# Nightlightning iBlaast Details



## SBK (Oct 18, 2006)

Here's some basic info on the iBlaast for those interested. Mine just arrived from NZ. Don't have the battery yet (grr!) as I chose to source it locally, but figured the basic info might be useful. Folks from Nightlightning were extremely helpful with info and details when I asked, but the website itself lacks some of the basic info that I was personally interested in.

The iBlaast as shown contains the control board onboard the lighting head. It's housed in the section rearward of the cooling fins. There's a membrane switch (with small braille-like bumps so you can find/feel it) on the rear face of the light head, just above the cord junction.

Their Digital Blast DCM is the light head alone, with the controls mounted in a separate pod - joined with a y-cord to the battery. That model would allow you to place or locate the control button wherever you like, but carries extra cabling. After some debate, I chose the iBlaast version for minimal cabling and simplicity as I plan to helmet-mount. The penalty is a requirement to reach to your head to turn on-off the light, and the additional mass (~30g according to NL, as the light engine-only of the Digital Blaast is 95g) of the iBlaast.

Helmet mounting of the lighting head looks pretty straightforward. As HVSkier and others have mentioned, the helmet mount is very simple and uses some heavy-duty velcro. We use this same type of heavy interlock-type velcro (both sides are stiff plastic, no "fuzzy" velcro here) at work to help hold down electronic equipment in test vehicles. It's beefy stuff.

The front lens and outer lens ring are a snug slip-fit to the main body of the light head. It's held in place further by two set-screws, one of which is visible in my side-view shot below. It's quite secure. The optics inside are held in place by the lens itself. Has anyone tried backing optics such as these with paint or another material to force all light forward? It would seem that there's a fair bit of opportunity to increase the total forward output by covering the back face of the optic cone with white paint or a reflective material. At the same time, this may drive more of a "clover" shaped beam pattern vs. the nicely dispersed beam that appears in Nightlightning's beamshots.

I can follow up to this post with a beamshot or two if it's of interest once my light arrives and I get the kit sorted. A friend just recently purchased a Stella 180N, so I can make some comparisons, although I expect it to be apples vs. oranges with what should be a huge difference in output.

One note on my measurements: I show a mass number of 135g vs. the 125g that Nightlightning provided me in some email prior to my purchase. I expect their number is accurate without any influence from the weight of the cord itself. Without disassembling the light, I was not able to really accurately measure the mass of the light head alone. 135g was the number my scale showed after some fiddling about, doing my best to minimize the influence of the weight of the attached cord. 














​


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Nice, very low weight. Next step- beam shot pictures on the trail


----------



## Homebrew (Jan 2, 2004)

I'm looking at these as well for use with DIY battery setup. It seems to be a real clean solution. Do you have any details on the programing options for different light levels?

Also, any chance you could dig up a fully chargered NiteRider HID for comparison on you beam shots?

Thanks.


----------



## linklemming (Jun 4, 2007)

Thanks for posting those measurements. I just received mine as well and it was 'alot' smaller than I expected.

Mine did have one led that did not seem to work. I took off the lens cover, reinstalled it and it has worked fine since. I will contact them tomorrow about that. Not sure it is a wiring issue since they are all in series (if a wiring contact broke, it seems like they would all go out).

Did you get the handlebar mount? I just couldnt fancy up to it although I bought one. It would be fine if it was just installed on 1 bike (you have to disassemble the mount to put it on another bike. I did anticipate this and ordered this mount.

http://www.batteryspace.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2080

After modifying this mount, I like it much better then the one they supplied. It is a litlle weird that they supply a secondary velcro strap to secure the lighthead better. I dont like that but can live with it.

I am also going to modify the helmet mount so it will mount using a couple of velcro straps so I can use it on different helmets or let a friend use it on his/her helmet.

The switch as it comes from the factory is pretty easy and intuitive to use. a simple touch turns it on. It will power up to the last brightness setting used (disconnecting battery might change this). To power off, just hold down the button till it powers off. From the factory, it has 3 light settings (low/med/high). Touching the button will cause the light to cycle up/down as follows:

Assuming the light powers on to low:

touch - med
touch - high
touch -med
touch - low
touch -med...etc

Of course, you can change many of these settings via admin mode. Can provide more details tomorrow.

All in all, a great light. I was going to go with this or the dinotte 600L. I went with this for the 'sole' reason of having the ability of changing the emitters and optics myself. Considering the extra battery the dinnote supplies makes it pretty close in price. I added the additional bar mount mentoned and used the trailtech waterproof connectors which added to the cost.

Gary


----------



## Broussard (Mar 17, 2005)

*Anybody got an ammeter?*

I'm really loving my Blaast. Was playing around with it in the shop today
and ran it in series with my ammeter. It's only pulling 550mA on High.
Literature says it should be pulling 1,000mA.... I've got one of the first 
generations of the Seoul LED's, but the Digital models should all be
pulling at least 700mA, right?

No wonder my battery lasts so long !

Can any of you guys measure your current draw on High?

I was totally satisfied with the light until I found out it might go
even brighter. The battery lasts so long I get bore trying to run it
down.

Thanks,
ZB


----------



## linklemming (Jun 4, 2007)

The quoted ampere ratings are at the emitter and you are measuring at the battery.

There is a circuit converting the 14.48 Li-Ion battery voltage to drive the triple LEDs at around 10-11 volts. Since the total power is the same, the higher voltage will have less amperage (some conversion loss).

Gary


----------



## SBK (Oct 18, 2006)

Homebrew said:


> I'm looking at these as well for use with DIY battery setup. It seems to be a real clean solution. Do you have any details on the programing options for different light levels?


As Gary points out above, the adjustments are made solely with a series of button-press after entering the "Admin Mode." There are now an electronic copy (.pdf) of the instructions for the iBlaast up on Nightlightning's website, a direct link to the instruction .pdf can be found by clicking here. Although Nightlightning's website suggests there are more _(check the link above, about halfway down the page on the right under "Approximate Power Draw")_, I find ten available power settings available in the Low power mode, and ten available settings in the Medium power mode. This seems to be plenty, it allows me to set a very low output for the Low mode for stops on the trail, reading a GPS or map, and for conversation without blinding. A Medium output mode for long runtimes with decent output, and still have the ability at a touch to reach max power.



Homebrew said:


> Also, any chance you could dig up a fully chargered NiteRider HID for comparison on you beam shots?


Not sure I will be riding anytime soon with anyone with a NiteRider HID, but if I do, I'll try to take some comparison beamshots per your request.

Gary, I did not buy the handlebar mount. I figured I'd be using the iBlaast as a helmet light, and initial indications are that this should work out nicely. My battery and charger arrived today, but the charger appears DOA _(Batteryspace, arrrgh!!)_ so I'm limited in what I can check out at the moment.


----------



## teamdicky (Jan 12, 2004)

Broussard said:


> I'm really loving my Blaast. Was playing around with it in the shop today
> and ran it in series with my ammeter. It's only pulling 550mA on High.
> Literature says it should be pulling 1,000mA.... I've got one of the first
> generations of the Seoul LED's, but the Digital models should all be
> ...


I didn't know you were smart.

(from the guy that has no clue what yinz are talking about)


----------



## GrumpyOne (Jan 7, 2004)

I've got a Niterider Flight HID you're welcome to use for comparison. Just shoot me an e-mail or give me a call. (Maybe a Poto single speed night ride?)

jw



SBK said:


> Not sure I will be riding anytime soon with anyone with a NiteRider HID, but if I do, I'll try to take some comparison beamshots per your request.


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

SBK said:


> Gary, I did not buy the handlebar mount. I figured I'd be using the iBlaast as a helmet light, and initial indications are that this should work out nicely.


Are you using it as the only light source, ie no bar light? If so how are you finding trail detail (with the lack of shadows a bar light produces).


----------



## iggs (Oct 18, 2007)

For beam comparisons have a look here> http://www.nightlightning.co.nz/endurenz details.htm#comparison


----------



## Homebrew (Jan 2, 2004)

eldiablo said:


> Are you using it as the only light source, ie no bar light? If so how are you finding trail detail (with the lack of shadows a bar light produces).


I've been riding with a primary helmet light for years and haven't had a problem riding at full speed. My regular trails are fairly technical and not that fast, average about 7-8 mph. If I have a bar light, I don't use it unless it's an emergency (primary light goes out, out ride the battery, etc) or conditions mandate (fog, severe dust, etc).


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

how is it operating the switch on the light head with full finger gloves when its helmet mounted? Is the switch quite positive to feel?

Just contemplating the all in one iblaast or the one with the seperate DCM


----------



## HVskier (Jun 20, 2004)

Just touch the back of the lighthead and you can't miss it. Don't even need to feel it, its just there.


----------



## papitouris (Feb 15, 2006)

I've been consdering this for a while and have my choices narrowed down to the Nightlighting and the Lupine Wilma 4. I'm not as concerned about the price difference as I am the light throw and beam pattern. I understand the iBlaast puts out less lumens than the Wilma, however it appears brighter in the comparison photos (of course on Nightlighting's website). 

Anyone elso go through the same comparison? What tipped the scales when it came to decision time?


----------



## Homebrew (Jan 2, 2004)

papitouris said:


> I've been consdering this for a while and have my choices narrowed down to the Nightlighting and the Lupine Wilma 4. I'm not as concerned about the price difference as I am the light throw and beam pattern. I understand the iBlaast puts out less lumens than the Wilma, however it appears brighter in the comparison photos (of course on Nightlighting's website).
> 
> Anyone elso go through the same comparison? What tipped the scales when it came to decision time?


That's probably the old Wilma on the Nightlighting website.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

I think it's the new Wilma. The old Wilma was not even close. It was visibly dimmer and seemed to have half the brightness the new one does. In fact, the light test I posted was done in Aug/Sept 2007 and the Wilma's brightness is the same as the one posted on the Nightlightning site.

The Nightlightning does have a wider beam and is definitely as bright as the Wilma. The brightness difference at that level is largely irrelevant. They will look equally bright on the trail. The price and beam pattern advantage goes to the iBlaast while the construction and quality advantage goes to the Wilma. The Wilma is very well designed, solidly built, and easily programmed. Gretnabikes is here in the US in case you have any problems but Lupines have been extremely reliable. 

The price around $400 with the Li-Ion battery from Nightlightning for the iBlaast while the Wilma will be around $600-$700. You can tell there is a difference in attention to detail and the Wilma is probably the best when it comes to the construction and quality.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Just to throw this in as another good option- don't forget the Dinotte 600L. That is a really bright light, priced at $400, very solidly made, comes with an extra battery, and Rob and his crew are simply the most customer-focused guys in the light business.


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

Flyer said:


> Just to throw this in as another good option- don't forget the Dinotte 600L. That is a really bright light, priced at $400, very solidly made, comes with an extra battery, and Rob and his crew are simply the most customer-focused guys in the light business.


Although one minus for the Dinotte is no helmet mount option....
(well i dont *think* there is but i am prepared to be corrected  )

I wish the big light test on the acidinmylegs site was out  I have changed my mind so many times now, and just want some to ride with, Iblaast winning at moment with ayups a close 2nd


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

I believe there is a helmet mount with the 600L. I think I have seen a picture of it on the site. You have to click on package contents or something like that.


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

:thumbsup: So there is! Must have been having a relapse in my light research to miss that!


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Don't worry- I stare at beam patterns, look at how high the light go on surrounding trees and terrain, examine mounts, look at emitter lenses, compare bright spots versus flood areas, examine connector design, and enough else to make up for anything you miss


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

Flyer said:


> Don't worry- I stare at beam patterns, look at how high the light go on surrounding trees and terrain, examine mounts, look at emitter lenses, compare bright spots versus flood areas, examine connector design, and enough else to make up for anything you miss


i'm just a novice researcher in comparison!

ok then pick one of these: (just curious to see how other peoples thoughts compare to mine. And mine keep changing every day at the moment!)

Ayup system Narrow helmet, wide bars (not so powerful at moment but sounds like good upgradeability for future, and brighter LED's, better battery are on the way in few months)

Iblaast...by itself to start then if i want to use bar and helmet i'd get a 200L or a Joystick Maxx

Dinottes 600 bar 200 helmet

Wilma 6

Cost wise all are about the same by the time taxes n stuff are paid. (even the wilma wont be much more cos i can get good discount on it)

Riding is technical singletrack (in and out of heavy forest) with jumps + rock drops, Northshore type timber trails and the odd bit of fireroad. No mountain lions though


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

I like the iBlaast and the 600L for the bar. The iBaast is slightly brighter and wider but the 600L comes with two Li-Ion batteries and the customer service is proven. You can upgrade the LEDs as well when brighter ones come out.

Helmet- I love the Joystick concept with no wires/cables and it is self-contained. However, make sure you have a center-vent on your helmet. It uses that to mount the light. I believe they have made no change to that but call James at Exposurelightsusa to confirm. Waiting list- 2-3 weeks.

So if you prefer the iBaast, get the Joystick for sure. It's a toss-up for the 600L but I think I'd still like the joystick as my helmet light IF the helmet had a center vent. If not, the 200L is a no-brainer.

I have the Wilma on my helmet and am still looking for a wider beam for the bar. In the LED world, I'm considering the iBlaast, Trinewt, and 600L. The EnduroMaXx is sweet but I have not seen any pics of how wide that new beam pattern is so I'm leery of jumping on that one.


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

thanks! Hadnt looked too carefully at my helmet for the joystick, i'll check that out. 

RE the Enduro... i looked at that but not sure if i fancied having the battery sealed in the unit. I emailed Exposure about if its replaceable, (i read Li-ions can lose a percentage of their max charge if not stored well) but no reply yet. At least with other makes of light its easy to get another battery.


----------



## radirpok (Feb 1, 2006)

Here is a beam shot for the 600L wide beam. This is the best I could make with a handheld compact camera. I was standing about 4 meters (12 feet) behind my bike.
Unfortunately I haven't quite figured out how to take proper nightshot pictures with my camera. In reality there are trees in front of the bike appr. 30 meters ahead (which is about a 100 feet), and the light provides sufficient output to see those. Also the center is nowhere near as bright as on the picture. The visibility is very good in about 90 degrees, and there is some light in 180 degrees (although not enough). It is true that there IS a hotspot in the middle, despite of the wide pattern. I think the main problem with this light is that the center is still too bright compared to the light spill on the sides, so even though there is light spill, you can't acutally see it because of the contrast difference. I've decided to ask Rob if they have (or are planning to have) some really wide optics instead of this semi-wide one.
I'm still undecided about what kind of helmet light to pair it with - I'm afraid the 200L is simply not powerful enough, and I'm also afraid that the 600L spot is too powerful ;-]


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Thanks radirpok. This is actually one of the best pics as far as how it accurately represents the light. I agree that a wider lens could be used and would be a great option for those looking for a bar light as a second light as well as a wide-beam helmet light. Thanks again- you did a good job with this and the trees are visible. This pic actually helps more than all the others I have see so far where the picture is taken so close to the light that the width is hard to really perceive and gives the illusion of being wider than it truly is.

Eldiablo- I believe the battery is replaceable. Just call James at Exposure lights USA and ask to confirm. USE is a great company and the quality of their new lights looks very promising. I like the wireless aspect of it a lot and even the old one had a pretty wide beam pattern. I believe they use one LEDs with a flood lens to get that spread while two have spot lenses (for their big light). The Joystick only weighs around 100 grams and that includes the battery.


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

Radirpok, 

Do you have a picture with the 600L spot lens handy to upload as well?

Thanks


----------



## radirpok (Feb 1, 2006)

eldiablo said:


> Radirpok,
> 
> Do you have a picture with the 600L spot lens handy to upload as well?
> 
> Thanks


Sorry, Eldiablo, I don't have a 600L spot (yet?)...

Flyer, the problem with this pic is that it does not represent too well what I actually see. It could be used for beam pattern comparisons, but not much more...


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

I just realized that the iBlaast's wider optics are 25 degrees. The regular ones are 10 degrees (the ones used in the pictures). Even with the regular ones, the beam is decent and wide for a LED light. With the 25 degree optics, it should make a fantastic bar light, especially for those who have a helmet light already. I wish they had pics of the beam with the wider optics.

In other news, it seems that the Dinotte 200L/600L and the Niterider Ninewt/Trinewt will be the biggest sellers in the US according to the big online retailers.


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

its only $3.85 for a wide beam lens. Looks like i'm pretty much decided on ordering the iblaast now. Just waiting for a reply to an email from them, and checking i can get a decent priced battery from anther shop. If i put the order in, i'll add in a wide lens just for you Flyer and take a photo


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

So with three LEDs, I think you will need three wide lenses. Each emitter has to have a lens. If that is correct, I'd get three wider lenses (maybe they call them optics) and then maybe put two wide and one spot and play around with different combinations. It's around $9NZ for three.



eldiablo said:


> its only $3.85 for a wide beam lens. Looks like i'm pretty much decided on ordering the iblaast now. Just waiting for a reply to an email from them, and checking i can get a decent priced battery from anther shop. If i put the order in, i'll add in a wide lens just for you Flyer and take a photo


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

Flyer said:


> So with three LEDs, I think you will need three wide lenses. Each emitter has to have a lens. If that is correct, I'd get three wider lenses (maybe they call them optics) and then maybe put two wide and one spot and play around with different combinations. It's around $9NZ for three.


Hey its lucky you're around to keep me right! I would have just ordered one haha! 
OK i also asked if the test Wilma phot was a 430 unupgraded, 750 upgraded wilma, or a new 830 wilma (lumens obviously, and off the top of my head cant remember if those are exact figures in the wilma history, but i think they're right +/- 10. Been out for a meal and lots of beer so bit confused!)
Anyway, they said Wilma test photo was of the current 830 lumen one. I just mentioned this as it was queried a few posts back by someone.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

That would have been hilarious. I can just see you looking at this tiny lens thinking WTF, where does this go?:lol: :lol:



eldiablo said:


> Hey its lucky you're around to keep me right! I would have just ordered one haha!
> OK i also asked if the test Wilma phot was a 430 unupgraded, 750 upgraded wilma, or a new 830 wilma (lumens obviously, and off the top of my head cant remember if those are exact figures in the wilma history, but i think they're right +/- 10. Been out for a meal and lots of beer so bit confused!)
> Anyway, they said Wilma test photo was of the current 830 lumen one. I just mentioned this as it was queried a few posts back by someone.


----------



## SBK (Oct 18, 2006)

From the sounds of it, the Wide and Spot lenses for the iBlaast are of slightly different lengths - making the idea of mixing wide/spot something that requires a bit of DIY modification to get both in there together. 

The Nightlightning folks are super helpful and quick to respond to email questions. I'm still working thru the details of my charger/battery setup, but will post some pics as soon as they're sorted. I'll also try to get with Grump to do a comparison to his HID setup. 

I don't have much to compare it to, but the iBlaast (even with the spot lenses) seems to have very decent spread.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

The 25-degree lens sits higher so a mm of filing/sanding will be required for a mix-and-match. If I get one, I'll just have them put all three 25-degree optics on and use it that way. I am loving my Wilma's weight and brightness but th elack of peripheral light is killing me out there. I gotta get something else fast. Night riding is (for the first time) beginning to feel spooky with such a low amount of side-spill. There are too many active animals at night and too many steep switchbacks here that we approach fast. I just can't see anything in the dark unless I completely turn my head and risk flying off the trail.

My Arc seemed to have a 160-170 degree beam- almost a straight line to the sides. After visually examining the Wilma, I'd say it throws a 110-120 degree beam and not as far to the sides either. I can roughly measure this sometimes. I'll arrange sticks/rocks and then keep adjusting the two lines and match it up to the effective beam and then do a 90 degree arrangement within it. It will be close. I'll also measure the effective width in feet IF I have an ARC rider with me and compare the two.


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

DAMN!!! :madman: 

Why did i do it !!!!

I went to local shop and had a look at a Wilma, the build quality is very impressive! Very bright as well, and he's going to let me try one on the trails this weekend.

I know its more expensive and not as wide beam as the iblaast, but if i like it on the ride i may get this, as quality is top spec, and ( quite a big plus) is that its got 2 year warranty and if theres any problems i wont have to ship it half way round the world to return it. 

Have to have some seious thinking this weekend


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

eldiablo- let me give you my thoughts on this. I had been using the ARC as my one light for a while- no complaints. Then I decided to try the Wilma and sold the ARC to a friend. However, as nice as the Wilma is, there is one thing you may also find. For me, the pattern is not enough to function as one light. It is bright but the beam pattern is so narrow that I feel I'm riding in a brightly lit tunnel with complete darkness outside. There is negligible transition light and I don't see half the trail details I used to on the sides. I have to approach steep switchbacks carefully. I don't see animals till the last second when they are bedded down a few feet away from the trail. A deer jumped up and almost gave me a heart attack yesterday. With my ARC, I would have seen it well enough to not jump out of my skin without having to turn my head to look at the area of noise.

So I do not find the Wilma enough as one light, which is why I am looking for another, wider-beam light. At $600 or $700, that is an expensive lesson to learn. Now many may not see this the same way but my trails are different and fast and I have an ARC "background". When I asked how the Wilma compared to the ARC, I was told "it is a fantastic beam pattern; don't worry". Well, it is a fantastic light but the ARC beam pattern is far better that the Wilma's and it and gave me a lot more confidence. If you can afford only light, I highly recommend a light like the iBlaast or the 600L with a wide lens. If you get the Wilma, at least keep in mind that you may want another light eventually. You may not but if you're like me, you will.


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

yeah thats what concerns me about the wilma after reading your posts. Hopefully my ride tomorrow with it will help! 

I'll keep you informed of my decision  I have until sunday night as no one will be shipping / processing orders over the weekend!

Have you seen an iblaast in the flesh (or metal!!). Just wondered if you knew what the build quality was like ( i think its the mounting i'm mainly worried about). Paging SBK or HVskier as they both have them........

Apologies to everyone reading this thread who is now sick of mine and Flyers indecisive ramblings


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

I have not seen the iBlaast in person. They look well built. If you're testing the Wilma, keep it at full brightness. Anything less ins't enough. Look to the sides without moving your head; just moving your eyes. The faster I go, the more I wish I had a wide bar laight. I really want to get another ARC but I want to stick with LEDs now that I have one so I'm debating this a little. I'm still deciding between the Dinotte 600L and the iBlaast. If Dinotte's beam was a little wider (even with the wide lens) it would be a no-brainer. Unfortunately, the iBlaast's wide beam isn't pictured and that may be the very reason I don't get one.


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

Flyer, did you ever look at Ayups? If its lateral spread you're wanting, these come in a wide lens option. Although i'm sure you will have looked into them


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

have you tried emailing Nightlightning and see if they have any beam shots of the wide / normal lens....they may be able to take a couple just so you can compare the spread between the two. Obviouls wont be able to compare the wide against other lights accurately, but would give you an idea of how much more it spreads from the normal beam. 
Thet've been really helpful with all my queries! And the weekend is coming up..they might have a spare minute to take a picture f they7're out on a ride


----------



## radirpok (Feb 1, 2006)

Flyer said:


> I have not seen the iBlaast in person. They look well built. If you're testing the Wilma, keep it at full brightness. Anything less ins't enough. Look to the sides without moving your head; just moving your eyes. The faster I go, the more I wish I had a wide bar laight. I really want to get another ARC but I want to stick with LEDs now that I have one so I'm debating this a little. I'm still deciding between the Dinotte 600L and the iBlaast. If Dinotte's beam was a little wider (even with the wide lens) it would be a no-brainer. Unfortunately, the iBlaast's wide beam isn't pictured and that may be the very reason I don't get one.


I'm in correspondence with Rob about the wide lens. Looking closer at the 600L head, it seems to be pretty much factory optics, which should be user-replaceable. The back of the lighthead is held together via 6 hex-bolts, so if Rob says I'm on my own I will disassemble it and start modding DIY ;-] Frankly, I'm sure that the basic 600L wide beam is not what you are looking for.
What bothers me looking at the Blaast pics is that it seems to be wider than the Wilma and still equally bright, which is just impossible, since the Wilma is more powerful. So I'm really curious about how it works in real life.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

The Lumen rating on the Wilma is probably a bit enthusiastic but I'm sure they are equally both very close in brightness. The wider optics don't reduce any brightness; just bring the beam closer and wider with less of a reflective spot.

I think Rob should design a wider lens as well. I looked at Ayup but they don't appeal to me much.


----------



## radirpok (Feb 1, 2006)

Flyer said:


> The Lumen rating on the Wilma is probably a bit enthusiastic but I'm sure they are equally both very close in brightness. The wider optics don't reduce any brightness; just bring the beam closer and wider with less of a reflective spot.


4 leds vs 3 leds, and considering Exposure's 720 lumens claim from 3, I'd say Lupine's 830 from 4 is fair enough.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Maybe but the LEDs are different, optics are different, and there are other variables too. I think the Lupine spot is brighter by a bit but the overall beam is so wide and even on the IBlaast that it may be a more effective light. If I get the iBlaast (or whichever light), I will take a lot of time to photograph and compare the two in different scenarios- twisties, steep switchbacks, etc. Probably not road unless it's easy enough but I could be swayed


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

I also wonder if the 25 degree iBlaast optics will fit the 600L LEDs.


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

radirpok said:


> What bothers me looking at the Blaast pics is that it seems to be wider than the Wilma and still equally bright, which is just impossible, since the Wilma is more powerful. So I'm really curious about how it works in real life.


Thats puzzling me as well! I asked Nightlightning about the iblaast vs wilma pics to see which wilma it was, and they said:

QUOTE:
According to the article in the Mountain Biking Australia magazine aug/sept 2007 issue - this is the 830 lumen tested and shown in the pics, their latest version of the Wilma. This proves that you can't base how good light output is on lumens only, other factors influence light out put including optics used and driver circuity. The Wilma in this article has 4 PSSC4 LEDs compared to ours with 3 of the same.

END QUOTE

So both lights use the same LED's as well!

I'd like to read a copy of the test from that magazine but cant find it on internet anywhere, so just posted a thread to see if anyone has a copy. Maybe should post it in an Australian forum, but not sure which one!!!


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

I posted that very article in this forum a week ago. Just look for it and you will find it.

LED light output can be a bit inconsistent from light to light but they are correct. A lot depends on how high you run the LEDs and the optics used make a big difference. I see it as the lenses used on cameras. Some lenses jsut provide better picture clarity and color rendition.

I'm not saying the Wilmas are inconsistent or anything like that but these are things to consider for sure. It takes much more than a Lumen rating to have a really good light.


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

I found a link for the review in Australian Mountain Bike http://cycletech.sprint3.com/packag...esources_render.asp?intKernel_resource_PK=183

But i was after the test in another magazine...Mountain Biking Australia (where the actaul pics on the iblaast site are from). Did you post a link for that as well?

This is the mag, there is a light test in the last issue i think http://www.bagear.com.au/product.php?productid=8005&cat=107&page=1

I mihgt just sign up for the e-zine as its only $14.95 (australian dollars)....but not sure if its a back issue i need and dont know if subscription lets you browse them


----------



## christexan (Jun 1, 2004)

Someone early on (maybe the original poster) asked about painting/coating the back of the optics for more light, this will NOT work, and will in fact destroy (effectively) the optics. 
Acrylic optics (not reflectors) like these work on the "TIR" principle (total internal reflection), which is a fancy way of saying that at the acrylic-air interface, the light reflects away from the edge at the air/acrylic interface based on it's incident angle and forward through the optic... this angle is what the cone is designed to maximize into the forward direction (and then diffused or angled as desired by the exiting surface characteristics). The angle of deflection is based solely on an air/acrylic interface, any other substance touching the surface (including fingerprints which are very bad) will alter the subsequent angle of deflection from the design. This includes away from the front, across the optic, etc, ultimately though NOT in the ideal exit path. You will still get light out (in fact much of the light from the LED never touches the edges and so exits straight out the front with only the exit surface deflection, the same amount as if the LED was behind a simple hole of similar diameter to the top of the "cone", but your efficiency will plummet for any photons that aren't on a direct path from emitter to top. Many will be absorbed at the interface, or reflected on paths that lead them back to the LED, etc, ultimately ending up dissipating as heat as their energy is absorbed. 
Long story short, don't do it, you could reflectively paint the cavity AROUND the optic and maybe get a few stray photons to hit the right angle and leave the optic, but it wouldn't be a visibly different amount, most current optics are 90%+ efficient, leaving only 10% to "play" with at most (and some of that is lost due to imperfections in the lens, so it doesn't all leave the lens out the sides either, but...), of that 10%, if all of it was reflected back at the optic sides at random angles (in a reflective cavity) only some tiny percentage would actually hit the right angle to eventually exit the front, at best maybe you'd get 1% more light but I highly doubt that it'd be even a single digit percentage.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

My bad. Those two magazine names are so close that I misread it. Please post the other article if you can.


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

Flyer said:


> My bad. Those two magazine names are so close that I misread it. Please post the other article if you can.


I just paid the 15 aus dollars, it has a save option / share / print option but cant get them working!!


----------



## radirpok (Feb 1, 2006)

Flyer said:


> Maybe but the LEDs are different, optics are different, and there are other variables too. I think the Lupine spot is brighter by a bit but the overall beam is so wide and even on the IBlaast that it may be a more effective light. If I get the iBlaast (or whichever light), I will take a lot of time to photograph and compare the two in different scenarios- twisties, steep switchbacks, etc. Probably not road unless it's easy enough but I could be swayed


What I wanted to say was that given equal lighting power if one of two lightheads had wide optics, and the other spot, then the light coming from the wide optics would look less bright, but spread over a larger area.

I suspect that the photos are not good enough, because I can easily imagine that the Wilma projects light much farther than the other lights, but you cannot see this on the photo, because the objects are too close to see the difference. Who knows?
What you are saying about lens quality, drivers, effectiveness etc. could sound true if the Lupine name weren't the equivalent of the best quality (and the highest price...) available on the market.
I guess we could go to the Lupine forums and ask their opinion directly ;-] Or get a Wilma and a Blaast together for a real test. Until then, everything is just speculation.


----------



## HVskier (Jun 20, 2004)

Thats cool that the beamshots on nightlighning's page are from a mag, it would be nice to see the article. 

In regards to build quality of the iblaast I would say it is very good. The lighthead has a very nice 'feel' to it and seems to be constructed well. The helmet mount I got (very stiff velcro) is plenty secure and doesn't move at all. Its only drawback is that its not adjustable and does not fit some helmets well. I have a Giro E2 and there was really only one place to put it and it was not optimal. They have a mount listed under accessories that may be better--"Universal helmet adapter for thinned ribbed helmets". The iblaast is also a very barebones setup, I went with a different supplier for the battery so all I got from nighlightning was the lighthead with cord, connectors, mount, instructions and the cardboard box it was shipped in. I don't have a problem with this but some may be after more bells and whistles.


----------



## Alex SP (Sep 25, 2007)

Hey Flyer!

Those beam shots showing in the comparison pics on the site really are something. I can´t believe the Digital Blaast! showing on the left bottom puts out THAT ammount of light - it looks even brighter than the Betty!!! Loadsa light everywhere, and what a spot! You can see the trees way far on teh trail. All others simply pale next to it, even the Wilma looks a bit weak - how come?? It has only 3 LEDs and no fancy lens (at least they look ordinary). I know there´s more to it than simple numbers but is it THAT much brighter than all those HIDs and the Lupine??


----------



## SBK (Oct 18, 2006)

christexan said:


> Someone early on (maybe the original poster) asked about painting/coating the back of the optics for more light, this will NOT work, and will in fact destroy (effectively) the optics....


christexan, thanks much for the post. I indeed wondered about this point and your explanation seems well founded. It seemed weird to me that the optics are "clear" on the backside, I had to wonder if some potentially forward-directable (yes, I know that's not a word) light was being lost. It looks like the closeup pic of the 600L on this thread suggests that DiNotte does something like what you describe - a backing behind the optic.

Good post, thanks for the contribution!


----------



## SBK (Oct 18, 2006)

eldiablo said:


> Have you seen an iblaast in the flesh (or metal!!). Just wondered if you knew what the build quality was like ( i think its the mounting i'm mainly worried about). Paging SBK or HVskier as they both have them........


Like HVskier, I find the build quality of the iBlaast to be excellent. It's an asembly of high quality using nice materials. I like the design a lot, and in my case the mount worked just fine (Giro Havoc, my spare helmet). As has been mentioned in other posts on the Nightlightning, the mount setup appeard a bit kludge-y, but in use it seems to perform very well and in my case the adjustability with the "velcro-like" setup is excellent.

Like HVskier, I bought it as a semi-DIY setup, so it was basically a light head and mount. It is indeed available with a battery sourced from Nightlighting direct, in which case it would make a complete kit. Personally, I was attracted by the price at which I could assemble my own package, using the iBlaast as the light engine. The total was FAR less than half the cost of a Wilma in my market, this was attractive given lights of somewhat similar output.

No question, if you are after a finely integrated kit/system, and are willing to pay for it - complete kits like the Lupine or Ayup look like top quality packages. I expect Nightlightning can offer a complete setup of similar quality if you were interested. But, if you are OK with a very mild DIY project, the iBlaast seems like a very capable and powerful light engine at an excellent price.


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

HVskier said:


> Thats cool that the beamshots on nightlighning's page are from a mag, it would be nice to see the article.
> .


I cant print the article or save it as its in some kind of protected e-magazinw format. I did sreen dumps of the article and forwarded them to Flyer, i can email you them as well if you PM me. I dont have any web space to host images on. Its a slight hassle reading them as each review takes 2 screen dumps. Lights reviewd are the ones in the comparison shots on the iblaast site.


----------



## minneSSnowta (Jul 8, 2006)

SBK, or anyone else that has an iBlaast,

Are you using the light w/ the 10 degree optics or the 25 degree?


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Good question- someone please try the 25-degree optics (THREE of them) and report back with pics- please.


----------



## SBK (Oct 18, 2006)

I'm running the 10-degree. I received my charger, so I should be able to try to take some pics sometime in the next few days.


----------



## eldiablo (Feb 23, 2005)

SBK said:


> I'm running the 10-degree. I received my charger, so I should be able to try to take some pics sometime in the next few days.


Yeah beam shots would be awesome......we likes beam shotses we does...my precious


----------



## minneSSnowta (Jul 8, 2006)

well, since it seems like nobody has the 25 degree optics. i will have to be the guinea pig and order a light w/ both optics. i will keep you all updated.


----------



## Flyer (Jan 25, 2004)

Good deal. The three extra optics should cost around $7.


----------



## eddielee70 (Dec 28, 2006)

Has anyone try 7.2volt NiMH batteries or 11.1volt Li batteries with iBlaast? I have been told by Eric at Nightlighting that SLA fuel gauge won't work with 11.1 Li battery, but does the iBlaast still work to it's full power with 7.2volt batteries?


----------



## radirpok (Feb 1, 2006)

eddielee70 said:


> Has anyone try 7.2volt NiMH batteries or 11.1volt Li batteries with iBlaast? I have been told by Eric at Nightlighting that SLA fuel gauge won't work with 11.1 Li battery, but does the iBlaast still work to it's full power with 7.2volt batteries?


No, you need at least 10V, at 7.2V the light would be very dim.
Another DIY solution is to replace the bFlex regulating driver with a Fatman boost (or similar one), which could transform the 7.2V to the required voltage. I guess this should be quite straightforward since the Blaast is meant to be DIY from the start... ;-]


----------



## minneSSnowta (Jul 8, 2006)

just got my iBlaast today, and will be using my own battery. NL included the Molex connector for my battery but i can not tell how to set up the + / - leads.

anyone know how to properly do this?


----------



## rockymtnway (Nov 14, 2004)

They wrote it on my baggie: Brown + on the pointed end of the molex
blue - on the square side of the molex


----------



## minneSSnowta (Jul 8, 2006)

rockymtnway said:


> They wrote it on my baggie: Brown + on the pointed end of the molex
> blue - on the square side of the molex


thank you,

i hope to have the light up and running by tomorrow, and tests w/ each set of optics by early next week.


----------



## dtheo (Sep 18, 2005)

*Beam Pics?*

I would love to see someone post some pics of this thing. Especially with comparisons to other lights. I know they have shots on their site, but want to see some others.

thanks,
DT



SBK said:


> I'm running the 10-degree. I received my charger, so I should be able to try to take some pics sometime in the next few days.


----------

