HDS Systems Tactical EDC: buy a 170 lumen or 200 lumen model?

so, based on what I'm seeing in reading around, the 170 lumen HDS Systems Tactical EDC throws a lot more than the 200 lumen model, right? This is due to one using a Golden Dragon something versus the 200 lumen model using an XP-G, right?

So is that the only difference? Will the beam or flood be the same in a 200 lumen HDS Tactical as it is in my ZebraLight SC51 AA (200 lumen)?

Also, are they planning on updating the HDS torches to XM-L at all?

I just had this same dilemma. I went with the 170 Tactical because based on reviews and YouTube videos, it seemed to have more the beam pattern I like for a tactical light. I like to have some throw, and the 200 looked too floody. The difference in lumens is slight, but the difference in beam seems to be pretty drastic.

I have a 170T, but no to 200 to compare it to... And yes, they use different emitters. A golden dragon V.S. an XP-G.

I think the difference in brightness between 170 to 200 lumens would be barley noticeable, so it really comes down to whether you want flood or throw.

I really enjoy the throw that my 170T has, (great throw from such a little package,) but a lot of people seem to prefer the 200 as this is mainly an EDC light and for the most part a floody beam is considered more useful.

Nobody but Henry knows if there will be an XM-L version...

I think this question has been coming up so many times here and I have replied so many times a simple search would suffice. But for your benefit I will post my reply again.

The 170T does throw a little bit more than the 200 rotary I have but not by a huge margin. The difference is so slight it's almost negligible. On the other hand, the XP-G 200 lumen puts out a bit more light overall and has a bigger hotspot making it a much more useful EDC light.

Keep in mind also, that the burst mode (AFAIK) cannot be disabled on the 170 model whereas it can on the newer 200. This means that in practical terms, unless you are going to keep using the burst mode over and over again, you are really looking at a comparison of 120 lumens (the stepdown on the 170) to 200 lumens. I have both, and the difference in output between the two is slight when the 170 is on burst mode and even appears to be slightly brighter outside when used at some distance due to the better throw. After the 170 steps down however, the 200 is obviously brighter, and what's more, the 170 (to my eyes at least) seems to lose its increased throw and the two lights seem to do about the same at illuminating things at a distance. Also FWIW, the 170 GDP emitter I believe tends to be slightly on the greenish side, whereas the 200 XPG model favors a slightly cool beam if you care about such things. The XPG in my 200 rotary was a little too cool for my tastes outdoors, so I had Milkyspit mod it with an R4 bin emitter in the neutral tint range. I lost a little output, but worth it for my tastes.

hope this helps

I have both. 200rotary,200T and 170T. U cant go wrong with any of them. For me, i prefer the 170 because of the tighter hotspot but to each is his own. Goodluck. My only regret i should have bought another 170with tan cerakote at over ready when it was available...it was going for good price...

Do u guys know who still cary the 170T,E???

Remember that it takes a 4x increase in output for a perceived doubling of brightness (i.e. 100 lumens will appear twice as bright as 25 lumens), so the difference between 170 and 200 won't be substantial.

SCblur said:

Keep in mind also, that the burst mode (AFAIK) cannot be disabled on the 170 model whereas it can on the newer 200. This means that in practical terms, unless you are going to keep using the burst mode over and over again, you are really looking at a comparison of 120 lumens (the stepdown on the 170) to 200 lumens. I have both, and the difference in output between the two is slight when the 170 is on burst mode and even appears to be slightly brighter outside when used at some distance due to the better throw. After the 170 steps down however, the 200 is obviously brighter, and what's more, the 170 (to my eyes at least) seems to lose its increased throw and the two lights seem to do about the same at illuminating things at a distance. Also FWIW, the 170 GDP emitter I believe tends to be slightly on the greenish side, whereas the 200 XPG model favors a slightly cool beam if you care about such things. The XPG in my 200 rotary was a little too cool for my tastes outdoors, so I had Milkyspit mod it with an R4 bin emitter in the neutral tint range. I lost a little output, but worth it for my tastes.

hope this helps

Click to expand...

What makes you say that? The burst mode can be disabled on the 170 with the improved electronics and ACME threads but not on the older 170T.

pjandyho said:

What makes you say that? The burst mode can be disabled on the 170 with the improved electronics and ACME threads but not on the older 170T.

Click to expand...

That's my mistake then. I was of the understanding that the 170 model only came with the old threads and old software. Sorry for the misinformation.

If you haven't seen Marshall's video review on the 120T, 170T and 200T here's the link; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaouqpHy0fs

I've mentioned this before (and as SCBlur suggested) that the GDP (Osram Golden Dragon Premium) has a chance of a greenish tint, which my 170T has. I was extremely close to having one of the guys do a emitter swap/mod, but decided against it because, 1) To keep the light in it's origional form, and 2) To keep it's warranty in place.

However in regards to beam profiles it's a matter of personal preference (and speaking for myself), I prefer the 170T's over my Rotary. BUT I like the tint on the Rotary over the 170T's.

One other thing I like about the Clicky's is the ability to switch tail caps (when you order/purchase it).

Good Luck!

I would say that the 170 only throws marginally better than the 200, but the 200 has a significantly larger and more useful hotspot. I'd take the 200 if I had to pick just one.