# Nite Hawk K2 Digital Emitter Lightset



## jeep (Sep 23, 2004)

I was wondering if anyone tried this lightset or saw it in action?
Would it be a good replacement for a 15watt halogen?
What are the light guru's suggesting?

At MEC
$159.00 CAD 
Made in Canada

Nite Hawk K2 Digital Emitter Lightset

A turbo version of the Emitter Pro with extra bells and whistles. Brilliant technology is packed into a compact, sleek little package that's quick to attach and remove. The light source is extremely bright, with custom-engineered lenses that harnesses its power and a life expectancy of 50,000 hours.

Choose from a wide range of settings, including flash, strobe, and beacon, for different conditions and varying burn times. The Power Reserve mode will detect a low battery and automatically power down to 10% mode to extend run time. The pod pivots and rotates for maximum range of visibility and is resistant to weather and temperature extremes. Battery is quick to recharge.

Uses revolutionary, super-bright Luxeon III / K2 Emitter technology for beyond-LED brightness. 
Total Internal Reflection (T.I.R.) optical lenses, engineered by Nite Hawk® to harness the power of the Emitter. 
An advanced microprocessor maintains the light at a constant brightness throughout the selected power setting. 
Three high-power settings (25%, 50%, and 100%) and 2 extended power settings (5% and 10%). On 100% setting it's about as bright as a 15W halogen bulb. 
Run times are: 4.75 hours at 100%, 12 hours at 50%, 23 hours at 25%, 55 hours at 10%, and 74 hours (3 days) at 5%. 
Five flash settings: 10% flash, 50% flash, beacon, strobe, and S.O.S. 
Flash setting run times are: at least 3 days (76 hours) at 50%, 9 days (220 hours) at 10%, 5 days (126 hours) on beacon, 20 hours on strobe, and 24 hours on S.O.S. 
Compact and lightweight aluminum head. 
Quick-release handlebar mount requires no tools and fits both standard and 31.8mm oversized handlebars. 
Pod rotates 360 degrees and pivots up and down. 
Includes a rechargeable 6V 4.0Ah NiMH battery pack and an ultra-fast digital charger with a safety timer to protect against overcharging. 
Switch is an easy-to-use push button on the pod.


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

There's a review of an earlier Nite Hawk *here*.

I'm not sure if you would be happy with this light for serious off-road riding by itself. They're pushing the fact that the new light uses a K2 emitter, but not all K2's are created equal. Depending on the emitter used they may be no better then the old three watt devices.

Note that the old Nite Hawk only had a single 1 watt device, so the new K2 Nite Hawk will be noticeably brighter regardless, however depending what you want to do with it I still doubt it will be enough light for you. I'd guesstimate it would be between a 10 to 15 watt halogen in brightness at the most, but with a much whiter colour temperature.

To give you an idea as to what is about at that price and power range as far as LED based lights go, check out the links *here* and *here*.

Personally as a stand alone light I would be thinking of lights with at least two or three 3 watt emitters as a minimum for serious trail riding if you want to go LED, especially if you're comparing it to a 15 watt halogen.

To give us a better idea, what lights (if you have a set) are you currently running and what do you (or want to) use them for?

Dave.


----------



## jeep (Sep 23, 2004)

I ride usually at night once a week (XC/Trail) 2 to 3hours.
For almost 2 years I used "Smart Lights 10watt" one bar and one helmet. In North America they called "Planet Bike Insight". You can check'em out here at MEC.
I have been very happy with them (got them used) but now one of them starts to play up and I want to get something a bit better as my night vision drops (I'm not getting younger). 
I got family in Canada and they are members at MEC so it's easy to get stuff shipped to Australia. 
I also looked at the HID from Planet Bike but its a bit pricey for a product I haven't tried and seen.
I also have a family member in NY that is visiting us end of the year, and I think that she could get me a TrailTech Eclipse HID or a Cateye Double Shotbut but I am unsure about witch of this light set will be best for me. I read a lot about them, probably too much and I can't make a descison.
To many choice in these days.


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

Yeah it’s a hard decision at this price range. From what you describe I don’t think you would be happy with the Nite Hawk. The Cat Eye Double Shot would be alright, but you’d probably be happier with a light with three 3 watt emitters. That’s starting to get expensive though.

The Trail Tech is quite popular and an excellent light at that price, but I’m not a fan of battery space, as you may have found if you’re doing some reading on MTBR. Apart from my concerns with their packs, I don’t think many of the Aussie guys have had too much luck with their packs and chargers either.

Dave.


----------



## can1 (Sep 22, 2006)

I purchased the Nite Hawk K2 emitter last week and have been out a few times with it already, just got back in about an hour ago actually.

Great light. Would highly recommend it, but it is my first decent bicycle light so I don't have any halogens to compare against.

Can1

btw... the packaging that it comes in says "20 watt halogen equivalent", although I don't know if that is marketing hype or not?


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

Cool, let us know how you go with it.

I’m getting sick of this “equivalent to 40 gazillion watts” BS that the lighting manufacturers are feeding us. Wattage is not an indication of a lights output. I can tell you right now that a single Luxeon 3 or Luxeon K2 will not be anywhere near a 20 watt halogen in terms of light output. 

As I have mentioned in a previous post recently, you will find that most manufacturers will measure their light output in lumens or lux. Simply put lumens is a measurement of total output, while lux is measured at a set distance and measures a lights ability to illuminate an object.

To give you a rough idea, an average 10 watt halogen will be around 200-260 lumens depending on bulb quality. The best K2 currently on the market is rated at 140 lumens at best, which is a lot less then a 20 watt halogen would obviously produce. The whiter colour temperature of Luxeon LED’s will help make the light appear brighter, but only to a certain extent.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 4, 2004)

Man, I totally agree. Give us a unit of measurement that means something!



Low_Rider said:


> Cool, let us know how you go with it.
> 
> I'm getting sick of this "equivalent to 40 gazillion watts" BS that the lighting manufacturers are feeding us. Wattage is not an indication of a lights output. I can tell you right now that a single Luxeon 3 or Luxeon K2 will not be anywhere near a 20 watt halogen in terms of light output.
> 
> ...


----------



## can1 (Sep 22, 2006)

*740 lumen output*

p.s. on the same packaging label as the 20-watt equivalent statement is the lumen output: 740 lumens. Hope that provides a more accurate guage of the true light level for those who have other lights to compare against.

I went out again tonight for ride. It's just an awesome light.

Can1


----------



## airman (Jan 13, 2004)

can1 said:


> p.s. on the same packaging label as the 20-watt equivalent statement is the lumen output: 740 lumens. Hope that provides a more accurate guage of the true light level for those who have other lights to compare against.
> 
> I went out again tonight for ride. It's just an awesome light.
> 
> Can1


740 lumens?

That sounds too good to be true. Even the high end K2s only put out 140 lm each when you run them at 1.5 amps. I have a triple Luxeon III star LED light and it is very impressive for a led system. It draws 1 amp and gets hotter than the hubs of he!!... I would say it is better than my 10 watt halogen, but not up to the level of a 20 watt. The K2 is more efficient than the luxeon III but it won't be twice as good... I'd sure like to know how they get 740 lm out of an led - that makes it better than a HID!

Cheers


----------



## Psycho Mike (Apr 2, 2006)

I went for the Planet Bike Alias SC at MEC...same price, but I put a little more faith in the 15W halogen. So far, it has done really well for me, even in the dark, rainy rides I've been doing in the evening here in Edmonton as of late.


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

James said:


> Give us a unit of measurement that means something!


And it's not as though it's hard to get a lux measurement at a few regular intervals, although to be honest at this stage I'd even be happy if everyone just provided a simple lumen measurement. :thumbsup:



can1 said:


> On the same packaging label as the 20-watt equivalent statement is the lumen output: 740 lumens.


Are you sure that the value you mention is actually referenced as lumens? It's interesting that Nite Hawk would do something silly like that with their marketing. Judging by their website, apart from a few silly marketing terms they seem to be reasonably honest about their systems as far as the claims they make.

Dave.


----------



## can1 (Sep 22, 2006)

The label actually say's "740 Lumen Output Approximate Halogen Equivalent: 20 Watts".

I actually sent an e-mail to MEC thinking that it was a mis-print, and meaning to say 140 Lumen output, and received a reply from Nite Hawk through MEC indicating that 740 Lumens is correct. The Nite Hawk website is supposed to be updated with the new K2 information sometime before Oct. 12/15 according to Nite Hawk.

The beam is fairly focused, and very bright.

Can1


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

I do not doubt you, but what they have told you is a load of rubbish! 

I long for the day that a single LED Emitter could produce that kind of light output, but sadly it won’t be for a fair few years yet.


----------



## jeep (Sep 23, 2004)

*can1*



can1 said:


> The label actually say's "740 Lumen Output Approximate Halogen Equivalent: 20 Watts".
> 
> I actually sent an e-mail to MEC thinking that it was a mis-print, and meaning to say 140 Lumen output, and received a reply from Nite Hawk through MEC indicating that 740 Lumens is correct. The Nite Hawk website is supposed to be updated with the new K2 information sometime before Oct. 12/15 according to Nite Hawk.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your info.
Can you compare your light with some of the people your riding with?


----------



## Ro.nin (Jun 3, 2005)

Hey Can 1.

Was looking at the same light.

Have you been out with it more? Still like it?

Let us know.


----------



## can1 (Sep 22, 2006)

I have been out once since then, still enjoying it. It is bright, but a fairly focused beam, it does not flood out at all. The response I received from Nite Hawk indicated that the light enters their patented optical lens at one lumen amount and exits at another? I'm not an optical engineer so cannot substantiate the 740 lumen claim, but the focused beam is bright.

I have not been out with anyone yet, just solo, but as soon as I do and have something to compare it against, I will post the comparison. My friend forgot his battery at the last a 24 hour race this summer so is lightless. Once he gets a new one, we can compare. 

Most of the stuff I have done so far with it was pretty mild double-track stuff. I hope to possibly trying some hilly single track tomorrow night if the rain holds off (it has been raining here a lot in the last 1.5 weeks). I will let you know how it fairs on the single track.

Can1


----------



## airman (Jan 13, 2004)

can1 said:


> clip... The response I received from Nite Hawk indicated that the light enters their patented optical lens at one lumen amount and exits at another? I'm not an optical engineer so cannot substantiate the 740 lumen claim, but the focused beam is bright.
> clip...
> 
> Can1


I'm really interested in what you think of this light when you compare it to another system. It sounds like a very effective spot light, but it doesn't have the output over a very wide angle. The Night Hawk explanation is pretty basic - I think the marketing guys are assuming no one will actually call them on the lumen claim  . 'cause its just plain wrong  .

Can you tell how many LEDs are actually in the headlight? Just curious  .

Cheers


----------



## can1 (Sep 22, 2006)

A single emitter in the light. I will let you know once I have another light to compare against.

Can1


----------



## firstrax (Mar 14, 2005)

airman said:


> I'm really interested in what you think of this light when you compare it to another system. It sounds like a very effective spot light, but it doesn't have the output over a very wide angle. The Night Hawk explanation is pretty basic - I think the marketing guys are assuming no one will actually call them on the lumen claim  . 'cause its just plain wrong  .
> 
> Can you tell how many LEDs are actually in the headlight? Just curious  .
> 
> Cheers


Its probably 740 foot candles. 740 foot candles would be 68.746 lumens which would be just about right for a T bin K2.


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

Someone’s on the ball! I was trying to find ways to make numbers add up, but it just wasn’t working out. I wasn’t using the old brain very well! 

It’s a shame Nite Hawk are trying to hide the light by marketing it with cloudy numbers. One day they’ll learn that they’re better off honestly telling it how it is.


There really needs to be consistency between manufacturers in the way they measure their lights. As mentioned earlier, measuring lux at a number of intervals would be a lot more useful to the consumer. At least it would give a better indication of beam shape and the lights ability to actually light an object.

I have heard that Cat Eye are currently taking steps towards advertising their lights with measurements that are worthwhile, although their current challenge is in educating the consumer. Educating the consumer while keeping it basic and not flooding them with technical terms is their current focus. I’m sure some pretty diagrams would easily get the point across in a shop situation though.

Let’s hope they see it through, and other manufacturers follow. :thumbsup:


Dave.


----------



## bcboy (Aug 9, 2004)

There was no demo unit in MEC so I picked one up today. There is no way the light is near a 20w halogen. A 10 w flood puts out more light. The beam is a laser beam spot which is totally useless for trails. I can't ride without a flood bulb. My 10 w flood is significantly better for me then the 15 w spot bulb or that useless Nite Hawk. I will post some pictures later to show the differences. As usual with pictures an attempt will be made to keep the same setting throughout and each camera is different so don't flame me if I don't use the right ASA setting or other camera settings. Some people seem to get a little touchy.


----------



## bcboy (Aug 9, 2004)

OK, no pictures as my camera has a wacky CCD sensor right now and I get too much noise. The 10 w has wide coverage of the trail and the Nite Hawk K2 Emitter is so weak I could never use it. I would be scared to use it on the road. At least cars could see you. The light is so concentrated that you see nothing but the couple foot area that is illuminated by the light. Damn now I have to find some way to run my AA cells to feed my Vistalite heads. My old batteries died from lack of use and I have piles of AA's so I'm off to rig them up (5 cells). Once my 10w flood dies I will be looking to make my own LED lights.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Low_Rider said:


> Note that the old Nite Hawk only had a single 1 watt device, so the new K2 Nite Hawk will be noticeably brighter regardless


No the originals used a 3W Luxeon... I've got other 3W Luxeon lights and the nitehawk emitters were identical brightness. I've also got 1W ones and they're lower output. The new versions are repackaged with seperate battery packs on a longer cord, and slimmer head unit. The K2 uses a 5W LED, the other version continues to use a 3W version.



> Personally as a stand alone light I would be thinking of lights with at least two or three 3 watt emitters as a minimum for serious trail riding if you want to go LED, especially if you're comparing it to a 15 watt halogen.


You can't just base a LED's usefulness of wattage because the bulbs are so much more efficient than HIDs or Halogens. You have to look at the focusing and reflectors being used too. I've got 3W's with a much wider flood beam than NiteHawk uses in their lights. Its also possible to find amazing little multiple LED units (using the 20 candlepower LEDs) which can easily equal the brightness of a single 3W LED, but with far greater battery life, and much lower cost. Princess auto stores in canada have these lights for $7 each...










I adapted them using 1" scope rings ($20/pair) and planet-bike quickcam mounts ($3 each at MEC). They run on 3AAA alkaline batteries, get about 20 hours of total life, have eight 20 candlepower LEDs and a reflector in a waterproof machined aluminium housing, push button on/off, and complete are about a quarter pound. They're more a flood pattern so they're good for illuminating a wide swath of road/trail about 30 feet in front of the bike if bar mounted.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

bcboy said:


> There was no demo unit in MEC so I picked one up today. There is no way the light is near a 20w halogen. A 10 w flood puts out more light. The beam is a laser beam spot which is totally useless for trails. I can't ride without a flood bulb. My 10 w flood is significantly better for me then the 15 w spot bulb or that useless Nite Hawk. I will post some pictures later to show the differences. As usual with pictures an attempt will be made to keep the same setting throughout and each camera is different so don't flame me if I don't use the right ASA setting or other camera settings. Some people seem to get a little touchy.


Depends on the halogen bulb... I've got 10W halogens which have less light from one brand than 6W from another brand.


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

> No the originals used a 3W Luxeon...


Ooops, that's the second time I've done that in a recent thread now! Sorry folks I can't get it out of my head. 



> You can't just base a LED's usefulness of wattage because the bulbs are so much more efficient than HIDs or Halogens.


Yep I totally agree, have a read of my other posts in this thread where we are discussing useful measurements. The point I was trying to get across in that earlier post was that the newer K2 Digital Emitter should have more light output in theory, but now that *firstrax* has done the numbers it appears that they are using a pathetic bin, so there probably won't be much of a noticeable difference if any at all. 

Depending on the brand and bin of the LED devices, many aren't terribly more efficient then a Halogen, and very few higher wattage devices have a better lumen per watt ratio then most HID systems. I'm not saying that there aren't devices out there that are in fact more efficient though. As mentioned in *this* thread it is easy to build a HID killer with a large array of low wattage devices, but housing such a light and being able to market it is the challenge. As a result most manufacturers are making the most of higher output, but power hungry devices and trying to get as much light out of a smaller package as possible.

Dave.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Another problem with HID's and high wattage LEDs is that while the light they throw out is bright white and/or blue in colour, its not gonna setup the best shadows and contrast with trail features that a halogen would (especially if bar mounted). I prefer to run a mix of lights with different colour outputs, both bar and helmet mounted, so I can actually READ the trail at night, at any speed. 

You see that with high performance car headlights too... great for illuminating deer eyes at 500 feet or making the road 100 feet in front of the car stand out... lousy for letting you know that dip in the road is more than just a dip. Also not much good in fog or snowing conditions. A 5W halogen on the bar just to get the colour and contrast to go with a "bright" LED/HID can be a good thing.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

As to lumens... one of the tactical flashlights I use as a bar mounted light (its more a flood beam, makes a good partner to a Nitehawk Emitter and its spot beam) has an output claim of 80 lumens output from a single 3W luxeons (and their reflector/lense assembly). This running on 3 AAA alkalines and lasting about 5 hours or so. Its certainly a longer lifespan than the digital emitter i have gets using 4 AA NiMH's (stupid digital circuit seems to suck an awful lot of juice, not to mention for some stupid reason mine seems to want to drain one of the pairs more than the other pair, then it kicks into that stupid "10%" reserve mode).


----------



## firstrax (Mar 14, 2005)

Low_Rider said:


> The point I was trying to get across in that earlier post was that the newer K2 Digital Emitter should have more light output in theory, but now that *firstrax* has done the numbers it appears that they are using a pathetic bin, so there probably won't be much of a noticeable difference if any at all.


I have some K2s (UX0P bin). Side by side with the same power the Luxeon IIIs (TX0K bin) look better. Its interesting that Niterider would use the Luxeon III for their new product instead of K2.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

I should point out, that the NiteHawk K2 isn't neccessarily the K2 series LEDs. They MAY have just named it for the mountain you know !


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

Yeah it is quite possible. I thought I saw a direct reference to the K2 series LED at one stage, but a quick search just now didn’t turn up anything useful. The MEC spiel claims the use of a Luxeon 3 / K2 so who knows.


----------



## Wombat (Jan 25, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> I prefer to run a mix of lights with different colour outputs, both bar and helmet mounted, so I can actually READ the trail at night, at any speed.


This is interesting. I recently tried my 30watt bar mounted halogen and 5 watt helmet mounted dinotte LED and found that my eyes were far more tired than when I just used the halogen. I thought it might be because my eyes had to adjust to the lights' different colours. But it could also be that I was more tired than usual.

I am not sure that I need the helmet light, but it is nice to see what is coming around the corner. The 30 watter is far brighter, but the LED is much whiter.

Wombat


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

I don’t think the lower colour temperature of a halogen is any easier on my eyes in comparison to my LED light. I think I prefer the higher colour temperature of my LED based light to be honest. I don’t think I cope riding with two completely different lights for any extended period though, I definitely do find that hard on the eyes.

Although I can tell quite a difference between the bars and helmet mount with my light, personally I have no issues with the higher colour temperature “washing out” the trail in either case.

Dave.


----------



## roy harley (May 8, 2004)

Does anyone have any experience with this light?:

TrailTech Eclipse HID Bar Mount Bike Light with 11.1V 4Ah Li-Ion Battery / Smart Fast Charger and waterproof cable. Read more here:

http://www.batteryspace.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2377&HS=1

Seems to be a great price for a HID light most are in the $300-400 range.


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

Do a quick search here on MTBR and you will find plenty of information. We are mainly discussing the Nite Hawk light in this thread.


----------



## vangreg (Nov 16, 2006)

*Info from Nite Hawk*

Hi All,

I was at MEC in North Vancouver a couple of nights ago and came across the Nite Hawk K2 Digital Emitter. I went home to check out the reviews here and because there seem to be some doubts over whether the claimed specs could be true, I e-mail the people at Nite Hawk and asked them to read this forum and provide some feed back.

Here is what they had to say (edited):
---------------------------------------------------------
Dear Greg,

Thank you for your interest in the Nite Hawk product and sorry for the delayed reply. We are really busy these days and were tied up with vendors most of yesterday.

First of all, rest assured that there is no mistake in the output of the lights.

We can tell you that we were one of the first companies in the world to commercially use the Lumileds Emitter Technology. We meet with Lumileds both here in Vancouver and in San Jose on a regular basis and have done so for many years.

We are authorized to use the Lumileds Luxeon Logo on our package which is only authorized to companies that have demonstrated to Lumileds they have a solid understanding of the technology and how to use it.

We also hold patents for our technology. Anyone who has ever gone through the process of patenting knows the kind of R & D required as well as application of technologies in a synergistic format to arrive at the desired result.

Our latest products the Nite Hawk AL-X and K2 Emitter models have just been released after over 3 years of R&D and is the second generation of our Emitter products.

Some Points for you to review (Feel Free to post this information on the site):

1. The Lumen rating from Nite Hawk is correct.

2. The difficulty with lighting is that there is no industry standard for comparison. Others can use the identical Emitter light source we are using and have substantially lower output products. The Light source itself is only one small step in the whole process and cannot be used as the sole barometer for making generalized statements.

3. Regarding halogen comparisons, most people relate to Halogen light output vs. lumens. Lumen output can be greatly misrepresented simply by changing the test parameters. A few centimeters / inches closer or further from the test equipment will make a large difference in the lumen reading.

4. Some of the people's comments are correct with regards to the Raw Lumens of the Emitters as posted by Lumileds. Depending on the light source they can vary greatly. We cannot disclose all of the procedures and parameters we use to process our specific Emitters as this is proprietary information; however, we can inform you that we do not purchase "off the shelf" Emitters.

5. The Raw Lumens of the Emitter are taken in what is called a 1/2 hemisphere test. This is a test that is done with a very specialized piece of equipment that measures the light output in Raw Lumens of the Light source within a 1/2 hemisphere (180 degree sphere). This test is a good measurement as a benchmark to compare various output Emitters from one to another. It is also a good benchmark to use if you are using Emitters without any optics. As an example, exterior architectural decorative lighting is often used to offer a glowing effect where the Emitter does not have any Optical Enhancement.

6. Our testing and results are done on the basis of the light after it is altered by our propriety patented process and patented optic. The light enters our Optic at an original Lumen level and then exits at an entirely different Lumen Level. (The light would not be useable for our purposes if we did not use our optic). The efficiency of the use of the technology also greatly affects the output of the light as well. Thermal management, Optical efficiency, Electrical Efficiency and selection all play a large roll in the colour temperature of the light, beam angle and light output in Lumens. You can rest assured that our lights are in the elite category. Many of our 1 Watt products go head to head with others' 3W products. This is due to our R&D, expertise and patented technology. To be clear, we are not posting the Raw Lumens of the Emitter's we are using. This information is really quite useless information to the consumer. The consumer needs the output power; hence, this is why we provide the output information.

7. The Lumen readings that we have taken are all performed using calibrated test equipment in identical conditions including distance comparing directly to Nite Hawk Halogen lighting products. Since no industry test exists or is likely to exist we have gone the extra mile and offered a scale that consumers can see and compare from one light to the next. In this way you can see the difference in output from the Nite Hawk entry level Emitter products to our most powerful Nite Hawk high power K2 Digital Dual system and how our Emitter products compare to typical halogen systems. Without some point of reference it would not be possible to convey to the masses the approximate brightness of our Nite Hawk Emitter products. Most people find the comparison to Halogen very helpful. Some people may not like this comparison; however, since there is no other standard reference point that people can use as a benchmark for portable lighting we will continue to use Halogen as a reference point.

Frankly, most people just want "bite-size" information that will allow them to make an educated and informed decision which is what we have tried to provide. We hope you will find these facts of assistance and hope that it helps in your decision to purchase one of our excellent lights.

Best Regards,
Customer Service & Technical Support

Nite Hawk Lighting
102 - 6249 - 205th Street,
Langley, BC Canada
V2Y 1N7
Tel: 604-530-9898
Fax: 604-530-7477
email: [email protected]
web: www.nite-hawk.com

Experience The Nite!
--------------------------------------------------

I went back and purchased the light last night and will hopefully set it up and ride with it in the next few days. I commute from East Vancouver to North Vancouver (about 12km each way) and there are a couple of very dark sections on my ride, so I'm hoping this light will hit the spot.

Thanks to all for supplying great information and insight on these forums and the site in general.

- Greg


----------



## airman (Jan 13, 2004)

vangreg said:


> Hi All,
> 
> I was at MEC in North Vancouver a couple of nights ago and came across the Nite Hawk K2 Digital Emitter. I went home to check out the reviews here and because there seem to be some doubts over whether the claimed specs could be true, I e-mail the people at Nite Hawk and asked them to read this forum and provide some feed back.
> 
> ...


Thanks for sharing the info from the manufacturer. I don't doubt that this is a decent manufacturer with decent products.

The big problem I have is separating marketing hype from reality. LED technology is moving forward at an incredible pace and is now where it can compete with halogen lighting. With the release of the latest Cree XR-E LEDs, the standard is at a very high level - the luxeon is going to have to improve to keep up...

I read over the response and the one thing I totally agree with is that the consumer needs a "bite-sized" review of lights or a reasonable point of comparison to understand what is being offered. The Nite Hawk explanation is riddled with terms that are confusing - STOP!!!:madman: .

If Nite Hawk wants to save this thread - cut the crap and give us what we are asking for - something meaningful... This light is very nice... probably a good fit for many consumers... I'd bet it is a poor fit for me because I want something with a high light output (10 to 20W halogen)... but the rating would mislead me to think it is a super high output light with some mysterious optics that defy the laws of physics (great marketing). Reminds me of the perpetual motion machine . This light sounds like it is the rough equivalent of a 5 watt halogen with a very tightly focused beam. Why don't they just say so?

I've used systems from BLT, Jett, NiteRider, Marwi, and Trailtech. I use a NiteHawk bulb in my BLT helmet light... I have my own hand built triple emitter LED light. I don't appreciate being mislead with technical jargon when it comes to these products :nono: That's what I feel NiteHawk is doing.

I look forward to some meaningful reviews for the K2, but this one has pretty much lost its luster for me...



.


----------



## itsdoable (Jan 6, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> Low_Rider said:
> 
> 
> > Note that the old Nite Hawk only had a single 1 watt device, so the new K2 Nite Hawk will be noticeably brighter regardless
> ...


I know this is digging up an old thread but, this is from 2004:

> Dear ********,
>
> The Digital Emitter uses the Luxeon 1 Watt emitter.
>
> Who's telling you it's a 3 watt? .
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Jamie Taylor
>
> Nite Hawk Bicycle Lighting
> 102 - 6249 - 205th Street,
> Langley, BC Canada
> V2Z 1B2
> Tel: 604-530-9898
> Fax: 604-530-7477
> email: [email protected]
> web: www.nite-hawk.com

This is for the original Emitter and Digital Emitter. I've measured power draw at full power from the Emitter, and it draws 1W. The digital draws more (~2W) with PWM boost circuit, and has a corresponding shorter run time due to inefficiencies in the circuit.

As far as I can tell, the new versions (AL-X & K2 Digital) are 1W & 3W Luxeons respecively.

There's nothing special they are doing to the LED. I have several Luxeon-V (5W) lights (DIY & the Dinotte) and they are brighter.

All in all, the Nite Hawk Emitters are nice units for what they are, I wish they'd be more up-front with the marketing.


----------



## vangreg (Nov 16, 2006)

Given that there is some sceptecism about the light claims and there is no industry standard for measuring light and so far I haven't seen any light company even propose a standard and publish their own results (this may have happened, but I haven't come across it) then the next best thing is something like the review and especially the accociated pictures at:
http://www.mtbr.com/spotlight/lightshootout/

Perhaps if someone knows the people who put together the original review and pictures they could ask that this light (and any others of interest) be added to the list so that there is a comparison that is available for all to see.

I guess comparing the specs is helpful, but a picture is worth a thousand words.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Well I picked up a NiteHawk K2 tonight and it IS easily double the brightness of the older Digital Emitter I have, and boy does the light housing get warm after only about 5 minutes. Also I think the comparing of the K2 to a 20W halogen is accurate considering NiteHawk actually makes a 20W halogen light.


----------



## ATBScott (Jun 4, 2006)

I have had one of these for the better part of 2 years. Great little light - very bright and runs fairly long. The bean is pretty tight and narrow - not a lot of "fill" or flood, but the reach is pretty amazing for a single LED. I have a Niterider MOAB on the bars as a main light, and then use this as a helmet mount. I had used the Nitehawk as my main light a few times, and it was OK but not great. Had to keep the speed in check! On the helmet in tandem with the HID is a nice combo. The NH is bright spot - you can actually see the hot spot of the LED light in the beam on the ground of the HID - that says something. I have one of the first ones, and there was not a rechargeable battery, so mine runs on 4 "AA" batts. Since I have a supply of them still, I'll continue to get about 4-1/2 hours running the light on the high setting or one below that (6 light settings). I never use the flashing programs, etc... Running it on "2" or "3" is fine for low speed and climbing, to increase the battery life. I will pick up some 2500 mA AA Li-ion batts with a charger soon, and they should run this fine - maybe a bit longer too! Great light, but not too sure I would want to do serious riding with this as my only light. Needs more flood capability.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

The one thing I wish Nitehawk used was a better switch... the one on the K2 especially is too hard to switch between output settings when just WALKING, let alone riding.


----------



## itsdoable (Jan 6, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> The one thing I wish Nitehawk used was a better switch... the one on the K2 especially is too hard to switch between output settings when just WALKING, let alone riding.


Same problem with the AL-X's, one of our guys called up Nite Hawk to complain, and they said it was a known issue, and they've switched to a softer rubber for the switch - which is retro-fittable.


----------



## GMF (Jan 10, 2004)

vangreg said:


> Here is what they had to say (edited):
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 1. The Lumen rating from Nite Hawk is correct.
> ...


I guess i have some problems with this reply... a lot of it is good, but there are a couple points:

1. Absolutely not. There is no single LED that we would realistically be talking about that can produce 740 lumens. 150... 200... *maybe*, but you still haven't taken into account optics efficiencies.

3. Lumens, by definition, are concerned with something called a steradian (basically a funky cone shape). They can say "we are getting this many lumens in this number of steradians", or "these are the total lumens", but distance is specifically factored out of lumens. Lux, on the other hand, cares about distance.

4. I used to work for a company that purchased hundreds of thousands of Luxeon LEDs... and we only ever got "off the shelf" LEDs. There is no way that Lumileds is custom making Nite Hawk's LEDs. Maybe they are getting specific binning (brightness, colour, etc.), but anyone else can get the same LEDs.

6. The only other entirely different lumen level that the light can leave by is less. See point 1. They are probably losing 5-10% of their light through their lens.

Personally, i think this kind of information is really frustrating to wade through as i think a lot of it is simply incorrect. I'd love to think they are stand up guys, though, and there is just some miscommunication here... I'm just not sure i see how that could be...

-Damon


----------



## XTC_Rider (Nov 26, 2006)

I'm thinking about buying one at MEC.

Do you guys who owned one think I could use it as my only light? 
(talking about the new K2 Emitter, not the old one)

Also, Is the "flood" on the new ones as bad as on the "old" ones?


----------



## airman (Jan 13, 2004)

XTC_Rider said:


> I'm thinking about buying one at MEC.
> 
> Do you guys who owned one think I could use it as my only light?
> (talking about the new K2 Emitter, not the old one)
> ...


It's probably best if you tell us what kind of riding you do and what your light expectations are.

Try to get someone at MEC to demo one of those lights and compare it to a halogen.

Cheers


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

The new ones seem to have a refocused lense, the pattern is a bit wider than the old ones which was a very narrow spot. I haven't tried mine as a single yet except for walking around and scaring geese and deer at night. I'm running my K2 on my helmet replacing a 15W halogen, with an older digital emitter bar mounted next to one of my adapted LED flashlights.

I aim the helmet light about 40 feet ahead and downwards at about a 40 degree angle (below the horizontal), the bar mounted emitter is maybe -5 degrees and the other LED flashlight is aimed about 60 degrees down and a few feet ahead of the wheel (its got a flood pattern). On commuter pathways and wooded forest doubletrack its been a nice amount of light.


----------



## mb323323 (Aug 1, 2006)

DeeEight, Does the K2 have enough light for trail riding on it's own or have you not used it on the trail yet. I'm curious about the dual K2, e-mailed Nitehawk and they claim the new K2 is equivelent to approx 20w halogen each head. Does your single K2 give off somewhere around 20w halogen equivelent in your opinion?

Thanks

MB


----------



## XTC_Rider (Nov 26, 2006)

What I want to know in fact is if it is worth at least a good 15 watt halogen bulb. I'll would use it to do some easy flat trails and commuting.


----------



## Hack On Wheels (Apr 29, 2006)

Is it worth it for use as a single light on easy non-technical trails but possibly at high speed? Not enough money for an HID this year, but I would love to get out on atleast the easy trails at night anyways...


----------



## XTC_Rider (Nov 26, 2006)

Bought one (ladie a MEC told me that there was no time limit to return it if I wasn't satisfied and she didn't know if the Alias SC was brighter. There was no dark place to try it out), only tested in house yet (and seem deceiving). I'll try it out outside on a ride in 10 minutes but I don't have anything to compare it to.


----------



## XTC_Rider (Nov 26, 2006)

The single helmet beam was a little too narrow for my taste (10 degree), so I tried the Dual K2 emitter. Pretty satisfied. I don't have anything to compare it to, and as it's my first light, I can't say what it's worth. However, I went on an easy flat trail in the dark and comfortably ran at around 25km/h. It could probably let you go faster, but I couldn't because of the snow. Also, I could see the branches of the trees hanging over me about 10m away, but not as clearly as I would like to. (I probably could only because of the snow). With one pod at each end of my bars, it gives me an acceptable spread.

Also, sorry for my ignorance, but I don't get how 740 lumens can be convert to foot-candles. I though that a foot-candle was "one lumen per square foot". Could anyone please explain it more explicitly? 

Thanks.


----------

