Just received Sunwayman M10A & M10R

[Ray_of_Light]

I received today the new Sunwayman M10A (AA) and M10R (CR123), I wanted to post my first impressions.

I am after ring controlled lights, as I consider the best interface to control the brightness of a flashlight, so I am trying to acquire all the possible models available.
The M10A is, in my opinion, a masterpiece of a flashlight, if you exclude the clips from the evaluation. Thick and uniform anodise, properly designed reflector for an XP-G LED (no doughnut hole in the beam), LED well centered. The selection of levels is properly done this time: Low is 3 mA, Med is 350 mA and High is 2 Amp from the battery. The converter is of very high quality, at the par of the one in the JetBeams. I tested the flashlight with Ni-MH, alkaline and LiFeS battery, and it works fine with all three chemistries. The operation of the controlling ring is absolutely perfect. In my opinion, the new M10A could be easily declared the best commercial AA flashlight of 2010.

The M10R R5 is replacing the old M10 model with the XR-E R2. The biggest gripe with the old M10 was the improperly chosen brightness levels. Well, in the new M10R the levels are selected with attention and I am satisfied of the consistency.

On the negative side of things, other than the clip, which is the standard clip-on from Sunway, there is to note the absolute incompatibility of the M10R with RCR123. While with the old R2 model a 4.2 V Li-Ion was producing an inconsistent operation of the controlling ring, in the new R5 model will immediately blow up the output MOSFET.

As I will use more the two new M10 flashlights, I will post more findings. For the moment I just wanted to share my sense of approval for those lights.

Regards

Anthony

 

[Light Brite]

Agreed, the precison of the control ring and finish is impressive. Bascially a well made light but the Li ion compatibility issue and deep push to operate the switch in the M10R keep if from being just about perfect. Ok, could do without the strobe too!

 

[grunscga]

Wait, I'm confused...all of the sales sites list the old "R2" M10R with a voltage range of 0.9 - 3.2V, and the new "R5" M10R with a voltage range of 0.9 - 4.2V. Are you saying that the new "RCR-friendly" voltage listing is wrong?

I am also interested in the ring UI, and the craftsmanship on these lights sounds excellent, but I absolutely will not buy a light that doesn't support rechargeables. With all the Li-ions I have sitting around, that's just asking for trouble...

 

[Ray_of_Light]

Wait, I'm confused...all of the sales sites list the old "R2" M10R with a voltage range of 0.9 - 3.2V, and the new "R5" M10R with a voltage range of 0.9 - 4.2V. Are you saying that the new "RCR-friendly" voltage listing is wrong?

I am also interested in the ring UI, and the craftsmanship on these lights sounds excellent, but I absolutely will not buy a light that doesn't support rechargeables. With all the Li-ions I have sitting around, that's just asking for trouble...

I know. But when I placed an AW123 in it, it blew up immediately. I am not going to repeat the test on another one.

Anthony

 

[Fleetlord]

I received one earlier this week.

It's defective. It flashed out and went dim after about 10 cycles.

I was running it on an Energizer CR123. Tried three different batteries. All were dim output after the "flash".

Control ring still functioned, just all modes were very dim.

I sent it back and I'm considering other options. I'm not impressed and I don't want this to happen to be again outside of the exchange period from the supplier.

Is it junk? Design flaw? Fluke incident? Why would this failure happen on primaries?

 

[liquidsix]

I got mine about two weeks ago from batteryjunction. Hands down I think it's the best light I've ever owned. It has great form and function. I just hope the 40 lumens for 10 hours is true! I haven't tested it yet, I'm actually just waiting for a review. It's a pretty good amount of light coming out at that level. I'm just amazed my old jet-I puts out the same amount of light and eats the battery in 50 minutes. Based on self built's review of the m10r, and comparing it to the med and high of my quark AA, I think 40 lumens is about accurate.

The selector ring feels great though mine's starting to get a bit dry. I haven't attempted to disassemble the head to lube up the ring yet.

The clip is garbage. In the next iteration they should just go with a sturdy bezel down screw on mclux style clip.

All the grooves and fins collect dirt and lint

The only other thing: I've been a bit spoiled by the neutral and warm quarks lately, it would be nice to have that option in this light.

 

[jsr]

The M10A and M10R are simply beautiful looking lights to me. I'm so attracted to them for their aesthetics and am curious to try a magnetic ring light. However, the clip is discouraging, as are the DOA or shortly thereafter issues, and the lack of Li-Ion support. I have a stockpile of CR123s, but those are for emergencies (and my wife, who isn't disciplined enough to recharge batteries), so I use all Li-Ions for 123-size. I hope it was a fluke issue with the driver and not that the circuit doesn't support R123s, which would be a shame for the M10R. The M10A still seems very promising. The only two 1xAA lights I'm interested currently are the M10A and Jetbeam BK135a...just wish I had more money.

 

[Ray_of_Light]

Some more findings today. The head of the M10R works fine on the M10A; it screws fine on the body of the AA flashlight, and produces just little less light.

I didn't try the opposite, as I already blew up one of my M10Rs. Where I live, to ship back the flashlights to the dealer, costs little less than the lights itself.

All in all, it seems that the both M10 uses the same circuit for 1 to 3 Volts power. The instruction leaflet included with the M10R specify 0.9 to 4.2 V range, but at 4.2 Volt the flashlight "flashed" and went dim on all levels. I have alot of spares for the M10R now.

The leaflet of the M10A doesn't specify the voltage range, it just says "Alkaline, Ni-MH or Lithium" battery.

I verified the flux specified in both leaflets are "true" emitter lumens, except for low, where we the output flux is close to 1 lumens instead of the 4 specified.
The flux specifications of the previous M10R-R2 were completely mismatched instead.

Regards

Anthony

 

[specimen]

I feel strange for your case.

I use 14500 with M10A R2(yes it R2 not R5) that was not supported.

It still work fine.

So it quite strange that your R5 version that was officially support this kind of batt cause problem.


The support team of Sunway make me feel good when I contact them by mail.

They reply my mail in hour, not day and very sincere answer.

They try to help but for some limitation, they let me know and not give me the fake information.

Before I send their the mail I decide not to buy their product more but after communicate with their support, I return to be their customer again.

I know that this is not the best product, but for me this is the first brand in my choice.(if their price more friendly :laughing: :laughing: :laughing

 

[Phaserburn]

Got my M10R R5 yesterday and decided to risk the CR123 vs R123 question. The light functions with no issues using both chemistries. Here's what I observed:

Current draw: (lo/med/high)

CR123: 30ma/190ma/890ma
R123: 40ma/260ma/520ma

Brightness: (lo/med/high, in lux) - remember that these readings are totally arbitrary in distance and conditions (room was lit, around 2ft) and are only intended to compare identical readings for the same light with different batteries.

CR123: 30/2050/8200
R123: 31/2590/6300

So. What I saw was that the CR123 is brighter on high than the R123; this surprised me, so i did the testing twice. The R123 is noticeably brighter on med, and both batteries produce a very low low. Sunwayman has stated that the light is direct drive on R123, so it should be brighter I would think. Perhaps my R123 sucks? Its and AW, but I will try current draw readings again tonight using another AW cell, just to be sure of what I saw.

Having said that, I like the distance between levels much better on CR123s, and will use those. The R123, with dimmer High and brighter Med isn't as well spaced at all.

Anyone else have similar observations? I really like this light quite a bit, and am overall very pleased with it. The beam is flawless and a bit different than many XPG beams in that it has a bright transition zone between the hotspot and spill, producing a bit more throw but very useful beam. No donuts here.

 

[Beamhead]

Phaserburn perhaps the RCR123 is driving the LED into saturation on high?

 

[Phaserburn]

Phaserburn perhaps the RCR123 is driving the LED into saturation on high?

Nope, don't think so. I've just tried 3 different AW R123s, and all are giving the same current draw results as stated above. Odd; I thought XPGs had lower vf's, which would result in a higher current if direct driven from a li-ion cell. Am I missing something here? If the led was being driven seriously, the current draw would be higher.

Actually, 520ma is a nice draw on an R123; decent runtime, I would think an hour or a little more. The mid level isn't bad either, just not as much difference between med and hi as on primaries. Low is still very low.

:shrug:

 

[sawlight]

After seeing this post, the actual manufacturer come in and stand behind his product, I am just impressed. I have looked, every day, at an M10R for the past 3 weeks on Going Gear. When I finish with this post, I am going right over and buying one.

That was first class.:thumbsup:

I agree, that is VERY impressive! I looked at the lights, have read about the problems and dismissed it as something I didn't want anyway. I don't like the UI myself.
But to see a manufacture come on like that, makes me want to rethink that choice! Glad to see someone eager to find problems so they can sort them out!:welcome: