drmaxx
Enlightened
Thank you all. Interesting and informative, but not very helpful (if you know what I mean. ..).
Yup, it sounds like this light's not for you. Perhaps this thread would be of more interest to you.
As we all experience various frustrations, I understand the feeling. That said, I think your post (#122) is way off, and could use more consideration in basically every sentence. I'm saying this pretty gently considering, among other things, the accusations based on no evidence, of poor manufacturing processes, then trying to cover it up.Admittedly I probably am over critical of this light since every light has its faults. Its just that I would have really liked for this one to be my first SureFire. I always respected the legendary name.
As we all experience various frustrations, I understand the feeling. That said, I think your post (#122) is way off, and could use more consideration in basically every sentence. I'm saying this pretty gently considering, among other things, the accusations based on no evidence, of poor manufacturing processes, then trying to cover it up.
Not a single post in this thread has provided the inside diameter of this light to even establish a baseline measurement, much less input from various owners to check consistency. And for anyone to poo poo the notion that there might be variations in soft, sticky labels applied onto batteries is in my estimation, as the saying goes, ludicrous.
Oh yeah, that's much less likely than Surefire's machines flopping around cutting inconsistent bores. Calipers, anyone?
Yup, it sounds like this light's not for you. Perhaps this thread would be of more interest to you.
Admittedly I probably am over critical of this light since every light has its faults. Its just that I would have really liked for this one to be my first SureFire. I always respected the legendary name.
. . . Not a single post in this thread has provided the inside diameter of this light to even establish a baseline measurement, much less input from various owners to check consistency. And for anyone to poo poo the notion that there might be variations in soft, sticky labels applied onto batteries is in my estimation, as the saying goes, ludicrous.
Oh yeah, that's much less likely than Surefire's machines flopping around cutting inconsistent bores. Calipers, anyone?
. . . Took the two Titans to work today for some measurements and the inner diameter of the battery tube was the same for both. As suspected, the only difference was the newer one didn't have the steel insert at the open end of the tube.
For those who like numbers . . .
Battery tube inner diameter = .420" (both bodies measured at midpoint of tube)
Steel insert inner diameter = .412" (only present on the first Titan received)
SureFire AAA diameter = .402"
Sanyo Eneloop AAA diameter = .410"
The battery measurements aren't quite as precise as the body measurements. The SureFire battery had a fairly uniform diameter along its length while the Eneloop varied a bit and it wasn't quite as true (round) as the SureFire battery.
I plan to complete a review on the New Titan Plus real soon. I plan to put some side by side comparisons with the "regular" AAA Titan. Hopefully it will help guide and inform others. I am still doing some testing.
Not sure why your statement is prefaced by this. However, I can speculate that it's either to somehow convey objectivity to your criticisms, or subtly belittle the opposing viewpoint.I'm aware of any criticism of the venerable SureFire name will draw some heat
I believe some plausible explanations have already been suggested in this thread.but I think my criticisms are reasonable. Reviews indicate that people who purchased this light are having issues with the AAA cells fitting very snugly to the point of having the use needle nose pliers to extract the cells. To me that indicates either poor design or poor manufacturing tolerance. If you have a better explanation please post it here.
Then don't get one until the patent goes through, and they no longer have to put that on the light. Even with it on there now, this is a big deal? I've seen "patent applied for" on all kinds of things throughout life. One good example of many is one of the classic Gibson guitar pickups sought after by collectors, with the design still in use to this day. It's called the P.A.F.The words "pat pending" is clearly printed on the light.
It won't be a problem. I speculate the decision there is that it's a keychain light that will get dropped many times. The plastic lens won't shatter, and coated will pass every bit as much light as a UCL. They can have scratch resistant coatings as well. If you had any idea the abuse my 12 year old plastic lens glasses have been through... and I still use them every day. Either way, the lens should be fairly well protected. I like glass myself for the ultimate in scratch prevention, but then I never drop my lights (watch me drop one tonight since I just jinxed myself).If the light has a UCL lens then I am mistaken on that point but reviewers have said the lens is plastic.
Many keychain lights do not.Reviewers have stated that the light does not tail stand.
Any idea which patent application this refers to? The Titan Plus also has the 'PAT. PENDING' notation but, for example an EB2 and a Titan T1A sitting on my desk do not (but they do list explicit patent numbers on the side).The words "pat pending" is clearly printed on the light.
...
Anybody know what's pending on these AAA Titan's?
How is the reliability of the light so far? Any issues?