NEXTORCH - 300 m long-shot E6        
Results 1 to 30 of 30

Thread: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

  1. #1
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    First of all, I want to say a big THANK YOU to Bill Waites for the use of his MagCharger; his generosity made this thread possible.

    I will be comparing and reviewing both the Tiger11 and the MagCharger-WA01160 while also discussing some very general topics and my somewhat pointed opinions on them. This thread might possibly be better placed in the Reviews forum, but given the philosophical rambling and tangential discourse involved, as well as the nature of the "review" itself, I decided to place it here. Moderators, you have my blessing if you would like to relocate it, and I apologize if I am in error on this matter.

    HOW BRIGHT IS IT?

    That's one of the main questions about a light, isn't it? and it's only natural. We never outgrow the love of sheer output and the need to compare the output of one light against another. However, even so, there are so many problems in trying to answer this question. What do we mean? Lumens or foot-candles? Total output or intensity? Throw or flood? Not to mention such things as beam profiles, artifacts, and color-quality.

    I don't have all the answers. I'm not even sure I have any. But what I do know is that we should all do our utmost to avoid turning a flashlight into a single number. To illustrate what I mean, let's consider the SureFire A2 vs. the L2. The A2 is rated at 50 lumens on high, while the L2 is rated at 100 lumens. The A2 runs for 50 minutes on high, and so does the L2 (depending on how you define the end of run--to 50 percent intensity in this case). So one might--from these numbers--simply jump to the conclusion that anyone who is willing to pay $20 more to get an A2 must be congenitally insane (that would be me) or irretrieveably stupid. I confess that this attitude makes my blood boil and gets me hot under the collar. A flashlight is more than a collection of numbers! And anyone who takes the time to live with both the A2 and the L2 will come to see that the comparison is not so simple as lumens, runtime, and cost. But I will leave the details of this example for my review of the A2.

    Back to the topic at hand. So, how to proceed? Obviously, beamshots together with a considered, balanced, and objective review go a long way towards getting beyond the single-number reductionism I think we should all avoid. There is no substitute for hands-on experience of a light together with a set of beamshots which the reviewer deems to be faithfully representative.

    That is my opinion. And I also dislike the other number which lights get reduced to: lux. I understand that a light meter is a useful tool, and I have no problem with lux measurements given in a proper context, but they are in no way as important as either beamshots or the considered opinions of the reviewer.

    As for the beamshots themselves, the camera, the same as the light meter, is a tool that must be used within its limitations. A camera and an eye are by no means identical, just as a light meter and an eye are not identical. In some cases, the camera gives a radically different picture than what you really see. What can you do but either throw those shots out, or put them in context and qualify them with comments?

    So this is what I have done. I have lived with the MagCharger for some time now (hehe, sorry, Bill) and I have gone out walking with it in the fields, and illuminated walls and objects inside my house, and I have taken it apart to some extent and gotten a feel for how it works. I haven't had as much experience with MagChargers as with TigerLights, but I think I have spent long enough with this light to get a pretty good feel for it and its' pros and cons.

    THE MC60

    It's a classic, no doubt. Take a stock MagCharger, drop in a $5 Welch Allyn 01160 halogen lamp, and you've got a very bright, long-throwing light for just over $100. Swap in an Aero 4AH NiMH battery stick and you've got an even better, longer-running light. The stock reflector is aluminum, and thus will not melt even with the 1160, and the stock lens is mineral glass, so the only heat issue stemming from the upgrade in power is the plastic bi-pin socket in the pedestal. I am told that prolonged and repeated running with the 1160 will eventually do considerable damage to the plastic of the socket. However, a mica shield placed between the socket and the lamp helps to minimize or eliminate such heat damage. Ginseng, master of all things MagCharger, has posted authoritative and informative threads on MC heat-shielding as well as many other MC topics. The MC60 will run for 40 minutes with the stock pack, or an impressive 70 minutes with the 4AH Aero pack. The light is hard anodized black with a nicely grippy checkered body.

    But it is a big and heavy light when compared to a Tiger11 FBOP or SureFire M6. Everyone makes decisions about how big is too big, and how much runtime is enough, and so opinions will vary. To my mind, the MC60 is simply too big and heavy, and I prefer the TigerLight or SF M6. I can pocket these lights or carry them in a pouch, but one simply cannot do this with a MagCharger. Still, I can see where someone would think that as long as you're going to be using a light as big as the TigerLight, you might as well go to a larger light and enjoy the increased runtime. It's a personal decision, and can't be argued.

    Another thing that I didn't like about this light is the cam-action focusing. I personally, have never found this feature to be desirable. I have always put the beam to its best setting and left it there. For me this is just off of the maximum throw position, but either setting is acceptable. Thus for me at best the focusing is superfluous, while at worst it is annoying. I did not find it to drift off of its set focus in normal use, however, except when there was a need to change or adjust the lamp.

    This is my biggest complaint. The process of nudging and coaxing the lamp into a well centered position is time consuming and tedious, which would be one thing if you did it once and were done with it, but that is not the case. The lamp has a tendency to drift of off center, and thus to yield a beam with a squashed or aberrant hot-spot. I prefer the SureFire lamp assemblies or my ring-potted lamps, because I will gladly trade focus-on-the-fly capability for a beam with a centered hot-spot that STAYS centered.

    So, to sum up: it's bright, it's economical, it's well made, and if you don't mind the size and weight, cam action focusing, occasionally drifting hot-spot, and heat sensitive bi-pin socket, this light may be for you.

    The Tiger11 (FBOP)

    Getting your hands on a Tiger11 is neither so inexpensive nor so easy as for a MC60. I am not the only person that could make a Tiger11, but as far as I know, right now I am the only one who is making them, although they are not generally available at the moment, given my commitments to the M6-R and USL projects.

    So that's for starters: this light is a rarity compared to an MC60. Next, as I mentioned, it is about twice as expensive to get a Tiger11 setup. The light itself costs $130 or so, unless you buy a TL modders special ($75) which lacks the battery pack and lamp assembly. And then the battery pack costs in the neighborhood of $50 (or more, depending on which batteries were used), while the reflector, lamp, and UCL add up to another $35 or so. Thus, at best it is $150 for a Tiger11, and at worst, it is about $200.

    Is it worth it? Heck yeah! It is small; it is bright; and it is bomb proof (well, figuratively speaking). The Tiger11 is significantly smaller than a standard Mag2D, which in its turn is smaller than a MC. You can actually stick the TigerLight in a pants pocket and it will stay there while you do something else, and even though it's not comfortable, it gives you an idea for how manageable the light is. Many carry it in a BlackHawk pouch or a jacket pocket without trouble. Yet it still runs for around 30 minutes, more or less, depending on which batteries I made the pack out of. The KAN packs run for around 29 minutes, while the Gold Peak and Sanyo packs run for around 35 minutes.

    Heat is not an issue with the Tiger11. There is no pedestal to melt, no plastic parts at all near the lamp. And the lamp assembly itself is set inside a rubber gasket or "hose" which pushes down on the battery pack and up on the reflector. This affords a certain degree of shock-isolation. I have occasionally dropped my TigerLights, but never broken a filament.

    The exterior is hard anodized and textured, like paint with sand added, for a very nice grip and feel, in my opinion. The switch is placed in the rear which allows for an overhand grip, or for a fourth finger or pinky finger underhand activation grip, which I find to be quite comfortable.

    The one problem with the Tiger11 is that there is a small but non-zero chance that the lamp will insta-flash if the light is turned on hot off the charger. There are something like 25 Tiger11's in the field, and I only know of one instance of this happening, so it is not a big deal, but on the other hand, I specifically warned everyone against turning on the light hot off the charger. I myself have intentionally tried to flash an 1111, and after 6 or 7 times, I stopped trying. So, the Tiger11 is not so high-strung as to be impractical, but nonetheless, is high-strung enough to make me concerned in the case of certain uses. I should mention that the MC60 is free of this problem: hot off the charger activation is a non-issue.

    SOME PICTURES

    OK. So, which is brighter? hehe. I went out to my favorite beam shot photo op spot and took what turned out to be some half-way decent pictures. My camera is an Olympus digital with what they call a "night mode" which uses a long shutter open time and special electronics to try to capture what the eye really sees at night. The camera needs to be on a tripod in order to use this feature.

    Below is the MC60 alone:



    Next, the Tiger11:



    And here is both lights pointed at the trees. The Tiger11 is on the right.



    And again but on the side of the barn, Tiger11 on the right.



    Next I took both lights indoors for some up-the-wall shots. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Tiger11 on the left.



    And here is a close-up of the floor end of things:



    And here is a close-up of the wall end of things:



    And finally, I shined both lights up against the ceiling and took a direct picture of the hotspots. Tiger11 is on the right this time.



    So, I think the pictures tell the same story which I am about to put into words: the Tiger11 is putting out somewhat more lumens, and they are whiter than the MC60 lumens. Both lights throw almost exactly the same distance, but the Tiger11 illuminates a larger area with higher CCT light.

    In terms of beam quality, that is really dependent on whether or not a smooth or LOP, MOP or HOP reflector is used. In these pictures, I used a light orange peel reflector, which lessened the throw ever so slightly, but which smoothed out the beam artifacts somewhat. An HOP reflector would yield a SureFire type beam with about 15 percent less throw. As you can probably see, the Tiger11 used here has a marginally nicer beam, which could have been somewhat nicer if I had set it slightly off maximum throw focus. However, as it was being compared against the MC60, I set it to maximum throw, but used an LOP reflector.

    Keep in mind that a Carley RF1940 can be modded to fit the MagCharger, and in MOP or HOP would yield a very nice beam quality, at the expense of throw, for two reasons: 1. the orange peeling would reduce throw, but also 2. the 1940's geometry is not as tight as the stock MC reflector.

    THE NUMBERS GAME

    So, with all of this context in mind, let's run some numbers using Welch Allyn specifications and the re-rating formulas:

    The 1160 is a 5.0 volt, 3.45 amp 326.7 lumen lamp with a life of 550 hours. Pushed to 6.2 volts--which is just about the mid-point voltage of the 4AH "UMP" pack--it is drawing 3.88 amps and giving 693.7 lumens with a life of 41 hours. This equates to 451 lumens out the front of the light, assuming a 35 percent loss rate. With the stock pack, this number drops to 357 lumens out the front, because the mid-point voltage of the stock pack is 5.8 volts.

    The 1111 is a 6.0 volt, 3.35 amp 465 lumen lamp with a life of 100 hours. Pushed to 7.0 volts, it is drawing 3.64 amps and giving 797.6 lumens with a life of 11 hours. This equates to 520 lumens out the front of the light. And actually, the Gold Peak 2000 4/5A's (which were used here) will hold 7.2 volts at the mid-point of the run, and thus this number would jump to 572 lumens out the front.

    Now this is only a 27 percent increase, (vs. the MC60 with UMP), and a 50 percent increase in lumens output is generally necessary for one light to be obviously brighter than another. In other words, both the numbers and the reality tell the same story: both these lights are very bright. The Tiger11 does beat the MC60 in output and equals it in throw, and is putting out a whiter light, but it definitely does NOT "blow it away". I would specifically not use the phrase "no comparison". These lights are in the same class and are friendly competitors. There are many reasons why a person would choose one over the other.

    ONE LAST DIGRESSION: LUMENS INFLATION

    Finally, as people may have noted, above I have followed what Gineng and others have established as standard hotwire practice when trying to put a lumens number to a given light setup. First, you simply can NOT use the nominal voltage rating of a battery pack when choosing the applied voltage to use in the re-rating formulas. In many cases, the pack doesn't even stay above nominal voltage for 1/10 of the runtime! The best practice is to actually measure what the voltage across the lamp is at the mid-point of the run. THAT is the voltage that should be used in the re-rating formula.

    Next, not all of the bulb-lumens make it out the front of the light. There are always losses. Standard hotwire wisdom around CPF estimates these at about 35 percent, or in other words, a 65 percent figure for lumens out the front of the light, also called "torch lumens".

    As impressive and fun as it is to think of a Tiger85 or Mag85 as "putting out 1234 lumens" it is just not commensurate with reality nor with the SureFire ratings, for example, and it causes what I have been calling "lumens inflation." I don't mean to be an a** about this or anything, and I know that not every modder has a volt-meter, but I just wanted to mention it.

    OK. Well, there it is. MC60 vs Tiger11. It's been a long time coming and it's kind of anti-climactic, but I hope it has been helpful. Thanks everyone.
    Last edited by js; 07-28-2014 at 10:53 PM. Reason: fix image links

  2. #2
    Flashaholic* CroMAGnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Los Gatos, CA
    Posts
    2,540

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Thanks js! Very nice [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

  3. #3
    *Flashaholic* bwaites's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Central Washington State
    Posts
    5,037

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Wow Jim!!

    A great review!!

    Now do the same with the stock Tiger and the MC60!!

    Jim and I have been the two ends of this argument, with me arguing for longer run time and Jim arguing for smaller package size. Until he got mine, he had not had a MagCharger, and I still don't have a TL. (BUT, one is on the way!)

    The TL vs MagCharger60 is a fair comparison for one reason, the MC60 is a simple and cheap bulb swap that costs about the same or less than the TL. Using the stock batteries for each, it is the most common of the upgrades, (there simply aren't that many 4 Amp/hour NIMH sticks out there.)

    I have bought a TL simply because of Jim's recommendation, and now also have a Tiger11 pack on the way!

    This comparison of the two is very fair, they are kissing cousins in this configuration and this IS the most likely mod of each for CPF'ers.

    Thanks Jim!!

    Bill

  4. #4
    *Flashaholic* PlayboyJoeShmoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Shepherd, TX (where dat?)
    Posts
    11,042

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    NICELY done!

    I have actually seen an MC60 as well as my M*gBP85 in action. A MC could concievly be in my future, but a Tiger11 ain't even.

    Anyhow, NICE pics!

    Thanks for taking the trouble!!!!

  5. #5
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    NW Rainforest
    Posts
    1,015

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Thanks Jim and Bill for this great review and these great lights.

    I have had one of Jim's Tiger11s for quite a while and it is an awesome light -- especially out here in the forest 7 miles off grid. Compared to the Surefire X10 (thanks Tom)(which is roughly comparable to the M6) the TL11 has a little less flood and a little more throw, but not all that much different.

    I just ordered one of Bill's Mag85 kits, so I'm pretty excited to see how that performs -- hopefully I won't melt anything essential.

    But no matter how well the Mag85 does, and no matter how much I like the X10 and its dual beam, I'm going to get another Tiger11 as soon as Jim offers it.

    Josey

  6. #6
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles County
    Posts
    232

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Nice review, thanks!

  7. #7

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Hi Jim,

    Nice review. Very well done. In fact, I'd offer that anyone who wants a great qualitative review to send you their subjects.

    Your findings are in line with mine. I had run the MC11+ (WA01111 and a 6 cell 4/5A HC pack) versus the MC60 and the results are much like what you found with the Tiger11. I also concur with your observations about beam quality. In fact, the most "useful" beam profile I found was with the SL-35X LAs which used a defocused bulb in a satin finish reflector.

    Nice job and beautiful pictures. Overall, an accurate and descriptive review that's balanced and well supported with photos and background information. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]

    Wilkey

  8. #8
    Silver Moderator
    SilverFox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Bellingham WA
    Posts
    12,386

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Hello Jim,

    Excellent review.

    I will agree with Wilkey. I love the SL-35X beam in my TigerLight. Now if I can keep from insta-flashing it...

    I was trying to make out the lux readings in your barn beam shots... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Have you every considered investing in a light meter? [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/nana.gif[/img]

    Tom

  9. #9
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    32*31\'N 92*11\'W
    Posts
    288

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    ...and doth he sayest:

    "but given the philosophical rambling and tangential discourse involved"

    Damn, Jim. I had to get out the dicshunary to even start reading your review. lol.

    Seriously, nice review. I wish either of these lights were in my future but when, and if, my ship comes in and I am not at the airport, I know to whom to go to fulfill my desires.

    Sincerely,
    vhyper007

  10. #10
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Thanks very much for your kind words everyone! I really appreciate it and I'm glad you found the review to be helpful and worthwhile. I had wanted to do detailed pictures of both lights disassembled and also do the stock MC vs. the stock TL, and the MC85 vs. the Tiger85, and talk a lot more about stuff (unfortunately I like to hear myself talk--sorry about the vocab, vhyper007 [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] ), but I never seem to have time to do all of the things I plan to do, so I decided to settle for this much and get Bill's MagCharger back to him, along with the GP 2000 6 cell TL pack and an WA1111 in a LOP 1940, plus a spare WA1111.

    So this means that Bill himself could do all sorts of fun comparisons, time permitting. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/evilgrin07.gif[/img]

    SilverFox,

    Oh, yeah, lux numbers for the side of the barn shot. Let me find them. Oh yes, here they are: Tiger11 95,000 lux. MC60 25,000 lux. No comparison. Stupid old MC. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/nana.gif[/img]

    Seriously, though, I bet at one meter you could get the MC60 to give a slightly higher lux reading, as at close indoor ranges, I can see an indication of the MC60 hotspot on the Tiger11 beam, although this could be due to CCT differences, but I doubt it. But out in the field, actually throwing the beams far, far away, the MC60 and the Tiger11 are tied. That was another of the things I wanted to get a shot of, but at that extreme throw, the camera wouldn't have captured much, even in night mode, plus again, it was a time thing. My long-throw range is no-small distance away from the light-up-the-barn spot.

    As for the 35X LA, as I recall, yes, it is a very, very nice and useful beam. Pleasing and even and smooth and wide and white. Nothing else quite like it, except for maybe a Lux V, although obviously the Lux V would be a lot less light. Of course, as S4MadMan's review showed, the TL35X doesn't throw as far, having only about 75 percent of the intensity of the MC60 at 1 meter.

    But, Tom, correct me if I'm wrong: you still haven't blown that 35X LA being driven by the Sanyo HR4/5AU pack, right? That's something. Perhaps I could offer this combo at some point. Or come to think of it, you could use the 35X LA with the Gen 2 Tiger11 without fear of flashing it. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleye11.gif[/img]

  11. #11

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Tiger11 95,000lux ?

  12. #12

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Jim,

    Top-notch review and words of wisdom:

    "There is no substitute for hands-on experience of a light together with a set of beamshots which the reviewer deems to be faithfully representative".

    Both my MC60 and Tiger11 have smooth reflectors. Tig11's tighter hotspot outthrows the Mc60 at sharpest focus and is whiter, as Jim observed. Also, the MC60's beam can be knocked askew by a relatively modest lateral impact. I keep most of my rechargeables off charger for weeks at a time and Tig11 (KAN 1800) retains its charge surprisingly well. For some reason the MC60 (UMP) loses its charge relatively quickly, possibly because of over-discharging when I first got the light and was compulsively playing with it.

    They are both great lights. For runtime and "percussive persuasion" choose the MC60. For everything else it's the Tig11.

    Jim, I'm looking forward to eventually getting a couple of those Gold Peak or Sanyo packs when you get back to Tiger battery construction.

    Brightnorm

    PS Any suggestions about M60 battery depletion?

  13. #13
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    [ QUOTE ]
    Luna said:
    Tiger11 95,000lux ?

    [/ QUOTE ]

    This was a joke! Hence the "Seriously," afterwards and the discussion of how the MC60 would likely have the slightly higher lux at very short range (1 meter). I don't even own a light meter. SilverFox was just messin' with me, so I responded in kind. I don't know what kind of reading a Tiger11 would give. Certainly something more like 40-50k lux, although, LOL, CromagNet's Tiger11 review quotes 400,000 lux. I think maybe he's off by a factor of 10. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon15.gif[/img]

  14. #14
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    BN,

    Thanks. And interesting! --the Tiger11 w/ smooth reflector set to maximum throw will out-throw the MC60. I wouldn't have guessed it, although, come to think of it, a police officer in Belgium who owns both told me the same thing.

    As for your MC60 battery pack problem, I'd say that if a 24 hour slow charge (i.e. stock MC charger harness) doesn't do the trick that you'll just have to break down and get a new Aero 4Ah stick. Sorry about that. If you want to be sure, you could mail me the battery stick and I will do some discharge testing to check for a bad cell or cells. It could be fine, except for losing its' charge a bit faster than the KAN's. Not sure. Oh, and I owe you an email. Look for it tomorrow.

  15. #15
    Silver Moderator
    SilverFox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Bellingham WA
    Posts
    12,386

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Hello Jim,

    As long as we are having fun... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

    [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/evilgrin07.gif[/img] Let's see now, 95000 lux at what appears to be about 50 meters... That works out to just over 237 Million lux... And you talk about lumen inflation... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/evilgrin07.gif[/img]

    Tom

  16. #16
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Well, Tom, it is a hotwire, now isn't it? It's a small piece of the sun. 237 million lux sounds about right to me. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

  17. #17

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Ok, so I beez a wee bit slow tonight JS, I thought the seriously was in regard to the "Stupid old MC" bit [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

    And my MC85 makes 1234lumens+1 [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

  18. #18
    *Flashaholic* PlayboyJoeShmoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Shepherd, TX (where dat?)
    Posts
    11,042

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    What does the SL35X bulb module need in the way of power?

    That might be the perfect light.

  19. #19

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    BTW, Im working on an thermo-plamsa element that might give the sun a run! I need a MB and megaray to use for comparison. Well, as soon as I get ahold of some Einsteinium-253 (you think the WA minimum order is steep!)

  20. #20
    *Flashaholic* bwaites's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Central Washington State
    Posts
    5,037

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    The SL35X is a 6 volt module, which, when driven to 7.2 volts is awesome, or so I am reliable informed.

    I have a couple on order to check them out.

    I would expect the 1111 to ouththrow the MC60 in the right reflector, as its lumen output IS a little higher.

    Bill

  21. #21

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Bill,

    I think you'll like the SL-35X on 6 cells. Just keep in mind that it's not reliable on high current cells in that configuration. We've all blown multiple units using fractional A and 1/2D cells. It handles 7.2V just fine, just not the initial spike of HC cells.

    The beam is meaty and pretty white. The spot to spill transition is smooth and does not distract from viewing the target. Very nice indeed.

    Wilkey

  22. #22
    Flashaholic makar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Stuttgart/Germany
    Posts
    394

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Great review. Thanks Jim!

  23. #23
    Enlightened agent8698's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Posts
    99

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    I have owned my Tiger11 since July 2004 (over 10 months now). Yesterday, the bulb died (for the first time). Not bad, considering that I turn the light on almost every day, and use it probably an average of 2 or 3 minutes a day. My opinion of the Tiger11 is that it has been very reliable and that it is awesome to hold the equivalent of a car headlight on high beam in your hand. Sometimes I would turn on the light fresh off the charger (just to satisfy my curiosity), and it never blew, until this time (fresh off the charger again), but it was probably ripe anyway. I installed my replacement bulb, and I hope to get another 10 months or so out of the bulb. Max

  24. #24
    *Flashaholic* bwaites's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Central Washington State
    Posts
    5,037

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    up

  25. #25
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    London England
    Posts
    137

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    WOW! Now I want a Tiger11!

  26. #26
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Yearly bump.

    Seems appropriate given that the TL passaround is ongoing and that I just mentioned this thread in a recent post.

    Plus, I will be selling some Tiger11's and 85's and even a regulated TL or two.

    The regulated TigerLight uses an 8 cell AA pack instead of a 6 cell 4/5A pack, and the output is regulated to exactly 7.2 volts DC-equivalent for the entire run. Against the WA1111 the regulated TL will run for 45 minutes. Neat, huh?

    Only downside is that the battery pack is soldered into the switch core and is not user-replaceable.
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  27. #27
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    NW Rainforest
    Posts
    1,015

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    I just saw this awesome review and was thinking of commenting, when, as I scrolled down through the replies, saw I already did. What the heck? Then I saw the review was done a long time ago. Whew! I was afraid I needed new medication. LOL

    I bought one of Jim's TL11s a long time ago, which is why I initially commented, and it has worked flawlessly. And I have used it a lot. I also have a MC60 with the 4000mAh NiMH battery pack, FiveMega focusing MC reflector and FiveMega ceramic slug. Everything Jim said in his review is exactly to my experience. I also have one of Ginseng's MC85 with 8 NiMH high-current/high capacity batteries (blows the bulb on the standard 9 batteries because these batts hold their voltage so well), and it is a great light, too, but very large -- about 5D in size.

    And just recently I was EXTREMELY lucky to get one of Jim's new TL11-R lights. This light is incredible. When I first got it, I took it out and compared it to some Mag85s and an ROP on high. The TL11-R won, but when I went back and charged everyone up to full, the Mag85s threw a little more light, but not a lot of difference. I tend to use stippled reflectors with 1185 bulbs because the beam is so nice and these bulbs have enough lumens to offset the loss in throw.

    My first TL11 had the pepper spray, which I haven't used since I lost a battle of chemical warfare to a couple of skunks. The new TL11-R is the 8-inch size, making it amazingly compact for so much light. And Jim set up the bulb and reflector just perfectly.

    The longer -- and regulated -- beam really overcomes the major advantage the MC60 had in runtime, using the larger pack. Although the MC60's runtime is still longer, the quality and brightness of that beam can't compare over the full span of runtime.

    The other issue everyone raises -- and one that had always bothered me -- was the placement of the switch on the TL. It's not too bad on the spray version, but the short version makes it a little weird, at least at first.

    I have, however, come to like that switch placement. As Jim says, it just takes a little adjustment. But the bigger point is that the proper tactical position for a bright light is just to the side of your head and just in front of your eyes. In that position, you don't see a lot of confusing shadows amid the beam. And the smallish 8-inch TL can be easily carried lens backwards in your hand, so you can swing the light up to the side of your head in the proper tactical position and use your thumb to click the switch.

    I've become a great believer in regulated incans. If I want to light up the homestead yard, I take a FiveMega tri-bored Mag85 with 9 GP2000 4/5A batts and AWR's Hotdriver set to 11 volts and a small-hole Litho123 heavy stipple reflector. Long runtime, heavy, and with a big, perfect-beam wall of light. But not a lot of throw.

    If I need throw, the TL11-R is perfect. Very portable, perfect beam that goes forever, and a long-regulated runtime. It's hard for the MC60 to break into that line up.

    Thanks, Jim.
    Last edited by Josey; 07-18-2006 at 11:30 AM.

  28. #28
    Flashaholic JimmyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Seattle, WA (USA)
    Posts
    198

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    Well since you bumped it I don't feel bad asking a question on such an old thread. In your initial review you state that the MC is Hard Anodized (type lll). Is this the case now? I ask because as a rookie cop 18 yrs ago, my partner bought a stock MC which was type ll anodized. Needless to say after a few weeks in the car it looked like hell. We commonly left them on the floor between the seat and the door. This made it easy to grab on the way out but scratched the bejesus out of it in short order. I lost my old Streamlight a few years back which had almost no finish left and almost looked like bare aluminum. Battle scars I called them (my partner called it fugly). Type lll sure would have been nice. I've been on a motor now for the last 8 yrs and carry a Surefire in a belt pouch which could pass for showroom new.



    JimmyB
    JimmyB
    "Gentlemen, get the thing straight, once and for all: the policeman isnít there to create disorder; the policeman is there to preserve disorder".
    -Mayor Richard J. Daley, Chicago. 1968 Democratic Convention
    (1) Exposed

  29. #29
    *Flashaholic* js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,791

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    JimmyB,

    According to the manual the finish is Type III. Whether it was always this way, or they are lying and it still isn't, or what, I couldn't say.

    Perhaps someone who has put his or her MC to heavy use can comment.
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  30. #30
    Flashaholic* voodoogreg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Global
    Posts
    1,828

    Default Re: The Tiger11, the MC60, and some related musing

    One thing I noticed is the MC60's lamp is out of alignment with the reflector
    (easily seen in the indoor shot's) this can change things a bit. I do have an aero HP stick and a 1160 WA so I guess i know it's operational stats. I use mine as a reliable tool, so if you can live with possably flashing a TL-11 lamp fine,, I don't roll like that.
    I do find it interesting that with the stock mag lamp (newest one) with the areo pack, it will throw a bit further then the WA, and is much whiter, at least in my 15 yr old MC.
    Proper centering, of the lamp (a PITA stock or WA) is the key, even stock, it lights up thing's far away my old eyes can't see in focus anyway, So I am happy with my MC/MC60 (it stays stock lamped 70% of the time) anyhoo, just a few thing's i have observed. VDG
    "In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti."

    "lumen Gentium!"

Posting Permissions

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