Surefire G3+KT2 turbohead, recommend a Lumens factory lamp

ebow86 · Jul 15, 2010

I'm thinking of replacing the MN15 in my G3 and naturally I'm looking toward lumens factory. I'm not intrested in a surefire MN16 because 20min runtime is just 2 low. Runtime has to be longer that 20 minutes using surefire primaries. Right now I'm eyeballin the HO-M3T (9V, 380 Lumens) High Output Lamp Assembly, their claiming 380lum with 40min runtime, however, I have no experience with lumens factory lamps so I'm not sure about their lumen and runtime claims. Also checking out the EO-M3T @450lum with with a claimed runtime of 32 minutes. What are you guys experience with these lamps using CR123 primaries? Is the runtime and lumens exaggerated or are they pretty accurate? Searches doesn't seem to give me many anwsers regarding performance using CR123's.

jp2515 · Jul 15, 2010

Incan noob here but I have dabbled with th LF lamps before. Mostly with the HO-M3T and the HO-M4. Pretty bright light, although I have not tested the runtime. Both have ran on SF CR123A without issues.

maxspeeds · Jul 16, 2010

LumensFactory lamps rock! I'd recommend the HO-M3T lamp for it's great runtime, and superior throwing ability. Check out mdocod's behemoth tactical shootout: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/235143

mdocod · Jul 16, 2010

LF bulbs are optimized for li-ion cells more than CR123 cells. The EO-M3T could be thought of as a li-ion compatible version of the MN16. (The MN16 is severely over driven on li-ion cells). What that means is that, the EO-M3T is also going to be under-driven on CR123s. The same could be said for the HO-M3T but to a lesser extent, which is just a hair below that point in power consumption.

I think the runtime figures on the LF website are quite optimistic for CR123s (I had never looked at the before personally). They probably calculated a runtime from cell capacity on paper minus an actual test. This type of runtime estimate works better with li-ion than with lithium primary cells beacuse li-ion cells hold closer to their rated capacity at a wider range of loads.

If I had to guess, I'd say that the HO-M3T would run closer to that 30 minute mark, and the EO-M3T would run about 20 minutes just like the MN16.

FYI: the MN16 and EO-M3T have about the same power consumption, but the MN16 will be brighter in this application because it has a lower design voltage that matches the discharge behavior of the CR123 cells better.

The HO-M3T might be worth a try. but I'm not sure if you will see a huge difference from the MN15 on CR123s. It will likely be slightly brighter, but possibly not by enough to notice. (probably less than a 35% difference)

As a very rough rule of thumb, to convert LumensFactory lumens into SureFire lumens for incandecent flashlights, divide LF by 2.

If the MN15 is rated 125 lumen, I would put the HO-M3T powered by CR123s at maybe 175 lumen.

Have you considered a pair of protected AW brand 17500 cells to power up the HO-M3T? That would give you 30 minutes of rechargeable runtime and a bit more impressive performance at this drain rate than CR123s, (more like "200" surefire lumens if I had to take a guess).

Eric

ebow86 · Jul 17, 2010

mdocod said:
LF bulbs are optimized for li-ion cells more than CR123 cells. The EO-M3T could be thought of as a li-ion compatible version of the MN16. (The MN16 is severely over driven on li-ion cells). What that means is that, the EO-M3T is also going to be under-driven on CR123s. The same could be said for the HO-M3T but to a lesser extent, which is just a hair below that point in power consumption.

I think the runtime figures on the LF website are quite optimistic for CR123s (I had never looked at the before personally). They probably calculated a runtime from cell capacity on paper minus an actual test. This type of runtime estimate works better with li-ion than with lithium primary cells beacuse li-ion cells hold closer to their rated capacity at a wider range of loads.

If I had to guess, I'd say that the HO-M3T would run closer to that 30 minute mark, and the EO-M3T would run about 20 minutes just like the MN16.

FYI: the MN16 and EO-M3T have about the same power consumption, but the MN16 will be brighter in this application because it has a lower design voltage that matches the discharge behavior of the CR123 cells better.

The HO-M3T might be worth a try. but I'm not sure if you will see a huge difference from the MN15 on CR123s. It will likely be slightly brighter, but possibly not by enough to notice. (probably less than a 35% difference)

As a very rough rule of thumb, to convert LumensFactory lumens into SureFire lumens for incandecent flashlights, divide LF by 2.

If the MN15 is rated 125 lumen, I would put the HO-M3T powered by CR123s at maybe 175 lumen.

Have you considered a pair of protected AW brand 17500 cells to power up the HO-M3T? That would give you 30 minutes of rechargeable runtime and a bit more impressive performance at this drain rate than CR123s, (more like "200" surefire lumens if I had to take a guess).

Eric

Well if that the case maybe I'll just stick with my MN15. It's not that I don't like the performence, it's just I thought there might be something better out there. Regarding using 17500 rechargeable cells, to be perfectly honest, I'm scarred. I don't know anything about rechargeable's, and I don't want to risk dropping the cash on cells and a charger without knowing exactly what I'm buying and how reliable it's going to be (exploding lamps, switches requiring multiple presses to activate, overcharging, overdischarging, etc, etc). Thats why I stick with primaries.

mdocod · Jul 18, 2010

I'll make it easy:

AW brand protected 3.7V 1100mAH 17500s

Pila IBC charger

Safer than primary cells believe it or not

ebow86 · Jul 18, 2010

mdocod said:
I'll make it easy:

AW brand protected 3.7V 1100mAH 17500s

Pila IBC charger

Safer than primary cells believe it or not

Thanks. I will consider it later on when I have the extra cash. Before I purchase any batteries and chargers I have a lot of reading and researching here. I don't know if it applies to this particular setup but I have read post in the past that talked about light needing double clicks or double presses in order to activate, or something along those lines. Would I have any issues like that with the setup you are recommending? And how would lamp life be using those lithium ion cells?

mdocod · Jul 18, 2010

Hi ebow86,

The double-triple tapping is only an issue when the lamp operates at a current consumption approaching the protection circuits high current limit. There are lot of threads from years ago when the PCBs were all set to low values like 1.5A about having to dance on tail-caps to fire up cold filaments. In modern years, there aren't many ordinary configurations of bulbs and modern cells that have this problem if you stick with good quality cells.

The AW brand 17500s will drive the MN15 without a hickup. The MN15 will be driven about the same on 17500s on average as on the CR123s. Bulb life shouldn't change much.

Eric

Paladin · Jul 18, 2010

I'll second Eric's advice about the utility of a pair of 17500's.

Both the incan(1.1 to 1.25 amps) and led(400mA) Streamlight TL-3's, Pelican 2370 Led(650mA), Surefire 9P with P90 lamp(1.18 amps), 9P turbo with N2 lamp(1.15 amps), G3L with P60L drop in(260 mA), and L6 with KL6 led bezel(525 mA) have all worked perfectly on rechargeable cells.

I've cycled the 17500's about 20 times, which would have normally "cost" about 60 primary cells. The savings really add up over time!

Paladin

ebow86 · Jul 21, 2010

Thanks for the advice guys. I was wondering, if I do decide to run lio-ion 17500's would I be able to run all the 9V lumens factory lamps well? I was eyeballin the EO-M3T @ 450lum. If I'm going to run a rechargable then runtime wouldn't be much of a concern, although it was have to be a solid 20 minutes at least. What would be the better lamp, MN16 or EO-M3T?

mdocod · Jul 22, 2010

Hello ebow86,

The EO-M3T draws 2.4A, which is a little over the safe maximum continuous discharge for a 17500 size cell. The maximum safe discharge for the 1.1AH 17500 size cell is about 2 amps, which lines up nicely with the HO-M3T. Which would be the brightest bulb you could run on those cells safely. (The cells will fire up the EO-M3T without a problem, it's just not good for them).

Not to worry though, there's very little visible difference between the HO-M3T and EO-M3T in actual use, and in my testing, the HO-M3T will actually produce higher peak lux in the beam (if you like throw this is a good thing).

The MN16 will draw more like 2.6A on a pair of 17500s, which is again, above the maximum safe discharge rate.

The SureFire HOLA lamps are optimized for use on CR123s, so they have a lower design voltage, this results in substantial over-drive when powered up by li-ion cells. Many people here have used bulbs like the MN16 powered by 2 li-ion cells (larger than 17500s), with good results, but short bulb life. The MN16 driven by li-ion cells is very very bright, 300-400 torch lumens is not uncommon fresh off the charger.

Eric

ebow86 · Jul 22, 2010

mdocod, thank you for all your great advice. When the budget allows for me to go with the rechargeable setup you recommended, I will put your advice to good use. Thank you.

Surefire G3+KT2 turbohead, recommend a Lumens factory lamp

ebow86

Flashlight Enthusiast

jp2515

Flashlight Enthusiast

maxspeeds

Flashlight Enthusiast

mdocod

Flashaholic

ebow86

Flashlight Enthusiast

mdocod

Flashaholic

ebow86

Flashlight Enthusiast

mdocod

Flashaholic

Paladin

Enlightened

ebow86

Flashlight Enthusiast

mdocod

Flashaholic

ebow86

Flashlight Enthusiast

Similar threads

Latest posts