My friends hello from USA TM 39Nitecore beautiful torch. Manker, MK, 35. -11 beautiful very powerful light. 6000 lm 1, million Candela, 2000 m in. I have these lights along with the L8/L7/3×21D. Last but not least, which I just received.Thrunite TN 42V2 monster thrower. This light runs on4 21700 Molicel🔦💪.
@@dvha79 Thank you will do. I would say in the past 2 1/2 years I must have spent US$4000 in some of my torches. I have many long distance throwers. You must check out if you get a chance the TM 39 from.Nitecore. another very interesting light which throws over 2000 m is that Manker MK35 -11. It runs on four. 18650 Hi drain batteries. it’s pushing 6000 lm which is a tad bit more than the TM 39. The TM 39 has a gorgeous beam and it still has the capabilities of throwing over 1600 m but only pushing out 5200 lens. It’s a beautiful light. It looks like a Ferrari. It has an LED screen on top that lets you know where your battery power is and where your levels are it’s just a work of art but expenses. The newest thrower that I picked up was the.Thrunite TN 42 V2. A monster of a thrower. it runs on four 21700 batteries. it’s pushing 4848 lm. of course this is a 90.2 admit, but all the lights as you know that I had mentioned run on the 90.2. The king of the lights that I have is the K 75 of course.AceBeam 😀 as you know, probably 2500 m at 1 million Candela. But then again Manker is quoting 1 million Candela on the MK 35. Don’t get me wrong I love my 3×21D for the price/L8/L7/4×18 a. Convoy for the price as you know makes an excellent light. You did a really good showing of your lights. I really appreciate that. Great show my friend I applaud you.
@@jlappin6277 Thank you for sharing about the TM39, as soon as you mentioned it I had to look for detailed information on the internet to see what it was like. I have to admit that it is very cool, the parameters announced by the company seem to be a bit modest, while some reviews point out that it actually has a greater throw distance than just announced. That's great, maybe I will consider this TM39 more carefully. Currently I'm focusing on the Lumitop GT110 that I just received, I will have a review clip about it soon. Thank you, a true expert in long throw flashlights 👍😁
You’re welcome believe me the two lights that you really should be looking at is the TM 39 and the manker MK35 -11 they are exquisite and not as large as you would think.🤔 I signed up to watch your channel. Good luck looking forward to seeing some of your shows.👍👍
As I said, we clearly see that the parameters of this new model flashlight do not reflect reality and do not meet the reference theoretical values. They just exaggerated the values in the advertising parameters. We see that the equivalent flashlights in the video have a slightly narrower hotspot than this, for example the L8 seems to have a slightly longer range than this model. What do you say about this, please share your experiences with us, my dear friend.
As you guessed, the company was too exaggerated when announcing the technical specifications of this flashlight (Mateminco MT001 and Astrolux EC01X). Through actual comparison of the light of the MT001 with the Convoy L8 and Astrolux FT03S, the MT001 loses to the Convoy L8 in both brightness and distance, it is only slightly better than the Astrolux FT03S. Convoy L8 installs a 26980 battery with very high discharge current, while Astrolux FT03S also installs a 26800 high discharge battery (CDR 25A). In addition, on the Astrolux FT03, I also replaced the pair of power wires for the SBT90.2 LED chip inside the flashlight from a pair of 20AWG wires with a pair of 18AWG wires with a larger copper core diameter and high conductivity. than. The light of the Astrolux FT03S is also much stronger than the original.
According to my assessment, the light parameters of the MT001 (EC01X) in terms of light intensity are only about 6000lm or maybe lower, the beam range is only about 1300-1400m. This parameter is very different from the company's announcement. Regarding light intensity, the actual parameter is only 6000lm or less, which is reasonable, the performance will be better and cooler than the company's announced parameter of 6800lm. Regarding the long range, ever since the company announced it, I believed that it could not actually reach 3065m, so I did not feel disappointed. The MT001 also has many strong points such as a large capacity battery of 32000mAh, it will be very comfortable to use, no need to worry about carrying a spare battery, integrated PD 12V2A and 9V2A fast charging standard, reverse charging for the phone as well. PD 9V2A fast charging standard. Very good finish, waterproof coating. The flashlight head size is only 69mm so it will be convenient for some people to use at work. Above is my review of this MT001 (EC01X). Thank you for your comments
thanks for all information, if you want the better performance but still decent battery capacity i think the best solution is convoy 3x21d, what do you think about that one?@@dvha79
Convoy with the 26980 wins this competition in every aspect. If you get a chance, you should try out the Manker MK 35.-11 it is an amazing light just a little pricey. It’s capabilities of throwing 2000 m at 6000 lm is pretty amazing. My K 75 2.0 is the real heavy hitter of the bunch at 2500 m. Another nice light my friend is the Nitecore TM, 39 beautiful torch, but very pricey. That is my favorite, although it does not throw quite as far as the my AceBeam K75 2.0. Another nice thrower is the.Thrunite TN 42V2. This is another one of my favorites it runs on 4 21700 it’s a monster 🔦💪
@@jlappin6277 Thank you for visiting and commenting, I'm very happy and hope you will regularly share your opinions about the flashlights I post on my youtube account. I'm also using the Manker MK35-II and I've also posted a review clip about it here. I have to admit it is a great flashlight, with excellent performance. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-JkI4ayBT_mo.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-zDSzHElJUV0.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hcosby5YXjE.html
There is often a discrepancy between the specs and real life because the specs often refer to LED chip maximums. Even when the specs refer to the LED - driver combination, the numbers are still higher than real because driver maximums are achieved at higher voltage and discharge current than realized in a flashlight. A lot of manufacturers do not explicitly make these distinctions in the published specs for marketing purposes. I am not making excuses on Mateminco’s part, just explaining.
