Any reason to choose a single mode Malkoff drop in over the M361?

[flashy bazook]

No, M361 does not get 5 hours on medium..

M61L draws 300 mAh at 6V and gets 175 lumens for 5 hours.

M61LL draws 150 mAh at 6V and gets 100 lumens.

M361N draws 275 mAh on medium and gets 80 lumens. However it does not specify at what voltage. If off a single 18650 (3.7V) then it makes sense that it draws considerably higher than off 6V. It has only one cell to work with versus 2. I would like to know the drain of M361N on medium off 6V (2x123).

M361N draws only 50 mAh which is comparable to M61LLL. Thats the valuable mode. I could live with the low and high mode, skipping the medium, which is brighter than M61.

I do realize the current draw on High is 1.5 Amps versus 0.65 Amps for High on M61 at 6V. Again, is the figure for M361N at 6V or 3.7V?


This review says they got over 10 hours on medium in M361:

While in medium mode the M361 maintained steady flat regulation for over 8.5 hours. It then dropped out of regulation and continued to produce a usable amount of light well after the 11 hour mark when the test was ended.

http://flashlightguide.com/2013/05/review-malkoff-m361n-lmh-drop-in/

Well, in my database the M361 on medium is supposed to draw 270 mAh at 6 volts (close to what you have, I believe).

This will give a maximum runtime of 5.6 hours. Less if you apply the 80% factor Malkoff suggests. Not 8+ hours as the review says.

Why the discrepancy? Because the review used a 1xLi-Ion, presumably putting out fewer lumens, and not 2x123A primaries. (Or, if you do the wattage calculation, with the Li-Ion used being on the very high side of capacity at 3,400 mAh, even with more similar lumens, the Li-Ion higher capacity explains the longer runtime).

So the efficiency comparison I gave and mbw_51 gave stands -- the M361 on medium is not as efficient as the single mode drop-ins at similar lumen outputs, it's worse by at least 3 hours (for M60LL) or even more (for M61LL which is a bit more efficient than the M60LL in terms of runtime/lumen).

But all your other points on the pluses of the M361 are very good points, and I think also other points regarding the single drop-ins are quite interesting and deserve a lot of consideration.

On what is an adequate amount of lumens for outdoors, it is an interesting question. I first like to go back to the original EDS (ancestor of HDS) which was quite the amazing innovation when it hit 60 lumens. This was considered quite good to use outdoors.

At some point I got a Fenix TK (not sure of the number after the TK, maybe 11?) dual mode with 60 lumens on low and around 200 lumens on high. I found I was quite happy to use the low mode when walking outdoors, although occasionally I benefited a lot by blasting out the 200 lumens to be able to see further away.

So for "near" outdoors the 60 lumens (and hence the M361 on medium, or M61LL, or M60LL) are quite fine, but you do appreciate a bigger blast (or now, the optics giving bigger lux) for "far" outdoors.

 

[etc]

Why the discrepancy? Because the review used a 1xLi-Ion, presumably putting out fewer lumens, and not 2x123A primaries. (Or, if you do the wattage calculation, with the Li-Ion used being on the very high side of capacity at 3,400 mAh, even with more similar lumens, the Li-Ion higher capacity explains the longer runtime).

If you are going to compare M361 to M60LL, use the same battery, ie. 18mm Li-ion cell in both cases, same capacity of 3500 mAh, *or* CR123A in both cases, otherwise it's applies and oranges.


I have been running my Malkoff Hound Dog on primaries - for the first time in a year, actually for the time ever. I always ran it on Li-Ions. It's undoubtedly brighter but the runtime is yet to be determined. I hypothethize it will be lower than on 2x18650. Anytime the lumens go up by increasing voltage - that's the behavior of Malkoffs - the runtime goes down.

You either load up primaries and get more lumens and less runtime, or use 1x18650 and get increased runtime but certainly lower lumens. I have seen that as the case with every Malkoff module. I.e. M61L on 2x18650 is *almost* as bright as M61 on a single 18650.

I don't have a reason to question the above review, where they got about 10 hours. Why would I? They likely got lower lumens than the advertised 75 lumens but increased runtime. Meaning

While in medium mode the M361 maintained steady flat regulation for over 8.5 hours. It then dropped out of regulation and continued to produce a usable amount of light well after the 11 hour mark when the test was ended.

Another data item. For example, if comparing both modules on 1x18650, M361N on medium will get about twice the lumens of M61WLL but half the runtime. The quote below where 1xAW 17670 (same specs as a 18650, just lower capacity and thus runtime which is not relevant) generates 35 lm @ 115 mAh versus (presumably) 60-70 lumens of M361N @ 275 mAh. So that makes perfect sense.

Now let's compare both modules on primaries, 123s:

M61WLL on 2x123 is 59 lumens at 100 mAh while M361N at 75 lumens is at 275 mAh, I get it, it's slightly more powerful versus more than twice as hungry. I don't fully understand that myself. My ideal would be a two-mode module, dropping the medium mode completely. And just dealing with a pretty-low mode and a pretty high mode. The former perhaps at 75 mAh and the latter perhaps at 1Amp. Now the 1.5 Amps that's off 1x18650 and what it requries off 2x123, I am not sure. Remember, you can run M361 off *either* 2x123 *or* 1x18650.

to be perfectly honest, I fired up the M361N once on 2x18650 without realizing it and it did just fine. But don't repeat it, don't try that at home, it's not manufacturer's spec'ed and out of usage guidelines, it's 6V and 2x18650 is more like 8V even though it instantly sinks


http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?328980-Malkoff-M61LL-runtime

I got a M61WLL (3700 K version) recently and put it into a Surefire 6P host (+ A19 extender). Measuring brightness and tailcap currents for various battery configurations gives these results:

2x eneloop AA - 2.4 V - 20 mA - 10 lm
1x AW 17670 - 3.7 V - 115mA - 35 lm
2x Surefire CR123A - 6.0 V - 100 mA - 59 lm
2x AW 16340 - 7.4 V - 105 mA - 67 lm
3x Surefire CR123A - 9.0 V - 105 mA - 71 lm

The 3-cell configuration with CR123 is slightly brighter than the 2-cell configuration, but the runtimes should be similar.

I plan to run a scientific test of M361N on Low versus M61LL. In fact, I will let users determine what is better. I can run a test of:

M361N on High versus M61

M361N on Med versus M61L

M361N on Med versus M61LL

Pick one!

I suspect med vs LL would be more useful. But I can do Med vs L if that's desired. I might have to use protected 18650 as unprotected ones will drain into the oblivion.

 

[Woods Walker]

I really like the beam pattern of the M61s for my outdoor use however guessing the M361 has that pro as well. I wonder if the M361 has the runtime on any level of a hi/lo ring. It is really really really loooooong. One thing I found often the best way to get run times are to physically test them. There are many factors and it's hard for anyone to keep track of all the data points etc etc.

 

[etc]

I will run a test either tonight or this weekend, supposed to be really nice out, today over 20C in the mid-atlantic area, perfect weather for testing.