Is the Thrunite Catapult V1 brighter than the V2???

Now I am baffled. I was about to pull the trigger on the newly released Catapult V2, but I just ran across the following reviews of the Catapult V1 and V2 and the reviewer claims that the V2 has a lower max output than the V1? How is this possible? Or are this reviewer's information/measurements just incorrect? Or am I misinterpreting his/her results? Or is it just a typo on the reviewer's part???

Catapult V1 review (claims 649 Lumens on High):

http://light-reviews.com/thrunite_catapult/

Catapult V2 review (claims 593 Lumens on High):

http://light-reviews.com/thrunite_catapult_v2/

It seems rather unusual that Thrunite would produce a newer version (V2) of their Catapult that has a lower max output than the original version (V1) that it replaced. :thinking:

By the way, these are not my reviews, so please don't kill the messenger...:candle:

Re: Is the Thrunite Catapult V2 not as bright as the V1???

:duh2: I also didn't understand anything... :thinking:

Honestly a 50 lumen difference at that level shouldn't be very noticeable. Perhaps the tints of the LEDs in the specific lights used could be slightly different, resulting in slightly different output levels?

since THe LED dome take off and affect the brightness!

The update on the review for the V2, posted on 23.05.2010 states that the emitter on the flashlight used for the review was damaged. Apparently the dome fell off the LED, which SHOULD increase brightness and not reduce brightness. However, since there is no definite confirmation as to what really happened, I'll take 593lumens as what the V2 puts out, I seriously doubt any human eye will see the difference of 56lumens that the V1 puts out over the V2.

My main concern from this issue would be the questionable QC standards that Thrunite has over its products when approving them ready for sale leaving the factory. I would REALLY HATE to receive a defective $159.95+S/H flashlight that either leaks thermal grease from the driver or has the dome falling off the emitter.

Did this reviewer measure the OTF lumens? I thought the emitter lumens were rated at 1,000 now for the V2 over the V1's 900 lumens. Everything I read previously made it sound as if the V2 was going to be at least a little brighter. :thinking:

Fusion_m8 said:

The update on the review for the V2, posted on 23.05.2010 states that the emitter on the flashlight used for the review was damaged. Apparently the dome fell off the LED, which SHOULD increase brightness and not reduce brightness. However, since there is no definite confirmation as to what really happened, I'll take 593lumens as what the V2 puts out, I seriously doubt any human eye will see the difference of 56lumens that the V1 puts out over the V2.

I thought when the dome falls off throw increases but measured lumen output (actual light output) decreases!

My main concern from this issue would be the questionable QC standards that Thrunite has over its products when approving them ready for sale leaving the factory. I would REALLY HATE to receive a defective $159.95+S/H flashlight that either leaks thermal grease from the driver or has the dome falling off the emitter.

Click to expand...

I saw a post around here (by a dealer?) saying the thermal grease issue has been rectified.

The SST-50 domes are known to be fragile - I guess that would be Luminous's doing.
Oh, here [V2 review] - The LED dome sits perfectly aligned at the bottom of the reflector, however I noticed the die within the dome sits slightly off. This is due to the LED manufacturing process and noting to do with the construction of the Catapult

Actually the loss of the dome would account for a drop in lumens of 50 or so. The 'removal of domes make it brighter' threads did in the end come to the conclusion that it stopped the light being as diffused and so increased lux, but overall lumen output dropped on the emitters with the domes removed.

Haha... Ok... I didn't realise people's MAIN concern was correcting me about a decrease in lumens after the dome falls off.

I guess I was wrong in thinking the bigger issues at hand were the QC standards at Thrunite before flashlights get approved for sale.

I guess I'm in the minority worrying about receiving a flashlight with a missing dome/leaking thermal grease because the issue of an ill fitting reflector hasn't really been ironed out.

lovecpf

Those are the issues that have kept me away and I've really been looking for a good throwing SST-50. Haven't found one yet with great quality that I can afford.

recDNA said:

Those are the issues that have kept me away and I've really been looking for a good throwing SST-50. Haven't found one yet with great quality that I can afford.

Click to expand...

It sounds more like a problem with the LED than the light manufac

I'll still probably end up buying the Catapult V2 at some point, but may wait for one of the reliable CPF reviewers, like selfbuilt or csshih, to crank out a detailed review and also wait for some feedback from those folks who've already purchased and used the V2.

I'm starting to learn that it's better to get some feedback about a new version from CPF'ers before jumping in and making an impulse buy right when it comes out.

So, anyone actually have the new V2 yet? And are you happy with it??? :thinking:

I will buy the Catapult eventually, but after I'm satisfied that the QC issues have been rectified. In the V1, many Catapult owners could not tighten the head fully due to the reflector crushing the LED and the driver causing thermal grease to spill out onto the reflector and internals of the flashlight. I use my lights regularly outdoors in saltwater/muddy/snow environments and the last thing I need is liquid damage to the electronics because I could not tighten the head far enough to maintain an airtight seal.

it seems all the problems with V1 have been fixed with V2

jcw122 said:

It sounds more like a problem with the LED than the light manufac

Click to expand...

Yes and no....the SST-50 may be a decent thrower with a reflector designed especially for it in a spotlight sized head (perhaps 5 - 6 inches). Same might be true with a quality aspheric designed FOR the SST-50. The new Olight SST-90 flashlight is just TOO big for me but an SST-50 can be driven well with just a couple of 18650's. I prefer a side by side format to make it shorter and to balance the large head.

If the Catapult had an aspherical lens option (designed FOR the Catapult) it could be great. I understand it's good as is but I have plenty of MC-E lights so the only advantage the SST-50 holds for me is potentially throwing significantly further than something like an M2XC4.

I think what he meant was that the dome of the LED falling off is on the part of Luminous QC, not Thrunite's. The SST domes have been known to be temperamental.

Light-reviews says:
"The LED dome sits perfectly aligned at the bottom of the reflector, however I noticed the die within the dome sits slightly off. This is due to the LED manufacturing process and noting to do with the construction of the Catapult."
Follow the link - http://light-reviews.com/thrunite_catapult_v2/


Also, by the beamshots I've seen posted the V2 is brighter then the V1.

Really...

I guess the fact that the reflector crushing the LED and driver when the head is fully tightened had nothing to do with it then?