vsiddhartha
Newly Enlightened
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2016
- Messages
- 2
Hi all, new user and first post here.
I'm looking to buy my first LED flashlight and specifically looking at the 1AAA models,something I can have in my pocket all the time.
As an engineer, I like seeing the lumens/candela/run-time specs but am pretty disappointed in the lack of availability of lumens vs. runtime graphs. You hardly get the full performance picture without these graphs and in their absence, the lumen/run-time specs can be downright misleading. Streamlight appears to be the only manufacturer I've seen that provides these on their website (in the fact sheets), which I love.
Take for example, the similarly-priced Pelican 1910b vs the Streamlight ProTac 1AAA. Both are 1AAA alkaline-powered, but the Pelican claims 106 lumens with 2.5 hours runtime and the Streamlight claims 70 lumens with 0.5 hours runtime. I'm aware of the FL1 standard and that the runtime is duration to 10% initial output. The question is, how can the Pelican have such apparently drastically better performance? In my mind, either:
A) The Pelican is taking advantage of much newer/better LED or regulation technology; or
B) The Pelican is deceivingly reporting runtimes with a lithium AAA battery; or
C) The Pelican is playing games with the light delivery over the course of the runtime, which would be apparent on a runtime graph (that is not available on their website).
What I mean here with (C): The Streamlight's graph clearly shows the lumen output stays pretty flat (above 90%) for the first 12 minutes or so before dropping to about 50% at 20 minutes, then falling off a cliff to less than 15% by 22 minutes, then a slow crawl for 8 minutes before reaching 10% at 30 minutes runtime. The last 8 minutes look like an intentional design of the driver to stretch the runtime misleadingly from 22 minutes to 30 minutes. On the other hand, graphs of other flashlights (e.g., the ProTac 1L-1AA) show them only outputting 100% at the immediate beginning before rapidly dropping to 50-70% output for the bulk of the runtime, thus allowing them to misleadingly claim a higher "max" output. Some higher-end tactical flashlights (e.g., the Streamlight TL-2 LED), although having lower "max" output, remain close to 100% for most of the runtime. This last scenario is ideal in my opinion, as it's the least misleading and results in a more predictable tool (i.e., the flashlight) at any given time (i.e., state of discharge). Obviously higher "max" lumens is what sells flashlights to the common uneducated consumer (or someone who only cares about initial brightness), but I feel most people, if educated, would prefer a more consistent brightness over the course of discharge.
So, back to my comparison of the 1910b and ProTac 1AAA, which of the above explanations is the most correct? Are there runtime graphs out there for the 1910b? I feel strongly that an astute consumer cannot make an informed decision with them!
I'm looking to buy my first LED flashlight and specifically looking at the 1AAA models,something I can have in my pocket all the time.
As an engineer, I like seeing the lumens/candela/run-time specs but am pretty disappointed in the lack of availability of lumens vs. runtime graphs. You hardly get the full performance picture without these graphs and in their absence, the lumen/run-time specs can be downright misleading. Streamlight appears to be the only manufacturer I've seen that provides these on their website (in the fact sheets), which I love.
Take for example, the similarly-priced Pelican 1910b vs the Streamlight ProTac 1AAA. Both are 1AAA alkaline-powered, but the Pelican claims 106 lumens with 2.5 hours runtime and the Streamlight claims 70 lumens with 0.5 hours runtime. I'm aware of the FL1 standard and that the runtime is duration to 10% initial output. The question is, how can the Pelican have such apparently drastically better performance? In my mind, either:
A) The Pelican is taking advantage of much newer/better LED or regulation technology; or
B) The Pelican is deceivingly reporting runtimes with a lithium AAA battery; or
C) The Pelican is playing games with the light delivery over the course of the runtime, which would be apparent on a runtime graph (that is not available on their website).
What I mean here with (C): The Streamlight's graph clearly shows the lumen output stays pretty flat (above 90%) for the first 12 minutes or so before dropping to about 50% at 20 minutes, then falling off a cliff to less than 15% by 22 minutes, then a slow crawl for 8 minutes before reaching 10% at 30 minutes runtime. The last 8 minutes look like an intentional design of the driver to stretch the runtime misleadingly from 22 minutes to 30 minutes. On the other hand, graphs of other flashlights (e.g., the ProTac 1L-1AA) show them only outputting 100% at the immediate beginning before rapidly dropping to 50-70% output for the bulk of the runtime, thus allowing them to misleadingly claim a higher "max" output. Some higher-end tactical flashlights (e.g., the Streamlight TL-2 LED), although having lower "max" output, remain close to 100% for most of the runtime. This last scenario is ideal in my opinion, as it's the least misleading and results in a more predictable tool (i.e., the flashlight) at any given time (i.e., state of discharge). Obviously higher "max" lumens is what sells flashlights to the common uneducated consumer (or someone who only cares about initial brightness), but I feel most people, if educated, would prefer a more consistent brightness over the course of discharge.
So, back to my comparison of the 1910b and ProTac 1AAA, which of the above explanations is the most correct? Are there runtime graphs out there for the 1910b? I feel strongly that an astute consumer cannot make an informed decision with them!