brightnorm
Flashaholic
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2001
- Messages
- 7,161
Incandescent lights still live and can do things that are (so far) impossible for LEDs. Even though I am a LED lover I can still appreciate the unique qualities of some incandescent lights, particularly this one:
_________________________________________________________
INITIAL COMMENTS & OBSERVATIONS
I recently received the rechargeable, fully regulated TL-R11 (Regulated Tigerlight FBOP with WA111) from JS (Jim Sexton). It has been around for awhile, though in limited production, and this is the first time I've been able to get my hands on one. Even though I tend to be a tough judge of lights I have to say that this light is a true marvel, with a combination of performance and features that I have yet to see equaled, let alone surpassed, by any other similar-sized incandescent light I have used, including the M6-R. Aside from multiple brightness levels, I judge incandescent lights using similar criteria as I do with LED lights. I want superlative brightness in a beam appropriate for my use along with true non-dimming regulation in the smallest possible package.
The TL-R11 uses eight low-self-discharge Eneloops which provide a nominal 9.6v. Measuring at the charging terminals will show about 10.4v fully charged, down to about 9.2 after a period of steady running but this is not the voltage applied to the bulb. The Willie Hunt LVR3K regulator cuts it down to 7.2 volts DC-equivalent exactly, and holds it there regardless of pack voltage. As long as the battery voltage is above 7.2 v, then 7.2 volts is what the lamp sees. Since the end of cycle voltage of an 8 cell pack is 7.2 volts, the end result is a light which does not dim at all over its run time.
Further, the lamp will last longer than an unregulated 6 cell TL because it has soft-start and is always at 7.2 volts, vs. the 7.6 volts starting voltage of an unregulated TL. The WA1111 should last for about 12-15 hours and about 40 hours from the WA1274.
Selectable beam configuration is another advantage of this light. The TL-R11 came with a MOP 1940 reflector which provided a perfect compromise between throw and spread, but I ended up preferring a smooth 1940 for its exceptional throw which still retains decent beam spread. One characteristic of the beam is its unusual "whiteness", surpassing almost every other incandescent light I have used including the M6/MN21 with fresh batteries (or M6-R). It is also brighter and whiter than the regular Tigerlight with high capacity battery running a WA1111. Jim suggests that is because the other Tigerlights may have lost some brightness. Tonight I double-checked using ceiling bounce, with my long-suffering girlfriend serving as a witness. In sheer brightness (ceiling bounce) it is the equal or near-equal of the M6/MN21 and the smooth 1940 reflector projects a beam of white fire.
Surefire conservatively rates the M6/MN21 at 500 Torch lumens on fresh lithium primaries, but observations made over the years, including those of JS strongly suggest torch lumen output closer to 630 Lumens. JS believes the TL-R11 puts out a steady 570 Torch lumens over its entire 41 minute run. The fresh M6 is only 11% (or less) brighter than the TL-R11, too small a difference to be seen except in direct A-B comparison. Frankly, my GF and I were unable to see any difference at all, even in A-B comparisons when I retested the lights this evening.
INDOOR BEAM TESTS
My indoor beam tests (sorry, no camera) ranged to about 27 feet in my living room. They included the "infamous" white wall test and shining the light at a variety of objects; furniture, walls of books, etc. I also had access to a 60 ft long room with white walls and no furniture, truly a white wall hunter's paradise, but still too short a distance to really put the M6-R and Tl-R11 through their paces. In every test the potted WA1111 in its smooth 1940 reflector cut through the MN21's beam with searing brilliance, but still retained reasonable spill. Having this brilliant beam for 41 non-dimming minutes was an unexpected luxury. The outdoor tests came next.
OUTOOR VERTICAL THROW TESTS
My densely urban city makes the usual horizontal distance testing very difficult, so I have developed my so-called "vertical throw tests". I select a spot on a tall building and count the number of floors, conservatively allowing 10 feet per floor. Then I pace out the horizontal distance from that building using a stride-matched pedometer, or just counting strides (average length is about 3 feet but I conservatively rate them as 2.75ft). When I have my distance and height, I use Pythagoras to derive the hypotenuse, which equals the total distance of the test. Accuracy can't be exact but is close because I measure very carefully. I try to enlist the services of at least one witness, usually more.
In the past I have tried using a laser rangefinder, but unless I'm able to get quite far from a low aim point, the severe vertical angle causes inconsistent readings. There are other difficulties. For example, in VT Test 2 (below) even though the 335 ft distance and (relatively) low 160 ft aim point would suggest an accurate rangefinder measurement, the fact that I had to stand at a very severe horizontal angle from the objective made the rangefinder measurement unreliable. Sorry for such a long-winded explanation but those who live in an ultra-congested high-rise city like NYC (Manhattan) will understand the problems.
I was able to perform one "normal" throw test with distance from a tree determined by rangefinder.
VT TEST 1
Concrete-colored wall
33 paces x 2.75 = 90 ft
17 floors = 170 ft
Hypotenuse = 192 ft
The M6-R's beam covered 3.5 – 4 floors with an impressively bright and white spotlight-like beam.
The TL-R11's beam covered about 2.5 floors with a very intense "hot" white beam. When superimposed upon the M6-R's beam it cut through it like the proverbial "hot knife through butter".
VT TEST 2
Dark brick-colored wall
122 paces x 2.75 = 335 ft
16 floors = 160 ft
Hypotenuse = 371 ft
The M6-R's beam was diffuse, not bright.
The TL-R11's beam was not clearly delineated, but was quite white and bright despite the severe (non-perpendicular) horizontal angle.
Throw Test 3 (non-vertical)
Tree: beam height (estimated) 20-30ft
Rangefinder distance to tree: 93 yds (279 ft)
I was able to perform this horizontal throw test with tree distance determined by rangefinder. Aim point height is estimated at about 25 ft. I wanted to illustrate this test with photos, but since I don't have a camera I've taken the liberty of borrowing from DM51's marvelous review of M6 bulb/battery options
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=204157
DM51's "integrating tree" was 135 yds (400 ft) from the camera, while mine was 279 ft away. Despite this difference, the relative brightness between the M6-R and TL-R11 appeared similar to my eyes although my TL-R11 using the 1940 smooth reflector appeared even brighter relative to the M6/MN21/6xcr123's.
Here is the M6/MN21 on primaries:
And the WA 1111. Imagine the TL-R11's beam as slightly narrower and noticeably brighter than pictured here.
In fact it looked almost exactly like this but somewhat broader
The TL-R11 really pulls away from the M6-R at distances over 100 ft and very significantly exceeds it at greater distances. However, to achieve real brightness combined with practical run time at those distances in a conveniently-sized flashlight-configured light you would probably have to go to HIDs.
CONCLUSION
Returning to the title of this thread, why do I consider the TL-R11 the "preeminent incandescent light of its size", despite the many excellent M6-R variations along with other modded lights that may be brighter or superior in some aspects? It is because of the entire package. I would doubt that the TL-R11's combination of superior throw, selectable beam configuration (MOP, LOP, Smooth, etc), convenient recharge (TL regular charger), 570 Torch Lumens running for 41 minutes of fully regulated, non-dimming, intense brightness and whiteness can be duplicated by any other incandescent light of its size, or possibly of any size. Of course, I may be wrong, considering the constant and rapid technical progress in our field.
Brightnorm
_________________________________________________________
INITIAL COMMENTS & OBSERVATIONS
I recently received the rechargeable, fully regulated TL-R11 (Regulated Tigerlight FBOP with WA111) from JS (Jim Sexton). It has been around for awhile, though in limited production, and this is the first time I've been able to get my hands on one. Even though I tend to be a tough judge of lights I have to say that this light is a true marvel, with a combination of performance and features that I have yet to see equaled, let alone surpassed, by any other similar-sized incandescent light I have used, including the M6-R. Aside from multiple brightness levels, I judge incandescent lights using similar criteria as I do with LED lights. I want superlative brightness in a beam appropriate for my use along with true non-dimming regulation in the smallest possible package.
The TL-R11 uses eight low-self-discharge Eneloops which provide a nominal 9.6v. Measuring at the charging terminals will show about 10.4v fully charged, down to about 9.2 after a period of steady running but this is not the voltage applied to the bulb. The Willie Hunt LVR3K regulator cuts it down to 7.2 volts DC-equivalent exactly, and holds it there regardless of pack voltage. As long as the battery voltage is above 7.2 v, then 7.2 volts is what the lamp sees. Since the end of cycle voltage of an 8 cell pack is 7.2 volts, the end result is a light which does not dim at all over its run time.
Further, the lamp will last longer than an unregulated 6 cell TL because it has soft-start and is always at 7.2 volts, vs. the 7.6 volts starting voltage of an unregulated TL. The WA1111 should last for about 12-15 hours and about 40 hours from the WA1274.
Selectable beam configuration is another advantage of this light. The TL-R11 came with a MOP 1940 reflector which provided a perfect compromise between throw and spread, but I ended up preferring a smooth 1940 for its exceptional throw which still retains decent beam spread. One characteristic of the beam is its unusual "whiteness", surpassing almost every other incandescent light I have used including the M6/MN21 with fresh batteries (or M6-R). It is also brighter and whiter than the regular Tigerlight with high capacity battery running a WA1111. Jim suggests that is because the other Tigerlights may have lost some brightness. Tonight I double-checked using ceiling bounce, with my long-suffering girlfriend serving as a witness. In sheer brightness (ceiling bounce) it is the equal or near-equal of the M6/MN21 and the smooth 1940 reflector projects a beam of white fire.
Surefire conservatively rates the M6/MN21 at 500 Torch lumens on fresh lithium primaries, but observations made over the years, including those of JS strongly suggest torch lumen output closer to 630 Lumens. JS believes the TL-R11 puts out a steady 570 Torch lumens over its entire 41 minute run. The fresh M6 is only 11% (or less) brighter than the TL-R11, too small a difference to be seen except in direct A-B comparison. Frankly, my GF and I were unable to see any difference at all, even in A-B comparisons when I retested the lights this evening.
INDOOR BEAM TESTS
My indoor beam tests (sorry, no camera) ranged to about 27 feet in my living room. They included the "infamous" white wall test and shining the light at a variety of objects; furniture, walls of books, etc. I also had access to a 60 ft long room with white walls and no furniture, truly a white wall hunter's paradise, but still too short a distance to really put the M6-R and Tl-R11 through their paces. In every test the potted WA1111 in its smooth 1940 reflector cut through the MN21's beam with searing brilliance, but still retained reasonable spill. Having this brilliant beam for 41 non-dimming minutes was an unexpected luxury. The outdoor tests came next.
OUTOOR VERTICAL THROW TESTS
My densely urban city makes the usual horizontal distance testing very difficult, so I have developed my so-called "vertical throw tests". I select a spot on a tall building and count the number of floors, conservatively allowing 10 feet per floor. Then I pace out the horizontal distance from that building using a stride-matched pedometer, or just counting strides (average length is about 3 feet but I conservatively rate them as 2.75ft). When I have my distance and height, I use Pythagoras to derive the hypotenuse, which equals the total distance of the test. Accuracy can't be exact but is close because I measure very carefully. I try to enlist the services of at least one witness, usually more.
In the past I have tried using a laser rangefinder, but unless I'm able to get quite far from a low aim point, the severe vertical angle causes inconsistent readings. There are other difficulties. For example, in VT Test 2 (below) even though the 335 ft distance and (relatively) low 160 ft aim point would suggest an accurate rangefinder measurement, the fact that I had to stand at a very severe horizontal angle from the objective made the rangefinder measurement unreliable. Sorry for such a long-winded explanation but those who live in an ultra-congested high-rise city like NYC (Manhattan) will understand the problems.
I was able to perform one "normal" throw test with distance from a tree determined by rangefinder.
VT TEST 1
Concrete-colored wall
33 paces x 2.75 = 90 ft
17 floors = 170 ft
Hypotenuse = 192 ft
The M6-R's beam covered 3.5 – 4 floors with an impressively bright and white spotlight-like beam.
The TL-R11's beam covered about 2.5 floors with a very intense "hot" white beam. When superimposed upon the M6-R's beam it cut through it like the proverbial "hot knife through butter".
VT TEST 2
Dark brick-colored wall
122 paces x 2.75 = 335 ft
16 floors = 160 ft
Hypotenuse = 371 ft
The M6-R's beam was diffuse, not bright.
The TL-R11's beam was not clearly delineated, but was quite white and bright despite the severe (non-perpendicular) horizontal angle.
Throw Test 3 (non-vertical)
Tree: beam height (estimated) 20-30ft
Rangefinder distance to tree: 93 yds (279 ft)
I was able to perform this horizontal throw test with tree distance determined by rangefinder. Aim point height is estimated at about 25 ft. I wanted to illustrate this test with photos, but since I don't have a camera I've taken the liberty of borrowing from DM51's marvelous review of M6 bulb/battery options
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=204157
DM51's "integrating tree" was 135 yds (400 ft) from the camera, while mine was 279 ft away. Despite this difference, the relative brightness between the M6-R and TL-R11 appeared similar to my eyes although my TL-R11 using the 1940 smooth reflector appeared even brighter relative to the M6/MN21/6xcr123's.
Here is the M6/MN21 on primaries:
And the WA 1111. Imagine the TL-R11's beam as slightly narrower and noticeably brighter than pictured here.
In fact it looked almost exactly like this but somewhat broader
The TL-R11 really pulls away from the M6-R at distances over 100 ft and very significantly exceeds it at greater distances. However, to achieve real brightness combined with practical run time at those distances in a conveniently-sized flashlight-configured light you would probably have to go to HIDs.
CONCLUSION
Returning to the title of this thread, why do I consider the TL-R11 the "preeminent incandescent light of its size", despite the many excellent M6-R variations along with other modded lights that may be brighter or superior in some aspects? It is because of the entire package. I would doubt that the TL-R11's combination of superior throw, selectable beam configuration (MOP, LOP, Smooth, etc), convenient recharge (TL regular charger), 570 Torch Lumens running for 41 minutes of fully regulated, non-dimming, intense brightness and whiteness can be duplicated by any other incandescent light of its size, or possibly of any size. Of course, I may be wrong, considering the constant and rapid technical progress in our field.
Brightnorm
Last edited:
