this_is_nascar
Flashaholic
"for submission in the Reviews forum".
My Twisty-100 arrived from Battery Station yesterday. Based on what others have said about the "tank-like" build of the Twisty, I had prepared myself for this huge/heavy light. I was pleasantly surprised upon taking the light from it's plastic bag. It's certainly not the smallest/lightest 1 x 123 light out there, but it's not the largest or heaviest either. I was pleased with the looks and apparent build quality. To coin the phase of others, it IS built like a tank. You can feel that quality in your hand. The fact that it a bit longer than some of my other 1 x 123 lights, actually makes it feel better in my hand. I have medium-large hands, so I'm always looking for a comfortable light while holding it. The Twisty is very comfortable to hold.
As others have mentioned, the twisting action is smooth, but not a one-handed operation. That's fine with me for this particular light. I don't want to compromise anything by swapping an o-ring or anything like that. Over time, it will loosen up a bit I'd suspect. If one-handed operation was key to me, I'd stick to clicky lights.
Activation seems consistant right now, but I'm not sure if that will change down the road or not. Others have reported an inconsistent activation spacing. I have not yet experienced that. I do wish there was more space between low and med. This particular unit is almost hair-trigger between low and medium, but then widely spread from medium to high.
The Ra tail-stands nicely on either end, unlike some other lights that will tail-stand, but are somewhat unstable in doing so. On the back-end, It would have really been nice to have a slot milled for a tritium vial, etc. I find myself wanting to push it, like it was a plunger or something similar.
I like the low level of the low setting. With normal daylight, one would think that it was way too dim, but in darkness, it's very useful for those nighttime strolls in the house or for checking on the kids, etc. Medium level is very useful and I know this is the level I'd find myself using the most. High is just that, high. I think I'd like to see more of a difference between the output of medium vs. high, but my opinion of that may change over time. From what I've seen in my testing last night, I think I would have preferred medium to be just a bit lower in output.
With only owning the Ra Twisty for less than 24-hours, I really like the light. So much, that I'm going to order the Twisty-120 version for comparisons to the Twisty-100. The marketing pitch of "The light that gets you home" seems to be dead-on with the Twisty. I can see where this light can more than handle the dings, bangs, drops and kicks that a normal flashlight user would put it through.
Rather than waiting for the inevitable to happen, I'm going to be the one to start the "how does the Ra Twisty compare to the Arc6" discussion right in this post. I'm going to limit the comments to matter-of-fact comments, not on my opinions or what I see as shortcomings in either light. I'll start by stating facts, without classifying them as an advantage or disadvantage.
-- Twisty is longer than the Arc6.
-- Twisty is heavier than the Arc6.
-- Twisty is dimmer, wide-open, than the Arc6, by a huge margin.
-- Twisty has a lower low-mode, than the Arc6, by a big margin.
-- Twisty is more stable in the tail-standing capability than the Arc6. On the one pack, the pocket-clip of the Arc6 protrudes past the end of the tube, making for a "not totally stable" stance. With the non-clipped pack, there is less surface area resting on the surface.
-- Twisty does not have a pocket-clip.
-- Twisty is a readily available light.
-- Twisty has confirmed accessories that are activity being manufactured.
I'm currently compiling the data of varous run-time tests that I'll post once I have it completed.
Edit #1: Although not completed, here's a couple run-time charts comparing the Ra with the Arc6 on different settings. The 1st chart is a 3-hour plot and the 2nd is a 15-hour plot. I still have to measure the Ra on Low and the Arc6 on Low. I still need to figure out a way to measure the high-output of the Arc6 on L-6 and L-7. It's puts out so much light, I have to somehow alter my setup.
Edit #2: So, I re-tested the Arc6 on L-4, while it was sunk into a glass of chilled water, with an ice-cube. The difference is that instead of stepping down at the 7-minute mark (shown in the graph), it lasted for 30-minutes until stepping down. Once stepped-down, the output was similar to what's shown, for a slightly shorter period of run-time. These results cause more confusion for me, rather than answering any questions.
It the Ra is running that long at a much higher output level compared to the Arc6, does that mean that 1) the Ra heat-sinking is that much more superior or 2) the Ra thermal-management system is not as sensitive or 3) the Arc6 went overboard with its thermal-management settings?
My Twisty-100 arrived from Battery Station yesterday. Based on what others have said about the "tank-like" build of the Twisty, I had prepared myself for this huge/heavy light. I was pleasantly surprised upon taking the light from it's plastic bag. It's certainly not the smallest/lightest 1 x 123 light out there, but it's not the largest or heaviest either. I was pleased with the looks and apparent build quality. To coin the phase of others, it IS built like a tank. You can feel that quality in your hand. The fact that it a bit longer than some of my other 1 x 123 lights, actually makes it feel better in my hand. I have medium-large hands, so I'm always looking for a comfortable light while holding it. The Twisty is very comfortable to hold.
As others have mentioned, the twisting action is smooth, but not a one-handed operation. That's fine with me for this particular light. I don't want to compromise anything by swapping an o-ring or anything like that. Over time, it will loosen up a bit I'd suspect. If one-handed operation was key to me, I'd stick to clicky lights.
Activation seems consistant right now, but I'm not sure if that will change down the road or not. Others have reported an inconsistent activation spacing. I have not yet experienced that. I do wish there was more space between low and med. This particular unit is almost hair-trigger between low and medium, but then widely spread from medium to high.
The Ra tail-stands nicely on either end, unlike some other lights that will tail-stand, but are somewhat unstable in doing so. On the back-end, It would have really been nice to have a slot milled for a tritium vial, etc. I find myself wanting to push it, like it was a plunger or something similar.
I like the low level of the low setting. With normal daylight, one would think that it was way too dim, but in darkness, it's very useful for those nighttime strolls in the house or for checking on the kids, etc. Medium level is very useful and I know this is the level I'd find myself using the most. High is just that, high. I think I'd like to see more of a difference between the output of medium vs. high, but my opinion of that may change over time. From what I've seen in my testing last night, I think I would have preferred medium to be just a bit lower in output.
With only owning the Ra Twisty for less than 24-hours, I really like the light. So much, that I'm going to order the Twisty-120 version for comparisons to the Twisty-100. The marketing pitch of "The light that gets you home" seems to be dead-on with the Twisty. I can see where this light can more than handle the dings, bangs, drops and kicks that a normal flashlight user would put it through.
Rather than waiting for the inevitable to happen, I'm going to be the one to start the "how does the Ra Twisty compare to the Arc6" discussion right in this post. I'm going to limit the comments to matter-of-fact comments, not on my opinions or what I see as shortcomings in either light. I'll start by stating facts, without classifying them as an advantage or disadvantage.
-- Twisty is longer than the Arc6.
-- Twisty is heavier than the Arc6.
-- Twisty is dimmer, wide-open, than the Arc6, by a huge margin.
-- Twisty has a lower low-mode, than the Arc6, by a big margin.
-- Twisty is more stable in the tail-standing capability than the Arc6. On the one pack, the pocket-clip of the Arc6 protrudes past the end of the tube, making for a "not totally stable" stance. With the non-clipped pack, there is less surface area resting on the surface.
-- Twisty does not have a pocket-clip.
-- Twisty is a readily available light.
-- Twisty has confirmed accessories that are activity being manufactured.
I'm currently compiling the data of varous run-time tests that I'll post once I have it completed.
Edit #1: Although not completed, here's a couple run-time charts comparing the Ra with the Arc6 on different settings. The 1st chart is a 3-hour plot and the 2nd is a 15-hour plot. I still have to measure the Ra on Low and the Arc6 on Low. I still need to figure out a way to measure the high-output of the Arc6 on L-6 and L-7. It's puts out so much light, I have to somehow alter my setup.
Edit #2: So, I re-tested the Arc6 on L-4, while it was sunk into a glass of chilled water, with an ice-cube. The difference is that instead of stepping down at the 7-minute mark (shown in the graph), it lasted for 30-minutes until stepping down. Once stepped-down, the output was similar to what's shown, for a slightly shorter period of run-time. These results cause more confusion for me, rather than answering any questions.
It the Ra is running that long at a much higher output level compared to the Arc6, does that mean that 1) the Ra heat-sinking is that much more superior or 2) the Ra thermal-management system is not as sensitive or 3) the Arc6 went overboard with its thermal-management settings?
Last edited:
