Well ive just bought my Catapult so i'm abit cheesed off to hear there is a new version out but none the less its still a great light.
with you 100% on the twist thing and keeping the 3 levels....just seems like a crappy way to have to adjust a 160 dollar flashlight LOOSENING the head of the thing......like how loose does it have to be..........id like to keep everything tight on a flash thats supposed to be submersible to 30 feet for several hours.......Here are the details of the Catapult v2.
Personally, the things I like about v2 are as follows:
- SS bezel. I'm hoping that these can be bought separately and fit on v1.
- The high mode is now 3.5a compared to v1's 3.0a.
What I don't like about v2:
- Mode switching via twist. I believe that this method no longer allows one handed operation of the light as I find it already difficult to twist the head of my v1 light with just the one hand.
- Only two modes, a high '1000 lumen' mode and a low '250 lumen' mode. I like medium mode a lot in the v1. I find the light that this mode produce is a great balance between run-time and brightness.
At the end of the day, I would prefer v1 over v2 because of its well spaced out brightness levels and functionality.
What I don't like about v2:
- Mode switching via twist. I believe that this method no longer allows one handed operation of the light as I find it already difficult to twist the head of my v1 light with just the one hand.
- Only two modes, a high '1000 lumen' mode and a low '250 lumen' mode. I like medium mode a lot in the v1. I find the light that this mode produce is a great balance between run-time and brightness.
At the end of the day, I would prefer v1 over v2 because of its well spaced out brightness levels and functionality.
with you 100% on the twist thing and keeping the 3 levels....just seems like a crappy way to have to adjust a 160 dollar flashlight LOOSENING the head of the thing......like how loose does it have to be..........I'd like to keep everything tight on a flash that's supposed to be submersible to 30 feet for several hours.......
I don't know much about this sort of stuff from a purely technical viewpoint, but will an extra 100 emitter lumens (=65 OTF lumens) make all that much difference over the "old" Catapult?
Aren't we looking at roughly 700L (old) versus 765L (new) OTF ? Not even 10%.
Although with an apparently broader hot spot.
— Jack.
There are plenty of twisty lights out there that maintain perfectly adequate waterproofness. There is a long history to show that this is not likely to be a problem - from Surefire tailcaps to Fenix, JetBeams and other head twists, etc.just seems like a crappy way to have to adjust a 160 dollar flashlight LOOSENING the head of the thing......like how loose does it have to be..........id like to keep everything tight on a flash thats supposed to be submersible to 30 feet for several hours.......
will you still be able to the the old model after the new one is out ??There are plenty of twisty lights out there that maintain perfectly adequate waterproofness. There is a long history to show that this is not likely to be a problem - from Surefire tailcaps to Fenix, JetBeams and other head twists, etc.
It's really just a question of preference. Many prefer it because it allows true momentary signaling at the tailcap (i.e. don't have to worry about accidentally advancing modes), and there is no uncertainty as to what mode the light will come on in (i.e. no memory needed - you can tell before turning on).
To each their own ... :shrug:
Yep... as an almost buyer of the Catapult, I'm disappointed that the second version has (to me at least) these shortcomings you guys have already noted.
Why did Thrunite change the original all-clicky modes? Why did they do away with any mid-level output?
I'm guessing the 250L low mode ain't gonna be low enough for a lot of people. That should've been around the "mid" level, and with an extra true low of around 12L.
The only "advantage" for me could be that it's gonna sell at the same price, so a bit more bang for your buck?
— Jack.
Relative outputs on all levels, on both 1x18650 and 2x18650 were tested and are shown with the runtimes here:Hi selfbuilt, the throw and output numbers in your chart are based on 2x 18650s right? Did you happen to test the throw and output on a single 18650?
Are you sure that is not from SS Enterprise? :laughing::laughing:
"Beam me up, Scotty"
Relative outputs on all levels, on both 1x18650 and 2x18650 were tested and are shown with the runtimes here:
Allthough I didn't measure throw at those levels, you can estimate on the basis of the output drop by comparing proportionally the square root of lux throw. For example, a 30% drop in output is likely close to a 30% drop in "throw" (square root lux) - just work backwards to get estimate acutal lux at the lower levels.
Not a perfect correlation, but I've found it works pretty well to get estimates