Surefire L1

[fleegs]

Hello everyone. Happy Holidays.

I was wondering if the new L1s (3 watt) are way better than the previous L1s (1 watt). Is it brighter? Does it have more throw? Is the low the same brightness (pretty dim) or brighter?

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,
fleegs

 

[fleegs]

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bump.gif

Anyone?

 

[357]

[ QUOTE ]
fleegs said:
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bump.gif

Anyone?

[/ QUOTE ]

I only have the 1-watt version of the L1s. I too was wondering if the 3-watt was any better.

If it uses the TIR optic like the KL1 uses, I suspect it will be a LOT worst than the 1-watt version of the L1. My L1s have a relatively smooth flood beam for an optic based light, and trading off for throw and a nasty ringy/funky colored beam would NOT be something I'd want to do (I have two of the new KL1s, and both have bad tint and lots of rings and artifacts).

However, if the new 3-watt L1s use the same optic that my current L1s use (the flood optic that has only moderate amount of artifacts), I'd be okay with that.

The more I use the L1s, the more I like them. They are so small, light weight, and very handy. I only wish that the tint was better (both of mine have really terrible tints).

I would like to try out the new 3-watt version, but last time I checked they were backordered.

 

[Size15's]

Is 357 the only one who thinks the new KL1 has a ringy beam?

 

[357]

[ QUOTE ]
Size15's said:
Is 357 the only one who thinks the new KL1 has a ringy beam?

[/ QUOTE ]

Its all a matter of perspective. I consider the corona part of the beam, and the corona on my KL1s is loaded with rings of various colors. The hotspots are hardly great either, with green and blue-purple bands (much bigger diameter than rings) in the outer edge of the hotspot.

For distance, these are not noticable. For close range, they drive me batty when I'm trying to concentrate on what I'm lighting up.

 

[Size15's]

I'm just trying to see whether CPF Members generally consider their new KL1's to have ringy beams because our opinions differ on the subject.

 

[357]

[ QUOTE ]
Size15's said:
I'm just trying to see whether CPF Members generally consider their new KL1's to have ringy beams because our opinions differ on the subject.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed, like I said its a matter of perspective.

 

[sotto]

As a throwmeister, I consider the extra colors in the periphery of my KL1 beam a bonus for my investment. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[jbfla]

I'm certainly no expert but my "new version" KL1 has 3 noticeable rings at the outer edge of the corona (1 bright ring bordered by 2 lighter rings. The hotspot also has a ring around it.

For my use, the rings don't bother me, and aren't anywhere near as bad as the rings on my Inova XO and X3. I don't have an earlier version to compare it with.

The tint on my KL1 is a nice white. I'm satisfied.

JB

 

[scuba]

I'm quite happy with my new Kl1's beam. I actually couldn't care less about that ring, wich I consider insignificant in any real applications. But that's me and I understand that it could bother people. I actually find it quite pretty...

 

[briteguy]

Back to the subject...

Does anyone has the new L1 with Luxeon III to give us a little review?

 

[HunterSon]

I hope (since they look the same in the surefire drawing) that the new L1 bezel is just the L2 bezel with a Lux I or Lux III led instead of the Lux V.
As for the second part about the KL1, I find the beam ringy too. I guess it is because the rest of my lights have the orange peel reflectors and produce such a smooth beam.

 

[cy]

I've got a new L1 with the 3watt lux. funny thing is it draws 908milliamps at the batt w/new surefire 123.

408 milliamps at the luxeon. since L1 is a dumb head, you can isolate the luxeon to get a current reading.

I've double checked these reading with two different Fluke 87's.

I've been in contact with Surefire about this. They will not disclose if spec's are correct.

The official line is if you don't think it's working right. Here an RMA for you to send back.

 

[AluminumOvercast]

What kind of lens is on it?

 

[Cornkid]

Yes... doesn't the lens have a profound impact on the beam quality and strength?

-tom

 

[fleegs]

[ QUOTE ]
cy said:
I've got a new L1 with the 3watt lux. funny thing is it draws 908milliamps at the batt w/new surefire 123.

408 milliamps at the luxeon. since L1 is a dumb head, you can isolate the luxeon to get a current reading.

I've double checked these reading with two different Fluke 87's.

I've been in contact with Surefire about this. They will not disclose if spec's are correct.

The official line is if you don't think it's working right. Here an RMA for you to send back.

[/ QUOTE ]

So does this mean that the flashlight is not efficient? Is the low the same brightness?

Thanks,
fleegs

 

[cy]

The new L1 w/3watt looks like NX-05 lens. SO17 will greatly improve throw & overall performance. The tint is a beautiful white.

Since my L1 is pulling 908 milliamps from cell and only deliverying 408 to lux. I'm sending it back to Surefire.

If it was deliveriing say 750 milliamps to lux. I'd keep the L1.

I really liked my old L1, it was the light I grabbed to go deer hunting with.

 

[fleegs]

Thanks cy.

fleegs

 

[sotto]

Cy:

Can you explain exactly how you measured the current when you did your tests of your L1? I'd just like to know so I can do some similar measurements sometime.

Many thanks.

 

[McGizmo]

cy,

I won't pretend to be an electronics expert as it would be blatently false but as I understand it, it is typical of the buck/ boost drivers to be inefficient. Your Iin and Iout sound reasonable to me! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon3.gif Getting 750 mA to a LED off a single CR123 is not trivial at all and certainly not likely from a buck/boost circuit!!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon15.gif If you did have an Iout of 750 mA your Iin could easily be up around 1500 mA given the internal resistance of the CR123, inefficiency of the converter and Vf of the LED.

PK mentioned that the new L1 would be increased in drive current from the original 360 mA of the older units to about 420 mA. It sounds to me like you have a perfectly functioning unit there! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon3.gif

If you are returning the light simply because you don't like it, that is one thing but unless I am way off, I doubt you would do any better with a replacement and might get a Luxeon thatpleases you less than the one you now have!