealExtreme X.1:_

Pretty much identical to the older JB MkIIX, its output and runtimes are definitely on the low side compared to some of the newer lights.
Very bright and regulated output on 14500, but runtime nowhere near the new Rex 2.1
Good build quality and very versatile, but complex UI may be off-putting for some

_Rexlight 2.1 vs. 2.0:_ 

If this new Rex 2.1 uses PWM, I can't measure it on my sample. The old Rex 2.0 ran at a noticeable 94 Hz.
All light modes now work as they are supposed to, on all battery types, with excellent runtimes in all modes now.
Outstanding performance on 14500. Light also features a 3.2-3.0V "low voltage" warning (i.e. light strobes), so you can safely use unprotected cells 
Light also features 3 sets of usage modes ("Daily/Tactic/Advanced"), with access to different output modes in each - but switching between them can be a bit confusing
Well worth the upgrade - only downgrades from 2.0 are in beam tint and "ringiness" on my sample, plus some UI issues

_Fenix L1D Cree lights (Q5, Q2 and older P4 model) vs Rebel L1D/L1T versions_

The Rebel versions of the L1D/L1T come with a R080 (or maybe R090) emitter. Also tested here is the L2D head, which has the "premium" R100 emitter.
The Cree version shown here is the Special Edition with the Q2 emitter and textured (orange peel) reflector, also tested is the new Q5 head from the L2D premium. 
See my original Fenix Rebel vs Cree: OUTPUT, RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS thread for direct comparison of R100, Q2, and P4 version results
See my  Fenix L2D Q5 vs R100, R80, Q2, P4 Comparison Review: RUNTIMES+for an analysis of the premium Cree Q5 and Rebel R100 heads on L2D form.
The Cree Q5 is slightly brighter than the Rebel R100 version, but with less runtime. Rebel R100 version is slightly brighter than the Q2 Cree, depending on battery type and mode, and with better throw. 
The Rebel R080 version is not as bright a R100, but still quite respectable. Output on Low on the L1Tv2.0 is bit higher than the L1D light, contributing to the shorter runtime.
Color rendition outdoors seems better on the Rebel lights compared to the Cree lights
L1Tv2.0 comes with the much sought-after forward clicky, which seems of very high quality.
Beam profiles on the R100 and R080 heads seem closer to the SSC lights than the Cree lights, but with better throw than the Cree lights reviewed here.
L1D remains the output/runtime king - nothing else beats Fenix's current-controlled low modes, regardless of which head you go for.
Runtimes on 14500 have now been added for L1D with Q5 head. You loose low modes initially as light runs in direct drive from max output until it hits the low mode level, and then switches into regulation (briefly - you have little time left at regulated lower levels, since battery is typcally almost exhausted by then). Turbo mode (i.e. head tightened) is difficult to do, due to extra length of the protected 14500 (I had to use a copper ring spacer for it to make contact and screw down tight).

_Lumapower 301 SSC_

New version has a SSC U-bin emitter, providing a less sharply defined hotspot than the other Cree lights reviewed here
Light uses a resistor for Low mode, so is not as efficient at other choices, but still quite good runtime for the output with long "moon mode." 
Can take 14500, but Manufacturer does not recommend it on Low mode - circuit not designed for it, produces reduced output and runtime compared to Hi mode
Build quality quite good - very substantial feel and nice anodizing, but longer than other lights here and can't tail-stand
Battery tube not wide enough to take all high capacity NiMH (i.e. none of my 2650mAh would fit, so Hi runtime is based on a 2500mAh battery)

_DX/Kai 5-stage Cree/Rebel lights, now including Ultrafire C3 multi-mode_

Except for the C3, all the other DX/Kai Cree/Rebel lights seem to use a similar circuit, and so have similar output/runtime characteristics but in different body formats with different beam profiles. That circuit lacks a truly low mode: seem to be 100%/70%/40% for Hi/Med/Low.
The new multi-mode C3 has much lower output levels, and very reasonable modes (I'd estimate 100%/40%/10%). Although absolute output is typically lower than other 1AA lights, runtimes on alkaline are very impressive on all modes. 
New multi-mode C3 can also run on 2AA, which is now approximately twice as bright as 1AA modes.
Unlike other Rebel lights, the MTE R100 is not as bright or long lasting as the Cree versions. The MTE R100 has relatively warm tint on Hi, but turns very pink/purplish on the Medium/Low modes. :green: Beam profile is also full of artifacts
The MTE R070 light (results not shown) is only about 2/3 as bright as the R100 reported here, with roughly equivalent runtimes.
In keeping with budget price, build quality is quite variable on all these lights. Ultrafire C3 seems to be among the best of the lot, although the multi-stage version has lower build quality than single stage (see my discussion here).
All lights have excellent relative performance on alkaline on Hi (with a very long low "moon mode"), but the new multi-stage C3 stands out as the runtime champ on lower modes.

_Liteflux LF5 SSC_

Good build quality and nice smooth, relatively floody beam thanks to the SSC emitter, but overall spillbeam width is narrower than the other lights reviewed here.
Very good output and runtime on NiMH and 14500, somewhat similar to the Rex 2.1, although LF5 is one of the best regulated lights I've seen
Runtime on alkaline is rather disappointing on all levels - consistently lower than the other lights tested here.
Light features lowest low mode of all lights tested here. In user-defined mode you can get the light down to ~0.3 on my output scale (i.e. 1/6 as bright as the Rex 2.1 low). This is slightly brighter than my SSC-modded 1st gen VB-16 on level 2. Continuous runtime is an impressive 15 days at this level, on alkaline.
Twisty interface is a bit unusual and takes some practice at first, but does allow you to skip the strobe/SOS modes if you want.
Light comes as a nice kit with loads of goodies - please see my detailed LF5 review for more info.

*Conclusion:*

On regular batteries, L1D body with the Q5 head is definitely your best choice for max output or throw, although the R100 head is probably your best choice for output/runtime. On Hi, the new L1T with R080 (or potentially R090 emitter) is typically intermittent to Cree P4/Q2 versions in overall output, but with slightly better runtimes on my samples.
If you like a low Lo mode with long runtime, the Rex 2.1 or LF5 are your best picks. The LF5 can go as low as ~0.3 on my output scale (with two weeks worth of continuous runtime at this level, on alkaline).
On 14500 batteries, Rex 2.1 or LF5 are your best choices for output/runtime, although the DX X.1 still remains the brightest with regulated output - but with much lower runtimes compared to the Rex 2.1 or LF5. On Fenix L1D on 14500, you "loose" the lower levels initially, as light runs direct drive from max output until the low level is reached and regulation kicks in (typically near the end of the battery life).
C-LE v2.0 and Lumapower 301 are both excellent choices in the mid-range (~$30), but lacking in some of the features/extras of the higher-end lights.
Budget DX/Kai models have variable quality and uncertain emitters. The new Utrafire multi-mode C3 is the real winner of this crowd, although overall output is toward the lower end of the 1AA spectrum. Ability to run 2AA with increased output is a real bonus.
_*UPDATE 11/27/07:* I can no longer recommend the Ultrafire C3, since the latest shipping versions from DX have been all over the map in terms of output and build quality. There's even one recent report of one arriving with the old 5-stage circuit installed!_

:sweat:Whew - there you have it! Hopefully that is helpful for you :kiss:.


----------



## blan (Aug 17, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Thank you selfbuilt!!


----------



## photonhoer (Aug 17, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

WOW!!!

Terrific info, and thanks for the work. It really helps to have the data to support conclusions!!

John


----------



## jsr (Aug 17, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Awesome review selfbuilt!

Could you also do a runtime using alkalines in Hi-Mode for the lights?

Thanks!


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 17, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Thanks for support everyone - this batch was certainly a lot of work. 



jsr said:


> Could you also do a runtime using alkalines in Hi-Mode for the lights?



Hmmm, that probably would be interesting to see. But it may take a few days before I can get around to it. I'll keep you posted.


----------



## jsr (Aug 18, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

No problem selfbuilt. We just appreciate all your work to get this great info to us.

OK, I have more to ask now if you don't mind...can you please try out the following:

1. Are the Dexlight X1 and Rexlight 2.1 heads swappable (Rex 2.1 head on Dex X1 body, and vice versa)?

For the next two: If the LED module and reflector are removeable in the Dexlight:

2. Are the LED modules and reflectors swappable between the Dex X1 and Rex 2.1?

3. Does the Rex 2.0 LED module and reflector fit inside the Dex X1?

Thanks selfbuilt!


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 18, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



jsr said:


> 1. Are the Dexlight X1 and Rexlight 2.1 heads swappable (Rex 2.1 head on Dex X1 body, and vice versa)?



No, there is a thread mismatch between the two lights - neither head can screw on the other's body. Note that there's also ~twice as many threads on the Rex body as compared to the X.1.

Given that, I doubt the pill assembly with the emitter would be able to screw into the opposing head of either unit.


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 20, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Given the interest, I've decided to donate another half dozen duracell alkalines to that great recycling bin in the sky. :mecry:

I've just started a series of alkalkine high mode run times, and the graph should be up by the end of the day tomorrow. :thumbsup:

_EDIT: Oooh, I've just ordered the new LiteFlux LF5 (1AA) light from LED Cool's dealer thread in the marketplace. I'll update this review once it arrives and I get to test it out. It will probably take about 2 weeks to get here, and then several days to do all the testing._


----------



## musicalfruit (Aug 20, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



selfbuilt said:


> _EDIT: Oooh, I've just ordered the new LiteFlux LF5 (1AA) light from LED Cool's dealer thread in the marketplace. I'll update this review once it arrives and I get to test it out. It will probably take about 2 weeks to get here, and then several days to do all the testing._



Thanks for the review, selfbuilt. Very helpful and informative as usual.

The LF5 looks interesting. Personally, I want to see any performance data when using 14500s. My L1D-CE doesn't seem to like 14500s so I'm looking for something to stick my 14500 in.

Thanks again.


----------



## gunga (Aug 20, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Outstanding work as always selfbuilt. THanks so much for all your efforts!

:wave:


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 21, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Thanks for the supportive comments!

Just added the Hi mode alkaline graph to the main post, and I'm glad I did these runs. Generally no surprises, except for the MTE C2 - it had the overall best performance! :huh:

Note that all the lights except the C-LE have a long "moon mode", with the Rex 2.1 and MTE C2 having the longest runtime in this state (the MTE C2 was still producing usable ultra-low light 24hrs later). Very impressive ... now if they could only add a true low mode with better low efficiency, this light would be a winner.

I wasn't able to complete the runtime on my Luma 301 - my unit has started exhibiting flickering over the last few days, and has now degenerated to the point where I can't get any kind of stable output at all. The problem seems to be within the head assembly, as I've shorted the battery directly to the head with my DMM and still have the same problem. I've contact Ricky and received an RMA authorization (prompt response, I must say - this is the first time I've ever had a problem with a Lumapower light). I'm sure they'll make it right.


----------



## Dobbler (Aug 21, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



selfbuilt said:


> Thanks for the supportive comments!
> 
> Just added the Hi mode alkaline graph to the main post, and I'm glad I did these runs. Generally no surprises, except for the MTE C2 - it had the overall best performance! :huh:
> 
> ...



Supposedly the LM301 was designed to run well on alkalines, so I would be interested to see numbers with that power source once your replacement arrives.


----------



## coldlocus (Aug 21, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Wow, nice work!
Thanks for all the effort you must have put in.
Just a question, I came here from the *Rebel LED 5 modes?-*thread and wondered if anyone know how that light compares to any of theese in output? Would a Rebel 100 be significantly brighter?


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 21, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



coldlocus said:


> Just a question, I came here from the *Rebel LED 5 modes?-*thread and wondered if anyone know how that light compares to any of theese in output? Would a Rebel 100 be significantly brighter?


I doubt it.

I have the earlier MTE Rebel version that DX has been offering for the last month and a half (sku.4862 - same MTE C2 body as shown here, but with smooth reflector and Rebel emitter). Seems to be same circuit, as I get the same runtime as the cree version shown here.

Don't see a bin on the DX site, but the max output of that light is only in the low 30s on my scale (i.e. somewhere between the Luma 301 and DX X.1). If it is a R0080, then I'd expect the R0100 to do ~40 or so on my output scale. If its a R0060, then I'd expect ~50 or so on my scale with the R0100 (i.e the same as the Cree version).

But we'll see for sure when I get my R0100 in!


----------



## NickBose (Aug 21, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



selfbuilt said:


> I doubt it.
> ...




You haven't seen the beamshot ?

Beamshot Left MTE SSC P4, Right Dealextreme Rebel 100

To my naked eyes, it appears that the Rebel 100 is brighter than the SSC P4. The tint is also consistent with what DX confirmed: it's warm white (slightly more yellowish than the SSC)

It will be next on my shopping list


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 22, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



NickBose said:


> You haven't seen the beamshot ?


Beamshots are tricky, and you can't capture all beam features simultaneously. But notice how much brighter the ceiling is over the MTE-SSC? That tells me the spill is lot a brighter on the SSC version, and the Rebel is a better thrower, as I'd expect. But that exposure doesn't let you conclude anything about overall output.

If you look at my single stage AA review thread, you see that MTE-SSC light scores ~45 on my output scale for initial brightness. Now, a U-bin SSC produces 91lm min ( 100lm typical) at 350mA. A Rebel 0100 produces 100lm minimum at 350mA (and logically max 110lm, or it would be a different bin code). So I wouldn't realistically expect a R0100 to be more than ~10% brighter than a U-bin SSC in practice. By that line of reasoning, a R0100 driven the same should score ~50 on my scale.

Note that ~50 output is also what I get if I assume there's a lowly R0060 in my current $16 DX MTE 5-stage Rebel (tested at only ~30 output). Hence why I doubt this new Rebel MTE will be that much brigther than the Cree version which also produces ~50 output.

Note that those are still only estimates based on various assumptions (i.e. which emitter present, equivalent drive currents, etc.). One big assumption in all of this is that there really is a R0100 bin in that new MTE light - Luxeon only has cool white available for purchase in that 0100 flux bin, not warm white (highest bin for warm tints is currently 0060). 

As always, there's no subsitute for actual testing of shipping lights under controlled conditions, which I'll do here when I receive the one I've ordered.


----------



## coldlocus (Aug 22, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



selfbuilt said:


> But we'll see for sure when I get my R0100 in!


 
I'll be looking forward to that! :goodjob:


----------



## musicalfruit (Aug 23, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

So was browsing the Marketplace and saw this post by DX.

$40 for a NiMH/14500 light with 2xAA tube and diffuser sounds pretty decent. Somebody in that thread mentioned that it sounded like a Mk-IIx knockoff. Anyone else got any info?


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 23, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



coldlocus said:


> I'll be looking forward to that!


My Fenix L2T v2.0 (with R0080) has shipped from the fenix-store.com, so I'll include that in my testing as well. According to 4sevens, the head will fit on the L1D body tube, so I can directly compare to the other 1AA DX lights. :twothumbs



musicalfruit said:


> $40 for a NiMH/14500 light with 2xAA tube and diffuser sounds pretty decent. Somebody in that thread mentioned that it sounded like a Mk-IIx knockoff. Anyone else got any info?



I saw that too, but I think I'll pass for now. Although the body looks to be a MkII knock-off, the circuit sounds a lot simpler. Given the price tag, I think I'll let someone else take the first plunge ...


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 28, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Update: Ricky at Lumapower has already processed my RMA, and is mailing back my light with a replacement LED module. Now that's what I call fast service! As soon as I receive it I'll run the alkaline low mode test.

Looks like the JB C-LE is no longer available at Emillion's site or the official Jetbeam page (www.jetbeam.com.cn). However, according to Jetbeam in the manufacturer's forum, a new version of the C-LE with a clicky switch will be coming out next month. And apparently a replacement for the MkIIX is also in the works. 

Guess I'll have to crack open the wallet again soon ...


----------



## roberttheiii (Aug 31, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Thanks for the informative review! Excellent.


----------



## phosphor (Aug 31, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



> My Fenix L2T v2.0 (with R0080) has shipped from the fenix-store.com, so I'll include that in my testing as well. According to 4sevens, the head will fit on the L1D body tube, so I can directly compare to the other 1AA DX lights.


I will be interested to see your evaluation of the new Fenix Rebel L1T v2.0 and how it compares to the rest of the group. I have one on back-order from 4 7's......I think this will be the perfect ( for the moment...LOL ) EDC and back-up for me. I also have been resisting pulling the trigger on a LM301....everyone seems to report the beam pattern on high to be bright and even, and on low to be useful. Also the price point is "attractive".

Anywho....thanks for all your nice work. I enjoy reading your reviews and find them both interesting and informative.

- best regards


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 1, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



phosphor said:


> I will be interested to see your evaluation of the new Fenix Rebel L1T v2.0 and how it compares to the rest of the group. I have one on back-order from 4 7's......I think this will be the perfect ( for the moment...LOL ) EDC and back-up for me. I also have been resisting pulling the trigger on a LM301....everyone seems to report the beam pattern on high to be bright and even, and on low to be useful. Also the price point is "attractive".
> 
> Anywho....thanks for all your nice work. I enjoy reading your reviews and find them both interesting and informative.
> 
> - best regards



Thanks for the positive comments roberttheiii and phosphor. 

Still waiting on the Fenix (mail is always slow to Canada from Atlanta). Got my R0100 MTE from DX, and am not too impressed so far: beam has lots of artifacts and huge purple tint shift when going to medium or low. Doesn't seem any brighter than the cree version, but still have to do all the tests.

I'm hopeful the Fenix will be a winner ...

P.S.: The LM301 does have a lovely beam, thanks to the SSC emitter


----------



## Kostoglotov (Sep 1, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Excellent work

Thanks


----------



## jirik_cz (Sep 1, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Thank you very much for all of your reviews! I really appreciate your effort.

It looks like mte with cree has nice smooth beam, almost like ssc version. 

And I am really impressed with fenix efficiency and runtimes. Now I finally understand fenix hype here on CPF, it actually deserves it! :thumbsup:


----------



## Gunner12 (Sep 1, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Great comparison Selfbuilt, I enjoy reading your reviews, very informative.

Coupon taken,


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 1, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Thanks for the all the positive comments guys! :wave:



jirik_cz said:


> It looks like mte with cree has nice smooth beam, almost like ssc version.


Good observation ... I was just thinking the same thing this morning when I was comparing it to the Rebel MTEs I've received. It is indeed the most SSC-like in its output (probably because the reflector was designed for something else, I'm guessing ).



> And I am really impressed with fenix efficiency and runtimes. Now I finally understand fenix hype here on CPF, it actually deserves it! :thumbsup:


Yeah, Fenix is not just a pretty face! Their output/runtime efficiency is still top of the pile for these types of lights.


----------



## merlocka (Sep 4, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



selfbuilt said:


> No, there is a thread mismatch between the two lights - neither head can screw on the other's body. Note that there's also ~twice as many threads on the Rex body as compared to the X.1.
> 
> Given that, I doubt the pill assembly with the emitter would be able to screw into the opposing head of either unit.





selfbuilt said:


> No, there is a thread mismatch between the two lights - neither head can screw on the other's body. Note that there's also ~twice as many threads on the Rex body as compared to the X.1.
> 
> Given that, I doubt the pill assembly with the emitter would be able to screw into the opposing head of either unit.



Note - the Rex 2.1 pill DOES fit into a Jetbeam MKIIx. I was just playing around and found that out.

After going on a spending spree, I'm sitting here trying to figure out which light to carry around everyday... 

Dexlight X.1 - Brightest of the bunch I have on 14500. Won't fit AW protected 14500 though. Gets hot fast on 14500. Really like this light as a pocket torch.

Jetbeam MKIIx Stock - Fits AW protected 14500 with a dot of solder on the pill's V+ contact. Looks great. Just a hair less bright than my DEX, might be just a throw vs spill thing, as my DEX seems more tightly focused. Gets hot fast on 14500. Anyone every try to drop a Q5 into one of these???

Jetbeam MKIIx with REX 2.1 pill - This was a happy accident! Fits AW protected 14500. Not as bright as regular MKIIx/DEX, but better UI. 

Rexlight 2.1 - Just like the above, but with a slightly worse 14500 fit. Can get AW to fit, but need to use included spacer ring. Also, I dislike the finish appearance (personal preference).

Fenix P1D CE - Best UI. A little bigger. Lose modes on 14500. Still, almost as bright on a NiMH. I believe this is the best all-around light... but I'm always wanting a few more lumens 

L301 - Nice dispersed beam. Good performance on alkaline, but 14500 not a good option. Biggest due to resistor switch.


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 5, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



merlocka said:


> Jetbeam MKIIx Stock - Fits AW protected 14500 with a dot of solder on the pill's V+ contact. Looks great. ... Jetbeam MKIIx with REX 2.1 pill - This was a happy accident! Fits AW protected 14500. Not as bright as regular MKIIx/DEX, but better UI.


Thanks for sharing your observations - I've reached much the same conclusions on these lights. 

And glad to to hear the Rex 2.1 pill fits in the MkIIX. I also prefer the finish of the MkIIX over the Rexlight, so may experiment myself (currently EDCing the Rex on 14500, as I prefer the UI and excellent runtime on this battery).

FYI, my stock MkIIX takes 14500 no problem, as it has a spring on the +'ve battery contact end in the head. For that matter, both my Rexlights have also taken my AW protecteds no problem, without needing the supplied extra contact ring. But good to point out that some lights may need it ...


----------



## BobbyRS (Sep 5, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



selfbuilt said:


> I saw that too, but I think I'll pass for now. Although the body looks to be a MkII knock-off, the circuit sounds a lot simpler. Given the price tag, I think I'll let someone else take the first plunge ...


 
Awww, that's too bad. The review talk (https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2135946) seems to be pretty positive. The overall lux readings (at 1 meter) seem to exceed the Rex2.1 with a 14500 cell. 

Fighter (bottom of post):
Med : 1410
Low : 360
High : 3680
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2136191&postcount=5

Rexlight 2.1 (bottom of post):
1x14500 Li-ion on high: *2760* Lux
1x14500 Li-ion on medium: *1154* Lux
1x14500 Li-ion on low: *192* Lux
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2093884&postcount=1

It also comes with a 2AA extension tube, a candle mode, and a diffuser on top of the simular features and extras of the Rexlight 2.1. (Lacks HAIII though and low isn't as low as the Rex2.1). I would love to see a direct compairson of beamshots on high and low with a 14500 cell and the runtime graphs.


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 5, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



BobbyRS said:


> Awww, that's too bad. The review talk (https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2135946) seems to be pretty positive.


Don't tempt me!  I saw that review too - the light looks to be in the same general class the Rexlight/Dexlight offerings.

But right now I'm focusing on getting a few Rebel lights in. They seem to do a better job of colour rendition, but I need to investigate that more. I'm done testing my two DX Rebel lights (0070 and 0100 bins), and my L2T v2.0 (0080) should be in any day now. I also a L2D RB100 on order - when I get the Fenix lights in, I'll post results here in the 1AA configuration (using the L1D body tube).


----------



## BobbyRS (Sep 5, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



selfbuilt said:


> Don't tempt me!  I saw that review too - the light looks to be in the same general class the Rexlight/Dexlight offerings.


 
:devil: If you don't, then I hope someone else does.



selfbuilt said:


> But right now I'm focusing on getting a few Rebel lights in. They seem to do a better job of colour rendition, but I need to investigate that more. I'm done testing my two DX Rebel lights (0070 and 0100 bins), and my L2T v2.0 (0080) should be in any day now. I also a L2D RB100 on order - when I get the Fenix lights in, I'll post results here in the 1AA configuration (using the L1D body tube).


 
:bow: You're awsome! I can't wait.


----------



## merlocka (Sep 5, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



selfbuilt said:


> Thanks for sharing your observations - I've reached much the same conclusions on these lights.
> 
> And glad to to hear the Rex 2.1 pill fits in the MkIIX. I also prefer the finish of the MkIIX over the Rexlight, so may experiment myself (currently EDCing the Rex on 14500, as I prefer the UI and excellent runtime on this battery).
> 
> FYI, my stock MkIIX takes 14500 no problem, as it has a spring on the +'ve battery contact end in the head. For that matter, both my Rexlights have also taken my AW protecteds no problem, without needing the supplied extra contact ring. But good to point out that some lights may need it ...



My DEX and REX will come close to a protected 14500... but I'm worried about crunching them. I'm very attached to my AW cells , especially after learning the hard way how much better AW cells are than Ultra/Trust/SuperFire cells. I've had to recycle almost all of those already.

P.S. your reviews are awesome!!! SAD I ORDERED MRV before you posted your thrower review!!! I WANT A TIABLO NOW!!!

This is a very bad hobby.


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 6, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Main post just updated with Luma 301 Hi mode on alkaline. As expected, it performed in the same range as the C-LE, but with a very nice long "moon mode" as opposed to the C-LE sudden drop off. Thanks to Ricky for the super-fast RMA service!

My Liteflux LF-5 also arrived today, so I've just started testing. First impressions are favourable - very white, smooth SSC beam - and it comes with a very nice kit and display box (with diffuser, filters, etc.). :thumbsup:. Now for the detailed testing to see how it stacks up!



merlocka said:


> P.S. your reviews are awesome!!! SAD I ORDERED MRV before you posted your thrower review!!! I WANT A TIABLO NOW!!!


Don't be - the MRV is an outstanding light. I still prefer the "hand feel" of it over the other lights, and I like the tailcap lockout feature (which the Tiablo doesn't have). You won't be disappointed with the MRV.


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 7, 2007)

*Re: LF5, Rex 2.1, LM301, DX X.1, C-LE, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNTIME*

Main post just updated with new Liteflux LF5.


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 11, 2007)

*Re: LF5, Rex 2.1, LM301, DX X.1, C-LE, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNTIME*

Main post just updated with final LF5 graph (low mode on 14500).

Very good results on NiMH and 14500 - output/runtime is at least as good as any of the other PWM lights, and probably the best regulated to boot.

However, I wouldn't recommend running this light on alkalines. If you plan to use mainly alkaline batteries, you are probably better off looking at some of the competition. 

I still can't detect the actual PWM freq (my DMM won't lock on a value that high), but like the Rex 2.1 it is definitely quite high and unnoticeable in actual use.


----------



## Gaffle (Sep 15, 2007)

*Re: LF5, Rex 2.1, LM301, DX X.1, C-LE, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNTIME*

Selfbuilt, I gots a question.

When you ran the L1D was your "HI" set at turbo, or was that regular "HI" (the 80 lumen high)?


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 15, 2007)

*Re: LF5, Rex 2.1, LM301, DX X.1, C-LE, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNTIME*



Gaffle said:


> When you ran the L1D was your "HI" set at turbo, or was that regular "HI" (the 80 lumen high)?


It's set to regular mode "Hi", not turbo mode "Turbo". In the L1D configuration, I found the difference between Turbo and Hi to be around ~5-8% (max) in my lightbox, depending on battery type. Since this is pretty negligible, and since the Hi mode outperforms almost all the other lights (in terms of output), I figured it was best to keep it in Hi for the runtime tests. 

I'll have to check through my records to see if I've done it in Turbo for a comparison. But I suspect there would just be a slight drop in runtime to correspond to the slight increase in output.


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 21, 2007)

Main post just updated with two Rebel light: MTE 5-Stage R100 and Fenix L1D with "Premium" R100 head from L2D.

Simply put, the Fenix Rebel light with this head is a home-run. It shows incremental improvements in all areas: higher output, further throw, longer runtime and improved color rendition over the Cree Q2 version (which itself was an incremental improvement in output and runtime over the orginal L1DCE). Even the standard R080/R090 L1D head would be an upgrade over the original L1DCE (with output/runtime likely similar to the Q2 Cree edition). :thumbsup:

The MTE 5-Stage R100 is a disappointment. Overall output and runtime has actually decreased slightly compared to the (presumably) P4 Cree editions. Huge tint change when switching modes, and beam profile is full of artifacts. Body design is also not an improvement, as it is longer, thiner, and won't tailstand. :thumbsdow

FYI, I also have the MTE 5-Stage R070 light, and it's output is about 2/3 that of the R100 reported here (as you would expect). Personally, I'd avoid the current crop of DX/Kai Rebel lights until they get these problems resolved.


----------



## mchlwise (Sep 21, 2007)

Thanks for the updates and the EXCELLENT reviews. 

Some of the best and most informative reviews I've seen since Doug retired. 

:twothumbs


----------



## THE_dAY (Sep 21, 2007)

amazing work selfbuilt, simply amazing! 
a definite 'go to' thread when answers are needed!


----------



## ElectronGuru (Sep 21, 2007)

Added to the Rebel Alliance:

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/172850


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 22, 2007)

Thanks for the support everyone. 

Just updated the last Fenix L1D runtime graph (low mode on alkaline). Looks like I spoke too soon - this is the one mode where the runtime was actually a bit lower than the Q2 Cree edition. But there's an obvious reason why - output is nearly 50% greater!

This might be an issue for those who actually like a lower low mode (for them, this would be a step in the wrong direction). Personally, I must admit that I quite like my Rex 2.1 for it's incredibly long-lasting ultra-low mode. But of course, your tastes may vary.


----------



## orbital (Sep 22, 2007)

+

selfbuilt, this has to be one of the best threads to date!!!

thanks for all your work.

:thumbsup:


----------



## PocketBeam (Sep 25, 2007)

Great job for keeping this updated. I keep telling people to check this thread before buying a single or double AA light as it shows which lights are more efficient and brighter. Very cool thread. :thumbsup:


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 25, 2007)

Thanks for support everyone! 

FYI, I've just posted a more detailed comparison review of the Fenix lights: Fenix Rebel vs Cree: OUTPUT, RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

I plan to keep updating both threads as more lights come in. And it looks like a few other 1AA lights are on the near horizon ... time to start saving up!


----------



## fasuto (Sep 26, 2007)

Sorry for the question but I dont fully undestand the rexlight UI.
Can you swith off the light with only one click when in any mode, like medium for example, or need a cycle of clicks.

Thanks


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 26, 2007)

fasuto said:


> Sorry for the question but I dont fully undestand the rexlight UI. Can you swith off the light with only one click when in any mode, like medium for example, or need a cycle of clicks.


You can click off in any mode with one click, and have it come back on in that mode next time you turn on the light.

Simply put, it has a 2sec memory feature, whereby it remembers the last mode used if you wait 2secs in any one mode before turning off the light (the light will flash to notify you memory is on). If you turn off the light in under 2secs, the next time you turn it on it will have advanced to the next mode (just as if you had soft-pressed without going to off).

It's a little more complicated if you leave it on low, as there's a another time window where turning if off now will switch you into the next set of light modes (i.e. Daily, Tactic, or Advanced modes), which control how many light levels are available to you. This is between 4-6 secs for Tactic/Advanced, or between 2-4secs on Daily. Fortunately, the light flashes again to let you know you are in the potential mode set change time window.

It sounds more confusing then it is in practice.


----------



## fasuto (Sep 27, 2007)

selfbuilt said:


> You can click off in any mode with one click, and have it come back on in that mode next time you turn on the light.



Many thanks, I'm trying to resist another buy


----------



## LED_Thrift (Sep 27, 2007)

Thank you Selfbuilt for the tremendous work you've done here. The comparison graphs are fantastically useful! To have all that information comparing different lights on ONE graph makes it more informative than pages and pages of stand alone graphs and reviews. Thank you so much. 

Thrifty


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 27, 2007)

LED_Thrift said:


> To have all that information comparing different lights on ONE graph makes it more informative than pages and pages of stand alone graphs and reviews. Thank you so much.


You're welcome! 

That was actually one of the key reasons why I created these types of reviews. Nothing works better than to be able to see the performance of different lights on the same graph, *tested under exactly the same conditions*.

I have the new C-LE v2.0 on order, and will update these reviews once it comes in. Stil waiting on Kai to make the upgrade rex modules available (my budget doesn't quite support ordering a whole new light, as nice as they are ). And I hate seeing my Rex 2.0 sitting there unloved and unused ... so many lights, so little dark. :laughing:

UPDATE 9/28: I've just start runtimes on the LF5 on its lowest mode (~0.3 on my output scale). I expect will this take several days (weeks?) before the alkaline dies. I'll let you know the results!

UPDATE 10/05: One week later, and the LF5 is still going strong on ultra low. I've updated the Lo graph in the main post to show you the output level. At this rate, we could be here awhile ...


----------



## fasuto (Sep 29, 2007)

I think there is a new and interesting contender: Olight T15


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 30, 2007)

fasuto said:


> I think there is a new and interesting contender: Olight T15



I've been looking at that one for while now, but just can't convince myself to go for it. I don't like the Hi to Low sequence (much prefer Low to Hi, like the Rex or Fenix lights). Twisty/clicky hybrid is interesting on this light ... but the full twisty of the Liteflux is far more versatile. So I'm hard-pressed to pull the trigger on this one ... actually, I'm looking forward to new Jetbeams with higher bin emitters (e.g. Jet II looks interesting).


----------



## selfbuilt (Oct 7, 2007)

Hi guys,

I manage to snag one of the new Jetbeam C-LE v2.0 clicky lights from Emillion's site before he ran out. My review is posted here:

JetBeam C-LE v2.0 review with comparison to previous versions: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

I figure no point in updating the graphs in this review, since the output/runtime characteristics are pretty much unchanged. It's quite a nice light for its price point. Cheers!


----------



## selfbuilt (Oct 15, 2007)

Just added LF5 runtime on lowest mode: an impressive 15 days to shutdown.

I'm re-ordering a L2T v2.0 to replace the one that got lost in the mail, and will update the results here in 1AA format when it comes in. Also ordering a new Cree Q5 Fenix, so we'll see how that compares as well.

Cheers!


----------



## Lobo (Oct 15, 2007)

I have for some reasons missed this review, but I have to say 
WOW, NICE WORK!
So cool that you pretty much got all the exciting multimode AAs and reviewed the whole bunch of them. I'm tempted to get the MTE Rebel100, I just like the looks of it, and it doesnt seem too bad.
Thanks for the hard work, Selfbuilt. It's most appreciated.


----------



## PopZiMus (Oct 17, 2007)

Thanks selfbuilt :twothumbs


----------



## selfbuilt (Oct 22, 2007)

Just updated main post with results from Fenix LxTv2.0 (Rebel R080 head). It's a very nice light for the price (picked mine up in L2T configuration from www.fenixtactical.com).

I've also provided some comments in my specific Fenix 1AA round-up thread:
Fenix Rebel vs Cree: L1D/L1T/P2D OUTPUT, RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS

Cheers!


----------



## illmatic (Oct 26, 2007)

Excellent comparisons selfbuilt!

Here's a question for you, which of the lights has the best fit and finish? My preference has been SureFire E series and I just recently picked up a new Cree L1, so I was rather shocked to see the quality of the JetBeam C-LE....I have to say I'm totally impressed with the fit and finish. Obviously it doesn't have the solid feel of a SureFire, but it blows away the old Fenix L1P I had. I know that Fenix lights now have a glossier finish to them(and in true Flashaholic mode, I have a LT1 on the way!). Part of me wants to order the JetBeam Jet 1 - MKII.R after seeing how nice the C-LE is. These AA lights will either be given as gifts or used as a emergency light in the car, so I was wondering what would be the rankings according to Fit and Finish.


----------



## selfbuilt (Oct 26, 2007)

illmatic said:


> Here's a question for you, which of the lights has the best fit and finish? My preference has been SureFire E series and I just recently picked up a new Cree L1, so I was rather shocked to see the quality of the JetBeam C-LE....I have to say I'm totally impressed with the fit and finish.


I agree, the fit and finish of the Jetbeam's have been excellent of late. Although there can be some anodizing mismatch on their neutral finish, this is certainly no worse than Surefire (who, ironically, are probably one of the worse offenders!). The C-LE and Jet-u have very attractive styling (for those who favour a more rugged look), and the MkIIX is one of the nicest "smooth" looking lights I have. Top marks all the way around for colour, durability, design and fit.

Lumapower has also been doing a nice job on their anodizing of late. The LM301 (or LM31 as they call it now) has a gorgeous dark green-grey colour, and the dark "chocolate brown" MRV is a real beauty.

It terms of black, I've always been partial to the glossy Fenix lights, although I've noticed of late that a number of them are coming far more "matte" finish than they used to. But I find black doesn't stand up as well to every day wear and tear (especially on a keychain). The Liteflux lights are aso matte black finish.

Stylistically, the Rexlight is nothing to write home about, and I find its natural finish to be a very dull light gray. But mine has certainly stood up well to abuse, so anodizing quality is high.

Past those "big five" (i.e. JB, Luma, Fenix, LF, Rex), you are likely to start experiencing finishing issues. The cheaper DX/Kai lights are especially rough, as you would expect for the price.


----------



## selfbuilt (Oct 31, 2007)

Just added results from new Ultrafire C3 multi-stage light to the first post.

This is first budget light I feel somewhat comfortable recommending, it terms of its output/runtime characteristics. Build quality issues are problematic, however, as discussed in my main review of that light (linked up above).

Cheers!


----------



## afahmic (Oct 31, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Is there any update for L1d Q5?


----------



## selfbuilt (Oct 31, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*



afahmic said:


> Is there any update for L1d Q5?


Will be at least another week before I receive my L2D-Q5, and it will take about a week from then to do all the testing in L1D format. 

But see the recent discussion on the likely minimal output difference in 1AA format here:


----------



## afahmic (Oct 31, 2007)

*Re: Rex 2.1, Luma 301, DX X.1, C-LE v1.2, Fenix L1DCE-Q2, DX/Kai 5-Stage Review: RUNT*

Can't wait longer to see how it compared.

Excellent job, selfbuilt.


----------



## Grateful Ned (Nov 2, 2007)

Super thread, thanks for all the info. 

Any chance you'll add in the Olight AA model, the T15? Guessing they will have a Q5 option for that soon, but it's already a great light according to some other folks here. Anxious to buy a couple of these models and try 'em out !


----------



## selfbuilt (Nov 2, 2007)

Grateful Ned said:


> Any chance you'll add in the Olight AA model, the T15? Guessing they will have a Q5 option for that soon, but it's already a great light according to some other folks here. Anxious to buy a couple of these models and try 'em out !


Thanks for the support.

I get a lot of request for this one, but I've been holding off. I'm not personally that keen on the interface sequence (i.e. I like low to hi), and I'm waiting for them to resolve the issue about running 14500 will all modes enabled. Revised version (likely also with Q5) should be out by end of year, so maybe I will get it then. Don't feel like outlaying the cash right now for a light that's undergoing circuit revisions ... wait and see. 

As an aside, ALL my reviews so far have been financed out of my own pocket, so I'm understandably choosy about what I spend my coin on ...


----------



## Grateful Ned (Nov 3, 2007)

No worries. I saw the video that is out there on the Olight T15 and the twisty interface seems a little hand-intensive... I'm still a noob to all these next gen lights so maybe I just have stuff to learn, but I think I'm gonna end up a 'clicky' fan. 

Keep up the good work selfbuilt - this thread needs a sticky, yes ? :thumbsup:


----------



## PhantomPhoton (Nov 3, 2007)

Wow, very nice. That was a lot of work. 

The AA light niche is crazy hard to keep track of. This thread helps a lot.


----------



## Grateful Ned (Nov 17, 2007)

> The AA light niche is crazy hard to keep track of.


 
Heh, esp with this month's addition of the Nitecore and the T15 Q5.... This is makin' me dizzy. :duh2:


----------



## merlocka (Nov 28, 2007)

Grateful Ned said:


> Heh, esp with this month's addition of the Nitecore and the T15 Q5.... This is makin' me dizzy. :duh2:



And where's the JetBeam MKIIR ?!?!? :naughty: C'mon SelfBuilt, we're counting on you :laughing:


----------



## selfbuilt (Nov 28, 2007)

No immediate plans to get an Olight or JetBeam MkIIR, I'm afraid (I'm not that interested in either UI, frankly). The NiteCore will be added to the review when I receive the actual shipping version (I don't think it's fair to put a pre-production model into the mix). As soon as I receive the shipping NiteCore and re-do the testing, the results will go up here and in my NiteCore thread.

However, I've just added the Fenix L1D with premium Q5 head results to the main post for your enjoyment.  New this time are 14500 results for the Fenix in most modes.


----------



## merlocka (Nov 28, 2007)

selfbuilt said:


> No immediate plans to get an Olight or JetBeam MkIIR, I'm afraid (I'm not that interested in either UI, frankly). The NiteCore will be added to the review when I receive the actual shipping version (I don't think it's fair to put a pre-production model into the mix). As soon as I receive the shipping NiteCore and re-do the testing, the results will go up here and in my NiteCore thread.
> 
> However, I've just added the Fenix L1D with premium Q5 head results to the main post for your enjoyment.  New this time are 14500 results for the Fenix in most modes.



The Olight and MKIIR comments were more of a tease. Your efforts are astounding, and very helpful to all CPF members.

I actually responded to JetBeam in their CPFMP thread that the current UI was not interesting in a $70 light, offered them some suggestions. 

The Olight does seem interesting from a UI perspective... but I'm waiting for the Nitecore, I think that will hold me off for a while. Might have to take it to one of my friends with a machine shop, carve off those knurlings though  I don't see myself warding off any attackers with a AA pocket light.


----------



## selfbuilt (Nov 28, 2007)

merlocka said:


> The Olight and MKIIR comments were more of a tease. Your efforts are astounding, and very helpful to all CPF members.
> 
> I actually responded to JetBeam in their CPFMP thread that the current UI was not interesting in a $70 light, offered them some suggestions.
> 
> The Olight does seem interesting from a UI perspective... but I'm waiting for the Nitecore, I think that will hold me off for a while. Might have to take it to one of my friends with a machine shop, carve off those knurlings though  I don't see myself warding off any attackers with a AA pocket light.


I realized you were being playful with your comments on the other lights - I took them that way. 

And I agree fully with your comments on the Jetbeam thread - in fact, I just replied there supporting your post. 

I'm less interested in the Olight given the hi to low sequence (I use lights the other way around), and I know the initial batch couldn't take 14500 properly and preserve all the levels (apparently they are working to fix that). 

But I have to say, from my perspective, the NiteCore adequately fulfills my needs at present. Hope the shipping versions match the performance of my sample!


----------



## Alan B (Nov 29, 2007)

Still, it would be very nice to see these other lights added to your excellent comparison.

If you are interested, I could loan you an Olight T15-Q5 for a couple of weeks for (non-destructive) testing.

Drop me a PM if you are interested.

-- Alan


----------



## Grateful Ned (Dec 2, 2007)

So one wonders when Fenix will offer us an L1D and/or L1T that already comes with an LED at the R100 or Q5 level. I see the P2 combo pack but I'm not sure I want to pay for extra parts, and I'm still hesitant about getting a light that has the P2 flash problem when switching modes.


----------



## Grateful Ned (Dec 13, 2007)

By way of a gift idea update for the holidays, I just received a couple Fenix L1T v2's in the mail today I plan to gift to potential flashaholics (incl my son's martial arts teacher) and I actually picked up an 'old' L1S as well as a starter light for my son. Even with that he'll blow away his scout buddies etc with their little incans, muhuahahaha. 

Anyways the *L1T V2*'s get a thumbs up from me for a good, straightforward light. Momentary clicky works great and the beam plenty bright and very pleasing color. I know a couple vendors are sold out of 'em right now but for good reason. Great AA light. A Q5 version or better (future bins) would rock, presuming interface and size stay the same, and price is reasonable (seems slightly overpriced right now for two-mode 90-ish lumens).

:thumbsup:


----------



## selfbuilt (Dec 17, 2007)

Alan B said:


> Still, it would be very nice to see these other lights added to your excellent comparison.
> 
> If you are interested, I could loan you an Olight T15-Q5 for a couple of weeks for (non-destructive) testing.


Just an update, but I finally pulled the trigger and ordered an Olight T15-Q5 from 4sevens. Will probably take a couple of weeks to get here, but I will add it to the review. 

Actually, I will probably also start a new review thread soon just to compare the various Q5 AA lights. EDGETAC is sending me a shipping version of the NiteCore, so I will be able to directly compare it to my pre-production version (reivew in my sig block).


----------



## Alan B (Dec 17, 2007)

Glad to hear you are going to add the T15 to the review. It is great to have side by side comparisons. I gave mine away, so I don't have one anymore. It is a nicely made light, but I have others I like better.

-- Alan


----------



## Alan B (Dec 17, 2007)

Perhaps an LRI Photon Proton PRO would be good to add as well...

Too Many Lights!

-- Alan


----------



## Grateful Ned (Dec 18, 2007)

selfbuilt said:


> Just an update, but I finally pulled the trigger and ordered an Olight T15-Q5 from 4sevens. Will probably take a couple of weeks to get here, but I will add it to the review.
> 
> Actually, I will probably also start a new review thread soon just to compare the various Q5 AA lights. EDGETAC is sending me a shipping version of the NiteCore, so I will be able to directly compare it to my pre-production version (reivew in my sig block).


 
:twothumbs

Hopefully by then Fenix will let us know what's happening with the L1T line as the v2 was a good AA light. Will be quite a lineup all side by side. You're doin' the Lord's work here selfbuilt.


----------



## orbital (Dec 27, 2008)

+

Ran a runtime test with my LiteFlux LF5 (SSC) 
Used an Energizer E2 Lithium AA.'
It lasted for 18.5 days of constant On {Lowest Low}


_*That's 444 hours on a single AA battery................*_


----------

