Equipment / lighting
Weight and Front/Rear Balance of Caving Headlamps
Practical guide to evaluate real carried headlamp weight and front/rear balance for caving, with concrete checks and architecture tradeoffs.
Why weight and balance matter
Two lamps with similar output can feel very different underground. Comfort depends less on the raw grams than on front/rear mass distribution, helmet stability, and movement shocks.
Quick read: total carried weight and balance
| Configuration | Total carried weight | Front/rear balance | Field effect |
|---|---|---|---|
| Light monobloc (battery at the front) | low to medium | often front-heavy | Comfortable at first, but neck fatigue may appear on long sessions with repeated movement. |
| Head + remote rear battery | medium | good to very good | Better dynamic stability and less helmet pitching. |
| Heavy front system + heavy rear pack | high | often good | Correct balance, but high global load over long durations. |
Concrete checks before buying
| Criterion | What to verify | Real impact |
|---|---|---|
| Complete system weight | Lamp + battery + mount + cable (not just the lamp head). | Avoids misleading comparisons between technical sheets. |
| Front/rear mass distribution | Center of gravity close to the helmet without excessive forward lever arm. | Less jolting on descents, crawling, and tight passages. |
| Mount and strap tension | Bracket stiffness, lateral hold, slippage on wet or muddy helmet. | Better visual stability and fewer micro-corrections of the head. |
| Cable and connector routing | Useful cable length, anchor points, risk of asymmetric pull. | A cable pulling to one side quickly degrades balance perception. |
Architecture and weight/balance tradeoffs
| Battery architecture | Weight trend | Balance trend | Practical reading |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1S integrated at front | light | medium | Simple and compact; very good for short to medium trips. |
| 1S/2S with rear pack | medium | good | Excellent compromise to reduce neck fatigue. |
| 3S/4S remote pack | high | good to very good | Strong stability and endurance, with higher total mass. |
Model details (practical order of magnitude)
Weight color reading (same logic as the comparison): lighter is better. All values below are considered with battery.
| Model | Published mass (order of magnitude) | Front/rear distribution | Comfort reading in progression |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stoots Yeti | ~134 g (with battery) | rather front | Very compact and light, comfortable as long as trip duration stays moderate. |
| Armytek Wizard C2 Pro Max LR | ~151 g (with battery) | front (offset by low mass) | Light in absolute terms, but monobloc layout needs attention on long outings. |
| Sofirn HS20 | ~124-175 g (with battery, depending on setup) | front (offset by low mass) | Relevant as a budget or backup option; helmet stability depends on mounting. |
| Phaeton Dual | ~395 g (with battery) | more balanced | Better rear counterweight, but clearly heavier overall. |
| Argolamp 2.0 | ~370 g (with battery) | more balanced | Good front/rear balance, with significant total mass. |
| Scurion 1500 caving | ~510 g (with battery) | good | Very stable in technical progression, but the heaviest setup in this list. |
| Meandre Prowide 4.5 | ~450 g (with battery) | good | Good hold and rear counterweight, but high global load on long trips. |