New LOGAN LED flashlight

[recDNA]

I'm very interested in this light but feel frustrated that there are no beam shots. I can't make an intelligent choice without them.
it would be great if curt could explain the expected brightness (in lumens) with primary vs. Li ion cell like imr16340. I WANT the 300 lumens even if only for a few minutes at a time.

 

[ElectronGuru]

Anyone have educated runtime guesses on each of the levels? Would like to see if I wan to a 6 or 7. If the regulation for level 7 is at least 1.5 hrs flat output I'll get that instead of a 6....

In the midst of testing now. Running #8 with a SF123 cell, its a half hour at max, followed by a full hour of what I would call high (so 1.5 hours of nearly flat), then a long gradually decline. Its at hour 5 and not quite in moon mode yet...

 

[easilyled]

In the midst of testing now. Running #8 with a SF123 cell, its a half hour at max, followed by a full hour of what I would call high (so 1.5 hours of nearly flat), then a long gradually decline. Its at hour 5 and not quite in moon mode yet...

Could you clarify in your testing that the max output on a SF123 cell at level #8 is much less than that with an RCR123 please.

This is what I found with my 2 Logan #8s in any case.

With both of them:-
Estimated lumen output on freshly charged RCR123 is about 300.
Estimated lumen output on brand-new SF123 is about 100.

 

[KDOG3]

Could you clarify in your testing that the max output on a SF123 cell at level #8 is much less than that with an RCR123 please.

This is what I found with my 2 Logan #8s in any case.

With both of them:-
Estimated lumen output on freshly charged RCR123 is about 300.
Estimated lumen output on brand-new SF123 is about 100.

Ugh. I hope this is not the case. That would mean their output claims are nowhere near what they are advertising. Doesn't sound right though.

 

[easilyled]

Ugh. I hope this is not the case. That would mean their output claims are nowhere near what they are advertising. Doesn't sound right though.

I already mentioned it in another thread and a few others with Logan #8 made similar observations.

 

[KDOG3]

Yikes. I hope it just a bad batch or something. Thats REALLY not good. I was very hopeful for this light. *sigh*

 

[easilyled]

Yikes. I hope it just a bad batch or something. Thats REALLY not good. I was very hopeful for this light. *sigh*

But you can still obtain 300 lumens with a rechargable, so why are you so disappointed?

In fact you can consider it as having more options this way. A lower level with a primary, and the level advertised with a rechargeable.

I don't think its a bad batch. I think one primary simply can't provide enough oomph for that kind of power.

I'm waiting for clarification from ElectronGuru though, since Curt_R never gave any answers in that thread.

 

[KDOG3]

Because thats not the way Peak has presented the light. They have us thinking that the advertised output is attainable on either primary or rechargeable. I don't like the idea of having to buy more stuff (RCR+charger) to get the advertised output.

But of course the jury is still out so lets see how it ends up....

 

[easilyled]

Because thats not the way Peak has presented the light. They have us thinking that the advertised output is attainable on either primary or rechargeable. I don't like the idea of having to buy more stuff (RCR+charger) to get the advertised output.

But of course the jury is still out so lets see how it ends up....

True, in fact it was in this thread itself that I questioned this. See my post #29 and the posts that follow it.

 

[ElectronGuru]

it would be great if curt could explain the expected brightness (in lumens) with primary vs. Li ion cell like imr16340. I WANT the 300 lumens even if only for a few minutes at a time.

I have no light measurement equipment, however, taking a pair of identical Logans and loading a fresh SF CR123A into one and a freshly charged AW IMR16340 into the other and doing a standard ceiling bounce test, there is a small difference in output, as would be expected from the small difference in voltage (3.0 vs 4.2). If the Logan is 350L with 4.2 volts, its believable that I'm seeing 300L with 3.0 volts. And the 'max' I refer to above is at this level.

Given the variety of high voltage choices in this size, the primary limit with this light is not voltage/battery but heat. Tailstanding, it runs for 5 minutes before I wanted to shut it down. In hand with the extra sinking, its more like 10, but thats still 2 shutoffs from heat before hitting the 30 minute point where 'max' becomes 'high'. These intervals are similar to other small powerful lights.

I would characterize the Logan as high performance with either cell. 4.2v options are just a bit more so. But given the extreme extended emergency runtime from the 3.0v SF cell (I'm at 12 hours and counting with my test), it would be hard to fault the performance and utility of using primaries in this package.

 

[KDOG3]

Thanks for responding. So the people who seem like they are getting only around 100L with a #8 probably have faulty units then? I can't wait to see runtime/output test on #6s' and hopefully #7s...

I also am holding out for confirmation that the multilevel switch WILL be produced.....

 

[easilyled]

Thanks for responding. So the people who seem like they are getting only around 100L with a #8 probably have faulty units then? I can't wait to see runtime/output test on #6s' and hopefully #7s...

I also am holding out for confirmation that the multilevel switch WILL be produced.....

I'm not so sure, that there was any faulty batch.

Its too much of a coincidence IMO that everybody with a Logan#8 has noticed this difference between the 2 cells and to many of them, its quite a significant one .

ElectronGuru has not taken any measurements and using the naked eye is prone to error because of the logarithmic nature of the way the eye perceives light.

What is a small increase to the eye, is a much bigger increase in reality in lumen output.

I did a ceiling bounce test with my Logans with primary CR123 and it was virtually identical to my PD-S which has been measured at about 120 lumens.

With a rechargable, the ceiling bounce was the same as my Olight M20 with SST-50 which was estimated to be about 350 lumens.

To the naked eye, 350 lumens does not appear to be all that much brighter than 120 lumens.

I think that the respective outputs with the 2 different cells should be measured with an integrating sphere. This is the only way to know for sure what is going on.

Anyway KDOG3, if you get one, do some ceiling bounce tests compared to some of your lights that you know the output for using both cells.

I'll be fascinated to see what you report.

 

[KDOG3]

Hmmm. I'm starting to wonder if it may be an issue with the driver itself - not being able to give the emitter THAT much current on 3.0v. I'm hoping that the other ones like the #6 I'm interested in will actually able to deliver advertised output since its much less work.... Hopefully someone will know what the #6s' and below ACTUALLY put out...

 

[fyrstormer]

I haven't done any formal testing, but I didn't see any difference between using an RCR or using a CR123 with my brass Logan #6.

 

[easilyled]

It only seems to exhibit this behaviour on level #8 as Galiphrey also observed in his post (#53)

I recall once that when I asked Don (McGizmo) to raise the high level of one my PDs many years ago to 750ma (he doesn't do that any more so don't request it) he warned me that I should use an RCR123 for this configuration as the primary would struggle to sustain the current needed.

Its probably no coincidence that the high level in the PD-series is about 500ma for which Don is happy to recommend either cell.

I'm pretty sure that the primary cell's voltage sags under a higher load and therefore is unable to pump the 1A required as Galiphrey observed.

I find it quite strange that curt_r, the initiator of this thread and guru of electronics at Peak, steadfastly refuses to comment on this at all.

It would be nice for him to clarify the situation for the sake of people that are buying the Logan #8 thinking that its the same with both cells,
because its obviously not.

Its really no big deal. I find the Logan great on a rechargeable for the spectacular output and also still very useful at the output level on a CR123 (equivalent to a PD-S)

 

[KDOG3]

I just tried to call RMSK twice and got now answer on either line. I may try to call Peak directly to order a number 6.

 

[Beacon of Light]

Let us know how it works out.

 

[KDOG3]

Ok folks here's the deal: There is some confusion about the current draw, etc. I just talked to Curt and let him know about all the mayhem here in this thread. At some point with in the next few days he is going to come in here and post a chart of all the current draws from both the battery and what the LED is getting in regard to both primaries and RCRs.... Basically there are 2 sets of outputs, one for primaries and one for RCRs.

*I will let him clarify all this, don't take my comments as fact, I just got off midnite shift and my mind is still mush so I could most certainly have something wrong!*

He seemed like a real nice guy so lets calm down and be cool with him....

I ordered a number 7 from him 🙂 heheh.... Which he said I'd get about 110 lumens out the front on a primary, obviously more with an RCR....

Interestingly enough there will actually be a level "0" for those who want ultra sick long runtimes.

The GOOD news is actually GREAT news. The multilevel switch WILL be produced in the next month or so and will be a THREE level switch. Awesome. The settings will be variable. As I gather it the user will be able to configure the switch with certain percentages of output as they desire. I can't WAIT for that sucker to come out.

Now the agonizing wait begins - My light probably won't be here until next Friday. *sniff* All I got is you guys' pictures to drool over.....

 

[Beacon of Light]

Very sweet, any idea if the switch will work for all types of Mountain series lights like Eiger? I'm going to have to call him and order a few lights now.

Ok folks here's the deal: There is some confusion about the current draw, etc. I just talked to Curt and let him know about all the mayhem here in this thread. At some point with in the next few days he is going to come in here and post a chart of all the current draws from both the battery and what the LED is getting in regard to both primaries and RCRs.... Basically there are 2 sets of outputs, one for primaries and one for RCRs.

*I will let him clarify all this, don't take my comments as fact, I just got off midnite shift and my mind is still mush so I could most certainly have something wrong!*

He seemed like a real nice guy so lets calm down and be cool with him....

I ordered a number 7 from him 🙂 heheh.... Which he said I'd get about 110 lumens out the front on a primary, obviously more with an RCR....

Interestingly enough there will actually be a level "0" for those who want ultra sick long runtimes.

The GOOD news is actually GREAT news. The multilevel switch WILL be produced in the next month or so and will be a THREE level switch. Awesome. The settings will be variable. As I gather it the user will be able to configure the switch with certain percentages of output as they desire. I can't WAIT for that sucker to come out.

Now the agonizing wait begins - My light probably won't be here until next Friday. *sniff* All I got is you guys' pictures to drool over.....

 

[KDOG3]

Oh I didn't ask if the switch would work with other lights. But I guess you'll find out if you call! I forgot to ask him if the multilevel switch will allow each setting to stay when you release or if they are momentary only. Hopefully you can get each setting to stay on.