For the output geeks it’s worth noting the i3E EOS can run on 10440’s as well. Be advised I blew out one light but the next one runs fine. It cost me $10 to find out. 🤷♂️ On Amazon I can’t discern if the i3t is a current or original version. I assume it’s the latest offering.
Ehhh I don't think they're throttling it. If anything they may have used a different part in the new flashlight that just looks different by chance not on purpose.
Perhaps a battery life test could show something interesting. If it’s regulated or using a different emitter, I’d think there would be a noticeable difference. If for some reason battery life is significantly more, then I personally wouldn’t think the change to be bad.
Nerfed? The key word is product liability! They made sure the i3T doesn't get too hot when used with a 3.7V rechargeable battery instead of a 1.5V AAA. My guess is that this only worked in the first place because Olight decided to use the same electronic components with the i3T and i3T Plus (which needs 2 x AAA at a cumulated 3V). The same goes for the i5T and the i5T Plus.
This could be why a change was made to the i3T, but I wonder why the same wasn’t done to the i5T, as those get quite a bit hotter when using 14500s than the i3Ts do with 10440s.
@@PardonMyEnglish Could be a matter of product life cycle / production road map. Or more issues with i3T (for example because of more units sold / more customers switching to 10440s). Just because they didn't alter the i5T this month, doesn't mean there isn't going to be a similarly altered version of the i5T just over the horizon.
A nerf really sucks because they can actually make money buy selling olight branded 10440's. There also seems to be a color temperature difference between the two.
Buck boost converters will regulate the power of the light better throughout the charge range of the cell, rather than overdriving the emitter. This can also be a factor of a higher Vf LED. A higher Vf will result in less overdriving with the higher voltage of a li-ion cell, and can vary from sample to sample. I don't know if Olight is requesting specific binning with their emitters, but based on the variability of the tint from sample to sample I do not suspect that to be the case, especially in the cheaper lights.
I should expand on this. The Vf (forward voltage) of the emitter is determined at its operating current, say 350mA. It is the voltage that the driver must supply to achieve the desired current. Many white LED emitters are in the 2.8-3.5v range for Vf when binned, which puts them in a difficult place when being driven by a 3.7v (4.2v peak) li-ion cell and will result in a boost converter being overdriven and actually pushing way more than the rated current through the emitter. The Vf of the LED has a direct impact on this, as a lower Vf will result in more overdriving, and thus more output. Many of the more expensive single-cell lights will employ a buck-boost converter that will drop the output voltage of the cell when it is above the Vf of the emitter, and then boost the voltage when it drops below the Vf of the emitter for a more even light output across the cell voltage range, less heat and subsequently longer life of the emitter.
Nice! Hopefully this does have higher Vf. That would explain a lot. I tested the runtimes in my latest video and the “new” i3Ts do have better runtime.
👍👌Yeah disappointing. It looks like it's throttled down somewhat, but still more than the 180lm with AAA batteries. Maybe our friend at Smothered Chrome can run a lumen test sometime?
I have tried LiFePo4 3.2 batteries in the i5T and they worked well with no difference between the older i5Ts and the new. They do get hot quickly though, just as a precaution.
In my opinion Nerfing is a good way to ensure warranty claims are not due to abnormal wear and tear from running hotter batteries. Reduces the amount of claims andd Makes warranty process less complicated. And if i am not mistaken didnt thry change to lifetime warranty on their products? Even more reason to nerf it
My donut i3T does not have memory. If I click on to low, then off, then wait a while, then back on, it comes on at low (like normal, past i3Ts). If I put it on its high setting, then off, then wait, then back on, it is on low. In other words, the UI is the exact same as usual. And I like that personally.
Yeah, I didn’t think the i3T needed a change either in my opinion. The change may have been unintentional, so I may have overreacted but I still prefer the previous iterations.
@Pardon My English It will probably take a little while to run through the old stock. Olight tends to be very conservative on how hot the light will get or how long it will run maxed out. That's probably why they can do a 5-year warranty on most of their flashlights. Other companies will push the limits & get greater output, but it probably comes with a shortened lifespan. I'm just guessing, but heat usually destroys electronic components. That's why, on Anduril 2 systems, you can change the temperature regulation. Set it to go higher before regulation & you will heat up everything in the flashlight, including the battery 🔋. Until they change the laws of physics, extra heat upon electronic components will reduce the lifespan of the flashlight. The way I look at it, I know I'm reducing the potential lifespan of the flashlight, but I paid 20 bucks at most for it. If I get a year or two out of it, I'm happy. My oldest i3t is 3 years old & still going strong. I only started using 14440s in it about a year ago. No problems so far as I don't use high mode for long periods.
For the output geeks it’s worth noting that the i3E eos can also run on 10440’s. Be advised I blew out one but the next one is running fine. Lost $10 to find out. 🤷♂️ How can you know that you’re getting the older model? on Amazon, the I 3T is what it is. I cannot discern whether it’s the model or not but I presume it is the latest model..
@@PardonMyEnglish That's.. actually ideal (for me), I wanted the 5 lumens low on AAA, and the 10440 High 😬 How does the low compared to AAA low? Thanks again for the info 👍🏼
You bet! That’s good. For me, I like to be able to tune the output by selecting particular batteries, so I don’t care for any regulation or throttling. I like to be able to take it to the max output possible if I’d like to, but lately the 3.2v LiFePO4s are my favorite.
The donut version looks fantastic and maybe some will like the fact that it’s a bit safer than the older versions when it comes to using 10440s. In the end, perhaps this is just another option for consumers, which is good. I just wanted to make this video so people can make the most informed decisions. I still love Olight and the i3T using AAAs is still a little beast of a flashlight in my opinion.
During the video I was wondering if you would compare with standard AAA.. you did it at the end 😂 Nice feed back. A good point discovered by Max EDC : donut has a memory mode. New feature may explain output difference with 10440s ? Still a bomb ;-)
True, it could be related to the addition of the memory mode. And yes, I tried to show the differences with the AAA as much as possible. Still a large boost in output using a 10440.
The finish really makes it a "kid's light" - Maybe they wanted to avoid another marketing disaster - like with the Warrior Mini v1? As someone already mentioned, a runtime test would be very interesting - AND: whether the light now perhaps has some kind of low-voltage protection.
@@PardonMyEnglish yeah, you’re probably right. Not many failure points. I think we are supposed to blame the politician representing the side we don’t like..🤣🤣🤣
More than brightness between an old i3T and a new i3T Donut with a 10440 battery, could it be a matter of temperature? Old i3T cooler than new i3T Donut? And now Olight goes and does this 😤 When I had bought some 10440 batteries for you! The difference is amazing hahaha
Yes, the emitter could be a slightly different color temperature but I couldn’t tell, myself. The good news is that this new version might have more runtime and be safer, I suppose. I’ll have to check the runtime difference.
10mm x 44m then throw a 0 in for the hell of it. 10440= 10mm x 44mm Aaa= 10.5mm x 44.5mm People use them interchangeably.. just look for volts. Just don’t use li-socl2 battery’s. They’re 3.7v also
@@PardonMyEnglish The 1st thing that got into my head after purchasing the 2nd i3T was INCONSISTENCY because even the tail button didn't behave the same which is same with the light output. I was disappointed after discovering it. I really like the feel of the tail button on my Black i3T not to mention it is alot brighter too even on ordinary batteries. Must be manufacturing inconsistency that's my guess.
The new ones have better runtime and heat management and the old ones have better output. Here’s another video where I test the runtimes if you’re interested: ua-cam.com/video/ZtzzJTVnXEc/v-deo.html
Most people can tell the difference and here is another look at it: Olight 10440 Output Comparison- i3T 2 vs. i3E vs. i3T (new & old versions) ua-cam.com/video/9llyzk9AyPk/v-deo.html
@@PardonMyEnglish There is a difference in "can tell the difference" and an actual practical difference. The difference in output has no practical impact in the effectiveness of the light. Thanks...and I enjoy your videos.
Safety is a good thing 👍 I still wish the consumer could choose a wider range of output by selecting particular batteries. For anyone looking for the safest option, that’s definitely AAAs.
For the output geeks it’s worth noting the i3E EOS can run on 10440’s as well. Be advised I blew out one light but the next one runs fine. It cost me $10 to find out. 🤷♂️
On Amazon I can’t discern if the i3t is a current or original version. I assume it’s the latest offering.
I have tested it with a 10440 and can confirm, it does still work. At least mine did.
That’s good to hear!
Ehhh I don't think they're throttling it. If anything they may have used a different part in the new flashlight that just looks different by chance not on purpose.
That very well could be the case. Maybe it was an unintentional change. If so, I wish they’d go back to using the old components.
Perhaps a battery life test could show something interesting. If it’s regulated or using a different emitter, I’d think there would be a noticeable difference. If for some reason battery life is significantly more, then I personally wouldn’t think the change to be bad.
Good point! Yes, improved runtime would be worth it depending on how much so I’ll have to check out the runtimes.
Please check run times and update us sir?
Just finished the test and posted pt. 2!
Good vid. I only use the 10440 in my black i3t’s for fear of ruining my special edition i3t’s. But I’m still going to order a doughnut.
That’s a good strategy. The donut looks incredible in my opinion!
Same here man, just in case
Nerfed? The key word is product liability!
They made sure the i3T doesn't get too hot when used with a 3.7V rechargeable battery instead of a 1.5V AAA.
My guess is that this only worked in the first place because Olight decided to use the same electronic components with the i3T and i3T Plus (which needs 2 x AAA at a cumulated 3V). The same goes for the i5T and the i5T Plus.
This could be why a change was made to the i3T, but I wonder why the same wasn’t done to the i5T, as those get quite a bit hotter when using 14500s than the i3Ts do with 10440s.
@@PardonMyEnglish Could be a matter of product life cycle / production road map. Or more issues with i3T (for example because of more units sold / more customers switching to 10440s).
Just because they didn't alter the i5T this month, doesn't mean there isn't going to be a similarly altered version of the i5T just over the horizon.
Same thoughts also. Turbo is great but the light is tiny with a low cap battery. A well regulated output is the way to go.
A nerf really sucks because they can actually make money buy selling olight branded 10440's. There also seems to be a color temperature difference between the two.
Good point and good observation 👍
If it has a buck boost converter in it that is a great upgrade in my opinion.
Sweet! Unfortunately I’m not familiar with what that is.
Buck boost converters will regulate the power of the light better throughout the charge range of the cell, rather than overdriving the emitter.
This can also be a factor of a higher Vf LED. A higher Vf will result in less overdriving with the higher voltage of a li-ion cell, and can vary from sample to sample. I don't know if Olight is requesting specific binning with their emitters, but based on the variability of the tint from sample to sample I do not suspect that to be the case, especially in the cheaper lights.
Great info and thank you for sharing!
I should expand on this.
The Vf (forward voltage) of the emitter is determined at its operating current, say 350mA. It is the voltage that the driver must supply to achieve the desired current. Many white LED emitters are in the 2.8-3.5v range for Vf when binned, which puts them in a difficult place when being driven by a 3.7v (4.2v peak) li-ion cell and will result in a boost converter being overdriven and actually pushing way more than the rated current through the emitter. The Vf of the LED has a direct impact on this, as a lower Vf will result in more overdriving, and thus more output. Many of the more expensive single-cell lights will employ a buck-boost converter that will drop the output voltage of the cell when it is above the Vf of the emitter, and then boost the voltage when it drops below the Vf of the emitter for a more even light output across the cell voltage range, less heat and subsequently longer life of the emitter.
Nice! Hopefully this does have higher Vf. That would explain a lot. I tested the runtimes in my latest video and the “new” i3Ts do have better runtime.
Looks like a little warmer tint to me. I've got one on the way. Told the wife I was ordering it for her. 😉
Interesting, so it may be a different emitter. And yes! I hope you and your wife enjoy this cool design, even if you “borrow” it frequently, haha!
Did that with the plum i5r after I started the odiction
👍👌Yeah disappointing. It looks like it's throttled down somewhat, but still more than the 180lm with AAA batteries. Maybe our friend at Smothered Chrome can run a lumen test sometime?
Yeah that would be cool!
Did anybody try the 14505 battery with the i5T?
The 14505 is 50.3mm long and 3.2V (LiFePo4 cell instead of Li-ion).
I have tried LiFePo4 3.2 batteries in the i5T and they worked well with no difference between the older i5Ts and the new. They do get hot quickly though, just as a precaution.
@@PardonMyEnglish Thanks for the quick reply! 👍
My money would be on the emitter being used in the donut light. Or maybe the bin from the manufacturer?
Good theories!
In my opinion Nerfing is a good way to ensure warranty claims are not due to abnormal wear and tear from running hotter batteries. Reduces the amount of claims andd Makes warranty process less complicated. And if i am not mistaken didnt thry change to lifetime warranty on their products? Even more reason to nerf it
Good point. Plus safety is a good thing, I guess 👍
This is how everything cool goes for me, tried getting a wm2 before the recall and all that but nooo," saftey"......
Just got mine, doesn't seem throttled, acts ok w 10440, no memory either.
That’s encouraging. Maybe only some are that way (?)
@@PardonMyEnglish Does yours have memory? Thanks.
My donut i3T does not have memory. If I click on to low, then off, then wait a while, then back on, it comes on at low (like normal, past i3Ts).
If I put it on its high setting, then off, then wait, then back on, it is on low.
In other words, the UI is the exact same as usual. And I like that personally.
@@PardonMyEnglish Thanks, just got my 2nd donut and tested fine too.
Cool! Do your donut i3Ts remember the high setting after being turned off for a few seconds?
I figured Olight would change it up on the i3T. If they nerf it, the flashlight won't be as good in my opinion.
Yeah, I didn’t think the i3T needed a change either in my opinion. The change may have been unintentional, so I may have overreacted but I still prefer the previous iterations.
@Pardon My English It will probably take a little while to run through the old stock. Olight tends to be very conservative on how hot the light will get or how long it will run maxed out. That's probably why they can do a 5-year warranty on most of their flashlights. Other companies will push the limits & get greater output, but it probably comes with a shortened lifespan. I'm just guessing, but heat usually destroys electronic components. That's why, on Anduril 2 systems, you can change the temperature regulation. Set it to go higher before regulation & you will heat up everything in the flashlight, including the battery 🔋. Until they change the laws of physics, extra heat upon electronic components will reduce the lifespan of the flashlight.
The way I look at it, I know I'm reducing the potential lifespan of the flashlight, but I paid 20 bucks at most for it. If I get a year or two out of it, I'm happy. My oldest i3t is 3 years old & still going strong. I only started using 14440s in it about a year ago. No problems so far as I don't use high mode for long periods.
Good points here. Yes, no issues with mine either.
For the output geeks it’s worth noting that the i3E eos can also run on 10440’s. Be advised I blew out one but the next one is running fine. Lost $10 to find out. 🤷♂️
How can you know that you’re getting the older model? on Amazon, the I 3T is what it is. I cannot discern whether it’s the model or not but I presume it is the latest model..
@@onedirection3510 I think the new one says i3t eos 2 on the flashlight.
Seems like the low is lower and the high is about the same? (on 10440)
I’d say that’s about right. To my eye, the high setting seems slightly decreased but not by too much.
@@PardonMyEnglish That's.. actually ideal (for me), I wanted the 5 lumens low on AAA, and the 10440 High 😬
How does the low compared to AAA low? Thanks again for the info 👍🏼
You bet! That’s good. For me, I like to be able to tune the output by selecting particular batteries, so I don’t care for any regulation or throttling. I like to be able to take it to the max output possible if I’d like to, but lately the 3.2v LiFePO4s are my favorite.
I compare the donut low mode with 10440 to the AAA low at around the 6:35 mark in the video, if that helps.
@@PardonMyEnglish nice thanks, not quite as low, but it's all good. Can't wait to get mine (:
Maybe they using a slightly different led emitter
Good theory! This could definitely be the case.
Thank you for showing this video! I ordered 2 donuts yesterday and probably never gonna order from them again. RIP i3T😭
The donut version looks fantastic and maybe some will like the fact that it’s a bit safer than the older versions when it comes to using 10440s. In the end, perhaps this is just another option for consumers, which is good. I just wanted to make this video so people can make the most informed decisions. I still love Olight and the i3T using AAAs is still a little beast of a flashlight in my opinion.
During the video I was wondering if you would compare with standard AAA.. you did it at the end 😂
Nice feed back. A good point discovered by Max EDC : donut has a memory mode. New feature may explain output difference with 10440s ? Still a bomb ;-)
True, it could be related to the addition of the memory mode. And yes, I tried to show the differences with the AAA as much as possible. Still a large boost in output using a 10440.
@@PardonMyEnglish very good, mine is still on the way :-)
Oddly mine does not have the memory mode
I just checked my donut i3T and it doesn’t have a memory function either. I don’t mind that though since I like the UI as is.
The finish really makes it a "kid's light" - Maybe they wanted to avoid another marketing disaster - like with the Warrior Mini v1?
As someone already mentioned, a runtime test would be very interesting - AND:
whether the light now perhaps has some kind of low-voltage protection.
Perhaps. And yes, those would be great tests!
Desert Olight super sweet to go with all the other desert edc sweet
I agree!
Probably nerfed to reduce warranty replacements. 🤷🏻♂️
Perhaps. I can’t imagine too many i3Ts getting sent back but who knows.
@@PardonMyEnglish yeah, you’re probably right. Not many failure points. I think we are supposed to blame the politician representing the side we don’t like..🤣🤣🤣
That is always the answer 😂
More than brightness between an old i3T and a new i3T Donut with a 10440 battery, could it be a matter of temperature? Old i3T cooler than new i3T Donut? And now Olight goes and does this 😤 When I had bought some 10440 batteries for you! The difference is amazing hahaha
Yes, the emitter could be a slightly different color temperature but I couldn’t tell, myself. The good news is that this new version might have more runtime and be safer, I suppose. I’ll have to check the runtime difference.
10440 is the size. If it’s the same diameter and lengh then they’re 10440
Ah, that’s right. I also don’t think of them as AAA since 3.2v is really high for AAA.
10mm x 44m then throw a 0 in for the hell of it.
10440= 10mm x 44mm
Aaa= 10.5mm x 44.5mm
People use them interchangeably.. just look for volts.
Just don’t use li-socl2 battery’s. They’re 3.7v also
Good to know. I believe that final “0” indicates that the cell is cylindrical if I’m not mistaken.
@@PardonMyEnglish 3.2 isn’t li-ion that’s LiFePO4
@@PardonMyEnglish correct
Maybe it's just manufacturing inconsistency.
Could be. People seem to have had different experiences with this model but I’m not sure.
@@PardonMyEnglish The 1st thing that got into my head after purchasing the 2nd i3T was INCONSISTENCY because even the tail button didn't behave the same which is same with the light output. I was disappointed after discovering it. I really like the feel of the tail button on my Black i3T not to mention it is alot brighter too even on ordinary batteries. Must be manufacturing inconsistency that's my guess.
Oh wow, that’s interesting. I wonder what got changed. I like the older ones better, myself.
@@PardonMyEnglish both my i3Ts were bought on the same year just few months apart. Both were brand new sealed in the box.
What are you talking about...there is almost NO difference in the new and old lights with the 10440. There is NO useable difference in them...geez!
The new ones have better runtime and heat management and the old ones have better output. Here’s another video where I test the runtimes if you’re interested: ua-cam.com/video/ZtzzJTVnXEc/v-deo.html
@@PardonMyEnglish I know...but there is still very little difference in output.
Most people can tell the difference and here is another look at it: Olight 10440 Output Comparison- i3T 2 vs. i3E vs. i3T (new & old versions)
ua-cam.com/video/9llyzk9AyPk/v-deo.html
@@PardonMyEnglish There is a difference in "can tell the difference" and an actual practical difference. The difference in output has no practical impact in the effectiveness of the light. Thanks...and I enjoy your videos.
I respect your opinion 🤜🤛
It’s called safety
Safety is a good thing 👍 I still wish the consumer could choose a wider range of output by selecting particular batteries. For anyone looking for the safest option, that’s definitely AAAs.
Looks like it's time to hoard all the I3ts you can
Yes, once the old versions are gone, they’re gone.
"Nerfed" ??? 🤷♂️
This is just a slang term meaning something got less powerful or made more soft.