# Foursevens Quark Tactical QT2L-X Burst Mode review



## ti-force (Aug 9, 2013)

I have the Foursevens Quark Tactical QT2L-X with Burst Mode here for review. This light was sent to me by Foursevens for review purposes. If you haven't seen my Quark X 123-2 review, you can see it here- click


For those of you who may not have heard, Foursevens has upgraded their popular QT2L-X by upgrading the circuitry to produce a massive amount of light in Max mode. Follow along to see just how much the light output in Max mode was increased compared to the QT2L-X non-Burst Mode.



*Operation (Taken from Foursevens website):*
“The Quark Tactical can memorize any two modes of output from its eight total modes to be instantly available. These two memorized modes are accessed by either tightening or loosening the head .
To have your Quark Tactical memorize a different mode: turn it on and loosen the head by a half-turn. Then tighten the head at least four times rapidly (twisting it tight then loose four times). After the fourth time leave the head tight or loose depending on which position you want to program.
The light will flash after three seconds to signal that it is ready to be programmed. Cycle through the eight available modes by clicking the tailcap off and on. The mode sequence is as follows:
· Moonlight-Low-Medium-High-Max-SOS-Strobe-Beacon
After finding your desired mode leave that mode on for ten seconds and the light will flash again to confirm that the mode has been memorized. To cancel programming simply turn the light off for three seconds before it flashes.”



*Specifications (Taken from Foursevens website):* 


*DIMENSIONS*Length: 4.5 inches
Body diameter: 0.86 inches
Head diameter: 0.86 inches
Weight (without batteries): 1.8 oz*LED EMITTER*CREE XM-L2*VOLTAGE RANGE*3V-9V*SPOT BEAM*Angle: 13.9 degrees
Diameter at 3 meters: 730mm*FLOOD BEAM*Angle: 73 degrees
Diameter at 3 meters: 4.44 meters*BRIGHTNESS LEVELS*Moonlight: 0.5 lumens, 25 days
Low: 5 lumens, 4 days
Medium: 55 lumens, 14 hrs
High: 300 lumens, 3.2 hrs
Max:Burst at 780 lumens, 1 minute
then 390 lumens, 1.9 hrs*SPECIAL MODES*Strobe: 10 hz, 1 hrs
SOS, 4 hours
Beacon, 12 hrs*REFLECTOR*Textured*BODY MATERIAL*Type-III hard-anodized aircraft-grade aluminum*BEZEL MATERIAL*Type-III hard-anodized aircraft-grade aluminum*LENS MATERIAL*Impact-resistant glass, sapphire coating, antireflective coating*INCLUDED ACCESSORIES*Batteries, lanyard, split ring for keychain attachment, spare o-ring, holster, hand-grip
 





*Some pictures:*



*Packaging-
*









*Included goodies-
*








*The light-*













*XM-L2 Emitter-*









*Revised Circuit Board-*














For those of you who may not be aware, I have my own calibrated homemade integrating sphere for measuring lumen output of different lights. My sphere has been calibrated using lights that were measured in a professional lab sphere, so my lumen results are very accurate. However, due to common variables such as temperature differences, battery charge state differences, and even differences within the components used within each and every light, you should only use my results as an example of what one sample outputs in OTF lumens. If you purchase one of these lights I'm sure the output would be similar, provided all variables are similar, but your light may not produce exactly the same output as this sample. The output could be less, the output could be more, it just depends.

Okay, now that I've got that out of the way, here are my OTF lumen results:



Here it is in Max Mode. As you can see, this little light puts out a massive amount of light, especially for such a small light. I’m very impressed:








And here it is directly compared to the previous Quark X without Burst Mode-









[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif] Here's my lumen data for this light running on a 17670 Li-Ion battery.[/FONT]

Oh, and I need to mention that the use of 17670 Li-ion's in this light has worked well for all of the 2xcr123 Foursevens lights I've ever tried, but there have been reports of others not being able to fit the 17670 into the battery tube because of its slightly larger diameter, so please try at your own risk. Foursevens recommends the use of cr123 primary batteries or rechargeable cr123 Li-Ion batteries in this light.


Max Mode AW 17670 Li-Ion-








Quark X 17670 vs QT2L-X Burst Mode 17670 (both AW 17670)-








QT2L-X AW 17670 vs cr123 primaries-








[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif] Here's my measured lumen data for various modes of this light.[/FONT]

I only tested out to 5 minutes in each mode because it would be extremely time consuming to run tests for each output mode until battery depletion. I have no way of data logging so I must remain with each light during every test session that I perform.

Low and Moonlight Modes-








High and Medium Modes-








And all modes in one graph-









In closing, I’m very impressed with this light. Not only does it output a tremendous amount of light in such a small form factor, it retains a very useable and long runtime in Max mode. For those of you who need (or want) large amounts of light in a small form factor, this is your light. Thanks for reading, and I hope you enjoyed my review.


----------



## LnL (Aug 9, 2013)

Great information! I've had a few FourSevens, and I'm considering getting one of these. Nice to know that it delivers better than advertised. Now I need to find a good supplier, as it appears my old supplier has gone belly-up...


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Aug 9, 2013)

Is the performance similar with a 17670, or is that a boring "Duh, yes" question? Thank you for the great information!


----------



## ti-force (Aug 9, 2013)

AnAppleSnail said:


> Is the performance similar with a 17670, or is that a boring "Duh, yes" question? Thank you for the great information!



That's actually a good question, and one that I'm curious of, too. I'm planning to test with a 17670 when I have time. Thanks for the kind words.


----------



## BigBluefish (Aug 9, 2013)

I've liked the Quark Tacticals and had a few...but am now down to one Quark standard Hi-CRI. This might make me grab another Quark...that's some serious output on burst. But I'd probably need to send it off for an emitter swap, unless 4 Sevens comes out with a decent neutral or warm tint version.


----------



## SCEMan (Aug 9, 2013)

I just picked up a QP2L-X (I have several tacticals) and have been using it with an AA body/14500. Awesome combo that on burst is brighter than my Eagletac D25LC2 clicky! 
And no Moonlight preflash either :thumbsup:


----------



## reppans (Aug 9, 2013)

Thanks for your review... very much appreciated.




ti-force said:


> For those of you who may not be aware, I have my own calibrated homemade integrating sphere for measuring lumen output of different lights. My sphere has been calibrated using lights that were measured in a professional lab sphere, so my lumen results are very accurate.




^^ Now this a real treat to hear - and an important statement no other reviewer around here seems to be able to claim. I've been really scratching my head with some of the so-called "ANSI FL1" claims that different manufacturers supposedly use for specs, but just don't make sense to my eyes. The differences between even reputable manufacturer marketing claims are significant (up to ~50%), making spec sheet comparisons a real joke, and started me testing my own lights with a light meter. Now glancing at this, and some of your past reviews, your lumen scale seems pretty closely aligned with FourSevens, which by many would be considered way over on the "conservative" side of the fence. Not knowing any better myself, I have chosen to calibrate my meter on Quarks (QPA2-X specifically) because I have found them to be the most consistently accurate across different modes and family members - not surprisingly, my numbers are pretty close to yours for matching lights. The downside of using this scale is that some lights become disappointing.


Couple of questions.... have you tested the actual lumen output of the lower modes on this Quark (I'm a low lumen fan)?, and if you get a chance to measure the 17670 output, could you also test a 14500 (SCEMan config)?, .... and lastly - have you tested any Zebralights


----------



## CampingMaster (Aug 9, 2013)

Who can explain me how come the Fenix *PD35 has a Maximum of 850 lumens for 1h 15 min ; High 450 lumens for 2.5 hours *and the *QP2L-X BM can do only 1 minute at 780 lumens and 1.9 hours at 390 lumens *? Both of these flashlights use 2 x CR123A ( or RCR123A ) ; both of them use the XM-L 2 emitter ( U2 for Fenix and T6 for Quark ) and Fenix say on their Web site : « Fenix is proud to support the new ANSI/NEMA FL1 standards for lighting Equipment. All performance data is measured to these standards ». I am really confused. And I want to thank you very much ti-force for your review, I was waiting for it for several days, the info you give us is very useful for taking a decision.​


----------



## frosty (Aug 10, 2013)

Great review.


----------



## reppans (Aug 10, 2013)

CampingMaster said:


> Who can explain me how come the Fenix *PD35 has a Maximum of 850 lumens for 1h 15 min ; High 450 lumens for 2.5 hours *and the *QP2L-X BM can do only 1 minute at 780 lumens and 1.9 hours at 390 lumens *? Both of these flashlights use 2 x CR123A ( or RCR123A ) ; both of them use the XM-L 2 emitter ( U2 for Fenix and T6 for Quark ) and Fenix say on their Web site : « Fenix is proud to support the new ANSI/NEMA FL1 standards for lighting Equipment. All performance data is measured to these standards ». I am really confused. And I want to thank you very much ti-force for your review, I was waiting for it for several days, the info you give us is very useful for taking a decision.​



With regard to the short-term burst mode, Foursevens is known for under driving their lights, a similar practice to the US manufacturers. Makes a lot of business sense for companies that stand behind their product for 10+ years. 

You can drive a truck through the different manufacturers' interpretations of the so called "ANSI" specs.... it's the point I was trying to make in my post above. 

As an one simple example, you can look at Selfbuilt's reviews of the TK35 and the Maelstrom X10, both heavy hitter XML lights. The TK35 is spec'd at 820 but tested at 750lms while the X10 is spec'd at 640 but tested at 770lms. Batteries used for the specs may also greatly differ affecting runtimes. 

Comparisons of spec sheets between different manufacturers can be a real joke - you won't find much consistency in the ANSI specs - just the independent reviews here on CPF. And even then, our independent reviewers will only be consistent within themselves - less so with each other - ie, Ti-force's lumen scale will be different than Selfbuilt's.


----------



## defloyd77 (Aug 10, 2013)

CampingMaster said:


> Who can explain me how come the Fenix *PD35 has a Maximum of 850 lumens for 1h 15 min ; High 450 lumens for 2.5 hours *and the *QP2L-X BM can do only 1 minute at 780 lumens and 1.9 hours at 390 lumens *? Both of these flashlights use 2 x CR123A ( or RCR123A ) ; both of them use the XM-L 2 emitter ( U2 for Fenix and T6 for Quark ) and Fenix say on their Web site : « Fenix is proud to support the new ANSI/NEMA FL1 standards for lighting Equipment. All performance data is measured to these standards ». I am really confused. And I want to thank you very much ti-force for your review, I was waiting for it for several days, the info you give us is very useful for taking a decision.​



The PD35 has a max of 850 lumens, but not 850 lumens for 1h 15 min, ANSI runtimes are to 10% of original output. They don't say how long it's 850 lumens for and what it drops down to.


----------



## Gadgetman7 (Aug 10, 2013)

Does the QT2L-X take 18650's? I know that the older versions of some Foursevens cr123 lights did not.


----------



## ti-force (Aug 10, 2013)

Thanks for the kind words, everyone. Here's some more data (I'll also update the first post with some of this data).

Oh, and I need to mention that the use of 17670 Li-ion's in this light has worked well for all of the 2xcr123 Foursevens lights I've ever tried, but there have been reports of others not being able to fit the 17670 into the battery tube because of its slight larger diameter. Just wanted to mention this.

AnAppleSnail-

Max Mode AW 17670 Li-Ion-








Quark X 17670 vs QT2L-X Burst Mode 17670 (both AW 17670)-








QT2L-X AW 17670 vs cr123 primaries-








Reppans-

I only tested out to 5 minutes in each mode because it would be extremely time consuming to run tests for each output mode until battery depletion. I have no way to datalog so I must remain with the lights during each test session to record data.

Low and Moonlight Modes-








High and Medium Modes-








And all modes in one graph-








And here's the data for the SCEMan config (14500). I would like to mention that I would certainly exercise caution when/if using any 14500 Li-ion with a max discharge rating of no more than 2c in this configuration. I measured 1.9 amps current draw in max mode with a 17670 Li-Ion for the full 60 seconds in max mode until the timer cut current back to 1.3 amps. I certainly wouldn't use a non-reputable brand 14500 and I wouldn't even consider using a non-protected 14500. I'm not here to tell you guys how to safely use your lights, but merely wanted to mention this for anyone reading these results that may not be aware of these types of safety precautions that should be followed to ensure safe usage.

AW protected 14500 Li-ion's are rated at 750mAh (.75 amp hr), but if I'm not mistaken, these batteries have been tested to have a lower capacity. 500 or 600mAh seems to pop out in my head. Or maybe I'm thinking about the RCR123's. At any rate, I would certainly be careful when using a single 14500 or 16340 Li-ion in this setup. I did my testing using an AW 14500 IMR LiMN, which has a much higher discharge rating at 4 amps continuous draw. For all I know a Li-Ion 14500 may not even be capable of delivering the full current to this light and could possibly cause the current draw to actually be lower, and within the safe operating range of those batteries.

Ok now that I've got that out of the way, here are my results-

QT2L-X with AW 14500 IMR Max mode-








Same as above vs AW 17670-








And here's the Foursevens included cr123 primary battery run thrown in with the previous two-


----------



## reppans (Aug 10, 2013)

Thanks Ti-force.... excellent info - just wanted to see if the lower mode outputs were in the ballpark of the specs, not expecting runtime tests at all. I've recently rec'd a light that was ~ 4-10x off spec in the lower modes, and that drives me nuts since those are the most often used for me. Great point on safety with the 14500s.


----------



## tobrien (Aug 10, 2013)

nice review man! i like how clear and easy to read/interpret you made your graphs!

i see they include a spring on the head contact now, nice!


----------



## michaelmcgo (Aug 10, 2013)

tobrien said:


> nice review man! i like how clear and easy to read/interpret you made your graphs!
> 
> i see they include a spring on the head contact now, nice!



I wonder if they changed the spring on the trail and if that will affect lego-ing.


----------



## reppans (Aug 10, 2013)

looks like a flat coiled contact pad to me


----------



## CampingMaster (Aug 10, 2013)

Thank you very much reppans and defloyd77 for your explanation on post 10 and 11.


----------



## tobrien (Aug 11, 2013)

michaelmcgo said:


> I wonder if they changed the spring on the trail and if that will affect lego-ing.


i have my doubts about it affecting LEGO-ing personally, i think any lego-disabling changes would have to be much more drastic 


reppans said:


> looks like a flat coiled contact pad to me



now that you mention it, you may be right, but it may be the angle of the pic


----------



## SCEMan (Aug 11, 2013)

michaelmcgo said:


> I wonder if they changed the spring on the trail and if that will affect lego-ing.



I've been using mine with 16340s (2x123 body) and 14500 (AA body) with zero problems.


----------



## SCEMan (Aug 11, 2013)

Awesome review ti-force!
Your runtime charts are exactly what is needed :thumbsup:


----------



## CampingMaster (Aug 13, 2013)

ti-force said:


> I have the Foursevens Quark Tactical QT2L-X with Burst Mode here for review. This light was sent to me by Foursevens for review purposes. If you haven't seen my Quark X 123-2 review, you can see it here- click
> 
> 
> For those of you who may not have heard, Foursevens has upgraded their popular QT2L-X by upgrading the circuitry to produce a massive amount of light in Max mode. Follow along to see just how much the light output in Max mode was increased compared to the QT2L-X non-Burst Mode.
> ...


 * 

FIRST INTERROGATION :

*
1.- If the QP2L-X has 500 lumens for 3 min before stabilizing at 360 lumens.


2.- and the QP2L-X with Burst has 800 lumens for 1 min before stabilizing at 410 lumens


3.- with this info should I expect my QP2L-X gen 2 to have 600 lumens for 3 min and stabilize at 430 lumens ( 360 X 20% ) ?


　

*SECOND INTERROGATION :


*1.- « Studies have shown that since the eye perceives light intensity on a logarithmic scale, it actually takes four times the output for the eyes to see double the output. » -- Quoted from FOURSEVENS email.


A.- Based on this info what will be the difference live between the 800 lumens QP2L-X with Burst and my QP2L-X gen 2 with probably 600 lumens for the first 3 min ? Any ?


B.- And also what will be de difference between the QP2L-X with Burst with a maximum of 410 lumens and the expected maximum of 430+​ lumens with the QP2L-X gen 2 ( 360 + 20% ) ? Any ?


*　

THIRD INTERROGATION :

*
1.- « The difference between the full output of the Burst mode and 50% of Burst mode will not be that significant but runtime will more than double. » -- Quoted from FOURSEVENS email.


A.- Based on this info why the QP2L-X with Burst has a High at 300 lumens and the maximum is at 390 lumens ; the difference is so minimal that we won't see any difference except for the runtime ? My QP2L-X gen 2 has a High of 160 lumens from 65 but for the QP2L-X with Burst the jump is from 55 lumens to 300...


I don't see why I should buy the QP2L-X with Burst having already something hard to beat with the QP2L-X gen 2.


Is somebody can explain me what I am missing, what I don't understand, or is my way of thinking has something good ? Thank you very much. I don't know what's happening but my Enter key does'nt work at all in the forum. This is the first time I see this happening. I hope you will understand my thinking because I write with a french accent...


----------



## ti-force (Aug 13, 2013)

CampingMaster said:


> * FIRST INTERROGATION :
> 
> *
> 1.- If the QP2L-X has 500 lumens for 3 min before stabilizing at 360 lumens.
> ...





First interrogation I can't really answer because I haven't tested a gen 2 light, or even held one in person. 

Second interrogation. 
A. If gen 2 makes 600 and the new burst mode makes roughly 800, the difference is roughly 200 lumens  jk, jk. I don't how to explain the difference to you. If you have a light that makes roughly 200 lumens, turn it on and look at it. That would be about the amount of increase in light. Then maybe turn on both the 200 lumen light (preferably a Quark with wide beam angle) and the 600 lumen light and combine the beams together, then separate, then together again. Maybe that will give you a rough idea of what to expect. Now whether you need (or want) that increase in light is up to you. 

B. Null. My opinion you wouldn't notice that small difference.


----------



## Coolz (Aug 13, 2013)

Great review! Just wondered if anyone has tested this with the tried and true 18650 body. I *think* I read somewhere that it works, but I can't seem to verify that information.


----------



## reppans (Aug 13, 2013)

CampingMaster said:


> I don't see why I should buy the QP2L-X with Burst having already something hard to beat with the QP2L-X gen 2.
> 
> Is somebody can explain me what I am missing, what I don't understand, or is my way of thinking has something good ?



Except for adding 20% for the G2 emitter (that's marketing max benefit - SB tested closer to ~10% OTF bump), I think your analysis is good. I believe in the logarithmic visual perception thing where we'll perceive the square root of lumen increases, while power consumption is linear to lumen changes. That's how I have become a low lumen fanatic (ie, I get 4x the runtime for half the perceived brightness) - if going up the lumen scale is subject to the laws of diminishing returns, then going down is subject to increasing gains. And Quarks are excellent on the low end, and why I personally love them.

If you double output from 400 to 800 lumens it will be perceived as ~ 41% increase to your eyes (square root of 2 = 1.41). That's enough to be noticeable, but it won't feel as much as it sounds.... except to the battery, of course. Also, if you tend to use turbo mode like most people, in short sub-minute bursts, then your cumulative runtime on turbo will actually be closer to half the listed spec.... something to consider.

The bottom line is that only you can decide when to upgrade. Just like iPhone upgrades going for 3G to 3GS to 4 to 4S to 5 etc, it may not make sense to upgrade at every iteration, perhaps just wait, enjoy what you're using, and catch it the next time around.


----------



## CampingMaster (Aug 13, 2013)

Thank you very much reppans and Ti-force, your input is very appreciate.


----------



## wrj0 (Aug 27, 2013)

Terrifically thorough and detailed review. Thank you! Helped me decide that I really do need one.


----------



## recDNA (Sep 1, 2013)

Any pre_flash in this one? 

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk 2


----------



## SCEMan (Sep 1, 2013)

recDNA said:


> Any pre_flash in this one?



Not on my QP2L-X Burst Mode :thumbsup:


----------



## ti-force (Sep 6, 2013)

recDNA said:


> Any pre_flash in this one?
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk 2



No pre-flash here either. If memory serves correctly, I think Foursevens made changes to eliminate pre-flash back when they released the first Quark X.


----------



## Etsu (Sep 6, 2013)

ti-force said:


> No pre-flash here either. If memory serves correctly, I think Foursevens made changes to eliminate pre-flash back when they released the first Quark X.



They weren't very successful at it, then. I bought a Quark QP2A-X (XML2 version) a couple of months ago, and there's definite pre-flash on moonlight mode. It's brief, not annoying bright, but it's definitely there.

There's none on my Preon. So, maybe it's only a problem with moonlight modes that are current-regulated, not PWM.


----------



## ti-force (Sep 6, 2013)

Etsu said:


> They weren't very successful at it, then. I bought a Quark QP2A-X (XML2 version) a couple of months ago, and there's definite pre-flash on moonlight mode. It's brief, not annoying bright, but it's definitely there.
> 
> There's none on my Preon. So, maybe it's only a problem with moonlight modes that are current-regulated, not PWM.



Maybe we should define pre-flash just to make sure we're on the same page. When I hear (or see) pre-flash mentioned I immediately think of it as selecting a lower output mode (e.g., moonlight) and immediately when the light is turned on the user gets an extremely bright flash that completely ruins ones night vision temporarily until ones eyes can readjust. But pre-flash could simply be an immediate flash that's dimmer than the selected modes output, correct? I've tested the first Quark x's (2x Cr123a and 2x aa) for pre-flash and have noticed a pre-flash that is dimmer than and/or the same brightness as moonlight mode immediately when the light is turned on. It's more like a flicker than a flash, and it happens so quickly that I hardly even noticed it. Is this what you're talking about or do you get an actual bright flash that takes away from your eyes adjustment to low light levels?


----------



## Etsu (Sep 6, 2013)

I get a bright flash, before the light goes down to moonlight brightness. It's very quick, and it doesn't affect my night vision, so I don't find it a problem. It's hard to estimate how bright the flash is. Probably something around 5 lumens, but that's just a guess. It only lasts for maybe 10 milliseconds. It's quick enough that I sometimes don't notice it. (A blink is longer.) It doesn't seem to matter how long the flashlight has been off, or the charge-level of the batteries. I just consider it a minor quirk that doesn't bother me. If it was a lot brighter, I might consider it to be an issue.


----------



## passive101 (Sep 6, 2013)

I'm interested in the Pro model like this. Does it take 18650 batteries if not, why the heck not, the are around 1mm difference and 18650 is now a very normal standard battery size.


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Sep 6, 2013)

passive101 said:


> I'm interested in the Pro model like this. Does it take 18650 batteries if not, why the heck not, the are around 1mm difference and 18650 is now a very normal standard battery size.



Thread size. The Quark standard lego threads just don't fit a 19690 (Let's be honest about sizes, 19mm diameter and 69mm length are required in the battery compartment) battery. The limited-run '18650 body' actually was a complete compartment because it had to have thread of smaller diameter than the hollow core for the battery to sit in.


----------



## passive101 (Sep 6, 2013)

I'm surprised that Foursevens doesn't really support 18650 batteries in their lights. I thought they were on top of the battery scene pretty well.


----------



## Overclocker (Sep 6, 2013)

passive101 said:


> I'm surprised that Foursevens doesn't really support 18650 batteries in their lights. I thought they were on top of the battery scene pretty well.




quarks were designed to be quite small and lego-able so naturally 18650 is too fat for them. so just use the 16650 or 17670

their larger MMX and MMS are 18650 compatible


----------



## passive101 (Sep 7, 2013)

Overclocker said:


> quarks were designed to be quite small and lego-able so naturally 18650 is too fat for them. so just use the 16650 or 17670
> 
> their larger MMX and MMS are 18650 compatible



Why don't they just make an optional 18650 body people can buy? 18650 is a standard that is 2x123A compatible and 18650 batteries can be purchased by the flashlights in Cabela's and Gander Mountain. I can't however purchase 16650 or 17670.


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Sep 8, 2013)

passive101 said:


> Why don't they just make an optional 18650 body people can buy? 18650 is a standard that is 2x123A compatible and 18650 batteries can be purchased by the flashlights in Cabela's and Gander Mountain. I can't however purchase 16650 or 17670.



They did. But it's a complicated part that's expensive to build and not very cost effective. There are a few hundred in the world. (Read my post above yours).


----------



## Overclocker (Sep 8, 2013)

exactly. 18650 is just too fat for the quarks. don't expect a slim AA/CR123 light to be able to accommodate 18650. the excellent sanyo 16650 2100mah cell is readily available from a variety of online dealers and it's what i use on my QP2L-X


----------



## waywardgeek (Sep 8, 2013)

No pre-flash on my QT2L-X in moonlight mode. I notice a flash only when programming the modes, which is no biggie. This is a great little light, a real pocket rocket. I bought 20 Rayovac CR123A batteries, which I believe are actually the same as the AW123A (made at the same USA plant the same way). I figure this is a better solution for camping/backpacking where I'd rather have a spare battery than a rechargeable, and the shelf life is something like 10 years.


----------



## rickypanecatyl (Nov 6, 2013)

Overclocker said:


> exactly. 18650 is just too fat for the quarks. don't expect a slim AA/CR123 light to be able to accommodate 18650. the excellent sanyo 16650 2100mah cell is readily available from a variety of online dealers and it's what i use on my QP2L-X



Sorry for the tangent but just curious on how those batteries are holding up? I've noticed most all of the newer 18650's I buy are really fragile. They fall apart in my backback (casing comes off and disc comes off the bottom) and the top dents in making them not charge in the charger or light the light; most often the problem is intermittent. Are the Sanyo's very robust?


----------



## BillSWPA (Nov 6, 2013)

Thanks for the review. I am learning a great deal from the reviews on this forum.

I recently took advantage of FourSevens' clearance page to pick up a 123 Tactical, the predecessor to the QT2L. I am so impressed with this light that it quickly became my EDC. I am looking at picking up a current production Quark Tactical. Regarding the burst mode:

I typically use my lights on high for very short periods of time. If I am using the light for longer, I will switch to a lower mode. Therefore, I would be in burst mode for likely 100% of the time the light was being used on high. With this in mind:

1) Would I effectively be cutting my run time on high in half?

2) What does this do to the lifespan of the LED or other circuitry?


----------



## reppans (Nov 6, 2013)

BillSWPA said:


> 1) Would I effectively be cutting my run time on high in half?
> 
> 2) What does this do to the lifespan of the LED or other circuitry?



Yes, your cumulative runtime on max will be ~ half the spec, although 47s tends to err on the conservative side with their specs. Don't worry about life span, 47s is also very conservative about over driving their lights - they do stand behind their products, better than most others, after all.


----------



## BillSWPA (Nov 6, 2013)

reppans said:


> Yes, your cumulative runtime on max will be ~ half the spec, although 47s tends to err on the conservative side with their specs. Don't worry about life span, 47s is also very conservative about over driving their lights - they do stand behind their products, better than most others, after all.



Thanks!


----------



## brightnorm (Nov 24, 2013)

Overclocker said:


> quarks were designed to be quite small and lego-able....


I believe they used Fenix's 2x123 lights as a model and produced a highly competitive light.

Brikghtnorm


----------



## JanCPF (Jan 3, 2014)

Thanks for this excellent review. Is it possible to select a mode that runs 410 lumens throughout the runtime without the initial 800 lumens burst? High mode seem to be around 300 lumens - correct?


----------



## Etsu (Jan 3, 2014)

JanCPF said:


> Thanks for this excellent review. Is it possible to select a mode that runs 410 lumens throughout the runtime without the initial 800 lumens burst? High mode seem to be around 300 lumens - correct?



In practice, you won't see much difference between 300 and 410 lumens, so just use the 300 lumen high setting if you don't want burst.


----------



## JanCPF (Jan 3, 2014)

Etsu said:


> In practice, you won't see much difference between 300 and 410 lumens, so just use the 300 lumen high setting if you don't want burst.



Yes I'm aware of that, but I already own the 200 lumen XP-G and there is also not much difference between 200 and 300, but 400 would (for me) justify an upgrade .


----------



## Etsu (Jan 3, 2014)

JanCPF said:


> Yes I'm aware of that, but I already own the 200 lumen XP-G and there is also not much difference between 200 and 300, but 400 would (for me) justify an upgrade .



The XML will give you a floodier light than the XPG, so getting that version may be worth it anyway. I have both flavors of the Quarks, and my preference is the XML versions. If you really don't want burst, then get an older version without burst, or a 2xAA format. (Though the XML versions still step down a bit after 3.5 minutes, just not as much as the burst mode does.) The 2xAA XM-L2 specs say 280 lumens, but it's a lot higher than that in reality... at least 350 lumens, maybe higher.


----------



## Xak (Jan 4, 2014)

This light sounds AWESOME! Been thinking of getting one, but not if warm tint isn't offered. Cost me $50 to replace an emitter from a third party for a light. Great job, no complaints, but why no more warm tint from 47s?!?!?!


----------



## Etsu (Jan 4, 2014)

4sevens says warm tints don't sell well. It's not worth tying up inventory. I guess cool white rules in the mass market.


----------



## brightnorm (Jan 13, 2014)

passive101 said:


> Why don't they just make an optional 18650 body people can buy? 18650 is a standard that is 2x123A compatible and 18650 batteries can be purchased by the flashlights in Cabela's and Gander Mountain. I can't however purchase 16650 or 17670.



2x123 Quarks were designed to directly compete with 2x123 Fenix. In fact the heads, bodies and tailcaps of the 2x123 lights are interchangeable between the two brands.

Brightnorm


----------



## Labrador72 (Jan 25, 2014)

I agree when the 2x123 Quark was designed it probably had the Fenix PD30 as a competitor but that was a long time ago. I think the QT2L would be a lot more popular if it was compatible with 18650s. I can understand the argument of wanting to keep the QT2L legoable with the other Quarks but at the same time I don't see why they could not have two models, one supporting 2xCR123/17650 and another one supporting 2xCR123/18650. Fenix did it for a while offering both the PD30 and PD31 and Eagletac still does it with the D25C2 and D25LC2: I don't see either company being on the verge of bankruptcy.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to bash the light, to the contrary I find it has an impressive performance, excellent mode spacing and a highly customizable UI: features very few lights in the same category - if any at all - can boast. I'm just saying that 18650 compatibility would make the light much more appealing. 
Tiforce, thanks for the very insightful review.


----------



## BillSWPA (Jan 26, 2014)

I can certainly see the appeal of 18650 compatibility given the number of people here already using this cell size in other lights as well as the cell's capacity.

Quarks are compatible with KeepPower 16650's, although FourSevens tells me that they believe performance would be poor. I believe some on this forum use these cells in Quarks. 18650 compatibility would require a wider diameter body, which diminishes the size efficiency that was a primary factor in making me a FourSevens fan.


----------



## thedoc007 (Aug 4, 2014)

First, let me thank you for an EXCELLENT review. Particularly the graphs. I have found that graphs can be used equally well to highlight or to obscure data, depending on whether you over-complicate things, or choose a scale that makes it difficult to actually see what is going on. Yours are a stellar example of how to do it properly!

I do have one question...does this light use PWM on any modes?


----------



## ti-force (Aug 7, 2014)

thedoc007 said:


> First, let me thank you for an EXCELLENT review. Particularly the graphs. I have found that graphs can be used equally well to highlight or to obscure data, depending on whether you over-complicate things, or choose a scale that makes it difficult to actually see what is going on. Yours are a stellar example of how to do it properly!
> 
> I do have one question...does this light use PWM on any modes?




Thank you very much for the kind words. It's greatly appreciated. To answer your question, yes, the model I reviewed is pulse width modulated.


----------



## Treeguy (Aug 7, 2014)

If you don`t mind, I`d like to piggyback a Quark question on here to avoid a new thread.

If the Quark Tactical QT2A-X puts out 336 lumens with standard 2XAAs, what would it put it with 14500s?

Thanks.


----------



## ti-force (Aug 7, 2014)

Treeguy said:


> If you don`t mind, I`d like to piggyback a Quark question on here to avoid a new thread.
> 
> If the Quark Tactical QT2A-X puts out 336 lumens with standard 2XAAs, what would it put it with 14500s?
> 
> Thanks.



I think I tested that. I'll look and see when I get a chance


----------



## Treeguy (Aug 7, 2014)

ti-force said:


> I think I tested that. I'll look and see when I get a chance



Thanks.


----------



## reppans (Aug 7, 2014)

ti-force said:


> Thank you very much for the kind words. It's greatly appreciated. To answer your question, yes, the model I reviewed is pulse width modulated.



Curious what modes you found PWM on. AFAIK, all Quarks are current regulated for all their constant on modes (don't know about the disco modes though). I have the 2L burst mode head and just did time exposure sweeps across a camera for all the loose bezel modes and L, M and H all look completely smooth like the center beam here (L2R @ ~3 lms - MDC AA, QPA-X, Mini MA):







However, on moonlight, there is some "warble" (as discussed in the PWM sticky) on my sample. Somewhat rare among my Quarks, but most are low voltage XML heads.


----------



## ti-force (Aug 8, 2014)

I thought I tested the aa version of this light with a 14500, but if I did I can't find my notes on it. I'm pretty sure I tested it, but I'm thinking the output was basically the same as 2xaa batteries so I ended the test. I did test the burst mode light with an AW IMR 14500. The results are in post # 13 of this thread - 

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...-Mode-review&p=4260035&viewfull=1#post4260035


----------



## Treeguy (Aug 8, 2014)

ti-force said:


> I thought I tested the aa version of this light with a 14500, but if I did I can't find my notes on it. I'm pretty sure I tested it, but I'm thinking the output was basically the same as 2xaa batteries so I ended the test. I did test the burst mode light with an AW IMR 14500. The results are in post # 13 of this thread -
> 
> http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...-Mode-review&p=4260035&viewfull=1#post4260035




Forgive my knuckleheadedness, but you got a 2X123 light to work with 1X14500?

I understood the graph, and thank you for that, but I admit to being unclear about using the 14500 in a 123 light. Or was this some kind of Lego thing? I guess it`s one more thing you hardcore flasha-battery-aholics can pull off.


----------



## ti-force (Aug 8, 2014)

Treeguy said:


> Forgive my knuckleheadedness, but you got a 2X123 light to work with 1X14500?
> 
> I understood the graph, and thank you for that, but I admit to being unclear about using the 14500 in a 123 light. Or was this some kind of Lego thing? I guess it`s one more thing you hardcore flasha-battery-aholics can pull off.



Yes that's it exactly. All you need is an aa body. All of the variants use the same parts. Threads are the same, all tailcaps are the same, all heads are the same, just electronics inside the head and reflectors are different to correspond with different led's. The only thing you need to be aware of is the fact that it is possible to put an aa/2xaa/1xcr123, i.e., low voltage head on a 2xcr123 body/battery tube and cause permanent damage to the electronics in the head due to overvoltage.


----------



## ti-force (Aug 8, 2014)

reppans said:


> Curious what modes you found PWM on. AFAIK, all Quarks are current regulated for all their constant on modes (don't know about the disco modes though). I have the 2L burst mode head and just did time exposure sweeps across a camera for all the loose bezel modes and L, M and H all look completely smooth like the center beam here (L2R @ ~3 lms - MDC AA, QPA-X, Mini MA):
> 
> 
> 
> ...



My mistake, I accidently picked up an older version 1 Quark x without burst mode. I've been away for a while. I'm a little rusty. Anyhow, the burst mode light doesn't use pwm as I just checked it, but the older Quark x I have does use pwm. Maybe it's a prototype? When I was still doing reviews, Foursevens would sometimes send me prototypes to test.


----------



## ti-force (Aug 8, 2014)

Here you go. Quark X PWM Moonlight Mode-


----------



## reppans (Aug 8, 2014)

ti-force said:


> My mistake, I accidently picked up an older version 1 Quark x without burst mode. I've been away for a while. I'm a little rusty. Anyhow, the burst mode light doesn't use pwm as I just checked it, but the older Quark x I have does use pwm. Maybe it's a prototype? When I was still doing reviews, Foursevens would sometimes send me prototypes to test.



Yeah, your photo looks like it could be an extreme case of that "warble" issue. Did you notice this behavior on all lower modes of your sample/prototype, as is usually the case for a true PWM light?

Anyways, here's a sample of my Quark Xs on moonlight. L to R, QP2L-X BM, QB2L-X (not BM), and QP2A-X, with a Mini MA for PWM reference. The QP2L-X BM has some of that warble thing going (as I mentioned above), but it's not true PWM. All three Xs look well current regulated on L,M and H, just like the bottom picture/horizontal lines.






BTW, I want to thank you for your reviews and resolving what are true ANSI lumens here on CPF.... your lumen scale seems ~25% different (which is huge in my mind) than another CPF reviewer for the same light (QP2A-X). I know the potential for sample variation, but I also run a lightbox, calibrate using various QP2A-Xs, peg the stepdown (which should be more consistent than max) at what you do, and can match most or all of the modes on the light. This scale (your scale) also matches most of my light collection, so I have the most faith in your output numbers. 

Great job ti-force.... review more lights please .


----------



## ti-force (Aug 10, 2014)

reppans said:


> Yeah, your photo looks like it could be an extreme case of that "warble" issue. Did you notice this behavior on all lower modes of your sample/prototype, as is usually the case for a true PWM light?
> 
> Anyways, here's a sample of my Quark Xs on moonlight. L to R, QP2L-X BM, QB2L-X (not BM), and QP2A-X, with a Mini MA for PWM reference. The QP2L-X BM has some of that warble thing going (as I mentioned above), but it's not true PWM. All three Xs look well current regulated on L,M and H, just like the bottom picture/horizontal lines.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the kind words. When I checked my sample it appeared as if it was pwm in every mode except max mode. I'll check again


----------



## ti-force (Aug 10, 2014)

Just checked the original Quark X again and all the lower modes are pwm on my sample. The higher the brightness the faster it's pulsed, but I see it with my eye when I wave it in front of my face. Could be they used a slightly different circuit on my sample. Usually if I was sent a prototype it was a final iteration, but maybe that wasn't the case with this one. Strange.


----------



## Tapis (Oct 6, 2014)

Thanks for the review. The brightness levels of this light are just PERFECT for me! Just wish it would be compatible with 18650


----------



## Raphion (Jan 31, 2015)

I just got a set of Keeppower 16650 2500mAh li-ions for this light from Illumination Supply, and WOW. They fit like they're made for the light, and I'm getting just over 100 minutes of runtime at the highest setting before any dimming, which exceeds the OPs runtime test with PRIMARY cells! And this is before doing any break-in of the new cells. After 105 minutes or so, it begins to fade slowly with these batteries, letting you know it's time to swap batteries, rather than leaving you suddenly in the dark like protected RCR123a does in this light.


----------



## NH Lumens (Feb 1, 2015)

Raphion said:


> I just got a set of Keeppower 16650 2500mAh li-ions for this light from Illumination Supply, and WOW. They fit like they're made for the light, and I'm getting just over 100 minutes of runtime at the highest setting before any dimming, which exceeds the OPs runtime test with PRIMARY cells! And this is before doing any break-in of the new cells. After 105 minutes or so, it begins to fade slowly with these batteries, letting you know it's time to swap batteries, rather than leaving you suddenly in the dark like protected RCR123a does in this light.



I am pleased with the same set up, though my favorite remains using a single AA tube with an AW IMR 14500 cell.


----------

