Problems with Fenix HL60R

[Caveman Ken]

I bought a Fenix HL 60R ten weeks ago.

I didn't get to use it until January this year. I have used it on about 6 trips. I am a little disappointed, although it is bright enough the light doesn't last anything near as long as it says on the box.

I use it on what they call 'mid' on the box. This is the third level of the five available. I noticed it drops down to level 1 quite quickly and doesn't last a complete (4hour) trip.

I did a test at home and after 2hr and 45min it drops from mid to low and then 5 mins later to eco.

On the box Fenix claim 10 hours on mid. and 29hr on low (level 2).

I have been charging the battery with a good quality charger which shows me that it has been delivering close to 2600mAh to the battery. Which is the rating shown.

I contacted the UK supplier who said that is probably because I keep changing the brightness level.
I do occasionally turn it up brighter to look up an aven or to light a scene for a photo.
They actually said: " Basically, the run time is how long it takes to drop from the quoted output down to 10% of that figure.
As most lights have a gradual decrease in the output if at any point the light is rotated through its output levels this will reset the light back to the initial power output (in your case 150 lumens) and this will have a consequently negative effect on the run time."
I think they are saying "you have to leave it on one brightness, or it will not last as long as you expect"
Not a very good situation in my opinion.
Anyone else have experience with this lamp?

 

[Brains]

My first thought would be the battery is broken...

 

[PeteHall]

I don't think this probably has anything to do with your battery, or switching between levels.

I think this is almost certainly a case of mis-representation of run times by Fenix.

See https://ukcaving.com/board/index.php?topic=26640.0 and https://ukcaving.com/board/index.php?topic=27501.0 for previous discussion on the topic.

I know a lot of people rate Fenix lights, but personally, I avoid them on the basis of their mis-representation of run times. I'd rather pay a bit more and support an honest business.

 

[royfellows]

I tend to agree with Peter.
What is the output on "mid" please?
Do we know what the emitter is?

From this we should be able to calculate actual run time from emitter data sheet and the stated battery capacity.

 

[snebbit]

I'd definitely say the battery, I scrimped on batteries when I had my HL60 and run times were similarly disappointing. But paying a few extra quid for a name-brand 18650 rather than the cheapest one from China I could find on ebay, the runtime did increase dramatically. Just because the battery says it's 2600mAh, doesn't mean that cheap anonymous manufacturer is ever planning to be held to account for it.

Although, as others have reported, it still never quite came close to the quoted runtimes, even with a good battery.

 

[MarkS]

I have been charging the battery with a good quality charger which shows me that it has been delivering close to 2600mAh to the battery. Which is the rating shown.

Just to add to snebbit's comment, the energy that goes into a battery doesn't necessary correspond to the energy it can store. If your charger says it has put in 2600 mAh, it doesn't mean you'll get the same out when you discharge it.

 

[Benfool]

2600mAh is also pretty low capacity for an 18650 these days. The highest capacity ones are usually around the 3500mAh mark.

Make sure you buy brands like Sony, LG, Panasonic or Sanyo. Avoid anything with the word Fire in it (assuming you don't want to set fire to your house).

Also use a reputable seller as there are many counterfeits around, my recommendation would be either 18650.uk or ecoluxshopdirect.co.uk

B

 

[royfellows]

So its a loose battery then, I didn't know this.

I therfore think you may have your culprit. As others say, buy a quality battery of high capacity. They are generally re wraps of the sanyo OEM cells I use.

 

[Ian Ball]

From listening to the company and the battery explanation I think I have managed to come to the conclusion that I won't be buying a Fenix.

 

[andrewmcleod]

It would be interesting to know if the ANSI test for flashlight runtimes - i.e. '4 hours at 400lm' means '400lm to start with, 40lm at the end, even if it ramps from 400lm to 40lm after 1 minute and stays there' would actually survive in a UK court...

A good 18650 battery and lamp should be able to give you 200 lumens or so for about 6 hours I think? (guessing from Roy's lamps doing 12 hours off about 200lm with two cells, although I could be misremembering)

 

[aricooperdavis]

For those with android phones and more time on their hands than they should, there is a makeshift app "ceilingbounce" with which you can roughly produce your own brightness/runtime curves using the light sensor on your mobile phone and a DIY integrating sphere (a shoebox lined with white paper) which you calibrate with known brightness sources. I've yet to try it out but will give it a go overnight tonight to see how it performs.

 

[ZombieCake]

I'm not sure any of the main mass market makers e.g. Fenix, Nitecore, Petzl, Olight, etc. etc. are particularly covered in glory when it comes to advertising.  Still they are better than the outrageous claims of the no-name Chinese brands and their massive lumens and fictional 9800mAh batteries!
Fenix say what tests they use
https://www.myfenix.co.uk/ansi-testing
Nitecore say the same
https://www.nitecorelights.com/pages/ansi-nema-fl-1-guide
I suppose the question is deciphering the tests.  Seem that with all makers they start bright and then drop off.  I've both Fenix and Nitecore lights among others and they're both OK, just take the marketing of all makes with a reasonable pinch of salt

This person has done some interesting tests on torch claims, although I couldn't find one on the head torches. Table at 13m 25 is interesting

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CvTJJgAMC8

 

[andrewmcleod]

Petzl used to be better, and most of their headlights had constant lighting (i.e. 50 lm for 4 hours meant it stayed at 50 lm for 4 hours) but sadly have switched to the ANSI method (presumably in order to compete with Fenix etc.)

 

[royfellows]

The video is something of an eye opener.

My pocket light is a Convoy shell from FastTech with a Cree XPG2 driven by 4 X 7135 linear chips bought as a complete PCB, FT again. Battery is a Sanyo 18650.
I remove the reverse polarity protection diode as I credit myself with not fitting the battery in backwards.

Its about 3 or 4 hundred lumens and seems to bear up well. Just single mode and no flashes. I have about 6 of them. Simple and they work.

 

[Fulk]

I?ve had no experience of the Fenix HL60R, but for what it?s worth I have a Fenix HL55, which is a forerunner of the HL60R, looks pretty much the same and has a similar specification. Spec according to Fenix (using 2600-mAh battery):

                Eco       Low     Mid       High       Turbo
HL60R Lumens 5       50     150       400       950
        Run time 100 hr    29 hr     10 hr       3 hr       48 min
HL55         Lumens 10       55     165       420       900
        Run time 150 hr      30 hr     10 hr       3.75 hr      ?Burst? mode only

One might infer, I guess, that the actual performance of the HL60R would be similar to that of the HL55.

I tested the HL55 with a 3500-mAh battery, and found that on the ?mid? setting it gave 9 hours of good light and that on the ?high? setting it lasted 3 hours, from which one might deduce that using a 2600-mAh battery the run times would be ~6.7 hours and 2.2 hours, respectively ? obviously disappointing by comparison with Fenix?s claims . . . but better that the 2 hr 45 min mentioned above.

Sorry, I can't get the columns to align properly . . . . they looked OK when I previewed it!

 

[Steve Clark]

I run a HM65R on a 3500mAh fenix branded cell and I've had that running out / changing mode / flashing on trips ~4hrs running on mid-flood, with the spot off. I use the spot occasionally on 'turbo' to look up and don't always remember to turn it off. I guess that does it.

I've recently got some BAK 3000mAh 18650 cells off ebay (button top, protected) for about ?6 (vs. ?20 for the branded fenix). They seem to work ok, but they are wrapped with a slightly larger diameter shrink wrap and are quite tight to extract from the lamp head.

 

[royfellows]

I have just done a very rough calc "second guessing" a Cree XP-L on average figures and got 7.8 hours on the mid, 150 lumens. using the 2600 cell capacity figure, allowing 10% inefficiency. This is, a very rough, 'ball park' calc.

I think as I have said, although the run time is overstated the real culprit is the battery.

 

[Bucket]

I run an HL55 with an Ansmann 2500 mAh battery.  We spent 14 hours in Aggy the other week and the light was still going strong - it was generally on settings 2 and 3 out of 5.  That ties in with the data posted by Fulk.

To get 3 hours from level 3 (instead of 10) suggests that your real battery capacity is just 1/3 of the rated value.  It sounds ok for 'dig night' but not a propoer trip.  I reckon you should try it with a better quality battery...

 

[topcat]

I'm very happy with the HL55, sounds like Fenix should have quit whilst they were ahead....

 

[Stuart France]

I?m look at a well-known lamp manufacturer?s website.  They?re claiming 200 lumens for 34 hours from two Li-ion 21700 batteries (the 5000mAh fat ones) for their lamp product.  Is that credible?

A runtime prediction depends on some assumptions you might make.  Let?s suppose the LED outputs 200 lumens per watt which is achievable with good heat sink and the best modern components and a super-efficient power supply, say 90%.

So the lamp setting is 1 watt (divide lumens by lumens per watt).  The battery is in effect 10Ah at an average of 3.75 volts during its discharge profile which is assumed to be the straight downhill ramp kind.  So one battery cycle delivers 37.5 watt-hours in theory, but allowing for only 90% conversion efficiency that becomes 33.75 instead, then divide that by the 1 watt load, and the runtime comes out at 33.75 hours which is pretty close to the 34 hours claimed.

So yes, it is credible, assuming the assumptions about quality hold true, and my maths is good, and honestly I didn't "fix up" this calculation - the figures above are the initial result I got from my lamp spreadsheet.

The proof is in the pudding, and I've just bought the said lamp, so I'll report back in due course... what I know for sure is that my old lamp's performance depends very much on using modern leading brand Li-ion batteries and not cheapy old ones.