Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 156
  1. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    215
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian_C View Post
    So heck - yes - throw one of them into the mix too. It would be great to see their ratings and beam shots compared to the name brands.
    I'll second that!

  2. #102
    Kir
    Kir is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    165
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian_C View Post
    There are several unbranded SS look-a-likes with different drivers and seller upgraded units. But the stock branded units from a good supplier (like FastTech) seem to be consistent between samples. I suppose Kir could really answer that, as he has SS units from several different suppliers.

    I'd be interested in seeing the output and beam shots as compared to the bigger name brands/higher priced units.
    Fasttech? Good supplier? Heh, just go and read their forum.
    And no, there is no consistency between SSX2 units...not at all.

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

  3. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by Kir View Post
    Fasttech? Good supplier? Heh, just go and read their forum.
    And no, there is no consistency between SSX2 units...not at all.

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

  4. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by TiGeo View Post
    This is a subjective statement...do you have anything to back up "Barely anyone even owns one. There are way more people who own budget 3x units or the like."? Sounds like we need a good poll to see.
    You're right - it is merely my opinion. I follow these boards though and no one was even talking about that light until a month or two ago, at all.

  5. #105
    swag ho Administrator
    Reputation: francois's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1996
    Posts
    18,335
    Gloworm X1 was 918 lumens at the 30 second mark.
    X2 was 1391 lumens.
    X3 is pending.

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

    fc
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 2014 Mtbr Lights Shootout-gloworm-x2.jpg  

    2014 Mtbr Lights Shootout-gloworm-x1.jpg  

    IPA will save America

  6. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    496
    X3=xs?

  7. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    878
    Quote Originally Posted by francois View Post
    Gloworm X1 was 918 lumens at the 30 second mark.
    X2 was 1391 lumens.
    X3 is pending.

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

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

  8. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gharddog03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    289
    Gloworms are looking good.

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    878
    A little off topic here Francois but i sent Gemini an email a while ago about the poor results in your integrating sphere tests primarily the Olympia. Responds was they were happy the overstated lumens had improved with the Xera/Duo from the previous year, but figured there must have been an error in testing with the Olympia and that they would investigate. I haven't seen anything posted on this forum nor has Gemini responded to my latest email about the Olympia,,,,,( I think I offended them). Have you had any interest in retesting the Olympia with the new fan, or are you satisfied with the original test? Thanx!!

  10. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pigmode's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    208
    The new X2 apparently falls short based on the 2013 MTBR Shootout "standard", where they rated higher tested lumens than advertised.

  11. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation: androgen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    874
    Francois i have a question about NiteRider Pro 1200 / 2200. Can you take a picture of the LEDs ? Is it using a different arrangement than the older 1800 / 3600. ? Every picture on the net is from an angle where you can't see the LEDs, and the picture you took is the same angle.

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

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

    Thanks !

  12. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    434
    Last year's glowworm tested roughly at the claimed lumens

    Claimed Lumens: 1200 Lumens
    Measured Lumens: 1148 Lumens

    Gloworm X2 ? 2013 Mtbr Lights Shootout | Mountain Bike Review
    Last edited by varider; 11-20-2013 at 02:47 PM.

  13. #113
    ww.glowormlites.co.nz
    Reputation: Gloworm Manufacture's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    300

    2014 Mtbr Lights Shootout

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

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

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

    Bruce
    Gloworm NZ


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

  14. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    30
    I noticed some things with the weights in the tests that seem to have been overlooked. The weights for the updated lights are recycled from previous years, and some seem to be the manufacturer's claims rather than measured. It would be useful for the battery pack lights to have a separate weight listing for the light head only for headband or helmet users, and to separate the effects of different battery pack capacities on the comparison weights a bit better. It would also be useful to standardize and explain what pieces are included in the installed weight for a more uniform comparison.

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

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

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

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

  15. #115
    Glowormlites UK
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    29
    I've carried out a Lux test using the ceiling method which gives a good indication of output on the Gloworm X2 v3 with the new vs old optics.

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

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

  16. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by xcandrew View Post
    The weights for the updated lights are recycled from previous years, and some seem to be the manufacturer's claims rather than measured. It would be useful for the battery pack lights to have a separate weight listing for the light head only for headband or helmet users, and to separate the effects of different battery pack capacities on the comparison weights a bit better. It would also be useful to standardize and explain what pieces are included in the installed weight for a more uniform comparison.
    The weight of the light at least for the Piko is shown in a picture further down in the review, though who knows if it's of the current version. No measurement for the battery and other parts is shown though. I agree that a clear breakdown of the weights would be useful for comparison.

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

    The Gemini Duo is not 316 g with the 1:30 run time 2600 mAH 2 cell setup; 316 g must have been with a 4 cell battery from a previous year test. The 2014 Duo that I recently purchased weighs 61 g for the light head (including cable and plastic mount), 1 g for the mount O-ring, 134 g for the battery pack, 4 g for the battery pack strap, and 26 g for the extension cable (not sure if the "installed weight" would include that, say, if you were to mount it on the stem). That comes out 200 g without the extension, which should bump it up from 3.82 to 6.04 lumens per gram.
    Looking at the gallery further down on the review page, it looks like the pictures were reused from the 2013 (unless the box wasn't updated for the 2014 version?) because it clearly states "2x Cree XM-L 1400 Lumens".

    I don't have the Piko, but I don't know if the 180 g installed weight is accurate. It is the manufacturer's claimed weight on the Lupine site. The light head is claimed to be 55 g, but I'm not sure if that includes the cable sticking out of it and the required mount. (Please measure the Piko lighthead with the mount for my curiosity.) The 3.3 AH hardcase battery pack for the Piko 4 that has the 2:00 run time listed in the shootout has a claimed weight of 125 g. So that's 180 g for the two pieces, but does that include the the mounts and straps or extensions to attach them to the bike or helmet, which would make it the installed weight? The tiny bit of weight difference between the two lights is just academic, but I'm curious about actual weights.
    On the Piko review page there's an image that shows 58g for the full light assembly with mount and attached cable.

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

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

    In the end, I'm glad I selected the Duo over the Piko - it's brighter; a lot brighter after 3 minutes (1,150 lumens and flat on the graph vs. about 880 lumens and going down steeply for the Piko); similar in weight; probably similar run time of 1:50 to 2:15 if programmed to 90% or 80% to match the Piko for actual lumens output; better beam pattern in my opinion/preference based on the tunnel photos and my experience with my Duo; a lot less expensive; the best user interface in my opinion; compatibility with more battery packs including my Geomangear 4 cell; and I think I actually like the mount design and slightly higher light position better. The Piko gets points from me for perceived cable durability; I don't know about actual cable durability. If the Piko were offered at a discount to me at the same price as the Duo, I'd still pick the Duo.
    I wonder if the new fan setup was tried out with the Piko, since Francois mentioned that it made a significant difference on the Betty and it seems that Lupine is fairly aggressive with the power reduction with heat. I've personally noticed no dimming while out on the trail, so I'm guessing that the brightness reduction is purely due to heat buildup.

  17. #117
    Action LED Lights
    Reputation: Action LED Lights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    376
    Quote Originally Posted by francois View Post
    Gloworm X1 was 918 lumens at the 30 second mark.
    X2 was 1391 lumens.
    X3 is pending.

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

    fc
    Actually, in the testing I've done the optic can make quite a difference in total light output. All of them lose light either through the side (a less than perfect reflectance) or absorbed in the material (less than 100% transmittance) Do be sure and retest in the sphere.
    Jim Harger
    Action LED Lights
    www.action-led-lights.com

  18. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by neb001 View Post
    I wonder if the new fan setup was tried out with the Piko, since Francois mentioned that it made a significant difference on the Betty and it seems that Lupine is fairly aggressive with the power reduction with heat. I've personally noticed no dimming while out on the trail, so I'm guessing that the brightness reduction is purely due to heat buildup.
    Wasn't the new fan at set 20 mph? That seems unrealistic for general mountain biking. 10 mph would match more riding situations.

  19. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by xcandrew View Post
    Wasn't the new fan at set 20 mph? That seems unrealistic for general mountain biking. 10 mph would match more riding situations.
    I don't believe it was stated what speed they actually tested with. In the video demoing the setup francois said they can set it to any speed they want, with the fan speed measurement during that demo vid showing roughly 22mph.

  20. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by Action LED Lights View Post
    Actually, in the testing I've done the optic can make quite a difference in total light output. All of them lose light either through the side (a less than perfect reflectance) or absorbed in the material (less than 100% transmittance) Do be sure and retest in the sphere.
    With all this talk about new optics are we talking about the little plastic cone lens you sell extras of like the flood or spot?

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

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

  21. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    491
    Looks like the XS release date was pushed back again, I'll wait till the end of this month. After that I'll look elsewhere, maybe Serfas new light 2500 L.

  22. #122
    Light freak
    Reputation: scar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,435

    Pssst.......

    Quote Originally Posted by dgw7000 View Post
    Looks like the XS release date was pushed back again, I'll wait till the end of this month. After that I'll look elsewhere, maybe Serfas new light 2500 L.

    How about a custom made one from a fellow biker?

    2014 Mtbr Lights Shootout-3x-xml-1.jpg

    2014 Mtbr Lights Shootout-3x-xml-2.jpg


    3X XM-L Amoeba light


    ****

  23. #123
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gharddog03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    289
    Is the xs going to be available as a lighthead only? If so price?

  24. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    491
    Yes, $220.00 you get the whole kit but no battery and charger.

  25. #125
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pigmode's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by dgw7000 View Post
    Looks like the XS release date was pushed back again, I'll wait till the end of this month. After that I'll look elsewhere, maybe Serfas new light 2500 L.

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

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 2013 Mtbr Lights Shootout
    By francois in forum Lights and Night Riding
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: 11-03-2013, 11:11 AM
  2. The Mtbr POV Camera Shootout
    By Photo-John in forum Photography for mountain bikers
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-21-2013, 07:36 AM
  3. 2013 Mtbr Lights Shootout
    By francois in forum Lights DIY - Do It Yourself
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 03-10-2013, 08:34 PM
  4. 2012 Mtbr Lights Shootout.
    By francois in forum Lights and Night Riding
    Replies: 569
    Last Post: 11-22-2012, 10:05 AM
  5. Mtbr lights shootout.
    By francois in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-19-2011, 04:52 PM

Posting Permissions

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