Anyone tried the new Fenix LD41 960 lm ?

Midnight.Sun

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
143
As it is out there now for 77 $
Has anyone tried the new LD41 960
lm version

Does this new one tail-stand properly now ? What about its ability to handle the extra heat going to be produce on MAX mode ?


In my experience

The old LD41 680 lm heat handling on MAX was significantly better than other 900+ lm 4AA flashlights, but cannot tail stand because of the raised rubber main tail switch.
 
Last edited:

davesc

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Messages
67
Location
Columbia, SC
Hi Midnight...I am wondering the same things about the new light. On the tail stand...My 680 will tail stand, though a bit wobbly because of the rubber buttons. Sometimes I need to do things with two hands and occasionally hold a small light between my teeth. So, I wrapped self vulcanizing electrical tape, (non sticky), around the lower end to cushion the light for my teeth...and the light stands OK, now. Just a small edge of the rubber raises the bottom enough to make the light stand with no problem.

But, I wonder what the new 2015 model's beam and throw is really like compared to the 680. Who has bought one and compared? The run times and outputs between the two models vary considerably. And, the turbo output may be more efficient with the latest model if indeed the light is 1/3 brighter. How can you get 1/3 more lumens out of the same voltage and same LED? Do you think the new light is more "floody"? Will it penetrate 1/3 farther in the darkness on turbo than the 680. Or is this a wild lumen chase? These are some questions I have from someone that has stepped out and bought one of these new lights. I cannot justify buying one till I see some truth between the two.

680 run times...Cree XM-L2 (U2)
Low Output: 10 lumens; 150 hours run time
Mid Output: 85 lumens; 21 hours run time
High Output: 240 lumens; 5 hours, 45 minutes run time
Turbo Output: 680 lumens; 1 hour, 15 minutes run time

2015 960 run times...Cree XM-L2 (U2)
Low: 6 lumens; 200 hours run time
Mid: 150 lumens; 9 hours, 30 minutes run time
High: 400 lumens; 2 hours, 25 minutes run time
Turbo: 960 lumens; 1 hour run time
 
Last edited:

Midnight.Sun

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
143
Hi Midnight...I am wondering the same things about the new light. On the tail stand...My 680 will tail stand, though a bit wobbly because of the rubber buttons. Sometimes I need to do things with two hands and occasionally hold a small light between my teeth. So, I wrapped self vulcanizing electrical tape, (non sticky), around the lower end to cushion the light for my teeth...and the light stands OK, now. Just a small edge of the rubber raises the bottom enough to make the light stand with no problem.

But, I wonder what the new 2015 model's beam and throw is really like compared to the 680. Who has bought one and compared? The run times and outputs between the two models vary considerably. And, the turbo output may be more efficient with the latest model if indeed the light is 1/3 brighter. How can you get 1/3 more lumens out of the same voltage and same LED? Do you think the new light is more "floody"? Will it penetrate 1/3 farther in the darkness on turbo than the 680. Or is this a wild lumen chase? These are some questions I have from someone that has stepped out and bought one of these new lights. I cannot justify buying one till I see some truth between the two.

680 run times...Cree XM-L2 (U2)
Low Output: 10 lumens; 150 hours run time
Mid Output: 85 lumens; 21 hours run time
High Output: 240 lumens; 5 hours, 45 minutes run time
Turbo Output: 680 lumens; 1 hour, 15 minutes run time

2015 960 run times...Cree XM-L2 (U2)
Low: 6 lumens; 200 hours run time
Mid: 150 lumens; 9 hours, 30 minutes run time
High: 400 lumens; 2 hours, 25 minutes run time
Turbo: 960 lumens; 1 hour run time

Hi davesc .. Thanx for the runtimes
LD41 680 lm is a great gift for regular people who don't have to be common with high performance Li Ion batteries flashlight, so its ability to not produce too much heat is a good thing, and it is very stable in hand very hard to slip, also it is a tall flashlight so it makes a great lantern when tail standing.

No answer though about the 960 lm tail stand capability ?
 

CelticCross74

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 30, 2014
Messages
4,021
Location
Fairfax Va
doubt it does its form factor is pretty close to the TK35 which can kind of tail stand at an angle for a few second before it falls over lol. Almost got the new LD41 but went with the 2015 TK35 instead. Double the run time and better ergos in a more compact package. 2015 TK35 must be under rated by 100 lumens its just as blindingly bright as my XP-L lights and kicks out 1000 lumens for a full half an hour before reguation kicks in
 

davesc

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Messages
67
Location
Columbia, SC
doubt it does its form factor is pretty close to the TK35 which can kind of tail stand at an angle for a few second before it falls over lol. Almost got the new LD41 but went with the 2015 TK35 instead. Double the run time and better ergos in a more compact package. 2015 TK35 must be under rated by 100 lumens its just as blindingly bright as my XP-L lights and kicks out 1000 lumens for a full half an hour before reguation kicks in

I had looked at the TK35 in the past before I got my LD41's. The reason I stuck with the LD41's is I am trying to keep all my stuff AA compatible. The 18650 battery is more efficient, but AA's are more available. I use Eneloops, too.

In order to get more out of the LED, besides the electronics, they must have also redesigned the mirror focus?
 

CelticCross74

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 30, 2014
Messages
4,021
Location
Fairfax Va
in the case of the TK35 2015 it actually has less candela than the last one. I belive Fenix selected its emitter for best performance within a more specific and agreeable tint range which is what I believe is behind the 3000 candela loss of the 2015 vs the last one. I believe it is actually due to specific emitter bin selection than to any change in the reflector which I do not believe there was. TK35 just has benchmark electronics all around always has which result in such efficiency for high out put LED. A real half hour of timed regulation for full 1000 lumen blast is pretty impressive. Run times across the modes are also above average.
 

davesc

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Messages
67
Location
Columbia, SC
I wonder if it's the same kind of thing for the LD41? But then how can you get 1/3 more light with almost the same run time? Or is it really 1/3 more? Seems the emitter is being run harder and no change in the mirror focus. There has got to be a limit with a shorter life, or else use a newer type LED.
 

WalkIntoTheLight

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
3,967
Location
Canada
I wonder if it's the same kind of thing for the LD41? But then how can you get 1/3 more light with almost the same run time? Or is it really 1/3 more? Seems the emitter is being run harder and no change in the mirror focus. There has got to be a limit with a shorter life, or else use a newer type LED.

You can get about 1000 lumens out of an XM-L2 emitter, before you're over-driving it. Cree specs driving it at up to 3 amps. Most of the lights putting out close to 1000 lumens drive it at about 2.8 amps. IIRC, Vin will overdrive them at something like 4.5 amps, which I presume would generate enough heat to shorten their life if you left it like that for a long time.
 

Midnight.Sun

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
143
I wonder if it's the same kind of thing for the LD41? But then how can you get 1/3 more light with almost the same run time? Or is it really 1/3 more? Seems the emitter is being run harder and no change in the mirror focus. There has got to be a limit with a shorter life, or else use a newer type LED.

Are you sure there is no change in the reflector size because by looking at its picture i notice the head design has changed and the cooling fins on the head are further to the back if compared with our previous 680 lm model, these cooling find are usually put on the level were the LED is located, so maybe the LED is deeper now at the base of a deeper reflector, which means longer throw range.
 

davesc

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Messages
67
Location
Columbia, SC
Are you sure there is no change in the reflector size because by looking at its picture i notice the head design has changed and the cooling fins on the head are further to the back if compared with our previous 680 lm model, these cooling find are usually put on the level were the LED is located, so maybe the LED is deeper now at the base of a deeper reflector, which means longer throw range.

I don't know if the reflector size or any of that has changed. That's one of the things I was wondering about. What you say makes sense. If that LED could be driven to 1000 lumens, I wonder why Fenix did not do that a year or two ago? Maybe to keep sales up bringing out updated lights?
 

davesc

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Messages
67
Location
Columbia, SC
I could not stand it anymore. I ordered one of the 2015 LD41 960 lumin lights. When I get it I will let you know how it compares with the 680 model.
[h=2][/h]
 

Midnight.Sun

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
143
In that case i wish it is a better version, and you enjoy your extra 280 lm and and 30 meter more throw.

Waiting to hear from you about the ( Tail stand & Heat feeling in hand on Max Level & Reflector depth ) comparesion between the two.

Good luck :)
 

1DaveN

Enlightened
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
593
Location
Upstate NY
I could not stand it anymore. I ordered one of the 2015 LD41 960 lumin lights. When I get it I will let you know how it compares with the 680 model.

Do you have a PD35? I'd love to know how it compares with that, as well.
 

wjv

Enlightened
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
962
680 run times...Cree XM-L2 (U2)
Low Output: 10 lumens; 150 hours run time
Mid Output: 85 lumens; 21 hours run time
High Output: 240 lumens; 5 hours, 45 minutes run time
Turbo Output: 680 lumens; 1 hour, 15 minutes run time

2015 960 run times...Cree XM-L2 (U2)
Low: 6 lumens; 200 hours run time
Mid: 150 lumens; 9 hours, 30 minutes run time
High: 400 lumens; 2 hours, 25 minutes run time
Turbo: 960 lumens; 1 hour run time

I like the older spacings and run-times better. . .

960 might be fun to play with, but 85 & 240 is far more practical for most tasks. . At least they made the Low, lower on the 2015. Fenix still can't seem to comprehend the concept of a 1-2 lumen low (or lower)
 

davesc

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Messages
67
Location
Columbia, SC
I like the older spacings and run-times better. . .

960 might be fun to play with, but 85 & 240 is far more practical for most tasks. . At least they made the Low, lower on the 2015. Fenix still can't seem to comprehend the concept of a 1-2 lumen low (or lower)

Bill...Yes, in a tent 1-2 lumens is more than enough.

I do use the the 240 and 680 quite a lot out in the woods pig hunting and such. The 960 may be better. We shall see. I use the red filter quite a lot, (with that color filter you cannot see all that far, and sometimes I use the green filter to see further...but the pigs are more aware of green).
 

davesc

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Messages
67
Location
Columbia, SC
Update...I got the 960 LD41 and compared it to my older 680 LD41 last night. There are some minor changes on the newer model. Very minor in my view.

The grip pattern on the body is a little different, the lens/mirror head outside is ever so slightly different, and the tail end is a shade longer and narrower than the older model. The wobbly tail standing feature is the same. It still stands up, though. No difference with that.

Looking at the mirror itself with the LED at the bottom, both models look the same. No differences in shape, angle, led placement or anything like that. The cooling fins on the outside have been moved downward about 1/8 inch. That's the only thing I could see. And the electronics changed inside to give the output differences.

The battery cradle is the same inside.

Now the important stuff. I took both lights outside at night and compared them. First off...No difference in cone pattern that I could tell. The light color looked the same, too. No donuts or hot spots. Really good patterns. What I would call a fine beam from a flashlight. Looks like day on high power.

There are of course differences in the brightness settings. I am telling it like it is and my honest opinion. I used only my eyeballs and a dark night against trees and buildings. On the lowest power setting you could tell the difference. I do like the lower lumen level of the 2015 model better than the older model. 6 vs 10. Bumping up to the second and third positions, you could see the differences. But not much. On the highest setting, I could see a difference between 960 and 680 lumens. But not much, either. I shined the lights at objects from my back yard and across a pond over 300 yards away at a tree line for the highest light level. The 960 lumen looked to be about 10% brighter. No difference in beam shape, color or any of that. I am sure our own eyes also compensate for differences we do not notice, also. Just like a camera sees things differently than when you look with your own eyes.

The bottom line. The LD41 is a wonderful light and top quality. Fenix quality is the best. However, if you are price conscious and do not have an LD41 yet, I would say, "Get the older model 680, before they sell out". $77 verses $49. $49 is a heck of a good deal for that light. If you have a 680 model and want another...get another 680 before they sell out for that price. There is not that big of a difference in my eyeballs between the newer and the older model at high power. I do not think I would have noticed any difference had I not used both lights simultaneously to compare. One was just a shade dimmer than the other on high at a distance. 10% difference maybe. If you want to know you have the brightest, then buy the 2015. I learned that on the upper end of the lumen scale above that 680 line, 300 lumens more does not make that big of a difference. To make the difference, the beam pattern would have to change. And I like the beam the way it is on the LD41. I also lean the way Bill, (WJV) mentioned...the 680 model has better spacing of lumens giving better run times. This lumen race lately is all about sales.
 
Last edited:

Midnight.Sun

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
143
Man !!
They did not bother to fix the wobbly tail-stand again !! though the design has had several complete changes over the years, what a lazy *** company, no wonder they did't improve the reflector's depth or any of that. ( I'm little disappointed )

Any way it is still the only 4AA semi tactical flashlight i know of, all the other 4AAs are compact and a little bulky not so steady with hand grip, and has no momentary tail switch like the one on LD41. Thats why i prefer it on all the others 4 AA flashlights.

A very good thing now is it has catched up with the others on brightness.
Don't care that you could not see much difference between 960 and 680 Lm, because 680 lm is pretty bright and there's only 280 additional Lumens, and it is not easy thing to notice with bare eyes ( as you said ).
I can confirm that issue from my experience with Sunwayman D40A , the same thing, one can hardly noice the difference in power between ( 3rd level 550 lm ) and ( 4th 980 lm ), but i assure you it is out there if you measure it, i think your new LD41 will give you beter vision at mid range distances especially with dim red filter on.
 
Last edited:
Top