What everyone has said! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
kj, you are absolutely right about the orange peel variations and I have noticed that the original reflectors had considerably more pronounced texture and the result of a smother blend from spot to flood. As stated, the lux readings and ultimate throw of the hot spot are reduced with the heavier textured reflectors. Unless one is using the light at its limit of reach, this has little bearing in real worls applications. If one is pushing the light to its limit, chances are that a more powerful tool should be in play, ideally.
Where the degree of texture really comes into play is with the 5W. I think folkks are starting to understand that a perfectly smooth parabolic reflector with 5W positioned at the optimal focal point will have a beam showing an obvious null in the center. To remove the null, the LED needs to be moved from the actual focus point or the reflector needs enough texture to blend the light in the beam to the extent that the null is blured out.
The PR-T and PR host the same reflector so the beams will be the same but for variations noted. The reduction in mass as well as some surface area in the "trimed" PR-T might have some thermal issues compared to the larger PR depending on the application, LED and drive level. Since the heat sink is an integral bulkhead in both designs, conduction of heat is immediate and the surface temp of the head will rise quickly. It should be clear by touch and comfort whether the tool is being over taxed or not. I think that the Lux III's are fine in most cases being hosted in these heads and it might only be an issue, if at all, with the hosting of a 5W.
Frankly, I don't think there is enough difference between the two to warrant a continued production of both parts. Hopefully this will become more clear as time goes on.