HDS Clicky 140, 200 & N170 Low Mode Runtime Tests

[John_Galt]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

I'm interested in seeing if the older gen Clickies/Twisties are more efficient [I'd imagine they would be]. I don't have a twisty, but I do have a Ra Clicky 140n. I think this week I'll start a run time test, myself.

I just hope I don't forget about it. Or grow tired of not having my clicky with me.

 

[notsofast]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

I'll do a test with a 100W that is just sitting in a drawer...heading to install a new battery.

Edit:

Started 3:09 Pacific time using a 4sevens battery expiration date 3/17.

 

[nbp]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

nbp,

My questioning of using older cells was only because it seems to be introducing 2 variables into your test. Testing the low runtime of these lights is interesting (how long will they really run for?). Testing a 9 year old SF cell is also interesting (how much capacity has it retained after 9 years :thinking. It's just that when they are combined, I think that it lessens what we learn.

I see what you are saying. I don't know if the cell has lost any significant amount of capacity, but I see what you're saying. In your opinion, how fresh do you think the cell has to be for it to be an accurate representation? I'm not sure where to draw the line. :shrug:


I have some fresher (only had them a few months) Battery Station cells, but they don't have expiration dates I don't think, so I don't technically know when they were manufactured. If you, or anyone, wants me to do the test with specific cells, I would be more than happy to accept them and run the test again.

I'm interested in seeing if the older gen Clickies/Twisties are more efficient [I'd imagine they would be]. I don't have a twisty, but I do have a Ra Clicky 140n. I think this week I'll start a run time test, myself.

I just hope I don't forget about it. Or grow tired of not having my clicky with me.

Give it a try and let us know!

I'll do a test with a 100W that is just sitting in a drawer...heading to install a new battery.

Edit:

Started 3:09 Pacific time using a 4sevens battery expiration date 3/17.

What level are you running it at notsofast? I have a 100Tw and an 85Tr, but as far as I know they are still programmed to their factory settings, and I don't feel like going through the hassle of all the twisting to reprogram them to their lowest possible levels for a test. I could do it at the factory low level on either one if people care. I also have an 18650 tube for them, but that could take weeks... :naughty:

 

[notsofast]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

What level are you running it at notsofast?

I am doing the lowest level.

 

[nbp]

How are the tests coming guys?

 

[notsofast]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

Nothing has changed here...still going.

 

[the.Mtn.Man]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

I'm a huge runtime fan...

I'm actually quite surprised it was so short. I thought I had read somewhere here that an HDS clicky would run a month, and the rotaries a week.

So how do ZL and 4/7s manage to squeeze out twice as many hours AND twice as many lumens from half as much battery?

HDS lights are rated for constant brightness. If Henry says you get 50 lumens then you get 50 lumens until the batteries are exhausted.

 

[notsofast]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

Well it has been 10 days, 242 hrs so far.

I am leaving town for the week end to fly my hang glider so I will be distracted a bit more. If it goes out hopefully I won't miss the hour by much.

 

[nbp]

Yowza! The Twisty is blistering the New Clicky!

:wow: Keep us up to date!

 

[notsofast]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

This is a 100W Ra clicky.

 

[nbp]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

This is a 100W Ra clicky.

Oh, my mistake, I thought it was a Twisty 100. Either way, it should be the same as the Twisty I think with the same guts and emitter. SSC P4 I assume?

I really love that emitter in the HDS lights.

 

[Wiggle]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

I've been interested in getting an HDS light for a while. But one main thing is holding me back, I just have no interest in CR123. It doesn't seem like low-end efficiency is the strong point of this light. For example 47's Preon P0 runs longer, brighter and on a Lithium AAA. A cell that has about 20% the electrical volume,if that, of a CR123. I suppose it comes down to the overhead from an electronic switch, programming and all that. As the brightness goes down, the proportion of energy spent on that versus actual LED power becomes greater and greater.

 

[nbp]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

I've been interested in getting an HDS light for a while. But one main thing is holding me back, I just have no interest in CR123. It doesn't seem like low-end efficiency is the strong point of this light. For example 47's Preon P0 runs longer, brighter and on a Lithium AAA. A cell that has about 20% the electrical volume,if that, of a CR123. I suppose it comes down to the overhead from an electronic switch, programming and all that. As the brightness goes down, the proportion of energy spent on that versus actual LED power becomes greater and greater.

Perhaps it is not as efficient, but if you choose the HDS over the Preon, you wouldn't do it for the runtime anyways. You'd do it for the programmable interface and the ridiculous toughness of the HDS, neither of which the Preon can match. If those are not important to you, the HDS may not be the best choice for you, though many will agree they are some of the best lights made.

 

[Wiggle]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

Oh absolutely. I'm not claiming the P0 to be a superior light. The toughness, reliability and quality of the HDS lights is well documented, just citing a comparison for low-lumen efficiency.

 

[nbp]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

You're right though, some of those other lights seem to have incredible runtimes. I don't know the intricacies of drivers well enough to explain why, but they do seem to go forever.

 

[John_Galt]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

You're right though, some of those other lights seem to have incredible runtimes. I don't know the intricacies of drivers well enough to explain why, but they do seem to go forever.

I'd imagine it comes down to two main things: less intricate driver [less power needed just for the drivers operation] and not as well regulated.

Basically, Henry's driver has to constantly monitor cell voltage while under load, check that against the current it's been pulling, calculate the best way to maintain the desired output, all the while monitoring the temperature of the LED, and finally powering the LED. Quite a bit of current overhead, I'd imagine. The Rotary offers another step in this process, meaning more power needed, even at lower outputs.

I'd imagine the reason both the Rotary and Clicky lights took a step down in the run-time department with this new generation is because they are the same driver [which makes the most sense from a manufacturing, assembling, and cost viewpoint]. The Rotaries are merely programmed to accept commands from the rotary tailcap switch. This makes sense to me, because the heads are probably all "dumb" until programmed and mated with their respective bodies.

-----
I'm also embarrased to admit I have not started my run time test... My Clicky's seen a lot of use over the last couple of night shifts, so it's been with me.

But it's started now: 4:58am EST 7/8/12 On a newer CR123 [2019 exp]. ~5 minutes high mode [not burst] use otherwise. I promise to check on it as frequently as I can and report back with a time estimate.

Night

Edit: It helps to have the automatic turn off disabled, lol. Re-restarted at8:21amEST

Still going strong

 

[morelightnow]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

I've been interested in getting an HDS light for a while. But one main thing is holding me back, I just have no interest in CR123. It doesn't seem like low-end efficiency is the strong point of this light. For example 47's Preon P0 runs longer, brighter and on a Lithium AAA. A cell that has about 20% the electrical volume,if that, of a CR123. I suppose it comes down to the overhead from an electronic switch, programming and all that. As the brightness goes down, the proportion of energy spent on that versus actual LED power becomes greater and greater.

The comparisons may not be accurate either. I see the P0 is rated at .24 lumens at 120 hours, which is less than a clicky at .3 lumens for 128 hours. There may be other lights that can beat this, but for the complexity of the control circuit I think it does darn good. I used to be a fan of direct drive, but then I realized I wanted more options so I don't blind myself at night.

 

[reppans]

The comparisons may not be accurate either. I see the P0 is rated at .24 lumens at 120 hours, which is less than a clicky at .3 lumens for 128 hours. There may be other lights that can beat this, but for the complexity of the control circuit I think it does darn good. I used to be a fan of direct drive, but then I realized I wanted more options so I don't blind myself at night.

I think what Wiggle is referring to actual runtime testimonials. The OP got around 140 hrs at 0.07 lumens in posts 1 and 30. Gotlumens got 180 hrs on the P0 with a AAA lithium primary. Interestingly, while testing a 1xAA Quark (0.2 lumens?), Darvis actually got MORE runtime out of a 1xAA alkaline than he did with a 1xAA lithium primary (470 vs 330 hrs)... now those runtimes are incredible. 4/7s is know for being pretty conservative with their numbers. Although they're not built like Henry's, I love 4/7s lights for their runtimes and great selection of low lumen modes.

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/sh...ght-Run-Time-Testimonials-real-world-testing!

I'm with Wiggle on the battery thing. I'd really like to get an HDS but have no interest in CR123s. It seems the only advantage of 123s is a higher max lumen output on primaries, yet many disadvantages in terms of rechargeables and back-up options.

 

[skyfire]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

nbp...got another runtime test for ya

surefire 1st gen L1 that i swapped in a nichia 219.
fresh rayovac primary was used.

runtime on low mode:
148-156 hours. (over 6 straight days)

i stopped the test this morning because output was so low, it was practically useless.
for the first couple days its output is about 6-8 lumens. then it would gradually drop down to about 1 lumen for the last couple days.
i dont have a sphere to measure lumens, so its just a guesstimate when i compare it to other lights with low modes.

conclusion: i love this light! high cri, perfect ergos, perfect UI (for me), near-perfect beam.
when considering the the amount of output this light is putting out, and for how long, its hard to think of a more efficient single cr123 light out there.
i dont need a high cri rotary... but i still really want one though.

 

[notsofast]

Re: NEW HDS Clicky 140 & 200 Runtime Tests

Well it finally drained the battery. Darkness happened at 12:00AM last night for a total of 465hrs (19 days 9hrs)

I think that is respectable!