Malkoff M61SHO

[tobrien]

Okay, who's ready for an M61SHOW ?

that'd be a real SHOW piece

Could somebody post a beamshot? I'm dying to see one. It would be greatly appreciated.

^^^

[GeoBruin]

Unfortunately, I'm out of town for the weekend, but I should be home tomorrow night. Based on when I ordered it (and Gene's typical shipping times) I should have an SHO waiting for me when I get there. I will definitely get a beam shot although it will be my only cool Malkoff, so it will probably look a bit blue. I've never tried to adjust anything to get the white balance right. I'm open to any tips anyone is willing to provide.

Also, I don't know if this is getting ahead of myself, but has anyone thought about the implications of a Hound Dog XP-G2? Just some back of the envelope math here... the original Hound Dog XP-G does 325 lumens compared to 260 in an M61. That's 20% more output in the Hound Dog, presumably because the additional mass could help dissipate some of the extra heat. If we apply the same math to the theoretical "Hound Dog XP-G2" that's 540 lumens! Not factoring in how the slight change in the LED's optic angle will affect the throw, we can assume some massively improved throw relative to the original HD (based just on brute force) and probably improved throw over the HD XM-L because of the smaller LED.

Thoughts?

[Jay T]

Some quick Bathroom bounce tests with my lightmeter.

M61 30 lux
M61 HO 38 lux
M61 SHO 54 lux

The beam profiles are the pretty much the same, so if you want a beamshot just download one from an M61 and lighten it. The color tint on the SHO is a little nicer, while both the HO and the SHO are cool the SHO seems to be a little more pure.

Both the HO and SHO draw about the same current at the tailcap.

Edited to add M61 readings

[tobrien]

Some quick Bathroom bounce tests with my lightmeter.

M61 HO 38 lux
M61 SHO 54 lux

The beam profiles are the pretty much the same, so if you want a beamshot just download one from an M61 and lighten it. The color tint on the SHO is a little nicer, while both the HO and the SHO are cool the SHO seems to be a little more pure.

Both draw about the same current at the tailcap.

very nice, thanks for the info!

[880arm]

Some quick Bathroom bounce tests with my lightmeter.

M61 HO 38 lux
M61 SHO 54 lux

The beam profiles are the pretty much the same, so if you want a beamshot just download one from an M61 and lighten it. The color tint on the SHO is a little nicer, while both the HO and the SHO are cool the SHO seems to be a little more pure.

Both draw about the same current at the tailcap.

Here are some additional comparative bounce test results. I threw in a few other Malkoffs and some other lights that were close at hand to give more comparisons.

Light	Lux	Mfr. Lumen Rating
Surefire M3LT/UB3	34	800
Surefire M6 (MN21)	28	500 (yeah right )
Nailbender XML	23	600
Surefire Fury	22	500
Malkoff M91 (3x123)	19	500
4Sevens X7 Maelstrom	17	480
Malkoff MD60 (3x123)	17	450
Malkoff M61SHO (3x123)	16	450
Surefire M4 (MN60)	12	225
Malkoff M61 (3x123)	11	260
Surefire 6PX	8	200
Malkoff M60	7	?
Surefire AZ2	7	150

These pretty well match what I saw with my eye. The differences were noticeable between the M61 and M61SHO (big difference) as well as between the M61SHO and M91 (much smaller difference). All of the Malkoffs were run on 3 new Surefire CR123's during these tests.

Just playing around indoors, I think I prefer the color of the M61SHO over my M61's but I will have a better idea after the sun goes down.

[spydie fanatic]

I believe the reason for one mode is due to the fact these models are meant as drop-in replacement for surefire lights; surefire lights are mainly tactical in nature and have only one mode for this reason; They were never designed for general purpose needs.

Perhaps if enough interest in multi-mode setups was expressed, Malkoff may offer them in the future.

sf

[Bullzeyebill]

880arm, try that MN60 with 3X16340's, and measure at 30 seconds. You will be impressed. I have used 3X17650's, or 3X17500's. with extenders, and it is absolutely outstanding. If using bored bodies, then use 18mm cells. 16340's is pushing the mAh specs of the cells, but good cells will be fine if not used non stop.

Bill

[GeoBruin]

Okay... as promised, some beam shots and numbers for the newly arrived M61SHO. As I've said previously, I only own warm/High CRI Malkoff's so I don't have a good tint comparison, but the shape of the beam should be apparent. Also note, I lent my camera to a friend on Friday and forgot to get it back so these are cell phone pictures . Wall shots are white balanced to "florescent" which was the best of my options and taken at 100 ISO.

First, for comparison:

M61 219 in MD2 with 2 x CR123a



M61W (3700) in MD2 with 2 x CR123a



M91W in MD3 with 3 x CR123a



and finally, M61SHO in MD2 with 2 x CR123a






I also took some very quick outdoor beam shots but again, this needs to be done by someone with a proper camera. Kept the white balance at "florescent" but bumped ISO up to 400 (in retrospect, should have been higher).

Same configuration, same order:

M61 219



M61W



M91W




M61 SHO






And for the numbers...

These are 1 meter lux numbers taken with my lux meter at the brightest part of the hot spot about 10 seconds after turn on. Note: I do not have a lab setup, these numbers should be considered only as relative to each other.

M61 219: 1760
M61W: 2050
M91W: 2300
M61 SHO: 5870

And just for kicks, I took a ceiling bounce test to compare my M91W with the SHO:

M91W: 38.4
M61SHO: 40.9 (a hair over 6% brighter)

Impressions are as follows:

I didn't know what to expect in terms of the beam profile. In my mind, it could have been a wider or narrower hot spot than the M61. If the pictures are any indication, the hot spot is definitely larger, but it is also noticeably more intense. It's tough to speak about the spill since the higher intensity of the hot spot diminishes any perceived increase in the brightness of the spill, however I suspect it is also significantly brighter.

In general, the beam is flawless. Very smooth transition from hot spot to spill, no rings like the M61 219 or irregularities like the M91W. It's as if the reflector was made for the LED. I am very, very happy with the performance of the light, especially on 2 x CR123a. The ability to run this fully regulated in an MD2 is awesome. The M91W runs at almost full power on 2 new cells but it eventually starts to taper outside of regulation.

I'm clearly a warm tint guy, but the tint on this is actually very nice. Quite obviously cooler than the warm drop ins but not a hint of blue. Just bright white. That said, I will be first in line for an M61 SHOW

Also, I have no idea what this would look like but we need to get this thing in a Hound Dog head. If it throws half as well as I think it will in that big deep reflector, the potential for a shorty 2 cell pocket thrower with Malkoff toughness is extremely enticing.

Hope this was helpful.

Cheers!

-G

[880arm]

880arm, try that MN60 with 3X16340's, and measure at 30 seconds. You will be impressed. I have used 3X17650's, or 3X17500's. with extenders, and it is absolutely outstanding. If using bored bodies, then use 18mm cells. 16340's is pushing the mAh specs of the cells, but good cells will be fine if not used non stop.

Bill

Bill, thanks for the tip. Right now I don't own 3 of any single rechargeable battery type but I will give this a try after I order some more.

[880arm]

GeoBruin, thanks for the pics they look great. I was going to take some last night but I couldn't find my camera . . . . but I don't think I would have done any better than you did with your phone!

In my earlier post I made a comment that my M91 was noticeably brighter than the M61SHO, when bouncing them off the ceiling, but I couldn't tell any difference when outside. I don't think I could have picked which was which, based on brightness, if I wasn't holding the lights in my hands.

Also, while outside it was interesting to compare the M61SHO to the Fury. The Fury definitely had the brighter hot spot (and more throw) but the M61SHO was more effective for me at distances up to 100' due to the noticeably brighter spill. I didn't have the opportunity to compare them at longer distances.

[Glock 22]

GeoBriun thanks for the beamshots they turned out perfect with all the others to compair to.

[twl]

How much shorter are the runtimes with the SHO, compared to the normal M61?

[GeoBruin]

According to the Malkoff Website, between a half hour and 45 minutes.

How much shorter are the runtimes with the SHO, compared to the normal M61?

[Jay T]

A quick shot of a standard M61 an HO and SHO all in the same shot.

[Darvis]

Hmmmm...

First off, great beamshots!!!

For me personally, especially seeing GEO's great outdoor shots, I'd have to say I'd pass on this one. The lux difference is clear between the M91w and the M61SHO, but I'm not sure it's more useful given the nice even flood of the 91. My guess is that the difference might be less if those shots also had the cool tint vs. cool tint comparison.

It's still a 2 cell light (like the M91) so no real gains there, it really just comes down to beam profile.

That, and having a few of the MD60's in an M6 package, I'm not sure the cost is justified for me.

Like it, don't love it enough though.

[Bullzeyebill]

I think we are seeing a 40-50% gain in lumens with the SHO, at 1A to the LED. Imagine what the SHO would show with 1.4A's to the LED in a Hound Dog, with the attendant throw.

Bill

[GeoBruin]

The M91 is not regulated on 2 primaries. To get full, regulated output in a two cell host, you will need to run lithium ions, effectively halving your capacity. Right?

Hmmmm...

First off, great beamshots!!!

For me personally, especially seeing GEO's great outdoor shots, I'd have to say I'd pass on this one. The lux difference is clear between the M91w and the M61SHO, but I'm not sure it's more useful given the nice even flood of the 91. My guess is that the difference might be less if those shots also had the cool tint vs. cool tint comparison.

It's still a 2 cell light (like the M91) so no real gains there, it really just comes down to beam profile.

That, and having a few of the MD60's in an M6 package, I'm not sure the cost is justified for me.

Like it, don't love it enough though.

[Darvis]

The M91 is not regulated on 2 primaries. To get full, regulated output in a two cell host, you will need to run lithium ions, effectively halving your capacity. Right?

Good point GeoBruin, and definitely. I was, actually, thinking LIon when I made that statement... you would need 3 primaries to run in regulation with the M91. A better statement by me would have been that multiple cells are still needed for regulated runtime with either light... If the SHO could run at that level on 1 LIon like the M61, well then, that would be a game changer!!

Also, I agree with Bill, get that output in the hound dog with the smaller die and then you'll have something as well...

But until then, I really do still feel it comes down to beam preference given the current P60 format... adding that, true (and a point I clearly overlooked), the option to run on 2 primaries in regulation is a nice to have if you're not charging your own, but not enought justify the extra spend if you are.

And, by the way, my stance is not that it's not a great offering, I think it is... just not different enough to justify the spend given that I already have about 20 Malkoff drop-ins with three being M91's. For someone buying their first, or second, or even third.. I think it's a lot to consider.

[af112566]

the m61sho is great!! noticably brighter and better tint than my m61.and the beam is very similar,just a brighter hot spot,but it still has the nice spill i love...all in all the xp-g2 has alot of potential..

[RobertM]

And for the numbers...

These are 1 meter lux numbers taken with my lux meter at the brightest part of the hot spot about 10 seconds after turn on. Note: I do not have a lab setup, these numbers should be considered only as relative to each other.

M61 219: 1760
M61W: 2050
M91W: 2300
M61 SHO: 5870

First, thanks for posting the beamshots and lux readings. Excellent work!
Do you have a Malkoff M60 that could could do comparative lux-at-1-meter readings with the new M61SHO? I'm curious to see if the M61SHO's pure power is able to keep up with the M60 as far as throw goes. I would imagine that the M60 would still out throw the M61SHO, but it would be interesting to see real numbers.

Thanks,
Robert

[THE_dAY]

First, thanks for posting the beamshots and lux readings. Excellent work!
Do you have a Malkoff M60 that could could do comparative lux-at-1-meter readings with the new M61SHO? I'm curious to see if the M61SHO's pure power is able to keep up with the M60 as far as throw goes. I would imagine that the M60 would still out throw the M61SHO, but it would be interesting to see real numbers.

Thanks,
Robert

+1, Thank you for the great info.

Would love to see how the M60 compares.

[Bullzeyebill]

Pulled out my light meter, an LM631 and did lux numbers at 1 meter for the:

M61 219.....1500
M60 ...........5350

As Robert said, these numbers are only useful relative to each other. I would hazard a guess, and say that the M60 SHO would be in the neighborhood of 5600+ lux using my light meter. That would be one huge hotspot with decent throw.

Bill

[THE_dAY]

Thanks for that Bullzeybill, the M60 SHO seems to be very promising!

[GeoBruin]

With the M61 219 as a benchmark, I think we can safely draw some conclusions even if no one has an M60 and an M61SHO. It looks like the M61SHO is making about similar lux to the M60 with a lot more light spilling out everywhere. Sweet!

[RobertM]

Pulled out my light meter, an LM631 and did lux numbers at 1 meter for the:

M61 219.....1500
M60 ...........5350

As Robert said, these numbers are only useful relative to each other. I would hazard a guess, and say that the M60 SHO would be in the neighborhood of 5600+ lux using my light meter. That would be one huge hotspot with decent throw.

Bill

Bill, thanks a lot for posting these numbers!

[arvetus]

I had to bite the bullet and buy one of these for my 9p. Guess we'll see how it works... I need a bit more throw out of it.

[bushmattster]

I would definitly go for a 3 mode drop in. Until then I'll look somewhere else.

[djans1397]

You know, I've followed this thread for awhile and ended up buying my own M61SHO. I have an original hand engraved M60, an M61 original version and now a M61SHO. From the naked eye I can honestly say that the M60 definitely out throws the both of my other two Malkoff's, granted it has MUCH less spill. Whats surprising though is that other than tint, I really can't see difference between my M61 and the M61SHO. The SHO MIGHT have a little more even spill is all. I can't say I'd buy it again due to this. Just a casual observation here folks. Has any one else noticed this at all?

Dan

[arvetus]

On the wall, the M61 and the SHO look very similar. The color is a little different side-by-side. In the dark, outside, the SHO does seem to give off quite a bit more light, but that's the only place I really notice it. I don't know that it throws any better... I probably wouldn't buy another SHO for the same reasons you mentioned. But it does give off a bit more.

I'm going to try a Nailbender in my other 6p and maybe get one of his hi-voltage ones for the 9p to see how it does. I like the 3-modes, which is likely what I'd prefer the 9p for (hunting). I like the 6p to be single mode for tactical/self-defense purposes, but I might try a hi/lo/strobe drop in to see what I think.

[djans1397]

Huh, ok. I guess I have to say that I only white wall hunted and shot some beams indoors in my basement, but I haven't really compared the two side by side outside. I'll have to try that.