Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 207
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dominik.M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    144

    Idea! Magicshine MJ-870 & MJ-872 review :).

    It is a short version of my review - for some people it will be just enough (who the heal reads playboy ?? )
    for others here is the full version (all beam-shots and measurements) => Magicshine MJ-870 and MJ-872 - magic 1000+ lumens from 3 and 4 Cree XP-G leds.

    Some marketing data.


    Close up :


    A bit closer


    Very close...


    Total show off :


    How does it light ?

    Assuming that I did not get jumbled up during the measurements and that the Chinese did not insert there the possible worst Cree XP-G leds, but only the most popular R4, in theory, on the leds, you should get 1400 and 1050 lumens so that, in both cases, the lights exceed the magic limit of 1000 lumens. However, frankly, if you add circa 10% loss across the optics, you will have 1250 and 950 only but this is still a lot of light . Well, of course, the weakest mode has 20% instead of 30, but the Chinese light users have got used to such trifles already .

    Magicshine MJ-808 - SSC P7 (high ca. 600 lumens)


    Magicshine MJ-808E Cree XM-L (high, ca. 750 lumens)


    Magicshine MJ-870 - high (100%, ca. 950 lumens)


    Magicshine MJ-872 - high (100%, ca. 1250 lumens)


    Resume.

    The new lights, the new quality, a lot of light. I tested MJ-872 in a fight, arranging and winding up the route of the night competition for orientation; the 300+ lumens on the low mode were completely enough for me to move on broken-stone roads; I switched on the maximum mode once, perhaps most probably in order to see how it would be . What does it give in practice ? On the single battery pack, you may ride for 10 hours !. The optics of the distribution angle circa 20* illuminates ideally the road before the bike. To put into words simply, after the tests, the 4-unit stays with me (after replacement of the cables, thermo paste, lubricating of all gaskets and threads with silicone grease and accurate tightening; at last, its Chinese stuff ).
    Last edited by Dominik.M; 07-03-2011 at 01:46 PM.

  2. #2
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,702
    Nice! That looks pretty sweet. Just so it's posted here, looks like street price is around $200 for the 4 emitter version. While that is getting out of the cheapo semi-disposable price range, it's still pretty amazing for the amount and quality of light, and running weight.

    The three emitter one is going for $126 at Dealextreme (but DX sucks serious rocks through a rope for customer service).

    *edit*

    Oh, the 4 element version is $146 at DX.

    Not sure I would run out to upgrade to it form my MJ808, since I don't seem to night ride enough to justify it.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Cat-man-do's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    5,211
    About the beam shots....What are the distances to the various markers? What camera settings were used? Only reason I'm asking is because Geoman didn't like the beam pattern of the 872 but from what I'm seeing here it looks pretty good ( depending on the marker distances of course )

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,309
    Very nice write up.

  5. #5
    www.airbornemtb.org
    Reputation: nick d's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    333
    not that i expect any of these type of lights to be waterproof, but i wonder how this would stand up to the type of testing catman did with the ray4?
    Quote Originally Posted by HamfisT
    I understand that engineering has value in and of itself. But in the end, it's still just a pile of aluminum tubes.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dominik.M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by Cat-man-do View Post
    About the beam shots....What are the distances to the various markers? What camera settings were used?
    Those are my standard settings, for the last few years...

    In the room :
    ISO 200, time 1/8s, aperture 3.5, manual white balance (daylight).
    Distance from the wall 3.0 m - the distance of the camera from the wall 3.0 m (the wall - white matt emulsion)

    The gravel path:
    ISO 200, time 2s, aperture 3.5, manual white balance (daylight).
    Markers spaced every 5 meters, lamps aimed at the 10 meter.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Cat-man-do's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    5,211
    Quote Originally Posted by nick d View Post
    not that i expect any of these type of lights to be waterproof, but i wonder how this would stand up to the type of testing catman did with the ray4?
    Yes, I was thinking the same thing. Dominik, any chance you can throw the light body under a shower head ( 15-20 min. ) at close distance ( 6" or less )? Since you already have it dismantled you don't have to include the Leds or electronics ( a big advantage ).

    Nick, Don't be surprised if these fair better than the Ray IV. The back plate and button looks much different. Dominik, does the rear of the light include an O-ring? How was it sealed?

    About the the beam photo's: Okay I did the conversion, 65.5 ft. at the last marker. For some reason I thought it was longer. Still a nice wide beam pattern that does look to carry a bit further beyond the markers. Real important to point out though that both the 808 and 808E will easily out throw the markers ( x 2 ) if aimed higher ( as they are both spot beam oriented lamps ).

    Oh, almost forgot...I was going to comment about the 10 hr run time you quoted but I now see you are posting a chart that shows 2.2hrs on high. Since this light offers 4 distinct modes, any way you can show some photos of the 70% and 50%.beam patterns...... For us folks that like lower modes that would be a big plus.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dominik.M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by Cat-man-do View Post
    Dominik, does the rear of the light include an O-ring? How was it sealed?
    There is the same seal as in the front - but the most problematic is the switch cover - it's not tight enough to be waterproof (and it can't be because it's too big and too soft) so I sealed it using silicon grease for torches. There is also no seal around cable where it enters into the case - here I use silicone sealant. So now I can put it even under water for 1/2 hour to check if it meats IPX7 requirements



    Quote Originally Posted by Cat-man-do View Post
    Since this light offers 4 distinct modes, any way you can show some photos of the 70% and 50%.beam patterns...... For us folks that like lower modes that would be a big plus.
    All other beam-shots are available at my site - but nobody reads

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by Dominik.M View Post
    the most problematic is the switch cover - it's not tight enough to be waterproof (and it can't be because it's too big and too soft) so I sealed it using silicon grease for torches. There is also no seal around cable where it enters into the case - here I use silicone sealant. So now I can put it even under water for 1/2 hour to check if it meats IPX7 requirements
    It just totally boggles my mind why you guys think it's acceptable to spend $150 on a light and then have to perform some DIY handiwork to make it waterproof?

    And why are you posting this review in this forum? Shouldn't it be in the DIY forum? This light, as it leaves the factory, is not suited for anybody that takes their riding seriously.

    On another note, is it me or does it look like both the Magicshine and the BikeRay are built in the same factory using pretty much the same design?
    Last edited by Azra; 07-02-2011 at 06:07 AM.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dominik.M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by Azra View Post
    On another note, is it me or does it look like both the Magicshine and the BikeRay are built in the same factory?
    Light and Go Foride = Magicshine MJ-856 = Magicshine MJ-872 in more fancy looking case.



    Light and Go Firefly = Magicshine MJ-858

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    126
    So, Dominik, are you saying, "Look at the shiny case and ignore the waterproofing?" Is that it?

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dominik.M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    144
    No, but basically if you want IPX7-8 Bike lamp you have to pay for it much more than 140 $, and not always you will get it, because producers these days are calculating "how many users are riding for 5-6 hours in the rain" -> 2-5% ? Ok, Then how much it will cost us to make our lamp waterproof ? 30% ?? No, thank you...

    That why most producers of the outdoor equipment are currently producing water resistant IPX4 lamps / headlamps. They may even meet the requirement's of the higher protection levels but nobody will declare that

  13. #13
    www.airbornemtb.org
    Reputation: nick d's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    333
    Quote Originally Posted by Azra View Post
    It just totally boggles my mind why you guys think it's acceptable to spend $150 on a light and then have to perform some DIY handiwork to make it waterproof?

    And why are you posting this review in this forum? Shouldn't it be in the DIY forum? This light, as it leaves the factory, is not suited for anybody that takes their riding seriously.

    On another note, is it me or does it look like both the Magicshine and the BikeRay are built in the same factory using pretty much the same design?
    Azra, I can only speak for myself as an owner of magicshines and a ray2, but i dont expect any cheap Chinese light to be waterproof. even if they blatantly advertised it as waterproof to a certain depth like some other manufacturers id be very skeptical. And even though the ray 3/4 and these magishines are more than the original magicshines, they are still 'cheap lights' compared to a light with simillar output from a 'better' manufacturer.

    I dont understand the ip ratings, but if they are not living up to that there is no excuse for false advertising, but it would not suprise me since it seems most all the Chinese manufacturers and vendors of those lights seem to have adopted the practice of overstating the output in lumens...

    I guess you could say you have to compare Output vs Ruggedness vs Price and pick the light that has the two you need, cause at this price it seems you cant have all three.

    The reason i can accept that these lights are not waterproof is that as a recreational rider i can generally avoid serious rain storms by just staying in and riding another night, which is an option that if i remember right you dont have since you use it for commuting also?

    It defiantly sounds like you will be better off with something like the stryker from baja designs even if it means you have to sacrifice some output in exchange for durability. In fact a while back he had a trade in deal, it might be worth checking to see if they still do.

    Im glad you have been so vocal about your experience because it will no doubt help people choose the light that is best for them.
    Quote Originally Posted by HamfisT
    I understand that engineering has value in and of itself. But in the end, it's still just a pile of aluminum tubes.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by nick d View Post
    i dont expect any cheap Chinese light to be waterproof.
    I could perhaps accept that a $79 Magicshine is cheap. But when you get in the $150-200 price range, that's not cheap. Cheaper than more established brands, yes, but not cheap.

    People that find $200 cheap would probably be buying a Lupine anyway.

  15. #15
    www.airbornemtb.org
    Reputation: nick d's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    333
    Quote Originally Posted by Azra View Post
    I could perhaps accept that a $79 Magicshine is cheap. But when you get in the $150-200 price range, that's not cheap. Cheaper than more established brands, yes, but not cheap.

    People that find $200 cheap would probably be buying a Lupine anyway.
    $150 to $200 is certainly nothing you want to throw away, and its much more painful to throw away a $200 light than an $80 light, but the Lupine equivelant is what a Wilma5 for $595? IM sure its a much better light, and its probably not a truly fair comparision, but the cheapest Lupine i saw on geomans website was the Piko for $310 and im sure it doesnt put out the same amount of light as a ray3/4 or these new magicshines.

    Anyway, im not trying to argue, just saying there's a reason some vendors sell both lines
    Quote Originally Posted by HamfisT
    I understand that engineering has value in and of itself. But in the end, it's still just a pile of aluminum tubes.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    691
    Quote Originally Posted by Azra View Post
    I could perhaps accept that a $79 Magicshine is cheap. But when you get in the $150-200 price range, that's not cheap. Cheaper than more established brands, yes, but not cheap.

    People that find $200 cheap would probably be buying a Lupine anyway.
    For such lights as MS, Floride, BR etc, the increase in price from say US$79 (single P7) to $150++ (quad XPG) has got little to do with manufacturing quality but simply the optics, emitters and circuit boards they are using in the light head itself. Everything else remains as is unfortunately. I do agree that having to open up light heads and perform ER as in the BikeRay IV thread is more than I'd want to do but waterproofing seals and threads with grease etc is acceptable in my books.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Cat-man-do's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    5,211
    Quote Originally Posted by Dominik.M View Post
    There is the same seal as in the front - but the most problematic is the switch cover - it's not tight enough to be waterproof (and it can't be because it's too big and too soft) so I sealed it using silicon grease for torches. There is also no seal around cable where it enters into the case - here I use silicone sealant. So now I can put it even under water for 1/2 hour to check if it meats IPX7 requirements
    Dominik, Thanks again for the pictures of the back plate. This looks like the inside of the back plate ( if I'm not mistaken ). At least it has an O-ring. There also looks like a secondary O-ring (?). I don't know about anyone else but after my experience with the Ray IV seeing some O-rings inspires confidence. It remains to be seen though just how well these rubber buttons can hold out water. At least with the MS 872 it is larger and might have more wiggle room. If true it might work better ( or in this case be a much easier fix ). Was it hard to get the back off? What tool was required and how was it done?

    What you said about the water-resistance of these kinds of lights is likely true. I think once you market something as "water-proof" you almost have to charge more money because the product will be held to a much higher standard and will cost more to produce. Not to mention it makes a great selling point for the vendors.

    In keeping with that thought, in the case of the Baja Stryker, since the design was so well thought out you are going to get much better water-resistance ( if not an out right water-proof quality level ). Need I say, the Stryker is much more money than other P-7 bike lights. Still with all that said I think I might be willing to pay another 20% for a typical Chinese light that was designed to be completely water-proof. Whither that will happen anytime soon is anyone's guess.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    126
    I don't get it. If all it takes is a smidge of grease to make those lights waterproof, why isn't that done at the factory?

    Surely $0.01 of grease would not increase the manufacturing cost by 30%.

  19. #19
    discombobulated SuperModerator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    3,217
    Quote Originally Posted by Azra View Post
    I don't get it. If all it takes is a smidge of grease to make those lights waterproof, why isn't that done at the factory?

    Surely $0.01 of grease would not increase the manufacturing cost by 30%.
    At some point I think your getting obsessive about the MS stuff. I think the whole point of 'Azra doesnt like them' was made pretty well....

    I bet soon enough though, the aforementioned problems will be addressed overseas.
    CDT

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    126
    Quite to the contrary, I'd like nothing better than to see Magicshine and BikeRay produce lights that are well designed, powerful, cheap, and waterproof. I'd love it. And I'd gladly buy one.

    I'm not a fool that craves status symbols to show off at the next group ride. Nor am I loaded with money. I'd much rather buy a $200 light from MS or BR than a $700 light from Light and Motion. Or even a $400 light from DiNotte.

    But if MS and BR produce lights that are crap and will die on me the first time it rains (as the BR IV has done so ignominiously), then... well, the lights are crap. I like to call things what they are. And if it offends fans of MS and BR, then so be it.

    If we were to all tell MS and BR "your lights are crap" maybe they'd get the message and actually start using some grease and silicone sealant in the final assembly. But as long as we have apologists saying "it's really no big deal", "you can seal it yourself with a little grease if you like", "who rides in the rain anyway?", etc, then MS and BR will continue to sell crap. And established manufacturers will continue to sell us grossly overpriced products. I don't like that.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: znomit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,863
    Quote Originally Posted by Dominik.M View Post
    Light and Go Foride = Magicshine MJ-856 = Magicshine MJ-872 in more fancy looking case.

    Perhaps with a tighter optic?

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dominik.M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by Cat-man-do View Post
    Was it hard to get the back off? What tool was required and how was it done?.
    It was easy to unscrew - it only take me some time to understood how do they put it all together, because I get used to typical torch design...

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Cat-man-do's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    5,211
    Quote Originally Posted by Chromagftw View Post
    For such lights as MS, Floride, BR etc, the increase in price from say US$79 (single P7) to $150++ (quad XPG) has got little to do with manufacturing quality but simply the optics, emitters and circuit boards they are using in the light head itself. Everything else remains as is unfortunately. I do agree that having to open up light heads and perform ER as in the BikeRay IV thread is more than I'd want to do but waterproofing seals and threads with grease etc is acceptable in my books.
    About the last part, I agree. If I had known going in what the real problem with the Ray IV was ( the rear plate threads/ lack of O-ring ) I could of simply found a suitable O-ring, slipped in over the top and slapped on some sealant without even having to completely remove the plate. Unfortunately I thought the biggest problem was the button cover. While it could still be a problem it was not the problem I originally thought it was. As such it would have been better if I had not taken the back of the light off. Anyway, don't want to venture too much off topic...

    In the case of the MS 872 the design of the rear plate is much different. As such my bet is that it will be much better at shedding water than the Ray IV. Since it has already been modded by the OP no real way to know for sure unless he has another one to fiddle with.

    As for the optics, I could wish for more throw but than again I always do.
    At 2hrs on high the run time lacks and if you power down to lower levels the throw will suffer even more. I think for this light a bigger battery is in order ( 5200mAh or more ) Two and half hours run time on high would be an improvement but 3hrs would be preferable.

    Znomit, any links to beam shots of the MS 856?

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mattthemuppet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    2,342
    Dominik - was there any thermal paste between that ribbed outer heatsink and the main casing? Did you run the light before dismantling to see how well the light heated up? If there wasn't any thermal paste, it would be a good idea to put some in, even if the light head has some kind of thermal management.

    Oh, and were you able to measure the current the LEDs were being driven at? The power figures quoted imply they're being driven above 1A, so there may be some grounds for their output claims

  25. #25
    www.airbornemtb.org
    Reputation: nick d's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    333
    anybody know if these optics would work with the 4 led version: http://www.cutter.com.au/cart.php?rp...prod%3Dcut1000

    somebody posted the link on dx, but i guess someone with the light would have to take some measurements to make sure?

    edit: actually i found some measurements above, looks like its too small?
    Quote Originally Posted by HamfisT
    I understand that engineering has value in and of itself. But in the end, it's still just a pile of aluminum tubes.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mattthemuppet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Chromagftw View Post
    For such lights as MS, Floride, BR etc, the increase in price from say US$79 (single P7) to $150++ (quad XPG) has got little to do with manufacturing quality but simply the optics, emitters and circuit boards they are using in the light head itself.
    I doubt the components increase the cost that much - quad XP-G boards from reputable sellers are ~$30 at retail. The increase over a C-bin P7 at bulk is probably ~$15 at most. Optic isn't more than a couple of bucks (and excessively floody by the looks of it) and I doubt the driver is any better built than the cheap jobs they put in the other MS lights. The fancier case probably adds $5 bulk at a very rough guess.

    With bike lights, more lumens = more money (like cars), even though it really doesn't cost much more to build. Look at L&M Seca 700 and 1400 - the only difference is 3 more cells in the battery and a reprogrammed driver. Or a 1800+lm light I just built for $20 more than a ~400lm commuter light. It's just market segmentation and profit margin.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dominik.M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by mattthemuppet View Post
    Dominik - was there any thermal paste between that ribbed outer heatsink and the main casing? Did you run the light before dismantling to see how well the light heated up?
    There is no thermal paste, but the parts are pretty tight match => 65,9*C in mcpcb and 56,7*C on the case...

    Quote Originally Posted by mattthemuppet View Post
    Oh, and were you able to measure the current the LEDs were being driven at? The power figures quoted imply they're being driven above 1A, so there may be some grounds for their output claims
    You can find every information here : Magicshine MJ-872 review

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    145
    Washed my bike after a wet ride with my MJ-872 on and no issues last night. All i have done it check and re screw on the front cover and replace the mount with electron one, with silicone seal.

    Im really happy with mine, with a XML on my helmet its a great combo, used it with a XML torch on Bars last night too, which was really good, gave the throw that the 872 lacks while still having a big pool of light upto 60 feet in front of bike.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mattthemuppet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Dominik.M View Post
    There is no thermal paste, but the parts are pretty tight match => 65,9*C in mcpcb and 56,7*C on the case...
    It would still be better with thermal paste, believe me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dominik.M View Post
    You can find every information here : Magicshine MJ-872 review
    I wonder why they run the triple XP-G as a parallel setup with a buck driver, when they could use the same boost driver as the quad XP-G (even on low, a series triple would be 0.6-1V above the max voltage of the battery)? Seems like an odd decision, especially as the boost driver appears more efficient in this case and they would only have to produce 1 driver.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dominik.M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by mattthemuppet View Post
    It would still be better with thermal paste, believe me.
    Believe me, I know

    Quote Originally Posted by mattthemuppet View Post
    Seems like an odd decision, especially as the boost driver appears more efficient in this case and they would only have to produce 1 driver.
    They already have the buck driver and they need it for their XM-L The buck version is probably a few cents cheaper...

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mattthemuppet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Dominik.M View Post
    Believe me, I know
    Good. Glad we got that willy waving issue over and done with.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dominik.M View Post
    They already have the buck driver and they need it for their XM-L The buck version is probably a few cents cheaper...
    Guess so. Just seems a bit odd - I don't know of any other light (the L&M Seca perhaps) that runs LEDs in parallel strings.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    752
    Quote Originally Posted by mattthemuppet View Post
    Guess so. Just seems a bit odd - I don't know of any other light (the L&M Seca perhaps) that runs LEDs in parallel strings.
    That's because it's not a good design practice. Especially when the different LEDs are not really closely thermally coupled inside a single package like a P7 or MCE. You can't guarantee that the current will split evenly between the multiple LEDs.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Cat-man-do's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    5,211
    Back with some comments about the optics on the MJ-872. Well it didn't take Magicshine long to figure out that people were not happy with the original optics. After looking at the MS website tonight it seems they are now offering the 872 with a clear optic over the emitters ( with frosting of the lens in between the emitters ). Not sure how that will change the beam pattern though. This is the same technique that Bikeray uses on the Bikeray III. I guess this means some new updated beam shots are in order if you think you might like the new set-up.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    17
    Anyone been able to compare the MJ-872 with the Bikeray IV?

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    146
    I bought the 872 this weekend (actually exchanged it from 808e) and tried it out last night. Its definitely brighter than the 808 and is excellent up close for flood use. I doubt there is anything at this pricepoint that comes close to this thing. However, the spot use is still lacking and I'm sure this could be adjusted by altering the light. The flood is actually so bright though that you kind of forget about the lacking spot. I've ridden with a Niterider HID Moab for the last few years and typically ride solo with one helmet mounted light. I really liked the Niterider but its troubling that a $600 light lasted only 3 years so I don't think I'm going to deal with them any longer. Ideally, I would like to adjust this so I could get a better spot - any ideas?

  36. #36
    recovering roadie
    Reputation: dobbs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    561
    I bought an 872 from Dealextreme and it has the new glass, but I can't really compare with the old glass. The light couldn't be better for what I need - I ride rocky technical trails and really need the flood beam.

    The problem is overheating. I live in Phoenix, and my summer night rides are often 100 degrees when I start at 8:30pm. On my last ride, I ran the light on next to lowest power (50% I think) and it had to shut down to the lowest power a few times to cool off. It was really quite annoying - even bombing down a hill it turned itself down.

    It looks like I can return it for DX for an exchange, but I'm wondering if it's just the design, and if it would be worthwhile for me to try to put some thermal paste on the inside of the heatsink ring. If so, how do you unscrew that lockring? Looks like it takes a special tool.

    Anyway, any advice you have would be helpful. Thanks.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Cat-man-do's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    5,211
    Quote Originally Posted by dobbs View Post
    I bought an 872 from Dealextreme and it has the new glass, but I can't really compare with the old glass. The light couldn't be better for what I need - I ride rocky technical trails and really need the flood beam.

    The problem is overheating. I live in Phoenix, and my summer night rides are often 100 degrees when I start at 8:30pm. On my last ride, I ran the light on next to lowest power (50% I think) and it had to shut down to the lowest power a few times to cool off. It was really quite annoying - even bombing down a hill it turned itself down.

    It looks like I can return it for DX for an exchange, but I'm wondering if it's just the design, and if it would be worthwhile for me to try to put some thermal paste on the inside of the heatsink ring. If so, how do you unscrew that lockring? Looks like it takes a special tool.

    Anyway, any advice you have would be helpful. Thanks.
    Wow...that's a real bummer. XP-G's do get very hot though. The only real option you might have would be to disconnect the thermal monitoring. Doing that would likely bake the led's and shorten their useful life but sadly you might not have any other better option. At least the light is not so expensive that if you burn it out it won't cost too much to replace it. Now just what you have to do to disconnect the thermal monitoring...I have no idea.

    This issue has me wondering just how well the Bikeray IV would hold up under those conditions. I'm really not sure if the BR IV has thermal monitoring but if it does the LED's it uses is the newer Rebel ES series that is designed to handle heat a little better. Anyway, food for thought.

    A while back I came up with an idea that might help someone that had heat issues. Basically my idea was to design a light that had a compartment behind the heat sink that could be used to store small pieces of dry ice. In essence this would keep the light cool ( very cool at that ) using CO*2. Dry ice can usually be easily obtained from various places. Where I work we have the "nugget" form readily available. ( which means I can get it for free... ) You would have to have the light modded for CO*2 use though. To prevent explosion it would have to have some small vents. In theory I think a couple of the small nuggets should last at least two or three hrs. Need I say, Dry ice is super cold and will actual burn you if you touch it. No telling what it would do to electronic components if directly exposed to the evaporated CO*2....Anyway, more food for thought.

    In the long run you might be better just running two cheap ( D/X cheap ) Standard MagicShines on low ( on the bars with a Y-cable ) and using the combined light to get you by. ( or option B ) Run your current light on low or mid low and use a cheap P-7 or XM-L torch ( which has no thermal monitoring ) to supplement the 872. ( which is what I would probably do ). Hope this helps. Cat.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    316
    I'm surprised Cat - given your previous experience I thought you might have suggested water cooling

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by Cat-man-do View Post
    A while back I came up with an idea that might help someone that had heat issues. Basically my idea was to design a light that had a compartment behind the heat sink that could be used to store small pieces of dry ice. In essence this would keep the light cool ( very cool at that ) using CO*2. Dry ice can usually be easily obtained from various places. Where I work we have the "nugget" form readily available. ( which means I can get it for free... ) You would have to have the light modded for CO*2 use though. To prevent explosion [ ] it would have to have some small vents. In theory I think a couple of the small nuggets should last at least two or three hrs. Need I say, Dry ice is super cold and will actual burn you if you touch it. No telling what it would do to electronic components if directly exposed to the evaporated CO*2....Anyway, more food for thought.
    Cat man, you're giving Wile E. Coyote a run for his money!

    Hold it right there, please, while I go fetch the popcorn. This is gonna be good.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,116
    I also live in the Phoenix area and run a BikeRay IV on the bars and a MS808e on my helmet. So far the BR IV has worked perfectly (although I wouldn't know otherwise unless it just quit) with one exception. I tried running both lights on the bar with a y connector and one Goeman 6ah battery and both battery life indicators turned red and the thermal monitoring on the 808 head kicked in. Everything went back to normal when I turned one of the lights off. Different current draw on the light heads, too much power draw, too small wire guage on the y connector, or maybe some safety feature on the battery? I don't know but I do know it wasn't overheating.
    I am interested in how the MS872 compares with my BR IV. I initially tried to order a LIGHTnGO foride with no luck. Maybe someone can do a beamshot comparison?

  41. #41
    recovering roadie
    Reputation: dobbs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    561
    So, to follow up, I mounted a dry ice cooler on it last night and it blew up in my face, but the exploding MagicShine battery offset the ice explosion....

    Actually, I did ride with it last night and it went a lot better. It was a few degrees cooler oustide and I kept the light cool in the house until it was time to leave, instead of mounted to the bike in the hot garage like last time. Then I ran it on the 50% setting most of the time, which is more than enough light. It did reduce power twice, but that's a lot better than the last time I was out.

    I figured out how to remove the end caps with spread open needle nose pliers and I plan to replace the thermal paste on the led pcb and also add some to the inside of the heatsink ring so heat can transfer better.

    Since you guys sound interested, I will follow up.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Cat-man-do's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    5,211
    Quote Originally Posted by dobbs View Post
    .... Then I ran it on the 50% setting most of the time, which is more than enough light. It did reduce power twice, but that's a lot better than the last time I was out.

    I figured out how to remove the end caps with spread open needle nose pliers and I plan to replace the thermal paste on the led pcb and also add some to the inside of the heatsink ring so heat can transfer better.

    Since you guys sound interested, I will follow up.
    Let us know how well it does once you mod the heat sink.

    Find Bruce said:
    I'm surprised Cat - given your previous experience I thought you might have suggested water cooling.
    Bruce: That idea has already been talked about on forum as has fan cooling. No one has built a water cooled light but someone DID build a fan cooled light. I thought CO*2 cooling was a novel idea as it requires no power source. (** and for the truly skilled, an adaption using CO*2 air cartridges would be interesting ) Keep in mind folks this is just an idea in passing for the DIY'ers who like to try ( or hear about ) new original ideas. Personally I have no need for such a light but if I lived in a desert I would consider it if I had no other options. It wouldn't have to look good - just work. ....Yes, I know Bruce, you were just being funny. Once again, if I had to ride it that kind of heat it would likely kill me anyway.

    MrMole said:
    I also live in the Phoenix area and run a BikeRay IV on the bars and a MS808e on my helmet. So far the BR IV has worked perfectly (although I wouldn't know otherwise unless it just quit) with one exception. I tried running both lights on the bar with a y connector and one Goeman 6ah battery and both battery life indicators turned red and the thermal monitoring on the 808 head kicked in. Everything went back to normal when I turned one of the lights off...
    Glad to hear the Bikeray IV can handle the heat. Not much rain out that way so you should be good.
    Yeah, it doesn't surprise me that the 6.0 battery would have problems running both lights. Did you try using the original Bikeray battery with the Y-connector? You might have to go with a 6-cell battery.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,116
    Hi Dobbs,
    I've been thinking about your lights problem and I think if I were you I'd return it for a new head before you try modifying it. Maybe there's something wrong with the thermal monitor in your light. I know several people who ride T100 with dual 808e's
    on single speeds (which keeps the speeds low) and between us I'm the only one who's had the termal monitor kick down the light (the y-cable thing). My BR IV (which I always run on high) at least has the same emitters as yor 872 and runs cooler to the touch than
    than my 808e. Maybe your thermal monitor is just kicking in too soon. Anyway you shouldn't have to run your light at 50% power to get it to work right! Good luck.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Cat-man-do's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    5,211
    Quote Originally Posted by MRMOLE View Post
    ....My BR IV (which I always run on high) at least has the same emitters as yor 872 and runs cooler to the touch than
    than my 808e. Maybe your thermal monitor is just kicking in too soon. Anyway you shouldn't have to run your light at 50% power to get it to work right! Good luck.
    Judging from the MS 872 review done by Dominik the 872 is built quite differently from the Bikeray IV. The heat sink on the BR IV is connected directly to the outer shell while the MS 872 uses some sort of sleeve assembly. That being the case I'm not sure how well the heat is transferring to the outer shell of the MS. Plus the MS 872 is using Cree XP-G's vs. the BR IV's use of the Philips/Luxeon Rebel ES emitters. XPG emitters get very hot. The Rebel ES emitters have different thermal characteristics that enable them to handle heat a little better. This might give the BR IV a better performance edge in a warmer environment. Of course something could be wrong with the light that Dobbs has but we can't really know for sure unless there are other 872's to compare it to in the same environment.

  45. #45
    recovering roadie
    Reputation: dobbs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    561
    OK, so my follow up after a few more rides with the mj-872 is positive. I dismantled the light head and added some high quality thermal paste to the back of the LED pcb that contacts the metal frame. Then I slid the heat fin "ring" as far back as a I could without having the remove the wires. (The dude that completely took it part for the review above removed the wires, which allowed complete removal of the ring) Since I wasn't able to access the entire underside of the heat fin ring, I spread some paste around underneath where it would be slid into place for better heat conducting.

    So I then tightened the whole thing back down. In the process I overtightened the front retaining ring and cracked the lens/reflector. Duh. That made me feel dumb. It still worked fine with the cracks and I contacted MagicShine directly and ordered a replacement.

    I have done two night rides in similar heat to my previous rides, unfortunately. I ran the light at the 50% power the entire rides without any power downs for cooling. The light is so good at that level that I would be happy even if it didn't go any higher when it's hot out. I will try higher levels on future rides, but I feel satisfied with the light now. Would I buy it again over a BikeRay 4? Not sure. I wish the BikeRay had more levels besides high and low... That's probably the only thing that would hold me back.

    All this being said, the flood light nature of the light is outstanding. With this light I can clean stuff on my local rocky trails that I wasn't with my previous lights. I will never again ride without a flood type light for mountain biking... I hope.

  46. #46
    recovering roadie
    Reputation: dobbs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    561
    Follow up #2 - I rode last night with the mj-872 and it was way hot. Hotter than the other rides I've done with it - it was 105 on my truck's thermometer when I left at 8:40. I kept the light on 50% for the climbs and 75% for the downhill and faster moving stuff and it was fine. I was also careful to turn it off whenever I stopped, even for a minute.

    I moved it up to 75% on the climb and it did overheat and drop down, but honestly, the 75% is unnecessary on a slow climb. I also set it at 100% for some fast downhills and then turned it down after the downhill. There's not a huge light output difference between 75 and 100.

    To repeat my comments about how nice it is for technical stuff, I cleaned my local 20 minute techy climb last night - something I've done in the day, but never at night before.

    I'd buy it again, though probably from Geoman this time for a few different reasons.

    Happy Trails.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    131
    Cross post from a different thread. Just posted here since the description of the thread is more along the lines of my review.

    This for road-based use:

    First Impressions, more to follow once I get a few rides in:

    I was going to compare along side my preferred helmet light (Dinotte 400L) but I leant it out and could not get it here in time to shoot pics with it. But my experience is that the MS900 dwarfs the 400L in the hotspot and by my eyes is about 2x the light making the 400L more like 300 lumens (assuming the MS900 is around 600)

    I used to MTB but kids and convenience trump my will to ride in the dark on the trail. So what you have here is what I would see most nights (city/suburb surface streets). Take my shots and my opinion with a grain of salt.

    IMHO, road riding demands more, not less light than off-road. Competing car lights, any kind of wet surface, and streetlights severly impeed my ability to ID obsticles and find clean tarmac. Riding on the streets in the rain is especially sketchy as wet road reflect the light and I would guess my usable visible light on the road about 25% of what my lights look like in the dry.

    Camera Settings:
    F4, 100ISO, WB-Sunlight, TV-6sec, apx 38mm focal
    All batteries freshly charged

    Control:


    Romisen
    Romisen RC-KF 3~8V Versatile Cree Flashlight (1x18650/3xAAA/2xCR123) - Free Shipping - DealExtreme
    About 120 lumens


    MS900 on High (apx 600L)


    Two MS900's on High (apx 1200L)


    MS 872 on High (apx 1000L)



    Same setup, but with a different focal length to show the backset beam patterns better
    Apx 16mm focal

    Romisen


    MS900 on High


    Two MS900's on High


    MS-872 on High


    MS872 + MS900 on High


    Overall impressions:

    Build quality on the new light is better by outward appearances. I did not tear it apart to check intermals for swarf. The front lens on the MS872 is plastic so you have to be a bit more careful with it than the MS900's since those are glass.

    The flood is nice, and on the road, I think it near ideal. Yes it throws some light above the horrizon and it may be bright for cars.... but I like the quality of the light. Its very smooth, and lack the rings and dropouts that the MS900 has. Paired with my Dinotte 400L I think I will be quite happy with the M872 alone w/o a paired up MS900. I suppose if I want to be truely annoying I could run all 4 lights and have a theoretical 2500 lumens, but being that they all are cone beams, and have no cutoff for other drivers, I find no reason to run that much light on the road unless perhaps I am in a downpour.

    The hotspot in the center on my MS900 tended to make me focus on just the stuff in that small area... effectively narrowing my vision when in fact I like to keep my perspective as wide as possible. The MS-872 allows me to scan far better which I like. I still want a spot on my head for directional light however....

    Looking at the pics, I would argue that the MS-872 VS dual MS900's (not the XML version) has nearly the same amount of light, just with a different beam pattern/distribution.

    Will report back more once I have a few more rides in.

    Note about the focal length. I think 38mm is closer to what I would see without scanning. Whereas 16mm is never really a realistic on-bike viewing perspective. It was thrown in there to just show beam pattern, as well as where a lot of light is going outside the visisble area on the 38mm shots.

    Cheers to Geoman for their great customer service and wonderful communication. I don't think I will be purchasing a light from any other dealer other than them for the forseeable future.

    -Jeff

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,169


    Quote Originally Posted by znomit View Post
    Perhaps with a tighter optic?
    I was informed this 856 light has the exact same beam pattern (25 degree) as the new 872with clear optic...however due to it's design and slightly larger size (4.6mm larger outer diameter) it has better cooling which is obviously an issue with the 872. Currently it's really a bar mount light and comes with a neat bracket but they are working on an o-ring mount and well..people are creative. Maybe not as spiffy looking as the 872 but I'm fine with that if it cools better and doesn't overheat. Thoughts....

    Anyone have any feedback on the new MS 5.6ah battery pack with Samsung cells? Basic hard case with no back lit display...fine by me.
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  49. #49
    Got a suspension fork
    Reputation: randyharris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,434
    Quote Originally Posted by skidad View Post




    I was informed this 856 light has the exact same beam pattern (25 degree) as the new 872with clear optic...however due to it's design and slightly larger size (4.6mm larger outer diameter) it has better cooling which is obviously an issue with the 872. Currently it's really a bar mount light and comes with a neat bracket but they are working on an o-ring mount and well..people are creative. Maybe not as spiffy looking as the 872 but I'm fine with that if it cools better and doesn't overheat. Thoughts....

    Anyone have any feedback on the new MS 5.6ah battery pack with Samsung cells? Basic hard case with no back lit display...fine by me.
    I actually find this version to look better than the 872 and it appears to have far better cooling from the light head.

    Ironically I don't like the look of the mount at all.

    In the eye of the beholder right.
    ONE SHOX, ONE GEAR, LOTS of FUN! www.TrailFu.com My Rides

  50. #50
    www.airbornemtb.org
    Reputation: nick d's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    333
    Quote Originally Posted by randyharris View Post
    I actually find this version to look better than the 872 and it appears to have far better cooling from the light head.

    Ironically I don't like the look of the mount at all.

    In the eye of the beholder right.
    i think that lighthead with an oring mount would be perfect
    Quote Originally Posted by HamfisT
    I understand that engineering has value in and of itself. But in the end, it's still just a pile of aluminum tubes.

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Review & dissection of magicshine battery mj-828
    By find_bruce in forum Lights and Night Riding
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-08-2012, 11:21 PM
  2. Magicshine 2300 Combo Review.
    By twowheelsdown2002 in forum Lights and Night Riding
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-17-2010, 02:20 PM
  3. Magicshine Lights Review (MJ-808 and MJ-816)
    By lticew in forum Lights and Night Riding
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-20-2010, 08:25 PM
  4. MTBR 2010 Magicshine MJ-808 review
    By The Singletrack Store in forum Lights and Night Riding
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-03-2009, 02:01 PM
  5. quick Magicshine review
    By beastwood9 in forum Lights and Night Riding
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 11-21-2009, 04:38 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
  •