Jetbeam RRT-3 XML Quality?

I like Jetbeam. Anything I own or have seen from them has been of high quality. Most recent being an RRT-21, which is very nice.

I remember reading in another thread though, someone who had the RRT-3 XML said it came with the old body from the SST-50 version! I can't find this thread now in a search.

I did notice however this appears to be the case from Jetbeams own website! Says 1200 lumens on the body, see lettering:



I think if this is true it is surprisingly poor. Espescially when Jetbeam have made such a big issue about quality.

Anyone got one can comment?

Their former models looked far better (and not only the rrt's : look at the pro cycler vs the IIIpro st r2 for example)

Ti²C said:

Their former models looked far better (and not only the rrt's : look at the pro cycler vs the IIIpro st r2 for example)

Click to expand...

I don't agree. I think the new rrt range looks better.

Anyway that is each to his own opinion.

Issue here is are they reusing old bodies on the new model?

Yes its truth old bodies in new flashlights rrt 3 xml have the old body the 1950 lumens is written on the head of the flashlight .1200 lumens written on the body.Jet beam is a big company had to take care of that. I got one.

I received my RRT-3XML yesterday and can confirm that my sample has the "old" body, however on the head, on the same ring that says "caution hot surface", on the opposing side, it reads "Turbo 1950 Lumens".

I agree that at first I was a bit put off by the "re-using" of the old body but after some more thought I don't really care. If you want to get really technical about it, the body is the exact same as the SST-50 body. With the only difference being the head it seems acceptable to me to label the head with the turbo marking.

I think the quality is at the very least, on par with my Maelstrom S18. I took both out on a walk last night. I live in a rural neighborhood, no streetlights, deer everywhere, etc.. during the day I was skeptical as to if the RRT would be brighter than the S18.

At night I was able to put that concern to rest, The RRT throws just about the same as the S18 (which works for me 95%) of the time... but the amount of light coming out of the RRT is pretty impressive, it's just a huge wall of light that will easily turn an area 100 feet wide by 200-250 feet deep into pure white, almost like someone turned stadium lights on. The same area with the S18 is also super bright but the hotspot is a bit more defined at the cost of less flood.

After playing with both last night, the S18 may be staying home more often, the RRT is noticeably shorter than the S18 and with twice as many output options I find it more useful. I am able to operate the RRT Ring easily with the same hand that I'm holding the light with so ease of use is good as well. I also used my S18 holster and the RRT fits right in....

I'd be curious to hear anyone else's opinions on this light

I know this light is just an upgrade on an existing model, but I find this very disappointing. If I had shelled out this money on this light to find the body had the wrong number written on it, I would not be pleased.

I don't doubt that in every other sense this is a great light. Still, Jetbeam should make new bodies unique for the XML version, or one that suits both, with no reference to output.

Seems a cheap way to get round this just to keep machining the same bodies even though they don't read correctly. :shakehead

I too would be interested to hear others thoughts on this and the light in general.

I am very happy with mine thus far but can appreciate your point...

It's a nice big flashlight .Not a thrower .The switch on tail cup not comfortable at all. At this size off flashlights side switch would be better .The hole for the remote switch I don't find it useful who will put these kinds off flashlights on guns. I would be more pleased if I could connect it with a 12V car adaptor from there. Anyway it's a nice piece from Jet Beam and I'm glad to have it.

No big deal, but it's a pity that they do that - just like in the old days where a Lexus would have "Toyota" etched on the glass windows...

loutsopo said:

The switch on tail cup not comfortable at all. At this size off flashlights side switch would be better .

Click to expand...

I just discovered something?
I notice that when you hold it by the lazy underhand grip, it's okay, but you can't see much - when you really want to see something, you must hold it by the overhand grip, with four fingers over the top, and hold the RRT-3 high, even above your head - in fact the higher you hold the RRT-3 and point the beam down, the more you can see far - and that's when the tail end switch can be operated by the fore finger one-handed.
Thus, I might be disappointed if it had a magnetic ring only.
Actually, if I remember correctly, there are laws for the minimum height of headlights on cars, because if the headlight is mounted too low, it can't throw the beam far enough.

However, when using the lazy relaxing underhand handshake grip, the side switch is better.
Maybe it should be just side switch and tail end switch, with no magnetic ring, because I really only use maximum, low, and middle brightness, and rarely anything in between...

Ti²C said:

Their former models looked far better (and not only the rrt's : look at the pro cycler vs the III pro st r2 for example)

Click to expand...

I know it's a personal opinion but I have to agree with you Ti²C. Jetbeams just aren't what they used to be. The RRTs are older models with existing CNC programs, so they are still the same (minus SS tails on the JET III, and RRT's) but the newer models, although nice are not to the same design calibre in terms of balance and machining details. The new RRT 15 and 21 are not in the same league, sorry but IMO they are not. SYSMAX are obviously better at mass production and marketing but the uniqueness of old JB models hasn't been carried over.

The JET models and RRT1, RRT2 still look fresh today, some 2-4 years after release. That is an achievement. That is good design. The CNC machining and finishing on older JB's rivals anything ever produced. The internals were always a different matter....

My understanding is that the head designer and others from the old (pre SYSMAX) JB set up Sunwayled (now Sunwayman). You can tell, the CNC machining, design details and finishing on the Sunway lights is top notch. Sunway lights are expensive compared to other manufacturers however. Perhaps the founders of Sunway were not happy with SYSMAX plan to 'downgrade' and mass market the JB name, so broke off and set Sunway up? Who knows, I'm just speculating but Sunway and SYSMAX are different companies and there is too much cross over to be a coincidence.

Back OT. SYSMAX are using up old stock. Fresh marketing and LED, nothing more - they are using up the old bodies. Anyone else noticed that the price has come down on the RRT3 as well? Once they are gone, this model will be discontinued would be my guess.

Me thinks your speculation is right Bass.
There is something about the old Jetbeam that is similar to the new Sunwayman.
Jb seems to be going down, while Sunway going up.
Sunway has micro-amperage standby on their magnetic ring, and Jb is just not moving...

I think Jetbeam quality is as good as I have ever known.

I think the new RRT series looks great and is high quality.

Just seems cheap of them to use the old bodies on this model.

I also thought that I could see some Jetbeam design "styles" featured on sunwayman lights. Maybe it's the same which happend to Novatac when Henry left - maybe it's totally different.

Pöbel said:

I also thought that I could see some Jetbeam design "styles" featured on sunwayman lights. Maybe it's the same which happend to Novatac when Henry left - maybe it's totally different.

Click to expand...

Yeah there is some blatant copying of design or they are just the same company saving money.

This does not really concern me, as long as the final product they turn out is of high quality in terms of materials and build, which I think JETBeam is. I have never owned a Sunwayman but guess they are similar in quality.

I don't doubt the battery tube from the older model is up to standard either incidentally, just seems annoying to me to have the wrong thing written on it. Maybe I am more fussy than I should be.

uknewbie said:

Maybe I am more fussy than I should be.

Click to expand...

Yep

I see where you're coming from considering the cost of them, but frankly I couldn't give 2 hoots what's written on it :shakehead

I've got the SST-50 version and I absolutely love it :thumbsup: It's a very sexy design for a flash light and I love it's interface :thumbsup:

Mind you, if all you can find to complain about is a bit of print on the side, then they must be doing something right :devil:

Hi there,

Had my RRT 3 triple XML for a few weeks now and I must say the light beam is excellent. The size has been a bit cumbersome, especially the tail switch, but I've been able to figure out more comfortable ways to hold/activate the light. That being said, it's certainly growing on me and is a quality piece. I had spoken with one of the JetBeam USA reps last week and also discovered the reasoning behind the mismatched lumen ratings between the bodies and Heads. Reason being is that the Triple XML's were going to be a 'limited edition' type offering, hence the reason to update only the heads. I think JetBeam could have put this issue to rest a while ago with some advanced press on the topic. It makes most sense, since this is a company that's clearly had a solid record of quality... After all, how many companies take the time to post their manufacturing process? As for my RRT 3 triple xml, I'm waiting for a nearby friend to receive their SR51 to compare if Throw is the most important factor in a beam and if the comfort factor of the SR51 makes most sense. I'm guessing not, and that the triple XML will come out on top. I'll update the seperate post I have running on that, but figured to post my 2 cents here. Cheers - RC