ArmyTek Partner A1, A2, C1 Series (XP-G and XM-L, AA and CR123A) Review: RUNTIMES+

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
Warning: a LOT more pic heavy than usual. :sweat:

This is a round-up overview of the new Partner family of lights from ArmyTek. All told, I have six different lights in this review – the C1 (1xCR123A/RCR), the A1 (1xAA/14500), and the A2 (2xAA) – in both XP-G and XM-L emitter formats.

Partner063.jpg

Partner062.jpg


Partner085.jpg

Partner086.jpg


Partner088.jpg

Partner089.jpg


Given the complexity of reviewing so many lights at one time, I have broken up this review into common elements up top (i.e., general build, user interface, etc.), and have left the specific comparisons (size overviews, beamshots, runtimes, etc.) in separate sections at the end, for each of the three battery-type models.

For most of this review, I have focused the light pics on the XP-G models, but have highlighted the XM-L versions where appropriate. There's a ton of data here, so sit back and make yourself comfortable … :whistle:

Manufacturer Reported Specifications:
(note: I don't have space to get into each model in detail, so see ArmyTek's website for more info. Below is just a quick overview of the major features, taken from their website).

  • LED: Cree XP-G LED or XM-L LED
  • XP-G models TIR 20°:70°, XM-L models TIR 50°:90°
  • Small size and weight for easy carry
  • 2 Modes and easy operation
  • Type of mode switching: Tailcap switch, Reverse clicky
  • Advanced heat transmission for LED with copper MPCB
  • Special spring material for higher efficiency
  • Battery over-discharge protection circuit for unprotected batteries
  • Advanced electronic reverse polarity protection
  • Light output without flickering
  • Ability to use batteries with a flat contact
  • Body material: Aircraft-grade aluminium
  • Body anti-abrasive finish: Premium type III hard anodizing 400HV
  • Premium antislipping matt surface treatment
  • Reliable spring construction for battery protection
  • Trapezoidal threads for longer lifetime
  • Body color: Matt Black
  • Waterproof and dustproof standard: IP68 (highest)
  • Waterproof & Submersible: 10m
  • Double O-rings for best waterproof
  • Impact Resistance: 10m
  • Belt holster (Molle)
  • Strong and easily removable lanyard
  • MSRP: ~$40-45
Partner056.jpg

Partner058.jpg

Partner061.jpg


Packaging is common for all versions - a typical carboard box, reminiscent of the Zebralight lights. Inside, the light comes with a basic but good quality holster with closing flap, wrist lanyard, spare o-rings and boot cover, and manual.

Partner011.jpg

From left to right: Rayovac CR123A; ArmyTel Partner C1 XP-G, A1 XP-G, A2 XP-G, Duracell NiMH AA.

Detail comparisons for each model – relative to their respective class – will be provided later in this review.

Common Build Elements

Partner087.jpg

Partner065.jpg

Partner073.jpg

Partner072.jpg


As always, ArmyTek build quality is very high, and the lights have a very robust feel. Physically, the two classes of models are distinguished primarily by their emitters and optics, which I will describe in more detail below.

The ArmyTek finish is fairly unique in my testing - the bodies of their lights have a very thick matte finish anodizing that feels almost molded (i.e., it is very "grippy"). According to ArmyTek, this anodization coating is much thicker than most lights. Although the lights lack knurling, grip is actually quite decent thanks to this unique finish. And there are some ridge detail elements to help further with grip. :)

Note the grippier finish may show dirt, hand oil, etc, more easily than traditional glossy knurling. There are also no real anti-roll features (except for some flattened areas of the tailcap), so the lights can all roll easily. Lettering is very bright and clear, and very legible.

Screw threads are standard triangular cut, but seem of good quality. Screw threads are anodized at the tail region of the battery tube and in the tailcap (for lock-out). Edges of the battery tube have all been chamfered (i.e., rounded off), which shows a nice attention to detail.

The tailcap switch is a reverse clicky in all lights, with good feel. The spring is thicker and longer than typical on these sorts of lights, with a flattened end (so as not to scratch your batteries).

There is a lanyard attachment point at the base of the tailcap. The lights cannot tailstand.

There is a small raised contact point in the head, so high capacity flat-top batteries can be used.

As mentioned earlier, the lights are distinguished by their emitter and optic choice. Note that the lights do not use a reflector, but have a customized TIR optic that goes with each emitter type.

XP-G emitter:

Partner066.jpg

Partner006.jpg

Partner080.jpg

Partner079.jpg

Partner075.jpg

Partner082.jpg


XM-L emitter:

Partner090.jpg

Partner100.jpg

Partner094.jpg

Partner093.jpg

Partner091.jpg


In all cases, the head of the light has a flat aluminum bezel. Use of TIR optics means the spill will be reduced (compared to reflectored lights). Although hard to capture on camera, please see my detailed beamshots later in this review, for each model.

User Interface

The Partner interface is very basic. The lights use a reverse clicky tailcap – press and release (click) to turn on.

The lights have two modes, Lo and Hi, accessed in sequence (i.e., click off-on to switch modes). When the light hasn't been used in awhile, it always comes on in Lo.

But there is an unusual twist here – when changing between modes, most lights only retain the last setting for a couple of seconds (i.e., you have to click off-on quickly to advance modes). But In the Partner case, mode-switching memory is retained for 7 mins. This means it will advance to the next mode if you turn the light off and back on within 7 mins.

There are no "blinky" modes on the Partners.

UPDATE AUGUST 14, 2013:ArmyTek informs me that they plan to switch to a new circuit without this long mode-switching delay. They will also add a third mode (i.e., Max - Med - Lo), and will include a clip on the next batch of lights.

Video:

For information on the light, including the build and user interface, please see my video overview:



Video was recorded in 720p, but YouTube typically defaults to 360p. Once the video is running, you can click on the configuration settings icon and select the higher 480p to 720p options. You can also run full-screen.

As with all my videos, I recommend you have annotations turned on. I commonly update the commentary with additional information or clarifications before publicly releasing the video.

PWM

There is no sign of PWM at either output level, on any light – the Partners are all current-controlled. :)

Testing Method:

All my output numbers are relative for my home-made light box setup, a la Quickbeam's flashlightreviews.com method. You can directly compare all my relative output values from different reviews - i.e. an output value of "10" in one graph is the same as "10" in another. All runtimes are done under a cooling fan, except for any extended run Lo/Min modes (i.e. >12 hours) which are done without cooling.

I have devised a method for converting my lightbox relative output values (ROV) to estimated Lumens. See my How to convert Selfbuilt's Lightbox values to Lumens thread for more info.

Throw/Output Summary Chart:

My summary tables are reported in a manner consistent with the ANSI FL-1 standard for flashlight testing. Please see http://www.flashlightreviews.ca/FL1.htm for a discussion, and a description of all the terms used in these tables. Effective July 2012, I have updated all my Peak Intensity/Beam Distance measures with a NIST-certified Extech EA31 lightmeter (orange highlights).

Ok, now that the common elements are out of the way, let's move on to the detailed testing of each battery-type model. :sweat:

------------

Partner C1

Partner021.jpg

Partner027.jpg

Partner009.jpg

From left to right: Rayovac CR123A; ArmyTek Partner C1 XP-G; Foursevens QTLC; Nitecore MT1C; Sunwayman C10Rl JetBeam PC10; Olight S10; Sunwayman V11R.

All dimensions directly measured, and given with no batteries installed:

1xCR123A/RCR:
ArmyTek C1 XP-G: Weight: 42.6g, Length: 79.8mm , With (bezel): 23.1mm
ArmyTek C1 XM-L: Weight: 43.0g, Length: 80.2mm , With (bezel): 23.1mm
Lumintop ED11: Weight: 44.1g, Length: 83.7, Width (bezel): 21.8mm
Foursevens QTLC: Weight 36.4g, Length 84.1mm, Width (bezel) 22.1mm
Olight S10: Weight 41.1g, Length: 70.6mm, Width (bezel): 23.0mm
Sunwayman C10R: Weight: 57.3g, Length: 76.2mm (no lanyard plug), 82.3mm (with plug), Width (bezel): 25.6mm, Width (head at widest part): 28.6mm
Eagletac D25C Clicky: Weight: 30g, Length: 76.0mm, Width (bezel): 20.0mm
Jetbeam PC10: Weight: 50.5g, Length: 93.6mm, Width (bezel): 22.6mm

Beamshots:

For white-wall beamshots below, all lights are on Max output on an AW protected 18650 battery. Lights are about ~0.75 meter from a white wall (with the camera ~1.25 meters back from the wall). Automatic white balance on the camera, to minimize tint differences.

Note: the XP-G Partner versions are not labeled with the emitter in the beamshots below. But to help you differentiate, all the XM-L versions are specifically identified.

1xCR123A

C1-CR-Beam001.jpg
C1-XML-CR123A-Beam001.jpg

ED11-CR123A-Beam001.jpg
D25CXML-CR123A-Beam001.jpg


C1-CR-Beam002.jpg
C1-XML-CR123A-Beam002.jpg

ED11-CR123A-Beam002.jpg
D25CXML-CR123A-Beam002.jpg


C1-CR-Beam003.jpg
C1-XML-CR123A-Beam003.jpg

ED11-CR123A-Beam003.jpg
D25CXML-CR123A-Beam003.jpg


C1-CR-Beam004.jpg
C1-XML-CR123A-Beam004.jpg

ED11-CR123A-Beam004.jpg
D25CXML-CR123A-Beam004.jpg


1xRCR

C1-RCR-Beam001.jpg
C1-XML-RCR-Beam001.jpg

S10-RCR-Beam001.jpg
D25CXML-RCR-Beam001.jpg


C1-RCR-Beam002.jpg
C1-XML-RCR-Beam002.jpg

S10-RCR-Beam002.jpg
D25CXML-RCR-Beam002.jpg


C1-RCR-Beam003.jpg
C1-XML-RCR-Beam003.jpg

S10-RCR-Beam003.jpg
D25CXML-RCR-Beam003.jpg


C1-RCR-Beam004.jpg
C1-XML-RCR-Beam004.jpg

S10-RCR-Beam004.jpg
D25CXML-RCR-Beam004.jpg


Summary Tables

C1-FL1-Summary-1.gif

C1-FL1-Summary-2.gif


Runtimes

C1-HiRCR.gif

C1-MedRCR.gif


C1-HiCR123A.gif

C1-MedCR123A.gif


------------

Partner A1

Partner034.jpg

Partner038.jpg

Partner013.jpg

From left to right: Duracell NiMH AA; ArmyTek Partner A1 XP-G; Nitecore MT1A, EA1; Zebralight SC52; Thrunite Neutron 1A; Sunwayman V11R+AA extender.

All dimensions directly measured, and given with no batteries installed:

1xAA:
ArmyTek A1 XP-G: Weight: 57.3g, Length: 96.8mm , With (bezel): 23.1mm
ArmyTek A1 XM-L: Weight: 56.5g, Length: 97.2mm , With (bezel): 23.1mm
Olight S15 1xAA: Weight: 46.4g, Length: 87.0mm, Width (bezel): 23.1mm
Nitecore MT1A: Weight: 54.6g, Length: 104.6mm, Width (bezel): 22.7mm
Nitecore SENS AA: Weight: 26.1g, Length: 82.7mm, Width (bezel): 19.8mm
Lumintop ED15: Weight: 59.7g, Length: 100.2, Width (bezel): 21.9mm
Zebralight SC52: Weight 39.5g, Length 79.0mm, Width (bezel): 22.6mm, Width (max) 25.4mm
Rofis ER12: Wright: 35.5g, Length: 96.2mm, Width (bezel): 18.6mm
Xeno E03:: Weight: 48.1g, Length 96.7mm, Width (bezel): 21.5mm

Beamshots:

For white-wall beamshots below, all lights are on Max output on an AW protected 18650 battery. Lights are about ~0.75 meter from a white wall (with the camera ~1.25 meters back from the wall). Automatic white balance on the camera, to minimize tint differences.

Note: the XP-G Partner versions are not labeled with the emitter in the beamshots below. But to help you differentiate, all the XM-L versions are specifically identified.

1xAA Sanyo Eneloop NiMH

A1-Beam001.jpg
A1-XML-AA-Beam001.jpg

S15-AA-Beam001.jpg
SC52-Ene-Beam001.jpg


A1-Beam002.jpg
A1-XML-AA-Beam002.jpg

S15-AA-Beam002.jpg
SC52-Ene-Beam002.jpg


A1-Beam003.jpg
A1-XML-AA-Beam003.jpg

S15-AA-Beam003.jpg
SC52-Ene-Beam003.jpg


A1-Beam004.jpg
A1-XML-AA-Beam004.jpg

S15-AA-Beam004.jpg
SC52-Ene-Beam004.jpg


1x14500 (AW Protected 14500) Li-ion

A1-XML-14500-Beam001.jpg
S15-14500-Beam001.jpg

SC52-14500-Beam001.jpg
V11R-14500-Beam001.jpg


A1-XML-14500-Beam002.jpg
S15-14500-Beam002.jpg

SC52-14500-Beam002.jpg
V11R-14500-Beam002.jpg


A1-XML-14500-Beam003.jpg
S15-14500-Beam003.jpg

SC52-14500-Beam003.jpg
V11R-14500-Beam003.jpg


A1-XML-14500-Beam004.jpg
S15-14500-Beam004.jpg

SC52-14500-Beam004.jpg
V11R-14500-Beam004.jpg


Summary Tables

A1-FL1-Summary-1.gif

A1-FL1-Summary-2.gif


Runtimes

S15-1xHiEne.gif


S15-1xHiAlka.gif

S15-1xMedAlka.gif


S15-1xHiL91.gif


S15-1xHi14500.gif


------------

Partner A2

Partner042.jpg

Partner054.jpg

Partner016.jpg

From left to right: Duracell NiMH AA; ArmyTek Partner A2 XP-G; Nitecore EA2; JetBeam PC20; Eagletac D24A2; Fenix LD20-R4.

All dimensions directly measured, and given with no batteries installed:

2xAA:
ArmyTek A2 XP-G: Weight: 83.4g, Length: 96.8mm , With (bezel): 23.2mm
ArmyTek A2 XM-L: Weight: 84.2g, Length: 97.2mm , With (bezel): 23.1mm
Olight S15 2xAA: Weight: 59.2g, Length: 137.9mm, Width (bezel): 23.1mm
Nitecore MT1: Weight: 66.9g, Length: 154.3mm, Width (bezel):22.7mm
Nitecore EA2: Weight: 68.9g, Length: 134.4, Width (bezel): 26.1mm
Eagletac D25A2: Weight: 54.8g, Length 148.5mm, Width (bezel): 21.0mm
4Sevens QAA-2 X (Tactical tailcap): Weight: 60.1g, Length: 149.1mm, Width (bezel) 22.0mm
Jetbeam BA20: Weight: 70.2g, Length: 156.4mm, Width (bezel) 23.2mm

Beamshots:

For white-wall beamshots below, all lights are on Max output on an AW protected 18650 battery. Lights are about ~0.75 meter from a white wall (with the camera ~1.25 meters back from the wall). Automatic white balance on the camera, to minimize tint differences.

Note: the XP-G Partner versions are not labeled with the emitter in the beamshots below. But to help you differentiate, all the XM-L versions are specifically identified.

2xAA Sanyo Eneloop NiMH

A2-Beam001.jpg
A2-XML-Beam001.jpg

S15-2AA-Beam001.jpg
BA20001.jpg


A2-Beam002.jpg
A2-XML-Beam002.jpg

S15-2AA-Beam002.jpg
BA20002.jpg


A2-Beam003.jpg
A2-XML-Beam003.jpg

S15-2AA-Beam003.jpg
BA20003.jpg


A2-Beam004.jpg
A2-XML-Beam004.jpg

S15-2AA-Beam004.jpg
BA20004.jpg


Summary Tables

A2-FL1-Summary.gif


Runtimes

S15-2xHiEne.gif

S15-2xMedEne.gif


S15-2xHiAlka.gif


----------------

Potential Issues

The extended retention of the output level state is unusual (i.e., it remembers what the last level used was for up to 7 mins, and will always advance to the next level during this time). This prolonged time is unusual, and I would prefer it if they behaved like most lights (where it is only a few seconds). (see Update at the end of this review)

There are very limited anti-roll features on the light, and no pocket clip is included. (see Update at the end of this review)

Lights lack a true Lo mode (i.e., on standard batteries they are more of a Med/Hi, and on Li-ion batteries more of a Hi/Turbo). (see Update at the end of this review)

Lights use TIR optics, customized to each emitter (i.e., center-beam throw for the XP-G, more diffuse for the XM-L). All optics tend to induce beam artifacts – most notably hotspot artifacts and spillbeam rings on throwers (like the XP-Gs), and "square" beams on floodier lights (like the XM-Ls).

Preliminary Observations

The Partner series is an interesting foray by ArmyTek into the world of simple-to-use, two-stage, basic consumer flashlights.

Let's start with the build – these are among the most solid lights I've seen in the 1xCR123A/AA or 2xAA classes. :eek:oo: Build quality is excellent, with good attention to detail (e.g., double o-rings with Nyogel lube, chamfered edges body, flattened tail springs etc.). Physically, they remind me of some of the higher-end made-in-the-USA brands. Simply put, these are tough little lights that I expect would survive a lot of abuse.

Circuit performance is also top-of-the-line, for their respective emitters and battery classes. No surprises here – both output modes of all models showed excellent regulation and output/runtime efficiency, across all batteries and over both emitters. It took a while for me to complete all the testing for this review (there is a lot of data up there!), and I am impressed to see such consistently good performance. :)

User interface is perhaps the one sore spot for me – I am really not clear why the mode-switching state memory is 7 mins long. :thinking: Typically, you either want a light to remember its mode indefinitely (and come back to it), or only allow a couple of seconds for mode switching purposes. Given that these are only two-stage lights, it's not a big deal – but it is frustrating to not always be certain which mode will show up upon activation. And personally, I would prefer a head tight/loose mode selection mechanism (with forward clicky for activation), but I know some people prefer to work with only the tailcap switch. :shrug:

The other point that could use a little refinement for me is the level spacing. Right now, the lights all typically offer what I would consider "Med/Hi" levels on standard cells (i.e., no real Lo mode). And on Li-ion, they are basically "Hi/Turbo" (i.e., even brighter, with little visual differentiation between the levels). Again, you are never going to please everyone with just two stages, ;) but I would like to see the "Lo" mode drop further in output (especially on the XP-G versions).

Beam patterns are also distinctive for the lines, with the TIR optics instead of reflectors. The XP-G optic is about what I would have expected (i.e., focused for throw, with minimal spill) - throw fans will be happy with this design. The XM-L optic is quite different, with a wider and squarer output beam. Both are well suited to their intended purposes, but differ from you might be used to (if you have dealt predominantly with reflectored lights). Please also keep in mind that the use of optics here may slightly affect the testing results, in terms of the relative output measures (i.e., the lightbox and ceiling bounce numbers may not be exactly comparable to reflectored lights). This is due to differing beam profiles of reflector and optics, which may not be interpreted entirely consistently in my simple setup.

I know this has been a massive review, but hopefully all the detailed testing results above will help you decide if these are lights for you. Whatever your personal preference in this space, I for one am glad to see ArmyTek venture out in the general purpose realm. And I think there is a lot to commend these lights for that purpose, but the two-stage user interface could use some tweaking. :wave:

UPDATE AUGUST 14, 2013: I've heard back from ArmyTek about my recommendations above. They tell me that they opted for a very simple circuit design in their first batch ("without a CPU") which is what led to the large mode-switching delay. They plan to switch to a new circuit without this delay, and will add a third mode (i.e., Max - Med - Lo). They will also include a clip on the next batch of lights. :wave:

----

Partner lights were supplied by ArmyTek for review.
 
Last edited:

mhanlen

Enlightened
Joined
Jul 14, 2013
Messages
494
Location
Eastern USA
Sorry for asking a dumb question, but are you saying that for up to 7 minutes after you shut the light off it behaves like next mode memory- or after 7 minutes?
 

Swede74

Enlightened
Joined
Sep 30, 2011
Messages
577
Thanks for taking the time (more time than usual, I assume) to do this review. Unfortunately I think the low level would be quite a bit too bright for nightly walks, especially on snowy winter nights, but I really like the thick anodizing. It almost looks like a rubber coating, and reminds me of the Varta / Rayovac indestructible series, which I find very comfortable to handle. I hope other manufacturers follow suit and let utility take priority over aesthetics.
 

jamesmyname

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Mar 14, 2012
Messages
63
Thanks, Selfbuilt. I like the simplicity of two modes, but I think I would prefer a head tight/loose mode switching. The 7-minute next mode memory just seems bizarre.
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
Sorry for asking a dumb question, but are you saying that for up to 7 minutes after you shut the light off it behaves like next mode memory- or after 7 minutes?
The first - it acts like you planning to change modes for up to 7 mins after turning off (i.e., if you turn it back on within 7 mins, it advances to the next mode). If you wait longer than 7 mins, it defaults back to Lo mode. Definitely peculiar. :shrug:

Unfortunately I think the low level would be quite a bit too bright for nightly walks, especially on snowy winter nights, but I really like the thick anodizing. It almost looks like a rubber coating, and reminds me of the Varta / Rayovac indestructible series, which I find very comfortable to handle. I hope other manufacturers follow suit and let utility take priority over aesthetics.
Agreed on both fronts. Note that the lights are still solid metal - it just the thick anodizing that makes it feel "rubberized".

Thanks, Selfbuilt. I like the simplicity of two modes, but I think I would prefer a head tight/loose mode switching..
Yes, that would be my preference as well.
 

mhanlen

Enlightened
Joined
Jul 14, 2013
Messages
494
Location
Eastern USA
The first - it acts like you planning to change modes for up to 7 mins after turning off (i.e., if you turn it back on within 7 mins, it advances to the next mode). If you wait longer than 7 mins, it defaults back to Lo mode. Definitely peculiar.

Bizarre. Thanks for answering the question. I guess it's sorta forgivable since there's only two modes.
 

shelm

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 8, 2011
Messages
2,047
thanks for the review.

have you added the dimensions (length, weight, ..) of the AT lights?
 

Wiggle

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 19, 2008
Messages
1,280
Location
Halifax, NS
Thank you for all your hard work selfbuilt. Physically, I like the look of these lights alot. And their performances (in their limited modes anyway) seem to stack up very well against the established lights in that class.

It is too bad that I don't feel like that UI and ouput levels have any real place in an EDC otherwise I'd love to try one. For me, I could never trade in the UI of my SC52 or Quark AA-Tactical for this interface. Anxious to see what they offer in the future though. The big thing for me with a UI is predictability and that 7 minute interval is a completely bizarre amount of time to choose as the threshold between a mode switch or not, makes no sense and I can't imagine any possible rationale for designing it like that. I'd have rather seen 2-mode with twist select (like the Fenix E11 or Jetbeam BA10, both lights I've bought for relatives before) and a forward clicky.

Love my Predator 2.5 and it definitely shows they are capable of great things in the build quality and driver design categories.
 
Last edited:

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
I've heard back from ArmyTek about the unusually long delay in the mode-selection programming (i.e., 7 mins).

They tell me that they opted for a very simple circuit design in their first batch ("without a CPU") which is what led to the large delay. They plan to switch to a new circuit ("CPU") without this delay, and will add a third mode (i.e., Max - Med - Lo). They will also include a clip on final version. :wave:
 

shelm

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 8, 2011
Messages
2,047
in their first batch ... They will also include a clip on final version.

Love to see the manufacturers rethinking their original designs and improving them from batch to batch. Revised versions are always the superior versions imho! :thumbsup:
 

markr6

Flashaholic
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
9,258
Glad they're adding a clip. I'm really aggravated by all these nice small lights without clips - the ones that need them the MOST. Yet so many of the massive toilet-plunger looking lights have clips, when I couldn't even fathom a use for them. A holster is more appropriate past a certain size.
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
Love to see the manufacturers rethinking their original designs and improving them from batch to batch. Revised versions are always the superior versions imho! :thumbsup:
Yes, I couldn't agree more.

Glad they're adding a clip. I'm really aggravated by all these nice small lights without clips - the ones that need them the MOST. Yet so many of the massive toilet-plunger looking lights have clips, when I couldn't even fathom a use for them. A holster is more appropriate past a certain size.
:laughing: I know exactly what you mean.
 

sspc

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jan 23, 2012
Messages
132
Thanks for another great review!! What are your thoughts on the performance of XP-G emitter, 1xAA using Eneloops? I'm surprised to see higher output (and consequently, lower runtimes) when compared to XM-L.
 
Top