# Surefire LX2 Pics, Beamshots & Info



## Sean (Jun 27, 2009)

*Surefire LX2 Review, Pics, Beamshots & Info*

*UPDATE:
*Just wanted to add that I picked up a "newer" LX2 (in 2012) and it is brighter than the first LX2 I had when I originally did this review. My first LX2 seemed to put out about ~205 or so lumens on high and ~15 lumens on low. My "newer" LX2 seems to put out closer to ~250 lumens on high and 35 lumens on low! Just what I wanted.  I like the 35 lumen low because it's bright enough for most all tasks with a very long run time, especially with the rechargeable batteries Surefire now offers. Also, the current draw is less on high with the new one.
*
Surefire LX2 LUMAMAX:*
*FEATURES*


Virtually indestructible LED regulated to maximize output and runtime 
Two-stage tailcap switch provides instant access to one of two levels of light output: 15 lumens or 200 lumens 
Press for low, press harder for high. Twist for constant on 
TIR lens produces tight beam with enough surround light for peripheral vision 
Corrosion-proof, scratch-resistant aluminum body is hard anodized 
O-ring and gasket sealed so it's waterproof to one meter for up to 30 minutes 
4.2 oz and 5.4" long and uses 2 CR123A batteries 
*Pros:* Comes in a box with a lanyard and instruction sheet. This is a nice upgrade from their other packaging because now you can actually get it out of the package. Fit and finish are good. Size is nice and small for easy use and pocket carry. The fluting instead of knurling works well and makes it easier to slide in and out of your pocket. It's much shorter than it's predocessor (the L2). Bezel up/down clip is very nice, finally making pocket carry of a two cell Surefire practical. It looks as if the clip can be placed on an E2e body & vice versa but I couldn't easily remove the clip so I gave up. TIR lens gives a great amount of punch without being too tight. The TIR does what other lights need a larger reflector to do. Standard 1" bezel accepts E series filters and the F04 beam diffuser. Two stage tailcap UI is easy to use and even pressing all the way for high is not as hard as my L1 was. Electronics are in the head, there is nothing in the body at all so the LX2 head works on an E2e body (though only in high mode). Removable lanyard attachment ring. The nice thing about his light is that is actually comes with a lanyard!

*Cons:* 
A bit pricey. Slight anodizing mismatch, although this is normal sometimes it actually matches. Some may not like the TIR or it's lack of Li-ion support. Run-time (2 hours on high) is average for this brightness level, but I would like it to be even longer. I'm sure it's more like 90 minutes on high. When you twist for constant on the tailcap is rubbing against the clip. It's not real bad because there is no knurling but it could wear the HA down over time.

*Overall*:
This light is a very good balance of long running low output and very bright output with great throw when you need it. The beam is like the E2DL and other new style TIR optic equipped Surefires. I personally like the 15 lumen low. I would even like it a bit brighter. Tint is great on my LX2, much better than most of the other Surefires I have had recently. Not harsh blue or green. My tests show the LX2 is brighter than my E2DL and Fenix T1. I estimate low to be right on 15 lumens and high to be right at 200 lumens (give or take ~10 lumens). I have a very hard time estimating lumens in excess of 115 with the "equipment" I have. The best I can do is give an estimate based on range. The range of my LX2 on high is between 190 & 228 lumens. By comparison, the range of my Fenix TK40 on high (not turbo) is between 227 and 273. So it looks like my LX2 is slightly over 200 lumens.

*Run time test @ ~200 lumens. Light held to keep cool. 2 hours & 2 minutes to 50% (Panasonic CR123A exp: 2018):
*_(hours) : (minutes)-(light output)
_00:00-*135*
01:00-*135*
01:20-*135*
01:23-*135*
01:24-*134*
01:25-*133 (light drops out of regulation)*
01:30-*127*
01:35-*122*
01:40-*118* 
01:45-*112*
01:50-*100*
01:55-*87*
02:00-*72*
02:01-*69*
02:02-*66* (*~50% output @ 2 hours & 2 minutes*)
02:03-*63*
02:04-*60*
02:05-*57 (ended test)


* *Pics:*



























































The LX2 head fits on the E2e body and can power the LX2 head on high only:






E series filters fit on the LX2 head:






This is how much contact the clip makes with the tailcap:










LX2 beam profile on high:






LX2 on low and a Surefire E2L (45 lumen version) on the right:






LX2 on high and a Surefire E2L (45 lumen version) on the right:






LX2 on high and a Fenix TK40 on the right set to medium (distance ~10 feet):







LX2 on high and a Fenix TK40 on the right set to high (note that the TK40 has more spill than the LX2 that you can't see in the pic):






LX2 on high and a Fenix TK40 on the right set to Turbo:






Shots across the room. LX2 on high:






LX2 on high with F04 (beam diffuser):






LX2 on low:






LX2 on low with F04:






TK40 on high:






Titan T1A on high:






Fenix P1D CE on max:






Outdoor shots. Distance 45 feet. (all shots on manual exp):

LX2 on high:





TK40 on high:





LX2 on low:





*Other shots taken previously from the same position with the same camera settings:*
*Fenix T1 on high:*






*Surefire E2DL on high:*


----------



## xpawel18x (Jun 27, 2009)

Very Nice. Thank You. Can't wait to get one.:naughty:


----------



## henry1960 (Jun 27, 2009)

Sean....I Couldent Say It Any Better.
I love The 15 Lumen Low And The 200 Lumen Is Abought The Same As My E2DL Making This A Five Star Flash Light In My Book :twothumbs


----------



## xpawel18x (Jun 27, 2009)

henry1960 said:


> Sean....I Couldent Say It Any Better.
> I love The 15 Lumen Low And The 200 Lumen Is Abought The Same As My E2DL Making This A Five Star Flash Light In My Book :twothumbs


 
LX2 the same as E2DL ? I thought the 200 lumens would be brighter than the E2DL's 120 ?:thinking:


----------



## henry1960 (Jun 27, 2009)

It Is Very Little Noticable Brighter Then My E2DL Light in My Opion :mecry:


----------



## henry1960 (Jun 27, 2009)

What I Like Is The Low And Then High And Still Has The Throw If Not More As My E2DL Light


----------



## Sgt. LED (Jun 27, 2009)

What does it do on a 17670 cell.
Somewhere between high an low, only low, no light at all?


----------



## Kiessling (Jun 27, 2009)

Hey Sarge ... obsessed with Li-Ion? :nana:

Sean ... thanx for the review! 
Moved to reviews.

bernie


----------



## Illum (Jun 27, 2009)

nice:twothumbs


----------



## Sgt. LED (Jun 27, 2009)

Yes sir. I know it's e tube compatible and I have a Nat 18650 e tube waiting to be used.


----------



## Tiny86 (Jun 27, 2009)

Sweet. I can't wait untill mine gets here!!

Thanks for the reveiw!


----------



## Sean (Jun 27, 2009)

xpawel18x said:


> LX2 the same as E2DL ? I thought the 200 lumens would be brighter than the E2DL's 120 ?:thinking:



My LX2 is brighter than my E2DL. But there's not a huge difference because the E2DLs actually put out between 160-210 lumens, way more than the published spec of 120. So if you already were lucky and have an E2DL that was around 200 lumens you won't see much of a difference in output if you get an LX2. In reality you need to quadruple the output for a light to appear twice as bright. So if your LX2 looks a little brighter than your E2DL then that means it's probably dozens of lumens brighter. I wouldn't dump my E2DL for a LX2 just for the lumen difference. I would (and did) dump my E2DL for the bezel down clip, higher low and great UI.


----------



## xpawel18x (Jun 27, 2009)

Sean said:


> My LX2 is brighter than my E2DL. But there's not a huge difference because the E2DLs actually put out between 160-210 lumens, way more than the published spec of 120. So if you already were lucky and have an E2DL that was around 200 lumens you won't see much of a difference in output if you get an LX2. In reality you need to quadruple the output for a light to appear twice as bright. So if your LX2 looks a little brighter than your E2DL then that means it's probably dozens of lumens brighter. I wouldn't dump my E2DL for a LX2 just for the lumen difference. I would (and did) dump my E2DL for the bezel down clip, higher low and great UI.


 
Then I think it's safe to say that SF started to print OTF lumens as opposed to their previously under-rated lumen ratings.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Jun 27, 2009)

Sweet!

Thank you for the review!

Looking forward to getting this light in the mail!

:thumbsup:


----------



## RobertM (Jun 27, 2009)

Thanks for the review and pics! :twothumbs

Any chance of any outdoor beamshot comparisons with other lights?

Thanks,
Robert


----------



## gswitter (Jun 27, 2009)

xpawel18x said:


> Then I think it's safe to say that SF started to print OTF lumens as opposed to their previously under-rated lumen ratings.


They weren't under-rated, they were minimum guaranteed.


----------



## RichS (Jun 27, 2009)

Great review Sean, thanks!! I've been waiting on this..

One question - in your beamshots with the TK40 you state "LX2 on high and a Fenix TK40 on the left set to medium (distance ~10 feet):"

The TK40 is actually always on the right, correct?

Thanks again - very nice job.


----------



## Sean (Jun 27, 2009)

RichS said:


> Great review Sean, thanks!! I've been waiting on this..
> 
> One question - in your beamshots with the TK40 you state "LX2 on high and a Fenix TK40 on the left set to medium (distance ~10 feet):"
> 
> ...



 Thanks for that, it's fixed now! 

The TK40 is always on the right.

Edit: More outdoor beamshots added.


----------



## Kid9P (Jun 27, 2009)

Sean said:


> I hope to get a few outdoor shots in a few hours when it's dark.


 

Looking forward to those shots !! Thanks for taking the time :thumbsup:


----------



## Chao (Jun 27, 2009)

Nice review, thanks a lot! 
I ordered one, can't wait.


----------



## sims2k (Jun 27, 2009)

Hi Sean,

Thanks for the review...that one finally made me a believer and a convert to the power of the LX2.:twothumbs


----------



## cue003 (Jun 27, 2009)

Great write up Sean. Thanks for taking the time to also provide the photos.

What is the fascination with using other e series bodies? Are they shorter or something? Or is it just for battery options?


----------



## Splunk_Au (Jun 27, 2009)

The build quality seems to have been taken down a notch compared to the older L1/L2, it doesn't have the front contact section in the battery tube. Nor does it have the isolating internal tube lining.

Hopefully the beam is still just as nice.


----------



## KDOG3 (Jun 27, 2009)

Nice review. My LX2 has the nice uniform hotspot like yours does, perfect as a matter of fact. Its' my new EDC. I also have the F04 beamshaper on it which is also very useful. As I stated in the LX2 thread in the LED forum, mine appears to be just a LITTLE brighter than the E2DLs' I've owned and I owned 3 of them. So its fair to say its probably dead on 200 lumens OTF.


----------



## prime77 (Jun 27, 2009)

Splunk_Au said:


> The build quality seems to have been taken down a notch compared to the older L1/L2, it doesn't have the front contact section in the battery tube. Nor does it have the isolating internal tube lining.
> 
> Hopefully the beam is still just as nice.


Judging from the pics and what some of the members that have got the LX2 have said the build quality looks great. It doesn't have the front contact section in the battery tube because the electronics have been moved from the battery tube to the head. Also as for the isolating internal tube lining Surefire has changed how they coat the inside of their lights from the brass color lining to a clear one.


----------



## Palestofwhite (Jun 28, 2009)

I'm waiting for this light to arrive as well, but I do have a question for those who already gotten it. I actually own some AW RCR123s which I bought to be used with an E2DL I sold (for this light). Can anyone confirm if the LX2 can handle the AW RCRs like how the E2DL is supposed to? Really appreciate if anyone can comment on this.

Thank you.


----------



## reneir0492 (Jun 28, 2009)

its beautiful,time to save up


----------



## Illumination (Jun 28, 2009)

Great review; thanks!

This light seems to be the most versatile SF yet (other than maybe an A2 or U2, depending on the use).

I love the way this light holds its own vs. the TK 40.


----------



## l2icel3all (Jun 29, 2009)

Once I get mine, this will be my new EDC! :thumbsup:


----------



## mikevelarde (Jun 29, 2009)

Great review!:devil:

Can't wait to get my hands on 1!


----------



## 3GT (Jun 30, 2009)

LX2 it can use with RCR123 (4.2V) ?


----------



## Splunk_Au (Jun 30, 2009)

prime77 said:


> Judging from the pics and what some of the members that have got the LX2 have said the build quality looks great. It doesn't have the front contact section in the battery tube because the electronics have been moved from the battery tube to the head. Also as for the isolating internal tube lining Surefire has changed how they coat the inside of their lights from the brass color lining to a clear one.


 
Still there is no longer that internal tube, I'm not saying that the there is a different color coat or anything. Take a look at the L1 with Cree LED. The internal sleeve is still there, even though it's silver in color.


----------



## RichS (Jun 30, 2009)

Has SureFire possibly adjusted their lumen rating methodology? The LX2 is rated at 200 lumens vs. 120 lumens for the E2DL. This is approximately a 70% increase in stated brightness over the E2DL. I would think this would be more noticeable than it is in the beamshots. This, in combination with testimonials from other LX2+E2DL owners stating both lights have close to the same output, makes me think that SF has somewhat adjusted their approach to rating lumens in their lights (or at least with the LX2). 

When I first saw that they were releasing a 200 lumen LED light, I thought that it must be a multi-die LED like an MCE or P7 based on SF's extremely conservative lumen ratings. I was surprised to find that it was a single-die Cree. 

I completely agree that the LX2 is rated very accurately at 200 lumens, but it seems like SF has modified their approach somewhat. I just have a hard time believing this light is a full 3 times brighter than my L1 Cree, rated at 65 lumens on high. BTW - does anyone have both and can compare the two?


----------



## Sgt. LED (Jun 30, 2009)

Perhaps their overall approach to estimates has changed?
They have also changed the runtime stats on the P60L in the G3L-FYL.

They seem to be no longer overstating runtime or understating output. I like it and hope this carries over to all their product line. 
It will be refreshing to simply read the stats and be able to use them without any further calculations.
:thumbsup:


----------



## Sean (Jun 30, 2009)

RichS said:


> Has SureFire possibly adjusted their lumen rating methodology? The LX2 is rated at 200 lumens vs. 120 lumens for the E2DL. This is approximately a 70% increase in stated brightness over the E2DL. I would think this would be more noticeable than it is in the beamshots. This, in combination with testimonials from other LX2+E2DL owners stating both lights have close to the same output, makes me think that SF has somewhat adjusted their approach to rating lumens in their lights (or at least with the LX2).
> 
> When I first saw that they were releasing a 200 lumen LED light, I thought that it must be a multi-die LED like an MCE or P7 based on SF's extremely conservative lumen ratings. I was surprised to find that it was a single-die Cree.



I think the reason they did this is simple. They were understating their output enough on the E2DL that people complained that Surefire was behind the times and other manufacturers like Fenix and everyone else had Cree XR-E powered lights that were being rated in the 200+ lumen range. So they did the smart thing and released a light rated in the 200 lumen range that actually puts out 200+ lumens. The E2DL was underrated a bit and I think most of them fell in the 150-180 range. I only know of one to have been tested to put out ~210 lumens (MrGman's). So now, with the LX2 you get a light that is as bright as MrGman's E2DL, without having to play the lottery to get one. IMHO. 



RichS said:


> I just have a hard time believing this light is a full 3 times brighter than my L1 Cree, rated at 65 lumens on high. BTW - does anyone have both and can compare the two?



I had an L1 a few months ago and it put out about 74 lumens on high. I also had an E2L two stage that was rated at 60 lumens on high but mine put out about 85 lumens. You can't see the difference between the L1 and E2L, but you certainly tell a difference between the L1 and the LX2. Remember, the way your eyes percieve brightness the light must be 4x brighter for it to _look _2x brighter.


----------



## toby_pra (Jul 1, 2009)

Very nice review! 

But it seems to me the LX2 is not brighter than the E2DL, right?


----------



## Sean (Jul 1, 2009)

toby_pra said:


> Very nice review!
> 
> But it seems to me the LX2 is not brighter than the E2DL, right?



Well, as I said in my review: "My tests show the LX2 is brighter than my E2DL and Fenix T1." 
I would say my E2DL was about ~165-170 lumens and my LX2 is about ~200-205 lumens. Unfortunately, The E2DL picture I posted was taken on a different day than the LX2 picture, so it's possible that the reason it doesn't look brighter is just me messing up something or some other problem.

Here are some nice shots taken by Prime77 comparing his E2DL and LX2:


----------



## toby_pra (Jul 1, 2009)

Now its clear to me...  

Many thanks! :thumbsup:


----------



## TITAN1833 (Jul 1, 2009)

Nice review 

I noticed the warning "caution hot surface" does it really get that hot? or is this just a standard thing with Surefire?:thinking:


----------



## Crenshaw (Jul 1, 2009)

Ive never owned an L2, so im not sure if its like this too, but does this mean that with the Lx1 the circuitry might be in the head also? meaning, the head is no longer a "dumb" head?

and does the tail lego with the older L series lights? (if you have any)

Crenshaw


----------



## Illum (Jul 1, 2009)

TITAN1833 said:


> Nice review
> 
> I noticed the warning "caution hot surface" does it really get that hot? or is this just a standard thing with Surefire?:thinking:



back in the says of Luxeon Vs yeah it gets hot...dunno how hard these are driven though. One thing is for sure, putting these labels on the E2L/E1L is a bit over exaggerating:nana:


----------



## xpawel18x (Jul 1, 2009)

The LX2 does look brighter than the E2DL. Thanks for the beamshots, I think I might buy one.lovecpf


----------



## Sgt. LED (Jul 1, 2009)

Crenshaw said:


> Ive never owned an L2, so im not sure if its like this too, but does this mean that with the Lx1 the circuitry might be in the head also? meaning, the head is no longer a "dumb" head?
> 
> and does the tail lego with the older L series lights? (if you have any)
> 
> Crenshaw


 Right it is no longer dumb. The tail is compatible with others like the L series and the A2.


----------



## Moonshadow (Jul 1, 2009)

Would I be right in thinking that if you twist it once for constant on at 15 Lumens you can still get full power instantly by mashing the button down ?


----------



## Sean (Jul 1, 2009)

Moonshadow said:


> Would I be right in thinking that if you twist it once for constant on at 15 Lumens you can still get full power instantly by mashing the button down ?



That is correct. 
You can also mash the button when the light is off to go directly to full power.


----------



## FrogmanM (Jul 1, 2009)

Moonshadow said:


> Would I be right in thinking that if you twist it once for constant on at 15 Lumens you can still get full power instantly by mashing the button down ?



That is correct, beautiful UI no?

-Mayo


----------



## Kestrel (Jul 1, 2009)

Sean said:


> Here are some nice shots taken by Prime77 comparing his E2DL and LX2


Good outdoor shots, the tint looks to be better as well. Can others who own both lights confirm this with theirs, or is it just the lottery at work again?


----------



## Kid9P (Jul 1, 2009)

Got mine about half an hour ago. It is definetely visually brighter than my E2DL. Not only is it brighter, the hotspot is perfectly round. 
I had to try several E2DL's before I found one with a somewhat round hotspot.

My only gripe is a few little markings on the light. There are no nicks, dings or scratches, but there are a few tiny spots where there is no anno.
Maybe rub marks?

Other than that, I've very pleased with it. I would have prefered a minty one, but I guess this one will be a user for me.

One more note, I was expecting a very crappy clip after reading a few comments made on them. I actually like the clip


----------



## CandlePowerForumsUser (Jul 1, 2009)

Sean said:


> That is correct.
> You can also mash the button when the light is off to go directly to full power.




Sweet, I wasn't sure how the UI worked. I love button mashing, Can't wait for mine to show in the mail.


----------



## gswitter (Jul 1, 2009)

RichS said:


> Has SureFire possibly adjusted their lumen rating methodology? The LX2 is rated at 200 lumens vs. 120 lumens for the E2DL. This is approximately a 70% increase in stated brightness over the E2DL. I would think this would be more noticeable than it is in the beamshots. This, in combination with testimonials from other LX2+E2DL owners stating both lights have close to the same output, makes me think that SF has somewhat adjusted their approach to rating lumens in their lights (or at least with the LX2).


Maybe they didn't change their lumen rating methodology at all.

Maybe the supply of higher binned LEDs has increased to point that they can reasonably guarantee a minimum of 200 lumens. Maybe they'll bump the specs of the E2DL and their other XR-E-based lights at some point as well.


----------



## vic303 (Jul 1, 2009)

I'd like to wait until the LX1 comes out, and see how it specs out. I am thinking of getting an E1b to replace my old style L2, but might opt for the LX1 instead.


----------



## Litbobber (Jul 1, 2009)

Sean great review and pics,mind me asking how much you paid and where you bought?

Thanks alot


----------



## RichS (Jul 1, 2009)

gswitter said:


> Maybe they didn't change their lumen rating methodology at all.
> 
> Maybe the supply of higher binned LEDs has increased to point that they can reasonably guarantee a minimum of 200 lumens. Maybe they'll bump the specs of the E2DL and their other XR-E-based lights at some point as well.


That very well could be based on the additional information. The LX2 is definitely exceeding 200 lumens for sure. I do hope they adjust the ratings of other similar lights to be closer to actual output. The main reason I thought they changed their rating methodology was the beamshots comparing the 120 lumen E2DL and the 200 lumen LX2. The output looks virtually identical in the shots, but Sean clarified that the E2DL beamshot was taken on a different day or it could have been another issue that made them appear equal. He confirmed that the LX2 is definitely brighter in real life. The shots taken by Prime77 make it very easy to see that the LX2 is much brighter - thus the higher lumen rating.


----------



## cue003 (Jul 1, 2009)

is it too soon for some runtime tests/graphs?


----------



## Moonshadow (Jul 1, 2009)

Quote:
Originally Posted by *Moonshadow* 

 
_Would I be right in thinking that if you twist it once for constant on at 15 Lumens you can still get full power instantly by mashing the button down ?_



> That is correct.
> You can also mash the button when the light is off to go directly to full power.





> That is correct, beautiful UI no?


Brilliant - that's exactly what I want. Thanks guys. 

Wonder how long till can we get these in the UK ?? . . . .


----------



## JKL (Jul 1, 2009)

Great review !






Amazing Surefire once again.


----------



## Kiessling (Jul 1, 2009)

This one sounds like the perfect 2-cell light. perfect. And you can swap E-Series heads, too. Even more perfect.
Now if only the post office would be somewhat quicker ... :green:


----------



## Kestrel (Jul 1, 2009)

Kiessling said:


> This one sounds like the perfect 2-cell light. perfect.


Sorry sir, but this is the first time I'm disagreeing with you: The LX2 would be perfect if the body could take 1x17670 - the ID is apparently too small.:sigh:


----------



## Kiessling (Jul 1, 2009)

That's cool, actually. No rattle with CR123 cells then. Cells for real men :nana:

But I do feel for you Li-Ion guys. Really. Think of it this way ... SF being one of the last refugee camps for primary guys.

bernie


----------



## Illum (Jul 1, 2009)

Kestrel said:


> Sorry sir, but this is the first time I'm disagreeing with you: The LX2 would be perfect if the body could take 1x17670 - the ID is apparently too small.:sigh:



there's always the 14670


----------



## Kestrel (Jul 1, 2009)

Illum said:


> there's always the 14670


LOL :green:


----------



## mudman cj (Jul 1, 2009)

I'd be willing to bet someone has already bored out the tube to accept a 17670. All you need is some 100 grit sandpaper, a 1/2" diameter dowel rod, some tape, a drill and a little patience.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Jul 1, 2009)

Illum said:


> there's always the 14670



Or unprotected 17650's, and monitor cell.

Bill


----------



## Sean (Jul 1, 2009)

cue003 said:


> is it too soon for some runtime tests/graphs?



If I get time this weekend I may do a runtime test on high. We shall see.


----------



## Illum (Jul 1, 2009)

mudman cj said:


> I'd be willing to bet someone has already bored out the tube to accept a 17670. All you need is some 100 grit sandpaper, a 1/2" diameter dowel rod, some tape, a drill and a little patience.



the L2 is in the shape of the A2 in terms of body cavity...I have yet to see someone successfully stuff a 17670 down its belly


----------



## Patriot (Jul 1, 2009)

Sean, thank you for the excellent review. Your pictures are excellent btw.

The difference in output between this and the E2DL is huge to my eye.

Impressive!


----------



## mudman cj (Jul 1, 2009)

Illum said:


> the L2 is in the shape of the A2 in terms of body cavity...I have yet to see someone successfully stuff a 17670 down its belly


Oh, as you probably know I was thinking more along the lines of an E2E. Sorry.


----------



## Chao (Jul 1, 2009)

Got mine today!
It's brighter than my E2DL, and..
wow! 9280 lux at 1 meter, this is crazy. I like LX2 :twothumbs


----------



## 1996alnl (Jul 1, 2009)

Wow i must say i lost interest in this light,however looking at those beamshots it's evident that this light is easily putting out 260+ lumens.

MrGman tested his E2DL at just over 200 lumens and this light looks much brighter. If this light will have the same output with a 17670 cell i'll be all over it,if not i won't touch it.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Jul 1, 2009)

The original SF L2 Lux V, was overdriven on high, with mA's to LED about 880 or more, higher than the KL4 which was driven about 700mA's to LED, or so. Maybe SF is doing this with the LX2, running the Cree at 1amp+ to the LED, to provide that max output, but with maybe a sloping output. I may be wrong as I have not seen a runtime graph of the LX2. The L2 was sort of the special Lux V light in its day and its runtime was no where as flat as the KL4. Just thinking out loud here, so don't take offence.

Bill


----------



## prime77 (Jul 1, 2009)

Chao said:


> Got mine today!
> It's brighter than my E2DL, and..
> wow! 9280 lux at 1 meter, this is crazy. I like LX2 :twothumbs


Great Chao.:twothumbs Can we expect some of your wonderful runtime graphs in the future?


----------



## Crenshaw (Jul 2, 2009)

now i reaaally want an Lx1

Crenshaw


----------



## Illum (Jul 2, 2009)

I wonder why its only single mode on the regular E2E bodies:shrug:



mudman cj said:


> Oh, as you probably know I was thinking more along the lines of an E2E. Sorry.



oh, hmm

Fortunately now that the L2's head is no longer "dumb" I suppose there will be a third party body that's 17670/18650 compatible assuming of course those buck circuits can handle the 30% lower voltage of a Li-ion

better yet, anyone stuffed a 17670 down the head end?


----------



## Sean (Jul 2, 2009)

Runtime test added to the original post.
1H 25M in regulation, 2H 2M to 50%. Held in hand to keep cool.


----------



## Kid9P (Jul 2, 2009)

Sean said:


> Runtime test added to the original post.
> 1H 25M in regulation, 2H 2M to 50%. Held in hand to keep cool.


 

It's funny how things quickly advance. 200+ lumens running in regulation for 1 hr and 25m would have been totally unheard of just last year!

LOL, I still remember when I got my first HDS B42XRGT....I was like "Wow, this is bright" 


:twothumbs Thanks for taking the time to do the runtime testing :twothumbs


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Jul 2, 2009)

So much for my thoughts on the runtime being steep. Very interesting that they got what they did. What is current draw at tail?

Bill


----------



## Federal LG (Jul 2, 2009)

Nice review! Thanks for posting it...
Man, Surefire TIR optics rules! I love my E1B and L1... 

Those LX2 beamshots are awesome!


----------



## Sean (Jul 2, 2009)

Bullzeyebill said:


> So much for my thoughts on the runtime being steep. Very interesting that they got what they did. What is current draw at tail?
> 
> Bill



I got .776A on fairly fresh Surefire cells. That's a little better than my E2DL.


----------



## Chao (Jul 2, 2009)

Sean said:


> Run time test @ ~200 lumens. Light held to keep cool. 2 hours & 2 minutes to 50% (Panasonic CR123A exp: 2018):
> [/B]_(hours) : (minutes)-(light output)
> _00:00-*135*
> 01:00-*135*
> ...


*

Thanks for the runtime test :twothumbs*


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Jul 2, 2009)

Thanks for current draw results. That is good. Must be using some steller LED's. How is heat over time? You held it throughout test? Never got hot like a KL4?

Bill


----------



## Sean (Jul 2, 2009)

Bullzeyebill said:


> Thanks for current draw results. That is good. Must be using some steller LED's. How is heat over time? You held it throughout test? Never got hot like a KL4?
> 
> Bill



It took a good ten minutes to get beyond warm. But even then it was not uncomfortable to hold. If you don't hold it, it gets pretty hot and then the brightness sags a bit. That's the main reason I held it. I wanted to draw as much heat away from the LED as I could to see how flat the brightness would be under those conditions.


----------



## weasle (Jul 5, 2009)

Thanks for the review


----------



## MikeF (Jul 5, 2009)

From the Thread Starter Post:



Sean said:


> *Surefire LX2 LUMAMAX:*
> *FEATURES*
> 
> 
> ...


 
Sean, I too was concerned about the possibility of wear of the Tailcap HA against the clip as the tailcap is rotated. I took a -210 Nitrile O-Ring from an assortment that I have and slid it onto the body and it rests where there is a small groove near the tail of the body. The O-Ring is thick enough to hold the clip away from the tailcap so there is no contact. The -210 ORing is 3/4" ID and made from 1/8" material. I ordered some GITD ORings from from Sigman to make the LX2 a little quicker to find and grab for those "bumps in the night".


----------



## Litbobber (Jul 5, 2009)

Hi MikeF
Great idea can you show a pic if possible?

Thanks


----------



## Sean (Jul 5, 2009)

I added a few more pics to the original post:


Shots across the room. LX2 on high:







LX2 on high with F04 (beam diffuser):






LX2 on low:






LX2 on low with F04:






TK40 on high:






Titan T1A on high:






Fenix P1D CE on max:


----------



## Sean (Jul 5, 2009)

MikeF said:


> From the Thread Starter Post:
> 
> 
> 
> Sean, I too was concerned about the possibility of wear of the Tailcap HA against the clip as the tailcap is rotated. I took a -210 Nitrile O-Ring from an assortment that I have and slid it onto the body and it rests where there is a small groove near the tail of the body. The O-Ring is thick enough to hold the clip away from the tailcap so there is no contact. The -210 ORing is 3/4" ID and made from 1/8" material. I ordered some GITD ORings from from Sigman to make the LX2 a little quicker to find and grab for those "bumps in the night".



My clip just barely rests on the tailcap. And since the tailcap is round and the clip curves back on itself at the point it touches the clip there seems to be very little actual contact between the clip and the tailcap. I don't feel or hear any resistance when I turn the tailcap either. So I'm not all that worried about it. It's not nearly as bad as the Fenix T1, where the clip drug on the knurling. Another option is that you can just pry up slightly on the clip before you turn the tailcap.

Here is what mine looks like:


----------



## toby_pra (Jul 5, 2009)

Can't believe this baby is soooo bright! 

Does anyone know, what kind of LED is built in?


----------



## Illum (Jul 6, 2009)

Sean said:


> Titan T1A on high:



assuming your camera setting is consistent, then the T1A really needs some help :green:



toby_pra said:


> Can't believe this baby is soooo bright!
> 
> Does anyone know, what kind of LED is built in?



CREE, unknown bin, and most likely unknown tint because tint lottery is at work in surefire's lights


----------



## Sean (Jul 6, 2009)

Illum said:


> assuming your camera setting is consistent, then the T1A really needs some help :green:



The Titan is singin' the blues.


----------



## Marlinaholic (Jul 6, 2009)

Looks like I'll have to bend the clip a hair so it sits just above the cap a millimeter or so. Or I might just remove it, I don't think I'd use this light clipped to the bill of my cap anyway, and with that nice lanyard attachment, I really don't need a clip for my pocket. Can't wait to for mine to get here


----------



## Illum (Jul 6, 2009)

Sean said:


> The Titan is singin' the blues.



its remarkable how off the camera's balance can be compared to our own eyes hey


----------



## cue003 (Jul 6, 2009)

Can anyone snap a picture of an E2DL (stock configuration) and a LX2 side by side? I am curious to see which one is noticeable larger. In the pictures from another thread with Ashton having a E2DL in his hand it appears rather small and when I have the LX2 (I have 2 of them) in my hands it feels rather large. 

Yes I know my hands and his hands are different sizes but I just wanted to see a side by side picture of the E2DL and the LX2.

Anyone?

Thanks guys.

Curtis


----------



## curlyfry562 (Jul 6, 2009)

I am curious to see if the other new lights that surefire is releasing this year will get outputs bumped up from what was stated in the catalog; i.e. The Aviators :twothumbs or the L1. Although as you guys have discussed it could simply be a change in Surefire's method of measurement and not a hardware upgrade.


----------



## RichS (Jul 6, 2009)

Illum said:


> its remarkable how off the camera's balance can be compared to our own eyes hey


This is the second set of beamshots I've seen within a couple of days where the T1A tint had a much more blue appearance when compared to other LED lights. 

The other review is here: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3003262&postcount=7


----------



## bondr006 (Jul 6, 2009)

They are both 5.40 inches in length...



cue003 said:


> Can anyone snap a picture of an E2DL (stock configuration) and a LX2 side by side? I am curious to see which one is noticeable larger. In the pictures from another thread with Ashton having a E2DL in his hand it appears rather small and when I have the LX2 (I have 2 of them) in my hands it feels rather large.
> 
> Yes I know my hands and his hands are different sizes but I just wanted to see a side by side picture of the E2DL and the LX2.
> 
> ...


----------



## Sean (Jul 6, 2009)

Illum said:


> its remarkable how off the camera's balance can be compared to our own eyes hey



It's not the white balance, it really is that blue. :green:


----------



## Illum (Jul 6, 2009)

Sean said:


> It's not the white balance, it really is that blue. :green:



eww? :green:

as far as the LX2 goes, now that the body can be accessed both ways, how about that 17670 fitting again?

judging from the tailcap its not going to be possible but from the front I'm not sure whether it stands as "incompatible"


----------



## Sgt. LED (Jul 6, 2009)

Nope, not going.


----------



## Search (Jul 7, 2009)

cue003 said:


> Can anyone snap a picture of an E2DL (stock configuration) and a LX2 side by side? I am curious to see which one is noticeable larger. In the pictures from another thread with Ashton having a E2DL in his hand it appears rather small and when I have the LX2 (I have 2 of them) in my hands it feels rather large.
> 
> Yes I know my hands and his hands are different sizes but I just wanted to see a side by side picture of the E2DL and the LX2.
> 
> ...



If you go back to that thread I posted another picture of him holding his "EDC" at night at another time and place.

It's an E2D not an E2DL. Which is smaller. That is why it seems that way.


----------



## Marlinaholic (Jul 7, 2009)

Got my LX2! I live in a rural area with almost no annoying ambient light, so I am blessed with a good place to test my lights. I gotta say, my LX2 is EXACTLY as bright as my E2DL! Both on low and high! I tried them from at my feet to several hundred yards too. Now I know that my E2DL is an over achiever, as I picked it from several I owned as the brightest one AND while the low is supposed to only be 5 lumens, its every bit the equal of the 15 lumens the LX2 is cranking out. I was surprised that even on low they were identical to my eye. I will say my LX2 has a slightly nicer tint on high, almost pure white, while my E2DL has a very very slight greenish tint to it, but not much, just slight. I also like the UI on the LX2 better, though you can't tailstand it. The LX2 is going to be brighter than most people's E2DL's, but not all. If you own a nice E2DL, don't expect this light to blow it away, even comparing them on low level. Hopefully these LX2's are just a consistent way for everyone to have a light as bright as the best E2DLs out there, without having to buy several E2DLs and pick through them. Check out how close the length of the LX2 is to my 5th gen L1! 




I prefer the knurling on the older lights too. I know Surefire is just trying for a new look, and at least its grippier than the E1B.


----------



## Kestrel (Jul 7, 2009)

Marlinaholic, thanks for the mini review and comparisons, particularly with regard to the low output levels. The earlier (luxIII) L1 is also a helpful comparison standard with regards to overall size.


----------



## Size15's (Jul 7, 2009)

Kestrel said:


> Marlinaholic, thanks for the mini review and comparisons, particularly with regard to the low output levels. The latest generation L1 is a helpful comparison standard.


The photo does not show the current L1 - it shows a previous version with a far longer body than the current L1 has.
The LX2 is almost an inch longer than the current L1.


----------



## Kestrel (Jul 7, 2009)

Size15's said:


> The photo does not show the current L1 - it shows a previous version with a far longer body than the current L1 has.
> The LX2 is almost an inch longer than the current L1.


Argh, thanks. I have both L1's in question but it's been a while since I've looked at / carried my Luxeon L1.


----------



## RobertM (Jul 7, 2009)

Sean said:


> Titan T1A on high:



It's a shame the T1A has such cool emitters. :sick2: I was really excited about the T1A for a long time, but the beamshots everyone has posted has kept me away from it. 

Thanks for posted the pics of the LX2 as well.


I've been holding out for the LX1, but I couldn't resist. I placed an order with OpticsHQ yesterday for an LX2


----------



## cue003 (Jul 7, 2009)

I noticed that the hotspot (circle) of my L1-Cree is much larger than the beam on either of my LX2 lights. I am sure that is probably due to the different LED types in each light. I do like the size of the hotspot for the L1-Cree. It is very good size.


----------



## Sharpy_swe (Jul 8, 2009)

Great review, thanks


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Jul 8, 2009)

cue003 said:


> I noticed that the hotspot (circle) of my L1-Cree is much larger than the beam on either of my LX2 lights. I am sure that is probably due to the different LED types in each light. I do like the size of the hotspot for the L1-Cree. It is very good size.



They both use the Cree XR-E.

Bill


----------



## Marlinaholic (Jul 9, 2009)

I used to own a large hot spot L1 Cree. My other like 8 or 9 TIR Surefires all had smaller hotpots. Don't know what causes it, but some L1 Crees do have abnormally large hotspots compared to other TIR current production Surefires.


----------



## Wattnot (Jul 9, 2009)

Nice review and beamshots!

I was thinking about getting an E2DL after seeing the comments on how the LX2 is the same or only slightly brighter, but those beamshots speak volumes!

Now if they could only get the annodizing right! Why does SF think it's okay now to put out multi-colored lights? If they're going to do that, how about electric maroon and speckled violet instead of 4 close shades of bronzish gray?

Any chance any of you new LX2 owners also have an Eagletac P10C2 you can compare it to?


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Jul 9, 2009)

Wattnot, SF has never been into getting the anodizing right. It is not one of their priorities, and usually does not bother most SF buyers, me included. I have never been one to be concerned by such and will mix black SF HA bodies with HA natural, ect. However, if one is concerned about art work and being a collector I can see the concern. I do think it is amazing that some flashlight producers are putting out flashlight with flawless matching HA. That for me would not be an important selling point, but I do appreciate that others like that perfect HA.

Bill


----------



## toby_pra (Jul 9, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> Any chance any of you new LX2 owners also have an Eagletac P10C2 you can compare it to?


 
I would be also interested in....


----------



## Size15's (Jul 10, 2009)

Bullzeyebill said:


> Wattnot, SF has never been into getting the anodizing right.
> Bill


Bill,
I disagree - SureFire products have industry-leading type III "Hard" anodisation. HA is a protective growth not a cosmetic coating. SureFire HA is manufactured for performance not aesthetics.


----------



## HKJ (Jul 10, 2009)

Size15's said:


> Bill,
> I disagree - SureFire products have industry-leading type III "Hard" anodisation. HA is a protective growth not a cosmetic coating. SureFire HA is manufactured for performance not aesthetics.



Even if a tool is made for performance, it does not exclude it can look good. Personally I prefer that my tools both look good and performs well (performance is the most important factor, I hate stuff only designed for good look and not for practical usage). This is not restricted to lights, but includes all kind of tools I uses.


----------



## Size15's (Jul 10, 2009)

I happen to think that SureFire's "natural" HA _does_ look good - the variety has a charm and is part of SureFire's style and character.
At the end of the day everybody can have their own view when it comes to 
aesthetics...


----------



## Zeruel (Jul 10, 2009)

I like Surefire's natural HA, it's a good difference from the usual black unless it's the super matt black that my E2DL has. A pleasure to hold. Back to the point, has anyone's LX2 got consistent ano? Seems like all that I saw has a slight mismatch, with the exception of their marketing shots.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Jul 10, 2009)

AH HA! And now we have somebody with an excellent point in the HA match matter.

If SF takes the time to assemble lights and shoot promo photo's of perfectly matched anno then why not deliver that same anno match to customers? If it doesn't matter to them then why not have 4 different shades of green/grey on one light to help sell the item? 




I just think it's funny that they make the effort to match anno on photo-shoot lights and never deliver it to customers. I don't care anymore on my user lights as long as it all wears at an even rate but still either match the anno on every HA-Nat light or none of them at all. 
Sure it's a nitpicking non-issue to most people but this is the company you can hold to a higher standard because you know what they are capable of. 
I have had some lights that the mismatch was actually nicer than if it was all the same hue. It made it look more rugged or tool grade somehow, dynamic. All of it the exact same shade would be a bit more boring I think. I know that if each light was perfectly matched then playing lego would not be as fun for me. Still all promo pics should be mismatched as well!


----------



## Size15's (Jul 10, 2009)

It's more likely that the proto-type / pre-production sample used for photography/marketing was made 'by hand' and the components anodised by SureFire's proto-type shop. As a result, I suggest this would create a far more consistently coloured set of components compared to production components.

SureFire batch manufacture production components so different pieces of bar stock will be used to create each of the components as they are scheduled to different CNC turning centres. Each batch of each of the components will be anodised as batch, perhaps even in different tanks.

Also, and I guess here you may have a point, SureFire's catalog and website are high quality marketing materials. When it comes to preparing a product for the interactive 3D web features etc. there’s a good chance the images/scans/renders will be graded for a consistent result. If this misrepresents the products to the extent that issue could be taken then I assume people would communicate their issues with SureFire. If this topic is seen as a big deal as a result of customer feedback then perhaps SureFire will consider addressing it.

I don't think it's an issue or a big deal although I have no doubt that Flashaholics are far more interested in a whole range of things that perhaps nobody else really cares about (otherwise everybody would be a Flashaholic!)

Al


----------



## Zeruel (Jul 10, 2009)

The mismatch isn't a deal breaker for me, but I'm just wondering aloud because I hardly see any mismatch for the older series. Are they using new methods or tanks? Are different parts done in different plants? Are they trying new mixtures? etc.... crossed my mind. If the more affordable lights can get it right, what happened here?

However, I will be concerned IF there are matching ones amongst those that are not. I rather have consistent inconsistency duh2 than to feel like I got the loosing end of the bargain with a mismatch and knowing there are matching ones out there. 

Besides, I dig the new design although some cited the lack of the familiar SF knurling. To me, it has a refreshing, sci-fi kind of look. I wouldn't want it otherwise or it isn't much different from L2.


----------



## Patriot (Jul 10, 2009)

Yeah, with regards to the catalog pics we all know that in an age of Photoshop no picture is what it seems. Even if the featured lights were mismatched in actuality, they're not going to be after a few clicks of the mouse button. 

In any case, I just quickly reviewed all the LX2 pics in this thread and I think the HA is very attractive, which is how I generally feel about all of SF's HA. To me, the small shade differences look very cool and give the light a custom look. The higher the number of color mismatched parts the more attractive they are to me. 

As an aircraft buff, it kind of reminds me of the old F15 Streak Eagle. The unpainted post test aircraft that broke all the previous time to climb records. I know.........quite the stretch. 









On the other hand, after quickly glancing at that T1A beamshot again, I find the color temperature of that light nearly indefensible....lol. Last time I saw something like that it was a $9 multi-5mm light at ACE harware store while in the check-out line. Even as a SF fan I can't excuse that one away. :laughing:


----------



## Size15's (Jul 10, 2009)

Zeruel said:


> The mismatch isn't a deal breaker for me, but I'm just wondering aloud because I hardly see any mismatch for the older series.


I guess you've not been around long enough to experience mismatching like this?!








Shelby Chan photography

As I said, there is varation... sometimes more, sometimes less...


----------



## Zeruel (Jul 10, 2009)

Size15's said:


> I guess you've not been around long enough to experience mismatching like this?!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not long enough. Now those look cool! 
Wait a minute.... are those marketing shots? I kid I kid :nana:


----------



## Size15's (Jul 10, 2009)

Zeruel said:


> Not long enough. Now those look cool!
> Wait a minute.... are those marketing shots? I kid I kid :nana:


Actually, they kinda were! SureFire has come a long way


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Jul 10, 2009)

Size15's said:


> Bill,
> I disagree - SureFire products have industry-leading type III "Hard" anodisation. HA is a protective growth not a cosmetic coating. SureFire HA is manufactured for performance not aesthetics.



Al, I meant matching the HA, and "right" as a sort of :devil: remark to those who think that perfect matching is all that important. Yes, I agree, SF uses the best HA process.

Bill


----------



## carfreak222 (Jul 13, 2009)

Hi! First post here, Sean, what site did you orders yours from? I have a normal Ed2 and I think it's time to upgrade.


----------



## toby_pra (Jul 13, 2009)

Has anyone already tried to run the LX2 with more than 6V????:tinfoil:


----------



## Sgt. LED (Jul 14, 2009)

Yes, brighter and no smoke. I didn't do it but I read a post where someone else did. I can't recall how long they tried it however.
:shrug:


----------



## toby_pra (Jul 14, 2009)

Brighter and no smoke sounds very good....but how long??? :devil:


----------



## Zeruel (Jul 14, 2009)

toby_pra said:


> Has anyone already tried to run the LX2 with more than 6V????:tinfoil:




Rejeme tried it:



rejeme said:


> Does this light have sime type of thermal cut-off built into it? I'm running mine off of RCR123's that put out around 3.5V when fully charged. I tried to run the light on high to observe battery drainage. At around 20 min on high the light flickered then shut off. I thought "I just blew out my $200 flashlight, good thing the wife doesn't know I bought it yet". I picked up the light and it was holdable, but hot. After about 20 seconds of being off, I was able to switch it back on with no ill effect. I did not let it run any longer as a took it apart to inspect. The batts were barely warm and they were still showing around 3.3V. Any thoughts.



When flickering like that happened in my previous experience with other lights, it's time for me to say "Uh oh".... If I'm lucky, when I switch back on it'll run per usual. If I'm not, the output will be halved or none at all, ie LED or driver busted.


----------



## toby_pra (Jul 14, 2009)

I think you are right...


----------



## cue003 (Jul 14, 2009)

Well, thus far rejeme has tried it and his light is still working. I don't think anyone else has run it longer than he has continuously at 20min or so.

Me, I think I am going to stick with primaries since I have a stock pile of them.


----------



## toby_pra (Jul 14, 2009)

I will use Rcr123 rated at 3.0V...:tinfoil:


----------



## Ctrain (Jul 15, 2009)

Well this light looks amazing...
After considering these points from your generous reviews and postings

1. A Surefire
2. 200+ lumens
3. Aprox 2hrs runtime
4. What I consider to be near perfect UI
5. Throws like a m.......
6. Did I mention its a Surefire

I'm placing an order TODAY... I am so pumped for this light... I hope it lives up to expectations!! Its to me what I'd consider to be the near perfect light!

After a few months offline I'm glad I got back in time to catch this one.

As for the pocket clip... Hopefully it looks better than in the pic's! But is it easy enough to replace with an E2 clip?

The postage wait begins...


----------



## toby_pra (Jul 16, 2009)

Good choose...


----------



## Gern Blanston (Aug 31, 2009)

I've had my LX2 for a couple of weeks, and I can't see a difference in brightness between my E2D LED and the LX2 on high. I like the LX2, but if I had to have only one, I'd pick the E2D LED.


----------



## Size15's (Aug 31, 2009)

Gern Blanston said:


> I've had my LX2 for a couple of weeks, and I can't see a difference in brightness between my E2D LED and the LX2 on high. I like the LX2, but if I had to have only one, I'd pick the E2D LED.


I think this is where SureFire's diversity of product design really shines because there exact opposite is the case for me! Is it the clickie that you like? Or actually the crenellated bezel?
(I find both annoying  )

BTW, for clarity and to avoid confusion it is better to refer to the likes of the E2DL by it's model number rather than name: "E2DL" rather than "E2D LED Defender". This way there is no doubt which product is being referred to.
(6PL, G2ZL, 6PDL etc are all specific and definite descriptions)


----------



## EV_007 (Sep 8, 2009)

RobertM said:


> It's a shame the T1A has such cool emitters. :sick2: I was really excited about the T1A for a long time, but the beamshots everyone has posted has kept me away from it.



What's all this talk about it being that "angry" blueish Mine looks nothing like the purple Arc-P lookin' impressions and pics I've seen posted. The tint compared to the other ones is a bit cooler, but not angry like that. To the naked eye it is a lot less blueish/purplish. Maybe I lucked out or I have extremely green LEDs that make up my other lights in my collection. 

LX2 on high same as TK40 on high is impressive indeed. I'm still trying to resist the LX2, but dang guys.


----------



## leon2245 (Sep 9, 2009)

*angry = strawman*



> On the other hand, after quickly glancing at that T1A beamshot again, I find the color temperature of that light nearly indefensible....lol. Last time I saw something like that it was a $9 multi-5mm light at ACE harware store while in the check-out line. Even as a SF fan I can't excuse that one away. :laughing:


 
The one detail I can't get past every time I look at comparison beamshots. And as the O.P. & some others have said it must not be entirely a camera trick, if it looks the same to their eyes as it does in photos. But the good news is, as much as these are still in demand despite the tint, you'd think there'll be future titans. Hopefully improved in that regard.

But either way the Lx2 looks like the one to get. L>O.L. @ the beamshots vs. the T.K. 40, then seeing their sizes juxtaposed. Thanks for all the photos & words O.P. well done.


----------



## EV_007 (Sep 17, 2009)

*Re: angry = strawman*



leon2245 said:


> The one detail I can't get past every time I look at comparison beamshots. And as the O.P. & some others have said it must not be entirely a camera trick, if it looks the same to their eyes as it does in photos. But the good news is, as much as these are still in demand despite the tint, you'd think there'll be future titans. Hopefully improved in that regard.



Mine's slightly cool, but not angry blue.








Okay, back to the topic at hand. I just placed an order for the LX2. If my E1B is any indicator of quality and output, I don't think I'll be disappointed with the LX2. I find that if the light is too big to pocket, then I don't use it as much. A two cell light seem to be the happy medium between tiny one cell or keychain lights and the 4 cell and up mega output ones.


----------



## MichaelRose (Sep 18, 2009)

surefires are wonderful flashlights, but they sure are expensive. The amount of flashlight per dollar you get is what makes surefires a little less awesome. If they were cheaper, I would be very loyal to surefire.


----------



## Aux (Sep 18, 2009)

Any information how this compares to the prior L2? I have a round body L2, and am interested to know if it is worth the cost to replace it with an LX2. It is really twice as bright on high?


----------



## Hitthespot (Sep 18, 2009)

Aux said:


> Any information how this compares to the prior L2? I have a round body L2, and am interested to know if it is worth the cost to replace it with an LX2. It is really twice as bright on high?


 
No. It is only 50% brighter. It would have to be 400 lumens to be twice as bright as the 100 lumen L2.

Hope this helps.

Bill


----------



## zven (Sep 18, 2009)

Aux said:


> Any information how this compares to the prior L2? I have a round body L2, and am interested to know if it is worth the cost to replace it with an LX2. It is really twice as bright on high?



I'm willing to bet you'd very much notice the increased brightness, and that it could be worth it just for that. Whether it's actually a perceived doubling of the brightness is another matter, and kind of hard to say.

The main thing to note with the LX2 is that it's a COMPLETELY different beam pattern from your L2. Whereas the L2 uses a reflector to achieve a very wide and floody beam, the LX2 concentrates nearly all of its light into a confined hotspot. If you enjoy the wide spread of your L2's beam, don't bother "upgrading" to an LX2 (unless you're okay with the F04 diffuser, which leaves you with great flood, but no hotspot).

So I definitely wouldn't recommend the LX2 as a replacement for the L2, but rather as a complement to it.


----------



## EV_007 (Sep 19, 2009)

As mentioned, the LX2 uses a different beam projection method as well as a different type of LED. 

If you want the wall of light the classic L2 offers, you can use the F04 diffuser over the head to smooth out the otherwise tight beam of the new LX2.


----------



## EV_007 (Sep 22, 2009)

SureFire LX2 on high doing a little painting with light duty. Tree was about 75 yards away and the LX2 on high was swept back and fourth to "paint" the tree with light.

Little overexposed, but wanted to see if I could make the tree glow in the dark against he light polluted filled starry night.


----------



## PoliceScannerMan (Sep 22, 2009)

Cool Pic!


----------



## steveG (Sep 22, 2009)

Very cool! I'm going to have to give something like that a try. Looks like it would be fin!


----------



## DimeRazorback (Sep 22, 2009)

That looks cool 

:twothumbs


----------



## funkymonkey1111 (Dec 12, 2009)

got my LX2 tonight and couldn't be more underwhelmed in a light. no way does this thing even outperform a G2 with a Bugoutgear drop in (which I understand isn't even one of the top P60 drop ins).


----------



## DimeRazorback (Dec 12, 2009)

Which drop in are you using?

In what way does the drop in "outperform" the LX2?


----------



## funkymonkey1111 (Dec 12, 2009)

The drop in is the one that Bugoutgear makes/sells. I don't know the specs on it, or even what its called. it cost $49 about a year ago, and was advertised to have (i believe) 220 lumens.

In a plain old G2 incan host, that thing throws as far as the LX2, and is bright as the LX2. the hotspot is smaller with the drop in, but downrange usable light is better with the drop in given the smaller hot spot. don't get me wrong--the drop in isn't some sort of magic throw king that should have any significant advantage over the LX2.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Dec 12, 2009)

Well, comparing two similar output lights won't ever make your jaw drop. No matter how much you spend.

As for output, the LX2 has a larger 'spot' than other TIR Surefire's like the E2DL, which I find is better as you have a larger area lit up.

The TIR is designed to throw the majority of the light forward hence why the drop in, using a reflector has a greater amount of spill.
Also, because the hotspot of the drop focuses it's light into a smaller area, it will definitely be 'brighter' than the LX2.

The same thing can be said about any light using a TIR, my Malkoffs have the same outcome compared to my Fenix TK11 etc etc

:thumbsup:


----------



## pulstar (Dec 13, 2009)

Hi guys,

I've been using my LX2 for about 4 months now and i couldn't be more happy with it! It's perfect!
But yesterday i noticed a small "flaw" while using it to light a path when i took a night walk with my girlfriend. It was very coold night (under 0 degrees Celzius). I put my handgloves on, and after a few minutes it happened: It was on constant low(tailcap twisted) and i tried to change position of a flashlight in my hand to a "tactical" hold. My gloves are made from warm polyester. Light almost slipped from my hands, i tried to catch it, but i made things even worse: Somehow i managed to even hit it to the ground. There was a long, loud clap onto the asphalt. I tought i beat the crap out of it: My girlfriend took her LedLenser K3 from her pocket and we inspected my wounded LX2: To our suprise (and my huuuge relief) LX2 had only one very small hollow but annodizing remained intact! My nitecore didn't survive it's first fall with so few consequences. Great job Surefire, for such a strong anno! 
So, now it's finally baptise, and i finally have one "complaint" about this light: it's slippery in synthetic gloves(polyester and so on). I wonder how it works with leather gloves. 

Lesson learned: Lanyard might be sometimes useful but nevertheless, LX2 has very pleasant finnish, i find it superior to any knurled light. It slips into your pocket very nice, and has very good grip even in wet hands. just be careful while using it wearing a gloves, you might have some unexpected workout trying to catch it


----------



## Size15's (Dec 13, 2009)

Why weren't you using the supplied lanyard?


----------



## RAF_Groundcrew (Dec 13, 2009)

Size15's said:


> I think this is where SureFire's diversity of product design really shines because there exact opposite is the case for me! Is it the clickie that you like? Or actually the crenellated bezel?
> (I find both annoying  )
> 
> BTW, for clarity and to avoid confusion it is better to refer to the likes of the E2DL by it's model number rather than name: "E2DL" rather than "E2D LED Defender". This way there is no doubt which product is being referred to.
> (6PL, G2ZL, 6PDL etc are all specific and definite descriptions)


It can get confusing, especially when SF carry out 'stealth upgrades' to lights, either by using newer LEDs, or some other trickery to increase the output.

I have just bought an E2D LED Defender, current version (5/200 lumen), and I love this light more than I have any other light for a long time. The option to have a long running useful low, with a punchy high, tight beam is really working for me right now.

This light goes everywhere with me, night and day at the moment, but I think I'll look around for a belt pouch, as I don't personally like lights clipped in pockets for my purposes.

I didn't buy it for the strike bezel ergonomics, but I find the crenelated tailcap great for tailstanding, and I like the clicky tailcap (I was considering the LX2, but there were enough features on the E2DL to win me over.

Apart from the serial number (and of course, this is only the number of the body tube, not the LED or electronics version in the head), there doesn't seem any way of identifying the model spec of some SF lights.

I have an L1 also, the one with 1.1/22 lumen output, from the 2006 product year, I think - Luxeon, instead of Cree. I greatly prefer the low output, long runtime of the older L1, and see that as it's main advantage.

Finally, I wish that SF would include the F04 diffuser with all its small TIR lights, I have not yet used one that didn't benefit from the diffuser, when indoors, under normal conditions. I actually added such comments, when I registered the warranty online, adding that a flip up diffuser would be even better (the rubber F04 on the E2DL makes it less 'sharp and scary' as well as preventing pocket snagging).


----------



## Tempest UK (Dec 14, 2009)

Size15's said:


> Why weren't you using the supplied lanyard?



Sometimes you just have to live life on the edge.



Regards,
Tempest


----------



## jhc37013 (Dec 16, 2009)

I am having a really tough time deciding if I should order this light or not. I just bought a E2DL and a E1B, I love them both but really want to carry the E2DL clipped to pocket but just really don't like bezel up and rough edges so I am thinking the LX2 could be solution to my problem what do you think? If I read a earlier post correctly did I read the LX2 has a larger hotspot then the E2DL, if so how about spill also? After carrying around these Surefires the past couple days I am having a tough time EDC a different brand they just feel so much more solid or fulfilling, what have I stared.


----------



## Size15's (Dec 16, 2009)

jhc37013 said:


> If I read a earlier post correctly did I read the LX2 has a larger hotspot then the E2DL, if so how about spill also?


That I'm aware of, SureFire are using their same TIR optic for the E1L, E1B, E2L, E2DL, LX2, M600C, X300 etc.
Beams vary from individual light to individual light due to how SureFire focus each individual optic with each individual LED when each bezel is assembled.


----------



## THE_dAY (Dec 16, 2009)

jhc37013 said:


> I am having a really tough time deciding if I should order this light or not. I just bought a E2DL and a E1B, I love them both but really want to carry the E2DL clipped to pocket but just really don't like bezel up and rough edges so I am thinking the LX2 could be solution to my problem what do you think? If I read a earlier post correctly did I read the LX2 has a larger hotspot then the E2DL, if so how about spill also? After carrying around these Surefires the past couple days I am having a tough time EDC a different brand they just feel so much more solid or fulfilling, what have I stared.


Check out this thread for outdoor beamshots of both LX2 and E2DL.

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/236064


----------



## jhc37013 (Dec 16, 2009)

THE_dAY said:


> Check out this thread for outdoor beamshots of both LX2 and E2DL.
> 
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/236064



Thanks for the link I ordered a LX2, couldn't stop myself.


----------



## garden (Dec 27, 2009)

Great review and pictures but I don't think this light is that good after all. Only runs for two hours on expensive CR123A batteries that you can't get in supermarkets (not in AUS anyway). A Nitecore EZ123 gives 180 lumens of fully regulated light for a little bit under an hour for only 1 CR123A, but the Surefire only gives 200 from 2.

Also Surefire advertises this light as for "tactical" use but in reality if I were a cop on a night patrol and this guy with a gun springs out of the bushes, I'd want a light with more "spill" light and a strobe mode to disorient the guy.

So I think it's good for camping or walking around the house but not for the purpose Surefire advertises it for.


----------



## Cosmo7809 (Dec 28, 2009)

garden said:


> guy with a gun springs out of the bushes, I'd want a light with more "spill" light and a strobe mode to disorient the guy.




Nothing personal, but I think its easier said than done. '


If you see someone with a gun pointed towards you, you grab your firearm, not click a light 5 times before you get to strobe



I do agree with you on the "tactical" aspect. Surefire does tend to make everything tacticool(example: pen)


----------



## prime77 (Dec 28, 2009)

> If you see someone with a gun pointed towards you, you grab your firearm, not click a light 5 times before you get to strobe



Don't forget to tighten the head first. Then click 5 times.


----------



## PeaceOfMind (Jan 11, 2010)

garden said:


> Only runs for two hours on expensive CR123A batteries that you can't get in supermarkets (not in AUS anyway). A Nitecore EZ123 gives 180 lumens of fully regulated light for a little bit under an hour for only 1 CR123A, but the Surefire only gives 200 from 2.


 
To this point, it's worth mentioning that NiteCore and Surefire are rating their lumens pretty differently (i.e. fairly conservative Out-The-Front output for Surefire versus probably less conservative Emitter output for Nitecore). Generally speaking, it's not necessarily that easy to simply compare lumens numbers from different manufacturers since there are so many variables in their measurement.

Plus, the point you've made is basically that the EZ123, with half the batteries of the LX2, puts out similar output for about half the runtime. This doesn't really give any kind of edge to the EZ123... half the batteries, half the energy stored, half the runtime @ similar output. You seem to be implying that the LX2 is doing poorly here, but these numbers just show that these two lights are running at a similar efficiency (with the LX2 being slightly more efficient - slightly more light, slightly more than double the runtime on double the batteries).


----------



## DimeRazorback (Jan 11, 2010)

As I just discovered when garden decided to trash my thread on my L1.

He doesn't like Surefire...

Troll??


----------



## jp2515 (Jan 11, 2010)

DimeRazorback said:


> As I just discovered when garden decided to trash my thread on my L1.
> 
> He doesn't like Surefire...
> 
> Troll??



Sounds more like a closed minded person who doesn't like any other brand (I see he likes Fenix)

Anyways I keep hearing a LX2 calling my name but somehow keep coming home with different lights and still no LX2 _yet_.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Jan 11, 2010)

jp2515 said:


> Anyways I keep hearing a LX2 calling my name but somehow keep coming home with different lights and still no LX2 _yet_.



And that last word is the most important!

You don't know what your missing until you have one :devil:


----------



## carrot (Jan 12, 2010)

It's OK...
Some people are like this. They just need to be bashed over the head with facts until they "get it" or get fed up and go back to DX forums.

The LX2 is a sweet light, every bit worth the purchase price. jp2515 ya gotta prioritize! The third good light I ever bought was the Surefire A2, because I wanted it so badly.


----------



## astanapane (May 30, 2010)

Hello all,

is there anyone that disassembled the Head of the Surefire LX2?

I would like to clean with a soft-smooth coat the back of the head but i cannot reach it deeper.

It would be interesting if someone has done it already for all our info.

Thanks.


----------



## tigervn (May 30, 2010)

astanapane said:


> Hello all,
> 
> is there anyone that disassembled the Head of the Surefire LX2?
> 
> ...


 
Do it may be you lost warranty service of SF.


----------



## Sean (Jun 3, 2012)

Just wanted to add that I picked up a "newer" LX2 and it is brighter than the first LX2 I had when I originally did this review. My first LX2 seemed to put out about ~205 or so lumens on high and ~15 lumens on low. My "newer" LX2 seems to put out closer to 250 lumens on high and 35 lumens on low! Just what I wanted.  I like the 35 lumen low because it's bright enough for most all tasks with a very long run time, especially with the rechargeable batteries Surefire now offers. Also, the current draw is lower on the newer version.


----------



## FPSRelic (Jun 4, 2012)

Sean said:


> Just wanted to add that I picked up a "newer" LX2 and it is brighter than the first LX2 I had when I originally did this review. My first LX2 seemed to put out about ~205 or so lumens on high and ~15 lumens on low. My "newer" LX2 seems to put out closer to 250 lumens on high and 35 lumens on low! Just what I wanted.  I like the 35 lumen low because it's bright enough for most all tasks with a very long run time, especially with the rechargeable batteries Surefire now offers. Also, the current draw is lower on the newer version.



This is interesting. Are you comparing the ligths side by side? Why did you buy a new lx2? Did you sell your old one?


----------



## Sean (Jun 4, 2012)

FPSRelic said:


> This is interesting. Are you comparing the ligths side by side? Why did you buy a new lx2? Did you sell your old one?



I sold my old one awhile ago. I bought another one recently, got a real good deal on it and was missing my LX2. I could just hold out on the new LX2's coming out later this year but will they be worth the price tag compared to what a used LX2 goes for? I have a light meter set up to compare light output and the newer LX2 on low is easily double the output. Apparently, Surefire is using newer more efficient led's without changing the electronics.


----------



## FPSRelic (Jun 4, 2012)

Sean said:


> I sold my old one awhile ago. I bought another one recently, got a real good deal on it and was missing my LX2. I could just hold out on the new LX2's coming out later this year but will they be worth the price tag compared to what a used LX2 goes for? I have a light meter set up to compare light output and the newer LX2 on low is easily double the output. Apparently, Surefire is using newer more efficient led's without changing the electronics.



Very interesting. I wonder when they made the change to the newer led's?


----------



## Sean (Jun 4, 2012)

FPSRelic said:


> Very interesting. I wonder when they made the change to the newer led's?



I would guess they made the change because more efficient LEDs are available. Why wouldn't they make the change?  The light is 3 years old, so it's no surprise leds have improved in that time.


----------



## FPSRelic (Jun 4, 2012)

Sean said:


> I would guess they made the change because more efficient LEDs are available. Why wouldn't they make the change?  The light is 3 years old, so it's no surprise leds have improved in that time.



Yeah I was thinking more of when not why. As in, aside from using a light meter, how would you know an lx2 is using one of the newer emitters.


----------



## Sean (Jun 4, 2012)

FPSRelic said:


> Yeah I was thinking more of when not why. As in, aside from using a light meter, how would you know an lx2 is using one of the newer emitters.



I don't know how you would know. Unless you compare them side by side.


----------



## Slumber (Jun 5, 2012)

May I ask what the serial number (or range) is on your brighter LX2?

I know the packaging has changed the stated runtime on low from 45 hours to 30 or there about. Maybe this coincides with an emitter update?


----------



## Sean (Jun 5, 2012)

Slumber Pass said:


> May I ask what the serial number (or range) is on your brighter LX2?
> 
> I know the packaging has changed the stated runtime on low from 45 hours to 30 or there about. Maybe this coincides with an emitter update?



I didn't know the stated runtime on the packaging changed. My newer LX2 serial number is in the A47,xxx range. My first LX2 serial # was less than 1,000.


----------



## Slumber (Jun 5, 2012)

Sean said:


> I didn't know the stated runtime on the packaging changed. My newer LX2 serial number is in the A47,xxx range. My first LX2 serial # was less than 1,000.



Thanks. Whats the stated low runtime on your box?

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?328690-Surefire-LX2-Lumamax-runtime-change


----------



## Sean (Jun 5, 2012)

I bought it used and it didn't come with a box.


----------



## yowzer (Jun 8, 2012)

Sean said:


> I would guess they made the change because more efficient LEDs are available. Why wouldn't they make the change?  The light is 3 years old, so it's no surprise leds have improved in that time.



There haven't been any new developments in the XR-E front in a few years, and putting in an XP-E or other newer LED would require a major redesign of the optic or going to a different beam profile (And the beam that the LX2 sports now is one of the 2 big reasons why I love the light, the other being the UI). It's not something I'd expect to have seen any incremental updates for in the last few years. Can't wait for the Ultra version, though. I'm curious if it'll have a tiny M3LT style fresnel lens or something more like the current TIR optic.


----------



## FPSRelic (Jun 11, 2012)

One thing that occurs to me is that the new standard LX2 has a listed high lumen output similar to the ones Sean is seeing with the newer old model. How high has anyone seen an XR-E go as far as lumen output? Maybe Surefire just decided to overdrive the emitter a little, hence the reduction in runtime. Large companies have also been known to buy in bulk to save cost, and take ages to use up supply. Maybe Surefire bought up big 5 years ago, and just used up supply. Maybe the "new" emitters Surefire are using are ones that are three years old. Who knows.

Unfortunately there really needs to be more in the way of sampling done to verify that Sean's LX2 isn't just a freak of nature. And since the new LX2 Ultra is due for release this year, I doubt we will find many interested in purchasing a new current model just to find out.


----------



## natas18 (Jul 7, 2012)

I have been debating for over a year now whether to get this light or not; with the new LX2 ultra coming out soon my decision is now made even harder :sigh:


----------



## Crazy894509 (Aug 11, 2012)

I purchased my LX2 at a steal of a price of only $60.00 brand new


----------



## jais (Aug 13, 2012)

Crazy894509 said:


> I purchased my LX2 at a steal of a price of only $60.00 brand new



where did you buy it?


----------



## tobrien (Sep 1, 2012)

so this is still being shipped with the XR-E right?


----------



## gerryccw (Sep 4, 2012)

Crazy894509 said:


> I purchased my LX2 at a steal of a price of only $60.00 brand new


Wow, It's a very good price, where did you get it!???
even I'm waiting for new LX2 500lm version, but, my LX2 200lm version is make me satisfy already. 
anyway, really good price, I will get another one, if I got this price offer.


----------



## FPSRelic (Dec 12, 2015)

So has anyone else noticed that the LX2 is no longer on Surefire's website?


----------



## pulstar (Jan 7, 2016)

Yea, i totally freaked out so i bought one off ebay!


----------



## Slumber (Jan 7, 2016)

*Re: Surefire LX2 Review, Pics, Beamshots & Info*

It's great light. Bright enough with no drastic step down. It will be missed.


----------



## RobertMM (Jan 16, 2016)

*Re: Surefire LX2 Review, Pics, Beamshots & Info*

LX2, E2L and E1L are no longer on the site. Grrrrrrrr!


I love my LX2. Although my L1 with XPG2 us the one always in my pocket, the stock LX2 with very nice runtime on high with 16650 is my bag carry light. 240 lumens then is still 240 lumens now and provides all the throw I ever need.


----------



## RobertMM (Dec 10, 2016)

*Re: Surefire LX2 Review, Pics, Beamshots & Info*

Bump. 
Anyone still using their LX2?

Thinking of dropping in a XPG3 on mine. Any idea what the output would be on the stock driver?


----------



## sween1911 (Dec 10, 2016)

*Re: Surefire LX2 Review, Pics, Beamshots & Info*

LX2 is still king of portability and functionality. Love mine. Gotta get my hands on one or three of these 16650's that you kids are talking about nowadays. Plus I love that it has the same UI as my 24/7 L1 EDC. No clickie means with the tailcap adjusted properly, I can drop it in a bag or pocket without worrying that it will get stuck on, but instantly ready for use.


----------



## FPSRelic (Dec 10, 2016)

*Re: Surefire LX2 Review, Pics, Beamshots & Info*

Still using mine. It's my weekend Edc.


----------



## Slumber (Dec 11, 2016)

*Re: Surefire LX2 Review, Pics, Beamshots & Info*

I miss owning one. I've bought and sold 5 now I think. I describe it as boringly reliable. Great light!


----------



## pulstar (Dec 12, 2016)

*Re: Surefire LX2 Review, Pics, Beamshots & Info*

XP-G2 will probably be better. As far as i read, G3 should have a wider angle, thus more broad beam. XPG2 in my LX2 is perfect! Much better than XML! You are probably looking at around 300 OTF lumens with a bit broader beam but still the punch, original XRE led had. I love my lx2 and after the mod i almost completely lost interest in other flashlights



RobertMM said:


> Bump.
> Anyone still using their LX2?
> 
> Thinking of dropping in a XPG3 on mine. Any idea what the output would be on the stock driver?


----------



## jayhackett03 (Dec 19, 2016)

*Re: Surefire LX2 Review, Pics, Beamshots & Info*



sween1911 said:


> LX2 is still king of portability and functionality. Love mine. Gotta get my hands on one or three of these 16650's that you kids are talking about nowadays. Plus I love that it has the same UI as my 24/7 L1 EDC. No clickie means with the tailcap adjusted properly, I can drop it in a bag or pocket without worrying that it will get stuck on, but instantly ready for use.



My LX2 is my nightstand light, and my favorite light. I have 1000 Lumen Fenix lights, but they're just not as fun as the LX2. I still have my 2007 L1 Cree, but that's only 60 lumens so the LX2 has taken it's place as my go-to light. The 200 lumens of the LX2 seems to be just enough for anything I need around the house/yard. I love the throwy TIR lens, low sidespill, 2x123a form factor, instantaneous on, and simple two stage user interface. If it was 18650 and 20/500 lumens it would be absolutely perfect.


----------

