Olight SR95S-UT (SBT-70) Review: RUNTIMES, OUTDOOR BEAMSHOTS, VIDEO and more!

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
Thanks for confirming this. Very happy Olight is improving with proper temperature management.
Agreed, it is good to see in the SR95S-UT.

FYI, I have checked with Olight, and they have no plans to introduce thermal output management into the standard SR95 (SST-90) model.

Happy holidays everyone. :santa:
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
What a great review! I am torn between this light and the new modified light from saabluster 400cd and 1273 meters of throw. http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?350936-OSTS-TN31mb-Monster-Thrower
Indeed, Saabluster has done an incredible job of getting that much throw out of the TN31 build. I haven't seen this mod in person, but I've always liked the TN-series build.

That said, I also find the standard SR95 to be an incredibly powerful light, with it's higher overall output (i.e., brighter spill). It really comes down to what you are looking for in terms of size and beam pattern.
 

phantom23

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
2,044
if you were to choose which one would you purchase (remember on modified 31 you still new to purchase batteries but it is so bright)?
Which one? Modified TN31 produces about 3x less light than SR95S, it's just very concentrated into tiny but intensive hotspot.
 

hahoo

Enlightened
Joined
Nov 12, 2011
Messages
920
Location
north carolina
Which one? Modified TN31 produces about 3x less light than SR95S, it's just very concentrated into tiny but intensive hotspot.


how do you get close to 1200 lumens, being 3 times less than 2000 lumens ?

last time i checked thats not even twice ??
 

BLUE LED

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
1,921
Location
UK
I am in a similar position deciding between the Olight SR95S-UT and the moded TN31 XP-G2. I do like throw and will only be buying one. Tiny hotspot with more throw vs larger hotspot with more lumens. I am finding it hard to quantify.
 

Exilpatriot

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
3
So do I see this right, the only thing left about the SR95UT compared to the new version is its 'limited' status and perhaps a slight advantage on the efficiency?
I cannot help but think that I might have been one of Olight's test pilots. My hunch with the limited version is that Olight wanted to gauge the consumer reaction by offering both floody throw and max throw options. When looking back at the quickly diminished availability of the SR95UT after it came out it would seem it was quite a hit with users. Therefore Olight's step toward a more developed UT version? It's not an unusual practice of manufacturers, I'm aware if that but the relatively quick disappearance of the original UT and launch of the SR95S-UT leaves me with this bitter taste of having been fooled. I already know this kind of feeling from using Apple products hmmm:thinking: at this price range it's not precisely a flashlight that one upgrades on every new launch.

Anyway, I've been using mine for several months now and I can say it's one heck of a flashlight and I find myself using it in situations when other people would feel bad about grabbing for their keyring light. :grin2: And here is one of the major reasons why I find this light to be so perfect for me: Unlike the standard SR95 (and most other lights I know) the SR95UT is capable of illuminating things effectively but also discreetly within a wide range of distance using a ridiculously low amount of lumens. In fact, after the initial waoaa factor of shooting holes in the night sky on full power I developed a habit of using the low setting most of the times which is what, 68 Lumens or so? If not directly looking at it from the front it's virtually invisible to others. It's a bit like sniping. I always find it irritating to be surrounded by a massive ball of light when walking the dog or otherwise being out in the dark where people might be around. Likewise I don't like being disturbed by other night folks performing light shows without even being aware of it while I try to enjoy the darkness. So, the light itself is ace but the quick upgrade of the UT I don't like. :shakehead
 

firelord777

Enlightened
Joined
Jul 11, 2010
Messages
931
Location
USA
I am in a similar position deciding between the Olight SR95S-UT and the moded TN31 XP-G2. I do like throw and will only be buying one. Tiny hotspot with more throw vs larger hotspot with more lumens. I am finding it hard to quantify.

Indeed it is:)

Basically, it's what YOU want, both will make you happy. Which one will bring you the most happiness though is the right question:)

I have an SR95S-UT on hand, if you have any questions let me know:D
 

phantom23

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
2,044
how do you get close to 1200 lumens, being 3 times less than 2000 lumens ?

last time i checked thats not even twice ??
1147lm is a lumen rating for stock TN31 with hardly driven XM-L. Modded one has XP-G2 emitter which is less efficient and can't handle such high current. With a good heatsinking it may reach up to 500-600 lumens, not more. But if it's dedomed it'll be even less.
 

hahoo

Enlightened
Joined
Nov 12, 2011
Messages
920
Location
north carolina
1147lm is a lumen rating for stock TN31 with hardly driven XM-L. Modded one has XP-G2 emitter which is less efficient and can't handle such high current. With a good heatsinking it may reach up to 500-600 lumens, not more. But if it's dedomed it'll be even less.

so the modded tn31mb, your saying, will only have 500 lumens otf ?

and get over 400k lux?

im thinkin your wayy off base......
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
im thinkin your wayy off base......
Not necessarily. The XP-G2 is a very different beast from the XM-L. I don't know how well it performs at really high drive levels (i.e., out of speck, only possible because of the copper heatsinking in this case). But phantom23's estimate doesn't seem unreasonable to me (i.e., I would have thought ~600 OTF lumens at the high end too, given the specs for XM-L vs XP-G2). But there are a lot of variables at play here, so you'll have to wait until saabluster completes it and people provide lumen estimates.

In any case, lumens aren't really the issue here. Just like SR95S-UT has lower lumens but much greater throw than the SR95, I can imagine that such a heavily driven XP-G2 (with it's smaller emitter footprint) could provide greater throw at much lower total lumens.
 

DENGOH

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 13, 2011
Messages
69
Agreed, it is good to see in the SR95S-UT.

FYI, I have checked with Olight, and they have no plans to introduce thermal output management into the standard SR95 (SST-90) model.

Happy holidays everyone. :santa:

It looks like Olight already have this feature in SR91. Originally Olight spec SR91 High runtime to be 3 hours. It seems to be assuming ATM will kick in. Wonder how Olight decide which model to have this ATM feature.

Quote from SR91 manual as below:
"SR91 increased ATM(Active Thermal Management)function for improving the model's security, stability and
applicability under long time running on high illumination
level. This improvement will make the model be
advantaged as follows,
1.The model can control the current decreased smoothly
to slower inside temperature's rising, so that less heat
accumulated when ATM start up
2.Over-heat protection. When the temperature of head
inside is over 70℃, the circuit will decrease the current
automatically to avoid possible danger caused by high
temperature.
3.Anytime the model will keep 3 minutes running at it's
highest level and then start up the ATM function. You can
start the model again when you need the highest level for
illumination.
4.The runtime can be extended as 3 hours under high level
with ATM function.
Note: Please note the high level means the three
adjustable output's high output, highest level means the
three minutes' output when model running at high level
before ATM start up(just as item 3). The highest output will
be lowered when ATM start up automatically but it still
under high level output."
 

brightnorm

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 13, 2001
Messages
7,160
The potential for the SBT70 in smaller lights is interesting. A light like the Thrunite TN31, but with a 4x18650 body, might produce impressive results, even if not quite up to the massive beam of its bigger brother. Selfbuilt, do you see this as a possibility? (Photo from Selfbuilt's review)

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...8650)-RUNTIMES-VIDEO-THROW-BEAMSHOTS-and-more!

Brightnorm

TN31049.jpg
 
Last edited:

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
It looks like Olight already have this feature in SR91. Originally Olight spec SR91 High runtime to be 3 hours. It seems to be assuming ATM will kick in. Wonder how Olight decide which model to have this ATM feature.
Thanks for the info. I haven't tested a SR91, so didn't know it had that thermal management feature as well.

My guess would be that it is the lower mass of the SR91 (relative to the larger SR90, which shares the same SST-90 emitter) that triggered the use of a thermal management system. Since the SR95 is of good size, I presume they feel it can handle the heat (from the SST-90) appropriately. But the SBT-70 is a less efficient emitter being driven at higher currents (resulting in more heat), so they again opted to go the thermal management route. It would thus seem that this is a case-by-case basis, depending on the specifics of the thermal heatsinking mass and emitter.

The potential for the SBT70 in smaller lights is interesting. A light like the Thrunite TN31, but with a 4x18650 body, might produce impressive results, even if not quite up to the massive beam of its bigger brother. Selfbuilt, do you see this as a possibility?
I expect the SBT-90 would do quite well in any light with a deep reflector for good throw. But the other issue here is the drive current - in order to get the high lumen levels, you need to drive this emitter harder than the earlier SST-90 (or SBT-90). As you point out, you probably need at least 4x18650 to get that kind of sustained power (and even at that, it may not be enough to match the 6x18650 SR95S-UT).
 

jh333233

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
1,163
Location
Hong Kong
Standby Drain

Due to the electronic switch, there is always a standby drain when the battery is fully connected. I measured this as 38uA on my SR95S-UT sample. I don't know how the battery pack is configured – if it is one 7800mAh battery, then that would translate into 23.4 years before it would be fully drained. If it is instead composed of six 1300mAh batteries in a 3s2p arrangement, then that would be 7.8 years, and so on, and so on. Any way you slice it, this standby current is not a problem. Note that my original SR95 was 53uA in comparison (which is similarly negligible).

How would it be six 1300mah battery?
By the size of battery tube i guess it uses 18650
And i guess you have missed the "7.4V"
7.4V 7800mah would be 2*3.7V and 3*2600maH which is "Three parallel sets of Two cell in series"
Even ultrafire crap 18650 wouldnt have such low (real) capacity
---------------------
Just got mine today from a dealer
Costs $346-usd eq.
Almost nothing to be complainted except the exposed reflector due to weight-reducing cut on the bezel, which might be an issue for water-ingress or cleaning
Secondly, no IPX-7, couldnt play it while im swimming:shakehead
 

jh333233

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
1,163
Location
Hong Kong
And some more to say:
The beam is perfectly focused, a tight circle with no artifact, superb quality.
I have to say that so far this is the BEST light i have bought and it definitely worths it:thumbsup:
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
How would it be six 1300mah battery?
Yes, that is not likely - that line was just trying to imagine the wose-case scenario where the manufacturer was not listing the total capacity correctly. I agree the likely correct interpretation is what you propose - i.e. 7.4V would suggest 2s3p arrangment of 6x 2600mAh batteries, as you say.

For those wondering why, the reason is that you add the voltages in series for total voltage (i.e., 7.4V = 2x 3.6V). For charge capacity, you should add capacities in parallel (i.e., 7800mAh = 3x 2600mAh). So that would all make sense, giving you the original 23.4 year drain estimate I provided. Note however that some makers get a bit sloppy about this, and sometimes list the charge capacity of individual cells no matter how arranged. Nice to see Olight is apparently listing it correctly, so I'll remove the speculative text that followed.
 
Last edited:

jh333233

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
1,163
Location
Hong Kong
And not allowing users to use their own 18650 was a pity
I dont know whether this was a measure to prevent accident from happening
(Large current draw posses the risk of discharging the cell heavily or using wrong cell like RCRs, causing overheating or even explosion)
or simply protecting their profit by limiting the user to use their own battery stick
Tho it gives us simplicity like Apple Inc, simply plug the plug and wait when batts low
I would like to enjoy flexibility like Android.
First i could get my back-up or replacement cell easily, 2nd ive got a bunch of 18650 sitting in my flashlight storage.
Or under extreme condition like disaster strikes, the light itself named Search and Rescue, but then it couldnt provide the flexibility of power source
I wish i could even use 4-D cells like the Fenix TK70, if really needed
Still, this light is a behemoth.
------------------
A good news is, you can still use the light while the AC-charger is plugged in
I dont know whether this affects the battery life or not
i.e. Charging the batt with AC but then discharging the batt for LED
Or it has a seperate channel for that
Im unable to find it out since the battery tube is sealed along with the circuit
 
Last edited:

DENGOH

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 13, 2011
Messages
69
Can we use the flashlight while it is being charged at the same time? Is it not recommended by Olight?
 

CouldUseALight

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Messages
174
Can we use the flashlight while it is being charged at the same time? Is it not recommended by Olight?

You can, but the light is still running off battery, not the charge trickle. You might get 10-20 minutes more runtime while charging (don't quote me on this) ;)

Have to say, this is the best "big" flashlight I've come across in the odyssey so far, by rather a lot...love this thing for the combo it offers: throw, spill, runtime, levels, weatherproof, throws farther than I can make out with context, useful charge indicators, takes a beating...., and lighter weight than a couple of my other lights....what an amazing package :thumbsup:
 
Top