SureFire M3LT Review (Pics, Indoor & Outdoor Comparo Beamshots, Runtimes)

[Bullzeyebill]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

To understand the M3LT circuit, maybe discovering that it is using some of the technology that pk uses on the ICON lights, try running it for fifteen minutes, turning it off, then on, running it for 15 more minutes, turn it off then on and run it for 15 more minutes. The ICON lights run in regulation for 10 minutes, then switch to direct drive, and if turned off and back on resume full regulation, and this sequence can continue till voltage drops significantly. Just some thoughts, and at this stage in the game, mostly shooting in the dark, no idea is bad.

Bill

 

[FroggyTaco]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

If anyone could do so, I'd be interested in a comparison of runtime and output for the M3LT compared to the Wildcat MD3 (new version).

Yeah..The Wildcat is brighter & runs longer for about 1/2 the money & a comparable warranty. Oh and it's more compact too.

And to think if the Wildcat production could be & needed to be scaled up to SF level production, it would prolly cost about 220.00 instead.

 

[turboBB]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

I've conducted another round of testing with primaries, this time using Energizer Photo Lithium's. You can hit up the updated chart for results (very similar to the SF123a's).

@ Mark, thx!! It was fun putting it together and enhanced by the ongoing dialogue now. Just a matter of meeting up w/Monocrom next weekend to complete the outdoor beamshots.

@Bill, I'll give that a shot with the AW's (hate filling up the landfill for mere sake of testing). Analyzing the data, seems to confirm what you are saying about the 10 minute regulation and then DD (is this what Size15's was alluding to?).

I do notice that in terms of regulation, it's not a true flatline but rather a very slight declining trend right from the get go. In the first 12 minutes of each battery type, there is an approximate drop of 2k lux:

Cheers,
Tim

 

[DimeRazorback]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

As Size15's has already pointed out, table-flat regulation is not always necessary.

So really, the bottom line is that it is up to Surefire, not that we should expect them to do this that and the other.

Surely this is not rocket science?

The bottom line is that 3 primaries simply cannot sustain a consistently high enough current to keep this light in regulation.

In order to change this, one or more of these options are required:-

1) design it for more than 3 primaries.

2) manufacture primaries with higher capacity (if this is feasible)

3) design the light to accept both primaries and high-capacity rechargeables such as 18500s/18650s. Then in the field, primaries can be used with resultant lack of regulation when no electricity supply is available. At least the option to use 18500s/18650s would still be there when this is not a problem.

Surely this is not rocket science?

 

[Rocketman]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

The bottom line is that 3 primaries simply cannot sustain a consistently high enough current to keep this light in regulation.

In order to change this, one or more of these options are required:-

1) design it for more than 3 primaries.

2) manufacture primaries with higher capacity (if this is feasible)

3) design the light to accept both primaries and high-capacity rechargeables such as 18500s/18650s. Then in the field, primaries can be used with resultant lack of regulation when no electricity supply is available. At least the option to use 18500s/18650s would still be there when this is not a problem.

Surely this is not rocket science?

They made this light for their intended audience to provide a high brightness beam for a short period of time. The intention for the batteries was to have the user change them often, at the begin of a mission or firefight. As stated, the design cannot provide for such high brightness under regulation. Also Surefire probably did not want the light to suddenly drop off. Makes sense to me now that I think of it this way.

It's not for us, basically, unless you intend to use it as intended.

 

[turboBB]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

Hi guys,

Review has been updated with 10 min. interval runtimes on AW17500's (look for "EDIT 6/28:"). It yields subtle improvements at best but does seem to reinforce the 10 min. reg run then DD.

Cheers,
Tim

 

[easilyled]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

As Size15's has already pointed out, table-flat regulation is not always necessary.

You can always excuse something that is not as good. Diehard fans always do.

So really, the bottom line is that it is up to Surefire, not that we should expect them to do this that and the other.

Heaven forbid that their captive audience should ever have the audacity to give them any feedback.

 

[DimeRazorback]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

There is a vast difference between feedback and telling someone what they should do.

 

[easilyled]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

There is a vast difference between feedback and telling someone what they should do.

I'm just stating my opinion, for what its worth. Surefire, no doubt, couldn't care in the slightest.

However, if enough people were to say that they prefer constant regulation to the kind of compromise that appears to exist in this light, then who knows.

 

[DimeRazorback]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

I'm just stating my opinion, for what its worth. Surefire, no doubt, couldn't care in the slightest.

However, if enough people were to say that they prefer constant regulation to the kind of compromise that appears to exist in this light, then who knows.

That is fair enough. However I feel that yes the general citizen flashaholic may benefit, but those who use the lights as intended will not receive many gains.

Who do you cater for as a producer of tactical flashlights. White wall hunters who want to utilise rechargeable batteries, nice tints and flat runtime regulation, or those who use the lights in the ways they were designed to be used.
I would never go out with a duty appointment half loaded. So why would I with a flashlight... it to is just another appointment.

My point is (to make it more clear) if I were to use an appointment, I would reload it. Same goes with flashlights and their batteries.
(Yes you can carry multiple rechargeable batteries... but will I always have time to keep an eye on their charge status? Will they work when I put them in?)

There are rechargeable SF's on the market... but only a few. Maybe there is a reason for that?

Also, with regards to flat runtimes, I find that they can be quite dangerous.
Not only for the fact that you are left in the dark without warning (read on), but unless there are protection methods built in, batteries become a hazard.

To me, the less electronics inside a light the better.
The more complex they are, the more there is to go wrong for example low battery warnings, protection circuits etc etc.

With regards to all of this, I am purely talking about what I regard as a "tactical flashlight" which to me is a surefire built with that intention.
The M3LT falls within this category.

If the M3LT were something I considered a toy, then hell yes bring on all those other goodies!
But if I need that light to keep a clear sight on a person of interest, I want simplicity, with minimal electronics to be at play.

 

[easilyled]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

You make some very good points there and I have to defer to you for your knowledge of what is required in military situations, since I do not have any personal experience.

Would there be any harm though, in the battery tube of the M3LT being thick enough to receive 2 18500s instead of 2 17500s? (in order to provide a longer constant regulation option)

This is only a very minor modification and would provide an alternative option for those who wish to use it, maybe not during an active field engagement but for some other less crucial task that a member in the armed forces might be required to perform.

Maybe I'm completely wrong, but I perceive a certain stubbornness on Surefire's part not to accept anything other than CR123s and being of a cynical disposition, I have conjectured that its in their interest to sell CR123s which they manufacture. :shrug:

I realize that there is a strong bond of loyalty between active service people and Surefire (who have earned that trust by providing first-rate, reliable duty lights), however I think that it is always in the interests of those being provided to, to constantly question and guide the provider for the sake of evolving new products in a changing technological environment.

 

[DimeRazorback]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

You make some very good points there and I have to defer to you for your knowledge of what is required in military situations, since I do not have any personal experience.

Would there be any harm though, in the battery tube of the M3LT being thick enough to receive 2 18500s instead of 2 17500s? (in order to provide a longer constant regulation option)

This is only a very minor modification and would provide an alternative option for those who wish to use it, maybe not during an active field engagement but for some other less crucial task that a member in the armed forces might be required to perform.

Maybe I'm completely wrong, but I perceive a certain stubbornness on Surefire's part not to accept anything other than CR123s and being of a cynical disposition, I have conjectured that its in their interest to sell CR123s which they manufacture. :shrug:

I realize that there is a strong bond of loyalty between active service people and Surefire (who have earned that trust by providing first-rate, reliable duty lights), however I think that it is always in the interests of those being provided to, to constantly question and guide the provider for the sake of evolving new products in a changing technological environment.

I don't want to drag this great review thread away from it's purpose anymore with my endless opinions 🙂laughing🙂, but I will say that I would love to see them introduce 18mm diameter bodies... as long as the rattle when using primary cells is addressed.

I can't stand the sloppiness (for lack of better words 😛) of cr123's in 18mm diameter tubed lights.

Perhaps moddoo will eventually look into the tube of the M3LT... there may be light at the end of the tunnel! 😀

 

[JNewell]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

They made this light for their intended audience to provide a high brightness beam for a short period of time. The intention for the batteries was to have the user change them often, at the begin of a mission or firefight. As stated, the design cannot provide for such high brightness under regulation. Also Surefire probably did not want the light to suddenly drop off. Makes sense to me now that I think of it this way.

It's not for us, basically, unless you intend to use it as intended.

I suspect that the part bolded above is correct. However, two comments.

For anyone not operating on someone else's (such as the taxpayers') nickel, this is very likely a serious issue for a light like this. On a smaller scale, level regulation was the thing that finally persuaded me to trade the P60 and P61 LAs in my EDC light gear for LEDs.

Second, I'm not sure that the design goals required this design. The latest Wildcat suggests that very high performance, regulated output, realistic runtimes and 3x 123 primary design elements can be very successfully mixed together in a single light.

 

[iapyx]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

I suspect that the part bolded above is correct. However, two comments.

For anyone not operating on someone else's (such as the taxpayers') nickel, this is very likely a serious issue for a light like this. On a smaller scale, level regulation was the thing that finally persuaded me to trade the P60 and P61 LAs in my EDC light gear for LEDs.

Second, I'm not sure that the design goals required this design. The latest Wildcat suggests that very high performance, regulated output, realistic runtimes and 3x 123 primary design elements can be very successfully mixed together in a single light.

Then I am really curious if the UB3T will be regulated. Could I be wrong if I guess that that light is designed for other purposes --> non-military or non-tactical.
Just blowing the vuvuzela a bit here...

 

[easilyled]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

Then I am really curious if the UB3T will be regulated. Could I be wrong if I guess that that light is designed for other purposes --> non-military or non-tactical.
Just blowing the vuvuzela a bit here...

Since these lights are open to purchase by CPFers and the general public, it would be helpful to know their specific designated purpose beforehand in order to help with any potential purchasing decision.

Then I wouldn't have to argue against lights such as the M3LT only to find that its specifically designed for military firefights. :tinfoil:

 

[Bullzeyebill]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

I too am mystified as to why the M3LT only runs about 30 minutes or so in regulation on high. Have not seen a runtime graph for the low mode, and can only guess that the purpose of the high mode is for burst, to light up an area temporarly, then turn off, or go back to low mode.

We need to be careful that this does not end up as "yet another SF bashing thread".

Bill

 

[Fleetlord]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

A couple of things I've been thinking about...

1. Surefire will knowingly NEVER design a light to accept aftermarket rechargables. If I remember correctly the U2 originally could accept rechargables, then Surefire changed the tube and rechargables wouldn't fit anymore.
They market and sell their own brand batteries which are a renewing revenue stream for the company. They are stating that these lights need these batteries, they have them with their name on them....buy them.

2. Surefire is backing away from LED regulated lights as being a beneficial feature. There doesn't seem to be any mention of regulation on the Surefire website on any lights, including the older A2, which was highly touted as being a regulated incandescent...now, no mention at all. I think as the older LED lights are phased out, the newer models won't be regulated as we would like them to be. The reason? Cost reduction. At the end of the day, Surefire is a business and they are in business to make money. Reducing costs equals higher profits so that is the track they will run on. Non regulated lights cost less to make and require less engineering time, so Surefire stands to make more money on each light.

If Surefire wanted to, they could give a regulated light a better warning before the batteries were drained completely. This, of course,would cost extra $$ and they figure if they get all that regulation "talk" off their website, most end users would never notice that it didn't have constant brightness..

 

[turboBB]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

Conducted an abbreviated runtime testing on low (shut it off after 109 min as I don't have time to run full test right now). It should be enough of a sample size to show it's regulated (never lower than 5.4K nor higher than 5.8K). The chart looks very exaggerated due to the revised y-axis scale.

@Fleet, agree about the capitilizing on the cells they sell thing. What I do find funny is the inconsistency with the I.D. of their tubes in that out of the lights I have, the M3LT, Z2 and G2Z can all accomodate 17xxx cells while my U2A has a very tight tolerance and can only accept 16xxx cells. :shrug: You'd imagine that they would've enforced strict tolerances all around no?

Cheers,
Tim

 

[Bullzeyebill]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

A couple of things I've been thinking about...


2. Surefire is backing away from LED regulated lights as being a beneficial feature. There doesn't seem to be any mention of regulation on the Surefire website on any lights, including the older A2, which was highly touted as being a regulated incandescent...now, no mention at all.

In the case of the M3LT, if you look at the spec page, under features you will see the word "regulated". Your post is interesting, but like most surmises is probably not accurate. Truth be told, we do not know what SF is up to, and we are only shooting in the dark. We are making stories up based on little or no information. I am more interested in real facts like what is the current draw from the batteries, and nice runtime graphs like those presented in this thread by the OP. As time goes on we will learn more real information about the M3LT, which the OP has started to present. Enough with the wild guesses, and surmises, and the commiserating that goes along with it.

Bill

 

[Size15's]

Re: SUREFIRE M3LT REVIEW (Pics, Indoor Beamshots, Runtimes)

Fleetlord,
The low output mode of the M3LT shows your assumption about SureFire no longer using regulation to be incorrect. It's a shame CPF hasn't been doing runtime plots for SureFire's latest models as this provides an information vacuum in which minds can easily wander.
Has anyone ever spoken to SureFire staff either openly or privately to try to get their perspective on why they don't make products that can make use of the various rechargeable batteries out there?
I've not met one yet who says or believes it is so they can make loads of money from their branded CR123As.

IMHO we're in an information desert of our own making...