Regal WT1 (v2) by Regalight -- first impressions

xevious

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
1,022
Location
Hoboken, NJ
I just received my Regal WT1 (v2) by Regalight. Ernsanada already wrote a very nice detailed review and I agree mostly with what he said. So, I'll try not to supply repetitive details. Here are my impressions:

Overall
  • The amount of light put out by this form factor is amazing. It's just a little bit longer than a Surefire L4, but reportedly pumps out a whopping 220 lumens. The weight is very good and balanced--just about right (maybe 4oz more would be perfect).
  • The shape reminds me a little of the Romisen RC-G2, but there's no contest in which is the superior light. The same would be true in comparing the WT1 to a Surefire (you know the winner), but I have to say it puts up a good fight. If the edges were a little smoothed out, some knurling was added to the barrel, and the threads given a little extra refinement--wow. But then you're heading into Surefire price territory. ;)
  • You really get a lot for your money. Along with the light comes two reflectors (OP and SMO), two clicky switches (one single mode forward, and one 2-mode reverse clicky), two switch boots (one black, one day glow), a nice lanyard with button lock, extra o-rings, and a holster. I don't think the best 2xCR123 light from DX could come close to the overall package (there will always be something lacking, be it the beam pattern, tint, regulation, finish, modes, etc).
Body
  • The HA-III anodizing is excellent. It would be nice to have some knurling for more grip. I'm going to add a few O-rings to help with that (several very nice barrel grooves will accommodate them).
  • The head is made of two parts, with 6 "U" shaped indentations on the outside. The top section of the head that the bezel screws onto begins the 6 indentations, but they don't widen enough where they meet the lower half of the head. They should be a little bit wider so the lines are contiguous. It's a minor point, but does make the light look a little bit "off".
  • The bezel has a nice edge... sharp enough to do damage but smooth enough not to chew through a pocket. It will be an effective tool for defense.
  • The largest ridge of the light is at the bottom of the head, where your fingers naturally grip the light. The cuts of the 6 side indentations and the ridge edging on the head have sharp edging. I can understand wanting to provide some extra grip, but the edging should have been smoothed off a bit more. I can see your fingers getting gouged by them if striking with the light bare handed.
  • You can remove the head and use the light as a candle, especially if you have the 2-mode clicky installed (the lower setting is more kind to the eyes), but the switch boot juts out 1mm too far, preventing the light from tail standing. Seriously, I think the boot could have been shortened by 1mm and still work really well.
  • The tail cap has only one hole (no additional "U" hole), so if the boot wasn't an issue but you had a lanyard attached, it wouldn't stand straight.
  • The barrel is definitely wider than CR123 batteries and when installing the cells, you expect that you'll hear them rattle around. Not so. The tail cap holds them tightly in place.
  • Every threaded section of the light (tail cap, head, bezel) also has o-rings. This shows thoughtful design and gives confidence for water resistance (WT1 is rated to 15 feet).
  • All threads are well machined. They could use a little extra lube as provided, but it's nothing to complain about.
Hardware
  • The provided switches are loud, especially when compared to the soft click of a Pila. But they certainly work well. The forward clicky is excellent with good pressure for the momentary on. The reverse clicky with 2-modes tempers the power to the Cree module and the high beam is noticeably brighter than the low beam. However, the low beam could be reduced by another 25%.
  • The 2-mode clicky starts with low and then delivers high--this is good. However, there is no "off" in between. So, no matter what, you'll always be cycling through both beams. The good thing is that you simply "double click" to get the high beam, which should satisfy anyone wanting the high beam right away. But if all you want is the low beam, you'll either have to "double click" to get the light off without letting the brighter beam flood the area, or cup the light.
  • The reflector is very easily changed by unscrewing the bezel.
  • The smooth reflector has a very clearly defined spot accompanied by a usable spill. But the yellow corona around the spot is quite prominent. The OP reflector is excellent as it does not reduce the spot brightness by very much, yet smooths out the spot edge and "blends" the yellow corona well. I plan to leave the OP reflector in.
  • The emitter module is well seated in the tube and would probably be a major pain to extract if you wanted to upgrade the emitter sometime later on (this ain't no Dereelight). However, there is a black plastic flange encircling the emitter (instead of potting), to help protect the emitter connections and circuitry. So, it might not be too difficult to swap emitters with a little soldering while leaving the module in place. The host seems to handle heat from the emitter well. The Cree Q5 definitely pumps out the power. For the first few minutes, you don't feel much of any rise in temperature... but after 5 minutes it is noticeable. At 10 minutes the barrel is just a little warmer, but it's definitely nowhere near as hot as an incandescent. The internal heat sink seems to be doing its job well.
I do hope that Regalight provides some future accessories, like a more aggressive thicker bezel and a 3-mode clicky switch. But do I like the WT1? YES. Would I buy another one, if I needed another light? YES.

I really think that this was one of the better value flashlights of 2007. And thanks to Ernsanada for giving us a really nice detailed review to help us make up our minds. I hope my little write-up gives some useful info to anyone else considering this light. Oh yeah, sorry--it wasn't quite as "quick" as I thought it would be. :laughing:
 
Last edited:

bspofford

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 15, 2007
Messages
824
Location
Colorado
Very nice review! I like the light a lot but agree that it would be even nicer if they eliminated the sharp ridge at the bottom of the head and added a second lanyard hole. Three or five modes would also be nice.
 

StefanFS

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
1,261
Location
Silicon Road 1, Sweden
It's a nicely built flashlight. But the CREE Q5 is not really potted, it's just covered with a plastic cover. You can lift that to swap emitters etc.

I think that the led pill is a press fit (down into the battery tube). It doesn't move with brute force and my biggest wrenches. Lifting the plastic cover is required to get access to the emitter.

RegalPill.jpg


Stefan
 

xevious

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
1,022
Location
Hoboken, NJ
It's a nicely built flashlight. But the CREE Q5 is not really potted, it's just covered with a plastic cover. You can lift that to swap emitters etc.
Thanks for pointing that out, Stefan. I should have re-read your posting--sorry I missed that. I updated my comments accordingly. Swapping emitters might be a little tricky to do with the module in place (extracting it looks like it would cause damage to the pill, as you noted) but it's good to know that the solder points are accessible. :)
 

StefanFS

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
1,261
Location
Silicon Road 1, Sweden
The damage on the pill comes from my failed effort to remove the pill from the battery tube with the biggest wrench I own. Just popping the plastic cover is easy.
Stefan
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
It is a very nice light, and at a good price right now through tango-lui.

FYI, I've just updated my WT1 vs Fenix T1 review to include throw/output/runtimes from the new second edition.

As you'll see, throw and output have both increased by ~13% from my earlier edition WT1, with equivalent runtime. :thumbsup:
 

cheapo

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
3,326
I'd like to add my own impressions of the light.

cons:

-threads are kinda gritty. needed lube. Didn't have good stuff so i went with wd40 which shouldn't hurt the silicone o-rings (someone please confirm)
-threads are a little loose on the tailcap
-no spring on the head. Allows for batteries to move when the flashlight is quickly displaced.
-ringy beam (matters to some)

pros

-HA is of the highest quality it seems
-Really high quality metal was used.
-tailcap has a great feel to it.
-fins on the head should provide adequate heatsinking
-runtime is over 3 hrs with 18650
-thick walls make this an almost indestructable light.
-good throw

overall its a great light for the $60 i've payed for it. Haven't really tested the actual light out to see how it performs, but i'd imagine it will just throw far and not illuminate the area as i'd like it to. we'll see.
 

xevious

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
1,022
Location
Hoboken, NJ
I'd like to add my own impressions of the light.

cons:
-threads are kinda gritty. needed lube. Didn't have good stuff so i went with wd40 which shouldn't hurt the silicone o-rings (someone please confirm)
-threads are a little loose on the tailcap
-no spring on the head. Allows for batteries to move when the flashlight is quickly displaced.
-ringy beam (matters to some)
Interesting... I got mine at the next price level. Threads aren't gritty, so maybe they cleaned them up. I find them machined pretty well--tail cap is snug. You're right about the spring--I looked down the tube and it's just a single metal contact. Beam seems ringy to me with the SMO, but with the OP it's very nice with only the slightest hint of diminished beam.

The T1 costs a little more and looks like it is more solid, but from the drop tests I saw posted I now think the WT1 could be more resilient.
 
Last edited:

cheapo

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
3,326
well, after a bit more analysis:

oh, the threads are fine, nice and smooth. The tailcap and head do wiggle when they is unscrewed a bit-thats why i mentioned loose threads, but its no concern at all, unless you plan using the light unscrewed.

i like the beam. i use the OP and i like it, not that i really care too much about how the beam looks.

output is really impressive- no doubt about that

my 18650s have a little room to move in the tube.

oh, and i didnt get a GIDT, but who cares.

great light. no doubt worth every penny. Its as tough as they get.
 

Tiny86

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
79
Location
Livermore, In the people's republic of CA
I have my WT 1 v2 now also. I really like it. I do have slight doughnut hole. But I can deal with it. I am very satisfied with it. For the size it has really good throw. The beam is pretty ringy with the smo reflector. But it has a good hot spot. Honestly I was really surprised how focused the hot spot is. When I first turned the light on I was disappointed for a second, but then I shined it on the wall and took it outside :devil: I could see the throw of the spill Great Value!
 

Stereodude

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
1,654
Location
US of A
I must have gotten a very different WT1 v2 from the rest of you guys. The beam even with the SMO reflector installed very good. It's considerably better than my Dereelight CL1H v3 with the SMO reflector installed. Especially the further you get away from the wall.:thinking:

Here's a shot comparing them. The CL1H v3 is on the left (no really!).

 
Top