Need advice on Quark 18650 vs Quark cr123X2 runtimes & performance

H

Hawaiian Fire

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
17
I recently ordered a Quark 123^2. Found out today via e-mail that they are back-ordered for another 2 weeks (not including the 2/1 advertised ship date). :mecry:

I'm looking for some information on runtimes between 2 quality cr123 batteries and 1 quality 18650 battery (AW 2600mah). Maybe someone can direct me to some reviews on other lights where some runtime tests were conducted.

I would like to start using 18650 batteries, but the start-up cost for 2 batteries and a charger is about $50. Plus I would have to buy the 18650 tube and AA holster for another $30. That would pay for quite a few cr123 batteries.

I like how the Quark performs with a 17670 regarding higher initial output combined with a long run-time with diminishing output. Is it correct to assume that performance with an 18650 will have the same output, stay in regulation longer, and then have a longer unregulated runtime?
 
Last edited:
wingnut86

wingnut86

Banned
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
194
Location
MI
For ~$90, you could get 48 SF123a's. And those would last forever (if used in only that light).

But a rechargeable system is nice to have...Especially with primaries as a backup or storage method.
 
apontes

apontes

Newly Enlightened
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
139
I like how the Quark performs with a 17670 regarding higher initial output combined with a long run-time with diminishing output. Is it correct to assume that performance with an 18650 will have the same output, stay in regulation longer, and then have a longer unregulated runtime?

In a word: yes.
 
J

JaguarDave-in-Oz

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
907
Location
Australian bush
I would like to start using 18650 batteries, but the start-up cost for 2 batteries and a charger is about $50. Plus I would have to buy the 18650 tube and AA holster for another $30. That would pay for quite a few cr123 batteries.
How much do you use the torch? Woud 18650 be so much better for you than 17670? I have a number of quarks and run most of them on 17670. They seem to last for a fair time and I didn't have to shell out for the rather complicated and thin walled 18650 tube arrangement and I can go back to 2 x 123 primaries as a backup whenever I want. Yes, my charger and first two AW batteries cost forty bucks or so from 4sevens but I somehow feel that it was the best value battery purchase I've ever made.
 
H

Hawaiian Fire

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
17
On paper, 18650 batteries have 62% more capacity than the 17670 for what seems to me like a small increase in overall flashlight size. I would guess that this is true since they have the same chemistry and voltage. For that reason, I would prefer to use 18650 batteries over 17670.

two cr123 batteries are rated nearly the same as an 18650 (9.3wh compared to 9.6wh by my calculations). I wasn't sure how this relates to performance since the 2 cr123s would only have to provide around 1/2 of the current.

My usage is inconsistent. Most of the time I just need a light to aid in reversing the engine or initial scene evaluation. This is just seconds and sometimes minutes. Occasionally, we run into a situation where we have to hike in a trail to assist an injured hiker and this can take hours.
 
J

JaguarDave-in-Oz

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
907
Location
Australian bush
On paper, 18650 batteries have 62% more capacity than the 17670 for what seems to me like a small increase in overall flashlight size.
Sort of. The 17670 fits the original 2 x 123 battery tube so the torch stays short but stepping up to the special 18650 adapter tube makes the quarks almost as long as the 2 x AA versions and with the quarks there's not a lot of noticeable difference in brightness between 18650 and AA2 so I don't see a lot of advantage in doing that over buying an a aa2 and running it on cheap and easy to manage eneloops.

But to answer your original question from the run time graphs I've seen - you'll get appx 75 - 80 mins on 2 x 123 primaries before it goes "suddenly" dark or appx 90 minutes before a 17670 starts it's merry slide from full brightness which then takes a further ten or fifteen but you'd only go there in an emergency because you really need to charge them long before that. An 18650 should stretch those figures out for longer but once again really should be charged before it gets to that stage.
 
Last edited:
H

Hawaiian Fire

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
17
I guess that 'small increase in size' is really based on personal perception. For me, having a light that has the same max diameter and 1/2" longer represents a small size increase. Will someone direct me to the graphs where they show 75-80 minute performance with primaries (4sevens site states 108minutes on max)? Maybe this is a stupid question but.... 'Primaries' means cr123 batteries and not rcr123, right?

I haven't gotten any responses that addressed my question about how cr123s compare to 1 18650 battery. By extrapolating selfbuilts' data using a 17670 in a cr123^2 Quark, it appears that a Quark with an 18650 (with 62% more wh) will run around 145 minutes before 'its merry slide down'. But that seems to be a stretch.

Anyone have any actual data?
 
J

JaguarDave-in-Oz

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
907
Location
Australian bush
Sorry yeah, maybe it is only half an inch longer (though even that is too long for me when I can instead keep the original length and still have a single Li-Ion) but I did think I had read somewhere that the 18650 tube made the torch only a quarter of an inch shorter than the AA version but I may well be mistaken. I'd recommened you read the threads that mentioned the practical issues with the tube before you jump though.

I've never seen any graph of 18650 on that torch, only 17670. I think the graph for 2 x cr123a primaries was somewhere in the "4sevens quark round-up review". Obviously they are all R2 torches but I imagine the differences for the different battery types should remain in proportion with the R5.
 
C

cave dave

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 15, 2001
Messages
3,664
Location
VA
But to answer your original question from the run time graphs I've seen - you'll get appx 75 - 80 mins on 2 x 123 primaries before it goes "suddenly" dark ...

You must have been looking at the wrong graph. 2x123 primaries (aka disposable) will not suddenly leave you in the dark and the Selfbuilt measured runtime is 1hr 52min to 50%.

I think you were reading the 2x123 RCR (rechargeable) chart.

Selfbuilt review and runtimes:
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2992446&postcount=1
 
S

slowhand23

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
31
On paper, 18650 batteries have 62% more capacity than the 17670 for what seems to me like a small increase in overall flashlight size. I would guess that this is true since they have the same chemistry and voltage. For that reason, I would prefer to use 18650 batteries over 17670.

two cr123 batteries are rated nearly the same as an 18650 (9.3wh compared to 9.6wh by my calculations). I wasn't sure how this relates to performance since the 2 cr123s would only have to provide around 1/2 of the current.

My usage is inconsistent. Most of the time I just need a light to aid in reversing the engine or initial scene evaluation. This is just seconds and sometimes minutes. Occasionally, we run into a situation where we have to hike in a trail to assist an injured hiker and this can take hours.

I guess that 'small increase in size' is really based on personal perception. For me, having a light that has the same max diameter and 1/2" longer represents a small size increase. Will someone direct me to the graphs where they show 75-80 minute performance with primaries (4sevens site states 108minutes on max)? Maybe this is a stupid question but.... 'Primaries' means cr123 batteries and not rcr123, right?

I haven't gotten any responses that addressed my question about how cr123s compare to 1 18650 battery. By extrapolating selfbuilts' data using a 17670 in a cr123^2 Quark, it appears that a Quark with an 18650 (with 62% more wh) will run around 145 minutes before 'its merry slide down'. But that seems to be a stretch.

Anyone have any actual data?

Sorry, no fancy graphs but my Quark R2 18650 ran for 150 minutes on a Eagletac 2400 cell. Cell still measured 3.6v and plenty of light.
 
J

JaguarDave-in-Oz

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
907
Location
Australian bush
You must have been looking at the wrong graph. 2x123 primaries (aka disposable) will not suddenly leave you in the dark and the Selfbuilt measured runtime is 1hr 52min to 50%.
yeah sorry part of what I said was mixed up. I was looking at the right graph but I accidently said the "suddenly go dark" bit from where cos I stuffed up the wording between what battery does what in which voltage head (I'ev got one of each variety of quark head).

What I should have said was that according to the graph in the quark all-in review the 2 x 123 primaries give about 75 to 80 minutes before the brightness goes on a slippery slope (instead of saying they go dark, cos it's actually the 17670/18650 in the low voltage head that goes dark isn't it).

And just on the subject of runtime - whilst I'm sure there's a reason for the "standard measurment" to 50% brightness, I don't see the point of it when talking about one of these regulated torches. To me that doesn't tell the characteristic of the torch. If talijg performance "numbers" (as opposed to looking at graphs), for me it's better to state a runtime at full brightness then a second additional figure that describes how long it takes from the point of initial drop off to some defined point of low light, be it 50% or moonlight or whatever.
 
Last edited:
H

Hawaiian Fire

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
17
Sorry, no fancy graphs but my Quark R2 18650 ran for 150 minutes on a Eagletac 2400 cell. Cell still measured 3.6v and plenty of light.

Now that is what I was hoping to hear. Assuming the light was on max, the 18650 provided considerably greater runtimes than 2x cr123.
 

Similar threads

N
Replies
0
Views
929
nodoubt
N
L
Replies
2
Views
649
Cataract
Cataract
LightWalker
Replies
10
Views
1K
bfksc
bfksc
G
Replies
15
Views
4K
G
J
Replies
71
Views
23K
shark_za
S
Top