Klarus        
Results 1 to 29 of 29

Thread: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

  1. #1
    this_is_nascar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Gloucester, New Jersey
    Posts
    7,684

    Default Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    I was fortuneate enough to land my 2nd Arc4x. My 1st task at hand was to perform a runtime comparison to measure the difference between my original Arc4x and this new one. I thought I'd share those results with you folks. For the heck of it, I took my very best Arc4+ and LSHP and included them in the chart.



    Enjoy.

  2. #2
    Farewell our Curmudgeon Administrator Roy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Granbury, Tx USA
    Posts
    4,466

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    ....need to keep your .jpg no more than 800 pixels wide so they don't runnoff the edge of the screen. I keep mine at 600 pixels wide. Nice plots!

  3. #3
    *Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,161

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    1st in line on an Arc4X if Nascar if decides to sell one ha ha. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

  4. #4
    this_is_nascar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Gloucester, New Jersey
    Posts
    7,684

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    Roy, it wasn't running off the edge from my laptop display, however I sized it down a bit. Hope that's better.

    Cy, not a chance of selling this anytime soon.

  5. #5
    *Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,161

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    Nascar, Hey it never hurts to ask.... keep me in mind if you ever change your mind. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bowdown.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bowdown.gif[/img]

  6. #6
    Flashaholic srue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Salem, OR
    Posts
    190

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    t_i_n,

    I think it's important to note that, as in all of your tests, the lights were not cooled (please correct me if I'm wrong). So the reason the lights drop down from level 1 so quickly is not from battery exhaustion, but rather from temperature control. In real use one's hand will heatsink the light.

    Someone could easily read this graph and think, "Six minutes at level 1? Arc4x is worthless."

    I'm not saying your results aren't valid, merely that the differences in testing procedure should be noted.

    Maybe you could put up a run with a small fan blowing on the light, or have it sitting in 1cm of water. It would be interesting to compare the runtimes.

    -Stuart

  7. #7
    this_is_nascar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Gloucester, New Jersey
    Posts
    7,684

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    [ QUOTE ]
    srue said:
    t_i_n,

    I think it's important to note that, as in all of your tests, the lights were not cooled (please correct me if I'm wrong). So the reason the lights drop down from level 1 so quickly is not from battery exhaustion, but rather from temperature control. In real use one's hand will heatsink the light.

    Someone could easily read this graph and think, "Six minutes at level 1? Arc4x is worthless."

    I'm not saying your results aren't valid, merely that the differences in testing procedure should be noted.

    Maybe you could put up a run with a small fan blowing on the light, or have it sitting in 1cm of water. It would be interesting to compare the runtimes.

    -Stuart

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Correct, no cooling. People can do what they want with these graphs. I'm not spending the time to create a special environment to put the light in their ideal environment. I only have one purpose in these graphs that I do and that's to compare lights of the same model/version/type. For my purposes, I'm going to assume that being held, the comparision of these 2-lights will remain almost constant, however with different/longer numbers.

    As the new tailcaps become available many folks will be using their Arc4's in a standalone mode, so I think this data is perfectly valid.

  8. #8
    Flashaholic* Klaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,998

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    Hmmh,

    how comes Ray got two of those rare Xs [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

    Congrats !

    Klaus

  9. #9
    this_is_nascar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Gloucester, New Jersey
    Posts
    7,684

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    My 1st one was from being in the right place at the right time in order to order it right after Peter made them available and the 2nd one was due to persistance and a big wallet.

  10. #10
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    South Florida, USA
    Posts
    2,461

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    Good job on the tests. Glad to see your are enjoying your new 4x.

  11. #11
    Silver Moderator
    SilverFox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Bellingham WA
    Posts
    12,386

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    Hello Ray,

    Other than the difference in light output and some difference in run time, is there any noticeble differences in the 4x (tint, operation, anything else)?

    Tom

  12. #12
    this_is_nascar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Gloucester, New Jersey
    Posts
    7,684

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    [ QUOTE ]
    SilverFox said:
    Hello Ray,

    Other than the difference in light output and some difference in run time, is there any noticeble differences in the 4x (tint, operation, anything else)?

    Tom

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Yes, in tint. My original Arc4x appeared white to me when I first got it. When I do the infamous side-by-side comparision on a white wall, this new Arc4x is whiter. It remains whiter at all levels.

  13. #13
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    half New Orleans, half Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    Posts
    253

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    Ray,

    You didn't say but am I correct in assuming that the 4x's and the 4+ all started out at the brightest setting with fresh batteries?

  14. #14
    Flashaholic* Ty_Bower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Newark, DE
    Posts
    1,192

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    So which 4x do you like better?

  15. #15
    this_is_nascar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Gloucester, New Jersey
    Posts
    7,684

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    Yes, all with a fresh SureFire cell, starting at Level-1, with no additional cooling.

  16. #16
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    South Florida, USA
    Posts
    2,461

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    I would guess that Ray likes the "new" Arc4X better. It is whiter and brighter. What is not to like? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

  17. #17
    this_is_nascar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Gloucester, New Jersey
    Posts
    7,684

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    It's tough one to call really. Each one has their advantages.

  18. #18
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    half New Orleans, half Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    Posts
    253

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    Ray,

    Once you decide which one you like better, I'll take the old junky one off your hands. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

  19. #19
    *Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,161

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    [ QUOTE ]
    this_is_nascar said:
    Roy, it wasn't running off the edge from my laptop display, however I sized it down a bit. Hope that's better.

    Cy, not a chance of selling this anytime soon.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    lucked out and finally got TIN's brightest ARC4X. Been wanting this light seems like forever.

    Found out right away, this puppy likes fresh batteries. Huge difference in output.

    Tailcap mod v1.2 coming up on ARC4X.

    Thanks TIN

  20. #20
    this_is_nascar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Gloucester, New Jersey
    Posts
    7,684

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    Enjoy.

  21. #21
    *Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,161

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    TIN,

    I figured what my problem was after reading your charts. High output only occurs with fresh cells, lasting aprox. 5 minutes in ARC4X.

    Now I see the output difference. Not so much in hotspot brightness, but in total output.

    The beam tint is indentical to my X3T, to me very slightly yellow. The ARC4X output is simular to the X3T in that it puts out a lot of light, but the hot spot is not as intense as other high end lights (L1-PR-T 917 TWOJ.

    I've looked at the lux closely and cannot tell if it's a 1 watt or 3 watt. (it's not a 5 watt) Peter sure can keep a secret and still has not fessed up.

    According to an earlier post by Peter, there are only 5 ARC4X made.

    Thanks again for offering this,
    CY

  22. #22
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    South Florida, USA
    Posts
    2,461

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    Cy,
    Congrats on the Arc4X. it is an impressive little bugga.

    Curtis

  23. #23
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,573

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    If I remember correctly Peter said the ARC4x did not use Lux3s.

  24. #24
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Linz, Austria
    Posts
    1,712

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    [ QUOTE ]
    cy said:According to an earlier post by Peter, there are only 5 ARC4X made.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I remember that somebody (sorry, forgot the name) won one in a raffle and got it in July.

    Besides that, did anybody try it with a rechargeable CR123 cell?
    Does it change anything?

  25. #25
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    101

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    [ QUOTE ]
    PeLu said:
    [ QUOTE ]
    cy said:According to an earlier post by Peter, there are only 5 ARC4X made.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I remember that somebody (sorry, forgot the name) won one in a raffle and got it in July.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I was the one that won the Arc4x in the drawing and I have not yet received the product. I have communicated with Peter and I have opted to wait for the Rev3 version of the product rather than get a Rev2 now. My understanding is the that Arc4x is a rare beast and is the result of finding a particularly good LED to suit the product. Even after the Rev3 is being shipped I may still have to wait a month or so until that LED that excels appears.

    I have not yet decided if I will auction the light or if I will keep the light. I need to see and fondle the light before making my decision.

    I anxiously await the arrival of the light.

  26. #26
    *Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,161

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    [ QUOTE ]
    Hoghead said:
    If I remember correctly Peter said the ARC4x did not use Lux3s.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Hogshead, I can't find that anywhere....

    finding a lux for ARC4X sounds like finding a U bin from several reels of TWOJ's by output, as described by ARC mania for his superlights.

  27. #27
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,573

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    cy,

    I'm pretty sure that Peter said that there were no Lux3s in the ARC4x. I have one of the original 4 and I've read pretty much everything about the ARC4x.

    I'll do a search. Check back here and I'll edit this post if I can find it.

    EDIT: I'm having trouble with the link. Search for post # 492889 02/27/04 05:20 PM Gransee

  28. #28
    *Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,161

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    [ QUOTE ]
    Gransee said:
    Some of the Arc4 Premiums, standards and seconds have Lux IIIs in them. They are in the minority compared to the Lux Is. No Lux III has been good enough to make it into a Arc4x though.

    And yes, I have tried T rank IIIs and no, they didn't make the cut. Here we go..

    Peter

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Thanks, Hogshead, I found it. Looks like ARC4X's lux is a one watt [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif[/img]

  29. #29
    *Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,161

    Default Re: Arc4x Runtime Comparisons

    [ QUOTE ]
    PeLu said:
    [ QUOTE ]
    cy said:According to an earlier post by Peter, there are only 5 ARC4X made.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I remember that somebody (sorry, forgot the name) won one in a raffle and got it in July.

    Besides that, did anybody try it with a rechargeable CR123 cell?
    Does it change anything?

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I've been running ARC4X on R123's for about a week now. It's the only way to go.

    Have not done any runtime tests yet, but bright is way longer than 10 minutes on std 123's.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •