Any visable difference between Malkoff M60 vs. Lumens Factory EO-9?

Hi,

I'm looking at running the AW rechargable 3.7V with a Lumens Factory EO-9 http://www.lighthound.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2848&strVarSel=&strCompare in a 6P. I already run a Malkoff M60 on primaries and I'm wondering if there is any real difference between the two other than the incandescent may be easier to see? I think it'd be nice to run rechargables. Is it worth it in your opinion? Thanks for your input.

I never ran Lumens Factory lamp before, but I'm glad you post it. It looks pretty nice to run HO incan lamp for a change with my 6P. I'm currently using the M60 right now, but I wouldn't mind trying out the EO-9 since it's only $15.99. Waiting to hear from others.

1203 said:

Hi,

I'm looking at running the AW rechargable 3.7V with a Lumens Factory EO-9 http://www.lighthound.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2848&strVarSel=&strCompare in a 6P. I already run a Malkoff M60 on primaries and I'm wondering if there is any real difference between the two other than the incandescent may be easier to see? I think it'd be nice to run rechargables. Is it worth it in your opinion? Thanks for your input.

Click to expand...

Waiting as well...

I would suggest that the 16340 may be a little small to effectively and safely power the EO9. Possibly 2 x 17500 in a 9P may be a better solution. An EO9 draws 2 amps, what is the AW rated at, 800mah?

I would recommend Mdocod thread to you, probably the single most comprehensive piece of information on cells and globes for incandescent flashlights on the net: http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=161536

the thread above is the best source of info that i have found. having read it inspired me to buy an EO-9 and the AW RCR123a's.
i can not compare to a malkoff p60 but i can compare to an R2 LED drop in:
in my 6p there is more flood with the EO-9 and actually the light that you see if softer and even pleasant when compared to the R2 LED which is rated to 320 lumens (whatever that means). within 5 minutes or there about the 6p becomes rather warm. i don't think you could stand it much past 10 minutes. i would not recommend it. the drain on the batts seems to be tremendous relative to the LED running on a single ULTRAFIRE 17670. the AW's have only had about a dozen charges on them so far and i have noticed no ill effects during charging.
i don't have any high speed measuring equipement so i can't through any #'s at you but it works so far. how scientic is that?
i do recommend that you buy some reloads and have them charged and ready to go if you if you will use this bulb for an extended period of time. i have only ran this bulb on the AW's. i like it. it's my current favorite at night. i might try and compare it with my p90 soon.

I ran a similar configuration in my two C3s with an A19 extender. I had one equipped with the M60 on 2x17670 and the other with the LF EO-9.

To be fair, I think the EO-9 is rated at 380 lumens whereas the M60 is around the 235+ lumens.

They are very different light sources and each hold their own in their own respect, BUT, the Lumens Factory EO-9 is the hands down winner in terms of output, range and flood. Not to mention the warmer look of the incan to boot.

There is just something about incans that I cannot dismiss over the newer LEDs. At the lower lumen range, the LEDs appear to outshine the incans, however, step up the the higher lumens incans and then you see where the difference is. The LEDs are putting out more and more light but the incans are not out of the game. Not for a very long time I dare say.

These are my favorite guilt-free high output setups from both camps as of late.

Anyone know if total output performance would suffer running an EO-9 on a pair of 3.7V rechargeable trustfires??

I'm considering buying 4 of these EO-9's as the Aussie Wolf-Eyes Website has a deal where you pay for 3 and get an extra for free.

I really like the EO-9, but I can't get enough runtime to use it effectively. I still pop it in my Raider once in a while, when I know I won't need more than about a half an hour of runtime. I usually leave it in my 9P, but the protected 17500's just don't stack up to the Wolf-Eyes 18500 size cells.

As far as light output, beam pattern, and light quality I would choose the EO-9 hands down.

For runtime and for using for longer constant-on periods I would have to go with an LED. I have a cheap R2 drop-in from DX and a Wolf-Eyes 1-mode drop-in. The Wolf-Eyes is worth the extra money for regular use, IMO.

The EO-9 give about 30-45 minute runtimes, depending on batteries, and I wouldn't recommend running it continuously for more than about 10 minutes. The Wolf-Eyes R2 I have gets me 3hrs.

I wouldn't use the RCR123A cells. I won't say it's not possible, but saftey first right :thumbsup:
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the pull from the lamp puts more strain on the smaller cells than the larger cells, producing heat. The smaller body of a 2x123A light also cannot dissipate as much heat as a larger light. These 2 factors raise the risk of a vent w/flame from the smaller batteries.
Pretty close?

The EO-9 is visibly brighter than the M60 outdoors.

Well, the EO-9 is (3) x CR123A's ~ 35 min., so (6) x CR123A's ~ 70 min., (15) 123's ~ 175 min.. The M60 is (2) 123's for 90 min., thus (6) 123's = 180 min..

So the EO-9 would need (15) 123's to ALMOST = the run time of the M60.

Sorry, I guess I don't get it, unless all you use your flashlight for is to PLAY with. I, however, use my lights for work and just don't see it. But, as they say, to each his own. My .02 FWIW.

cowboy wrote:
"Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the pull from the lamp puts more strain on the smaller cells than the larger cells, producing heat. The smaller body of a 2x123A light also cannot dissipate as much heat as a larger light. These 2 factors raise the risk of a vent w/flame from the smaller batteries.
Pretty close?"
i think you are right, though i think the EO-9 will get pretty dang hot regarless of the platform used. i have only ran mine w/ 2 RCR's at the moment so i have nothing else to compare it to yet. i am considering putting it in a g3 with 2 17500's based on what you just said. i don't mind the 30 minute run time so much because they can be charged. i am careful with my batts and never run them completely down. also, i check them for excessive heat from the charger as well as only using them in short bursts of no more than 5 minutes..... it does get hot....

RWT1405 said:

Well, the EO-9 is (3) x CR123A's ~ 35 min., so (6) x CR123A's ~ 70 min., (15) 123's ~ 175 min.. The M60 is (2) 123's for 90 min., thus (6) 123's = 180 min..

So the EO-9 would need (15) 123's to ALMOST = the run time of the M60.

Sorry, I guess I don't get it, unless all you use your flashlight for is to PLAY with. I, however, use my lights for work and just don' see it. But, as they say, to each his own. My .02 FWIW.

Click to expand...

LEDs will obviously have better runtime than incans. No one is arguing that point. For runtime, I have many other LED based lights I can choose from in my small collection that also accompany my incans outdoors. This is where the 2 is 1 and 1 is none concept falls into play. In fact, these two particular lights are my current "out in the night" setup along with a multi-level LED as backup which happens to be the "Backup" from SureFire.

Even running the M60 continiously for more than 20 minutes is not wise due to the massive amount of heat it generates. Here is where a metal body with a pyrex lens is better suited than a plastic host with a plastic lens..

No offense meant EV_007 and thank you for the very informative response as to what you use and why. I guess I just don't see the difference in the incans to the LEDs. I used my 6P's and 9P (along with various Streamlights, Mags, Smoke-Cutters, etc.) for years before the M60's & M60L's (for my 6P's & 9P's) and M60LL's (they go in my G2's) and can't see any reason to go back to incans. I even tried the A2's (I have 2), but they sit in my light case as I can't see where they give me anything an LED can't, other then limited run-time and the limited bulb time, along with the chance of "blowing" if dropped. I don't "buy or see" enough color or depth perception difference to "see" their worth. Perhaps I'm not a true CPF'er (or I'm blind), but I just don't get it.

To give you an idea as to my background with flashlights I've been using "good" flashlights since 1980, when I got into EMS & Firefighting and work full-time as a Paramedic on the night shift and use my lights often. Once I started using "good" LED's I have not had a time or place to "see the use" for an incan. light, with which the batts. die quicker and the bulb may "die" in mid-use or after a drop.

I'm just TRYING to understand the "draw" to incans, but I guess I will never understand. But I'm very glad you enjoy yours and use them, that's all that really matters I guess. Viva la difference or something like that! LOL My .02 FWIW

RWT1405 said:

Well, the EO-9 is (3) x CR123A's ~ 35 min., so (6) x CR123A's ~ 70 min., (15) 123's ~ 175 min.. The M60 is (2) 123's for 90 min., thus (6) 123's = 180 min..

So the EO-9 would need (15) 123's to ALMOST = the run time of the M60.

Sorry, I guess I don't get it, unless all you use your flashlight for is to PLAY with. I, however, use my lights for work and just don't see it. But, as they say, to each his own. My .02 FWIW.

Click to expand...

I have both the EO-9 and the M60 in duty lights and they both serve their purpose.

The EO-9 in a Leaf 2 x 18500 body is my late shift light when the extra light and "throw through ambient light" factors are worth the extra length of torch on my belt.

On day shifts I cary the M60 in a 2 cell host (with 2 x RCR123A's)

Both setups run very well on li-ion batteries and I always carry spares so the reduced run time as opposed to primary batteries doesn't bother me.

Perhaps the "throw" of the incan is what I'm missing. I'll have to get out my A2's and my SF incan drop-ins for the 6P & 9P and try them again. But I have to be honest, I haven't noticed it up to now. Perhaps the "ambient light" issue could be the difference that I may notice, I'll have to try that also. Thanks!

In my case I always pick up a 2x cell 9V incan with say the EO-9 or EO-9L when I go outside in darkness and/or it is foggy/raining. In these conditions I find the LED lights unhelpful. Indoors or in city lighting outside the LED's are ok.....at least this is my experience over the last few years including R100 and Q5 LED lights.

RWT1405 said:

Perhaps the "throw" of the incan is what I'm missing. I'll have to get out my A2's and my SF incan drop-ins for the 6P & 9P and try them again. But I have to be honest, I haven't noticed it up to now. Perhaps the "ambient light" issue could be the difference that I may notice, I'll have to try that also. Thanks!

Click to expand...

I carry a G3/HO-9 and a G2Z/R2 Cree at work. The G2Z uses primaries while the G3 runs a pair of AW 17500s. I've tried it with a EO-9 but didn't find it that much brighter. My G2Z with the Cree R2 is surprisingly bright a with a well defined hotspot, but in use outdoors, the HO-9 has a bigger and brighter hotspot, and the color is excellent, especially around your typical sodium or metal halide outdoor lights.

One thing to keep in mind when comparing incan P60 lamps is that Lumens Factory lamps tend to have a tighter hotspot (better throw).

True, true... each to their own. At least we all are into lights enough to bring up such finer points.

The "cutting through the ambient light" is another factor I've noticed as well.

In the deep dark woods, any light will provide decent illumination over no light at all of course. The incans will render trees and bark better than LEDs. Look at the last image demonstrating the E2E incan compared to other LEDs in its size and range.




In the city, I noticed that I need more light to compete with the existing ambient light from street lamps, building illumination and car headlights. If you shine an LED light down a city street that is flooded with the mercury vapor or sodium lamps, they seem to get swallowed up as the distance increases, however, a good powerful incan "appears" to cut through it much better by its beam still being visible, especially at greater distances.

For me, a good incan bulb starts out at 200 lumens. The SureFire P91 and Lumens Factory EO-9 are my starting points of reference.

Thanks for the pictures EV_007, they show an interesting difference! I will have to "play around" a bit with my incans and see if I can notice a "real world" difference with them. Thanks!

EV_007 said:

True, true... each to their own. At least we all are into lights enough to bring up such finer points.

The "cutting through the ambient light" is another factor I've noticed as well.

In the deep dark woods, any light will provide decent illumination over no light at all of course. The incans will render trees and bark better than LEDs. Look at the last image demonstrating the E2E incan compared to other LEDs in its size and range.


In the city, I noticed that I need more light to compete with the existing ambient light from street lamps, building illumination and car headlights. If you shine an LED light down a city street that is flooded with the mercury vapor or sodium lamps, they seem to get swallowed up as the distance increases, however, a good powerful incan "appears" to cut through it much better by its beam still being visible, especially at greater distances.

For me, a good incan bulb starts out at 200 lumens. The SureFire P91 and Lumens Factory EO-9 are my starting points of reference.

Click to expand...

I've never understood the need to cut through ambient light. There's already enough light to overpower a handheld light, so what's the point of shining your light at whatever you're looking at? You can already see it.