SELF-CONTAINED A to Z - Page 2- Mtbr.com
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 201 to 214 of 214
  1. #201
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Cat-man-do's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    6,254
    Quote Originally Posted by MRMOLE View Post
    Unfortunately still no good ride with the Pavo 2400 yet. Last I herd the curfew was supposed to end @ 5am this morning but predicted high winds this evening might keep me off the bike tonight too (). Only actual ride time so far has been 15-20 minutes of pre-curfew semi darkness a couple of nights ago. Beam looks nice and wide but that's about the only valuable comment I can make considering the lighting conditions. Indoor test has been a bit of good and bad (IMO). The light did run a full 3 hrs. in the steady/high mode and while the output did degrade it spent most of the time in the 1300-1400 lumen range, above 1000 lumens till about 2.5 hrs., and didn't dip below 500 lumens till just before 3 hrs. (). Next level down I was expecting a lower but very usable output (which it has) and more consistency (which wasn't as good as what I anticipated). While I'm sure the second highest consistent mode will run over 6 hrs. (I quit test after it dropped below 350 lumenn @ 4.5 hrs.) my 500 lumen lower level output for mtn. biking was only extended to about 4 hrs so not much of an improvement over the high/steady level. Of course beam pattern effectiveness can influence how usable the light is at higher and lower output levels so really need actual ride impressions to solidify my opinion. More to come, hopefully soon!
    Mole
    All things considered it still sounds like good bang for the buck. Hard for any lamp to maintain an output over 2000 lumen unless of course you are using the newer / brighter LED's and have a good size battery. XP-G is just so old school. I'm of the opinion that a lot of the drop in brightness is just due to how the XP-G's react when really driven hard.

    Another possibility to consider is that you /we really don't know if any thing coming from China now is using actual Cree LED's. The Chinese probably have effectively cloned almost every LED that Cree has made ( except perhaps the newer XHP series ). That said the Chinese are also using a lot of the Luminus SST LED's which I'm sure they can likely clone as well.

    Sad to hear about the bad weather your way. Tropical storms can indeed screw things up for a good while. As for the curfew, I read in one of your local news websites that many people in Arizona were just ignoring the state wide curfew. If it had been me I'd of ran that sucker......and then lied if caught...."Curfew?......What Curfew?...I thought that was for the cities....No, it's not?....OMG, I'm sorry officer I'll go right home". Now if you actually live in one of the urban areas of Arizona than maybe that lie wouldn't work but didn't sound like too many people were being arrested for breaking curfew unless they were in one of the trouble spots. Then again I'd likely not be willing to ride if I started seeing a bunch of hooded / masked people walking around with poles, baseball bats or cans of gas.

  2. #202
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,761
    OK, curfew ended yesterday morning and in spite of questionable weather conditions I did go out last night with the Pavo 2400. First 3 miles of the ride had me going straight into a 17mph headwind but the rest of the 30mi. total distance was done at less severe angles and it was still blowing at 14mph when I got home so I did get some tailwind action too. Maybe only used the light for half the ride but it did give me an opportunity to try out the motion mode which I have mixed feelings about. It definitely works so you get the advantage of less power drain when not necessary and less heat buildup with no air flow when stopped but I would say useing the 2nd highest motion mode instead of dimming from 1200 lumens to 600 lumens it goes down to maybe 100 lumens first and then back to the 600 level. It may be picky but it makes it feel like the system could be refined a bit more though it may also be something I would just get used to. Brightness levels react quickly to starting and stopping but I do wish they hadn't combined the flash modes and motion modes on one program. Beam pattern seem pretty good from first impressions. It's nice and wide but doesn't flood the foreground with too much light + has plenty of throw for bar use. Mount holds the light solidly (no beam bounce) but 2 bolt bar clamp systems is a giant PITA to use. For now I need to get some more time using the light and I think I will concentrate on finding an easier to use and adjust mounting system.
    Mole

  3. #203
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,761
    I did my Saturday night 50 miler on my Raleigh SS with the Pavo 2400 on the left of the stem and my Magicshine RN1200 on the right for comparison. Sound a bit unfair and it is if your comparing runtime (Pavo runs about 2x as long) or mounts, cost, and ease of use (RN trounces the Pavo here) but overall light output (other than initial turn on) and beam pattern are surprisingly similar (2 highest modes). The Pavo's floody beam is a tiny bit wider and shines up into the trees higher but is a little softer near the front tire (which I like) but the RN counters with a more pleasing warmer tint so overall visibility ends up being pretty equal. I did learn a bit more about the motion program too. I had been thinking something was wrong with my light because when using the motion program it would sometimes cycle slowly from bright to dim while riding. Playing around with the two lights last night I figured out that it was doing that only when I would switch to the motion program on the fly. So you have to be stopped to activate the motion program (and have it work correctly). I still need to figure a way to measure the output in the motion program though. Visually to me it seems weaker than the steady program which will be disapointing if that is actually the case.
    Mole
    Last edited by MRMOLE; 2 Weeks Ago at 08:41 AM.

  4. #204
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,761
    SELF-CONTAINED A to Z-pavo-2400-rn1200.jpg
    Lifeline Pavo Motion 2400 = Red line / Magicshine RN1200 = Green line
    **click on image to expand!

    In regards to my comments about the Pavo 2400 and RN1200 visual output similarities combining the output vs. runtime curves of the top 2 modes of each light pretty much confirms my visual impressions. Playing around with my meter remotely mounted off the bike I was also able to measure the motion mode by shaking the bars. Unfortunately the results also matched what I noticed visually and instead of being 20% stronger in the motion mode my readings were about 10% weaker than the steady mode at each of the motion settings. So highest output reading I've gotten so far with the Pavo 2400 has been about 1950 lumens but typical to a lot of self-contained lights only for a short time and realistically this ended up being a 1300-1400 lumen light. Much more than that would be too much for me anyway (for bar use) and it has a very nice/effictive floody beam pattern for mtn. biking. Main advantage to this light IMO is its excellent runtimes but with its poor mount, inconsistent mode button, and significantly lower output than claimed for the $139 I paid for it I don't consider it that good of a value.

    In regards to the Magicshine RN1200's performance on the output vs. runtime chart it shows a good example of how far single cell self-contaiiined lights have come. Improved output and runtimes means the RN1200 and other larger battery capacity single cell lights (Bontrager Ion 300, Cygolite Ranger 1400) are a far more attractive/effective option even for more serious riders. In the $125-130 range the Ion and Ranger are fairly expensive but the $75 retail ($50 on ebay if you don't mind waiting longer for shipping) RN1200 is by far the best value in this group (IMO) and should fit almost any budget.
    Mole
    Last edited by MRMOLE; 2 Weeks Ago at 02:59 PM.

  5. #205
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,761

    Ravemen CR1000 - This looks pretty cool!



    I got an e-mail from Bob @ Ravemen alerting me about this new model. 21700 battery (much longer runtimes) and a new lens design for greater throw. Looks like a big improvement over the still sold CR900 so excited to see some rider iimpresions when people start getting their hands on these!
    Mole

    https://www.ravemen.com/product/CR1000.html

    SELF-CONTAINED A to Z-cr1000.jpg

  6. #206
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,761

    Lifeline Pavo Motion 2400 Final Thoughts

    Unfortunately I'm done with this light. I had high hopes from the great review it got on the BikeRadar light comparison video but I don't share their high regards for it. It does work OK but instead of running with lights with twice its claimed output I found that other than for the first 10 or so minutes it was far more comparable to lights with half its claimed output. It has a good beam pattern and excellent runtimes but also considerable heft, an inaccurate mode button, and the mount is such a PITA to use that I always look elsewhere when picking out a light for my rides.
    Mole

    I'm attempting to return this light because it's been so disappointing. It's an international order and the light has been used a couple of times so my expectations aren't too high but also was expensive enough that I'd like to salvage whatever I can from this purchase.
    Last edited by MRMOLE; 4 Days Ago at 01:18 PM.

  7. #207
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,761
    Quote Originally Posted by MRMOLE View Post

    I got an e-mail from Bob @ Ravemen alerting me about this new model. 21700 battery (much longer runtimes) and a new lens design for greater throw. Looks like a big improvement over the still sold CR900 so excited to see some rider iimpresions when people start getting their hands on these!
    Mole

    https://www.ravemen.com/product/CR1000.html

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	CR1000.jpg 
Views:	8 
Size:	120.5 KB 
ID:	1345195
    Looks like Ravemen is sending me a CR1000 to do a review on (Ya and thank you BoB/Ravemen!). Other good news is there is going to be a new US distributor for Ravemen products so all their lights and accessories should be easier to source for US customers.
    Mole

  8. #208
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    118
    Quote Originally Posted by MRMOLE View Post
    I got an e-mail from Bob @ Ravemen alerting me about this new model [CR1000]. 21700 battery (much longer runtimes) and a new lens design for greater throw. Looks like a big improvement
    The shown wallshot look interesting, but for my liking the brightness distribution in that wallshot is still too homogeneous for proper throw at non-blinding adjustment. Would need a lot more brightness just below the cut-off (or a lot less in the rest of the beam)

  9. #209
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,761
    Quote Originally Posted by biking_tg View Post
    The shown wallshot look interesting, but for my liking the brightness distribution in that wallshot is still too homogeneous for proper throw at non-blinding adjustment. Would need a lot more brightness just below the cut-off (or a lot less in the rest of the beam)
    When Ravemen first contacted me about this light they seemed more interested in my opinion of how the CR1000 would work as a bar light for mountain biking so I'm thinking their intention was to make a low glare all-rounder and not a brighter/higher battery capacity replacement for the more cutoff beam style CR900. Beam shape is different so I'm anxious to try it out to see how effective it is.
    Mole

  10. #210
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Cat-man-do's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    6,254
    Quote Originally Posted by MRMOLE View Post
    When Ravemen first contacted me about this light they seemed more interested in my opinion of how the CR1000 would work as a bar light for mountain biking so I'm thinking their intention was to make a low glare all-rounder and not a brighter/higher battery capacity replacement for the more cutoff beam style CR900. Beam shape is different so I'm anxious to try it out to see how effective it is.
    Mole
    To me it looks like they are trying to put more light not only further out but to also limit the brightness of the width portion of the beam pattern. I thought this might make a road lamp that might appeal to those who think the current optics limit the throw ( which it does ). Personally I like the current optic. Works on the road and works on the trail. I might actually think of buying one of the new CR-1000 but I want to see a road beam pattern photo first.

    Now if Raveman does actually find someone to sell their products in the USA I might just go ahead and buy one from them and then return it if it turns out I don't like the beam pattern.

  11. #211
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,761
    Quote Originally Posted by Cat-man-do View Post
    To me it looks like they are trying to put more light not only further out but to also limit the brightness of the width portion of the beam pattern. I thought this might make a road lamp that might appeal to those who think the current optics limit the throw ( which it does ). Personally I like the current optic. Works on the road and works on the trail. I might actually think of buying one of the new CR-1000 but I want to see a road beam pattern photo first.

    Now if Raveman does actually find someone to sell their products in the USA I might just go ahead and buy one from them and then return it if it turns out I don't like the beam pattern.
    CR900 / CR1000
    LR800
    SELF-CONTAINED A to Z-cr900-low-beam.pngSELF-CONTAINED A to Z-20200605_161057.jpgSELF-CONTAINED A to Z-lr800p-1.png

    In the "beamshot dimension" judging only from Ravemen's posted beam shots of the CR900/CR1000/LR800 I too have some reservations about the beam pattern. We'll see what it's like to ride with in the real world.

    Curious if you've ever taken the front of your CR700 apart? As per our off-line conversation I'm wondering if the optic would be switchable since the construction of the 700 and 1000 appear similar.
    Mole

  12. #212
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Cat-man-do's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    6,254
    Quote Originally Posted by MRMOLE View Post
    ...In the "beamshot dimension" judging only from Ravemen's posted beam shots of the CR900/CR1000/LR800 I too have some reservations about the beam pattern. We'll see what it's like to ride with in the real world.

    Curious if you've ever taken the front of your CR700 apart? As per our off-line conversation I'm wondering if the optic would be switchable since the construction of the 700 and 1000 appear similar.
    Mole
    The front part of the CR700 and CR1000 look to be constructed differently from the other CR series lamps. With the others the front easily unscrews and the optic can be removed ( and turned upside down if desired ). With the 700/1000 there is no outer ring to unscrew on the front of the lamp. There looks to be an inner ring on the 700 I own but there is only one very small notch on that ring. Trying to remove that inner ring with only one notch, ...would be very hard to do if not totally impossible.

    The more photos I see of the CR1000's beam pattern the more I'm not liking it. I'd much rather have it with either the optic in the CR-900 or the newer LR800. Too bad they didn't make the optic in the CR-1000 more accessible. If I could switch out the optic I'd likely buy one. I like how on the CR-1000 the second highest mode is 600 lumen. On the CR-900 the second highest mode is 450 lumen. Now I have no problems using that 450 mode on the one I have but having another 150 lumen with roughly the same amount of run time because of the bigger battery in the 1000 would be sweet.

  13. #213
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,761
    Quote Originally Posted by Cat-man-do View Post
    The front part of the CR700 and CR1000 look to be constructed differently from the other CR series lamps. With the others the front easily unscrews and the optic can be removed ( and turned upside down if desired ). With the 700/1000 there is no outer ring to unscrew on the front of the lamp. There looks to be an inner ring on the 700 I own but there is only one very small notch on that ring. Trying to remove that inner ring with only one notch, ...would be very hard to do if not totally impossible.
    I agree but think it wouldn't be too hard to make a tool to fit that. I'll take a look when I get the light but will check with Ravemen first to see if they would be willing to sell the optic (since they wouldn't in the past) before I waste any time on it.


    The more photos I see of the CR1000's beam pattern the more I'm not liking it. I'd much rather have it with either the optic in the CR-900 or the newer LR800. Too bad they didn't make the optic in the CR-1000 more accessible. If I could switch out the optic I'd likely buy one. I like how on the CR-1000 the second highest mode is 600 lumen. On the CR-900 the second highest mode is 450 lumen. Now I have no problems using that 450 mode on the one I have but having another 150 lumen with roughly the same amount of run time because of the bigger battery in the 1000 would be sweet.
    That 600 lumen second level is a nice feature. If your 900 is anything like my LR800 the 450 lumen second level is probably closer to 600 than the 450 rating so will be interesting to see what the CR1000's second level measures out at. I'm also curious how accurate the claimed runtime for that 2nd level is. Dropping to 60% output should just about double the high mode's runtime so either the 2.7 hr. claim is understated or the CR1000 is not particularly good at maintaining its output in the high mode (which is not like the other Ravemen lights I've tested). I'll do runtime vs. output on the two highest modes to see what's correct.
    Mole

  14. #214
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,809
    Quote Originally Posted by MRMOLE View Post
    I agree but think it wouldn't be too hard to make a tool to fit that. ......
    If it turns out that you want a tool for that, I'd be willing to help with that. PM if you want to talk about it.
    GoPro adapters for bike lights http://www.pacifier.com/~kevinb/index.html

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Best Self-contained Tail Light
    By Lugano in forum Lights and Night Riding
    Replies: 201
    Last Post: 06-23-2014, 12:55 AM
  2. DIY (sort of) High Lumen self contained bar lights
    By Fury25 in forum Lights DIY - Do It Yourself
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-01-2012, 04:43 AM
  3. High Lumen self contained bar lights
    By Fury25 in forum Lights and Night Riding
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-01-2012, 04:38 AM
  4. Exposure or Other Self Contained Lights or Not?
    By 80sbmxkid in forum Lights and Night Riding
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 12-06-2011, 01:38 PM
  5. Self-contained, USB charged lights?
    By Crack Monkey in forum Lights and Night Riding
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-22-2011, 01:56 PM

Members who have read this thread: 128

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.