Upcoming 2AA XM-L?

Kingnog

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
21
Is it realistic that someone (4sevens? Fenix?) will be making a 2AA XM-L light soon? I thought XM-L was better suited for higher voltages.

If not, what is on the horizon for 2AA lights? The S2 didn't seem to do too well because of the green tint (I returned my Quark because of it). What's next?
 

Warp

Enlightened
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
597
Location
Georgia (USA)
Is it realistic that someone (4sevens? Fenix?) will be making a 2AA XM-L light soon? I thought XM-L was better suited for higher voltages.

If not, what is on the horizon for 2AA lights? The S2 didn't seem to do too well because of the green tint (I returned my Quark because of it). What's next?

Thrunite Neutron 2A
 

Warp

Enlightened
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
597
Location
Georgia (USA)
I saw that but I read it's too floody and doesn't seem any brighter than a 180 lumen Quark 2AA. Will all XM-L lights be like that?

You should specify that, then. All you did was ask for any XM-L 2xAA.

The XM-L is definitely floody.
 

CarpentryHero

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
3,096
Location
Edmonton
Even though the thrunites are floody, they have more of a hotspot than Quarks and would outthrow the 2aa quark (also has 60 lumens more than the Quark)
 

Kingnog

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
21
Even though the thrunites are floody, they have more of a hotspot than Quarks and would outthrow the 2aa quark (also has 60 lumens more than the Quark)

It's just that I read this post where he says his Quark AA2 S2 (which I had and didn't like) out-throws the Neutron which is too floody, and he is overall disappointed with the Neutron.
 

CarpentryHero

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
3,096
Location
Edmonton
Tough to say for sure, but I have the Nuetron 1a and 1c using rechargeables they out preform my Quarks and don't have preflash between modes. The XML is a floody emitter and you'd need a larger bezel to have any real throw.
I've owned three Quarks and none have a real hotspot (very smooth transition to spill)
The thrunite has a large hotspot and nice spill. Neither light is handy for throw, first 10-40 feet there great.
 

CarpentryHero

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
3,096
Location
Edmonton
Just read the post, for starters, he tested a nuetral tint Nuetron against an S2 Quark which is cool white.
They'd have a near match in output but nuetral tint doesn't appear as bright on a ceiling bounce. It will how ever give superior color contrast when navigating uneven ground.
Comparing nuetral or warm to a cool white on a ceiling bounce is like comparing apples and oranges, atleast to me
 

roadkill1109

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
2,309
Is it realistic that someone (4sevens? Fenix?) will be making a 2AA XM-L light soon? I thought XM-L was better suited for higher voltages.

If not, what is on the horizon for 2AA lights? The S2 didn't seem to do too well because of the green tint (I returned my Quark because of it). What's next?

Other than the ThruNite 2A and maybe a few others, its hard to find an XML in the 2AA format due to the fact that these LED require substantial power to maximize its potential, hence you see XML's in the 2x123 format, the 18650 format, and other formats with a higher voltage and ampere rating.
 

CarpentryHero

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
3,096
Location
Edmonton
Could go with a Solarforce L2R or Dereelight Javelin with a .8-4.2volt p60 XML dropin. It may be a little brighter than the thrunite Neutron 2a, with the larger reflector it'll out throw it.

Remember that the XML truly shines at 3 amps, you can't pull that out of 2 regular AA batteries.
 

Outdoorsman5

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
1,310
Location
North GA Mountains
It's just that I read this post where he says his Quark AA2 S2 (which I had and didn't like) out-throws the Neutron which is too floody, and he is overall disappointed with the Neutron.

That was my thread that you were referring to. Maybe the neutral tint Thrunite 2A is not as bright as the cool white, and goinggear.com just has it listed wrong. This would make sense as other lights usually have lower outputs with a neutral tint compared to the cool white version. But when I talked to goinggear about it they didn't seem to know.

Regarding the hotspot on the Neutron 2A neutral, I was playing with them last night (we were without power for 36 hours where I live in Arkansas) and you can only make out the hotspot within only a few feet. Beyond a few feet it looks like pure flood....which is great if you like/need a flood light. My quark AA2 S2 and R5 and especially the R2 ALL have a visible hotspot even out to distances. Yes the R5 has a very smooth transition from hotspot to flood, but the S2 has a more defined hotspot than the R5...more along the lines of the R2 just bigger. The R2 has the most defined hotspot...no surprise there since the LED is smaller than the R5 & S2. The point is though is that these three LEDs all generate a visible hotspot in the quarks quite easily due to their smaller size. The larger XM-L really struggles to generate a visible hotspot in such a small package. With a bigger head like in my Quark Turbo X or my EagleTac M3C4 XM-L there's no problem focusing the hotspot into something very throwy. But, in the Thrunite Neutron 2A the XM-L, to me, just produced a flood light. Another thing, for a flood light the overall beam was quite narrow. The overall beam profile of my quark AA2 lights and my fenix LD20 & LD10 were wider. This is strange to me for a flood light to be all flood but have somewhat of a narrow beam.

I'm not trying to bash the Neurtrons because if I wasn't comparing it to the quarks or fenix lights then it's truly an awesome light in every way. For me though, I like the quarks and the fenix lights beam profile better. I'd really like to test out a Neutron 1A though, and run it on a 14500 like CarpentryHero does. That sounds like the best way to run this light. I didn't want to go that route though because I was buying the two neutrons for my non-flashaholic nephews that will be using eneloops & alkalines only.

FYI - 4sevens (makers of the quark line) has told me twice over the phone that they had no plans to put a XM-L in their Quark line of lights with the exception of the Quark 123x2 Turbo X that sports an oversized head. They said they didn't like the beam that the XM-L produced in these small lights. After experimenting with the Neutron 2A neutral lights I have to say I now understand why. I have not experimented with the cool white version of the neutrons, so there could be a difference that I'm unaware of.
 

Kingnog

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
21
That was my thread that you were referring to. Maybe the neutral tint Thrunite 2A is not as bright as the cool white, and goinggear.com just has it listed wrong. This would make sense as other lights usually have lower outputs with a neutral tint compared to the cool white version. But when I talked to goinggear about it they didn't seem to know.

Regarding the hotspot on the Neutron 2A neutral, I was playing with them last night (we were without power for 36 hours where I live in Arkansas) and you can only make out the hotspot within only a few feet. Beyond a few feet it looks like pure flood....which is great if you like/need a flood light. My quark AA2 S2 and R5 and especially the R2 ALL have a visible hotspot even out to distances. Yes the R5 has a very smooth transition from hotspot to flood, but the S2 has a more defined hotspot than the R5...more along the lines of the R2 just bigger. The R2 has the most defined hotspot...no surprise there since the LED is smaller than the R5 & S2. The point is though is that these three LEDs all generate a visible hotspot in the quarks quite easily due to their smaller size. The larger XM-L really struggles to generate a visible hotspot in such a small package. With a bigger head like in my Quark Turbo X or my EagleTac M3C4 XM-L there's no problem focusing the hotspot into something very throwy. But, in the Thrunite Neutron 2A the XM-L, to me, just produced a flood light. Another thing, for a flood light the overall beam was quite narrow. The overall beam profile of my quark AA2 lights and my fenix LD20 & LD10 were wider. This is strange to me for a flood light to be all flood but have somewhat of a narrow beam.

I'm not trying to bash the Neurtrons because if I wasn't comparing it to the quarks or fenix lights then it's truly an awesome light in every way. For me though, I like the quarks and the fenix lights beam profile better. I'd really like to test out a Neutron 1A though, and run it on a 14500 like CarpentryHero does. That sounds like the best way to run this light. I didn't want to go that route though because I was buying the two neutrons for my non-flashaholic nephews that will be using eneloops & alkalines only.

FYI - 4sevens (makers of the quark line) has told me twice over the phone that they had no plans to put a XM-L in their Quark line of lights with the exception of the Quark 123x2 Turbo X that sports an oversized head. They said they didn't like the beam that the XM-L produced in these small lights. After experimenting with the Neutron 2A neutral lights I have to say I now understand why. I have not experimented with the cool white version of the neutrons, so there could be a difference that I'm unaware of.

Thanks for clarifying. I really liked the beam profile of the Quark AA2, just not the horrible green tint I got. It was so bad on mine even a non-flashaholic commented on it so I had to return it. I also wanted something brighter than the R5 so the Neutron 2A really seemed like the way to go. It's really difficult to see what the Neutron beams look like since there are only 1 or 2 reviews and one video review without any comparison to other lights. I guess I should keep waiting...I didn't want a "fat" head like the P60's, I have one of those already.
 

mrpink

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Mar 26, 2011
Messages
80
i was about to get a neutron 1A until i read a review where the clip end rests on the head. and part of the operating procedure is to turn the head. the reviewer put some tape on it to stop it from scratching the anodizing. but im not a big fan of jerry rigging things to make up for design failures.
 

Kingnog

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
21
i was about to get a neutron 1A until i read a review where the clip end rests on the head. and part of the operating procedure is to turn the head. the reviewer put some tape on it to stop it from scratching the anodizing. but im not a big fan of jerry rigging things to make up for design failures.

I remember seeing that too, but this review has pictures which counter that argument...I'm not sure who is right, maybe they have different versions?
 

AaronG

Enlightened
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
385
Location
Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
That was my thread that you were referring to. Maybe the neutral tint Thrunite 2A is not as bright as the cool white, and goinggear.com just has it listed wrong. This would make sense as other lights usually have lower outputs with a neutral tint compared to the cool white version. But when I talked to goinggear about it they didn't seem to know.

Regarding the hotspot on the Neutron 2A neutral, I was playing with them last night (we were without power for 36 hours where I live in Arkansas) and you can only make out the hotspot within only a few feet. Beyond a few feet it looks like pure flood....which is great if you like/need a flood light. My quark AA2 S2 and R5 and especially the R2 ALL have a visible hotspot even out to distances. Yes the R5 has a very smooth transition from hotspot to flood, but the S2 has a more defined hotspot than the R5...more along the lines of the R2 just bigger. The R2 has the most defined hotspot...no surprise there since the LED is smaller than the R5 & S2. The point is though is that these three LEDs all generate a visible hotspot in the quarks quite easily due to their smaller size. The larger XM-L really struggles to generate a visible hotspot in such a small package. With a bigger head like in my Quark Turbo X or my EagleTac M3C4 XM-L there's no problem focusing the hotspot into something very throwy. But, in the Thrunite Neutron 2A the XM-L, to me, just produced a flood light. Another thing, for a flood light the overall beam was quite narrow. The overall beam profile of my quark AA2 lights and my fenix LD20 & LD10 were wider. This is strange to me for a flood light to be all flood but have somewhat of a narrow beam.

I'm not trying to bash the Neurtrons because if I wasn't comparing it to the quarks or fenix lights then it's truly an awesome light in every way. For me though, I like the quarks and the fenix lights beam profile better. I'd really like to test out a Neutron 1A though, and run it on a 14500 like CarpentryHero does. That sounds like the best way to run this light. I didn't want to go that route though because I was buying the two neutrons for my non-flashaholic nephews that will be using eneloops & alkalines only.

FYI - 4sevens (makers of the quark line) has told me twice over the phone that they had no plans to put a XM-L in their Quark line of lights with the exception of the Quark 123x2 Turbo X that sports an oversized head. They said they didn't like the beam that the XM-L produced in these small lights. After experimenting with the Neutron 2A neutral lights I have to say I now understand why. I have not experimented with the cool white version of the neutrons, so there could be a difference that I'm unaware of.

That's funny because I thought the beam profile looked really good in the comparison shots :) A broad hotspot and narrower spill would be more useful for my purposes:shrug:
 

Outdoorsman5

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
1,310
Location
North GA Mountains
That's funny because I thought the beam profile looked really good in the comparison shots :) A broad hotspot and narrower spill would be more useful for my purposes:shrug:

I can understand that because I find floody lights to be very useful which is why I like my zebralights quite a bit....especially my ZL H501 neutral. I was just looking for a more throwy 2xAA light as a gift for my nephews. I went with a couple of Fenix LD20 R5's....they loved them! The Neutron 2A neutral XM-L just didn't reach out as far as the fenix LD20 R5.
 

EngrPaul

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 28, 2006
Messages
3,678
Location
PA
I bought the neutron 2A BECAUSE it is floody.

Going Gear has neutral ones, hurry before they are all gone.
 

Lightman2

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 11, 2011
Messages
381
I know Illuminationgear had or I believe had a drop in XML or XML light version of the Eagletac P20A2 MKII which runs off 2 x AA's.
 

MichaelW

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
1,788
Location
USA
There isn't that much of an efficiency difference between the xp-g & xm-l
at 1.5 amp drive: A T6 xm-l versus R5 xp-g, roughly 75 more lumens from the xm-l, and only 0.5 watt less consumption.
So the biggest difference is die size & apparent die size. The xm-l is twice the size (apparent die size is roughly the same for both. Both are the largest die in their respective package xm & xp)
For the same size flashlight, the smaller die will throw better.
Really the LED selection should be based on maximum wattage you are planning on running.
<1 xp-c
<3 xp-e
<6 xp-g
<9 xm-l
 
Top