MN10 in M3 head on an M4 Devastator Body

[Roger Sully]

How comes no one told me that if you turn this combo on it would go .....:laughing:
I usually don't mess too much with incans but when I looked through the box and saw the M3 head laying there next to the M4 body..I just couldn't help it. I must say that the MN11 does pour out a decent amount of incan goodness!

 

[kakster]

The M3 bulbs are designed to run on 3xCR123, the M4 is 4xCR123.

 

[Roger Sully]

So I'm not supposed to the using the mn11 in there either? See this is why I like the LED's...But since I already have it I might as well put it to work. Can anyone suggest which of the LF bulbs I could use that would put out the most light?
If i'm using 2 17670s will I get the full output of the EO-M3T? What about the IMR-M3 or M3T?

 

[Steve in SoCal]

1. Lumens Factory HO-M3: 320 Lumens Lamp Assembly for SureFire M3
2. Lumens Factory EO-M3: 380 Lumens Extreme High Output Lamp Assembly for SureFire M3
3. Lumens Factory IMR-M3 500 Lumens Lamp Assembly for SureFire M3 with IMR Batteries ONLY

• (For 3 x CR123A or 2 x 3.7V Rechargeable Battery

The other light assemblies you mention will not fit in the M3 head.

​

 

[mdocod]

With 2x17670 in the M4 body, you can run the HO-M3, EO-M3, IMR-M3 HO-M3T, EO-M3T, MN10, MN11, MN15, MN16 lamp options. (they must be coupled to the appropriate head, I've listed both M3 head (Z46) and turbo-head options there). The IMR-M3T should be avoided as it draws too much current for 17670 size cells.

The MN11/MN16 (2.7A) will be the brightest option for 2x17670s, followed by the EO-M3T/IMR-M3 (2.4A), followed by the EO-M3/HO-M3T (2.0A), followed by the HO-M3 (1.5A), followed by the MN10/MN15 (1.2A). Again, I have combined lamps in these recommendations that overlap the 2 head options you have there.

With 4xCR123 cells you need to stick to lamps that are specifically sold as being designed for that battery configuration.

Keep in mind that more power hungry bulbs don't always translate to better results in the field. if you application requires more throw then the highest powered lamp options are often not worth the power consumption and loss of runtime as they will produce floodier beam profiles within the same reflector size.

I suggest you try out a HO-M3T in the millennium turbo-head on the M4 with 2x17670 cells. This will give you about 45 minutes runtime and and great balance of throw and over-all output.

Eric

 

[Roger Sully]

Thanks for the input. this is the reason why lovecpf.
Going through the forums everyday is quite a learning experience.

 

[Fusion_m8]

I totally agree with mdocod. I find that the HO-M3T gives a much better hotspot and throw compared to the EO-M3T. My eyes could not detect any difference in brightness between the two. My DMM shows that the HO-M3T draws 2.12A at the tailcap while the EO-M3T is drawing 2.38A. The HO will be less stressful on the 17670s than the EO, thus prolonging battery life while giving the same performance.

HSG: Do not use the IMR M3/M3T with standard Li-On cells! Only use IMR cells with IMR lamps!

That being said, The IMR-M3T lamp with 2xIMR18650s in a FM 2x18650 body absolutely kicks @ss!!! Makes the HO/EO-M3T look ordinary....

 

[mdocod]

Hello Fusion_m8,

Technically speaking, all of the LF IMR bulbs can be run on properly sized protected LiCo cells, one just has to look at the operating current and match up large enough cells.

The IMR-M3T and IMR-9L are the "big beasts" of current draw in the LF lineup, but they are no more power hungry than a WA1111 or 64250 which people run on a pair of protected 18650s all the time, but those bulbs should not be run on anything smaller than an 18650. The IMR-9 and IMR-M3 are only ~2.4A (same as a EO-M3T), they should be paired with cells no smaller in capacity than a protected 18500 or 17670. IMR cells will deliver the best performance on all of these bulbs for output, and in reading around, it seems that the IMR-M3T really needs the IMR18650 cells to "wake up" to it's potential.

Eric

 

[angelofwar]

I would like to see a pic of an M3 head on an M4...I'm still trying to get myself an M4 body...

With out getting into a whole alot of different cell configs, the easiest would be to use three CR123's and a Z20 (single cell) spacer. Post a pic if ya can...I think an M3 head would look pretty cool on an M4 body!

 

[bstrickler]

I would like to see a pic of an M3 head on an M4...I'm still trying to get myself an M4 body...

With out getting into a whole alot of different cell configs, the easiest would be to use three CR123's and a Z20 (single cell) spacer. Post a pic if ya can...I think an M3 head would look pretty cool on an M4 body!

I'll take a pic of one today, if you want, but these will have to suffice for now:

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2668802&postcount=16
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2654537&postcount=14
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2775726&postcount=28

So I'm not supposed to the using the mn11 in there either? See this is why I like the LED's...But since I already have it I might as well put it to work. Can anyone suggest which of the LF bulbs I could use that would put out the most light?
If i'm using 2 17670s will I get the full output of the EO-M3T? What about the IMR-M3 or M3T?

You can use 2x17670's with the MN11. Runtime won't be too long though (change batteries once you start seeing noticeable yellowing. Another good test, if you're suspicious of the batteries being dead, is to shut the light off. If the batteries ares still good, the light will either shut off almost instantly, or have a small amount of dimming as the filament cools. If you can easily watch the bulb dim, when you shut it off, CHANGE THE BATTERIES. Otherwise, you risk over-discharging them.)


~Brian

 

[Dioni]

How comes no one told me that if you turn this combo on it would go .....:laughing:

You did it just like me when I mistakenly put a P60 in my 9P! :green:
For a while, 1/2 sec I think, I guess it delivered more lumens than a P91 running on IMRs! :laughing:

 

[angelofwar]

Thanks for the pic's, stricker! That looks wicked! When I get my M4 body, I'm definitely gonna try that set-up with an MN15 and Z20 battery spacer!

 

[mdocod]

Thanks for the pic's, stricker! That looks wicked! When I get my M4 body, I'm definitely gonna try that set-up with an MN15 and Z20 battery spacer!

The MN15 won't fit in a Z46 (M3) head. The tower length is too long. The MN10 is the short-tower equivalent that will run in the Z46 head.

Eric

 

[angelofwar]

The MN15 won't fit in a Z46 (M3) head. The tower length is too long. The MN10 is the short-tower equivalent that will run in the Z46 head.

Eric

Good catch, mdcod...I was getting a little ahead of myself! I've been using my MN15 in my M6 for awhile, and messing with my 918FA and my M3, and have been getting the bulbs mixed up...bulbs here and there, everywhere...you're completely right!

 

[Roger Sully]

You can use 2x17670's with the MN11.

I'm probably going to stick with this combo for now....OK mabe tikk next week. I though this thing was bright in the living room until i took it outside! Holy Smokes. oo:

 

[zygibajt]

The MN11/MN16 (2.7A) will be the brightest option for 2x17670s

Either MN11 or MN16 is hardly overdriven with 17670 batteries, I don't know why anyone is still recommending this set up. They both are overdriven even when using 17500 batteries that sug more under this load and it is only the question of time when they blow.

Having used the M3T and M4 for long time with variety of bulbs I recently tried M3 head with MN10 and MN11 and found the output very disappointing. It is not only the throw but M3 head somehow gives way less light and MN10 seems to be dimmer than MN15 at least the ones I tried.

 

[Bullzeyebill]

I have noted lower output reading, doing bounce with light meter, when I compare the MN10 and the MN15. The MN15 in a KT1 also shows more output than when used with the KT4. Some losses due to setback of reflectors in the M3 head and the KT4.

Bill