McLux PR-T versus PR

What are the advantages of a McLux PR Turbo head over de regular PR head?

smaller and cooler looking /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

I have a couple of "T"ish heads and find them to be much more carry friendly. And YES, they do look cool.

Think of T-tiny. They're simply a smaller outside dimension. Won't be as good at handling heat, but for conservatively-driven mods, they're sexy.

just like ... size DOES matter ... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/naughty.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
bernhard

On the heads that I have, heat has not been a problem at all. It seems that the head still has more than enough surface area to get rid of the heat. Of course, my lights are only running at 700mA. One is a 3W and the other is a 5W.

is the T a turbo version?...ie tighter beam?

IIRC, "T" stands for "Trimmed". I.e., smaller version.

It uses the same Pelican reflector, so the beams should be identical.

[ QUOTE ]
kj said:
IIRC, "T" stands for "Trimmed". I.e., smaller version.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, that's probably what Don had in mind originally, but it has morphed into greater things. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

And as has been mentioned, it is NOT for "turbo." At least not in the traditional beam-shaping sense. The beams are identical.

BTW, I found Pelican reflectors varied in orange peel surface. Some reflectors have a bit smoother surface and they produce a slightly tighter beam. According to my light meter, the smoothest reflector I have produces roughly 30% brighter hotspot than the bumpiest one. If you have several Pelican reflectors, pick up the smoothest one and put it into the PR-T head. Now you have the Turbo version /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

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.

Yeah, I agree that the 30% difference can be negligible in the real world.

Anyway, are you going to stop manufacturing one of these heads? No... the shape difference is important! I've created the stadnard PR heads for 2x123 and 3x123 and I'm going to use PR-T for 1x123 so that I can easily distinguish /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

If you need to unify, you may use this design since it's in-between /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

kj,

I'm clueless as to what I'm going to do! I agree that for 1x123, the PR-T is a better choice. I have also though about a merge of the two designs as well as just looking for a real life if I can find one! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

I personally prefer the more "orange peel" PRs, the beam is of a much better quality, especially with the 5W parts where this difference really counts. I am really sad that the newer PRs are all smoother /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif, I got only two of the more aggressive oranges.

As for the designs ... cosmetics aside, which are subjective anway, the old massive head may have an advantage when driven harder (heat) whereas the T-head has no real advantage ... just a thought ...

but then again ... we're on CPF here ... build both !!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/party.gif

bernhard

As for the designs ... I prefer the PR, especially when used with 2x 123A or 2x AA.
When used on a 1x 123A body the PR-T is my favorite, so… I have to buy both!

The PR is more elegant than the abrupt T shape. Why not meld the two into a smoothly tapered design?

Brightnorm

[ QUOTE ]
icarus said:
As for the designs ... I prefer the PR, especially when used with 2x 123A or 2x AA.
When used on a 1x 123A body the PR-T is my favorite, so… I have to buy both!

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree the PR-T looks better on my E1E and the PR looks better on the E2E

I think it is time for a Mc-BeehivePR!

[ QUOTE ]
brightnorm said:
The PR is more elegant than the abrupt T shape. Why not meld the two into a smoothly tapered design?

Brightnorm

[/ QUOTE ]

Brightnorm,

Nore like the profile below?




Darell,

If you're hoping to get more parts from me, I'd suggest you stop dis'ing The PR-Can with the BeeHive /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

What *I* would like is some milled flutes to break into a tapered profile but I think that would be unkind to the price......