Quick Quark AA question.

[tcr03]

if i were to get a Quark AA R5 and get a spare 18650 body. does anyone know the max lumens and runtime would be with that battery.

thanks in advance
matt

 

[Ragiska]

see the review for your answer

 

[tcr03]

sorry for that. the pics in the review dont show up on the computer im using. so i was just hoping someone could just type the stats out for me.

sorry for the inconvenience

 

[RedForest UK]

As the heads have different max input voltages I'm not sure that the AA version would be compatible with 18650 cells as their peak voltage is 4.2v. I'm not an expert on the exact quark limits but especially if it's the single AA version I would think that using 18650 cells would risk making your light go

 

[Henk_Lu]

No Quark head goes on a single cell. There are only two heads, the common low voltage head which runs between 0,9V and 4,2V and the high volatge head of the 123-2 which needs 3,0V and accepts 9,0V.

The output should be 170 Lumen OTF on a li-ion, same as the AA-2 or the 123. As for the runtime, I have no real idea, but it should be around 2,5 hours on turbo, depending on your cell of course!

 

[ky70]

As the heads have different max input voltages I'm not sure that the AA version would be compatible with 18650 cells as their peak voltage is 4.2v. I'm not an expert on the exact quark limits but especially if it's the single AA version I would think that using 18650 cells would risk making your light go

Shouldn't a 18650 body/battery work without issue (conceptually) with the AA head if the head has a working volatge up to 4.2V? I know there would be a problem using 2 li-on batteries in a 4.2v head but I thought any single cell li-on should be within specs.

 

[tcr03]

The output should be 170 Lumen OTF on a li-ion, same as the AA-2 or the 123. As for the runtime, I have no real idea, but it should be around 2,5 hours on turbo, depending on your cell of course!

i think those specs are for the r2. im talking about the R5.

the 123 R5 model claims 206 lumen OTF. thats on 3volts of the 123

i would imagine the 18650 would put out more lumens having 3.7-4.2 volts. i was just asking to see if anyone used this paticular setup and if they had a lumens rating and run time.

thanks for all the input.

 

[ti-force]

i think those specs are for the r2. im talking about the R5.

the 123 R5 model claims 206 lumen OTF. thats on 3volts of the 123

i would imagine the 18650 would put out more lumens having 3.7-4.2 volts. i was just asking to see if anyone used this paticular setup and if they had a lumens rating and run time.

thanks for all the input.

Not only does 4sevens advertise real OTF lumens, but my experience has shown me that they underrate their OTF numbers:thumbsup:. Trust me, if you buy the Quark AA R5, you will most likely be making 250 + OTF on a 14500. Both of my Quark 123-2 XP-E R2's make around 230 OTF, and that's using 2xRCR123 Li-ions or 1x17670 Li-ion and you already know that the XP-E R2's make less lumens than the XP-G R5's. Current readings at the tail cap show that the low voltage head is drawing almost the same current on 1xLi-ion as the high voltage head on 1xLi-ion.

If you purchase the 18650 body, you won't see any increase in lumens, but you will see a great increase in runtime if your going from a 14500 to an 18650.

 

[tcr03]

thank you for the info. i kind of assumed that. i dont know about everyone else on here, but im a gotta know specs kinda guy. always been that way.

 

[ti-force]

thank you for the info. i kind of assumed that. i dont know about everyone else on here, but im a gotta know specs kinda guy. always been that way.

The Quarks are great lights. They don't try to hype their numbers up to sell more lights. They can't say exactly what the output will be for every single light because of efficiency differences with the drivers and/or emitters, and I think that's also why they underrate their OTF numbers, but I think you can expect to make more than advertised.

So go click that add to cart button, and don't forget to enter in the "CPF8" discount code during checkout to get an additional 8% off:thumbsup:. Report back here and share your experience with the light if you like; a lot of times we only hear the bad things about a product, so it's always nice to hear good things.

 

[tcr03]

well i have a fenix tk11 r2 and love it. the best light i have ever owned. dont use the low setting ever. but the high is awsome. i get about a weeks use out of it on one battery. as you can see i dont use it that often. this fall during hunting and camping will be different. thats why i have 4 18650 for it.

ive decided i will get the quark aa r5, when i save alittle more. just hope ill like it as much as the fenix.

 

[ti-force]

Just remember, a beam profile that has a brighter/tighter hot spot will appear brighter to most people during real use. It's all about what you want. Below are some beam shots I took. Distance from light to the pine tree is roughly 23ft. I also made a gif out of the images so it's easier to see the difference. I noticed you said earlier that images weren't showing up correctly on your computer, but maybe it's working now.



Fenix TK11 vs Quark XPE R2:

Fenix TK11 vs Quark XP-G R5

Quark XP-E R2 vs Quark XP-G R5

 

[tcr03]

thank you. thats great.

 

[tcr03]

the tk11 looks to have more spill than the quark. is it that way in person

 

[ti-force]

the tk11 looks to have more spill than the quark. is it that way in person

Yes, the TK11 has brighter spill. Notice that the TK11 has a tighter/smaller spill pattern/area. The spill is concentrated into a smaller area so it's brighter. I'll use a Maglite for an example here: Take the Maglite and focus the head so that you get a tightly focused beam, then loosen the head to produce a lot of spill/flood. The light appears to be brighter when the beam is focused into a nice tight hot spot, but it's not producing more light, you're just focusing the same amount of light into a smaller area, which makes a brighter spot.

Also, my TK11 has a slight orange peel reflector. I'm not sure if all TK11 R2's came that way, but mine did and I think that smooths out the beam (reduces rings) and brightens spill at the same time. My TK11 Q5 had a completely smooth reflector.

 

[tcr03]

another quick question. on the regular version it offers a tail stand option. is there a split in the tailcap to allow a split ring to lay flush.

 

[tcr03]

nevermind. i just looked and no it doesnt.

 

[ti-force]

Maybe you could run it through the slot and the circle to the right of the slot in the picture. I've never used it, so I couldn't say.



Tactical on the left, Regular on the right:

All Quark tail caps:
Left to right; Turbo, Turbo Flat, Tactical and Regular:

 

[ti-force]

Like this, but now I have to get the darn thing back off:

 

[tcr03]

thanks for all they info you have posted. i thank you for the time and effort you have devoted to my questions and find you to be a asset to this forum.