- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- PD40R V2.0 vs TK22 TAC
Fenix PD40R V2.0 vs Fenix TK22 TAC
What PD40R V2.0 does better (3) and where TK22 TAC wins (2) — every spec side by side.
vs
7.1Brightness & throw7.9
7.2Battery & charging4.9
8.3Build & durability6.4
5.9Features5.9
Dimensions
Size comparison
PD40R V2.0TK22 TAC
| PD40R V2.0 | TK22 TAC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length / height | 138 mm | 154 mm | −16 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 33.2 mm | 40 mm | −6.8 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 26 mm | 26 mm | = |
| Weight | 116 g | 156 g | −40 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is PD40R V2.0 better than TK22 TAC?
- Maximum runtime88.2 h vs 49.5 h+78%
- Maximum output3,000 lm vs 2,800 lm+7%
- Weight116 g vs 156 g+34%
Why is TK22 TAC better than PD40R V2.0?
- Beam distance (ANSI FL1)405 m vs 540 m+33%
- Peak beam intensity41,010 cd vs 72,900 cd+78%
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 3,000 lm | 2,800 lm |
| Peak beam intensity | 41,010 cd | 72,900 cd |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | 405 m | 540 m |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| LED & beam | ||
| LED emitter | Luminus SST-70 | Luminus SFT-70 |
| LED maker | Luminus | Luminus |
| Colour temperature | — | 6,500K |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | 21700 Li-ion, 18650 Li-ion | 21700 Li-ion |
| Maximum runtime | 88.2 h | 49.5 h |
| Rechargeable | Yes | Yes |
| USB-C charging | Yes | Yes |
| Battery level indicator | Yes | — |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | IP68 | IP68 |
| Water protection (IPx) | IPx8 | IPx8 |
| Submersible to | 2 m | — |
| Size & weight | ||
| Length / height | 138 mm | 154 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 33.2 mm | 40 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 26 mm | 26 mm |
| Weight | 116 g | 156 g |
| Modes & features | ||
| Brightness levels | 4 | — |
| Switch | Rotary / scroll wheel | Tail switch |
| Strobe | Yes | Yes |
