Just got a Tank566 - impressions/pics

[scott2907]

Hi
I just got a Tank007 TK566 1xAA - I think its a Q5.
I decided to get it as a trial, becuase I normally buy my friends C3's, but the build quality and intermittant connection issues are a bit of a problem, so I thought I might try these, for a little more £.

Out of the bag, I was really really impressed with the build quality and looks. I've used my phone for speed, so sorry for the quality, it's just to give you an idea.

And inside the head, it even had branding on the contact plate etched into the PCB copper:

And I love the lanyard too - that's got TANK007 written all the way round it. It looks great, seems robust and has O's in all the right places. It needs a bit of greaase but that's about it. Eager to fire it up and test it against a C3 I fired her up and this happened:

WHOA! :fail:

Has anyone else got a TANK566 that can tell me if mine is faulty or are they all LORD OF THE RINGS???

Its actually worse when you see it for real, one of the rings is yellow, but got washed out on the pic.
Not only that but the off-centre ring is not the angle that the photo was taken at. It's miles off!

That said, they'd be great hosts for modders.

 

[^Gurthang]

Bummer on the rings. What type of reflector? OP or SMO?? Did you try to adjust the focus? Also wonder if the pill has an insulator disk to protect against short circuiting, that could mess up focus.

 

[Surnia]

yes the TK-566 is unfortunately rather Ringy.... SMO reflector, although according to tank007's site, the emitter should be a Q3. It also has a low PWM frequency that is noticeable... On my unit the hotspot is not as off centre as yours, however there's a minor tilt to the emitter on mine.

The one thing on this light though that's amazing is the front window. That piece of glass is DURABLE! my D10 has an abrasion blemish on it already, and its clipped safely away from change and whatnot... while the TK-566 sits IN the change and the window is completely flawless! The Anno is a different matter, but that lens is great.

 

[sb56637]

Yep, those rings are about normal for the TK-566-5. I noted the same thing in my review. Otherwise it's actually a very high quality light.

 

[mcnair55]

Yep, those rings are about normal for the TK-566-5. I noted the same thing in my review. Otherwise it's actually a very high quality light.

Cheeky advertising another forum,well out of order in my book.:rolleyes:

 

[scott2907]

Yes I don't think its a Q5 either, its much duller than my C3 P4. The tail switch is a little off centre too. I wonder if the seller is maybe buying QC throw-outs, this seems shocking even for a budget light. I just can't get over what a shame it is, if it is how it should be. Great feel, body. Worst beam I've seen. I didn't try to adjust the focus (I'm not really sure how anyway? Enlighten me?!) , I sold the light on to a very impressed noob !

 

[Surnia]

well the off centre parts are obviously not design elements ;)

very good light to get people started, it sure did for me.... Although I'd recommend the extension tube as well for a 2xAA config, there appears to be no perceivable difference in light output between the two setups, but the current draw is far lower on the double cell, and might be better for the batteries.

 

[^Gurthang]

This light will make a nice host for modding, if nothing else.