TerraLUX LightStar220 Extreme LED Flashlight

Looking at this LightStar 220 advertised on Battery Junction the ad states that it will run on High: 220 Lumens for up to 3.5 Hours!
Low: 100 Lumens for up to 26 Hours!

I have much difficulty believing that it will run at 100 lumens for 26 hours using 2 x AA Alkaline Batteries.
Anyone with any info on this?
Thanks,
jerry

My understanding is that Terralux is an American R&D optics thinktank and production facility out of Colorado and not inclined to making up specs. Sounds like a good flashlight. I saw somewhere that light got 5/5 stars with nine reviews and that it light beats out a Surefire 6P in direct comparison.

I love dropping Terralux bulbs into my Maglites and have never had a problem (other than the D batteries won't die with LEDs and bulb imbedded voltage driver circuitry). I think Maglites should come out of the box with Terralux's, but tinkering with them is half the fun.

Thanks, Mag-man. I would think that the output would have dropped a lot in 26 hours but evidently it is still burning. At $24.95 it appears to be a good buy if one wants a 2AA light. I guess I will have to say, WOW!
Best,
Jerry

TerraLUX does not use OTF lumens or adhere to ANSI FL1 standards, so the actual output is going to be much less. Here's that the LightStar300 (which is actually around 140-160 lumens) looks like on high:

Robin, what makes the NiMh not perform better in this light? Thanks.

It's regulated.

On CPF, regulated is often used loosely for lights that have flat runtime graphs, but that is actually incorrect. Regulated means that regardless of battery chemistry, output is more or less the same.

Thanks, very much, Robin. That is helpful, and makes sense.
Regards,
Jerry

Robin24k said:

It's regulated.

On CPF, regulated is often used loosely for lights that have flat runtime graphs, but that is actually incorrect. Regulated means that regardless of battery chemistry, output is more or less the same.

Click to expand...

Thanks Robin, suspected that might be the case, but it's very nice to get it explained and confirmed. I guess the only shame with such lights are the fact you don't get any gain using better batteries for those that know to use them.

Robin24k said:

It's regulated.

On CPF, regulated is often used loosely for lights that have flat runtime graphs, but that is actually incorrect. Regulated means that regardless of battery chemistry, output is more or less the same.

Click to expand...

Thanks Robin, suspected that might be the case, but it's very nice to get it explained and confirmed. I guess the only shame with such lights are the fact you don't get any gain using better batteries for those that know to use them.

I just got one 2 of these off someone from the MarketPlace. It was a really good deal for 2 unused ones.

What emitter do these have in them?
What's the actual output? I read they did not rate OTF or ANSI so what can I expect in terms of output?
Is this a good upgrade options for replacing a Enegerizer e2 Lithium 2AA flashlight???

I don't think you will see much of an improvement in performance with lithium AA's, since the regulation is a fixed step-down.

I didn't mean the L91s, I meant compared to the e2 flashlight I linked in my last post.

What did you mean by fixed stepdown? After how long?
On the 22o right? The graph abover is for the 300. I am no fan of any step down or turbo boost.

It's going to be really hard to say...I imagine that they will be around 100 lumens or so, but that is purely speculation. To be honest, you probably would have been better off getting the Mini Maglite Pro or Pro+ instead.

I was one of the first to have the Mini Maglite pro. Boy did it sell quick, as soon as I posted on CPFM within minutes it was sold. It's just that I got 2 of these lights nearly brand new for a good deal. I wondered if it was better then the Energizer Lithium 2AA flashlight in terms of overall brightness and throw that way I could have good piece of mind. The Energizer is one of my favorite lights and I owned a ton of 2AA lights. It's only 110 ANSI but it can throw really well for that very short reflector.

If the Terralux 220 outperforms it I'd be happy.
Maybe others around here can throw me some opinions or insight.

Anyone?

Is the Terralux 220 a better light the energizer e2 2aa lithium flashlight?

A little off topic but a FYI for those Lightstar would fans.
I got the Lightstar 300 and like its brother the 220 the lumen output
is not what you would expect. It beats the Coleman 2AA 140 lumen light
but only matches the Coast 187 lumen headlamp even with the focus
adjusted to match the :Lightstar hotspot.

Also the light color itself is not nearly as clean as others.
Maybe the spread sprectrum light just appears lower in
lumens even though the energy level is what is touted.

I have a LightStar 220 Extreme Edition (TLF-3C2AAEX). I don't have the Energizer flashlight, but perhaps I could offer some observations on my LightStar 220 as a comparison for you.

Firstly, I purchased my light in mid-2011, and the packaging claims 1-1.5h on high, and 6h on low. Since new lights seem to have 3.5/26h runtime, my light *may* be the previous generation. I did a 2 hour run test with 2 Duracell NiMHs, but terminated it early because the light was getting a little too warm for my liking. The entire front half of the flashlight body was warm. This is a good thing, as the body was removing heat from the emitter assembly, and I probably should have put it in front of a fan and continued the run test. The flashlight body is about 2mm thick, which makes for a nice heat sink, as well as being strong. The brightness seemed pretty constant over the 2 hours. This exceeds the runtime claim for the light so it's possible that this is the same light as yours.

The reflector is a light orange peel type, with it's base starting at the ring of the emitter. This makes for a nice hot spot with a large even spill area. As I mentioned, there's no flat spot at the bottom of the reflector (as with wider-bodied lights), so there's no rings to break up the spill. On second thought, there is indeed a slightly brighter ring just outside the hot spot. Curiously, you can see the pattern of the reflector in the beam.

Low mode apparently uses PWM. I notice no flickering of the beam, however it does seem to be slightly bluer than on high.

The heat from my run test lightly fogged the lens of my light. Ordinarily, this wouldn't matter much, but the head is sealed, so you can't clean it. Further, the lens is thin plastic, and, despite babying this light, has collected some scratches on it. There appears to be an o-ring between the lens and the reflector, but I'm not sure if there's one between the lens and the bezel (I wouldn't submerge the light). TerraLux tells me that I can send the light back on warranty to clean the head (probably cheaper to buy another light).

Speaking of scratches, I have two or three locations where the anodizing has chipped or scraped off (mostly edges). Did I mention I've babied this light; never dropped it; nor ever taken it outside? I don't think the anodizing is very hard.

The tail cap's threads are rough. I tried silicon grease on the threads, but it didn't help. I cleaned and reapplied it 3 or 4 more times in the following weeks, all to no avail. I finally wiped it off, and tried some Duralube. That made the action much smoother. I suspect the trouble is that the body threads are anodized, while the tail cap's threads are not. A byproduct of all that silicone grease is that some made it's way to the nice, large o-ring that seals the back of the light. It may have swelled, as occasionally, when closing the tail cap, it will catch the o-ring and cause it to bulge out. I suspect the rear o-ring is silicon.

I asked TerraLux about the rear clickie and replacement size of the rear switch cover. Neither are user-replaceable (I think it may be covered by warranty), and the switch cover isn't guaranteed to keep water out. Thus, the light is probably ok in the rain, but don't submerge it.

Hope you find this useful.