- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- HL18R-T V2.0 vs UT27 MCT Pro
Fenix HL18R-T V2.0 vs Nitecore UT27 MCT Pro
What HL18R-T V2.0 does better (1) and where UT27 MCT Pro wins (3) — every spec side by side.
vs
6.5Brightness & throw7.3
7.3Battery & charging5.6
7.7Build & durability5.0
3.0Light quality5.6
5.9Features5.9
Why is HL18R-T V2.0 better than UT27 MCT Pro?
- Water protection (IPx)IPx8 vs IPx6+33%
Why is UT27 MCT Pro better than HL18R-T V2.0?
- Beam distance (ANSI FL1)125 m vs 167 m+34%
- Peak beam intensity3,910 cd vs 6,970 cd+78%
- Weight103 g vs 74 g+39%
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 800 lm | 800 lm |
| Peak beam intensity | 3,910 cd | 6,970 cd |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | 125 m | 167 m |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| LED & beam | ||
| LED emitter | Luminus SST-25 | — |
| LED maker | Luminus | — |
| Number of LEDs | 2 | — |
| Colour rendering (CRI) | 80 | — |
| Colour temperature | 6,000K | 3,000K |
| Adjustable colour temperature | Yes | Yes |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | AAA | AAA |
| Battery capacity | 1,900 mAh | — |
| Maximum runtime | 160 h | — |
| Rechargeable | Yes | Yes |
| USB-C charging | Yes | Yes |
| Battery level indicator | Yes | Yes |
| Also runs on AA/AAA/CR123A | Yes | Yes |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | — | IP66 |
| Water protection (IPx) | IPx8 | IPx6 |
| Submersible to | 2 m | — |
| Impact resistance (drop) | — | 1 m |
| Body material | Plastic / polymer | — |
| Size & weight | ||
| Head diameter / width | 57.5 mm | — |
| Body diameter / depth | 47 mm | — |
| Weight | 103 g | 74 g |
| Modes & features | ||
| Switch | Dual switches | Dual switches |
| SOS / beacon | Yes | — |
| Red light | Yes | Yes |
| Lockout | Yes | Yes |
| Mode memory | Yes | — |
| Colours | Orange, Red, Black | — |
