# MagCharger vs. Tigerlight vs. Surefire M6 LOLA



## bwaites (Jul 19, 2005)

This review had its genesis months ago when Jim Sexton reviewed the MagCharger60 and TigerLight11. After in depth analysis of his notes and thoughts, I realized that although the MC60 and TL11 were probably the most widespread of the incandescent high performance modifications, neither approached, even remotely, the numbers of stock MagChargers and Tigerlights out there. I have worked on it off and on for more than 3 months, changing my opinions as I have experimented with both the stock and modified versions of each light. 

The two lights lend themselves to easy comparisons because of their very similar normal uses and runtimes, though the larger MagCharger has an obvious advantage there. However, a straight up comparison of the lights seemed pretty mundane, until I realized that adding the Surefire M6 with its low output lamp assembly would give me three lights with very similar runtimes and outputs. Where the MagCharger and Tigerlight are rechargeable, the M6 uses a battery carrier and 6 123A cells. I had hoped to add the Jim Sexton built regulated battery pack to the comparison, but then realized that it would best be left to a new comparison of the modifications of each light, and I will update this review with my thoughts on the modified lights when theM6-R pack becomes available.

Another drawback to my review was that I did not have a camera adequate to capture decent beamshots of each light. That has now been remedied, so I will attempt to add those shots, perhaps with the capable assistance of Codeman, who fixes all my posting deficiencies. However, those will be added at a later date.

First, we should examine the manufacturers statements and specifications of the lights.

Each of the 3 is hard annodized with Type III annodizing, the Tigerlight and MagCharger in black, the Surefire M6 in natural gray/green.

The MagCharger is the largest, at 3D sized, with the Tigerlight shorter but fatter, and the M6 even shorter yet. The MC stands out from its lesser brethren by sporting 2 silver rings below the switch, which are actually the external charger contacts for the clip in charger. 

The TL comes in two versions, the FBOP and Standard versions. The FBOP (Federal Bureau of Prisons), reviewed here, is shorter due to the lack of a pepper spray compartment. For most modifiers, it is the preferred version, but performance of the flashlight portion is identical, with the Standard version losing any size advantage over the MagCharger. Tigerlights have a Gold ring at the neck of the light, giving it some distinction from any other all black flashlight. 

The M6 is the most distinctive appearing of the 3, and indeed may be the most distinctive appearing flashlight, period. There is no doubt that it is something special from the first time you see it, with it’s grooves and ridges and serrations. This is a SERIOUS light, and lest anyone forget it, the M6 itself screams out its seriousness. This light is the most weaponlike flashlight ever built, to my mind, while the new scalloped bezel version even intensifies that belief.

All three lights feature high output lamp assemblies or lamps. While the average 3D flashlight puts out less than 30 lumens, these lights all pump out upwards of 150, easily 5 times the output of stock 3D sized lights. 

The MagCharger features a rounded tip lamp that appears to all in the know to be manufactured by WelchAllyn. The lamp, running at 6 volts on five 1/2D NiCad cells and updated a few years ago, produces 40,000 peak beam candlepower, according to Maglite. The bulb is believed to produce approximately 175-225 lumens. The beam is whiter than most stock beams, and obviously much brighter as well, due to the Halogen/Xenon construction. The reflector is smooth, spun stainless steel, polished to a mirror finish. It resides in a high temperature plastic enclosure which is cammed, allowing focusing with a simple ¼ twist of the head. This feature is patented and jealously guarded by Maglite. The light is 12.6 inches (320 mm) long 1.56 inches in diameter ( 39.67mm) and weighs 32 ounces (907 grams). The largest bezel diameter is 2.31 inches (58.72mm). Runtime is quoted at 2 hours, but realistically is closer to 70-85 minutes before significant dimming is noted. The pack will improve somewhat with use, so run time will go up slightly from that found on the first run.

The Tigerlight comes with a bulb believed to be produced by Carley lamps, which is thought to produce about 250-275 lumens at 7.2 volts running on six 4/5A NiMH cells, and is potted in a smooth spun aluminum highly polished reflector by Carley. Theoretically, this allows the filament to be placed at the ideal spot in the reflector for the least artifact. Theory, especially in mass production, plays little part in actuality, and the quality of the assemblies varies widely. For this comparison, I used the best of my two assemblies. The initial version, which had no lip on the reflector, while focused in a roughly circular pattern, left much to be desired, and the Generation II version is much preferred and is the version used for this review. Later versions are supposed to be patterned after the Generation II lamp assembly. The light is 8 inches in length (203.2 mm) and weighs 21 ounces. It is 1.71 inches (43.4mm) in diameter, and 2.4 inches (61 mm) in diameter at the bezel. Run time is quoted at 1.1 hours, but in reality, is more like 45-50 minutes before significant dimming is noted. Like most NiMH cells, the cells in the TL will improve somewhat from new until they reach a maximum undimmed runtime of around 50 minutes or so.

The M6, alone among the three, comes with 2 stock bulb options, both of which use the same shock isolated reflector. The MN20 produces 250 lamp lumens and the MN21 500 lamp lumens. Both bulbs run on 9 volts produced by a unique double stack of 123A lithium primary cells in a carrier. The stock reflector is heavily orange peeled and shock isolated with a dense, closed cell, foam. As with most Surefires, this produces a very dense hot spot, which is larger than the hotspots produced at focus by either of the other lights. Surefire, however, has mastered the art of filament placement, even with lights that feature fixed reflectors and replaceable bulbs, and the pattern produced when a new bulb is introduced is consistent from bulb to bulb, with only very minor variations. The light is 7.75 inches (197 mm) long, 1.75 inches (44.5mm) in diameter weighs 15.4 ounces, and is 2.5 inches (63.5 mm) at the bezel. Run time is quoted at 60 minutes with the 250 lumen lamp, though the lamp will dim and yellow before that point.

So much for the hardware, how about the evaluation?

First, subjectively and objectively, the M6 doesn’t seem to belong here. It is lighter, smaller, and brighter than the other two. (It is almost exactly half the weight of the MagCharger!) Runtimes are close enough between the three, as is output, to make this a worthy clash, though.

Using a scale similar to boxing’s “10 point must”, where the best must receive 10 points and the rest are graded from there, the best in each category receives 10 points. Since small size and brightness are attributes I find desirable, the thumping capability of the larger MagCharger doesn’t receive much weight, though it does receive its own, separated category, not factored into the final scoring. 

First, my subjective evaluation of the feel of the lights: The M6 is in a class of its own. Light, maneuverable and easily carried compared to the other two. The grip of the light is the best of the three, and while my initial thoughts were that it was too aggressive, I came to appreciate the almost undroppable grip effected by it’s combination of scallops, grooves and knurling. The Tigerlight is next. With a sandpaper like finish that was harder to drop than I initially expected, the light was nearly as maneuverable as the M6, although almost 50% heavier. The MagCharger finishes last, though it’s smaller diameter proves easier for some people to grip and its knurling is more than sufficient, it’s length and weight make it the most difficult. Score M6-10, Tigerlight-8, MagCharger-5. 

Second, subjective evaluations of the beam qualities of each light: There is no doubt, the M6 is the class act here. The Surefire displays a heavy, large, very slightly oblong white hot spot, with no real artifact in the corona, there is minimal light difference across the large area which is almost 14 inches across the dense white portion of the spot. The Tigerlight has a bilobed, dense hotspot as well, though much smaller, but significantly more artifact due to the smooth reflector. The MagCharger, alone among the three, can be focused to a near pinpoint of light, or defocused to a large corona. The TL and MC have very comparable beams overall, with a bilobed MC beam as well when the bulb is appropriately centered, but the MC can be focused more tightly due to it’s smaller filament. This should equate to more throw, which will be judged later. Score M6-10, Magcharger 7, Tigerlight-6. (Some may argue that the Tiger wins this over the MC, but the ability to defocus has some uses, and thus the MC wins in my subjective view.)

Third, subjective rating of ergonomics: This will be the most controversial of the categories, because the uses of these lights are so wide. The M6 features a twisty tailcap with momentary on pushbutton like many tactical lights. Undoubtedly, this is the best solution so far for tactical situations, however the dual mechanism is tough to master for most users in a light of this diameter and length. Large hands are an advantage! The Tigerlight has a rear mounted pushbutton, but on the cylinder instead of the end, allowing momentary on with a partial push, full on with a deeper push. Used overhand, like many tactical users, this allows the index finger to push the button, but in a conventional grip the button is much more difficult to locate without practice. Alone of the three, the MagCharger has the pushbutton where most flashlight users expect it, just beneath the head. The MC is easily activated in an overhand grip by either holding the head with the hand, or by using the little finger if a barrel grip is preferred. The underhand grip places the switch right beneath the thumb for easy activation. Momentary on is accomplished with a partial push, full on with a deeper push. Score MagCharger-10, TL-7, M6-6.

Those are the subjective scores. 
Surefire-26
Magcharger-22
TigerLight-21.

Build quality: The M6 runs away and hides here. It, simply put, has the best build quality of any mass produced light, consistent with Surefire’s history. The Tigerlight is well built and incredibly tough, with the build of a Sherman tank. Watch Tigerlights online demo of a light being thrown down the street and hit by a bat and you become a believer. Alone among the lights, though, it has a Lexan lens, much more likely to be scratched than the glass lenses in the M6 and MC. Tigerlight mitigates this by giving you a new lens with each lamp assembly, however. The Lexan lens also makes the lens tougher to break in those dropped or struck lights. The bezel threads are not as smooth as the bezel threads on the MC. The dual rings of the MC are more elegant than the TigerLight charging pins in my mind, and the system allows easier engagement than the TL system, although this is nitpicky on my part as both are very easy to engage. Score M6-10, MC-7, TL-7.

Runtime: As mentioned above, the Surefire uses primary cells, while the other two are rechargeables. The MC, by virtue of it’s sheer size, has an advantage. Score MC-10, 
TL-9, M6-9. 

Light output: I should start by saying that flashlights cannot be rated solely by numbers. Lux/Lumen readings mean nothing, if the quality of the light is poor. A laser has an incredibly high Lux rating, but is useless as a light. So the lux readings I have undertaken are nothing more than an attempt to quantify the overall ambience of the respective lights, not the be all and end all of the light. There is little doubt that Surefire underrates the output of its lights. The 250 lumen MN20 obviously puts out more light than either of the other 2, regardless of what the ratings are. The ceiling bounce test shows a significant difference, easily discernable by everyone in my family. The TL and MC are much closer, with the TL winning by the slightest of margins. Measured output, though, shows why Lux readings of the hotspot do not do justice to lights. At 4 meters the average light output of the hotspots, measured at the greatest intensity and then at 2 inches around that spot, show that the Surefire wins with an average of 1638, using the inverse square law, the 1 meter equivalent would be 26,208 Lux, the MC is second at 1602, 1 meter equivalent of 25,632 Lux, and the TL is last at 1470, or a 1 meter equivalent of 22,432. However, measuring the corona at 1 foot from the hotspot shows a lux reading of 140 for the TL, 100 for the M6, and only 80 for the MC, where that tight spot hurts overall light distribution! If I had simply used the highest Lux reading, without averaging, the MC would have scored 31,200. The M6 would measure 28,640 and the TL, 27,040. As a point of reference, I had deliberately NOT read Quickbeams (flashlightreviews.com) reviews of the MagCharger and Tigerlight until I finished mine. Interestingly, we came very close to matching the numbers for output. Score Surefire M6 10, TL-8, MC-7. 

Throw: This category is less important overall than the others, so I have arbitrarily decided to only award a maximum of 5 points to the winner. Some will argue that this is more important than I make it out to be, but each of these lights is bright enough to identify an individual at 100 yards, human eyesight is about at its limit at that distance anyway. The Magcharger, due to it’s ability to focus, throws a tiny bit better than the other two. Score MC-5, TL-4, M6-4. 

Since I haven’t mentioned it elsewhere, I should weigh in on the problems associated with the MagCharger’s focus mechanism. While many complain that it easily is knocked out of focus, and then must be refocused, and others argue that the bipin bulb is inherently unstable, I find that these are really minor concerns to me. I do occasionally have to refocus the light, but that is, at most, a quarter turn away! I do occasionally have to adjust the bulb to center it, after some blow or dropping the light, but once again, that is fairly infrequent. Neither is a major drawback to me. My good friend Jim Sexton would disagree, as he prefers constant focus lights, and given my choice between the MC and the M6 I would choose the M6 beam. Given the same choice between the MC and the Tigerlight, I’ll take the MC, since I know I can improve the beam with some adjustments.

I do have one significant complaint about the Tigerlight, and that is that the battery is almost not replaceable in the field due to the lights construction. Since most TL's will never use up a full charge in one nights use, this isn't an issue for most users, but both the other lights have easily replaced battery packs.

Objective Scores. 
M6-33
TL-28
MC-29

Totals M6-59
MC-51
TL-49

These scores will, of necessity, show some bias in my weighting of the categories, since I rated the lights on what was important to me (and probably to normal users also)! The TL could be easily improved and jump ahead of the MC if the light pattern was a little more controlled or if the battery pack was more efficient. I replaced the stock pack with one of Jim Sexton’s custom builds and the light output improved significantly. 

There are 3 other categories whose scores do not factor in, but which must be considered by those buying these lights. 

They are:

Cost/Cost of use:

At around $100, with parts easily available, and a rechargeable battery, the MagCharger scores a 10 here. Bulbs, the only real expendable, are available in many hardware and sporting goods stores. 

The Tigerlight, more expensive, comes in a close second, but the cost of lamp assemblies drives ownership costs up as well. A solid 8.

The Surefire is in a category all its own here as well! With a suggested retail price of $392.00 and few if any discounts, the M6 is nearly 4 times as expensive as its closest competitor. The cost of ownership goes up, with every hour of use costing between $6 and $8, even buying cells at the best prices. Lamps are not cheap, either, with Surefires quality at a cost! Jim Sextons rechargeable, regulated pack will pay for itself quickly at that price of use and is heartily recommended. A score of only 4. 

Offensive/Defensive capability:

Though the MagCharger has been used by more LEO’s to help subdue a suspect than the sales of the other two combined, all three do have some ability to protect the user. TL’s patented pepper spray, available in the standard version, is the most obvious, but the new scalloped M6 bezel certainly can also be used as a protective device. That big, long MagCharger, though, is the next best thing to a baton, and has been used as such many times. The blinding ability of all three is a plus, but the big hotspot of the M6 makes that much more useable. Scores then are TL Standard-10, MagCharger 8, M6-7, TL FBOP-5.

Availability:

The MagCharger is available everywhere you look, the TL basically just online, and the M6 only in specialty stores or online. The MC wins easily. 

So which light do I use the most? For now, the MagCharger, but for two reasons not allowed here. Mine have all be modded with WelchAllyn 1160 bulbs and high current battery sticks. The Tiger is a close second, though I really would like more runtime, and switching packs is tough in the field. Finally the M6. Though it is the favorite as far as size, light output, and ease of use for me, the cost is too high, at least until the rechargeable M6-R pack gets here!!

Bill


----------



## js (Jul 20, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*bwaites said:*

Totals M6-59 
MC-51 
TL-49 

[/ QUOTE ]

I see that you have reduced these flashlights to single numbers! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crackup.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crackup.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crackup.gif

*ahem* Just kidding, Bill! LOL.

Seriously, this is a great review with some very well thought out commentary and discussion of the three lights and it should prove very useful to those who are investigating any of the three. Having done a review myself, I am well aware of the amount of work it takes to do one of these, beamshots aside, so please consider me to speak for everyone here at CPF when I say "Thank you!" for a job well done. I liked how you divided the consideration into different categories with separate scores and discussion. It works well to help people decide what they would personally prefer, given that they can weigh the categories as appropriate for them.

One or two points about the TL lamp assemblies and the availability of the lights and their accessories and parts:

Given that almost no one would buy a Mag Charger from a retail store due to the huge discounts available on-line, I really do not personally see the lack of B&M stores that sell TL as any kind of downside. Also, I should point out that there is a 6 month guarantee on the TL lamp assemblies, and that I personally have never broken one, which I suspect is due to the shock isolation provided by the rubber gasket. So the fact that you can't buy a spare TL LA at the local WallMart is not as big an issue as it might seem. Plus, a flashaholic ALWAYS has a spare LA on hand, right?

But these are minor points which I just wanted to throw in, and, mostly, again, I thank you for your efforts on this, Bill. Cheers!

p.s. This really should have been in the incan forum or general forum because reviews here are more for in-depth consideration of single lights. What you have here is more suited to the discussion and comparison type forums represented by the general and incan forums. Plus, more people could benefit from it there, given the greater exposure. Maybe it could be moved by a mod? Or possibly it really belongs here and I don't know what I'm talking about (wouldn't be the first time).


----------



## bwaites (Jul 20, 2005)

Thanks Jim!

I have asked Quickbeam for a decision on your suggestion.

Bill


----------



## Quickbeam (Jul 20, 2005)

Seems like a comparison/review hybrid post...

Bwaites - if you want it moved, let me or Roy know! Otherwise, it's fine here by my judgement. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif


----------



## bwaites (Jul 20, 2005)

Quickbeam, email sent!

Bill


----------



## 270winchester (Jul 20, 2005)

Sweet. Finally here, and great as expected...thanks Bill...


----------



## bwaites (Jul 21, 2005)

You're welcome and thanks!

Bill


----------



## cy (Jul 21, 2005)

nice writeup..

always curious about how magcharger and tigerlight would stack up against SF M6. 

can't want to get my M6R pack in..


----------



## makar (Jul 21, 2005)

Thanks for the review /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif I'm only missing the mention of the shock isolation of the TL and the option of a fast charger with trickle charging, since this is - in my eyes- a major advantage.
Marc


----------



## bwaites (Jul 21, 2005)

The TL LA does have some shock isolation due to a rubber gasket and hose combo. It is nowhere as effective as the M6 shock isolation, but may be better than the MagLites.

The MagLite pedestal "floats" so to speak, so there is some shock protection there also. It also has a rubber gasket that protects the front of the reflector from contact with the window, so it has some of the same advantage.

The fast charger is relatively new, I have not seen one, and thus have no experience with it, and I just flat forgot it! I will add that it is available to the review, though.

Bill


----------



## js (Jul 21, 2005)

Regarding the TL charger:

It's a good charger! It has a nice three tiered charging scheme. A fast charge phase, a top-off phase to gently bring the pack to full charge, and a true low-level trickle charge phase to maintain that charge. The rate is low enough that you can just leave your light on the charger as long as desired (with-in reason, of course).


----------



## Quickbeam (Jul 21, 2005)

Author requested this be moved to Incand. Forum. Off it goes!


----------



## Ginseng (Jul 21, 2005)

Hi Bill,

Good review. I've gotta get ahold of an M6 to play with. All this hot wire work and I've never even held one in my hand. Shame. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

One other point I'd make about the MC is that it can accept both reflectorized SL-series lamp assemblies from Streamlight with no modifications required. This effectively gives the MC user the "no focus/smooth beam" option that SL and TL offer. If you factor that in, it might grant the MC another point or two. Sorry Jim /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Wilkey


----------



## bole64 (Jul 21, 2005)

Yeah, I got the M6-r pack (thanks a lot again Js) and it makes the M6 really cheap to use. I have no second thought to using the M6 any more. I always keep the Actual battery back close by just in case. But the pack it self is really easy to use and effective. Works like a charm.


----------



## makar (Jul 22, 2005)

I dropped the TL several times on the floor to test the shock absorbtion - the bulb never failed. there's a pretty impressive video of a durability test on the tl website. 
I wouldn't do that with a MC. I have the newest mc model in my hands right now. although there is a spring that allows you to focus may take force in vertical directions. but there is nothing to take horizontal forces. both forces appear when you drop a flashlight. 
The shock absorbtion of a SF M6 is superb, no doubt about that. 
Personally I prefer the whole battery sytem of the tl. not only is a fast charger avaiable but also has the tl a memory free nimh battery whether the mc has a nicd battery.

I'm very curious on the rechargeable pack for the m6!

Bill: thanks again for this detailed review. i liked the idea to give points /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/happy14.gif The issues I mentioned are personal preferences, I thought were interesting to share.


Marc

P.S: this is my 400th post!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/party.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/happy23.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/party.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/party.gif


----------



## chrisse242 (Jul 22, 2005)

Very nice comparison Bill!!! Thanks a lot.

I got to handle all three lights, but not at the same time. Anyway,I have to say none of them is perfect for me for a very simple reason. I'd rarely use it, so it has to be able to keep it's energy for a long time. The M6 sure does that, but I couldn't justify the price for a light used once or twice every three months. Rechargeable nicd or nimh just aren't up to the task so they're more or less ruled out. Li-ions would work since you can store them for quite some time without loosing too much energy, but any kind of li-ion battery-pack will be expensive due to the needed protection electronics. 
I could easily give up some of the M6's toughness and beam quality for a lower price but there is another major drawback: Runtime is rather pathetic. Finding a dog that has escaped in the night (as an example for non-Leo, non-military use) might very well take more than an hour.

A light in the range of 200-250 Lumens, throwing it's spot over a serious distance, with long shelf life battery packs and a runtime of at least 2 hours, maybe even regulated, that would be my favourite incan light. Finish durability and overall looks are definitly less important to me, this would be a tool and I don't care if my hammer or a screwdriver get scratched. I wouldn't edc this light, so size and weight are less important as well.

Chrisse


----------



## js (Jul 22, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*Ginseng said:*
Hi Bill,

Good review. I've gotta get ahold of an M6 to play with. All this hot wire work and I've never even held one in my hand. Shame. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

One other point I'd make about the MC is that it can accept both reflectorized SL-series lamp assemblies from Streamlight with no modifications required. This effectively gives the MC user the "no focus/smooth beam" option that SL and TL offer. If you factor that in, it might grant the MC another point or two. Sorry Jim /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Wilkey 

[/ QUOTE ]

Wilkey,

Yes. Right. I'd forgotten about that fact! It is a very important point to bring up, and does indeed give the MC another point or two. Also, you will get a chance to play with an M6 someday. As soon as I can spare it, I will be sending you mine, with rechargeable pack to boot. Unfortunately, this is at least a month or two away.

Bole,

Good to know! Glad it's working fine for you. I really like that charging system which I made for the first pack, and it's kind of a bummer that I had to abandon it for the production run. Oh, well.


----------



## SilverFox (Jul 22, 2005)

Hello Bill,

Excellent review.

I am not sure of you grading method, but agree that you have brought up the key points for comparison. I have had very good luck with my TigerLight lamps and would give the TigerLight another point there. I also find the ergonomics of the TigerLight very favorable.

I solved the run time issue a long time ago. I have two TigerLights... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif 

I agree that the M6 stands head and shoulders above both of these lights. I was pleased to see that you were able to do a good comparison of it. 

I am still a TigerLight fan, but the combination of the Mag Charger with a Streamlight lamp may be worth looking into...

Tom


----------



## bwaites (Jul 22, 2005)

I've ordered both a SL20X and SL35 LA to make that comparison, though the SL20's I've seen I haven't been very impressed with.

Bill


----------



## Phaserburn (Jul 22, 2005)

I'm actually a fan of the 35X LA. I love the smooth, Pila-ish beam; very, very good for full sight at medium range. I have other lights and combos that are brighter, but the 35X is really useful.


----------



## Ginseng (Jul 22, 2005)

Bill,

The SL-20X LA isn't very bright, but it runs a good long time and has a nice beam. I've used it for task lighting when sawing away the waste pipe under my kitchen and it was far preferable to a spotty or artifacty beam.

Wilkey


----------



## eyeeatingfish (Jul 7, 2007)

What are these WelchAllyn 1160 bulbs ive been reading about for the maglight?

Are these supermags any good?
http://www.light-edge.com/proddetail.asp?section=Super Mag&prod=MLS3D016B


----------



## BSBG (Jul 7, 2007)

eyeeatingfish said:


> What are these WelchAllyn 1160 bulbs ive been reading about for the maglight?
> 
> A





Search for "Magcharger mods" and you will get tons of info on the 1160. Basically, it is a 5V rated bulb that when driven at 6V puts out a good deal more light than the standard MC bulb.


----------

