Thrunite Neutron Series (XM-L) 1C, 2C, 1A, 2A Review: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS and more!

[Kilovolt]

I have discovered that the diffuser tip that Lumapower supplies for their EDC lights fits very well onto Neutron 1C:

With the diffuser on and placed upright on a table the Neutron can really illuminate a room.

 

[HIDblue]

I have discovered that the diffuser tip that Lumapower supplies for their EDC lights fits very well onto Neutron 1C:

With the diffuser on and placed upright on a table the Neutron can really illuminate a room.

That's a great idea kilo...now I just have to go find my Lumapower box with the diffuser.

 

[Xak]

Has anyone found the head of their 1A to be too loose when not tightened? This is a common complaint in the marketplace. I want a 1A in neutral tint, but not if the head and body don't fit correctly.

 

[flashflood]

Has anyone found the head of their 1A to be too loose when not tightened? This is a common complaint in the marketplace. I want a 1A in neutral tint, but not if the head and body don't fit correctly.

Unclear. I have four Neutrons (1A and 1C, original and neutral) and they all work fine when loosened, but some folks have reported intermittent connectivity when loosened. I have tried, but cannot reproduce this with any of my lights. I think the jury's out until someone experiencing the problem returns their light to Thrunite for evaluation and we see what they have to say. Unfortunately I don't see any good way to assess this over the internet, e.g. via photos or videos, because the tolerances involved are measured in thousandths of an inch.

I hope Thrunite resolves this quickly and transparently, because as long as this question lingers it's going to hurt adoption of a great little flashlight.

 

[selfbuilt]

Has anyone found the head of their 1A to be too loose when not tightened? This is a common complaint in the marketplace. I want a 1A in neutral tint, but not if the head and body don't fit correctly.

No issue on any of my samples. But of course, they are from an early batch.

 

[DHart]

When running a 14500 li-ion in the 1AA model, is a regular protected li-ion sufficient, or is it highly advised to use an IMR cell? I ordered some regular AW 14500's with my light and hoping I didn't need to have IMR instead...

 

[tallyram]

Regular(black) AW14500's work great for me.

 

[harlequinn]

I'm just going to ramble a bit here, so bear with me, and hopefully some of what I have to say will make sense and/or be helpful with understanding this whole PWM issue...

I'm not aware that there's a temporal difference in persistence between rods and cones, but I'd have to look it up to be sure. I'm not an expert on rhodopsin characteristics, but one of my professors from grad school when I was getting my PhD in perceptual psychology at UC Santa Cruz, Gene Switkes, is... I'll have to look up some of his papers and see if he's done anything on differences in the characteristics of the pigments in rods vs cones. Just of the top of my head, I'd say that sensitivity to PWM because of differences between rods and cones is more about the differential sensitivity they have; a cone requires 5 - 6 photons to generate an action potential, whereas a rod only requires 1 - 2, so your hypothesis is certainly possible, but I'd think that overall even with the PWM the total light output would be enough to activate the cones, and at that point the intensity of the light is so high the rods get overwhelmed and essentially shut down and don't work (as in photopic vision).

With respect to flicker sensitivity, the critical flicker fusion (CFF) rate is a function of the intensity of the light. The greater the intensity of the light, the higher the rate needs to be for the light to be perceived as continuous rather than strobing/flickering, so in general, a lower PWM rate is less noticeable at low levels than high levels. I'm not an electrical engineer, so I don't know if it's possible to design a circuit that would vary the PWM rate based on the output level, but I would imagine it's cheaper and easier to build a driver that uses the same rate at all output levels. Still, the reason as to why the 2C uses such a low rate is baffling to me, and aside from the fact I don't do 123 format lights, I'd never get one because I am fairly sensitive to PWM.

Anyway, please pardon the early Sunday morning ramblings of a tired old psychophysics professor... haven't had my caffeine yet...

PS: I have to say, I really like the beam profiles of these lights... I love the large hotspot in the beam... the idea of having most of the beam be hotspot and the minority of it as spill is a very appealing profile to me for my EDC preferences. Although I find the poor regulation a put-off and the fact they're only available in cool tints right now too means I'll be waiting until they come out with neutral versions (IF they come out with neutral versions that is...)

That's interesting information! It would be great to see what some experts in the area think!!! Their input could help change the industry (if manufacturers were willing to listen - some are, some aren't).

I thought CFF worked in reverse - so lower intensity needs higher rate, higher intensity needs lower rate. It's not my field so I'm probably wrong and you're probably right.

I returned my 2C variant. PWM was sooooo annoying. I might pickup a 1A version instead - no PWM issues and 1 less battery to worry about.

 

[selfbuilt]

When running a 14500 li-ion in the 1AA model, is a regular protected li-ion sufficient, or is it highly advised to use an IMR cell? I ordered some regular AW 14500's with my light and hoping I didn't need to have IMR instead...

Regular AW protected 14500 will be fine. Even on Turbo, I get 40 mins to shut-off. That's less than a 2C discharge rate, well within specs for a standard Li-ion. In fact, unprotected IMR would not be advised, since the lights lack a built-in low voltage shut-off feature.

That's interesting information! It would be great to see what some experts in the area think!!! Their input could help change the industry (if manufacturers were willing to listen - some are, some aren't).

Agreed, it is interesting. But I am still at a loss as to why I (and others) seem to find PWM so much more noticeable at lower levels. :shrug:

In this case, certainly no issues with the 1A - it is just the 2C that has the low PWM issue.

 

[B0wz3r]

Agreed, it is interesting. But I am still at a loss as to why I (and others) seem to find PWM so much more noticeable at lower levels. :shrug:

There are a LOT of individual differences from person to person in terms of the nuances of their perceptual experiences. On average, about 60% of the cones are red ones, 30% green ones, and 10% blue ones, but this can vary from person to person. A late friend of mine who was an artists always said he could see more shades of red than anyone else he knew... he could look at a car with a red paint job and see swirls in the paint on the car when no one else could, and he also could not see green or blue as well. That would be consistent with him having a greater percentage of red cones at the expense of the other two types, and could also mean he had a greater range of wavelength sensitivities in his red cones as well.

The human visual system is actually a pretty bloody amazing piece of biology... as I mention above, photoreceptors are incredibly sensitive, so much so that under ideal conditions, an observer with no visual defects can see a candle flame a mile away! Further, we are so good at detecting alignments of objects, we are capable of detecting two parallel lines that are offset by about only a micron; that's less than the actual size of a photoreceptor itself. (How the visual system does that is pretty amazing too, but far too complex for me to go into here easily... and I have a class to teach in 15 min.)

The differences in detecting PWM would be based on what's known as the magnocellular system in the retina; it receives information from subtypes of cones that are specialized to detect rapid changes in brightness and also detect motion. This is the system that our ability to see motion, determine the spatial location of an object with respect to ourselves and other objects, and navigate through the environment is based on; all those spatial perceptual abilities are based on the functioning of the magnocellular system. Some people just have slightly more sensitive systems than others, based on slight differences in the proportion of the different types of cones, rods, magnocellular retinal ganglion cells, and parvocellular retinal ganglion cells.

 

[selfbuilt]

The differences in detecting PWM would be based on what's known as the magnocellular system in the retina; it receives information from subtypes of cones that are specialized to detect rapid changes in brightness and also detect motion. This is the system that our ability to see motion, determine the spatial location of an object with respect to ourselves and other objects, and navigate through the environment is based on; all those spatial perceptual abilities are based on the functioning of the magnocellular system. Some people just have slightly more sensitive systems than others, based on slight differences in the proportion of the different types of cones, rods, magnocellular retinal ganglion cells, and parvocellular retinal ganglion cells.

Thanks for the comments, it is definitely an interesting issue.

What you suggest above makes sense me, as I find I perceive PWM flicker as a subjective sensation that something is moving (typically in a rather stroboscopic way). This is especially obvious when looking at a moving object, but the same relative perception effect occurs if looking at a static scene. But of course, something is always moving - I am likely performing eye saccades. Given that we can cover several hundred degree arcs per second, with saccades lasting typically tens to hundreds of msec duration, I wouldn't be surprised if this was part of the explanation for those of us sensitive to PWM (in conjunction with the magnocellular system and relative sensitivity of the components).

 

[Xak]

Just got the Neutron Neutral 1A. There is a bit of wobble to the head in the loosened mode. If I turn it 1/4 of a turn or so there is no problem with accidental switching of modes or levels unless you really use 2 hands and force it, it does still wobble when sideways pressure is applied, though. I must say that even the Quarks can be manipulated this way with just a slight turn of the head and not a full 1/4 turn.

This does not interfere with normal use of the light at all, even if I use it like I do my Quark. The noticeable wobble of the head in the loosened position does worry me as far as water resistance (is it really IPX...whatever... water proof).

The beam and tint ROCK. I was surprised to find, though, that removing the bezel gives you wider, smoother spill. Why was it designed to have such a cumbersome bezel? Really, it's an EDC-type light. It doesn't need a "tactical" bezel. Does it physically need the bezel at all? Will the glass fall out if I leave it removed?

In any case the pros out weigh the cons (unless there is a water proof issue). This thing appears to be built like a tank, the threads are robust and very square, more so than the Quarks. That is why I agree with another poster that there must be a tolerance issue possibly with the 1A bodies as I hear the same head works fine in a 1C or 2A.

The UI is like a combo of the Quark Tactical and Quark Regular. It will function like a tactical because it has memory retention in the loose head mode, but a tight head will ALWAYS start as turbo THEN strobe if you click or tap the switch within one sec. VERY cool.

If someone want's to test the waterproofing of this light and it fails I hope Thrunite will supply new 1A bodies for those with this issue. I love the light. The head wobble and bezel are kind of a bummer. If only 4 Sevens came out with a XM-L Quark with this UI.

 

[EngrPaul]

I bought a neutral-emitter 2A (2AA) from Going Gear and received it earlier this week.

Overall, I like the light. The tint is great, the light has a good balance of flood and hotspot. The selection of levels is very good and the reverse clicky is acceptable to me because it allows me to change modes without disengaging the switch.

It's a boring-looking flashlight, the only nice feature is the front bezel. The mid-secion has some flats that give it a tiny bit of personality, but overall I consider the design "me too" and falls short of looking like a flashlight lover's piece.

The flux is not as impressive as I expected. It's not a whole lot better than my Nitecore D20 Q3-5A. I was expecting a bigger punch... regardless it is an improvement.

The reflector is a very reflective light OP. Perfect in my book, I'm tired of hazy OP finishes that have reduced reflectance. I only wish they would frame the LED at the bottom of the reflector with a donut of plastic like other manufacturers have been doing in order to make the LED look more "finished".

I experienced some things with the light that ThruNite should consider fixing.

(1) The button on the light "puffs" after installing the tailcap from the simple pressure of the collapsing volume of air as it's turned in. This prevents tailstanding. I solved this by swapping the switch cover rubber from an old "Rexlight". This has a slightly shorter button which is stiffer. I no longer have any issues with puff. However, the switch is harder to push to switch the light on. But tapping the switch for mode-changing still works without much effort.

(2) If I switch from firefly to turbo, when I go back to firefly more often than not the emitter is completely dark. If I switch the light off, then back on, the firefly comes back.

(3) The pocket clip is way too stiff and is not deburred on the inside. The burr-side of the stamping in on the internal side of the clip and is scratching off the anodizing where it rests on the body. It's also quite rough on my pants. They should at a minimum deburr the inside of the clip where it touches the body. They should consider dropping down a gage. I also experienced frequent unscrewing of the clip retaining bezel toward the tailcap, not that it causes problems.

"Wobble" is not an issue with my light.

Overall, I feel the light is acceptable at this price point because it has a newer XM-L emitter. However, it has enough flaws and lack of personality that it's appeal will quickly subside.

I do not feel this light has the same quality as the Catapult. It doesn't seem to be made by the same people. At the price point, it's somewhat lacking in features and execution. I wish it was more like the Catapult's little brother.

 

[selfbuilt]

It's a boring-looking flashlight, the only nice feature is the front bezel. The mid-secion has some flats that give it a tiny bit of personality, but overall I consider the design "me too" and falls short of looking like a flashlight lover's piece.

Hi Paul, welcome back. I tend to agree on the lack of "personality" - I find them a little plain looking myself. But some here seem to favour the simplified look. In a sense, they do have the distinction (?) of being among the most flat and having most consistent width across their length. :shrug:

The flux is not as impressive as I expected. It's not a whole lot better than my Nitecore D20 Q3-5A. I was expecting a bigger punch... regardless it is an improvement.

Hmmm, I find the 2A quite a bit brighter than my D20-Q5. But I appreciate the comment, as it raises an important issue that has been on my mind lately - we generally perceive "throwier" lights as relatively brighter than "floodier" ones.

I see this as an emitter class effect in small bodies (with small reflectors), and not one specific to this Thrunite series. The XM-L lights are all "floodier" than the XP-E/G class lights, leading to less throw and less relative perceived brightness. I think a closet ceiling bounce would convince anyone they are quite a bit brighter - but they may not seem that way in everyday use, given how we all track the hospot by eye.

Again, this is not specific to the Thrunites - the same would apply to any small light series "upgraded" to XM-L. I have EDCed a lot of different small lights over the years, and I find myself attract to "throwier" ones for this reason. But again, I understand why some prefer floodier lights - it is really just a question of calibrating one's light choice to one's personal preference.

 

[EngrPaul]

Agreed!

The D20 was the closest thing I had in "floodiness" to the ThruNite. (My particular D20 was always an overachiever.) With additional comparision and ceiling bounce, I have to agree the output of the ThruNite is indeed a healthy step forward.

I bought the Neturon knowing it would be a floody hotspot, and I'm 100% satisfied with the type of beam it provides.

 

[Xak]

One more thing about my 1A... it does get that "puff" to the switch when changing the battery and loosening the bezel fixes it, but even when puffy I haven't noticed the "squishy" tail switch some people are talking about. Mine seams perfectly normal.

Now and then the firefly doesn't come on when twisting the head from tight to loose while the light is on.

I was surprised someone liked the bezel. I like a plain flashlight, it's the beam that I like to show off. The bezel greatly reduces the spill. Am I correct in assuming the bezel holds the glass in and keeps it waterproof?

 

[EngrPaul]

I was surprised someone liked the bezel. I like a plain flashlight, it's the beam that I like to show off. The bezel greatly reduces the spill. Am I correct in assuming the bezel holds the glass in and keeps it waterproof?

I like a flashlight with a bezel because you can replace the glass if it breaks, clean the emitter if it has processing gunk on it, or replace the reflector with another type if desired. Also, flashlights tend to get a hazy lens over time because silicon and other chemicals become volatile and condense on the lens.

Bezel-less lights are made where everything is loaded from the back side and then, more often than not, they expoxy the threads. Anything goes wrong, you're out of luck.

 

[Xak]

Are the heads of the 1A and 1C interchangeable? Has anyone come to the conclusion that the wobble is caused by the body? Think Thrunight will offer parts like 4Sevens does in the future? If he doesn't offer a fix for the wobble I may consider buying a new body in the future, though it would be super classy if he would just take care of the customers with the wobble problem. Perhaps a recall on the 1A bodies that wobble. (one can dream)

 

[Xak]

I replaced the tailswitch with a 4Sevens regular and it works perfectly now. Tailstands no matter what. Before it was wobbling and would switch modes when pushed flush with the table. Now it's perfect.

I found some really thin o-rings and noticed there was room for one of them next to the original o-ring. So now there are 2 o-rings in there, this did seam to help a bit. It can still switch modes when the loosened head is manipulated with 2 hands, but in normal use this is not a problem.

I am finally happy with this light.

 

[Uxorious]

I replaced the tailswitch with a 4Sevens regular and it works perfectly now. Tailstands no matter what. Before it was wobbling and would switch modes when pushed flush with the table. Now it's perfect.

There is another easy way to fixed the "puff" of the tailcap to an acceptable level.

First, you have to disassemble the tailswitch, and pick up the larger one of the four spare o-rings(I think they are in two size) included in the box.

Second, put the o-ring around the rubber tailcap, which can provide an additional
space between the rubber tailcap and the "shell" of the tailswitch.
This will let the tailcap recessed more from the surface which provides tailstand ability.

Third, reassemble the tailswitch.

Because the airtight of the tailswitch remains quite will, you still have to press
the tailcap when you screw the tailswitch in.
Overrall it works pretty good for my two Neutron 1A :thumbsup:

Lastly, if you can't screw in the tailswitch to the body as close as you want,
just replace the metal spacer in the tailswitch with a thinner one.

Sorry for my poor English, hope you guys really understand what I said......:hairpull: