# 2014 Mtbr Lights Shootout



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Phase 1 is here:

2014 Mtbr Bike Lights Shootout | Mountain Bike Review

It is not perfect so please look it over and let me know about comments and feedback. I wanted to get it out as soon as the time changed.

I'm testing a dozen more lights this week to add to the shootout for Phase 2. And I'll shoot a few videos to select my top picks.

Here's the excel spreadsheet doc. Please make me some graphs that show the data better.

claimed vs actual lumen

lumen per dollar

lumen per gram

etc.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0isJlpsmGimZ2M0V3VteG5YTGM/edit?usp=sharing


----------



## varider (Nov 29, 2012)

Great job as usual. Will you still put up the backyard beamshots in addition to the tunnel shots?


----------



## -Archie- (Aug 25, 2013)

Many thanks for your effort, *francois*: excellent!


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

varider said:


> Great job as usual. Will you still put up the backyard beamshots in addition to the tunnel shots?


Sadly, no. My backyard light studio gave up its life to a pump track. 

Feature: The Backyard Pump Track ? Construction | Mountain Bike Review

fc


----------



## cue003 (May 6, 2011)

Francois, can you clarify the following statements that is on all the individual light reviews right above the tunnel photo?

"Cones and targets are set up with the far target set up at 120 yards."

And then on some reviews it mentions..

"Cones and targets are set up with the far target set up at 80 yards."

The photos don't look anywhere close to 80/100 yards. The markings on the ground I assume represent feet so the target on all these photos should be 120 feet. Right??

Thx


----------



## cue003 (May 6, 2011)

francois said:


> Phase 1 is here:
> 
> ......
> 
> ...


Does that above statement mean that the lights you have already tested and provided the reviews on (as in already published in the 2014 reviews) aren't any of your top picks?


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

cue003 said:


> Francois, can you clarify the following statements that is on all the individual light reviews right above the tunnel photo?
> 
> "Cones and targets are set up with the far target set up at 120 yards."
> 
> ...


Correct, 120. Last year was 80 feet and we bumped it up for the bigger lights. Let me find that inconsistency and fix.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

cue003 said:


> Does that above statement mean that the lights you have already tested and provided the reviews on (as in already published in the 2014 reviews) aren't any of your top picks?


I've already got some top picks in mind.

Cateye 1200, Lupine Wilma, Serfas 750, Taz 1000.

Now, I have to test the three Gloworms I have and the Bontrager Ion 700.

Have you guys heard about the Bontrager 700? 700 lumens for $99.

fc


----------



## mtbRevolution (Aug 10, 2012)

francois said:


> Sadly, no. My backyard light studio gave up its life to a pump track.


Just a suggestion Francois. In the interest of showing which light performs best picking up ruts & obstacles on trails, terrain elevation and dips, a beamshot across the pump track may be a good idea. Hotspot intensity on the fence can demonstrate throw power.


----------



## Gharddog03 (Sep 25, 2013)

I'm sure we will be seeing many self contained lights in the near future. 1200 lumens is not to shabby for self contained. Thanks for all the hard work Francois!:thumbsup:


----------



## varider (Nov 29, 2012)

That Bontrager looks tiny. Very impressive. $99 for a 700 lumens self-contained light is going to be hard to beat. That 1200 lumen Cateye is going to be another big hit. 

One thing that I would like to see more info on is the battery replacement in the self-contained lights (especially if they are built-in). Does the manufacturer offer a replacement battery service and what is the cost of this? I know some of the older Luminas used regular 18650 that could be swapped out by the user. I would hate to see all of these lights end up in the trash three years from now, just because the battery life is a third of what it used to be. After all, the leds themselves should still operational years from now. The lights will undoubtedly be better at that point, but you could still use it for an around town beater bike. 

I'll miss the backyard beamshots, but it was sacrificed for a good cause. The pump track looks like a lot of fun!

P.S. I think you forgot to sticky this thread


----------



## indebt (Nov 8, 2009)

francois said:


> Sadly, no. My backyard light studio gave up its life to a pump track.
> 
> Feature: The Backyard Pump Track ? Construction | Mountain Bike Review
> 
> fc


 Pump track turned out great Francois, I enjoyed the video. Once again thank you for all your hard work on the 2014 shootout. Looking forward to the rest of the reviews. Cheers!!:thumbsup:


----------



## cue003 (May 6, 2011)

francois said:


> I've already got some top picks in mind.
> 
> Cateye 1200, Lupine Wilma, Serfas 750, Taz 1000.
> 
> ...


I am very interested in seeing the beamshots and reading your thoughts on that bontrager. It isn't even on their website and I have a trek store close by that carries all their products so I am very very interested. Hopefully you can get that one up very soon and they hold a candle to the other 700 lumen contenders.


----------



## cue003 (May 6, 2011)

Also interesting you pick the lupine Wilma say over the beam pattern and light output of the seca 2000. But all good.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

mtbRevolution said:


> Just a suggestion Francois. In the interest of showing which light performs best picking up ruts & obstacles on trails, terrain elevation and dips, a beamshot across the pump track may be a good idea. Hotspot intensity on the fence can demonstrate throw power.


I'll definitely give it a try. There's a gap in the track where the light can poke through the berms.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

cue003 said:


> Also interesting you pick the lupine Wilma say over the beam pattern and light output of the seca 2000. But all good.


The Seca is awesome but it just a tired design. Long wire, old batteries. But it has a beautiful beam pattern and the old head can still handle the heat of all the lumens.

But the Wilma is just a work of art at 2770 lumens, lumens/dollar, lumens per gram.

I do like the Taz 1000 though at $250. That is a good one.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

cue003 said:


> I am very interested in seeing the beamshots and reading your thoughts on that bontrager. It isn't even on their website and I have a trek store close by that carries all their products so I am very very interested. Hopefully you can get that one up very soon and they hold a candle to the other 700 lumen contenders.


I have the Bontrager Ion 700. $99, about 680 lumens on my home lab, 1:45 run time, beautiful build nice beam pattern. Real integrating sphere measurement is coming tomorrow.

It's only weakness is thermal management is not sophisticated and it doesn't step down when there's no airflow. So caution to high heat night riders.

And the other weakness is it's not available for another month. But it looks like an industry shaker.

fc


----------



## stu06 (Dec 8, 2012)

Hey Francois,

Any ideas about the Betty coming in under Lupine's claimed output? Supposedly they use an integrating sphere as well.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

francois said:


> it looks like an industry shaker.


looks like L&M Urban clone.


----------



## Fourtrax (Mar 17, 2013)

Some graphs:


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

francois said:


> The Seca is awesome but it just a tired design. Long wire, old batteries. But it has a beautiful beam pattern and the old head can still handle the heat of all the lumens.
> 
> But the Wilma is just a work of art at 2770 lumens, lumens/dollar, lumens per gram.
> 
> ...


i understand your frustration with the Seca only picking up an extra 200 measured lumens over last year's model. that's why i picked up the last year's Seca 1700 over the new 2000, because the new one just wasn't enough of an upgrade to warrant the price difference ( $499 vs $320 at the time ).

on the other hand with 2700 lumens for $600 the Wilma is more competitive on the lumens per dollar front, so i understand why you're leaning to make it a pick. i also like that it can be ordered with 13 amp hour battery, which is a lot.

personally though, i would probably still get the Seca over the Wilma. the Seca isn't improved much because it was already perfect. the Wilma on the other hand is improved precisely in the area where it did not need improvement ( output ) and unchanged where improvement was needed ( beam pattern ).

the Taz 1000 does look like a very interesting light for road use. very interesting pattern - almost like a German STVZO light, but brighter.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

stu06 said:


> Hey Francois,
> 
> Any ideas about the Betty coming in under Lupine's claimed output? Supposedly they use an integrating sphere as well.


I will recheck it. I think it's related to heat. These light heads are so small compared to the 4500 lumen claims that they're too bright for the heatsinking available. We take readings at the the 30 second mark and our fan was tiny.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

androgen said:


> looks like L&M Urban clone.


Yup. It's a $150 light for $100.

fc


----------



## Mike123456 (May 14, 2013)

Francois, thank you for the shootout. Noob question follows: what would be the ideal number of lumens for trail/XC riding?

Mike


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Mike123456 said:


> Francois, thank you for the shootout. Noob question follows: what would be the ideal number of lumens for trail/XC riding?
> 
> Mike


For XC riding this year... I would say 1200-1400 lumens. That could be one 1200 lumen light on the bar or 700 on bar and 700 on the helmet.

Lumens get cheaper each year so I tend to ratchet up a little every year.

Generally:

- the faster you go, the more lumens you need so you don't outrun your light.

- the more people you ride with, the more lumens you need. That's because someone will have a super bright light and your eyes will adjust to their bright light.

What do others think?

fc


----------



## RojoRacing53 (Jul 23, 2013)

Waiting for gloworm reviews


----------



## indebt (Nov 8, 2009)

francois said:


> I will recheck it. I think it's related to heat. These light heads are so small compared to the 4500 lumen claims that they're too bright for the heatsinking available. We take readings at the the 30 second mark and our fan was tiny.
> 
> fc


 With the ever increasing outputs in these tiny lamp heads, do you think it may be worth re-visiting the time frame the measurements are taken to achieve that products max output? Maybe the ten or fifteen second mark just to help rule out that some power houses are stepping down due to heat before the measurements are taken. The Olympia is also one that had been discussed as been majorly over stated, and that there should have been some decent improvement over last years model.

I understand by doing this it could alleviate motivation for these company's to improve their heat sinking


----------



## RojoRacing53 (Jul 23, 2013)

When are we going to get water cooled headlamps? Air cooling is so last century.


----------



## jkirkpatri (Sep 16, 2008)

RojoRacing53 said:


> Waiting for gloworm reviews


Same here!


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

indebt said:


> With the ever increasing outputs in these tiny lamp heads, do you think it may be worth re-visiting the time frame the measurements are taken to achieve that products max output? Maybe the ten or fifteen second mark just to help rule out that some power houses are stepping down due to heat before the measurements are taken. The Olympia is also one that had been discussed as been majorly over stated, and that there should have been some decent improvement over last years model.
> 
> I understand by doing this it could alleviate motivation for these company's to improve their heat sinking


We're using the 30 second mark since that is the FL1 standard of measurement for lumen output for flashlights. FL1 is becoming widely adopted now by light manufacturers. Here are some excerpts:
http://www.streamlight.com/Documents/ansi/ansi-pres.pdf

Bot on the review of each light, we have a 3 minute graph showing the lumen output, so one can see the output at any point within the first 3 minutes.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

jkirkpatri said:


> Same here!


They sent me three lights a few weeks ago. This week, they sent me three new lights of the same models since they made some 'significant' improvements.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Fourtrax said:


> Some graphs:


Thank you!!!!!


----------



## varider (Nov 29, 2012)

francois said:


> For XC riding this year... I would say 1200-1400 lumens. That could be one 1200 lumen light on the bar or 700 on bar and 700 on the helmet.
> 
> Lumens get cheaper each year so I tend to ratchet up a little every year.
> 
> ...


That sounds good to me. I think it's becoming more about beam shape than just pure lumens, because we have reached a point where all the lights put out enough light. If you have a light that puts 2000 lumens into a hotspot size of basketball it doesn't do you any good. You need some light between the tire and the hotspot, and some side-spill to see where you going. There is a lot of personal preference that comes into this as well. Some love the super-spot lights, where I prefer a floodier even beam. Some of the manufacturers are catching on to this, and providing different optics choices.


----------



## indebt (Nov 8, 2009)

francois said:


> We're using the 30 second mark since that is the FL1 standard of measurement for lumen output for flashlights. FL1 is becoming widely adopted now by light manufacturers. Here are some excerpts:
> http://www.streamlight.com/Documents/ansi/ansi-pres.pdf
> 
> Bot on the review of each light, we have a 3 minute graph showing the lumen output, so one can see the output at any point within the first 3 minutes.


 Does that three minute graph start when the light is first turned on,,,, or at the thirty second mark?


----------



## ziscwg (May 18, 2007)

varider said:


> That sounds good to me. I think it's becoming more about beam shape than just pure lumens, because we have reached a point where all the lights put out enough light. If you have a light that puts 2000 lumens into a hotspot size of basketball it doesn't do you any good. You need some light between the tire and the hotspot, and some side-spill to see where you going. *There is a lot of personal preference that comes into this as well. Some love the super-spot lights, where I prefer a floodier even beam. Some of the manufacturers are catching on to this, and providing different optics choices*.


I just got the Lezyne Deca drive (800 lm) and it has plenty of light output on roads and fire roads.

I totally agree that the beam pattern is more of a factor now. Running that light at higher light output would just be a waste of battery power.

One thing I noticed on my Deca light is the cover lens appears to be replaceable. This has me thinking, "Can the cover lens be swapped to change the beam pattern to your liking?"


----------



## pabcor (Aug 25, 2011)

Good job!


----------



## Fourtrax (Mar 17, 2013)

Updated the graphs with more info and larger.


----------



## Gharddog03 (Sep 25, 2013)

Sweet. Thanks fourtrax!


----------



## steelhmr (Sep 30, 2011)

francois said:


> Phase 1 is here:
> 
> 2014 Mtbr Bike Lights Shootout | Mountain Bike Review
> 
> ...


How about some comparisons with lux instead of lumens? $/lux, lux/gram, etc. I copied this from another thread:

Remember when "lux" was supposed to be more important than "lumens"? Compare the lux & lumens of the Gemini Olympia vs the Seca Race:

Lumens: 1477 vs 2022 (Seca Race has 36.9% more lumens)
Lux: 153 vs 170 (Seca Race has 11.1% more lux)
$/Lux: 1.96 vs 2.94 (Seca Race costs 50% more $ per lux)


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

steelhmr said:


> How about some comparisons with lux instead of lumens? $/lux, lux/gram, etc. I copied this from another thread:
> 
> Remember when "lux" was supposed to be more important than "lumens"? Compare the lux & lumens of the Gemini Olympia vs the Seca Race:
> 
> ...


Lux is really not that relevant. It measures light output at a specific spot in the beam pattern.

We do something called Mtbr Lux which is the ambient lux reading of a light meter when the light is pointed at the ceiling in a controlled room. This number is really easy for us to get but it is only relevant to us for the basis of comparison. We used this a lot when we didn't have access to a $20,000 machine that measures lumens, an integrating sphere.

An integrating sphere measures lumens, which is the total output of a bike light. It measures by capturing all the light from a light and bouncing it on a sphere and collecting the light output. So lumens is the end all, be all for measuring light output.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Fourtrax said:


> Updated the graphs with more info and larger.


Can I get a hell ya.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

indebt said:


> Does that three minute graph start when the light is first turned on,,,, or at the thirty second mark?


It starts when the light is turned on, or second or two before the light is turned on.

fc


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

francois said:


> Lux is really not that relevant. It measures light output at a specific spot in the beam pattern.
> 
> We do something called Mtbr Lux which is the ambient lux reading of a light meter when the light is pointed at the ceiling in a controlled room. This number is really easy for us to get but it is only relevant to us for the basis of comparison. We used this a lot when we didn't have access to a $20,000 machine that measures lumens, an integrating sphere.
> 
> ...


Lumens ( when independently measured using an Integrating sphere ) are certainly a more useful metric than Lux.

however Lux i think can also be useful for measuring the "throw" of a light.

going by Lux alone is a good way to mislead the customer, but using Lux in addition to Lumens i think would be interesting and informative.

while it can be argued that the Tunnel beam pattern shots already convey the information about "throw" of the light, they do not do so in a way that can be easily entered into an excel spreadsheet.


----------



## geoff_tewierik (Mar 24, 2012)

francois said:


> They sent me three lights a few weeks ago. This week, they sent me three new lights of the same models since they made some 'significant' improvements.


I have the X1v1 for helmet and the X2v2 for the bar.

Would love to see you include the 3 lights from a few weeks ago plus the 3 new lights to see the differences and whether it's worth upgrading.


----------



## Gharddog03 (Sep 25, 2013)

Francois, can you share your thoughts on the Duo and Olympia? Gemini seems to be a hot topic.:madmax:


----------



## Gharddog03 (Sep 25, 2013)

francois said:


> The Seca is awesome but it just a tired design.


X2. Awesome beam pattern though but it needs a revamp!


----------



## indebt (Nov 8, 2009)

francois said:


> It starts when the light is turned on, or second or two before the light is turned on.
> 
> fc


 Thanx, good to know as it rules out my concern about the thirty second mark as graph will show a cool lamp head's output in the beginning. Cheers!!!


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

androgen said:


> Lumens ( when independently measured using an Integrating sphere ) are certainly a more useful metric than Lux.
> 
> however Lux i think can also be useful for measuring the "throw" of a light.
> 
> ...


Good points. I think it's too much detail and not enough background and it's hard to be consistent. A light with a very focused beam pattern will be rewarded with a high lux number. But then, that's really not what we want for biking.

In this FL1 document,
http://www.streamlight.com/Documents/ansi/ansi-pres.pdf
The standard measure for light throw is determined by the distance where one can get a reading of .25 lux at the center. Unfortunately, that lux number is too low for these modern lights and I'll have to go hundreds and hundreds of yards to get to that low a reading for the big lights.

So, I'd say the photographs will be a better indicator of throw.


----------



## John Serkaian (Oct 11, 2013)

ziscwg said:


> I just got the Lezyne Deca drive (800 lm) and it has plenty of light output on roads and fire roads.
> 
> I totally agree that the beam pattern is more of a factor now. Running that light at higher light output would just be a waste of battery power.
> 
> One thing I noticed on my Deca light is the cover lens appears to be replaceable. This has me thinking, "Can the cover lens be swapped to change the beam pattern to your liking?"


Have you compared the Mega Drive with the Deca Drive? Is the extra throw of the Mega Drive useful for road use or is the Deca Drive enough? Thanks.


----------



## Fourtrax (Mar 17, 2013)

Attached is the Excel file that I used to make the graphs.

I added a couple columns to convert the run time and charge time to minutes in case anyone wanted to use them in a calculation. There were a couple I couldn't decipher from the original data (highlighted in yellow). I added a couple macros so you can re-sort the graphs.

I can update as new lights are added.

View attachment 2014 Lights Shootout.zip


----------



## mb323323 (Aug 1, 2006)

Francios

Can you tell me if the Cateye 1200 batteries can be removed and replaced on the fly. Are they just 2 separate 18650's or is it in a Cateye proprietary battery pack.

Thx


----------



## indebt (Nov 8, 2009)

Hopefully Francois will have a definitive answer for you mb323323. Looking on Cateye's website and checking out the manual, it appears that the battery's are in a proprietary format. The disturbing thing though is I couldn't find anywhere on their website where you could order a spare battery. Hopefully an oversight on my part.


----------



## varider (Nov 29, 2012)

Look at this page 
HL-EL1000RC | CATEYE

They have a replacement battery listed. It actually looks like the whole back of the light (the black part) is the battery cartridge. My guess is that it is not meant to be on-the-fly replaceable though, not like the lezyne lights.

Edit: It takes two or three allen bolts to remove the battery. I attached a picture from the manual. I wouldn't do this on the trail.


----------



## cue003 (May 6, 2011)

Francois are you testing the lights stability (or lack thereof) while mounted and riding or just primarily the light output?

Thanks


----------



## indebt (Nov 8, 2009)

varider said:


> Look at this page
> HL-EL1000RC | CATEYE
> 
> They have a replacement battery listed. It actually looks like the whole back of the light (the black part) is the battery cartridge. My guess is that it is not meant to be on-the-fly replaceable though, not like the lezyne lights.
> ...


ugh!! man i'm blind,,, thanx.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

don't see why people are so excited over this Volt 1200 light. yeah it's self-contained so what.

to me Gemini Olympia is the standout light here.

from top to bottom: Seca / Olympia / Volt :


























the first light ( Seca ) is expensive out of the box, and a replacement / additional 6 cell L&M battery is $200, which IMO is downright unethical. The last one ( Volt ) is clearly inferior, but the middle one ( Olympia ) has a great price / performance balance IMO, and the ability to use MagicShine batteries IMO is a huge plus.

the beam pattern of the Olympia looks incredible - a work of art ! they were able to get beam quality similar to the Seca from a much smaller and simpler light head and for much cheaper - outstanding !

if you look carefully starting from the top beam shot and going down, the Seca lights up everything more or less evenly, going down to the 2nd beam shot the Olympia looks similar to the Seca but is just slightly narrower. going down again to the Volt suddenly it just turns to [email protected]#% with mostly one giant artifact instead of a beam - too much light in the nearfield, almost none on the sides, and an ugly abrupt transition.

yes i understand i am comparing a self-contained system to wired systems. the Volt isn't bad for a self-contained light, but the obsession with self-contained is IMO irrational.

as for the Olympia - yes it is unfortunate that they lied about the Lumens, the cooling looks questionable for the output, and the mount is not what i would prefer but if we were looking at beam patterns alone this would be my top pick !


----------



## mb323323 (Aug 1, 2006)

Yeah, got an email from Cateye and they said it can be replaced but you do have to buy their battery. They don't have the cost yet but said around 100. That takes me out and it's is probably too big for the helmet anyway.

So far I still can't beat my cheap Ultrafire 502b w/ several Panasonic 3100 mah batteries. 15 for the light and about 20 for the batteries and charger and yes, I can replace on the trail no issues.

Still waiting for Dinotte to come out w/ something awesome that is self contained and very small for the helmet.

MB


----------



## indebt (Nov 8, 2009)

Have you checked out the Cygolite Expillion 800. New product 800 lumens and an hour and a half on the highest setting. Self contained with interchangeable 18650's on the fly. Our MEC in Vancouver has them listed at $109.


----------



## Warshade (Jun 19, 2006)

I just bought a Nitefighter BT40 with a claimed 1600 max lumens for only $80, (and it is every bit as bright as a Lezyne MegaDrive, if not more so)...pretty good deal if you ask me!

The Nitefighter BT40 is essentially the same thing as the MagicShine MJ-872.


----------



## varider (Nov 29, 2012)

mb323323 said:


> Yeah, got an email from Cateye and they said it can be replaced but you do have to buy their battery. They don't have the cost yet but said around 100. That takes me out and it's is probably too big for the helmet anyway.
> 
> So far I still can't beat my cheap Ultrafire 502b w/ several Panasonic 3100 mah batteries. 15 for the light and about 20 for the batteries and charger and yes, I can replace on the trail no issues.
> 
> ...


Ouch! $100 for what is probably a two cell battery is way overpriced.

The Lezyne mega/deca drive battery is much more reasonable at $40. 
LIR 2 Cell Rechargeable Battery (MEGA DRIVE / DECA DRIVE)

The cost of the battery replacement is a huge factor in determining what light I would buy.


----------



## Warshade (Jun 19, 2006)

Warshade said:


> I just bought a Nitefighter BT40 with a claimed 1600 max lumens for only $80, (and it is every bit as bright as a Lezyne MegaDrive, if not more so)...pretty good deal if you ask me!
> 
> The Nitefighter BT40 is essentially the same thing as the MagicShine MJ-872.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

indebt said:


> Have you checked out the Cygolite Expillion 800. New product 800 lumens and an hour and a half on the highest setting. Self contained with interchangeable 18650's on the fly. Our MEC in Vancouver has them listed at $109.


Cygolite... It's very frustrating dealing with them since they don't want to send lights. They just do not want independent reviews of their lights.

We might purchase them for the review but they don't like that either. Just strange.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Warshade said:


>


Yes that light is probably the most copied/sold one under different brands. It's a good light with a wide beam. We reviewed the original one.

Magicshine MJ-872 ? 2013 Mtbr Lights Shootout | Mountain Bike Review

fc


----------



## indebt (Nov 8, 2009)

francois said:


> Cygolite... It's very frustrating dealing with them since they don't want to send lights. They just do not want independent reviews of their lights.
> 
> We might purchase them for the review but they don't like that either. Just strange.
> 
> fc


 Yes it's to bad their so uncooperative as my experience with their products have been very good. My 2009 Triden-X Extra is still going strong with the new owner and with the original battery to boot.


----------



## varider (Nov 29, 2012)

I'm curious how the Magicshine 880 with new xm-l2 stacks up against similarly priced lights. Jim from action led produced a nice graph which showed a noticeable improvement in performance. Any chance you could review this light?

http://forums.mtbr.com/lights-night-riding/xm-l2-comes-magicshine-866239.html


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

John Serkaian said:


> Have you compared the Mega Drive with the Deca Drive? Is the extra throw of the Mega Drive useful for road use or is the Deca Drive enough? Thanks.


Deca Drive is enough and is better I think. $50 cheaper, longer run time and wider pattern with the 3 LEDs.

fc


----------



## mb323323 (Aug 1, 2006)

It would be great if you did get one of the Expillion 800's and test. I'm curious as to output and real run time test.

I would really like a bike light dedicated self contained helmet light. My Ultrafire is ok but even w/ 3100's it dims after 45 min or so. 

I imagine the Cygo would not dim but power down when the battery is drained which I'd prefer.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Went to the integrated sphere lab yesterday. Gloworms all measured up to claims, Bontrager Ion 700 measured in at 682 lumens. We got 4250 lumens now for the Lupine Betty as we had better cooling. Detailed charts to follow. Meanwhile, here's a really cool Wind Speed simulator for our extended run time tests.


----------



## John Serkaian (Oct 11, 2013)

francois said:


> Deca Drive is enough and is better I think. $50 cheaper, longer run time and wider pattern with the 3 LEDs.
> 
> fc


Thank you. It would be interesting to see how Cygolite's Expilion 800 compares with the Deca Drive's 800 lumen rating and features. Keep up the great job providing such objective and comprehensive reviews.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

John Serkaian said:


> Thank you. It would be interesting to see how Cygolite's Expilion 800 compares with the Deca Drive's 800 lumen rating and features. Keep up the great job providing such objective and comprehensive reviews.


In the past, Cygolites have been ok. Decent beam with good light level programming. But they measured about 10-15% lower than lumen claims on average in their Expilion line.

fc


----------



## derekbob (May 4, 2005)

androgen said:


> to me Gemini Olympia is the standout light here.
> 
> the beam pattern of the Olympia looks incredible - a work of art ! they were able to get beam quality similar to the Seca from a much smaller and simpler light head and for much cheaper - outstanding !
> 
> as for the Olympia - yes it is unfortunate that they lied about the Lumens, the cooling looks questionable for the output, and the mount is not what i would prefer but if we were looking at beam patterns alone this would be my top pick !


I agree with you on this one. The Olympia lights up the entire tunnel with a very even pattern and still allows you to see directly in front. The Lupines are so intense up front you can barely read the 45 degree and 20' marks. Everyone has been throwing Gemini under the bus for the lumens claims, and they threw the baby under the bus with the bathwater.


----------



## pabcor (Aug 25, 2011)

Can you test new Magicshine Eagle 300 and 600 USB lights?


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

pabcor said:


> Can you test new Magicshine Eagle 300 and 600 USB lights?


I have the Magicshine Eagle 600 and will publish soon. It is awesome. About 610 lumens and the digital readout really works and it adds value. It displays run time or charge time in real-time based on the current light level.

fc


----------



## pabcor (Aug 25, 2011)

Good, thanks


----------



## ziscwg (May 18, 2007)

John Serkaian said:


> Have you compared the Mega Drive with the Deca Drive? Is the extra throw of the Mega Drive useful for road use or is the Deca Drive enough? Thanks.


Take a look at this video after about 5 min, they show beams

Link here


----------



## cue003 (May 6, 2011)

Francois, are you getting the Exposure Equinox? That would be interesting to see its beam and how it stacks up with thermal protection etc. That is a ton of output at 2000 lumens off a single cell. It will probably be a must to purchase a support cell to go along with the equinox.


----------



## -Archie- (Aug 25, 2013)

francois said:


> Cygolite... It's very frustrating dealing with them since they don't want to send lights. They just do not want independent reviews of their lights.
> 
> We might purchase them for the review but they don't like that either. Just strange.


Yes, quite strange and IMHO highly suspicious. They obviously don't want to disclose real parameters...


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

cue003 said:


> Francois, are you getting the Exposure Equinox? That would be interesting to see its beam and how it stacks up with thermal protection etc. That is a ton of output at 2000 lumens off a single cell. It will probably be a must to purchase a support cell to go along with the equinox.


Yes, I'll follow up on this. The only gotcha is they do poorly on the claimed vs. actual lumen tests. They just always claim so high.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Video on the 700 lumen lights.






comments?


----------



## indebt (Nov 8, 2009)

Thanx for the video review Francois. Before you said it in your video, I was thinking the Serfas True 750, and MS new light as my top two picks. Same reasons as you already mentioned. The pure output of the Serfas True 750 with it's interchangeable battery, plus the fact it looks like it would dissipate the heat well with it's size.

And the MS as their disclosing true and honest lumen claims which is a 180 from just a couple of years ago. The display feature is a front runner as well. If I missed it my apology's,,, but i'm guessing the battery is none interchangeable?? If interchangeable, those readouts would only be accurate with a designated aMh of what MS put in stock say 3100aMh, or 3400aMh?

Of coarse my opinion may change as real world use would show what your review cant and that is how the beam quality is on the trails despite the tunnel beam shots. Based on those i'd give the L&M 700 best beam for my taste.:thumbsup:


----------



## cue003 (May 6, 2011)

Thanks for that video Francois. Good to see how the lights stack up against each other in that self contained 600-800 category. Lots of lights to chose from in the video and I know you mentioned best display and best price etc but......

If YOU can have only 2 of the lights in your video...which two would you have? And they can be two of the same. Where would your hard earned dollars go? And would your decision/selection change if it was for mtbr vs road? I mean taking everything into play from:

A) stability in mounting system for use on rough terrain
B) light output/beam pattern
C) heat sinking/cooling
D) runtime at various output levels 
E) price


----------



## RojoRacing53 (Jul 23, 2013)

It would be cool if we could see the beam shots for the gloworm XS with three flood lenses as well as the OEM setup(whatever combo it is) I think most of us will be mounting it to the bars anyways and would like it as a flood beam.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

1200 lumen flashlight show 'n tell


----------



## pabcor (Aug 25, 2011)

Good videos. Thank you very much to include Magicshine Eagle 600.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

cue003 said:


> Thanks for that video Francois. Good to see how the lights stack up against each other in that self contained 600-800 category. Lots of lights to chose from in the video and I know you mentioned best display and best price etc but......
> 
> If YOU can have only 2 of the lights in your video...which two would you have? And they can be two of the same. Where would your hard earned dollars go? And would your decision/selection change if it was for mtbr vs road? I mean taking everything into play from:
> 
> ...


I think my favorite is the Serfas 750. It measured brighter at 773. Good mounts, good cooling, charger included and spare optic included for $160.

The other cool light is the Bontrager Ion 700. It's small and polished and very handy as a flashlight. And it's only $100.

fc


----------



## stu06 (Dec 8, 2012)

Francois, will you be posting updated lumen measurements of all of the lights using the new fan cooling system?


----------



## pigmode (Nov 15, 2009)

Nice set ups of all-in-one lights, the heavier weight of which brings up the issue of light mount solidity or the lack there of. 

I can see myself picking up a Lupine TL MiniMax which looks like an ideal throw-in-the-pack stop-and-go commuter light.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

stu06 said:


> Francois, will you be posting updated lumen measurements of all of the lights using the new fan cooling system?


No, just the Betty. I tested a few other lights and they are unaffected since it's only a 3 minute run. That fan system is really good for a full battery drain.

The Betty had a couple other problems at lab #1. It was already warm at the start of the test and it had some light leakage since the port hole was too big. A few % of error on that light translates to hundreds of lumens since the numbers are so big.

I do have a bunch of new data though and I'll need the graphs redone soon.

fc


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

On a good note, my backyard light studio may make a comeback. I tested some lights on it and it's still tells a good story.

Here's the Cateye Volt 1200

fc


----------



## indebt (Nov 8, 2009)

Do you have the numbers on all three of the GloWorm products yet?? Or better yet ,,,the reviews??


----------



## Fourtrax (Mar 17, 2013)

francois said:


> I do have a bunch of new data though and I'll need the graphs redone soon.


Post or send me the data and i'll update the graphs.


----------



## RojoRacing53 (Jul 23, 2013)

indebt said:


> Do you have the numbers on all three of the GloWorm products yet?? Or better yet ,,,the reviews??


Not to sound pushy but this^


----------



## dgw7000 (Aug 31, 2011)

I can't wait for the new Gloworm XS review, but my best light to date is Serfas true 1500.

The only problem is the weight of the head!!! I think the new Gloworm XS will be the light to get if it ever comes out.


----------



## Ian_C (Sep 27, 2012)

Francois,

I realize your shootout is mainly targeted at the big named brands, sold in local bike shops.

In the Lights and Night Riding forum there are three very highly discussed inexpensive ($55 or less) Chinese import lights, available from online retailers. We all know their claimed output bares little resemblance to their actual output. and their batteries don't stack up to the claimed capacity. Another downside is the variability in quality that seems to depend on which seller the light is purchased from. Certainly their fit and finish and quality control don't stack up to the big boys.

If you'll pardon the expression, where they would really shine is in the Lumens per Dollar chart. It would be fascinating to see the results from controlled standardized tests, and their tunnel beam shots compared to the others in the field.

The three I'm referring to are the SolarStorm X2 (XM-L or XM-L2 version), the YINDING YD-2XU2, and the KD 2 x Cree XM-L2 U2. At $20 to $30 (light head only) and $30 to $55 for full kits with battery, they are game changers for entry level bike lights.

It would be great to see your take on each, after giving them the once over. I'm sure there are member who would gladly loan them to you testing. Is there any chance of getting you to take a look at them?


----------



## superkermit (Nov 14, 2013)

Ian_C said:


> Francois,
> 
> I realize your shootout is mainly targeted at the big named brands, sold in local bike shops.
> 
> ...


I have gone the way of 2 YINDING YD-2XU2s.

Ordered from fasttech but now I want to add in the rear MJ-818 Bike Tail light - (Tail Light with Y-Cable)

I am trying to find a case that will allow me to just put 4 x 18650 batts in it (have batts and charger at home) and use this to run my lights.

Any ideas?


----------



## Gharddog03 (Sep 25, 2013)

Something like this?

PANNOVO B-C04 Water Resistant 4 x 18650 Battery Pack Case for Bike Lamp - Black - Free Shipping - DealExtreme


----------



## steelhmr (Sep 30, 2011)

Ian_C said:


> Francois,
> 
> I realize your shootout is mainly targeted at the big named brands, sold in local bike shops.
> 
> ...


You already answered your own question. Doing any kind of controlled testing would not accomplish much since the light output varies so much from light to light with those units. The results wouldn't be _representative_ or _reproducible_. The purpose of these reviews is to be able to purchase a light that at least meets the performance that it showed in the formal testing. Given the claims and acutal performance of some of the budget lights & batteries, I doubt those manufactures even want a formal test performed.

Additionally, that Yingding light is far from one of the most popular budget lights. Barely anyone even owns one. There are way more people who own budget 3x units or the like.


----------



## Ian_C (Sep 27, 2012)

steelhmr said:


> Doing any kind of controlled testing would not accomplish much since the light output varies so much from light to light with those units. The results wouldn't be _representative_ or _reproducible_. The purpose of these reviews is to be able to purchase a light that at least meets the performance that it showed in the formal testing. Given the claims and acutal performance of some of the budget lights & batteries, I doubt those manufactures even want a formal test performed.
> 
> Additionally, that Yingding light is far from one of the most popular budget lights. Barely anyone even owns one. There are way more people who own budget 3x units or the like.


I've followed the discussions fairly closely, and I don't think I've seen people noting brightness differences between branded units (other than XM-L vs XM-L2). There are several unbranded SS look-a-likes with different drivers and seller upgraded units. But the stock branded units from a good supplier (like FastTech) seem to be consistent between samples. I suppose Kir could really answer that, as he has SS units from several different suppliers.

With lights at this price point, I really don't care about the difference between the claimed output and the actual output. We know that depending on the seller, the amount of exaggeration can range from somewhat inflated to ridiculous. I'd be interested in seeing the output and beam shots as compared to the bigger name brands/higher priced units.

Who cares about the manufacturer's involvement. Francois has already stated that Cygo-Lite (one of the bigger players) has been unwilling to supply test samples, but he may purchase some to include in the shootout.

Admittedly the Yinding is new to the scene (I think it showed up around July). But it is extremely highly discussed, and picking up speed in the number of people acquiring it.

Yes more people have the 3x units. But how many of them have the SAME 3x light? Every Ebay seller seems to have a different body style, and different drivers. There is no trusted source supplier on those, so repeat-ability might be impossible. Though something like the Sky Ray S6 3T6 with that solid walled, mid body, LED mounting plate would be an above average representative for the 3x. So heck - yes - throw one of them into the mix too. It would be great to see their ratings and beam shots compared to the name brands.

My main point is that many of us have opted for the cheap Chinese lights. It would be nice to see how they really stack up to the field. A ball park of their actual output would suffice. If nothing else, the beam shot comparison would prove interesting.

Francois has tested the Best in Class lights. His impression of the bottom end would be interesting. He was surprised by the $100 Bontrager. He might be amazed by the offerings in the <$55 class.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

steelhmr said:


> Additionally, that Yingding light is far from one of the most popular budget lights. Barely anyone even owns one. There are way more people who own budget 3x units or the like.


This is a subjective statement...do you have anything to back up "Barely anyone even owns one. There are way more people who own budget 3x units or the like."? Sounds like we need a good poll to see.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

Ian_C said:


> My main point is that many of us have opted for the cheap Chinese lights. It would be nice to see how they really stack up to the field. A ball park of their actual output would suffice. If nothing else, the beam shot comparison would prove interesting.
> 
> Francois has tested the Best in Class lights. His impression of the bottom end would be interesting. He was surprised by the $100 Bontrager. He might be amazed by the offerings in the <$55 class.


Agree 100%.


----------



## -Archie- (Aug 25, 2013)

Ian_C said:


> So heck - yes - throw one of them into the mix too. It would be great to see their ratings and beam shots compared to the name brands.


I'll second that! :thumbsup:


----------



## Kir (May 30, 2013)

Ian_C said:


> There are several unbranded SS look-a-likes with different drivers and seller upgraded units. But the stock branded units from a good supplier (like FastTech) seem to be consistent between samples. I suppose Kir could really answer that, as he has SS units from several different suppliers.
> 
> I'd be interested in seeing the output and beam shots as compared to the bigger name brands/higher priced units.


Fasttech? Good supplier? Heh, just go and read their forum.
And no, there is no consistency between SSX2 units...not at all.

You're interested in output? 900-1500 lumen, depending on what you'll get. 
Beamshots will be interesting for comparison with expensive lights, but thats basically the only useful thing that you can get from such test.


----------



## steelhmr (Sep 30, 2011)

Kir said:


> Fasttech? Good supplier? Heh, just go and read their forum.
> And no, there is no consistency between SSX2 units...not at all.
> 
> You're interested in output? 900-1500 lumen, depending on what you'll get.
> Beamshots will be interesting for comparison with expensive lights, but thats basically the only useful thing that you can get from such test.


Thanks for weighing in, Kir.


----------



## steelhmr (Sep 30, 2011)

TiGeo said:


> This is a subjective statement...do you have anything to back up "Barely anyone even owns one. There are way more people who own budget 3x units or the like."? Sounds like we need a good poll to see.


You're right - it is merely my opinion. I follow these boards though and no one was even talking about that light until a month or two ago, at all.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Gloworm X1 was 918 lumens at the 30 second mark.
X2 was 1391 lumens.
X3 is pending.

Here's some 3 minute graphs. The newest optics are being sent to me right now. They won't affect lumen output but will improve beam pattern.

fc


----------



## RojoRacing53 (Jul 23, 2013)

X3=xs?


----------



## indebt (Nov 8, 2009)

francois said:


> Gloworm X1 was 918 lumens at the 30 second mark.
> X2 was 1391 lumens.
> X3 is pending.
> 
> ...


 Some very impressive numbers from GloWorm Francois,,,, pretty close to claimed, looking forward to the reviews as well as the XS information. Cheers!!


----------



## Gharddog03 (Sep 25, 2013)

Gloworms are looking good.


----------



## indebt (Nov 8, 2009)

A little off topic here Francois but i sent Gemini an email a while ago about the poor results in your integrating sphere tests primarily the Olympia. Responds was they were happy the overstated lumens had improved with the Xera/Duo from the previous year, but figured there must have been an error in testing with the Olympia and that they would investigate. I haven't seen anything posted on this forum nor has Gemini responded to my latest email about the Olympia,,,,,( I think I offended them). Have you had any interest in retesting the Olympia with the new fan, or are you satisfied with the original test? Thanx!!


----------



## pigmode (Nov 15, 2009)

The new X2 apparently falls short based on the 2013 MTBR Shootout "standard", where they rated higher tested lumens than advertised.


----------



## androgen (Apr 28, 2005)

Francois i have a question about NiteRider Pro 1200 / 2200. Can you take a picture of the LEDs ? Is it using a different arrangement than the older 1800 / 3600. ? Every picture on the net is from an angle where you can't see the LEDs, and the picture you took is the same angle.

most disturbingly the picture on the NiteRider site and MTBR picture is of different lights ! ! ! 

yeah a better picture of the LEDs would really be nice.

Thanks !


----------



## varider (Nov 29, 2012)

Last year's glowworm tested roughly at the claimed lumens

Claimed Lumens: 1200 Lumens
Measured Lumens: 1148 Lumens

Gloworm X2 ? 2013 Mtbr Lights Shootout | Mountain Bike Review


----------



## Gloworm Manufacture (Nov 29, 2011)

Hey guys, yes it appears we are ever so slightly off the mark, however we do have another x2 with new upgraded optics (the new optics were not ready at the time of sending) on its way as we speak. We expect this to have a small effect on the result.

Looking at the actual numbers, last year we fell 4.3% short with the x2 this year with the current test it is 7%. We're definitely not disappointed with the output at all.

Standby for updates in the next week.....and you are, we're waiting on the XS results, which should be quite interesting.

Bruce
Gloworm NZ 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## xcandrew (Dec 30, 2007)

I noticed some things with the weights in the tests that seem to have been overlooked. The weights for the updated lights are recycled from previous years, and some seem to be the manufacturer's claims rather than measured. It would be useful for the battery pack lights to have a separate weight listing for the light head only for headband or helmet users, and to separate the effects of different battery pack capacities on the comparison weights a bit better. It would also be useful to standardize and explain what pieces are included in the installed weight for a more uniform comparison.

I looked at the numbers for the two lights I was most interested in (prior to a recent purchase), the Gemini Duo 1500 and the Piko 4.

The Gemini Duo is not 316 g with the 1:30 run time 2600 mAH 2 cell setup; 316 g must have been with a 4 cell battery from a previous year test. The 2014 Duo that I recently purchased weighs 61 g for the light head (including cable and plastic mount), 1 g for the mount O-ring, 134 g for the battery pack, 4 g for the battery pack strap, and 26 g for the extension cable (not sure if the "installed weight" would include that, say, if you were to mount it on the stem). That comes out 200 g without the extension, which should bump it up from 3.82 to 6.04 lumens per gram.

I don't have the Piko, but I don't know if the 180 g installed weight is accurate. It is the manufacturer's claimed weight on the Lupine site. The light head is claimed to be 55 g, but I'm not sure if that includes the cable sticking out of it and the required mount. (Please measure the Piko lighthead with the mount for my curiosity.) The 3.3 AH hardcase battery pack for the Piko 4 that has the 2:00 run time listed in the shootout has a claimed weight of 125 g. So that's 180 g for the two pieces, but does that include the the mounts and straps or extensions to attach them to the bike or helmet, which would make it the installed weight? The tiny bit of weight difference between the two lights is just academic, but I'm curious about actual weights.

In the end, I'm glad I selected the Duo over the Piko - it's brighter; a lot brighter after 3 minutes (1,150 lumens and flat on the graph vs. about 880 lumens and going down steeply for the Piko); similar in weight; probably similar run time of 1:50 to 2:15 if programmed to 90% or 80% to match the Piko for actual lumens output; better beam pattern in my opinion/preference based on the tunnel photos and my experience with my Duo; a lot less expensive; the best user interface in my opinion; compatibility with more battery packs including my Geomangear 4 cell; and I think I actually like the mount design and slightly higher light position better. The Piko gets points from me for perceived cable durability; I don't know about actual cable durability. If the Piko were offered at a discount to me at the same price as the Duo, I'd still pick the Duo.


----------



## crgmoto (Nov 12, 2012)

I've carried out a Lux test using the ceiling method which gives a good indication of output on the Gloworm X2 v3 with the new vs old optics.

I repeated the test several times and the new optics showed approx. 8-10% increase in total Lux (both the light and meter at 1m from the ceiling), the result was the same comparing the Flood/Spot combination or Spot/Spot on both lights.

I think this extra efficiency should also be seen in the integrating sphere as the new optics seem to focus more light out of the front with fewer losses. It would be interesting if you were able to repeat the Integrating Sphere test with the revised optics.


----------



## neb001 (Mar 22, 2007)

xcandrew said:


> The weights for the updated lights are recycled from previous years, and some seem to be the manufacturer's claims rather than measured. It would be useful for the battery pack lights to have a separate weight listing for the light head only for headband or helmet users, and to separate the effects of different battery pack capacities on the comparison weights a bit better. It would also be useful to standardize and explain what pieces are included in the installed weight for a more uniform comparison.


The weight of the light at least for the Piko is shown in a picture further down in the review, though who knows if it's of the current version. No measurement for the battery and other parts is shown though. I agree that a clear breakdown of the weights would be useful for comparison.



> I looked at the numbers for the two lights I was most interested in (prior to a recent purchase), the Gemini Duo 1500 and the Piko 4.
> 
> The Gemini Duo is not 316 g with the 1:30 run time 2600 mAH 2 cell setup; 316 g must have been with a 4 cell battery from a previous year test. The 2014 Duo that I recently purchased weighs 61 g for the light head (including cable and plastic mount), 1 g for the mount O-ring, 134 g for the battery pack, 4 g for the battery pack strap, and 26 g for the extension cable (not sure if the "installed weight" would include that, say, if you were to mount it on the stem). That comes out 200 g without the extension, which should bump it up from 3.82 to 6.04 lumens per gram.


Looking at the gallery further down on the review page, it looks like the pictures were reused from the 2013 (unless the box wasn't updated for the 2014 version?) because it clearly states "2x Cree XM-L 1400 Lumens".



> I don't have the Piko, but I don't know if the 180 g installed weight is accurate. It is the manufacturer's claimed weight on the Lupine site. The light head is claimed to be 55 g, but I'm not sure if that includes the cable sticking out of it and the required mount. (Please measure the Piko lighthead with the mount for my curiosity.) The 3.3 AH hardcase battery pack for the Piko 4 that has the 2:00 run time listed in the shootout has a claimed weight of 125 g. So that's 180 g for the two pieces, but does that include the the mounts and straps or extensions to attach them to the bike or helmet, which would make it the installed weight? The tiny bit of weight difference between the two lights is just academic, but I'm curious about actual weights.


On the Piko review page there's an image that shows 58g for the full light assembly with mount and attached cable.

Here's the weights I have for my Piko 7:

Light + mount: 62g (Claimed 50g)
Velcro for light mount: 2g
6.6Ah battery: 242g (claimed 240g)
120cm extension: 50g



> In the end, I'm glad I selected the Duo over the Piko - it's brighter; a lot brighter after 3 minutes (1,150 lumens and flat on the graph vs. about 880 lumens and going down steeply for the Piko); similar in weight; probably similar run time of 1:50 to 2:15 if programmed to 90% or 80% to match the Piko for actual lumens output; better beam pattern in my opinion/preference based on the tunnel photos and my experience with my Duo; a lot less expensive; the best user interface in my opinion; compatibility with more battery packs including my Geomangear 4 cell; and I think I actually like the mount design and slightly higher light position better. The Piko gets points from me for perceived cable durability; I don't know about actual cable durability. If the Piko were offered at a discount to me at the same price as the Duo, I'd still pick the Duo.


I wonder if the new fan setup was tried out with the Piko, since Francois mentioned that it made a significant difference on the Betty and it seems that Lupine is fairly aggressive with the power reduction with heat. I've personally noticed no dimming while out on the trail, so I'm guessing that the brightness reduction is purely due to heat buildup.


----------



## Action LED Lights (Nov 11, 2011)

francois said:


> Gloworm X1 was 918 lumens at the 30 second mark.
> X2 was 1391 lumens.
> X3 is pending.
> 
> ...


Actually, in the testing I've done the optic can make quite a difference in total light output. All of them lose light either through the side (a less than perfect reflectance) or absorbed in the material (less than 100% transmittance) Do be sure and retest in the sphere.


----------



## xcandrew (Dec 30, 2007)

neb001 said:


> I wonder if the new fan setup was tried out with the Piko, since Francois mentioned that it made a significant difference on the Betty and it seems that Lupine is fairly aggressive with the power reduction with heat. I've personally noticed no dimming while out on the trail, so I'm guessing that the brightness reduction is purely due to heat buildup.


Wasn't the new fan at set 20 mph? That seems unrealistic for general mountain biking. 10 mph would match more riding situations.


----------



## neb001 (Mar 22, 2007)

xcandrew said:


> Wasn't the new fan at set 20 mph? That seems unrealistic for general mountain biking. 10 mph would match more riding situations.


I don't believe it was stated what speed they actually tested with. In the video demoing the setup francois said they can set it to any speed they want, with the fan speed measurement during that demo vid showing roughly 22mph.


----------



## RojoRacing53 (Jul 23, 2013)

Action LED Lights said:


> Actually, in the testing I've done the optic can make quite a difference in total light output. All of them lose light either through the side (a less than perfect reflectance) or absorbed in the material (less than 100% transmittance) Do be sure and retest in the sphere.


With all this talk about new optics are we talking about the little plastic cone lens you sell extras of like the flood or spot?

And if so will we be getting the new optics with the new XS whenever it is finally avalible?

How can you tell the difference in the old vs new optics if you want to upgrade an older model?


----------



## dgw7000 (Aug 31, 2011)

Looks like the XS release date was pushed back again, I'll wait till the end of this month. After that I'll look elsewhere, maybe Serfas new light 2500 L.


----------



## scar (Jun 2, 2005)

*Pssst.......*



dgw7000 said:


> Looks like the XS release date was pushed back again, I'll wait till the end of this month. After that I'll look elsewhere, maybe Serfas new light 2500 L.


How about a custom made one from a fellow biker?

















3X XM-L Amoeba light

****


----------



## Gharddog03 (Sep 25, 2013)

Is the xs going to be available as a lighthead only? If so price?


----------



## dgw7000 (Aug 31, 2011)

Yes, $220.00 you get the whole kit but no battery and charger.


----------



## pigmode (Nov 15, 2009)

dgw7000 said:


> Looks like the XS release date was pushed back again, I'll wait till the end of this month. After that I'll look elsewhere, maybe Serfas new light 2500 L.


Tempting, although I plan to wait for beamshots and lens options on the XS.


----------



## Gloworm Manufacture (Nov 29, 2011)

Hey Team,

Looks like XS has started to ship to our distributors - with all our apologies for late delivery!

The XS is shipped with spare optics (our own new customised optics) - 1 spare flood and 1 spare spot.

For those who decide to jump in and try the XS you won't be disappointed. It has been engineered by a team of four which include the test rider (myself), our design engineer (20 years in plastics and mechanical engineering, our electronics engineer (a self confessed outdoors man) and Vag (our greek director who just loves lights!).

The lumen per gram ratio of the XS will be released soon and we're confident its going to be near the top of the pile as it should be for the lumen per $$.

Enjoy and let us know what you think!

Cheers

Bruce
Gloworm NZ
Chief Gear Wrecker & Mountain Biker


----------



## RojoRacing53 (Jul 23, 2013)

Gloworm Manufacture said:


> The XS is shipped with spare optics (our own new customised optics) - 1 spare flood and 1 spare spot.


So only the spare optics are the "new customized optics" or are the three install and the two spares all the new design?

Would the X2 v2 I have benefit from these new optics or not really a noticeable difference?

I have the X2 v2 and like the control sequence and timing so far and I understand the v3 is different in several areas like power on and setting changes. When I get the XS and get used to the controls can I expect the X2 v3 to be the exact same as the XS or is it a bit different as well.

Thanks


----------



## RojoRacing53 (Jul 23, 2013)

Any updates to this?


----------



## Action LED Lights (Nov 11, 2011)

RojoRacing53 said:


> With all this talk about new optics are we talking about the little plastic cone lens you sell extras of like the flood or spot?
> 
> And if so will we be getting the new optics with the new XS whenever it is finally avalible?
> 
> How can you tell the difference in the old vs new optics if you want to upgrade an older model?


Yes, were talking about the plastic cones. The optics for the XS will be different than what the X2 has been using and will not be interchangeable. The newest X2's (available as of today) will use the same optics. We will have spare flood and spot optics available when the XS's arrive. (as of now that date is the end of next week) I will post a picture of the old vs new so you can see the difference as well as test results.


----------



## RojoRacing53 (Jul 23, 2013)

Action LED Lights said:


> Yes, were talking about the plastic cones. The optics for the XS will be different than what the X2 has been using and will not be interchangeable. The newest X2's (available as of today) will use the same optics. We will have spare flood and spot optics available when the XS's arrive. (as of now that date is the end of next week) I will post a picture of the old vs new so you can see the difference as well as test results.


It seems I perpetually ahead of the curve with this lights unfortunately. So the X2 v3 I just got yesterday from you is using the old plastic cones still?

Order was for Jason Perez with XS preorder and extra MS battery straps.


----------



## stu06 (Dec 8, 2012)

Hi Francois,

Any chance you'll be taking tunnel beam shots of the Gloworm lineup?


----------



## dgw7000 (Aug 31, 2011)

I would hope they will, the back yard pict looks fairly dim. I have one on order !!


----------



## dgw7000 (Aug 31, 2011)

OK the very 1st pict of back yard that Francois showed did look dim. The review now show's a much brighter pict. With 2230 L tested and 224 Lux, I can't wait to get mine!!


----------



## dgw7000 (Aug 31, 2011)

The Gloworm XS is now in stock at Actionledlights.com right in time for Christmas !! Yes.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

The new spreadsheet is here. Can I get some updated graphs please?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0isJlpsmGimTnhJUVMzY2M2V2c/edit?usp=sharing

fc


----------



## Fourtrax (Mar 17, 2013)

Graphs Updated


----------



## Davide (Jan 29, 2004)

Fourtrax said:


> Graphs Updated
> View attachment 856309


I am starting to wonder about the overall reliability of these measurements.

The lumen/gram is fairly meaningless, since it most depends on the number of cells in the battery. It should just be lumens/dollar/unit disregarding the battery. If you do that, you'd see units like the Gemini Duo go close to first place (61 grams head for 1300 lumens) ...

And the lumens measurements are baffling. Just compare the measurements for Magic Shine, Glowarm and Gemini with the measurements reported by Action Led and you'll notice how different a picture could emerge. Contrary to MTBR, Action Led yields very similar values for Gemini and Glowarm (e.g. duo vs X2), and shows how the results are highly influenced by the lens used in the unit (just look at X2).

They are baffling because if one cannot even duplicate measurement across two labs settings (MTBR vs Action-Led) it implies that all the possible diatribes about plus or minus 200 lumens become fairly moot ...


----------



## fireswamp (Nov 4, 2013)

Why is the DiNotte XML-3 not in the 2014 shootout?

Can anyone comment on a direct comparison between the latest DiNotte XML-3 and the latest Gloworm X2?


----------



## Action LED Lights (Nov 11, 2011)

Davide said:


> I am starting to wonder about the overall reliability of these measurements.
> 
> The lumen/gram is fairly meaningless, since it most depends on the number of cells in the battery. It should just be lumens/dollar/unit disregarding the battery. If you do that, you'd see units like the Gemini Duo go close to first place (61 grams head for 1300 lumens) ...
> 
> ...


Davide,
The test we are doing are measuring LUX (light intensity on a given spot) not Lumens (a total of the light energy given off in all directions added together) The purpose of our test are to show the distribution of light (spot vs flood) to help customers select the light that best suits their needs


----------



## fireswamp (Nov 4, 2013)

fireswamp said:


> Why is the DiNotte XML-3 not in the 2014 shootout?
> 
> Can anyone comment on a direct comparison between the latest DiNotte XML-3 and the latest Gloworm X2?


I'm giving this a bump because I accidentally posted it in the midst of another conversation (I probably should have made it its own thread, but I'll stick with this post to avoid cross-posting).

Anyone have a comparison between the 2013 DiNotte XML-3 and the new Gloworm X2? In particular, does the XML-3 stay cooler and therefore brighter when not moving (or during long slow mountain bike climbs)?

Other comparisons between them?


----------



## Gharddog03 (Sep 25, 2013)

I was also considering the Dinotte XML3 but I chose the Gemini Olympia. I was very impressed with the build quality on my Dinotte daytime red.


----------



## Action LED Lights (Nov 11, 2011)

*Beam Pattern Comparisons*

The Lights Shootout has some great information with real lumen output, weights and cost. 
The tunnel shots give you some idea of the light spread/beam pattern but it's really hard to make a good comparison between lights. Last year we did a series of testing to add some more analytical data (at least for the lights we have/sell) with our beam pattern comparison charts. 
This year with the upgrades to most of the lights we have redone these test and upgraded our test equipment at the same time. With last years setup we projected the light at a wall 10ft away and move the light meter along the wall in 2.5 degree steps. There was some error in that the distance to the wall changed as the angle increased. This year we purchased a machinist rotary table and built a fixture that lets us rotate the light with the meter at a stationary 10ft. The setup and procedure is detailed below.

*Set up:* We used a test room with black walls and ceiling.

*Test Procedure:* The lights were set up 10 feet from a light meter and turned on at their maximum setting. Each was allowed to run for 5 minutes with a fan blowing on the light to keep it cool. (all the lights dim down slightly in the first few minutes as the LED heats up) The light was then rotated side to side and up and down to find the brightest spot at the center of the beam. (Our equipment lets us adjust the aim of the light in 0.1 degree increments) The light is then rotated in 1 degree increments and a reading taken out to 35 degrees.

*Results:* Though the meter was not calibrated and there was a small amount of ambient light (2-3 LUX), all lights were tested under the same conditions. The comparison between lights and lens/optic options is valid. The results are shown as a graph of light intensity vs angle from the center point.

A light with a higher reading at 0 degree will provide farther throw (light an object at the farthest distance)
A wider curve will provide more flood (light the sides of the road or trail better)
For lights with interchangeable optics they are all shown on the same graph for comparison.

Here are a few of the resulting graphs. Rather than make this post too large you can visit the Beam Pattern Comparison page on our site to see the full results. We will also be adding tests there as time goes on.
If anyone owns some other light they would like to see added to this test and could loan them to me for a day I'd be glad to run them through and add them to the page. The test takes about 1/2 hour and I'll turn them around the same day they arrive and get them back in the mail to you. Contact me to schedule a day so I don't get flooded with to many on the same day.
Francois, if you'd be willing to loan me a batch of the lights you received for your testing it would be great. You could add this information to the shootout if you like.


----------



## jkirkpatri (Sep 16, 2008)

Wow, thanks for the great post and link! I definitely know who I'm sourcing for my lights come this June!


----------



## Gharddog03 (Sep 25, 2013)

Excellent work Jim. Thank you. I will be running SSS on my XS.


----------



## CheapWhine (Dec 16, 2005)

*New view on Action LED data*

I really like Jim's data and charts but I find it hard to quickly make sense of all of it. I plotted it differently and thought it might be useful for the whole MTBR community.

Jim's plots show two useful data points: the maximum brightness and the distribution of the light. Some lights are clearly narrowly focused while others target a wide flood with lots in between the extremes.

Gemini suggested using full width half max (FWHM) as a measure of the beam angle. This is basically the angle at which the light intensity is half the maximum intensity. It other words, what is the angle when the brightness is 50% of the maximum. This seems like a reasonable metric, so I used Jim's data to make a pretty good estimate of the FWHM for each light.

Obviously, price is an important factor in choosing a light. I collected the prices for each light from Jim's site, trying to standardized on the lighthead + 4 cell battery configuration so all the comparisons were as similar as possible. Some packages will have different sets of components, but I have ignored these since most of the cost is usually in the light head and the battery.

For me, there are other important factors in choosing a light, including form factor, quality/reliability, compatibility (e.g. standard cable connectors) and the retailer. In this case, the retailer is a non-issue since all the lights are available from Action LED but I don't have a good way to objectively measure the other factors for a fair comparison, so I haven't tried to.

Here is the summary chart I came up with:









Each "ball" corresponds to a light. The center of each ball reflects the price and maximum lux reading while the width of each ball reflects the FWHM value.

It is clear there there are 3 price points represented (horizontal groups) at about $100, $200-$250 and about $375. Similarly, there are three brightness groups.

I find this chart useful in my own thinking about getting a new light but it does not address all the factors so it is not a complete solution. For example, it is important to me that the light doesn't fail halfway through a ride when I am in some remote location, so I need to make my own estimate of reliability for the lights of interest. Everyone will have their own tradeoffs depending on priorities, what they already have and other factors that they value.

Finally, I hope that everyone appreciates the work Jim has done in collecting the data and then sharing it with all of us. This is a very valuable contribution that only Action LED has made. We all benefit from his sharing and it would be great to encourage this behavior by buying from him.

Disclosure: I have no personal or financial interest in Action LED, but I have bought a light from them in the past (it still works great!).


----------



## cue003 (May 6, 2011)

@Cheapwine, thanks for the chart and plotting of the information. I find it helpful.


----------



## dgw7000 (Aug 31, 2011)

Went out the other night with Gloworm XS2200 on bar and Gemini Xera on helmet, great combo. Nice and light and bright, good spot with the Xera forgot is was on my helmet. The 2200 just has everything, its all there !!


----------



## Dirt Gnome (Apr 28, 2014)

CatEye 1200 on sale at REI for $150 USD ... i just picked one up, couldnt pass it up


----------



## Dirt Gnome (Apr 28, 2014)

here is the link. CatEye Volt 1200 Front Bike Light - Free Shipping at REI.com deal is online only through memorial day


----------



## elliott436 (Jul 25, 2014)

I have the cat eye volt 300 and it's a great light!


----------



## Action LED Lights (Nov 11, 2011)

Dirt Gnome said:


> here is the link. CatEye Volt 1200 Front Bike Light - Free Shipping at REI.com deal is online only through memorial day


After you have to spend $100 on a proprietary 2 cell replacement battery the price might not seem so good.


----------



## Davide (Jan 29, 2004)

Not sure anybody looks at the lumen/weight but it seems a bit deceiving. Hard to compare when the external battery can be of different capacity ... If anything the lumen/weight without battery would seem more interesting for units with external battery.


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

When will this thread get updated for 2015 stuff?


----------



## subzero (Jan 5, 2004)

TiGeo said:


> When will this thread get updated for 2015 stuff?


Today I just picked me up a new Light & Motion Urban 800 with the fast charge. It's an excellent light. And it's new for 2015 line from L&M. Here's the link to check it out. Priced pretty decent as well.

Urban 800 Fast Charge - Light & Motion


----------



## spankone (Aug 31, 2011)

mb323323 said:


> Francios
> 
> Can you tell me if the Cateye 1200 batteries can be removed and replaced on the fly. Are they just 2 separate 18650's or is it in a Cateye proprietary battery pack.
> 
> Thx


Fenix bc30 would be right up your street. Claimed 1200 lumen with a great bean pattern. The 18650's are purchased separately.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## pabcor (Aug 25, 2011)

New Magicshine EAGLE F3 3000lm (2 photos), MJ-858 1000lm and EAGLE 700 will be interesting for test.


----------



## themightymonty (Jul 16, 2014)

If you'd like to include one of our Lumicycle Explorers in your next shoot out let me know and I'll get one sent out to you, I've sent a pm with my contact details.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

Unstick. The new shootout is coming


----------

