Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good *with pics and graphs*

I just recently purchased over 150 of the New Titanium 123 batteries directly
from AmondoTech. Based on the test results and good things I've read here
on CPF, figured it was a wise and well researched purchase.

The story starts here...

Using my new SF M6 and not keeping track of the "minutes" the M6 seemed
to be eating batteries in a hurry with the MN21 bulb, much faster than the SF
advertised 20 minutes runtime. So I decided to run a few runtime tests to see
if my feelings were accurate, and boy were they!!!

I ran through two sets of (6) batteries and here are the results.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

First run:
Loaded the M6 with (6) fresh New Titanium batteries, stepped outside, turned
it on, and started the stop watch.

At 2 minutes 50 seconds the light dimmed enough to be noticeable.
At 7 minutes 10 seconds the light dimmed to a barely useable amount (+/- 100L)
At 9 minutes 30 seconds the light slowly dimmed to nothing and went dead.

Removed the batteries.
(3) were warm.
(1) was too hot to hold.
(2) were skin burners.

Let the batteries cool for 12 minutes, reinstalled them and started the stop
watch.

The light was at the barely useable amount of +/- 100 lumens for 6 minutes
10 seconds and then dimmed to nothing and went dead.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second run:
Loaded the M6 with (6) fresh New Titanium batteries, stepped outside, turned
it on, and started the stop watch.

At 3 minutes 10 seconds the light dimmed enough to be noticeable.
At 6 minutes 30 seconds the light dimmed to a barely useable amount (+/- 100L)
At 8 minutes 50 seconds the light slowly dimmed to nothing and went dead.

Removed the batteries.
(1) was warm.
(4) were too hot to hold.
(1) was a skin burner.

Let the batteries again cool for 12 minutes, reinstalled them and started the
stop watch.

The light was again at the barely useable amount of +/- 100 lumens for 7
minutes 15 seconds and then dimmed to nothing and went dead.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Very dissapointing to say the least.
- Am I expecting to much?
- How does this compare to your results or what you would have thought?

Wednesday night I'm going to run the same two tests but with OEM Surefire
batteries. Look for the results about the same time tomorrow night.

ALL thoughts/comments/suggestions/concerns/ideas/etc. are very much
appreciated.

Going to put in a call to AmondoTech tomorrow and express my concerns and
ask for a refund on the bateries. Will also keep you posted on the response.

Until then, happy illuminating!

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

Good report, that will make me hesitate to buy titaniums.

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

Amondotech's Titaniums feed my A2 and G2. No problems here. Your poor results must be due to the higher drain of the M6.

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

I have run Titaniums in my M6 and didn't notice much difference from the Surefire batteries. I did not do any extended run tests however.

Could there possibly be a probem with the battery carrier in the M6? I don't have much technical background, but it seems strange that the batteries are different temps. Thanks for posting your experience. I would wait for more info before jumping to any conclusions regarding the quality of the Titaniums. I will look forward to your Surefire battery test.

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

nethiker - The thought of a faulty battery carrier never came to mind, but I'll
call SF tomorrow and see if that is a possability. If not they may be able to
suggext other reasons.

Note:
I've also been running the Titaniums in (2) E2D's and an M3. May do some runtime
tests in those two SF lights as well.

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

The cells are entering thermal shutdown, it sounds like. The M6 was not really designed to be run continuously for that long--it's a tactical light and you'd only use it as momentary or to light your way while you rappel down from a helicopter into an enemy encampment. If you want to burn another set of cells, you might try running 1 minute at a time with a cooldown period after each burst.

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

yes Andrew wynn found similar results with sf 123s. After 11 minutes i believe the cells gave up due to thermal stress. i believe at peak draw 40 watts is being wasted heating up the batteries. it would seem that that the m6 HOLA pulls just a bit more than 123's want to put out reliably. try doing a test in which you run the m6 in 2 minute intervals and see how it runs! IE the two minutes it is going to take to clear the meth lab you and your team is about to take down .... i cant really think of many situations that the m6 would actually be used for 20 minutes straight on the high setting. i mean if you are walking a trail and just pointing the m6 at the ground ...... i feel sorry for you night vision!

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

I'm currently working on a similar situation, but it will have to wait for a resolution before I can post.

In using my M6 in the field, I rarely use it for more than a minute at a time, however, it has happened. While busting into drug labs isn't my specialty, searching for people who don't want to be found is. This can take a minute or an hour. You don't really know how long it will take. It would be a major nuisance for a light to require a cool down every few minutes.

This is interesting data.

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

has a runtime test been done using the MN20 lamp assembly and the Titanium 123's? I'm just courious if these Titaniums perform as poorly with the lower output they would definantly be a no-go for my M6.

wonderful information and I hope you are able to get resolution to your lsatisfaction


doug

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

I have had a similar experience as Seery with titanium cells bought recently.

4 cells in series driving a 1.35A load (G120 lamp)... in theory it should be over 45 minuts runtime at a decent output (1300mah rating would suggest at least 1ah of good output into a 1.35a load)... but instead, I got less than 15 minuts of usable output, and those 15 minuts were broken up into short bursts of usage here and there. (never heated up the cells)...

I think amondotech may have lousy cells right now... possibly sent in "good" cells for official testing, but reverted back to cheapos shortly thereafter. I won't buy again unless I hear some convincing words that they are improved "again." luckily I only wasted $20 on titanium cells.

[edit in] the "cheapo" WF brand cells that came with the ultrafire, lasted much longer driving the same lamp (at least 40+ minuts at good output, with another 20+ minuts deminishing)... suggesting that there is nothing wrong with my light, only the batteries.

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

I have an M6 on the way to me right now in the mail, so I'm interested in this outcome, although I plane to use Battery Station cells.

With my M4, I found that cheaper cells (Panasonic white label, via ebay) can't handle the drain of the LOLA, never mind even trying the HOLA. Battery Station cells seem to be a close runner to the SF brand cells, but they get warm if running the light for a long time, whereas the white Panasonics seem ready to melt after extended use in the M4. I would expect the M6 running the LOLA to be cooler, as the drain is being shared across 2 parallel paths (it is a 9 volt Lamp, right, not 18, as some people think). Ultimately, I found that for practical purposes, the M4 HOLA didn't seem much brighter than the LOLA, and was slower to light (heavy filament), as well as draining the cells faster.

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

There're two things happening here. One, QC on the cheap cells like the Titaniums isn't quite so good. They're fine for normal use, they just don't stand up to severe use. Two, HOLAs drain the cells at a rapid rate. Anything that claims a runtime of 20 minutes on CR123As is going to be putting the cells under a load that they really aren't meant to sustain. These are high voltage, *low amperage* cells, and they're really meant to be used in small numbers at that. If you can expect to kill them in under 30 minutes, they're going to be very stressed out and the lesser cells might not make it.

The more cells you use at one time, also, the more likely it is that one or more of those cells will be one of the bad apples that fails sooner under high load (see the QC issue above.) A lot of those cells would work fine in something with a more reasonable current draw, or for short bursts, but they just can't handle prolonged high drain.

If you don't want to feed that sucker lots of higher-cost cells, you might want to consider a rechargable option. There's the venerable Mr-R, and several homebrewed Li-Ion options using multiple high-powered 18650s and 17500s. There's also some possibility of an adapter being produced when/if AW's C-size Li-Ions become a reality by any of several modders.

If you need runtime, you might also want to consider a ROP LE on low in a Mag C body. It's still quite bright, you get a solid hour from two 18650s, and you can choose the beam pattern that suits you best. It's not nearly as robust as a SF light, but it can be made easily and inexpensively with readily-available parts and it makes a fine workhorse. I've read a number of accounts from LEOs that liked it quite a bit with both lamp options, even in spite of its limitations.

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

Ran my M6 last night on SF cells for 5-10 minutes straight. The body got very warm despite 40 degree weather. The cells still put out though.
I found Pentagonlight cells below par in my E2d and sent them back to Pentagonlight.
I have a stock of new Baterystation cells and will let you all know how they fare.

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

This is what I ordered and for what device.

- 100 singles (for the M6)
- 22 inseperable doubles (E2D's)
- 6 inseperable triples (M3/M3T)
- For a total of 162 batteries.

This is from Amondotech's web site.
The batteries are manufactured in the same production lot and matched the internal resistances.
Referring to the doubles and triples. You would think in a larger volume order
(as in the 100 singles) they would know these are going to be used together
and send out "same production lot" batteries as well. Don't think it would
make any difference, if they tell me it would I'll seperate the triples and run
the same tests again to find out.

Bought the M6 as an emergency search light on and 3 minutes 10 seconds of
runtime just won't cut it folks! I bought the most rugged and reliable high
output light for a reason.

Very anxious to run the same tests again tonight with the SF batts, and
hoping they perform as advertised.

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

All the more reason to get a ROP as a backup! :nana:

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

I can second the runtime thing, im new to lights, and am currently thinking of getting a SF L4 for Search and Rescue purposes, this could mean running batteries until they are totally gone and replacing them and carrying on in the same session. Basically until the person has been found, no matter how long it takes!!

I thought Surefire was for me, but now im thinking maybee its not.... For night trials at the moment im carrying a 5 million candle power (dunno what that is in lumens) lamp, its quite large, but it only lasts about 20-25 mins before its useless, so i wanted something with medium to long range that i could use continously for searching for people and the lamp for cross mountain or more detailed inspection of a particular area, say a deep gulley.

I think ill wait on the findings of you guys before i decide.

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

This will be interesting.

The M6 is known to go into thermal shutdown using Surefire cells as well.

js and I have discussed this at length several times. But the M6 IS designed as a special tactics light, not as most people typically use flashlights.

It really is NOT designed to run continuously with the HOLA on 123 cells. js's M6-R pack, using more robust NiMH cells solves the problem, but obviously is not widely available.

There are lots of high power unregulated options that run more consistently than the M6 on 123's. But a regulated LiIon solution for the M6 would be seriously cool.

Andrewwynns hotdriver might make that happen. We'll have to wait and see.

Bill

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

Englander said:

I can second the runtime thing, im new to lights, and am currently thinking of getting a SF L4 for Search and Rescue purposes, this could mean running batteries until they are totally gone and replacing them and carrying on in the same session. Basically until the person has been found, no matter how long it takes!!

Click to expand...

May just be me but the SF L4 is not a search and rescue light. I have one and it's a great light but it just doesn't have the mass to dissipate the heat. That's the reason I've got a 2 stage switch in it.

Back on topic. It sounds like the failures were exactly the same and makes me think the battery carrier might have something to do with it. The other thing is the M6 won't put out 20 minutes of light at full tilt boogie. On long runs it does dim appreciably. That's why a number of folks are looking for a rechargeable/regulated option (think JS's M6-R) that will burn full output for that long.

-LT

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

Just off the phone with SF.

SF feels the problem lies in either the batteries or the bulb and that although
the battery carrier may be at fault it is unlikely. SF recommended trying a new
MN21 bulb and testing the results again. I do have another MN21 bulb and if the
test run tonight with the SF batts gives the same results I'll replace the bulb
and start over.

Also stated was that very small variances in starting voltages will cause
uneven draw on the (6) batteries causing the thermal shutdown experienced.
And that battery over-heating is not typical of the M6 light.

SF assured me that the M6 will and is designed to give 20+ minutes of continuous
output with the HOLA. If changing the bulb and/or the batteries does not
remedy the problem, send it back and they will make certain it returns to run
as advertised.

If I could put a percentage on "voice tones" I'd say the SF tech rep was here.
- Failure due to batteries 55%
- Failure due to faulty MN21 bulb 35%
- Failure due to faulty battery carrier 10%

Darkness won't come fast enough tonight so I can resume testing. Until then.

Re: Surefire M6 / New Titanium 123's / Results / Not good

The failure, more than likely, IS due to the batteries, but many of us that have done multiple extended runs have had shutdowns of this nature.

It hasn't ever happened on the LOLA that I am aware of.

Surefire knows about this, even if the rep you talked to didn't.

Bill