Maglite 2D P7 Malkoff or Tiablo Ace-G?

Hello,

This question has been keeping me awake for the last two weeks: I want a really powerful flashlight, what should I take:
- Maglite 2D with Malkoff P7 kit and 2x18650 adapter
or:
- Tiablo ACE-G

I really do not know. At this moment, my most powerful flashlight must be something like my Tiablo A9 (really), so I would go up from some 250 lumens to 700+ lumens.
I still wonder:
- which one has the best heatsinking?
- which one throws further?
- are the Malkoff cut-off plastic reflector and the standard plastic lens ok for this P7?

Or is the Lumapower MVP (3 led version) a better option?

Please help me out as I need to sleep again :sleepy:

Thanks,
Joris

Look at the MrGman IS Lumens thread. It is a sticky in this section. Post #1 and #3 have the numbers tested. You get the real out the front lumens.


The 2D Mag P7 direct drive with 3 C NiMH cells will give you the most out the front lumens. 750~870 Lumens to be exact.

The Tiablo ACE-G with li-on cells will make 100 or so less lumens because li-on cells sag more than NiMH cells.

I like my 2D Mag P7 with 3 NiMH cells the best, I would purchase the revolution 2D P7 here:
http://www.lambdalights.com/revolution.html

IMHO: Nothing comes close to the lambdalights P7 Mag build. It is so small and yet it fits 3 C NiMH cells. They are really nice and MrGman tested one already. It was 750 out the front ( NiMH cells charge unknown). Usually; topped off cells make more lumens.


bigchelis

Hi bigchelis,

I recently received Malkoff P7 dropin for my old Maglite 6D which has been standing unused several years. I use it with 12000mAh NiMh cells. When I put on the light I was impressed of the brightness, far brighter than the standard Incan bulb. But yes; the 6D is quite a beast to carry around...
Therefore I wonder about placing the dropin in the 2 or 3D. Just wondering about the required batteries.

When you say:
"The 2D Mag P7 direct drive with 3 C NiMH cells will give you the most out the front lumens. 750~870 Lumens to be exact", which dropin do you then mean? That high lumen rating not even 6D will provide with Malkoff P7.

Regards, Patric

Hello,
Thanks for the replies :thumbsup:.
I just placed my order for the Malkoff P7 dropin for a Maglite 2D, together with the cut-off reflector and the conversion kit for 2 x 18650 cells.
After that I ordered the necessary cells at AW.

I guess I cracked for the form factor and the robustness of a Maglite and, besides, I already had good experiences with the dropin in my 2C.

Kind regards,
Joris

bigchelis said:

Look at the MrGman IS Lumens thread. It is a sticky in this section. Post #1 and #3 have the numbers tested. You get the real out the front lumens.


The 2D Mag P7 direct drive with 3 C NiMH cells will give you the most out the front lumens. 750~870 Lumens to be exact.

The Tiablo ACE-G with li-on cells will make 100 or so less lumens because li-on cells sag more than NiMH cells.

I like my 2D Mag P7 with 3 NiMH cells the best, I would purchase the revolution 2D P7 here:
http://www.lambdalights.com/revolution.html

IMHO: Nothing comes close to the lambdalights P7 Mag build. It is so small and yet it fits 3 C NiMH cells. They are really nice and MrGman tested one already. It was 750 out the front ( NiMH cells charge unknown). Usually; topped off cells make more lumens.


bigchelis

Click to expand...

Hello,
Do you mean Nimh or Lion C-cells??

Joris

A Mag light 2D can fit 3 NiMH C cells for a total of 4.2v which is the same as running it with a single Li-on IMR 18650.

Under 2.8~3A of load, which is typical current for a P7 or MC-E LED on direct drive the cells sag and your initial voltage drops. The bigger capacity Tenergy C NiMH 5000mAh cells sag considerably less and it showed in the rea IS Sphere Test done by MrGman.

My 2D Maglight has Britelumens heatsink and tons of heatsinking compound to help it cool more efficiently. The Malkoff unit I know will cool the P7 just as efficiently and you should get 750 stable out the front lumens. The 870 I got was a split second reading, but after 1 minute it settled down at 750. MrGman also tested several other P7 Mag builds including the Lamda Custom P7 running off 3 C NiMH cells..it gave a steady 750 lumens.


If you have a P7 Mag hosts and run it with NiMH C or D cells your average out the front lumens will be 750 using a UCL lens.

If you use a IMR 18650 or IMR C cells the average will be 650, but it drops fast and after 3 minutes you will be at around 550 out the front lumens because direct drive P7's give less lumens as the capacity of the cell is drained. With the Malkoff regulated P7 and IMR C cells this wouldn't be the case and is a better choice if you ask me.

The Malkoff is a regulated P7 and you will get 700 plus lumens for a longer period of time, unless it gets hot then you loose it ASAP.


If I had a Malkoff P7 drop-in I would run it with a 1.5D Mag hosts, but there are other more compact options too:

For a D size drop-in

In a 4D Mag with 5 NiMH cells = 7v max
In a 1.5D Mag with 2 IMR C cells = 8.4v


For a C size drop-in

In a 2C Mag hosts Bored ($10) to fit 2 IMR C cells = 8.4v Max

Thanks for detailed report,

I understand the number of lumens we are here talking about are emitter lumens? My 6D with Malkoff P7 provides very exactly twice the light output than Fenix TK10 claimed for 225 lumens. This then should mean 450 torch lumens.

Regards, Patric

22hornet said:

Hello,
Thanks for the replies :thumbsup:.
I just placed my order for the Malkoff P7 dropin for a Maglite 2D, together with the cut-off reflector and the conversion kit for 2 x 18650 cells.
After that I ordered the necessary cells at AW.

I guess I cracked for the form factor and the robustness of a Maglite and, besides, I already had good experiences with the dropin in my 2C.

Kind regards,
Joris

Click to expand...

Joris,

For the absolute best combo considering cell capacity and compactness I would send a PM to: Mirage_Man

Mirage Man can sell you a 1.5D Mag or for $25 dollars send him your 2D Mag to be shortened for 2 IMR C cells. It is amazing how small they end up being and the KD Li-on C cell charger for these is amazing both in function reliability. It is only $7

I had a 1.5D Mag that would fit 2 C li-on cells and it is the same lenght as my 1D Mags or as long as a Surefire M6. They are that small.


Here is a 1C Mag Mr. Mirage Man made for me..





Here you can see my KD charger and my 1.5D Mag Hosts. I had a Malkoff Quad in that one.


To run the Li-on C or NiMH C cells in a D size hosts you need a plastic plumbers pipe from Home depot about $.25 cents.





Here is a 4C vs. 1C Mag hosts: I use my Malkoff Tripple in eighter hosts, but recently sold the 1C Mag.

Swedpat said:

Thanks for detailed report,

I understand the number of lumens we are here talking about are emitter lumens? My 6D with Malkoff P7 provides very exactly twice the light output than Fenix TK10 claimed for 225 lumens. This then means 450 torch lumens.

Regards, Patric

Click to expand...

Patric,

My Lumen numbers are actually out the front real life torch lumens as Tested by MrGman in his real IS Sphere.

He has a sticky in the LED section on top read it and wheep...Read Post #1 and #3 and let me know if you have questions as many of the lights tested where mine.

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/229135

Regards,
bigC

From helping MrGman test many P7 Mag builds and P7 lights in general I can tell you the results in regards to out the front lumens will be cosiderably better if you can run bigger cells.

IMR 18650 and smaller I consider small


Li-on C or D cells I consider big.


NiMH C or D cells I consider big in size and capacity and for reasons already mentioned they gave us more peak lumens. You get at least 10% more real out the front lumens, but your hosts tripples in size This is why I still use my 4C with 4 NiMH C cells and Malkoff Tripple. I also have a 1C Mag hosts for it when the 4C becomes too burdensome.

Regards,
Bigchelis

bigchelis said:

Patric,

My Lumen numbers are actually out the front real life torch lumens as Tested by MrGman in his real IS Sphere.

He has a sticky in the LED section on top read it and wheep...Read Post #1 and #3 and let me know if you have questions as many of the lights tested where mine.

Regards,
bigC

Click to expand...

Ok bigchelis,

Then I come to the conclusion that Fenix statements may be too low? TK10 then has ca 350 lumens, and E20 ca 170?
Otherwise something else may be wrong, a faulty dropin or faulty batteries? The lightmeter also isn't the most advanced, but it shows that four pieces of E20 give four times the brightness as one, so it seems to be enough proportional. :thinking:

Regards, Patric

I have found that Calculated Lumens never work. My Malkoff MC-E P60 drop-in with a single IMR 18650 was doing 4.5A at the tail:twothumbs Gene Malkoff expected me to get well over 1000 out the front lumens based on conservative paper math. In real life it made 406 split second out the front lumens then it dropped real fast.


You have to account for heat, cell sag, and driver efficiency in your paper math. It is much easier to just have MrGman test it and see what it does in real life with real batteries and with real California weather

Portable lux meters are good to get an idea of which light will throw more, but you will never get the real out the front lumens unless you have a IS Sphere that is calibrated.


The Fenix TK11 is an upgrade from TK10 right? Look how it performed, no where near 350 lumens, but very appropriate and realistic.
Fenix TK11____________,__2 CR123 Primaries_____high_________221.7,___10 sec_______,


bigC

bigchelis said:

I have found that Calculated Lumens never work. My Malkoff MC-E P60 drop-in with a single IMR 18650 was doing 4.5A at the tail:twothumbs Gene Malkoff expected me to get well over 1000 out the front lumens based on conservative paper math. In real life it made 406 split second out the front lumens then it dropped real fast.


You have to account for heat, cell sag, and driver efficiency in your paper math. It is much easier to just have MrGman test it and see what it does in real life with real batteries and with real California weather

Portable lux meters are good to get an idea of which light will throw more, but you will never get the real out the front lumens unless you have a IS Sphere that is calibrated.


The Fenix TK11 is an upgrade from TK10 right? Look how it performed, no where near 350 lumens, but very appropriate and realistic.
Fenix TK11____________,__2 CR123 Primaries_____high_________221.7,___10 sec_______,


bigC

Click to expand...

Hi,

My measurings are made with careful ceiling bounce tests, which I found (comparing my flashlights) is a fairly exact method. The total light output bounces on the ceiling and therefore differences of lux values of the beam are practically eliminated. Surely not that exact as a IS Sphere, but it can't be too wrong.

Regards, Patric

Swedpat said:

Hi,

My measurings are made with careful ceiling bounce tests, which I found (comparing my flashlights) is a fairly exact method. The total light output bounces on the ceiling and therefore differences of lux values of the beam are practically eliminated. Surely not that exact as a IS Sphere, but it can't be too wrong.

Regards, Patric

Click to expand...

When I first showed MrGman the Malkoff MC-E Warm direct drive P60 drop-in he was doing ceiling bounce test. We were comparing it against the Malkoff Tripple R2 which we knew made 686 out the front lumens. Using the test you mentioned he said it will be at least 800 out the front. It was 406 out the front. I am not sure what we did wrong, but even to the naked eye the MC-E warm on ceiling bounce even seemed brighter, yet it wasn't.

I know my co-worker krammer5150 uses the ceiling bounce test with success, so you may have a good set-up that actually works too.

Swedpat said:

Hi,

My measurings are made with careful ceiling bounce tests, which I found (comparing my flashlights) is a fairly exact method. The total light output bounces on the ceiling and therefore differences of lux values of the beam are practically eliminated. Surely not that exact as a IS Sphere, but it can't be too wrong.

Regards, Patric

Click to expand...

Yes actually it can be way wrong due to different beam patterns. Your ceiling isn't collecting all the light and bouncing it back inside a curved surface to be collected as best possible at a light port. its going to bounce that light all over the room and not necessarily back to the sensor facing up. So lights with tight beam patterns might actually do much better than flood type lights. You can do a direct comparison of lights with the same beam pattern and get linear results. You can't compare lights of different beam patterns on the ceiling and get consistent results.

so doing a test with 1 and then 4 of the exact same light model might actually show 4 times the brightness. But going from a Surefire E2DL to a Fenix T1 may not show any consistency at all. There is a reason they use "spheres" for this type of testing. If all lights had the exact same beam pattern your test might mean something. Your just kidding yourself.

Thanks for your replies,

Yes, I know the ceiling bounce test is debated and the opinions are varying.

The basis for my belief of the ceiling bounce at a decent method are following:

1: the total light amount reflexed from the ceiling is the same undependent of the distance I hold the flashlight from the ceiling. (this makes the demand of a clearly limited beam, so that no light spreads out to the walls)

2: the received values of lux reduces with longer distance, because of that the light from the periphery of beam is more distant from the sensor.

3: according to point 2 I therefore always take in consider the beam width of different lights and hold, for example a a Maglite, closer to the ceiling than a Fenix. Actually the differences of beam widths will be less important the closer to the ceiling I hold the light. I can also simply hold the light very close to the ceiling and note the brightest available value of the light meter by varying the position of the light.

Therefore I believe in the ceiling bounce method for making a quite trustworthy comparison. Also I have taken in consider the eventual effects of the light reflexions from my own body when I stand up and hold the light to the ceiling. I then found that wearing dark or light clothes made no significant difference of the result.

But I have to say that I actually was surprised of the result of Maglite6D/Malkoff. For my eyes it appear to be brighter than twice of TK10. And much brighter than Maglite 3D/Malkoff 2-3 dropin + Maglite 2C/Malkoff 4-6 dropin (used with 3xCR123). Together they receive nearly the same lux value as Maglite 6D with the D7...

I guessed that one contributing factor may be the cold tint of the beam. I described it in this thread:
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/220850&page=4

I would like to use a IS sphere to compare!

Edited: I realized that discussing this issue in this thread is to go off-topic. Therefore I have started a new thread in the General flashlight discussion section. Moderator may delete my posts and just keep this information if you want.

Regards, Patric

Hello,

Friday my package from Malkoff arrived with the Maglite P7 D-dropin and the 2x18650 convertor for a 2D. Everything was nicely packed and arrived, here in Belgium, within a week.
I quickly installed the dropin and put the 2x18650 convertor in the body. Problem was that I do not have 18650 cells, they are still in transit from AW. So, I used 2x14670 cells (AW) instead and rushed out.

So, in short: Maglite 2D with P7 dropin, 2x14670, standard lens and Malkoff cut-off plastic reflector.

First reaction: ok, it is somewhat bright...
Then I compared to a Tiablo A9 (220-250 lumens?) and a Maglite 2C Malkoff (140 lumens?) and a Fenix L2D RB100 (125 lumens) and a Maglite 6C incandescent on 6 nimh (100 lumens)

It was, when comparing, that the P7 really showed it's supremacy. The Malkoff 2C, at 140 lumens, was dim in comparison, as was the Tiablo. The difference was really BIG, so I guess the P7 to be well over 500 lumens.
Because of the smooth reflector, throw is acceptable and artifacts can be lived with if the light is not used to illuminate white walls .

So, in short, I am a happy Malkoff customer :twothumbs. This light really puts a smile on your face, so it is worht the money.
I only wonder if these 2 14670 cells are a good idea... and if the 18650 cells would still improve the output.

Kind regards,
Joris

PS: recently I bought a good camera so I will try to post some beamshots in the near future.

Joris,

I think you will see a difference when you use the huge AW 18650 cells.

The best hosts IMHO for that set-up is to purchase a 2D Mag and have it cut down to a 2C size. Then you could use 2 IMR C cells:twothumbs

Or

What I had done was a 2C size Mag bored for IMR C size cells. I just love the AW C cells

bigchelis said:

Joris,

I think you will see a difference when you use the huge AW 18650 cells.

The best hosts IMHO for that set-up is to purchase a 2D Mag and have it cut down to a 2C size. Then you could use 2 IMR C cells:twothumbs

Or

What I had done was a 2C size Mag bored for IMR C size cells. I just love the AW C cells

Click to expand...

Hello,
Thanks for the reply. Because they have arrived by now, I'm already using 18650 cells.
Do you think there is any real difference between the C- and the D-Maglite when using the P7 Dropin? I got the D-size because I thought that the bigger dropin unit would provide a better heathsink. You think this is true?

Kind regards,
Joris

The only test I had MrGman do for me was testing the NiMH C cells vs NiMH D 12,000mAh each.

I purchased fivemega extentions for the test and with 3 C NiMH cells and 3 D NiMC cells the P7 direct drive delivered the same out the front lumens. I thought the bigger D size cells would deliver more, but no.

Now, the heatsink has to be somewhat better. That is a good idea, but the only way for me to know 100% for sure is If I ask Gene himself. I know MrGman recently built and calibrated an IS Sphere for him. So, the new units he builds are tested with real out the front lumens.

I will ask Gene and see if he can test this theory of ours.

bigC

22hornet said:

Hello,
Thanks for the reply. Because they have arrived by now, I'm already using 18650 cells.
Do you think there is any real difference between the C- and the D-Maglite when using the P7 Dropin? I got the D-size because I thought that the bigger dropin unit would provide a better heathsink. You think this is true?

Kind regards,
Joris

Click to expand...