EO-4 & 1x17670 or SR-9 & 2xRCR123

[BoomerSooner]

EO-4 & 1x17670 or SR-9 & 2xRCR123

I see more runtime with the EO-4 option but which is the brighter, whiter beam? Much difference?

Is one option better than the other? Which do most people do?

 

[mdocod]

As far as brightness, the SR-9 setup would be a hair better, but at the cost of some runtime..

17670>LF D26 EO-4: ~9W, 122 - 70 lumen in about 37 minutes

2xRCR123>LF D26 SR-9: ~9W, 126 - 74 lumen in about 25 minutes

(these are calculated estimates from the charts, link in my sig line)

I don't know that you would be able to see much practical difference between the 2 setups, and because of that, would recommend the 1x17670 configuration because the cell is under less stress (so it's safer and will last longer), and because single cell configurations are safer in general than multi-cell. The extra 50% runtime would more than makeup for the slight difference in output IMO....

In fact, If I were seriously recommending a lamp for that setup, I would say the HO-4 is more practical due to the longer runtime, but of course, that is for you to decide

17670> LF D26 HO-4: ~7W, 106 - 69 lumen in 49 minutes

 

[BoomerSooner]

mdocod,

I have more lights that use 17670 than I do RCR123 so I think I'll go for the EO-4 since I will doubtfully notice a difference. See, I'm practical. Kind of.

Thanks for the reply!

 

[DM51]

What light is this for? You say yours take 17670s, but if you have one which will take an 18650 cell, such as a WE 6AX Sniper, this would give you ~50 mins run-time with an EO-4 and would be indistinguishable in brightness from the SR-9's 25 mins on 2xR123s.

An 18650 has twice the capacity of 2xR123s, so it is really no contest.

 

[BoomerSooner]

It was for a SF, not a WE.

The EO-9 on 1x17670 is not as bright a my P60 on primaries. :thinking:

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=173405

 

[KentuckyMike]

The EO-9 on 1x17670 is not as bright a my P60 on primaries. :thinking:

Boomer,

You do mean EO-4, not EO-9, right?

 

[BoomerSooner]

Boomer,

You do mean EO-4, not EO-9, right?

Yes I do, thank you for the correction.