- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- PD35 V3.0 vs WT25R
Fenix PD35 V3.0 vs Fenix WT25R
What PD35 V3.0 does better (5) and where WT25R wins (0) — every spec side by side.
Dimensions
Size comparison
PD35 V3.0WT25R
| PD35 V3.0 | WT25R | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length / height | 134 mm | 135.3 mm | −1.3 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 25.4 mm | 29 mm | −3.6 mm |
| Weight | 84 g | 137 g | −53 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is PD35 V3.0 better than WT25R?
- Maximum runtime230 h vs 29 h7.9×
- Maximum output1,700 lm vs 1,000 lm+70%
- Beam distance (ANSI FL1)357 m vs 220 m+62%
- Water protection (IPx)IPx8 vs IPx42×
- Weight84 g vs 137 g+63%
Why is WT25R better than PD35 V3.0?
WT25R has no measurable advantages in this pair.
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 1,700 lm | 1,000 lm |
| Peak beam intensity | 31,860 cd | — |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | 357 m | 220 m |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| LED & beam | ||
| LED emitter | Luminus SFT-40 | — |
| LED maker | Luminus | — |
| Number of LEDs | 1 | — |
| Colour temperature | 6,000K | — |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | 18650 Li-ion, CR123A | Built-in Li-ion / Li-Po |
| Number of batteries | — | 1 |
| Maximum runtime | 230 h | 29 h |
| Rechargeable | Yes | Yes |
| USB-C charging | Yes | — |
| Battery level indicator | Yes | — |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | IP68 | — |
| Water protection (IPx) | IPx8 | IPx4 |
| Body material | Aluminium | — |
| Pocket clip | Yes | — |
| Size & weight | ||
| Length / height | 134 mm | 135.3 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 25.4 mm | 29 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 22.8 mm | — |
| Weight | 84 g | 137 g |
| Modes & features | ||
| Brightness levels | 5 | — |
| Switch | Dual switches | — |
| Tactical tail switch (momentary on) | Yes | — |
| Strobe | Yes | Yes |
| SOS / beacon | — | Yes |
| Mode memory | Yes | — |
| Colours | — | Black |
