CLOSED TM36vn

GhostReaction said:

Will the king of throw be dethrone by a tiny monster.

Click to expand...

Snellvillegalighter said:

This light is so robust in everyway, i wonder what you can do to it that wiill blow our mind?

Click to expand...

vinhnguyen54 said:

​

Why is the TM36 do expensive?

1) Ultra thick copper heat sink
2) LED Copper PCB solder bonded to Copper heat sink below! I thought only I do this LOL
3) Attention to detail everywhere. Look at how large those LED wires are compared to a 22 AWG wire. High quality thermal paste at key connection
4) High quality battery pack
5) Flawless aluminum reflector
6) Perfect focus beam
7) Massive weight = great heat sinking
8) LCD screen for crucial info
9) High quality thick AR glass
10) Reflector thread onto body so it too helps with heat sinking
11) Retail SBT-70 cost $70 while XML2 cost $10 at most places

Click to expand...

jmpaul320 said:

interesting... I thought the stock spec was around 210,000 lux ? Maybe my memory is incorrect lol.

Click to expand...

vinhnguyen54 said:

TM36vn


With my cheap light meter I measured 27,800,000 LUX at 18 feet for the TK61vn & 22,000,000 LUX for a stock TM36
If we assume the TK61vn throw 600K Lux then by cross multiplying and solve for X I got ~475K Lux for a stock TM36
​

Click to expand...

I'm thinking that 27 million eight hundred thousand lux is not correct, and, that most meters don't go that high...

Is it possible that you meant more like 27,800 lux at 18 feet (Which would be more like ~ 838 k cd)?

Similarly, 22,000 lux at 18' would be more like 663 k cd.



So if your "Cheap lux meter" is off by the same factor across its sensor range (Unlikely actually...), so that it read both high by the same proportion, you could simply use the ratio you did to "correct for" the meter's lack of accuracy, and, absolute data values.

Now, your measurement was only at ~ 5.4864 meters (18'), whereas the ANSI measurement is done at 10 meters (~32.808'), and, some hard throwers needing the measurement to be done even further away to be representative of a beam's true range.



THAT all means that a short ~ 5 meter measurement would favor the weaker thrower, as, proportionally, its beam would tend to be MORE fully formed at any given distance, than the stronger thrower's beam.



So the measured differences above might be showing the two as being closer than they might actually be.





​

TEEJ said:

I'm thinking that 27 million eight hundred thousand lux is not correct, and, that most meters don't go that high...

Is it possible that you meant more like 27,800 lux at 18 feet (Which would be more like ~ 838 k cd)?

Similarly, 22,000 lux at 18' would be more like 663 k cd.



So if your "Cheap lux meter" is off by the same factor across its sensor range (Unlikely actually...), so that it read both high by the same proportion, you could simply use the ratio you did to "correct for" the meter's lack of accuracy, and, absolute data values.

Now, your measurement was only at ~ 5.4864 meters (18'), whereas the ANSI measurement is done at 10 meters (~32.808'), and, some hard throwers needing the measurement to be done even further away to be representative of a beam's true range.



THAT all means that a short ~ 5 meter measurement would favor the weaker thrower, as, proportionally, its beam would tend to be MORE fully formed at any given distance, than the stronger thrower's beam.



So the measured differences above might be showing the two as being closer than they might actually be.





​

Click to expand...