Malkoff Devices vs. Inretech Quadlight

[jerry i h]

I cranked up my credit card (not to mention permission from you-know-who), and got both of these and stuck them into Maglites, which I also had to purchase separately. I have played around with them, and these are my initial impressions. The Quadlight is certainly brighter, but I prefer the Malkoff in other aspects. Final judgement: draw, both are very worthwhile. Hey, why not buy one of each?

1) I have only had these for a few days, and these are first impressions only; particularly, I have not done a battery drain test, yet.
2) do not have a camera, so cannot supply beamshots or pictures of the modules (sorry 'bout that)
3) both companies shipped promptly, and I received my order in about 2 weeks, to California. These are not commercial companies, and the packaging is likewise not commercial quality. Do not be surprised when you receive your stuff informally stuffed into a plastic baggie and jammed into brown, cardboard box addressed with a ballpoint pen.

http://www.inretech.net/
Quadlight
4-D cell Maglite, 640 lumens advertised, 4 x K2
total purchase price $105

http://www.malkoffdevices.com/
Drop-In Module for 2-3-4 D-Cell Maglite Flashlight
2-3-4 D-Cell Maglite, 240 lumens advertised, 1 x Cree
total purchase price $97, but this includes 2 optional reflectors and the copper heatsink

MECHANICS
The Quadlight was rather frustrating to install: it took a few attempts before the module caught the Maglite threads and screwed in. The Malkoff also had a drawback: you have to either cut off the neck of the stock reflector or buy an optional pre-cut reflector. The Malkoff retains the focusing ability, albeit at a lower range of focus, but the Quadlight cannot be focused at all: you discard the stock reflector for 4, smaller, fixed focus reflectors.

HALO
Despite the unusual optics of the Quadlight, I was delighted to discover that it still had the large, useful halo of the original Maglite. However, it was spotty and not uniform; worse, it has a dimmer, larger outer halo that is even more uneven, but much of this more or less disappeared at a distance of a few feet. The Malkoff has a mild gradient, but is circularly symmetrical. I also note that the Malkoff beam is much more uniform with the stippled reflector, and I recommend you buy one.

HOT SPOT
When I de-focused the Malkoff to match the sizes, the Quadlight clearly put out more light, but the focus is fixed: you cannot change it like the Malkoff. However, it looked like four smaller circles attached, and backing up a few feet did not reduce this effect. Also, the K2's were not well matched: one has a distinct orange hue, and another has a slightly lower output. The result is that one side of the square hot spot is dimmed noticeably. The color of both are nice and white, but I detect a slight blue tinge in the Quadlight.

DISTANCE
Both did a commendable job of illuminating neighboring rooftops. However, for a tree 4-5 stories tall one block over, neither one worked, but both a rechargeable Coleman halogen spot and 6D xenon Maglite light up the tree satisfactorily. I also realized that I did not do a distance of the Malkoff plain vs. stippled reflector, as the maker says that the stippled reduces throw, and all these comparisons are with the stippled reflector.

WHICH IS BETTER?
Both come surprisingly close to a 55 watt Coleman halogen rechargeable spot, and the Quadlight was much closer. The Quadlight is clearly more powerful, but the Malkoff is smaller (I stuck it into a 2D, so it is just a regular sized flashlight), the beam quality is better, and you can still change the focus. In fact, it is so bright, that I usually use it totally defocused; it still has the dead zone in the middle, but the light in this state is quite useful and pleasing. Push; deal another round.

NOTE
Over time, I have found that when you have specialty items like these with special qualities not to be found in standard commercial offerings being manufactured by one person or small, private group, it is better to buy one sooner rather than later. Who knows at what point that person or group will simply decide to stop. You should try to avoid a Homer D'Oh moment.

 

[Bullzeyebill]

Try the Malkofff in a 3D mag and see if that makes a difference. Also, are you using alkaline's or NiMh's.

Bill

 

[Gunner12]

The Malkoff uses a Seoul, not a Cree. It is driven at 600 mA with 2D cells, 1000 mA with 3D Cells, and more with 4D cells. That is about a 60 Lumen difference at the LED.

I wounder how much the Quad light would put out with 4 Seoul P4s or Luxeon Rebel 100s?

 

[lumenal]

I've got one of the original Malkoff drop-ins, and I tested it with 2,3, and 4 D Mags.

The more batteries, the more voltage, the brighter the light. I stuck with the 4-D.

I originally used the stippled reflector, for a beautiful beam, and then finally modified the stock smooth reflector. And went WOW!

There is a huge difference in throw between the two.

After using the smooth reflector, and then changing to the stippled, I immediately went back to the smooth reflector.

The Malkoff is way more impressive with the smooth reflector. :twothumbs

And one more thing.

The stock plastic Mag window blocks alot of light.

I got a mineral glass window for my 4-D, and noticed a substantial increase in the already amazing throw.

I didn't believe it 'till I saw it.

Do yourself a favor and get a mineral glass, soda-lime, or UCL window for your Malkoff.

 

[arty]

I have Malkoff in a 3D with an LDF lens. How smooth is the output with the smooth reflector and how useful is the spill?
Have you seen any loss in output of the LED with a 4D host over time? I have been hesitant to use mine in a 4D because I wondered if that would exceed the limits of the Seoul and produce too much heat.
I raelly like the output with the 3D and the LDF for walking the dog at night, but I'd like more runtime and would get that with the 4D.

 

[lumenal]

Arty - I haven't noticed any decrease in output at all while using the Malkoff 4-D/smooth.

But I use mine for spotting; I rarely have it on for more than say 10-15 minutes at any one time. When I have, the head and the top of the battery tube get warm, indicating good heat-sinking.

I talked to Gene on the phone, and he told me he tweaked the driver and circuitry to accomodate 6 volts (4 D cells), but no more than that.

He said if the Seoul gets too hot it's tint will shift to a very blue output, and mine has never done that. (Thanks to Gene's excellent heat-sinking).

The smooth reflectored Malkoff is about the same as a stock MagLED, but at least 3 times brighter. (Probably more).

Smaller, but intense hotspot, with very useable spill. Not a perfect white-wall hunter's beam, but certainly acceptable. For walking the dog, I'd imagine that stippled reflector is perfect. Now, if you want to see further out, then the smooth reflector is the way to go.

I've gotten used to handling the 4-D, although the 3-D used to be my favorite D-sized Mag. (The 2-C is my absolute favorite sized Mag).

I've gotten used to the weight of the 4-D, and besides, I can do curls with it to stay in shape! :laughing:

 

[martonic]

I've gotten used to handling the 4-D, although the 3-D used to be my favorite D-sized Mag. (The 2-C is my absolute favorite sized Mag).

I've gotten used to the weight of the 4-D, and besides, I can do curls with it to stay in shape! :laughing:

Don't forget that with a piece of Schedule 4 (1") PVC pipe you can fit 4 "C" cells into a 3D mag - as bright as the 4-D but smaller and much lighter.

 

[jerry i h]

Battery Drain Test

I loaded both up with cheapie, generic alkalines on sale from Walgreen's. With such high outputs of light, I was concerned with battery life, since I wanted to know how hard I could lean on them in a pinch. Well, both passed with flying colors, as well they ought since they use good old-fashioned D cells and not penlite batteries or those ridiculous CR123's.

The first night, I stopped the test at 6 hours because it was bedtime. I noticed that for the first 2 hours, the Quad ran warm to the touch, whereas the Malkoff was more or less ambient temp. At the end, both were still giving decent, if weaker, light (this is where I wish I had a measuring instrument, and I could tell you what % is decent). The Quad's light dropped off slightly faster than the Malkoff, and at 6 hours the Malkoff was giving more light by a noticeable margin. Both seemed to give steady, strong light for the first couple of hours before starting to gradually taper off.

The next night, I continued the test because I wanted to see what happens to the modules when the batteries got weak. They had an overnight rest, so do not take the combined runtimes as total, continuous runtime all in one shot. Also, it is a matter of personal preference as to what point the batteries need changing. Although they were no longer blindness-inducing, they were still much brighter than the other flashlights I had. I judged the batteries to be exhausted when the light was noticeably dimmer than a 2D powered Ministar1. The Malkoff lasted for 3 more hours, and the Quad went for 4 1/2 hours before giving up the ghost. Out of curiosity, I continued the test to see how the batteries finally die. I stopped the test at 5 1/2 hours, and both still had some life left.

The third night, I continued the test. I was still able to squeeze out 4 hours of severely reduced light before I stopped the test. Even in this weak state, they both still worked as plain LED flashlights, not unlike Everled or a Ministar1. I never did manage to drain the batteries into total darkness, but they did get really dim. Here, I was concerned with the mod going 'POINK' unexpectedly, leaving me in the dark. In this case, both satisfied my concern. I was delighted to learn that both dimmed gracefully, and give you plenty of warning when the batteries need replacing.

Both are definitely worth your money. They will cost you a c-note each, but I was totally satisfied with both mods and think they are both definitely worth it. If push comes to shove, I lean towards the Malkoff, but only by a small margin; fortunately, I was able to afford both. I should mention, since I dropped it and almost broke it, that the Quad comes with a glass lens (at least it sounded like it when it hit the ground). However, I kept the stock, plastic lens.

 

[lumenal]

Don't forget that with a piece of Schedule 4 (1") PVC pipe you can fit 4 "C" cells into a 3D mag - as bright as the 4-D but smaller and much lighter.

Yeah, I'd like to do that.

I tried it once, but there is no way that tailcap is going back on without a hydraulic press!! :duh2:

I tried reversing the spring, and read numerous threads offering different ways to accomplish this, but was still unclear exactly what to do. :shrug: Obviously the spring needs to be modified. And then someone said to remove the annodizing from the tailcap. And then something about tin foil. See what I mean?

I didn't feel like experimenting, so I went with the 4-D.

 

[jerry i h]

I finally finished my comparison; sorry for the delay. The Malkoff was in a 2D Mag, and the Quad was in a 4D. I only had one 4D, so I had to swap out the Quad to see how the Malkoff did with 4D; hence, I was unable to make direct comparisons but settled for a relative measure against a Coleman halogen rechargeable spot. Powered by 4D, the Malkoff was certainly brighter by a noticeable but not dramatic margin than in a 2D. It was still less bright than the Quad.

I can state that both mods can be successfully undone, and then subsequently re-installed properly; this is not a trivial matter, as I am rather klutzy in such matters. To undo the Malkoff, you just use a pair of needle nose pliers in the 2 holes and pull rather firmly. I can also state that these items will survive, both assembled and in the undone state, when you drop them rather hard accidentally onto the floor.

When I swapped the stippled and smooth reflectors for the Malkoff, the difference was noticeable but small. When cranked all the way down, the smooth was more uneven. When totally de-focused, the stippled had a rather less dramatic dead zone. In between, there was little difference between the two reflectors. When focused on a flat wall diagonally across the street, the smooth had a tighter hot spot by a small margin; the difference was noticeable but not dramatic. If you get the Malkoff, I suggest you get both pre-cut reflectors, and decide for yourself, since they only cost a few dollars.

I like both mods very much. I like the Quad because it is brighter, and I like the Malkoff because it is more versatile. I should also say that these 2 guys will spoil you for flashlights. I have already decommissioned several flashlights, and more will surely follow. My only concern is that at a c-note each, it is a major problem if they grow legs and walk away (which is the same problem with the flashlight that has an Everled).