Lumens Factory HO-9: ANYBODY USE THESE ??

[jefflrrp]

Was wondering if the Lumens Factory lamp assemblies are reliable, specifically the HO-9?

Can I use them in a Surefire G3?
Will there be any gap between the body and the bezel while using
these lamps?

How does the HO-9 compare to the standard p90 LA?

Thanks. Your imput is greatly appreciated.

 

[waterboiler]

I am running one of these in my 9P at the moment on 2x17500's. I find its output in between the P90 and P91 say maybe about 130-140 Lumens ( just and eyeball estimate ). I have not played with it much on primary cells, as I like guilt free lumens too much. I tend only to keep primary cells around for backup when I drain my Li-ons.

I really do like this bulb as I find the P91 or EO-9 to hard on 17500 cells for safety or cell life sake. I would give the runtime as around 30 minutes but have not really done any long runs only shorther bursts of less than 2 minutes. My guesstimate of run times comes from needing to recharge about twice as often as I did with the P90 in the same setup.

I do not notice any gap with this bulb and have tried it in my G3 but I generally only run a P90 in there due to the heat. I also use the G3 as a bike light and find the P90 output sufficient and the longer runtime needed.

 

[Fusion_m8]

I'm using the HO-9 in my Surefire M2 with 2xRCR123s from AW. This combo is as bright as an M3 with the 125lumen MN10 lamp.

The HO-9 module fits precisely into the M2 bezel without any noticeable rattle.

 

[mdocod]

really strange, I responded to this a long time ago and it never appeared.

oh well...

it should work fine in the G3 with either 2x17500 or 3xCR123 cells, and will deliver about "140 surefire lumens" as opposed to the "105 surefire lumens P90"

 

[cernobila]

really strange, I responded to this a long time ago and it never appeared.

oh well...

it should work fine in the G3 with either 2x17500 or 3xCR123 cells, and will deliver about "140 surefire lumens" as opposed to the "105 surefire lumens P90"

mdocod, you are too modest, you should show your work more often.....ok, I will do it for you;

Cell configuration: 2x17500

Bulb Options:
LF D26 ES-9: 7W, 115 - 75 lumen in 73 minutes
LF D26 SR-9: 9W, 160 - 100 lumen in 51 minutes
LF D26 HO-9: 12W, 215 - 132 lumen in 40 minutes
LF D26 EO-9: 15W, 268 - 162 lumen in 30 minutes
SF P90: 9W, 151 - 94 lumen in 52 minutes
G&P G90: 9W, 151 - 94 lumen in 52 minutes
G&P D26 7.4V "DX 10W xenon": 9W, 153 - 95 lumen in 52 minutes (guess)
G&P D26 7.4V "DX 15W xenon": 10.5W, 175 - 108 lumen in 46 minutes (guess)
Pathfinder P90: 10W, 165 - 102 lumen in 47 minutes
WE D26 9V: 10W, 175 - 108 lumen in 46 minutes
Pila GL3 LA: 10W, 175 - 108 lumen in 46 minutes

Body Options:
Leefbody 2x18500 w/C tail and head, +SF compatible tail-cap/bezel. +++
Surefire [G2, 6P, C2, Z2, G2Z, M2] +1 cell extender ++(some extenders fit 17mm cells, some don't)
Surefire G3, 9P, C3, +++
Wolf-Eyes 9 series Raider (non-turbo) +++
Ultrafire/Superfire 3 cell: WF501C, WF502C, ++(some rare UF heads don't fit LF lamps)
Cabellas XPG 9V 3 cell +++
G&P 9P, T-9 +++
Pila GL3 ++

 

[mdocod]

wait a sec... now I know why it DIDN'T APPEAR!!!

This is a exact duplicate of a thread you started in the general flashlights section. I answered the question over there also, then must have found the thread here and thought it was the same one and tried to answer it again... Please.... don't post the same thing across the forum in many places.... it causes people like me to think we are loosing our minds!!! (just ask a moderator to move a thread if you post it in the wrong section)


oh.. and cernobila thank you for taking the time to reference the chart and paste it in... I get lazy sometimes, lol...I figured a simple quick comparison using the same "units" (surefire lumens) would suffice to answer the question.... Those lumens above I like to call "MDOCOD unit's."

 

[ampdude]

I have used an HO-9 at work every night since they came out. I run it on two 17500's in a Sure-Fire C3. No problems. Same with the P90 I also use for the same purpose.

 

[zx7dave]

I am running that bulb in a M3 non-turbo head / M4 body / SW02 tailcap powered by 17670 (x2). As a fan of the M4 body this is a great setup.

 

[mdocod]

I assume you mean the HO-M3 (seems to be the same bulb, or very similar, on a M3 compatible assembly)

 

[USM0083]

I'm running a HO-9 in a 6P with a Detonator extention and 2 x AW 17500. Performance is very good, with better throw and output than a SF P90. I've also tried a SR-9, which is roughly comparable to a P90 but with better throw. It is has noticeably less output than the HO-9, so it's my backup lamp assembly.

An EO-9 is a good alternative to a P91; less output, more throw and better runtime.

 

[Paul_in_Maryland]

When the HO-9 came out, Mike at Pacific Tactical Solutions made it his personal lamp of choice for his take-everywhere D26 Raider.

 

[cernobila]

When the HO-9 came out, Mike at Pacific Tactical Solutions made it his personal lamp of choice for his take-everywhere D26 Raider.

How about that, thats exactly what my Raider has in it, good combination of run time and output on two 18500's.....

 

[Sgt. LED]

I have one and don't use it, just can't stand incan light! Even at that brightness, I see too much yellow.

 

[ampdude]

I have one and don't use it, just can't stand incan light! Even at that brightness, I see too much yellow.

Well that sucks! I have the same problem with LED's, everything looks dark and gothic while at the same time I see abnormal amounts of glare and shadows. And you can't pick out details in anything for spit. Definitely not good in tactical situations and just is for crap all around. And for all the hubub about the forever bulb, they seem to be less reliable than incans in my experience. Plus, they get dimmer with use. Then there's the whole CRI thing. Shall I go on?

Want to let that HO-9 go for the price of postage? I'd sure use it.

 

[eshishlo]

I just tried out a set of AW 17500 cells in my D3 with this bulb. Wow!! I am slightly tempted to try the P91 just to see how that shines. I wasn't too happy with the HO-9 on primaries and switched back to my P90.

I think that LEDs are like digital cameras and incans are like film cameras. The quality and popularity of film was hard to surpass. I think that LEDs will eventually do the same when it comes to the general use of lights. But until then...lets burn some tungsten!!

 

[ampdude]

I would like to see some Lumens Factory bulbs, like the HO-9 and EO-9 without the frosting. Sure the beam would not be as nice for the whitewall hunters, but the beam would throw even better and there would be slightly better output as well. As much as I like the LF bulbs, I always feel like I'm not getting the output I could be getting because of the frosted bulbs. I even try to get unfrosted Surefire bulbs whenever possible.

 

[Fusion_m8]

I got one of these unfrosted lamps and it works a treat for close-medium range applications(re:nomoney's review), ironically the frosted LF HO-9 throws much further than these unfrosted ones.

I reckon reflector design plays a greater role in determining throw than bulb frosting.

I would like to see some Lumens Factory bulbs, like the HO-9 and EO-9 without the frosting. Sure the beam would not be as nice for the whitewall hunters, but the beam would throw even better and there would be slightly better output as well. As much as I like the LF bulbs, I always feel like I'm not getting the output I could be getting because of the frosted bulbs. I even try to get unfrosted Surefire bulbs whenever possible.

 

[ampdude]

I got one of these unfrosted lamps and it works a treat for close-medium range applications(re:nomoney's review), ironically the frosted LF HO-9 throws much further than these unfrosted ones.

I reckon reflector design plays a greater role in determining throw than bulb frosting.

I agree that reflector design plays a greater role. I see from the link that one has a P60/P90 type reflector. From my experiments it appears they both have some affect though. Frosting seems to affect overall output more than throw.

 

[yazkaz]

I have no experience with LF's D26 bulb replacements. However, when trying out the M-series bulbs it's determined that some earlier SF clicky switches won't power on the light as these switches can't handle high amperages. With the standard press-twist switch the lights can be powered on as usual.

I have also been told that Leef clickies are very compatible with these LF bulbs and that these clickies can handle amperages up to 4A, which LF's boss regards as "crazy."

So if you use the HO-9, just stick to the standard switch. If you need a clicky, then get a Leef type or an SF SW02.

 

[ampdude]

The Z57/Z61 switches have smaller gauge springs than the McClicky's. I've noticed an increase in brightness when moving up from the Sure-Fire E-series clicky to McClicky switches. Not to mention the better reliability and tailstand ability.

The Z58/Z59 clickies for the P/C series of Sure-Fire lights also have thinner gauge springs than the Leef Clickies. The Sure-Fire Z48 and Z49 switches as well as the SW01/SW02 have a heavier gauge spring that is about the same as the Leef Clicky. A smaller gauge spring will increase resistance and reduce brightness, but I've not had a problem with any of these thinner gauge Sure-Fire switches as far as powering up high amperage lamps.

The biggest problem is usually the protection circuit on lithium ion batteries which will trip if too much current is being attempted on smaller lithium ion batteries.

There is a point though where these SF switches with thinner gauge springs may heat up more than other kinds and that may cause problems.