I would like the floodiest Tri EDC!

My question for you Macaholics, is there a floodier option to Mac's lights? Difference in LED's, different optics? Would I have to get one and then have it modded? I usually like to get something right from the get go rather than have to mess with anything if possible. Lately a neutral D25a Ti from Eagletac has been my edc light of choice and I love the beam on it, but been looking to step up to a tri edc after getting my hands on a Nichia triple from Oveready and falling in love with it (but realizing a C2 isn't practical for me to carry in my pocket all day) I think a Ti Mac's is on my short list!

I had my Tri EDC modded to XP-G2 and put on a 10508 medium frosted optic. It is now very floody and I love it. Great companion to another thrower light I carry at the same time

Mac now offers his lights with XP-G2s, and you can get the wider optics on a lot of websites. You can also give the frosted wide 10509 optic a try too

I don't have one of his EDC's, or an oveready, to compare.
I do, however, have Mac's Tri XP-G2 P60, and an EagleTac Ti D25C.

The Eagletac is floodier than the Tri, but also has a tighter hotspot. The Tri makes a smooth "disc" of light.
Chris (Mac) had been giving the option of XP-G or XP-E, and has done custom jobs with 219 and XP-G2. Of those, the 219 should be the floodiest.
However, he also does an XM-L EDC with a reflector instead of optics. It won't have the beam pattern of a triple optic, but should offer a wider spill than any of his other choices, and about the same overall brightness (max lumens) as a triple 219. Maybe even slightly more. (He lists 575 OTF on his site.)
I have not seen a triple XM-L option from him.
If anyone out there has a triple and an XM-L to compare beamshots, that would be very revealing.
Otherwise, if by "floodiest" you mean widest spill, I think the XM-L is the way to go. If you mean widest disc/spot - probably the triple 219's.

Thanks man, great tip! I forget how great a frosted optic can flood things out. Would you know, is it simply a matter of unscrewing the light engine, taking the optic out and swapping in a new one? That...would be amazing.

I do like the look of the beam on the triple 219, just enough flood and amazing color.

Espionage Studio said:

Would you know, is it simply a matter of unscrewing the light engine, taking the optic out and swapping in a new one?

Click to expand...

That's exactly it.

I run my triple with no optic whatsoever. The beam profile is a perfectly uniform wall of light. The quality of which is completely unlike any reflectored or optic collimated light. Similar to McGiz's Arm's Length Mule, bare LED head. It's perfect for around the house use. Checking on kids, looking in the pantry, etc.

Wilkey

Ginseng said:

I run my triple with no optic whatsoever. The beam profile is a perfectly uniform wall of light. The quality of which is completely unlike any reflectored or optic collimated light. Similar to McGiz's Arm's Length Mule, bare LED head. It's perfect for around the house use. Checking on kids, looking in the pantry, etc.

Wilkey

Click to expand...

That's a very interesting idea! I think I may have to give that a try.

I'll see if I can take a beamshot for you tonight.

The nice thing about this approach is it's non-destructive and quick to set and reverse.

Wilkey

Here's Mac's triple with no optic.


Here's Mac's triple with the stock optic.


Note, the images were quick and dirty. I didn't fix exposure settings at all but they were pretty close in all respects from shutter speed, ISO, to aperture. These are just meant to give a relative sense of the beam patterns. They are true to how they appear to my eye in actual use. Light was about 2' from the wall.

Wilkey

Ginseng said:

These are just meant to give a relative sense of the beam patterns. They are true to how they appear to my eye in actual use. Light was about 2' from the wall.

Wilkey

Click to expand...

Thanks for that. Given how close you were to the wall, it definitely looks like the no optic configuration would put out a very large wall of light!

As much as I love my Tri EDC, for pure and perfect flood, you simply can't do better than a Mule from Don, IMHO.

nbp said:

As much as I love my Tri EDC, for pure and perfect flood, you simply can't do better than a Mule from Don, IMHO.

Click to expand...

The beam from my ALM is similar to that of my no-optic Tri. But there is one difference: the tri-lobe pattern from the overlap of the three emitters. Thus, the periphery of the ALM beam is a near perfect circle by contrast. Additionally, running the ALM on an SF L1 body makes for a very compact "wall of light" device. But one that is visibly and significantly exceeded by the Tri on high.

Wilkey

Ginseng said:

Additionally, running the ALM on an SF L1 body makes for a very compact "wall of light" device. But one that is visibly and significantly exceeded by the Tri on high.

Wilkey

Click to expand...

That's why I want to try this. I already have a Mule, but is sounds like this would be a Mule on major steroids!

dlmorgan999 said:

Thanks for that. Given how close you were to the wall, it definitely looks like the no optic configuration would put out a very large wall of light!

Click to expand...

Indeed. The subjective sense is of nearly a hemisphere of light. This, I suspect, is due to the impressive uniformity of the beam pattern. That is, when the whole space in front of you is uniformly lit, the bright zone "feels" very wide. This is contrasted with a typical "hot spot" beam pattern where the visual focus is generally on the much narrower central spot. It's tunnel vision by comparison.

Wilkey

dlmorgan999 said:

That's why I want to try this. I already have a Mule, but is sounds like this would be a Mule on major steroids!

Click to expand...

Exactly right. And of course the other benefit is that my Tri has a neutral-highish CRI CCT that is much more pleasing to my eyes than the decidedly cooler tint of my ALM prototype.

Wilkey