# 1800 lumens on a XML?



## mochodurazo (Nov 29, 2008)

A bunch of my teamates are interested in buy this light :

1800 Lumen CREE XML T6 LED bike Bicycle Light HeadLight Lamp Flashlight Headlamp | eBay

Really? 1800 lumens on a single XML and a 6.4 mA. Can somebody give me and advice for them? or go for it?


----------



## Vancbiker (May 25, 2005)

Bogus number. Overstated by 2x. See the datasheet.

http://www.cree.com/products/pdf/XLampXM-L.pdf


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

I have that light (a variation of it from same manufacturer). I'll measure it later but that's about a 600-700 lumen light.

1000 lumens is the theoretical/impossible output so 1800 is an outright lie. 

I wouldn't touch that vendor with a 10 foot pole as they're clearly liberal with the truth.

fc


----------



## mochodurazo (Nov 29, 2008)

francois said:


> I have that light (a variation of it from same manufacturer). I'll measure it later but that's about a 600-700 lumen light.
> 
> 1000 lumens is the theoretical/impossible output so 1800 is an outright lie.
> 
> ...


Common sense. 1000 lm your mesure will say how much energy its lost(again theorical), by heat dissipation.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

mochodurazo said:


> Common sense. 1000 lm your mesure will say how much energy its lost(again theorical), by heat dissipation.


I believe there's four factors that will hinder it from reaching 1000 lumens:

- lower grade LEDs. They're call Bins and cheaper ones have no chance of getting 1000.
- power source. The quality of the power source is critical to getting the max output.
- electronics - delivering the power to the LED.
- optics quality and reflector quality. The glass and the mirror will result in lumen loss.
- heat causes lower outputs and decreases efficiency.

I'm not an expert on LEDs but these are some of the things I've learned.

fc


----------



## rschultz101 (Oct 5, 2009)

for the XMl,...
some flashlight guys, burned it trough the paces, up to 5A,... to see what it does,...
well at max current, even for the first 5 sec, you won't get 1000 lumen,
in lab conditions, maybe you hit 900,...
for those lights, where it looks like a previous P7 version,...
they claimed a lots of times 2.8A ,... what was the max for the P7,...
in real numbers, more like 2.6A,....
so , if you are lucky, be about 670-710 lumen .
the old P7 top of the line was about 630 cold, and 565 hot.....

so , if you like that 1800 number,... just buy 3X of them ,...
cheers, Rob


----------



## skidad (May 23, 2005)

rschultz101 said:


> so , if you like that 1800 number,... just buy 3X of them ,...
> cheers, Rob


:lol::lol::thumbsup:


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

francois said:


> I have that light (a variation of it from same manufacturer). I'll measure it later but that's about a 600-700 lumen light.
> 
> 1000 lumens is the theoretical/impossible output so 1800 is an outright lie.
> 
> ...


1200 is ok though?

Cough cough


----------



## skidad (May 23, 2005)

kvsitinw said:


> CREE-XML-T6 LED bike Bicycle Light belongs to XECCON flashlight, which is used as headlamp.
> got the information from that site. the max output can reach up to 1600 lumens.


Kvsitinw....Please stop promoting these overstated lights from XECCON. This is the 2nd thread I've seen you doing this so I now assume you work for them in some fashion.

Since you like them so much perhaps you should send a few to Francis to be included in the MTBR light shootout:yesnod:


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

kvsitinw said:


> CREE-XML-T6 LED bike Bicycle Light belongs to XECCON flashlight, which is used as headlamp.
> got the information from that site. the max output can reach up to 1600 lumens.


kvsitinw, you're a shill. If you want to advertise on this forum, buy an advert.

Oh, and stop lying too


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

znomit said:


> 1200 is ok though?
> 
> Cough cough


 Where'd you find that?

fc


----------



## skidad (May 23, 2005)

francois said:


> Where'd you find that?
> 
> fc


Francois has been testing so many lights he's losing his sight

It's right on this main light page right hand side.


----------



## RTM (Sep 17, 2005)

It's a slippery slope when you start criticizing SOME light manufacturers for exaggerating claimed lumens. I would say the guy claiming 1800 is actually doing less harm than the same light claiming 1000. You can reasonably brush off the 1800 as a complete farce with even the slightest amount of due diligence. A lot more people could get suckered into buying a 1,000 lumen light that only puts out 600. 

In my opinion there are only two ways to rate these companies. Honest, or liars. This is why Francios' testing really is so important. I have a very high opinion of any company who shows a consistent and justifiable lumen claim:lux reading, and conversely, a very low opinion of those who exaggerate. They all know it's a crucial data point for every consumer, and one most consumers will never be able to verify first hand. So, big props to those companies who are honest and let the truth sell their products.


----------



## Francis Cebedo (Aug 1, 1996)

RTM said:


> It's a slippery slope when you start criticizing SOME light manufacturers for exaggerating claimed lumens. I would say the guy claiming 1800 is actually doing less harm than the same light claiming 1000. You can reasonably brush off the 1800 as a complete farce with even the slightest amount of due diligence. A lot more people could get suckered into buying a 1,000 lumen light that only puts out 600.
> 
> In my opinion there are only two ways to rate these companies. Honest, or liars. This is why Francios' testing really is so important. I have a very high opinion of any company who shows a consistent and justifiable lumen claim:lux reading, and conversely, a very low opinion of those who exaggerate. They all know it's a crucial data point for every consumer, and one most consumers will never be able to verify first hand. So, big props to those companies who are honest and let the truth sell their products.


Good points.

It's a slippery slope but we have traction control. 

Most manufacturers overstate by 20-30%. So anything with triple digit exaggeration should get a time out.

fc


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

from my point of view, if a manufacturer quotes the theoretical output (say, 900lm for a P7 D-bin) that's excusable, if misleading. Lots and lots of bike light companies do that and, however much it might be wrong, it's understandable when most buyers judge a light by how big a number is on the box and how small a number is on the price tag. If a company is honest, people will pass over their lights for a competitor that isn't, it's just the way it is. Thankfully Francois is doing his best to educate the world, but he's still only going to reach a tiny fraction of the mtb community.

However, when a manufacturer claims an output that simply isn't physically possible, that's just outright lying.


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

francois said:


> Where'd you find that?
> 
> fc


 :incazzato:


----------



## odtexas (Oct 2, 2008)

znomit said:


> 1200 is ok though?
> 
> Cough cough


Post of the year there znomit...:thumbsup:


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

mattthemuppet said:


> ...from my point of view, if a manufacturer quotes the theoretical output (say, 900lm for a P7 D-bin) that's excusable, if misleading....


Agree....Yes, when they do that as least you know that they understand what LED they are working with. However the issue becomes a bit muddied when you start mixing and or using multiple LED's.



mattthemuppet said:


> ...However, when a manufacturer claims an output that simply isn't physically possible, that's just outright lying.


....I'll go a step further....It could be construed as outright deception. I would say that it "is" outright deception if were not for the fact that they are telling you what LED is being used. ( provided they're not lying about that as well .. )

The educated consumer already knows the limits of the LED's in question.. Unfortunately it's the novice that doesn't know jack about how much light a certain LED is capable of outputting.

Now with all this said, who are you gonna buy from....Someone who's lying out his xxx, or someone who at least is telling you some semblance of truth?

Anyway, to the folks propagating these "Monster Lumen" claims, here's one super 2-die green led you can sell for free...It uses a new US output standard called "Moonins" -> :ciappa: 
Shine on my friends. :smilewinkgrin:


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

Cat-man-do said:


> ....I'll go a step further....It could be construed as outright deception. I would say that it "is" outright deception if were not for the fact that they are telling you what LED is being used. ( provided they're not lying about that as well .. )


How about when they remove the LED from their specs and photos after people question their Lumen numbers?

Cough cough youknowwho. :nono:


----------



## juergenor (Mar 30, 2004)

Did you get a chance to measure that light? - I am wondering what light $50-60 would buy and if it is worth that amount or money.

Thanks


----------



## mochodurazo (Nov 29, 2008)

So at the end of the day, this sellers are only foucs to the "novice", entry, ignorant market.


----------



## Vancbiker (May 25, 2005)

juergenor said:


> Did you get a chance to measure that light? - I am wondering what light $50-60 would buy and if it is worth that amount or money.
> 
> Thanks


If you buy a high power LED light for $50-$60 you'll get what you pay for. At best it will be 600-700 lumens. At best it will work for a long time though it likely won't. When it does have trouble you'll have no recourse with the seller, if you can find them. You'll then learn the lesson or go buy another $50-$60 light and probably repeat the previous experience.

WARNING!! Ramble mode on!

The manufacturers get the price so low by cutting quality, using low grade and underspec'd components, and low labor costs. They prey on a consumer that doesn't know what a lumen or mA is, but believes more of them for less $$$ must be better. Thus a market exists.

Some, like the OP, have doubts and do the research. They research and discover the facts. They then are positioned to better decide if the low end product could still serve their need and if the can tolerate the risk that they will get a POS that might leave them without their primary light at a bad time.

Ramble off

Whew!


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

znomit said:


> How about when they remove the LED from their specs and photos after people question their Lumen numbers?
> 
> Cough cough youknowwho. :nono:


If you are referring to the BikerayUSA web site, yes I know but they weren't the first to inflate their lumen claims. They did remove their LED info from their web site which wasn't a good idea and after checking ( just now ) it looks as though things remain the same. The Ray IV likely puts out about 1200 to 1300 lumen IMO. Claimed output is 1500lm.

Anyway, saying a light using an LED with an actual output of 800 lumen ( at best ) is putting out 1800 lumen...:skep:.... that is a category of deception that you can't ignore with a wink and a nod. There's "bad" and then there's "Really freeking Bad".



Vancbiker said:


> ...If you buy a high power LED light for $50-$60 you'll get what you pay for. At best it will be 600-700 lumens. At best it will work for a long time though it likely won't. When it does have trouble you'll have no recourse with the seller, if you can find them. You'll then learn the lesson or go buy another $50-$60 light and probably repeat the previous experience.
> !


Well said.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

mochodurazo said:


> So at the end of the day, this sellers are only focusing to the "novice", entry, ignorant market.


For the most part, yes. Then there are the people I call "The Gamblers". Gamblers know the issues ( the pro's and the con's ) yet they still are willing to take a chance on a product because it is affordable. Gamblers are willing to over-look deception as long as they get what they think they are actually paying for. As for myself I suppose I'm a bit of a gambler however if the claims are too outlandish I tend to let someone else roll the dice.


----------



## mochodurazo (Nov 29, 2008)

Cat-man-do said:


> As for myself I suppose I'm a bit of a gambler however if the claims are too outlandish I tend to let someone else roll the dice.


x2

I pulled the trigger on the 2600 lumens combo that Geomans sales, knowing the hugh battery problem from last year. Another reason was becasue here, got a reputation that they "stand" on what they sale.


----------



## Baja Designs (Aug 3, 2010)

The funny thing about the whole "max lumens" thing is that it not necessarily a measure of how well a light system will actually work out on the trail, throwing out a ton of super bright white retina-burning light doesn't necessarily equal a great light on the trail. (it may make a great parking lot test light though) 

The color temperature of the LED and the functionality of the reflector(s) also comes into play. For instance, we at Baja Designs believe that generally speaking a warmer temperature LED works best in most trail conditions as the warmer light tends to reflect less off the trail, surrounding flora, and floating dust particles, and tends to be more like the natural sunlight which your brain is wired to function best with. 

I think there will come a point at which lights will be judged more for the effectiveness of their light output and less for their raw (claimed) lumens rating. This of course doesn't even bring into play all of the other factors that should come into play when plunking down hard earned cash on something that you are literally entrusting your life with, but like Mr. Cat-Man said, some people are Gamblers.


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

Cat-man-do said:


> If you are referring to the BikerayUSA web site, yes I know but they weren't the first to inflate their lumen claims.


No nitelights and their 1200lm XML powered "destroyer"


----------



## fightnut (Jul 5, 2007)

mochodurazo said:


> A bunch of my teamates are interested in buy this light :
> 
> 1800 Lumen CREE XML T6 LED bike Bicycle Light HeadLight Lamp Flashlight Headlamp | eBay
> 
> Really? 1800 lumens on a single XML and a 6.4 mA. Can somebody give me and advice for them? or go for it?


You can get this a little cheaper at DX ($45), but I have to give you a heads up that the beam is a very tight hot spot and to me isn't very good for trail riding. If you can get your hands on an OP (orange peel textured) reflector that fits, it spreads the beam out and makes it much more useful (I used one from a Magicshine).
600-700 lumens for $45 and a little modding/adapting to spread the beam, you can't beat it.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

znomit said:


> No nitelights and their 1200lm XML powered "destroyer"


Well that was a while ago and I only vaguely remember it now. After just checking their website I almost laughed myself to death. These people are trying to sell you an LED lamp claiming to output 1200lm but don't tell you a damn thing about the LED. Not only that but the picture of the light head is angled so you can't see the emitter...and Oh yeah, all this for $279! :shocked: :bluefrown:

Sorry znomit, I had completely forgotten about that one.


----------



## RTM (Sep 17, 2005)

BajaDesignsShannon said:


> The funny thing about the whole "max lumens" thing is that it not necessarily a measure of how well a light system will actually work out on the trail, throwing out a ton of super bright white retina-burning light doesn't necessarily equal a great light on the trail. (it may make a great parking lot test light though)
> 
> The color temperature of the LED and the functionality of the reflector(s) also comes into play. For instance, we at Baja Designs believe that generally speaking a warmer temperature LED works best in most trail conditions as the warmer light tends to reflect less off the trail, surrounding flora, and floating dust particles, and tends to be more like the natural sunlight which your brain is wired to function best with.
> 
> I think there will come a point at which lights will be judged more for the effectiveness of their light output and less for their raw (claimed) lumens rating. This of course doesn't even bring into play all of the other factors that should come into play when plunking down hard earned cash on something that you are literally entrusting your life with, but like Mr. Cat-Man said, some people are Gamblers.


You nailed it! I've been trying to figure out how to express my thoughts on this whole quality vs quantity issue and there it is. Well said Shannon. Cheers to the companies putting quality into every component and to the guys supporting them.

you guys realize if we all buy cheap crap because it's "good enough" we'll eventually drive some good companies out of business and be left with nothing but crap to choose from. Just my opinion.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

RTM said:


> ....you guys realize if we all buy cheap crap because it's "good enough" we'll eventually drive some good companies out of business and be left with nothing but crap to choose from. Just my opinion.


That would be one way to look at it. Free enterprise is based on competition though. That means someone is going to succeed and someone is going to lose or just break even. Sad but true. Success will be based on things like; quality, innovation, vision and an ability to adapt. Create the right product with the right features, with a decent amount of quality, at the right price and market it properly at a time when the consumer is looking for said product....you have a winner.

There are more than a couple companies that fit the bill that have done just that. As a consumer it is always to your advantage to have choice. Choice helps keep prices down and keeps the big boy lights within reason. I can't see anyone who wouldn't want prices to be within reason, especially in the economy we have at the time.

The people who buy the $50 lights at least have a light they can see with as long as the light works properly. It may only last a year or two but even if that's the case they still get their monies worth. When the consumer gets what he calls, "The best bang for the buck", he will buy "That" product. The company selling that product will be successful. Just my opinion.


----------



## Dikkie (Dec 16, 2005)

For €40, I accepted the gamble as I was looking for headlight for road and light off-road use.
I also have an 4 yr old trailtech HID 11W for trail use.
Burning time and power is diminishing.
This light was rated to produce 500 lm of power, I guess it's pumping 300lmn max now.

The '1800 China lumens' Cree has a very tiny hotspot, so the beam is pretty useless for fast trailriding.
The contrast between the center of the beam and it's periferal light is to big.

In short: I prefer the beam of my old Trailtech, but as I plan to use the new Cree light mostly for safer road training, it's worth the money.


----------

