Electronics, Lighting, & Gadgets - Coleman Max

Did we ever decide if the Coleman max available at Wal-Mart was ok as a main headlight? Will it allow for vison of the road at commuter speeds?

I just bought a Coleman Max Cree 2AA one week ago. I like it. It puts a decent amount of light on the road, but I wouldn't go too fast with just one. Small animals (rabbits mostly) can still be a pain, but otherwise I'm quite satisfied. Totally beats the *old CatEye HL500 it replaced!

I still have yet to: 1. Determine runtime with rechargeable batteries 2. Get out in some real country darkness and 3. See if rain/snow has any negative effects on the overall performance.

Online shopping is a rather major hassle for me so being able to walk in to a B&M store with ~$25 and come out with a ~100 lumen light :thumb:

Did we ever decide if the Coleman max available at Wal-Mart was ok as a main headlight? Will it allow for vison of the road at commuter speeds?

Definte "commuter speeds" (some of us are slower than others :o) and how well-lit are the roads you're on? I'd recommend at least two if you're moving at a good clip.

let's say 8-15 mph.

Personally, I'd still prefer two, but one should suffice. This will give you an idea (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=441808) how a Coleman looks on the roadway. Hope that helps!

Any major diff. in the AA and AAA models? The AAA says longer last time with the same lumens. any perceivable difference?

the AAA will not last as long as the AA, just not enough juice in the tiny cell. Also, they are direct drive (meaning the light will gradually get dim over time) where the AA uses a boost circuit, so it'll hold it's brightness a little better over time, fading towards the end.

They claim a longer runtime with the AAA because they rate it until it's nearly dead, but it's less than useful far sooner than that.

I was in WallyWorld today & looked at the Coleman flashlights, they had the 2AA & 3AAA versions- and almost no other flashlights at all! Looks like Hurricane Ike sold lotsa flashlights for 'em.

In theory, with All Else Equal, a larger reflector should be able to produce a better light(no guarantee it will though!). I don't know what practical difference it may make- but held side by side, it's easy to see that the 3AAA version has a larger diameter reflector & lens than the 2AA model. FYI.

I was in WallyWorld today & looked at the Coleman flashlights, they had the 2AA & 3AAA versions- and almost no other flashlights at all! Looks like Hurricane Ike sold lotsa flashlights for 'em.

In theory, with All Else Equal, a larger reflector should be able to produce a better light(no guarantee it will though!). I don't know what practical difference it may make- but held side by side, it's easy to see that the 3AAA version has a larger diameter reflector & lens than the 2AA model. FYI.

I saw those last night. I think the 3 AAA light has three colors, white, red and blue hence the bigger head? Does it take three leds to produce three colors?

I think there are *Two* models of Coleman Max 3-AAA flashlight- one that has 3 colors, & another that's just plain white light. The 3-AAA lights I saw were all one-color(white) light output, definitely had a bigger head/reflector/lens than the 2-AA light.

Do not equate reflector / lens size to the adequacy or brightness of a light. It's all about the emitter and the power driving it.

The MAX 3AAA and 2AA use the same emitters, so that's a gimme. The only reason the 3AAA's reflector is bigger is because 3AAA cells are physically wider than a AA, so the body has to be wider. :innocent:

The 2AA uses a boost circuit to push a 3v power system up to the 3-4ish volts needed to drive the emitter. The 3AAA starts at 4.5v, resistored down to the same 3-4ish volts. Now, the 2AA's boost circuit (being cheap) isn't terribly efficient, so it won't quite reach the same peak voltage that the 3AAA is being resistored (very cheap, but easy) to. So the 3AAA may be brighter than the 2AA with brand new batteries.

BUT (and this is a big but :lol:) with alkaline batteries, from the moment you turn the switch on, the cells slowly lose voltage. Thus, as long as the light is on, it gets gradually dimmer and dimmer. Meanwhile, the boost circuit on the 2AA tries to push the same voltage as the AA cells draw down, so it will hold it's brightness relatively even for a while before giving out.

So, for alkaline batteries, while the 3AAA may be brighter at first, it gradually dims, so the 2AA is essentially brighter after a short while. (like 10-20 minutes I'd guess) It will also hold this brightness longer, while the 3AAA keeps getting dimmer.

"Now, what about NiMH or Lithiums?" you may ask.

It's true, the NiMH and (especially) Lithium batteries do not have the same "constant decrease" that alkalines do. So you can circumvent some of this dimming by using batteries of that type. However, you then run into the second problem. The battery capacity of a AAA cell is much smaller than a AA cell. (a difference of about 2.5x for batteries of the same chemistry) That means those 3 AAA's have almost the same power capacity as just one of the two AA's in the other light.

Does that make 3AAA lights worthless? Nope. They're economical (resistors are way cheaper than boost circuits) and for "typical" flashlight use (i.e. a few minutes at a time) it's not really noticable. Especially if you're using rechargables that you can keep topped off. It also means that you have a loooong transition time between the light being bright and uselessly dim so you have ample time to decide to switch batteries. Regulated lights, by nature, give up the boost closer to when the cells are exhausted. Depending on the light/circuit this can mean that the light grows dim rapidly over the last 20-30 minutes, or it may blink out completely. This can happen, for example, with the MiniMAG 2AA LED light, it blinks out suddenly as the batteries die and the light falls out of regulation.

However, for this type of usage (i.e. bike rides tend to need lights longer than a few minutes at a time) I can't really recommend 3AAA type lights.

"Do not equate reflector / lens size to the adequacy or brightness of a light. It's all about the emitter and the power driving it.

The MAX 3AAA and 2AA use the same emitters, so that's a gimme. The only reason the 3AAA's reflector is bigger is because 3AAA cells are physically wider than a AA, so the body has to be wider."

I understand all that- like I said above, only means anything if All Else Is Equal, and the different circuitry inside certainly kills that.;) And BTW- yes it's certainly practical to make a larger head for a larger diameter body. But they *could* use the same size reflector & lens as the 2AA model in the larger 3AAA head. It would look kinda goofy though, & customers might wonder why all that frontal area was going to waste!:D

I don't own either one, suspect that either the 2AA or 3AAA Coleman would be OK for me, & would strongly tend toward the 2AA model myself, simply because a AA cell has a lot more total power(figure VmAH) than a AAA, & batts cost the same. (Must admit though since I rarely use a flashlight for more than a few minutes, the 3AAA would probably be just as good for me- though a little more expensive to feed.)

I'm new to all this super-duper flashlight business. I *do* have a Lowe's Task Force 2-C cell light(actually 2 of 'em, one still sealed in package), Cree model. About it, I can only say- Wow! Sure beats my old genuine 2-C Official Cub Scout flashlight.(I killed it in the name of Super-Bright Flashlight Experimentation , year was probably 1962! :o But that, as they say, is another story.)

Do not equate reflector / lens size to the adequacy or brightness of a light. It's all about the emitter and the power driving it.

Reflector size can have a profound impact, actually. Here's a sample, an underexposed shot showing the hotspot of a MRV SideKick (fairly big reflector) and a Fenix L2D Q5 (fairly small reflector). They both use Cree Q5 emitters. Output's not identical, but I think the photo still illustrates the point: reflector size & design is muy importante.

http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff237/mechBgon/LumaPower_MRV_SideKick/mrv_versus_fenix_l2dq5.jpg
MRV SK Q5 on left, Fenix L2D Q5 on right

A couple other factors that can come into play: the lens (is it high-transmission antireflective glass, or is it just "glass?" Or is it plastic?) and the reflector's surface (orange-peel texture, versus smooth). You can lose 10% of your output in the lens/optic, and you can lose 50% of your hotspot intensity with a textured reflector (although the beam will be smoother and more evenly-lit elsewhere). My MRV SK is an example of where you could literally lose half the hotspot intensity depending which reflector you use (fortunately, it came with both).

Bear in mind you're comparing two different lights by two different manufacturers. One that is using (I'm assuming, since it can take a variety of cells) 2 CR123's driving the Cree much harder (280 lumens estimated at emitter) vs one that's using 2 AA's driving the emitter at a much lower 107 lumens. (180 if you had it on turbo). Granted, different manufacturers have differing opinions of how "bright" their lights are, but neither Lumapower or Fenix are known to overinflate their values, so I think they're a pretty fair comparison. In this case, it would appear the Fenix circuit is either less efficient (after all the Lumapower is much more expensive) or it's designed to sacrifice some brightness for better runtime on limited cell capacity.

In this case, the power circuit is also playing a role in perceived brightness. Yes, the Lumapower also has a tighter beam, but it's not the only factor in play here. And in the grand scheme of things (imho) it's a relatively small factor. A Lux1 with a huge head will be hard pressed to outshine a Cree with a small reflector.

If you were to ask me, the factors that play into how "bright" a light is, in order of impact

1) Emitter
2) Power system (circuit, batteries, etc)
3) Optics (lens or reflector design)

In the context of this thread, my opinion was regarding two lights made by the same manufacturer, in the same product line. In that case, I believe that the variation in reflector size will not make a significant impact on which light is "better" vs other factors (circuit, cell capacity,etc)

I will grant you, however, that in the context of beam pattern on the road, the role of optics/reflector design is absolutely #1. The Task Force 2C has a wonderfully tight beam, able to penetrate deep into the darkness. But as a bike headlight it creates a small terribly bright spot that makes it difficult to see the road anywhere but within that spot. Not ideal for a headlight (at least by itself - it works marvelously when coupled with a 2nd broader beam) By the same token, a light with an overly "floody" beam may waste a lot of energy and not get it all on the road. The P7 lights can be plagued by this. Wonderfully bright pointed low down on the road, but you're limited with how far you can see because the light is so floody - at least not without blinding everyone you come across.

Bear in mind you're comparing two different lights by two different manufacturers. One that is using (I'm assuming, since it can take a variety of cells) 2 CR123's driving the Cree much harder (280 lumens estimated at emitter) vs one that's using 2 AA's driving the emitter at a much lower 107 lumens. (180 if you had it on turbo).

Actually the MRV SK is using 18650s and is closer to the Fenix's output than you realize (yes, the Fenix is on Turbo there). Also, that photo was shot with a partially-charged 18650. So the lumen outputs are close enough to make the point that we both agree on: reflector/optic design has a tremendous impact, and size/depth of the reflector is very relevant.



Granted, different manufacturers have differing opinions of how "bright" their lights are, but neither Lumapower or Fenix are known to overinflate their values, so I think they're a pretty fair comparison. In this case, it would appear the Fenix circuit is either less efficient (after all the Lumapower is much more expensive) or it's designed to sacrifice some brightness for better runtime on limited cell capacity.

I think they're similar in actual lumen output here, the large reflector of the MRV is simply capable of wrapping around more of it and getting it where it's intended to go. If I used RCR123s then the MRV could hit 280 at the emitter, but as it is, I believe I'm showing you about 200.



I will grant you, however, that in the context of beam pattern on the road, the role of optics/reflector design is absolutely #1. The Task Force 2C has a wonderfully tight beam, able to penetrate deep into the darkness. But as a bike headlight it creates a small terribly bright spot that makes it difficult to see the road anywhere but within that spot. Not ideal for a headlight (at least by itself - it works marvelously when coupled with a 2nd broader beam) By the same token, a light with an overly "floody" beam may waste a lot of energy and not get it all on the road. The P7 lights can be plagued by this. Wonderfully bright pointed low down on the road, but you're limited with how far you can see because the light is so floody - at least not without blinding everyone you come across.

I agree that there's not a "best" beam pattern, it depends what you want. I happen to want to see WAAYYYY down the road on my highway commuting runs, which means I like having one or two lights like the MRV to supplement whatever's illuminating the immediate foreground (a DiNotte 600L, in my case). If I were off-roading, the MRV would only be useful as a helmet light, because that tight hotspot would be flyin' all over the place if the light were on the bike itself :)

http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff237/mechBgon/022.jpg

Bought the max. t is a huge step up from the cluster light I was using. I think it wil do me fine. I won't have much true dark riding just some early morning things and hopefully it will give me plenty of be seen light and a little vision of my own also.