A small empiric comparison

Hail to all CPF's fellows!

This is my latest story. I got myself a state of the art BLF GT (Hulk's flashlight as wife calls it ), after having sold my good old companion Olight SR90. However, I am a little disappointed when compared to my other best thrower (and yet it's non dedicated): the Thrunite TN40.

Both are neutral white but the GT is clearly warmer than Thrunite.

I am not good with numbers, nor do I intend absolute results or measurements, but having the Thrunite 331k cd and the GT over a million, should it not be notory the reach advantage on the latter? Or could it be that my perception is being deceived due to the broad and powergul beam of the TN40?

I would love to read your opinions on this, also because all the hype around the GT, folks seem to be very happy with it.

Cheers!

Two different flashlights, two different beam profiles. Two different size classifications. One flashlight has a narrow beam with maximum throw, the other light has a broader beam with more power and not as much throw.

I like to buy flashlights by the beam profile. Lots of throw is good, lots of broad beam power is good. I can't have all of the best aspects in one light, that is why I have a few lights.

have you looked at the Acebeam X65?

I did and hesitated in buying the X65. In the end I got the GT at a fair price and much cheaper than the X65.

Concerning the beam profiles, that was not new for me either. I just didn't have a dedicated thrower before getting the GT. In any case, the more practical size, weight and usability of the beam of the TN40 makes it more pleasant.

I also see that all your lights carry the VN signature. I wish I could have some of mine like that, but living in Portugal makes it impossible due to the import fees. Customs charged me with over 110 US$ for the GT! So sad!

Set the lights up and go visit the targets being illuminated. Big bright beam in your view seems impressive till you realize it is just light not hitting the target...