tobrien
Flashlight Enthusiast
So if I want an L1 style interface, I need the tactical E1B right?
I've measured 12,000cd with a LFP123A.If so , how many lux does it put out from 1 meter ?
It's a tradeoff between output and runtime, which doesn't any bearing on quality. It's not hard to make flat regulation, but then you'll see practical problems such as short runtimes and excessive heat production. Avoiding these issues should be a sign of quality, not the other way around.I appreciate your hard work so thank you. The old E1B was 90 percent after 1 hour. Look at is now with the new EB1. I don't understand why from a professional viewpoint you don't think this is pathetic compared to the E1B? If I wanted a light that was going to start to decline fast after 30 min I don't need to pay top dollar for a Surefire. Flat regulation is also a sign of a quality in my book.
At this point, I don't see any issue with the runtime.I wish Surefire would chime in on this.
Has anyone called them and ask whether on not this to be true to them ??
I've measured 12,000cd with a LFP123A.
The Surefire E1B had excellent run time and regulation without producing excessive heat. The EB1 looks like zero regulation. The fast downhill slide looks like they are just relying on the battery to maintain voltage.
I agree with Robin. Show me a 1 cell 200 lumen TIR light with flat regulation for 1 hour on the market.It's a tradeoff between output and runtime, which doesn't any bearing on quality. It's not hard to make flat regulation, but then you'll see practical problems such as short runtimes and excessive heat production. Avoiding these issues should be a sign of quality, not the other way around.
At this point, I don't see any issue with the runtime.
I only own Surefire so this is not a bash. I am mad and frustrated to have waited 5 years to see Surefire come out with the EB1. This light is a inferior upgrade to the awesome E1B. Crap regulation, no real run time improvement, and my gosh at least they could have used a more recent emitter.
So now I (or the rest of us) will have to wait another 5 years and hope the next model actually has flat regulation, and a significant lumen and run time improvement. If I was spending $50 for this light I would expect this. However at over $200 I expect flat regulation, not a cliff dive.
I don't think you're alone in those observations but since it is a SF we'll be assured that this is not yet another case of yesterday's technology at tomorrow's prices. Isn't the XP-E sort of a poor man's version of the XP-G? As Cree says: 'XP-E HEW [High-Efficiency White] is designed to enable faster adoption of LED in cost-sensitive, consumer lighting products.'
Wow my feelings for surefire are going down the toilet. Poor regulation and a LED intended for cheap lights. Problem is this is not a cheap light.
Not necessarily. Larger LED dies require larger optics, and for an XM-L, the optic will be 1.5" wide. The EB1's bezel is already wider than the E1B's, which tapers off in the front, so that is probably why SureFire had to use the XP-E. It would be better to sacrifice strict regulation rather than size of the light or the beam pattern.I don't think you're alone in those observations but since it is a SF we'll be assured that this is not yet another case of yesterday's technology at tomorrow's prices. Isn't the XP-E sort of a poor man's version of the XP-G? As Cree says: 'XP-E HEW [High-Efficiency White] is designed to enable faster adoption of LED in cost-sensitive, consumer lighting products.'
I don't use loose lithium-ion cells...all I've got are LFP123A's.For Robin24k, What about trying a RCR123 in it and see what the graph would look like? Since your EB1 is a review sample. Try it and see if it will work. I'm sure other members would be curious to know as well.
I don't use loose lithium-ion cells...all I've got are LFP123A's.
Sorry, I meant that the only rechargeable 123A's I have are LFP123A's. Lithium primary tests were done with SF123A's.
Not necessarily. Larger LED dies require larger optics, and for an XM-L, the optic will be 1.5" wide. The EB1's bezel is already wider than the E1B's, which tapers off in the front, so that is probably why SureFire had to use the XP-E. It would be better to sacrifice strict regulation rather than size of the light or the beam pattern.
That's where the issue is. Remember, this is the EB1 Backup, and SureFire's marketing materials tout the fact that it's a compact backup light source. If it's too big, it's becomes tactical-sized.If this means size has to be bigger then so be it.
Engineering is all about tradeoffs, and nothing comes without some sort of tradeoff.
There do seem to be many XP-G lights in the 200 lumen range including the low end SF's.
Take the Malkoff M31 in the cool tint it's around 230 lumens. And you get that output from a single CR123a, plus it's an XP-G led.