When will Fenix change the P2D to handle 3,7 rechargables properly???

[Badbeams3]

Probably around the same time Surefire makes a light that takes AA's.

Hey! I think that would sell well...even better with a Q5 in there. But I guess that is just a joke...cut into thier sales of 123 batts:shakehead

 

[pbs357]

Can't answer the OP's question about when Fenix P2D's will support 3.7v as well as 3v primary, but I 'm using the "1000mah" 3v rcr's from Lighthound.com. I realize most companies overstate their capacity, but as an urban flashaholic, I use my EDC in bursts or in 5 minute or less situations. And although I can top off every night, I haven't done so in about a month... not bad. Just a suggestion for an alternative 3v rcr.

 

[Any Cal.]

The efficiency of the buck/boost circuit will be @10% less than a boost only. That means you will be running for less time on primaries, with the only appreciable gain being to regain modes on RCRs. Many may not wish to make that sacrifice on a light that is so long lived on primaries.

Since the RCRs are only 1/2 capacity, you could have carried primaries for quite a while before you dropped down to the level of runtime the fully charged RCRs would give you.

To me, the only way such a light would make sense is in the rumored 18650 light, which would have much more power available, roughly 4 times as much.

 

[lumenlover2]

I`d take the 10% less runtime !!! You all do with the P3d obviously so it should not be a problem with the P2d to accept that.

 

[glenda17]

Just get a 'Ultrafire 602C Q5 5-Mode LED. Brighter, smaller, and lighter than the P2DQ5 and levels work with a 3.7VLi-ion.

 

[Any Cal.]

The P3D is a buck only, so it is actually more efficient than the boost circuit found in the L1/2, unless they are using something funny.

If you run the P3D on RCRs, you lose like half your runtime. I was referring to what you would lose running a boost/buck on primaries.

If you were a manufacturer in a crowded marketplace, would you want to throw away 10% of your runtime figures in order to make a light totally compatible with rechargeables, for the relatively small percentage of those who are actually worried about it?

 

[Jarl]

I`d take the 10% less runtime !!! You all do with the P3d obviously so it should not be a problem with the P2d to accept that.

P3D has a completely different circuit. Try again

 

[lumenlover2]

The P3D is a buck only, so it is actually more efficient than the boost circuit found in the L1/2, unless they are using something funny.

If you run the P3D on RCRs, you lose like half your runtime. I was referring to what you would lose running a boost/buck on primaries.

If you were a manufacturer in a crowded marketplace, would you want to throw away 10% of your runtime figures in order to make a light totally compatible with rechargeables, for the relatively small percentage of those who are actually worried about it?

Me and mother earth , el nino and some others are pretty much worried about it

 

[lumenlover2]

P3D has a completely different circuit. Try again

Very smart , thank`s. Now try posting something useful for this thread topic...

 

[Jarl]

Very smart , thank`s. Now try posting something useful for this thread topic...

post 9?

Try to understand how a light works before making statements about it