How come we hear so little of the Xeno E03 ???????????

[mrlysle]

I am using a 14505 in my neutral XM-L red X03. Works great, and isn't direct drive like a 14500 (3V still under the led's forward voltage). Because of that, it will maintain regulation at all levels nicely, and you actually keep the respective levels. I love the floodiness of this emitter, and the X03 can gobble any battery chemistry you have on hand. I use nimh for around the house, but the 14505 if EDCing. I like the fact that this light is different - color, shape, led type, tint, etc.

Awesome! Thanks for the info! I think I'll definitely pick one up then. I hate it when you guys talk me into new lights!!!!! :devil: BTW, I love the diffusion film I got from you! I brag about it every chance I get, hoping you'll get some more sales. Great stuff! Have it on 3 lights now where the beam was awful before and now they're beautiful!

 

[j2k]

I did some night time comparison yesterday between nw & cw xeno xml, nw r5 xeno and nw & cw neutron 1A all with eneloops.

Xenos seem to put about as much light out as neutrons on high (on turbo neutrons are brighter). The R5 version holds its own vs neutrons outside, because of a tighter spot. Xml versions have very reduced throw and seem much dimmer because of that, they have a lot of spill and they will still be very good for campsite duties etc.

Indoors the floody beam performs very well. In ceiling bounce the nw xml version appears to be a tiny bit brighter than nw r5, but the difference is very small.

Btw - my copy of nw xml is visibly cooler and less pleasant than r5 nw and neutron nw xml.

 

[Phaserburn]

Awesome! Thanks for the info! I think I'll definitely pick one up then. I hate it when you guys talk me into new lights!!!!! :devil: BTW, I love the diffusion film I got from you! I brag about it every chance I get, hoping you'll get some more sales. Great stuff! Have it on 3 lights now where the beam was awful before and now they're beautiful!

Thanks. It's good stuff, and very inexpensive to play with.

Yeah, I end up buying lights due to other member's contagious enthusiasm, too.

 

[jbdan]

I am using a 14505 in my neutral XM-L red X03. Works great, and isn't direct drive like a 14500 (3V still under the led's forward voltage). Because of that, it will maintain regulation at all levels nicely, and you actually keep the respective levels. I love the floodiness of this emitter, and the X03 can gobble any battery chemistry you have on hand. I use nimh for around the house, but the 14505 if EDCing. I like the fact that this light is different - color, shape, led type, tint, etc.

Quick question for ya. I'm new at this what brand 14505 do you recommend? And if I understand correctly you still get the same output as a 14500? Thanks

 

[Z-Tab]

The output is not the same with a 14505 primary as it is with a 14500 li-ion. The modes each get brighter, but it doesn't get crazy bright, as you might expect from doubling the voltage. The biggest difference seems to be that the low just becomes about as bright as medium was and the medium becomes medium-high.

As for brand, I have the Battery Junction brand. I'd definitely be interested in hearing of others.

 

[jbdan]

The output is not the same with a 14505 primary as it is with a 14500 li-ion. The modes each get brighter, but it doesn't get crazy bright, as you might expect from doubling the voltage. The biggest difference seems to be that the low just becomes about as bright as medium was and the medium becomes medium-high.

Thanks!

 

[pikal]

Anyone know the rough lumens output on alkaline AA for their new XM-L model? [FONT=&quot][/FONT]

 

[SirJohn]

Man, I wish that these actually had a usable low on 14500. I returned my Neutron 1a because of the wobble head issue and I feel like I need to play the lottery to get a replacement without that problem. If the E03 had a usable low, I would probably get it instead. The Neutron gives me the blast of power on 14500, but then I can also use it just roam around the house at night without turning on the lights with the low mode, so its ideal for my edc pocket carry. Right now, I either play the Neutron lottery or give up all that XM-L power for a different light with similar mode flexibility.

 

[StarHalo]

I ordered mine a few days ago, will be receiving it with their next wave of shipments; I've got a 14500 ready to go and will do some photos when it arrives..

 

[Cataract]

Thanks for sharing, guys!

Small lights like these don't usually throw that much and huge emitters like the XM-L definitely make for much more flood, making the light output only look less intense. You probably have about the same amount of light at a given point of the spot, but bigger spot with same intensity = more overall light. To top it off, if the XM-L version has a shallower reflector, it will make for even more flood. Floody lights are nice for close-up work, but lights with such massive output should try to preserve some throw or just offer 2 reflector depths. I use small lights for work at arm's reach and 200 lumens seems to be the limit of reasonability, unless you're working on really dark parts (too much light means that you either blind yourself, have to readjust when you turn it off or just start seeing less deta. I would definitely enjoy a small light with about medium throw (Let's say comparable to a PD30) with ~500 lumen output.

Nevertheless, you guys have me convinced. Even if I still would prefer a low-med-high sequence, I'll keep some dough in my wallet for one. After all, my only blue flashlight is an old discolored solitaire...

 

[Fireclaw18]

I recently got a Xeno E03 XML and a Thrunite 1C, both cool white.
My initial impressions comparing the two (Thrunite running AW protected 16340 v. E03 on AW IMR 14500):

* The EO3 feels incredibly well built. All the parts fit well together, the finish is excellent, and its shape and knurling are superb. It has a better grip than the Thrunite. I would assume that the E03 has HAII anodizing while the Thrunite has HAIII, but so far the E03 hasn't scratched yet. If it's type 2 anodizing, it's of very high quality.
* At maximum brightness both lights put out a comparable amount of light. Using a ceiling bounce test I think the E03 was slightly brighter, but the difference is so close it is hard to tell. Note the E03 reportedly draws 1.56 amps at max compared to 1.3 amps for the Thrunite. So the E03 should be brighter. This is probably why the Thrunite reportedly ouputs 440-450 lumens compared to 490 for the E03.
* Both lights are very floody. The flood on the E03 is wider due to the shallower reflector.
* The E03 feels more durable than the Thrunite. This is because the E03 doesn't have the removable body tube, has springs at both ends of the battery compartment, and has double o-rings. It feels like it's built like a tank.
* The E03 lacks a usable low mode. It has high, slightly higher, and medium-high. No low. In contrast, the Thrunite has a much broader range of brightness settings. This is one area the E03 falls flat.
* With batteries installed, the E03 is slightly heavier than the Thrunite (2.4 oz for the E03 and 2.2 oz for the Thrunite). The E03 is also longer and very slightly narrower.
* The Thrunite has a very nice pure white tint. The E03's tint is also nice, but not quite as nice as the Thrunite's.
* The E03 tailstands easily. In contrast the puffy switch boot on the Thrunite prevents it from tailstanding reliably.

Conclusion: Overall I'm very impressed with both lights. The clincher for me is the lack of any kind of low or very low mode on the E03. In most other respects it feels like a superb light - every bit as good or even better than Thrunite which cost twice as much.

 

[J888www]

* The E03 lacks a usable low mode. It has high, slightly higher, and medium-high. No low. In contrast, the E03 has a much broader range of brightness settings. This is one area the E03 falls flat.
....The clincher for me is the lack of any kind of low or very low mode on the E03. In most other respects it feels like a superb light - every bit as good or even better than Thrunite which cost twice as much.

I am baffled.
After all you have said, I arrived at the conclusion that I have no idea whether you like or dislike the E03 in comparison to the Thrunite.
ie E03 lacks low mode and have a much broader range of brightness settings=area E03 falls flat, but the clincher=E03 lacks low mode and you prefer this E03 because of the area where you consider it falls flat ?

Would you elaborate a little further.

 

[SirJohn]

I believe he meant to post:
The E03 lacks a usable low mode. It has high, slightly higher, and medium-high. No low. In contrast, the 1A has a much broader range of brightness settings. This is one area the E03 falls flat.

 

[black_ice_pc]

Just ordered a cool white E03 for a friend last night. I told him about it and he wanted one, so now I get to see if I like the light and the beam angle or not before I buy :twothumbs
It looks like a very interesting light though, and I love pocket rockets. That plus the finger detents makes this a unique addition to my collection. The main possible deal breaker is the beam angle. I'm more of a throw guy, so I'll have to see if the brightness makes up for the floody beam. At the price this thing's going for though, I do expect to buy one.

 

[Nokoff]

I have a XML T4 warm in the mail...if it's near as nice as the pictures in the sales thread show, I'll be super happy with it. I'm thinking dog walks at night for this one, and leave no darkscary corners and hiding spots to the imagination. I hear it even shines right through trees!

 

[Fireclaw18]

I believe he meant to post:
The E03 lacks a usable low mode. It has high, slightly higher, and medium-high. No low. In contrast, the 1A has a much broader range of brightness settings. This is one area the E03 falls flat.

Yes that is what I meant. I corrected my post. I really like the solid feel, grip and build quality of the E03, but find myself exclusively using the Thrunite 1C for EDC use because of its slightly smaller size and low modes.

 

[rickypanecatyl]

I got 2 of the XP G versions and found them very "fragile." One broke the first day when my daughter dropped it from about 3' on the cement. The other one just stopped working for unknown reasons.

Now they both work sometimes and sometimes they don't... very bright when they do but certainly more of a gimick/novelty than something you should depend on.

 

[jasonck08]

I got 2 of the XP G versions and found them very "fragile." One broke the first day when my daughter dropped it from about 3' on the cement. The other one just stopped working for unknown reasons.

Now they both work sometimes and sometimes they don't... very bright when they do but certainly more of a gimick/novelty than something you should depend on.

Ricky, as mentioned in the other review thread, I mentioned that the LED supplier (not Xeno) messed up the reflow solder job on a handful of XP-G lights. This only affected a small number of lights. I already offered to fix / replace yours, but you have not responded to my last email. Is there really a need for you to continue to continue to post your negative experience with them, despite my best efforts to fix / replace your lights?

 

[rickypanecatyl]

Jason I emailed you a while ago with my address and where to send the new light engines and never heard back from you? Am I missing something?

 

[sirimaxi]

I received my E03 Cool White XM-L, Awesome light!!! According to specs of the box it says 430 OTF Lms (I suppose only with 14500)...I really like how it performs....The only things I don´t like is the GITD (Glow in the Dark) silicon rubber tail cap, it lacks memory and the reverse clicky but for the money it is really very good (better than others at higher prices)...Question for Jason: Is there a way to have an standard black rubber tail cap one to replace the GITD? If it´s possible could you include it when ordering the NW?. Thanks!