# The Ultimate EagleTac M2*** TRIPLE REVIEW!



## Wattnot (May 8, 2009)

Hi All and welcome to a very exciting comparison review of yet another “performance envelope pushing” new set of lights: The EagleTac M2 series. Yes, I have ALL THREE here and beamshots are below. If you can’t wait and want to zip right down to the photos, I understand. Just please come back and read all of this stuff because there’s more to these lights than just the singeing of my house and trees! 

First I would like to thank Mike at PTS who sent me all THREE lights for this review. I appreciate the confidence he has in me to carry out what I’m sure is a heavily anticipated review. Seeing all three perform in my back yard will be a great help to all who will have (or are having) trouble deciding. Of course in the spirit of CPF I have to say at least once . . . Buy all THREE! 






TK40 - M2C4 - M2XC4 W - M2XC4 C - 2C Mag with extender

*Manufacturer’s features and specifications* (from PTS’s site):

*EagleTac M2C4*


*Features: *
Quad die SSC P7 D bin Premium tint LED emitter with up to 900 lumen
Constant Current Regulation Output C2800 Light Engine
Gold Plated Copper Contacts for Superior Conductivity and Durability
ET54 Aluminum Optical Reflector with mild OP finish
Battery Options: 4 - CR123A or 2 - 18650 Li-ion Rechargeables
All inOne Digital Rotary Switch with Off Position and Tactical Strobe
Rotary Switch made in Re‐enforced Polycarbonate with Smooth Rubber Coating
Output Levels : Strobe > 900 lumen > 420 lumen > 170 lumen > 45 lumen > Off
Runtime (4x123A): Strobe > 1.2hr > 3.5hr > 9.5 hr > 45hr > Off
Runtime (2x18650): Strobe > 1.5hr > 4.5hr > 12.5 hr > 55hr > Off

*Dimensions: *
Bezel - 2.4" 
Body - 2.0" x 1.1"
Length - 6.3" (M2X) 6.5" (M2) 

*Included accessories:*
Para cord lanyard with position lock
Rigid Nylon holster with adjustable mounting for different belt sizes
Spare o-ring

*Optional accessories:*
- Filter Kit (Red/Blue/Green/IR)
- Diffuser Kit
- Window Protector Cap
- 123A Battery Magazine Holder, efficiently loads CR123A lithium batteries compatible with M2 battery tray
- M2 Additional Battery Tray custom fit for 18650 and CR123A batteries with gold plated copper contacts

*EagleTac M2XC4 cool white (6000k)*


*Features:* 
3-R2 Cree LED Cluster for Mega Throw up to 800 lumen
Output Levels : Strobe > 800 lumen > 420 lumen > 170 lumen > 45 lumen > Off
Reviewer note: ALL of the rest is identical to the M2C4


*EagleTac M2XC4 natural white (4300k)*

*Features: *
Neutral white *3-Q3 LED Cluster *for Mega Throw & good color rendition 
M2X Neutral White Output Level: Strobe > 665 lumen > 300 lumen > 125 lumen > 33 lumen > Off 
Runtime (4x123A): Strobe > 1.2hr > 3.5hr > 9.5 hr > 45hr > Off
Reviewer note: ALL of the rest is identical to the M2C4













M2C4 - Warm - Cool

*Initial Impressions:*

“To boldly go where no light has gone before.” That’s my first impression. This light could easily be used as a prop in a Star Trek movie! Don’t get me wrong, this IS a compliment. It is a very cool looking light! Its’ looks say rugged and it’s not kidding. It feels very stout and strong. It’s compact too at only 1 inch longer than my Surefire A2. The head may appear large but it’s only slightly larger than my 2C Mag. When you place them lens to lens, the Mag head fits snugly inside the good looking stainless steel bezel. It will take a minute to get used to the grip (especially with the clicky tailcap option installed) but if you keep your thumb on the control ring, your hand will find a natural feeling position in short order.













In my TK40 review I commented on the thin-ness of that light’s metal and how the TK40 wouldn’t make a good duty belt light. Well the M2 (They are identical in many ways so I’m going to say M2 for when it doesn’t matter which one I’m talking about) seems the opposite with regards to the heft and thickness. It’s not as thick as some of the Wolf Eyes and SF offerings but to give you an idea, the much shorter body of the M2 weighs 2.8 oz and the body of the TK40 weights 2.4 oz. The odd shape would make this a poor duty belt choice for our LEO friends (unless someone made a fancy kydex retention holster just for the M2). But like the TK40, the M2 would make a great “trunk bag” light. I’ll get into the details on the UI next but this light is slightly higher on the tactical totem pole than the TK40, but our small but vocal pool of strobe haters is going to flip out on how easy it is to accidentally get it into strobe.

The EagleTac M2 has a forward clicky (as an “included for now” option) with tactical momentary. Except for the plastic control ring and SS strike bezel the M2 is HAIII hard anodized. There are two instances of knurling, one large “fin” type on the rectangular body and a fine crosshatch on the head and I consider both to be non-aggressive. It weighs 13.9 oz empty and 16.5 oz with 2 18650 protected batteries. It is a little top heavy, even with the batteries installed. The head weighs 9.4 oz and the body (including batteries) weighs 7.1 oz. However, this imbalance isn’t very noticeable, probably because of the short length. The fit and finish and threads are all excellent. As for “O” rings, the tailcap on the stock light (not the clicky) is a screwed on plate with a single O-ring. The head has one but it’s difficult to see under the plastic control ring, directly beneath which the head comes off. The output is incredible and yes, I’m going to say it again, especially for it’s size. 














*UI:*

The user interface on the M2s is very simple. After installing the batteries, you simply rotate the plastic control ring. It is smooth and has no stops or detents or clicks. Looking INTO the light (this is NOT recommended!) it rotates counter-clockwise. So holding the light and looking down at it, you would turn it to the right. It’s an excellent one handed operation by the way. Low comes first, followed by medium, high, turbo then strobe. It’s very smooth and the level changes come fast. In a way it is similar to the much loved Surefire A2/L1 as it comes on low first but you can zip right to turbo by rotating less than ¼ turn. The problem for me is that right after turbo, BAM, you’re into the strobe mode. Do a search and you’ll see I always stick up for strobe. I like it and I feel it has its’ uses and its’ place. On this light, however, I wish they would have found some other way to activate it because it’s way too easy to get to it while trying to get to turbo. High is extremely bright so you actually may find it difficult to tell the difference between high and turbo, at least at first. So if you slam it on all the way with a quarter turn, you’ll be “strobin.” I know it would have added cost and complexity but here is where a click or detent in the control ring would have gone a LONG way. Perhaps even a manual sliding stop at turbo that could keep it from going into strobe mode could be an inexpensive option? I’m starting to understand why Surefires cost so much but then again a SF light like this will probably cost two or three times as much (if SF can ever get something new off the glossy brochure and into the stores, that is!). As with anything, it takes some getting used to. I wrote this having played with the lights for a mere hour or two. This is by no means a deal-breaker. As for the tactical aspect, yes, you could call this UI tactical in that it makes no significant sound and can be operated with one hand (in the stock config) but in a stressful situation, you will probably slam it right into strobe. That could be a good thing but there doesn’t seem to be a way to slam it into turbo without diverting more attention to what you are doing. So for that I’ll leave the tactical aspect up to the tactical user. It has the capability, but some practice would be wise. 

*UI continued, the optional clicky:*

I installed the clicky tailcap and battery holder on one of the lights. It has some advantages and some disadvantages that I see. First, I had some trouble installing it. It was tedious. The screws are miniscule. I was afraid to touch them because they’re so tiny I thought they were going to be absorbed through my skin. The oval shaped O-ring seems a tiny bit too big for the half a channel you have to put it in. The other half of what should be a channel is merely a tiny ridge that runs along the top of the hole area where the switch goes into the cap. I finally got it after a good 20 minutes. The switch comes attached to an included battery holder that replaces the stock one. Once you get that all put back together, you’re ready to go. Set the ring to your favorite setting and when you hit the clicky, you get your light. You also end up with a double disconnect for storage when you have the ring in the off position AND the switch in the off position. The downside to that is now it takes TWO switches to light it up. You lose tailstand ability as well. The grip gets a tad less comfortable but that will differ with each person, I’m sure. In my opinion the clicky switch is a give/take option that I will probably not use myself.






*Logistics:*

The light only opens from the middle. Both the stock tailcap and the optional clicky tailcap are permanently attached by the 4 tiny screws. A gentle, inverted shake drops the battery carrier in your hand. There was no battery rattle except when I held the head and shook the handle hard (why would you do this?). Bare CR123’s will work but with all of the extra room in there I would use the CR123 sleeves just for piece of mind. They’re listed as an option but came with all 3 of mine. The petite battery carrier is well designed and solid even though it may not appear that way in the photos. I see no time saving or convenience advantage to owning more than one so don’t worry about buying extra battery carriers. There is no clip but the light comes with a very nice holster and a para-cord lanyard. The light rides bezel down in the holster. The holster offers options itself. It has a piece with both Velcro AND a snap that you could use to slip it over a belt you are already wearing. To make it even sturdier you can loop your belt behind a second piece of material next to the snap/Velcro piece. To top it all off it has a D ring as well. For all this light already offers I found the included holster a very generous addition. Aftermarket holster makers . . . don’t waste your time! After my experience installing the clicky tailcap, I got suspicious and found I could blow a little air through the body. (NOTE: see post 2 for update to this) That’s when I found the four small screws on the head side of the body tube loose on all three lights. After tightening them the airflow was much harder but I still blew some through (blowing through a breathalyzer is much easier than this . . . don’t ask me how I know). I got more curious and found I could blow through the bodies with the stock tailcaps too. I won’t be dunking this in water. To be fair, I did not try this on any of my other reviews but I attribute this to the oval O-ring design. 






*Current draw:* 

All current draw measurements were done with a fresh set of Wolf Eyes 18650s. Keep in mind these are measurements of what the light draws off of the batteries, NOT what the driver feeds the emitter. These batteries are in series so the driver is getting 7.2 to 8.4 volts which gets cut in half (or so) before it’s fed to the LED. Dropping the voltage raises the current by ohms law, minus component losses. Chances are the emitter is getting half the volts and 1.5 times the amperage figures below (I’m rough guessing that last part and trying to keep this simple – experts, don’t attack me!).

*M2C4*
*Low - *42ma
*Med - *180ma
*High - *590ma
*Turbo - *1.5A

*M2XC4 cool*
*Low *- 42ma
*Med -*210ma
*High -*600ma
*Turbo -* 1.6A

*M2XC4 warm*

*Low *- 46ma
*Med - *220ma
*High - 6*00ma
*Turbo - *1.6A 

Again, do NOT look at those numbers and think the emitters are only getting a total of 1.6 amps on turbo. I don’t have a way to measure the current delivered to the emitters but I have no doubt it’s what EagleTac’s claims. 

*In the hands of “babes:”* 

I took a little walk over to my “non-flashaholic” neighbor’s house. He’s a mechanic but to him a good flashlight is (or was) a stock Mag. I’m slowly converting him but there is no “passion” there. This makes him a great subject to hand a light to for an opinion. His overall impression was positive but the first thing he said after finding all of the modes was that there should be detents in the selector ring. In trying to find turbo he kept hitting strobe and high. He didn't like the grip with the stock tailcap too much but felt he could get used to it. He liked the grip with the clicky tailcap even less and did not feel he could get used to it. He did otherwise like the clickly tailcap. His favorite beam was the M2XC4 warm. He was going to go with the cool at first because but after a few seconds he decided he liked the warm better. A friend of his caught a glimpse of it and wanted to buy one on the spot. He's another lifelong Mag user.


*The beam and white walling:*

Bravo EagleTac. I don’t know how you did it but you got 3 emitters to appear as a near perfect circle on my wall! The beam from the single P7 emitter of the M2C4 is flawless except for a barely perceptible dark spot in the center. The other two exhibit the customary Cree ringy-ness but are still very nice. The only way you’re going to be able to tell it’s a tri-emitter is if I tell you it is and you search hard for the outline. Very well done. The 4300K looks very nice and I like it a lot. I will most likely choose this one for myself. I put it up on the wall on medium, alongside my A2. It seems to fit between what we’re used to from an LED and the A2. In fact, it was slightly over the halfway mark, closer to the A2 than a run-of-the-mill, white LED. I have a feeling this one will be the most popular among flashaholics. The color seems very natural; not forced or faked as if a yellow lens were on the front, if that makes any sense.





Auto exposure of TK40 - M2C4 - M2XC4 warm - M2XC4 cool





Severe under exposure of TK40 - M2C4 - M2XC4 warm - M2XC4 cool

*PWM:*

Using my highly scientific test method (pointing it into a fan) I discovered no discernable PWM on ANY power level. How are they doing this? Is the PWM so fast that even the fan doesn’t show it or are they using some other technology?


*Outdoor Beamshots:*




M2C4 100 feet





M2XC4 Warm - 100 feet






M2XC4 cool - 100 feet






TK40 left - M2XC4 cool right





M2C4 150 feet





M2XC4 warm 150 feet





M2XC4 cool - 150 feet





TK40 left - M2XC4 cool right 150 feet





M2C4 200 feet






M2XC4 warm - 200 feet






M2XC4 cool - 200 feet






M2C4 - warm - cool - 200 feet






M2C4 - 300 feet






M2XC4 warm - 300 feet






M2XC4 cool - 300 feet






M2C4 - warm - cool - 300 feet


*Conclusions:*

This has to be the most unique looking light and one the most powerful LEDs (the cool version) that I’ve seen in person or on CPF (custom and boutique lights excluded – I’m talking big factory stuff here). I like the look of some of the new 2x18650 offerings and I wasn’t sure if I was going to like the "side-by-side" form factor but I do. The grip is almost like a tennis racket so it won’t take long getting used to . . . and the more I look at this thing, the more I like it. For those of you with non-flashaholic friends, but who are curious about your lights, this will change everything. When you let them play with this thing, you will find them signing up on the board shorly after! 

So I say pick one, pick two or just go crazy and get all three, but get at least one of these. Like most things it’s not perfect but there is little to complain about. I would have liked a better UI. If I was on the design team I would have pushed for detents or click stops on the control ring and some labeling too. The reason is to be able to avoid strobe and to prevent accidental activation (premature illumination?). I would have skipped the clicky altogether but that’s just me. On larger lights I would rather have thumb control anyway and the M2 gives you that. The clicky kind of takes it away for me. Here’s my rating on a 10 scale (with half points where needed): M2C4 – overall I give it an 8. Output 8. Battery system 9. Fit and finish 7 (would have been 10 except for the O-ring problem). UI 7. Features 7. The M2CX4 Warm gets a 8.5 overall. Output 9. The cool version gets a 9 overall because the output is a 9.5. Their tri-emitter M2XC4 models have much better throw as you can see in the longer tree shots. There is a small trade-off in output for the warm color but the rendition is very nice. I’m having a hard time picking a winner between those two but I’m still leaning toward the warm version even though the cool version is a tad brighter. Even though the single P7 emitter M2C4 has the most lumens, it started flooding out at 200 feet and the throwers took over. It still chucked a bunch of light down the field, but the greater the distance, the more diffused it became.

There are many fine retailers for this light but I recommend www.PTS-Flashlights.com for great prices and great service. CPF members who set up an account receive special pricing on everything they sell.


----------



## Wattnot (May 8, 2009)

*NOTES:*

I just did a 12 minute test on turbo and it wasn't that warm at all. I didn't even bother getting my IR temp gun because it felt like other lights on medium. It would make a lousy hand warmer if that's what anyone was looking for!!

I just finished installing the EagleTac provided washers on all three lights. I did the same seal test I did for the initial review and all 3 passed! I was unable to blow any air through, even on the one with the clicky cap installed. 

EagleTac has assured us that the head is sealed and will guarantee that, and the washers seal the body so I'm officially amending my review to say that the light now meets the claimed waterproof standard (provided you do the mod to your old one, or buy one with the mod installed as all new ones are).


----------



## Ryanrpm (May 8, 2009)

Nice review...and thanks for working hard to provide us with beamshots and a detailed review! 



I've Shrunk some down and placed them side by side so we can see the comparisons a little better. Hope you don't mind!!

M2 and M2X Cool: 300ft








M2 and M2X Warm: 300ft








M2X Cool and M2X Warm: 300ft


----------



## Ryanrpm (May 8, 2009)

Other than tint...it looks like the TK40 and M2 have a nearly identical brightness in your underexposed shot. Do you have any throwers you can compare the M2X's with?

Can you also get the TK40 out there in the tree shots?


----------



## Metatron (May 8, 2009)

fantastic Wattnot, they sure do look awesome, i pre ordered mine and its no where on the horizon.


----------



## vincebdx (May 8, 2009)

Perfect review, thank you Wattnot :twothumbs


----------



## jzmtl (May 8, 2009)

Very nice! Thanks you!

Looks like I made the right choice with M2X cool.


----------



## JKL (May 8, 2009)

:thanks: Wattnot, nice review and very interesting .


----------



## woodrow (May 8, 2009)

Wow! Great Review.... This is going to be the best year for flashaholics since the Cree leds came out! There are really no bad choices! Thanks again.


----------



## Zeruel (May 8, 2009)

Thank you for your review. Great outdoor shots! :thumbsup:
Almost made me wish I had pre-ordered the M2XC4 warm instead.

I'll probably be checking these shots again and again and again till mine's delivered. :sigh:


----------



## genotypic (May 8, 2009)

Excellent review, Wattnot! :thumbsup:
What are your impressions on the heat dissipation of the lights, and any runtime figures for us?


----------



## dudu84 (May 8, 2009)

Thanks for the great reviews, very detailed with great beamshots :twothumbs

Is it possible that you could test the water-proof-ability for one of those 3 versions? I think it's seriously lacking if a 150$ light dies because of the rain or being dropped into a stream :shakehead. All lights nowadays (quality ones) are water-proof to certain extents.


----------



## 1dash1 (May 8, 2009)

dudu84 said:


> Thanks for the great reviews, very detailed with great beamshots :twothumbs
> 
> Is it possible that you could test the water-proof-ability for one of those 3 versions? I think it's seriously lacking if a 150$ light dies because of the rain or being dropped into a stream :shakehead. All lights nowadays (quality ones) are water-proof to certain extents.


 
Test? 

_Wattnot already mentioned that he could blow air past the seals. These flashlights are NOT waterproof._ :tinfoil:


----------



## duboost (May 8, 2009)

great beamshots! thanks for the awesome review

and yet i still can't narrow it down to just one that i want


----------



## dudu84 (May 8, 2009)

1dash1 said:


> Test?
> 
> _Wattnot already mentioned that he could blow air past the seals. These flashlights are NOT waterproof._ :tinfoil:



Well when you blow the air, the fluid going through the body has higher pressure than ambient pressure. Depends on how hard you need to blow to force the air through, the test can be similar to dunking into the water at certain depth. 
Perhaps these lights can be splash-proof or rain-proof at least :candle:


----------



## Glenn7 (May 8, 2009)

I was thinking :thinking: I know its not ideal but you could ether use a dot of liquid paper or GTD paint or even trits to use on the body and control ring as a feel/visual for each level of output on the light - well thats what I will do anyway :naughty:


----------



## dudu84 (May 8, 2009)

Funny the specs on eagletac website says the light is water resistance to IPX8 standard (dunkable) :thumbsdow

That's why I prefer to have some actual tests :thinking:


----------



## 1dash1 (May 8, 2009)

dudu84 said:


> Well when you blow the air, the fluid going through the body has higher pressure than ambient pressure. Depends on how hard you need to blow to force the air through, the test can be similar to dunking into the water at certain depth.
> Perhaps these lights can be splash-proof or rain-proof at least :candle:


 
I won't be running any splash tests with my light. 

BTW, did you note the battery draw:



> *M2C4
> **Low - *42ma
> *Med - *180ma
> *High - *590ma
> ...


 
So, it seems the C2800 driver is driving the tri-beams harder than the P7. The manufacturer's advertised claims seem more plausible. But it doesn't answer the question of "how" Eagletac did it. :shrug:


----------



## dudu84 (May 8, 2009)

1dash1 said:


> BTW, did you note the battery draw:
> 
> 
> 
> So, it seems the C2800 driver is driving the tri-beams harder than the P7. The manufacturer's advertised claims seem more plausible. But it doesn't answer the question of "how" Eagletac did it. :shrug:



Perhaps it has something to do with the higher Vf of XR-E Cree compared to P7?


----------



## 1dash1 (May 8, 2009)

Wattnot:

Great review, especially the nice pic's!

A couple of questions, both of a subjective nature:

*1. In your opinion, did Eagletac get the output levels right? Or would you have preferred a lower low, medium, and high modes?*


*2. In your opinion, would the UI work better if the control ring rotated 110-120 degrees from Off to Strobe, instead of 90 degrees?*


----------



## ergotelis (May 8, 2009)

NIce review thanks!DId you got any lux measurements?Is it possible?Thanks again!


----------



## chrisWELD (May 8, 2009)

Thanks for the great review Wattnot 

Slightly a concern that it's not looking too water-resistant. As it said in their specs - IPX-8. Surely EagleTac will be living up to their guarantee based on their quoted specs - maybe it's a case of test and return under warranty... 

Anyway, looking forward to getting a tracking order for mine (cool white) - maybe today (Friday)... Hopefully... Argh....!


----------



## faco (May 8, 2009)

Thanks for the Excellent review :thumbsup:

Glad I ordered the M2XC4, now we must wait................................


----------



## Creecher (May 8, 2009)

Thanks, that was just what everyone needed, a great review and good beamshots. I'd always tend to go for the brightest, ie. the cooler tints, but these shots really show the colour rendition of the warmer led and are definitely swaying me in that direction.


----------



## ilLUMENati (May 8, 2009)

Finally! Took y'all long enough.


----------



## 5.0Trunk (May 8, 2009)

Thanks for the review. The M2C4 really looks good at 300 ft. Would you happen to have any P7 Mags to compare at 300 ft to the M2C4?


----------



## Krahl (May 8, 2009)

Finally!!

Thanks for this great review!!


----------



## applevision (May 8, 2009)

WHOOO HOOO!!

Outstanding!!

Thank you soooo much!!


----------



## Yucca Patrol (May 8, 2009)

I ordered my M2X cool last night. I have a feeling that my Deerelight DBS V3 R2 will soon be listed in the classifieds.. . . . . :twothumbs

But I will keep my Deerelight with the MC-E. . . .


----------



## PsychoBunny (May 8, 2009)

Great beam shots, thanks!!

Now I can see why I had a hard time picking just one, I like all three!!


----------



## Kremer (May 8, 2009)

wow.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (May 8, 2009)

Wow. Excellent review. Awesome work there. They certainly look like very nice lights!


----------



## callmaster (May 8, 2009)

I'm certainly impressed with all 3. Must control self from making a purchase!


----------



## hazna (May 8, 2009)

thanks for the review

Seems like in those 100ft beamshots the P7 has a larger hot spot but less spill, while the 3xcree versions have a smaller hot spot but greater spill. Can you confirm whether this is the case in real life?

Hmmm... I was really looking forward to this flashlight but to be honest I'm bit concerned regarding the water resistance of the light, as well as the issue with the selector ring. Have a 'click' for each mode would be better.


----------



## swiftwing (May 8, 2009)

Woot, i am so glad i pre-ordered the M2C4 since flood is exactly what i want. Good to know that i basically have the ability to light a nice wide 300ft path in front of me. Looks like my M25 clicky switch pack will be staying in the bag however.


----------



## Daniel_sk (May 8, 2009)

Nice, I am glad I preordered the M2X warm version. The strobe is a little disappointing. I think I'll tape some marks on the bezel so I know where the turbo mode is and strobe starts.. I wish they didn't use such small screws, I am affraid they will get lost (loctite could solve this) or the threads get stripped.


----------



## MrGman (May 8, 2009)

Wattnot, Excellent review. I don't suppose you want to send me all those lights you have in that first photo for me to measure the total lumens of each and send them back to you???? G

send me a pm if you do.


----------



## Trekmeister (May 8, 2009)

Good review! Any idea if the head opens up easily for a future emitter swap? I really like the colour of the neutral XR-E's I've soldered into other lights I have, but at the same time the output of the P7 is very tempting. If the head opens perhaps one could switch for a neutral P7 or similar sometime in the future.


----------



## houtex (May 8, 2009)

Thank you for the pics and review. I really appreciate the time you took for us .
How far were you able to break the light down? Is the bezel removable ? What about the reflectors?


----------



## houtex (May 8, 2009)

I'm thinking of adding some trits to indicate levels to the switch. what do you think of that?


----------



## swiftwing (May 8, 2009)

houtex said:


> I'm thinking of adding some trits to indicate levels to the switch. what do you think of that?



I'm not certain if it would be a good idea to machine tritium slots into the body, don't think it'd be easy either. The ring itself is plastic too, so i'm not sure how you can install a tritium into that.

I was initially sceptical about how well a totally smooth switching ring would work when it was first reported in the marketplace. I have since given it some thought and i think its more functional than one with detents, at least when paired with the normal tail (non clicky).

Without the clicky tail, you'd have it initially on off and it will always ramp up. So its functional in a sense that there is no real need to know which mode you're in. Just point the light in the direction you want lit, and turn the ring until its bright enough. With a smooth ring, you'd be able to do this one handed, detents don't really add any value here. If you wanted to blast someone with max power, just give it a big twist and you're at strobe, target blinded, hopefully.

Detents would be useful with the clicky switch for users who want to determine the mode its going to light up in before powering up the light, but as i see it, a totally smooth ring with the stock tailcap is the functional way to go for one handed use.


----------



## Dioni (May 8, 2009)

You just make me change for M2Xc4 Cool!

Thanks, great review! :thumbsup:


----------



## Wattnot (May 8, 2009)

Thank you all for the many compliments! 



Ryanrpm said:


> Other than tint...it looks like the TK40 and M2 have a nearly identical brightness in your underexposed shot. Do you have any throwers you can compare the M2X's with?
> 
> Can you also get the TK40 out there in the tree shots?


 
The only other thrower I have is the Tiablo A9. I have a Mag 85 but I'm not sure how useful that will be. 

As for the TK40, I'll see what I can do. The TK40 seemed to fit between the flood of the M2C4 and the spot of the others. Fumbling with all of those lights out there in the dark, with wind and a lightening storm nearby made for a slightly uncomfortable shoot. I had to rush inside hence the shot with the car headlights seen through the trees!



hazna said:


> thanks for the review
> 
> Seems like in those 100ft beamshots the P7 has a larger hot spot but less spill, while the 3xcree versions have a smaller hot spot but greater spill. Can you confirm whether this is the case in real life?


 
Yes, I'd agree with that. The pics, even though I tried to underexpose them, are still slightly overexposed. In my last review people seemed to like that so I did it that way intentionally so the pics are fairly close to what my eyes saw. However, the M2C4 seems to flood out past 200 feet. This was similar to my Sniper P7 that started to flood out beyond 100 feet. The M2C4 is almost pure flood at those big distances. A couple of these on poles could do a night game at a high school football field!



Trekmeister said:


> Good review! Any idea if the head opens up easily for a future emitter swap? I really like the colour of the neutral XR-E's I've soldered into other lights I have, but at the same time the output of the P7 is very tempting. If the head opens perhaps one could switch for a neutral P7 or similar sometime in the future.


 


houtex said:


> Thank you for the pics and review. I really appreciate the time you took for us .
> How far were you able to break the light down? Is the bezel removable ? What about the reflectors?


 
As for water dunking and disassembly, these are loners for the review, not mine to subject to those kinds of tests so I just treated the light as an end user. The bezel screws right off but that's as far as I went. The head is heavy feels very stout. It's like holding a lead tennis ball. I have no doubt it's well built with a lot of heat sinking. From the looks of it the reflector assembly most likely comes right out when you open it up.

As for runtimes, I usually don't do those in my reviews. Too many variables with batteries and such. Even my two chargers charge differently. I did forget to check how hot it gets and I will do that. My current draw measurments divided by 80 percent of the known capacity of your cells should give you a good idea of runtime.



1dash1 said:


> Wattnot:
> 
> Great review, especially the nice pic's!
> 
> ...


 
As for my opinion on the levels, they're great. The only two that might be too close are high and turbo. It's almost difficult to tell. As for more spacing between the switching, yes, that would have helped but with a tradeoff of having to reposition your hand. Think of a touchpad on a laptop when you're trying to get from one end of the screen to another.

A detent for each level is probably not necessary but a detent for strobe should be addressed. I bet that in 6 months from now, if someone starts a poll on the biggest complaint for this light, it will be related to how close turbo and strobe are and/or about unintentional strobing. It's minor for all they've accomplished here and I'm sure people will get used to it, but you'll see what I mean when you get yours.


----------



## Dioni (May 8, 2009)

5.0Trunk, I think this pic that you're talking about is with 3 models together at same beamshot. Don't?

The M2c4 model is very flood beam and is not so good on large distances.


----------



## houtex (May 8, 2009)

so by just looking at the adjustment ring,how do you know which level you are at without the light being on?


----------



## Lone Eagle (May 8, 2009)

Kudos and thank you for the great review. Am looking forward to my M2X (cool) which is enroute.


----------



## Wattnot (May 8, 2009)

houtex said:


> so by just looking at the adjustment ring,how do you know which level you are at without the light being on?


 
You don't. Labeling isn't that necessary without the clicky tailcap installed. Since from off it goes up in order, it's intuitive anyway. Now if you install and use the tail clicky, the lack of labeling may annoy some because you won't know the level. However, that is similar to many of the computer controlled lights that memorize your last setting so all of this can be considered somewhat subjective.

I just did a 12 minute test on turbo and it wasn't that warm at all. I didn't even bother getting my IR temp gun because it felt like other lights on medium. It would make a lousy hand warmer if that's what anyone was looking for!!


----------



## houtex (May 8, 2009)

do you think some trit vials could cleanly be installed in the grooves of the ring?


----------



## Mike Painter (May 8, 2009)

It would seem that Strobe-off-low-med-high would solve the problem of hitting Strobe when you are in a hurry. Early Hydromatic transmissions had park-drive-low-reverse rather than what is common today.

It looks like the only "hype" in the ads is the claim that one has monster throw over the other. Even at 300 feet it's hard to tell.


----------



## Ryanrpm (May 8, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> I just did a 12 minute test on turbo and it wasn't that warm at all. I didn't even bother getting my IR temp gun because it felt like other lights on medium. It would make a lousy hand warmer if that's what anyone was looking for!!


 
I don't know if that's good or bad. :thinking: Often, the quicker the light warms up proves that the light has excellent heat sinking ability. It could be that the current isn't as high too...

Can you do a 30 minute test and see how warm it gets?


----------



## applevision (May 8, 2009)

Ryanrpm said:


> Nice review...and thanks for working hard to provide us with beamshots and a detailed review!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks *Ryanrpm*, this is awesome!


----------



## BirdofPrey (May 8, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> The only other thrower I have is the Tiablo A9.




Perfect! How would you say the P7 M2 compares to the A9? I've got an A8 (recently converted over to aspherical but ANYway) and would love to know what to expect between these two lights. I SHOULD have mine Monday but won't get to play with it until Wednesday and my curiosity is getting the best of me.


----------



## Kremer (May 8, 2009)

I wonder how difficult it would be to integrate a 2 cell li-ion PCB into the battery carrier, making the thing friendly for unprotected cells, probably not very hard. :devil::devil::devil:


----------



## 1dash1 (May 8, 2009)

5.0Trunk said:


> Thanks for the review. The M2C4 really looks good at 300 ft. Would you happen to have any P7 Mags to compare at 300 ft to the M2C4?


 
5.0Trunk:

To avoid any misunderstanding, that picture that you quoted is not of the M2C4 at 300 feet. It's a picture of all three lights turned on at the same time at 300 feet.


----------



## BST07 (May 8, 2009)

Thank you for your excellent review!

I'm glad I ordered the P7 for my needs. The only concern for me was the donut hole of the P7. But it looks like it's not apparent all; buyer remorse gone!


----------



## applevision (May 8, 2009)

Hey *Wattnot*, can we get more of your subjective impression of these lights vs. the TK40? The beamshots with the TK40 were all directly compared to the M2 series, so it was harder for me to appreciate the difference.

How did the TK40 stack up?

And now (for me at least... for now at least... hee hee) all I need is for you to play with a Legion-II and give us your thoughts on that--then I am done! For this time...
lovecpf


----------



## dirtech (May 8, 2009)

swiftwing said:


> I'm not certain if it would be a good idea to machine tritium slots into the body, don't think it'd be easy either. The ring itself is plastic too, so i'm not sure how you can install a tritium into that.
> 
> I was initially sceptical about how well a totally smooth switching ring would work when it was first reported in the marketplace. I have since given it some thought and i think its more functional than one with detents, at least when paired with the normal tail (non clicky).
> 
> ...




What about a smooth transition between low med high with detents only at the off and strobe modes? I know nothing about switches, but I think it would be nice to have some extra assurance about this light coming on in a pack or having some extra effort needed for going into strobe.


----------



## Kiessling (May 8, 2009)

Excellent review, thanx ! :thumbsup:

The waterproofing really sucks though 
This is a serious flaw IMHO.

Can you spot how the ring works? IIRC the claim is it would be a magnetic switch like the U2 ... 

bernie


----------



## AlexGT (May 8, 2009)

Thanks for the review! I been waiting for it for a long time.

Do you have a Coleman triple cree spotlight to compare? 

Since most of us would not dissasemble the body do you thing using silicone to seal the tube would help in waterproofing the light? Did you notice where was the air escaping?

Are the cree's well centered in the reflectors? How about dust or fingerprints inside the reflector / glass?

Thanks!
AlexGT


----------



## I came to the light... (May 8, 2009)

Excellent review, thank you. I'm glad I ordered a M2. But on the thrower side, I wonder how the M1X and M2X compare?

However, I'm disappointed in the waterproofing. For such an innovative light, you would think they could squeeze in a little more innovation and forget o-rings in a non-circular seal.


----------



## [email protected] (May 8, 2009)

Hey Wattnot 
Thanks for the great review as always! :twothumbs
Wow, this thread has grown pretty fast in less than 24 hours!


----------



## Dizos (May 8, 2009)

I came to the light... said:


> Excellent review, thank you. I'm glad I ordered a M2. But on the thrower side, I wonder how the M1X and M2X compare?
> 
> However, I'm disappointed in the waterproofing. For such an innovative light, you would think they could squeeze in a little more innovation and forget o-rings in a non-circular seal.



A gasket would work better.


----------



## richardcpf (May 8, 2009)

Great review!

It is just me or these lights have one of the smoothest beam I've ever seen?? I'm glad i ordered the M2X cool... Maybe getting the warm version as well, looks pretty similar in brightness.


----------



## Splunk_Au (May 8, 2009)

Judging from the beamshots, the M2XC4 cool throws a brighter spot and spill beam than the M2C4 which makes it redundant to have the M2C4 other than to show that they have an MC-E offering.


----------



## richardcpf (May 8, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> As for my opinion on the levels, they're great. The only two that might be too close are high and turbo. It's almost difficult to tell.


 
*M2XC4 *
*Low *- 42ma
*Med -*210ma
*High -*600ma
*Turbo -* 1.6A

If the output difference is minimal between high and turbo, then i think there is some kind of inefficiency with the driving board... turbo is almost drawing triple the power than high, should be noticeably brighter. And also as stated in the spec turbo should be at least 250 lumens more than high.

Lets wait for some readings anyways.


----------



## 1dash1 (May 8, 2009)

Splunk_Au said:


> Judging from the beamshots, the M2XC4 cool throws a brighter spot and spill beam than the M2C4 which makes it redundant to have the M2C4 other than to show that they have an MC-E offering.


 
I think you meant P7, not MC-E. 

_BTW, I think the brighter, smoother beamed M2C4 would be the more useful light for anything under 100 feet - which would comprise the majority of tasks for the average user. It's the better general purpose light. The M2XC4, on the other hand, is the better thrower. _

_I bought the M2XC4 to augment my M30. If I had to use only one - as a stand-alone - I'd have picked the M2C4._

_EDIT: Well, at least that's the one that I would have picked based on spec's. However, after looking at Wattnot's beamshots, I'd be sorely tempted by the tint of the tri-Q3 version. Simply marvelous! :naughty:_


----------



## Patriot (May 8, 2009)

Fantastic review with some excellent beamshots! I'm still taking it all in but wanted to express my appreciation now.


----------



## ntalbot (May 8, 2009)

1dash1 said:


> I think you meant P7, not MC-E.
> 
> _BTW, I think the brighter, smoother beamed M2C4 would be the more useful light for anything under 100 feet - which would comprise the majority of tasks for the average user. It's the better general purpose light. The M2XC4, on the other hand, is the better thrower. _
> 
> ...



I think of the 3, I would go for the M2C4 also for a stand-alone also. But here at CPF there is no such thing as a stand-alone flashlight!


----------



## Wattnot (May 8, 2009)

BirdofPrey said:


> Perfect! How would you say the P7 M2 compares to the A9?


 
This would be an odd comparison as the A9 throws a 2 inch beam for miles and the M2C4 is a flooder. They are complete opposites. Did you mean the M2XC4 and the A9? 



applevision said:


> Hey *Wattnot*, can we get more of your subjective impression of these lights vs. the TK40? The beamshots with the TK40 were all directly compared to the M2 series, so it was harder for me to appreciate the difference.
> 
> How did the TK40 stack up?


 
All 3 lights start with "M2" so I'm guessing you mean the M2C4 with the quad emitter? I started to include the TK40 in the shots but at the longer distances, it just seemed like I was adding confusion. Things changed for each of the lights at each distance. The TK40 stacks up okay but it's different. It seemed to fit between the M2C4 and the M2XC4s since the M2C4 is a flooder and the M2XC4s are throwers. If you want a light in-between the M2C4 and M2XC4 then the TK40 is it. Again, depending on the distance, the TK40 has a brighter hotspot but less spill. The M2C4 has a lot of spill and the hotspot fades right into it. The farther away you aim, the less hotspot you get. At 300 feet the M2C4 is pure flood where the TK40 was brighter in the hotspot only. Then at 300 feet the M2CX4s beat the TK40 but with a slightly smaller hotspot. 

Let me put this another way . . . If throw is most important to you, get the M2XC4. If flood is most important to you, get the M2C4. If you want a compromise between flood and throw then maybe the TK40 is for you.



Kiessling said:


> Excellent review, thanx ! :thumbsup:
> 
> The waterproofing really sucks though
> This is a serious flaw IMHO.
> ...


 
I'm not exactly sure what you are asking here. By ring I guess you mean O-ring or are you talking about the tailcap switch cover? The switch is a simple on/off click just like a table lamp. The boot that covers the switch is held down securely but threaded washer.

I can't tell where the air is leaking from but if Mike doesn't mind, I'll try blowing through it while it's dunked in water. I'll have a family member watch and we'll see if we can get this figured out. I wouldn't give up on the light over this. Maybe a smear of something or a gasket will fix it right up.



Splunk_Au said:


> Judging from the beamshots, the M2XC4 cool throws a brighter spot and spill beam than the M2C4 which makes it redundant to have the M2C4 other than to show that they have an MC-E offering.


 
Like I said above, they are very different lights. Choosing one over the other should be more about your needs. Me thinks they just want you to buy two or three! 




richardcpf said:


> *M2XC4 *
> *Low *- 42ma
> *Med -*210ma
> *High -*600ma
> ...


 
Well as many threads here have disucssed, it takes double the lumens to look only noticably brighter and over four times the lumens to _maybe_ look twice as bright. I imagine the higher these numbers get the more this is true. I believe it's like that on the decible scale too. It's like that with transmitter power output as well (that has a name . . . inverse square law?). Also, I said "until you get used to it" so I'm sure after a while it will be easier to tell.


----------



## qip (May 9, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> All 3 lights start with "M2" so I'm guessing you mean the M2C4 with the quad emitter? I started to include the TK40 in the shots but at the longer distances, it just seemed like I was adding confusion. Things changed for each of the lights at each distance. The TK40 stacks up okay but it's different. It seemed to fit between the M2C4 and the M2XC4s since the M2C4 is a flooder and the M2XC4s are throwers. If you want a light in-between the M2C4 and M2XC4 then the TK40 is it. Again, depending on the distance, the TK40 has a brighter hotspot but less spill. The M2C4 has a lot of spill and the hotspot fades right into it. The farther away you aim, the less hotspot you get. At 300 feet the M2C4 is pure flood where the TK40 was brighter in the hotspot only. Then at 300 feet the M2CX4s beat the TK40 but with a slightly smaller hotspot.
> 
> Let me put this another way . . . If throw is most important to you, get the M2XC4. If flood is most important to you, get the M2C4. If you want a compromise between flood and throw then maybe the TK40 is for you.




so what your saying is buy them all:laughing: :mecry:


----------



## 1dash1 (May 9, 2009)

qip said:


> so what your saying is buy them all:laughing: :mecry:


 
*And use them all at the same time!*






It's hard to argue with the results.


----------



## Burgess (May 9, 2009)

Thank you, Wattnot, for your time and effort
in this very informative review !


:goodjob::kewlpics::thanks:



BTW, i'd imagine the automobiles in the distance
were wondering about the *Aircraft Landing Lights*
coming from your direction.


 + 





Oh yes, that *non-water-proofness* really sux.

:shakehead

_


----------



## DM51 (May 9, 2009)

That is a very good review indeed, giving a clear insight into these lights. 

They're quite unusual looking, but they seem pretty good performers and I like the compact design. It's an unusual shaped handle/body, but so what? It works well, by the look of it.

Your photos are excellent, and the camera settings you have used give a very interesting comparison of the tints. The warm looks bad on a white wall, but it works very well on the trees. 

Thanks for your work - it's a fine review, and I'm sure members will find it extremely useful.


----------



## 5.0Trunk (May 9, 2009)

1dash1 said:


> 5.0Trunk:
> 
> To avoid any misunderstanding, that picture that you quoted is not of the M2C4 at 300 feet. It's a picture of all three lights turned on at the same time at 300 feet.



Thanks for pointing that out. I guess I should have read it a little better. Still, excellent output.


----------



## BirdofPrey (May 9, 2009)

Posted this in Marketplace but was meant for here before the outage.


The first reviewer stated that it wasn't much good after 300 feet in the standard M2 P7 model. I heartily disagree.

I just came back in from testing in a location that unfortunately has some ambient light to my side and found that according to Google Earth I'm seeing perfectly usable light out to 253 yards (the furthest I can get away from me without hopping in the car and going for a drive). Up close at 300 feet (what the reviewer used as his preferred max range, the amount of light is devastating. I'm HIGHLY impressed with this and will likely use this in place of my HID just on the principle of being easier to carry and instant light.

If you get this light and are disappointed, you are seriously hard to please.

BTW, to clarify, at the range I was speaking of above, it isn't as bright as my A8 Aspherical but I could easily see if someone was walking at that range. This was clearly visible on damp dark green grass and trees so anything with lighter colors would most definitely stand out.

I was worried when I first read the 300 foot comment but now I'm elated!

New camping/hiking light indeed.



http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=2307492


----------



## BirdofPrey (May 10, 2009)

Ok. First things first. While not technically useable per se, there was a very obvious tint of light on the trees across a field from the train tracks I was standing on. That, according to google, is 466 yards. Even though it would have taken something fluorescent or at least very white for me to have been able to truely pick it iout, just the fact that I could see the light on the trees that far away impresses me.

Low... while walking along the very dark tracks my lady and I preferred the light on low and it lit the path quite well. Considering the run time on that setting, this would indeed make one excellent camping/hiking light.

High is nearly too bright up close and personal. 

The grip turned out to be quite comfortable for the 30 or so minutes we walked. I don't forsee it getting any less comfortable on a longer walk. On Turbo the head does start to get warm but I'm going to say thats not a bad thing because that means its doing its job of radiating the heat off. I assume that its ok to run it constant at that level.

Weight is just enough to feel "confident" but not so high as to be a negative issue. Even my lady friend agreed that it was "surprisingly" light all else considered.

My only complaint is similar to others. I wish that there was a small "detent" at each level or at a minimum, before the strobe mode. I hit strobe multiple times. Not anything that would run me off but somewhat aggravating.

Overall, I'm very happy with it and glad I spent the money.


----------



## Wattnot (May 10, 2009)

I finally got to show the lights to my neighbor Joe so I updated post one with the addition of my "in the hands of babes" section.

I also wanted to mention I did that quick, 12 minutes heat test with the M2XC4 cool. Because the M2C4s head is a little larger, I imagine they're anticipating more heat with that one but with the mass of these things, I doubt heat will be an issue with any of them.

While I was over at Joe's just now, he helped me with a dunk test. I did not do anything with the head . . . only the empty battery tube with the stock tailcap. No water entered the tailcap when I pushed it almost all the way into the large glass of water. I got two tiny, reluctant bubbles from the tailcap area while blowing hard into the opening. Joe and I agreed that it was holding up well enough because I was putting significant pressure in there that would not be present in a shallow dunk. Not a dive light but at this point we felt confident dunking this for a short time would not result in any water coming in. Then I tested the other end of the tube, the one that goes toward the head. I inverted in and pushed it halfway into the glass which trapped the air inside and generated pressure. Now some fast bubbles started from each side. I removed the round top piece to make sure the gasket was seated correctly and it was. I flipped it over and carefully tightened all of the screws in a manner similar to the proper way of tightening a wheel on a car (alternating back and forth and making multiple passes). It still leaked. Joe then said he thought a little smear of silicone would fix it right up but he was a little disappointed someone should have to do this to a new light. 

So it appears that the leaking can be easily corrected by either the factory or the end user. Again, I wouldn't make this a deal-breaker.

One last thing . . . I got a message from my picture hosting site that I was approaching the 25 GIG monthly limit! Don't be surprised if the pictures drop off suddenly! You guys are sucking these off their server like mad with all of these views!!


----------



## dudu84 (May 10, 2009)

Thanks for doing further testing with the water-proof-ness of these torch, Wattnot. 

It's good to know that the problem is fixable but still, I think eagletac should quickly design some gaskets or whatever they deem necessary, send to the dealers so the end-users can do a quick fix on their expensive lights. Surely posting a short instruction on their website would help . Such a bright and hefty light are probably used mainly outdoor so rain-proof is a must IMHO :sigh:


----------



## Trekmeister (May 10, 2009)

Another question for the reviewer, what is the inside diameter of the battery tube(s)? Do you foresee any problem with thicker protected cells?


----------



## applevision (May 10, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> All 3 lights start with "M2" so I'm guessing you mean the M2C4 with the quad emitter? I started to include the TK40 in the shots but at the longer distances, it just seemed like I was adding confusion. Things changed for each of the lights at each distance. The TK40 stacks up okay but it's different. It seemed to fit between the M2C4 and the M2XC4s since the M2C4 is a flooder and the M2XC4s are throwers. If you want a light in-between the M2C4 and M2XC4 then the TK40 is it. Again, depending on the distance, the TK40 has a brighter hotspot but less spill. The M2C4 has a lot of spill and the hotspot fades right into it. The farther away you aim, the less hotspot you get. At 300 feet the M2C4 is pure flood where the TK40 was brighter in the hotspot only. Then at 300 feet the M2CX4s beat the TK40 but with a slightly smaller hotspot.
> 
> Let me put this another way . . . If throw is most important to you, get the M2XC4. If flood is most important to you, get the M2C4. If you want a compromise between flood and throw then maybe the TK40 is for you.



*Wattnot*! :bow::bow::bow:
Thank you sooo much! This is just what the doctor ordered! Impressions like this one are SO helpful to me in sorting out this rapidly burgeoning area of lights! 

Okay, I'm starting to put it together in my head...

Throw--->Flood
[Crazy aspherics]...
M2XC4 cool
M2XC4 warm
TK40
M2C4
[Crazy mules]

Okay... I just want to figure out where the Legion II fits in (in the bigger sense, of course, not just necessarily in terms of throw/flood) and the Olight M30...

Part of the problem for me is that I am a bit of a poseur--I love these high powered "tactical" lights but, in truth I don't have much of a use for these beyond occasional bump in the night and for the sheer joy of power and efficiency and light! So it's kinda hard when folks say "...depending on your needs..." hee hee... since a Mag Solitaire can help me find the quarter I dropped under the couch... 

That said, like a sports car connoisseur who does not race them but, like Cameron Frye's dad (from Ferris Bueller) simply rubs them with a diaper, I like to see which ones are superlative in various categories, and, most importantly, I search for lights that just find that magic spot of design/performance/ideas/function that fills you with wonder. 

The Fenix TK11 is a light that is just so--how do the young people call it these days?--"tight!" And the Fenix LD01 is such a brilliant little light that does what it does so well and gives me such pleasure. I also have a fetish for the littlest lights (like the FireFli and the Lummi Wee and Drake, etc) and these have a dash of magic each!

So I'm looking for a big dog, a monstrous light with throw and flood (something beyond the LED projectors... hee hee), and thinking about these lights: the M2 series, the Legion II, the M30 and the TK40. It's so much fun!

lovecpf


----------



## Mike Painter (May 10, 2009)

DM51 said:


> They're quite unusual looking, but they seem pretty good performers and I like the compact design. It's an unusual shaped handle/body, but so what? It works well, by the look of it.



I have a dive light in this configuration and have been looking for this design for quite a while. I like the feel.
The dive light uses "C" batteries and is probably a little bigger, however it will fit into a lot of pockets and stays there. A longer skinny light tends to fall out of pockets.


----------



## I came to the light... (May 10, 2009)

Dizos said:


> A gasket would work better.



That's what I was thinking.


----------



## 1dash1 (May 10, 2009)

Applevision:

While the M30 fits in the genre of the M2/M2X line, personally, I find it hard to compare because it's almost half the size. Moreover, the output levels of the M30 differ substantially from the M2/M2X. 

_When I get my M2X from 4sevens, I'll post beamshots comparing the two (if no one else has done so by then ). _


----------



## HKJ (May 10, 2009)

1dash1 said:


> While the M30 fits in the genre of the M2/M2X line, personally, I find it hard to compare because it's almost half the size. Moreover, the output levels of the M30 differ substantially from the M2/M2X.


The small size of the M30, does not restrict its output, it has nearly the same output as TK40. Now I just need the M2 to compare with, but it is delayed.


----------



## Funzelfutzi (May 10, 2009)

1dash1 said:


> While the M30 fits in the genre of the M2/M2X line, personally, I find it hard to compare because it's almost half the size. Moreover, the output levels of the M30 differ substantially from the M2/M2X.
> 
> _When I get my M2X from 4sevens, I'll post beamshots comparing the two (if no one else has done so by then ). _


I'm looking forward to that shootout quite some time now. Hurry!


----------



## Ryanrpm (May 10, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> The only other thrower I have is the Tiablo A9. I have a Mag 85 but I'm not sure how useful that will be.
> 
> As for the TK40, I'll see what I can do. The TK40 seemed to fit between the flood of the M2C4 and the spot of the others. Fumbling with all of those lights out there in the dark, with wind and a lightening storm nearby made for a slightly uncomfortable shoot. I had to rush inside hence the shot with the car headlights seen through the trees!



Maybe when you get time and its not windy...I'd still like to see the A9 against the M2X's and the TK40 hitting the trees at 300ft.

:thumbsup:


----------



## Mike Painter (May 10, 2009)

Summer's coming so I'd like to see a "spash test" rather than a dunking as getting hit with rain is a far more likely problem.
So the first nice day (It was in the 80's here today) walk through a sprinkler system a few times.
My biggest concern is not water but dust and dirt. What happens when that rotating ring spends some time in a dusty environment or gets dropped in the dirt?


----------



## Vernon (May 10, 2009)

I would love to see a shootout of the Legion II, TK40, and M2. Anyone lucky enough to have all three? I have a Legion II and M2 on order and can't hardly wait to see the output and quality.


----------



## applevision (May 11, 2009)

Vernon said:


> I would love to see a shootout of the Legion II, TK40, and M2. Anyone lucky enough to have all three? I have a Legion II and M2 on order and can't hardly wait to see the output and quality.



100%! *Vernon*, when you get them, we will be eagerly awaiting your thoughts (and pics)!


----------



## frosty (May 11, 2009)

Superb review.:thumbsup:


----------



## Glock27 (May 11, 2009)

Wow! These have some heft. Selector ring is like butter! I hope it is as easy to turn after a caving trip or jaunt in the desert. 
Careful as mine was not water tight at all. Slight amount of water visible inside battery compartment after brief washdown with soap and water. 4 screws on both head and tail end were loose.
I have to go back to work, but will pull off the head and tailcap and check the O-rings. The rings have a rectangular cross section. Perhaps some gasket compound is in order?
Come on darkness!
G27


----------



## dirtech (May 11, 2009)

Its too bad about these reports of poor water resistant. How hard would it be to cut out a gasket out of appropriate material I wonder?


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (May 11, 2009)

applevision said:


> *Wattnot*! :bow::bow::bow:
> Thank you sooo much! This is just what the doctor ordered! Impressions like this one are SO helpful to me in sorting out this rapidly burgeoning area of lights!
> 
> Okay, I'm starting to put it together in my head...
> ...


Check this video out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlQ7vzXqz4A

Cheers!


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (May 11, 2009)

applevision said:


> 100%! *Vernon*, when you get them, we will be eagerly awaiting your thoughts (and pics)!


*+2*!

Well said..


----------



## applevision (May 11, 2009)

Outdoors Fanatic said:


> Check this video out:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlQ7vzXqz4A
> 
> Cheers!



So cool! Thanks!


----------



## faucon (May 12, 2009)

Just got my M2 P7 today. So far it's almost all good. It's very bright and it has as much throw as I'm ever likely to need. I don't have any way to measure distance at the moment but I'm estimating that it put useful light at least out to 150-200 yards, and perhaps could go further. I hope along with many of us that EagleTac will put something in place (that we can retrofit?) to stop going to the strobe setting by accident. Personally I'd also like a bit of rubber armor around the butt end of the light---it would make gripping it a little more comfortable for me. 

I took my T10C2 out at the same time, and I'm even more impressed with this light than I was before. There's no way it can be as bright as the M2, of course, but I feel it compares well with the M2 for a light that's so much smaller and lighter.


----------



## BirdofPrey (May 12, 2009)

Alright folks, give me an idea here because I'm ignorant of what to do. The chances of me being out in foul weather with this light are VERY VERY high. It seems its less than ideal for this even though they advertise it as being waterproof.

So, where exactly are all of the leak points and what can the average layman do to fix it himself?


----------



## Glock27 (May 12, 2009)

There are 2 rectangular O-rings, 1 on either end of the battery compartment. These are not sealing well on my light. I think it will be easy to add some gasket compound to make these seal much better.

There are 2 more O-rings on the head. One underneath the selector ring and one sealing the glass in the bezel. I don't think either of these passed any water.

I think this is a minor problem with these 2 O-rings that will be easy to fix. Awesome light!
G27


----------



## Kremer (May 12, 2009)

Mine arrived this morning, wow, what a tank. I have to say that while the whole thing is smaller than I'd thought, the head is indeed huge, the light fits in the hand perfectly. Over or underhanded grip is quite secure and the clickie feels perfect in the overhanded grip. The selector ring moves like butter and I agree that it needs a detent or something between high and strobe. and another would be nice between off and low. I like that it comes with a 2nd battery carrier, one with the switch and one without. everything about this light says solid, even the battery carriers are beefy feeling. I'm pondering how to integrate a battery protection PCB into the carrier, there seems to be enough room.
Obviously night won't come fast enough today.


----------



## Wattnot (May 12, 2009)

UPDATE:

Hi All. I was contacted by a representative of EagleTac and was told a fix is a week away for the body seal issue. I believe it will be a retrofit and will be provided at no cost to owners of the M2*** series lights. They said tweezers and the correct screwdriver (tiny phillips) will be needed. I will keep you posted if any more details come my way. They also suggested transferring the stock tailcap's O-ring if you choose to install the optional clicky tailcap.

Also, due to coincidence, at least one photo will not show up for a week. Fortunately, I switched nearly all of the photos to another host. I can't get the last one(s) because a new 10000 character limit was instituted and as a result, I can no longer edit this post because the board won't allow it. Greta is aware of the situation and I believe she is working on it.


----------



## dudu84 (May 12, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> UPDATE:
> 
> Hi All. I was contacted by a representative of EagleTac and was told a fix is a week away for the body seal issue. I believe it will be a retrofit and will be provided at no cost to owners of the M2*** series lights. They said tweezers and the correct screwdriver (tiny phillips) will be needed. I will keep you posted if any more details come my way. They also suggested transferring the stock tailcap's O-ring if you choose to install the optional clicky tailcap.



Great! It seems eagletac is listening :thumbsup:


----------



## Helmut.G (May 12, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> UPDATE:
> 
> Hi All. I was contacted by a representative of EagleTac and was told a fix is a week away for the body seal issue. I believe it will be a retrofit and will be provided at no cost to owners of the M2*** series lights. They said tweezers and the correct screwdriver (tiny phillips) will be needed. I will keep you posted if any more details come my way. They also suggested transferring the stock tailcap's O-ring if you choose to install the optional clicky tailcap.
> 
> Also, due to coincidence, at least one photo will not show up for a week. Fortunately, I switched nearly all of the photos to another host. I can't get the last one(s) because a new 10000 word limit was instituded and as a result, I can no longer edit this post because the board won't allow it. Greta is aware of the situation and I believe she is working on it.


Thank you for your great work  :thanks:


----------



## wojtek_pl (May 12, 2009)

Great review ! :twothumbs

Though I thought they can make rotating switch better. And waterproof at least... :thumbsdow


----------



## striwa88 (May 12, 2009)

I really love this light, Got it from PTS-Flashlights (M2C4).
Well night finally came and I decided to take a walk around the neighborhood, WOW the output from such a small package is very impressive. Anyway I have to credit this thing from a possible dog attack, as I was walking a dog behind a fence was barking like crazy not the nice hey I'm here bark, but let me get out I need a snack kinda bark, so next thing I know he jumps over the fence and is running at me, I turn this laser on to Turbo and Poof the dog explodes ! But seriously once the light hits him, he stops dead in his tracks like a dog that was scolded with a huge newspaper. His owners see the light and call him off. So.... I am glad I was packing such an intense light I think it saved me a painful dog bite. Great light glad Eagletac is listening to the consumers. lovecpf

CIAO


----------



## Vernon (May 12, 2009)

4Sevens received a shipment late Monday afternoon, and they have enough to fill all of their pre-orders. It's going to be a good weekend.


----------



## Mike Painter (May 13, 2009)

wojtek_pl said:


> Great review ! :twothumbs
> 
> Though I thought they can make rotating switch better. And waterproof at least... :thumbsdow



This is probably as good as I will find. It is still not as good as my mag-light with a separate pot. The pot sits just above the switch and can go from dim to full on with just a flick of the thumb.
It lets me decide before or after I turn the light on how bright I want it.


----------



## faucon (May 13, 2009)

I took my M2 out for another spin tonight. On high it visibly reached the far goalpost of a football field that was well over 100 yards away. So probably not far off 250 yards at a guess. I also installed the clicky tailcap and personally I really love it and find it comfortable. I'm so used to a tactical grip and I use the momentary feature constantly, so I'm keeping the clicky. For another thing, it lets me retain the primary setting I want. Great light.


----------



## Kremer (May 13, 2009)

Well after playing in the dark for a bit I really like the M2C4, the low is enough for a lot of outside tasks, and medium is enough for most of the rest. The top two brightnesses are quite a lot of output, and 900 Lu strobe at night? woa....
Like others have stated I definately would not call the P7 model a "flooder". Yes, it lights up everything in front of you, but it still has a nice hotspot that goes for quite a distance (easily 200yd in my neighborhood). I 
compare it most closely to the beam profile from my L2D Q5. The spill from this thing is insane, looking at the light cone shining it up in the air I estimate about 70 degrees edge to edge in the spill.
I also took out my TLE-300M light, the P7 to my eyes in a ceiling bounce is darn close but has a slight edge over the TLE-300. It is much warmer than the terralux and is almost a spotlight by comparison to the TLE's broad bat shaped wall of light.
Again as previously reviewed in the underhand grip the mode ring falls right under you thumb, and brightness changes are quite natural, until you accidentally get strobe a fraction past full power. In an overhand grip with your thumb on the clickie the grip is quite natural also, however mode changes are now a bit of a pain, requiring either some pinkie olympics, a flip in the hand, or help from your 2nd hand.
I also notice that when activating on low that the light seems to flash to the 2nd level for an instant before settling down, almost like the turbo flash from my L2Q but not near as pronounced.

I like it.
~Dougk


----------



## bilatos (May 13, 2009)

Hello friends, my name is Wagner and I live in Brazil, I'm new in the CPF community, would like help from you, I am in doubt to buy a flashlight, I Jetbeam m1x between the Tiablo Ace-G or the Eagletac M2, I wonder if someone compared the 3, I want a flashlight that has a good range and very light, what do you recommend? thanks:twothumbs


----------



## Splunk_Au (May 13, 2009)

Any reason why there's no side by side comparison of the M2C4 vs TK40 since they're both using quad dies?

Seems like a fairer apples to apples comparison rather than the M2XC4 vs TK40.


----------



## 1dash1 (May 13, 2009)

bilatos said:


> Hello friends, my name is Wagner and I live in Brazil, I'm new in the CPF community, would like help from you, I am in doubt to buy a flashlight, I Jetbeam m1x between the Tiablo Ace-G or the Eagletac M2, I wonder if someone compared the 3, I want a flashlight that has a good range and very light, what do you recommend? thanks:twothumbs


 
Bilatos:

This will get you part of the way to your goal. Link.

:welcome:


----------



## brightnorm (May 14, 2009)

striwa88 said:


> ...I have to credit this thing from a possible dog attack, as I was walking a dog behind a fence was barking like crazy not the nice hey I'm here bark, but let me get out I need a snack kinda bark, so next thing I know he jumps over the fence and is running at me, I turn this laser on to Turbo and Poof the dog explodes ! But seriously once the light hits him, he stops dead in his tracks like a dog that was scolded with a huge newspaper. His owners see the light and call him off. So.... I am glad I was packing such an intense light I think it saved me a painful dog bite. Great light glad Eagletac is listening to the consumers. CIAO


Glad it worked! It's impressive that in this high-stress situation you were able to hit turbo without inadvertently activating strobe. Had you been practicing a lot with the light? 

Brightnorm


----------



## striwa88 (May 14, 2009)

I think at first I did strobe him out but then just turned it back a notch to turbo, strobe is just as effective if not more so. :duck:


----------



## brightnorm (May 14, 2009)

You know, that may turn out to be a solution to the "I wanted turbo but got strobe" problem. Deliberately hit strobe then instantly turn back to turbo. I'll have to try it when mine arrives.

Brightnorm


----------



## rizky_p (May 14, 2009)

nice review, make me want to buy one. I want the tri-cree version so bad!


----------



## ntalbot (May 14, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> UPDATE:
> 
> Hi All. I was contacted by a representative of EagleTac and was told a fix is a week away for the body seal issue. I believe it will be a retrofit and will be provided at no cost to owners of the M2*** series lights. They said tweezers and the correct screwdriver (tiny phillips) will be needed. I will keep you posted if any more details come my way. They also suggested transferring the stock tailcap's O-ring if you choose to install the optional clicky tailcap.
> .




Cool! 
I was wondering if you could measure the current draw from the batteries when these M2's have been turned off by the selector ring, with the tailcap turned on. The reason I am concerned about this is that the Raptor, with it's similar UI, uses a significant amount of power when turned off by the selector ring, but with the clicky in the on position (as reported by Flavio). I don't want my batteries to get drained if my M2 sits on the shelf for a bit. (I am planning to not install the clicky so it can tail stand).
Thanks!


----------



## Wattnot (May 15, 2009)

wojtek_pl said:


> Great review ! :twothumbs
> 
> Though I thought they can make rotating switch better. And waterproof at least... :thumbsdow


 
The rotating switch and the head should be waterproof. I told the rep who contacted me that people were going to be concerned about the head as well and she informed me that the head is sealed with 1.5mm O-ring at the lens, and 2.0mm O-ring at the reflector and another 1.0mm O-ring at the pcb bay. EagleTac is addressing the body tube leak issue and I feel the head is fine. I'm sure they'll stand behind the product.



Splunk_Au said:


> Any reason why there's no side by side comparison of the M2C4 vs TK40 since they're both using quad dies?
> 
> Seems like a fairer apples to apples comparison rather than the M2XC4 vs TK40.


 
I thought about this but I believe I touched on it above. The TK40 kind of fits in-between the M2C4 and the M2XC4s. They're more like apples and oranges. I left the TK40 out of the larger distance shots because it just added confusion. The P7 and the tri-emitters are so different . . . THAT was an apples to pizza comparison! At 300 feet the M2XC4s beat the TK40 by a good margin. The TK40 had a brighter hotspot than the M2C4 but not as much spill. I too first thought the two quad emitters would be similar but the TK40 seemed closer to the M2XC4 than the M2C4, as odd as that seems. Perhaps I'll take another look at it when I get out there with the Tiablo A9 comparison somebody requested. 



ntalbot said:


> Cool!
> I was wondering if you could measure the current draw from the batteries when these M2's have been turned off by the selector ring, with the tailcap turned on. The reason I am concerned about this is that the Raptor, with it's similar UI, uses a significant amount of power when turned off by the selector ring, but with the clicky in the on position (as reported by Flavio). I don't want my batteries to get drained if my M2 sits on the shelf for a bit. (I am planning to not install the clicky so it can tail stand).
> Thanks!


 
I seriously doubt there is any parasitic drain with these lights. They are not computer controled. The selector ring is a manual switch. The tailcap is a dumb single pole switch that breaks the connection between the two batteries. When I was doing the current measurements, there was zero draw until I turned the light on.


----------



## Helmut.G (May 15, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> I thought about this but I believe I touched on it above. The TK40 kind of fits in-between the M2C4 and the M2XC4s. They're more like apples and oranges. I left the TK40 out of the larger distance shots because it just added confusion. The P7 and the tri-emitters are so different . . . THAT was an apples to pizza comparison! At 300 feet the M2XC4s beat the TK40 by a good margin. The TK40 had a brighter hotspot than the M2C4 but not as much spill. I too first thought the two quad emitters would be similar but the TK40 seemed closer to the M2XC4 than the M2C4, as odd as that seems. Perhaps I'll take another look at it when I get out there with the Tiablo A9 comparison somebody requested.


That makes sense to me as the M2 was specially designed to be floody. The M2X versions are for throw.


----------



## jzmtl (May 15, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> The rotating switch and the head should be waterproof. I told the rep who contacted me that people were going to be concerned about the head as well and she informed me that the head is sealed with 1.5mm O-ring at the lens, and 2.0mm O-ring at the reflector and another 1.0mm O-ring at the pcb bay. EagleTac is addressing the body tube leak issue and I feel the head is fine. I'm sure they'll stand behind the product.



That's really strange. Sounds like they went overboard fortify the front end, yet left back door wide open. Good thing they are quick to correct any error, as previously showed by T10C2 lens issue.


----------



## Dizos (May 15, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> I told the rep who contacted me that people were going to be concerned about the head as well and she informed me that the head is sealed with 1.5mm O-ring at the lens, and 2.0mm O-ring at the reflector and another 1.0mm O-ring at the pcb bay.



Thank you for the great review. Did you discuss with the rep about the selector ring needing a stop before going into strobe?


----------



## houtex (May 15, 2009)

Couples of things I noticed on my light. I have the Tri-cree cool.
I was not able to fit the rectangular o-ring to the clicky. Used the o-ring from the base tail instead.
The travel between modes is different between each mode.
Between strobe and super high it is very close.
Super high and high is a little more.
High and medium are the furthest apart.
Medium and low are are a little less than high/med are.
These are not complaints just observations.


----------



## PsychoBunny (May 15, 2009)

When it strobs, is it in high or medium beam?


----------



## houtex (May 15, 2009)

It appears to be in super high,as I like to call it. It's not a fast fenix like strobe. It's slower.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (May 15, 2009)

I just received my M2X from Mike @ PTS. Really amazing brightness and buttery smooth adjuster ring. I haven't tried it with the clicky yet. That will come.

I've taken to calling it low-med-high-and crazy. It appears to strobe in Crazy and yes, it's a little slower than Fenix's current strobe. More like their old P2D-CE strobe, if I remember correctly. 

Review to follow! Just give me a few days to gather my impressions.


----------



## dirtech (May 15, 2009)

houtex said:


> Couples of things I noticed on my light. I have the Tri-cree cool.
> I was not able to fit the rectangular o-ring to the clicky. Used the o-ring from the base tail instead.
> The travel between modes is different between each mode.
> Between strobe and super high it is very close.
> ...



I just received mine as well. I will +1 your observations about the different travel lengths between modes. Mine appears similiar to yours.

I don't see it as a problem, just something to get used to. Now to get a smallish screwdriver so I can play with the clicky.


----------



## ntalbot (May 15, 2009)

Since the selector ring is just a mechanical switch, maybe with bit of tinkering the strobe can be disabled. Probably void the warranty though.


----------



## Mike Painter (May 15, 2009)

ntalbot said:


> Since the selector ring is just a mechanical switch, maybe with bit of tinkering the strobe can be disabled. Probably void the warranty though.



An idea to play with would be to put a zip tie around the body just below the ring. Adjust it so the "bump" (technical term) stopped your fingere from sliding into the strobe.
If that works womething more permanent could be put in place.


----------



## Vernon (May 15, 2009)

Eagletac M2 Warm (250 ft)


----------



## Vernon (May 15, 2009)




----------



## Vernon (May 16, 2009)

I took a few photos tonight of the following: Fenix P3D Rebel, Fenix T1, Surefire C2 w/Malkoff M60, and the Eagletac M2. This is the first time I've taken photos of my lights at night, so I don't know if the settings on my camera were consistent for all the shots. I used the "auto" setting with no flash, so I'm assuming the camera adjusted differently for each shot. In my attempt to avoid this, I focused the lens using the same object and lighting before actually snapping each photo, but I'm not sure if that ensures that the camera settings remain the same? If someone can provide tips here, I'd be open to trying again. I'm using a Nikon D50.

In the pictures, you'll notice the top of a very small Japanese Maple at the bottom of each shot - that little tree is only about five feet in front of me, and I hope it helps depict the intensity of the spill. The first group of trees/bushes following is about 100 feet away, and then the final tree in the background is about 225 feet. By the way, I just walked off the distances, so don't hold me accountable to the exact measures.


Fenix P3D Rebel





Fenix T1





Surefire w/Malkoff M60





Eagletac M2 Warm







I like the idea of the control ring, but I expected it to be smoother/easier to turn with my thumb. Don't get me wrong, it's not difficult to turn by any means, but it definitely feels a little tight. Granted, this might be a positive in the sense that a slight bump or rub won't inadvertently change my light setting, and overtime, this ring might actually loosen up a bit from normal usage. I haven't tried the clicky, so I can't weigh in on that yet. I wanted to use the ring control for a few days before switching.

I agree with the previous posts that it's just way too easy to go straight to strobe with the control ring. It would be so nice to have the strobe as a "left" turn, and leave the low, med, high, turbo setting to the right turn. This is really my only complaint with the light. 

I'm looking forward to the diffuser kit - I think it will make the light even more versatile and useful in different situations. For $140, I would actually expect Eagletac to make a diffuser a standard offering with the light, but hopefully they'll price them fairly.

Overall, I'm impressed with the M2. It's definitely heavier than I expected, but man, this thing puts out the light. The warm tint of the neutral LED version is a really nice tint at night. Compared to my stock 3D Mag, it's a slight bit more white, but I'm impressed that we now have LED's that offer this warm of a tint. I would have probably gone with the P7, but since I have a Legion II on the way, I wanted to see how useful/different the warm tint is when camping/hiking (or messing around in the garden at night).


----------



## Lite_me (May 16, 2009)

Cool..... I mean _warm!__ :thumbsup:_


----------



## Helmut.G (May 16, 2009)

Vernon said:


> I took a few photos tonight of the following: Fenix P3D Rebel, Fenix T1, Surefire C2 w/Malkoff M60, and the Eagletac M2.


great pictures :thanks:
comparing two of my favourite lights to what I ordered lovecpf
The difference between the M2XW and the T1 looks bigger than I expected :devil:


----------



## Dizos (May 16, 2009)

Another thought on preventing the strobe is if the spacing between levels on the adjustment ring can be changed, the strobe could be set so that a long turn past the max output would be required. The problem is that it is such a short hop from max.


----------



## Lone Eagle (May 16, 2009)

Vernon,

Good pics for comparison, thanks for time and effort. I have the M2X (cool) and M2(P7). Found the control ring as you described in that the P7 is real smooth and almost loose and the 2X is a bit tighter. Maybe it is in the lubrication.


----------



## 1dash1 (May 16, 2009)

Vernon:

Well done. I especially like that you included the japanese red maple in the foreground, it really shows off the M2X neutral tint's better color rendering. Nice!


----------



## Vernon (May 16, 2009)

When the Legion II gets here (eventually), I'll do another comparison with the M2. I think the Legion will have more output, but you just can't beat the nice warm tint of the M2. Can someone who already has both post a comparison?


----------



## dirtech (May 17, 2009)

ntalbot said:


> Since the selector ring is just a mechanical switch, maybe with bit of tinkering the strobe can be disabled. Probably void the warranty though.



Not sure I would call it a mechanical switch. With the ring off of the flashlight, you have a metal tab on the inside of the ring that, when on the flashlight, is stopped in its 90 degree travel by tabs machined on the flashlight head. With the ring off, you can activate modes by placing the ring near the correspond area on the flashlight head to turn on the flashlight. So if you glued some thin material on the the plastic tab on the inside ring you could prevent the metal tab from being able to ride above the area that activates strobe.

Make sense.


----------



## 1dash1 (May 17, 2009)

This shows part of the reason for the UI manipulation problem between the turbo and strobe modes. The separation between modes is NOT uniform! The combined high and turbo modes are LESS THAN the single medium mode. 

_It's understandable why users tend to overshoot the high and turbo, into the strobe, if they are not careful._

Disclaimer: This chart is based on a sampling of one. Accuracy is approximately + 3/4 degree.

EDIT: CORRECTED ERROR IN DEGREE SPREAD CALCULATION.


----------



## Glock27 (May 17, 2009)

There's a magnet embedded into the selector ring. It will be easy to lockout Strobe by filling the last amount of the threads the selector ring travels in. Silicone caulk would be more reversible than epoxy.

G27


----------



## AlexGT (May 17, 2009)

CPF member Nakahoshi posted some pictures of the insides of the M2 triple cree, on his sales tread, credit goes to him.









The sink looks very capable of dissipating the heat generated by the leds, I like the self centering holes for the leds, same idea Fenix used on some of their lights, Nakahoshi did say that puting it back together was almost impossible and he ended up selling it.

Tread here:
http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=195182

AlexGT


----------



## AardvarkSagus (May 17, 2009)

Wow, that does look like a very capable heatsink. That's good to know, I thank Nakahoshi for his $75 investment in our knowledge.


----------



## clumma (May 18, 2009)

*EagleTac M2C4 - why P7over MC-E?*

Anyone know (or care to guess) why EagleTac chose the Seoul P7 LED over the Cree MC-E for their new megalight?

-Carl


----------



## easilyled (May 18, 2009)

*Re: EagleTac M2C4 - why P7over MC-E?*



clumma said:


> Anyone know (or care to guess) why EagleTac chose the Seoul P7 LED over the Cree MC-E for their new megalight?
> 
> -Carl



It could be that the donut in the beam is easier to control with the SSC-P7.

The LegionII and the Jetbeam M1X use the Cree MC-E and both have very obvious donuts in their beam.

I have also heard it said that thermal management is easier with the SSC-P7 because of the larger area underneath it 
for heat to dissipate, given similar heat-sinking.

Unfortunately though, your question is likely to provoke a political hot potato.

Many seem to feel very strongly for either one company or the other.

I, on the other hand, am pleased that both options are available.


----------



## Ryanrpm (May 18, 2009)

*Re: EagleTac M2C4 - why P7over MC-E?*



easilyled said:


> It could be that the donut in the beam is easier to control with the SSC-P7.
> 
> The LegionII and the Jetbeam M1X use the Cree MC-E and both have very obvious donuts in their beam.



Yes, but so do the TK40, M30 and ACE-G, and there supposedly is no donut hole. :thinking:

Might just be company preference. Maybe for the same power, the P7 was brighter.


----------



## easilyled (May 18, 2009)

*Re: EagleTac M2C4 - why P7over MC-E?*



Ryanrpm said:


> Yes, but so do the TK40, M30 and ACE-G, and there supposedly is no donut hole. :thinking:




True, but that's why I used the word "easier" in the phrase "easier to control". I didn't say it was impossible.

It may be that for real throwers, which the M1X and the LegionII are, that it is more difficult to control the donut with the MC-E led
than with the SSC-P7 which the Solarforce L950M uses and has no noticeable donut even though it throws well.

This is just a guess anyway. :tinfoil:


----------



## chrisWELD (May 18, 2009)

ntalbot said:


> Since the selector ring is just a mechanical switch, maybe with bit of tinkering the strobe can be disabled. Probably void the warranty though.



On this note, I thought you all might be interested in adsl_keeki's fix for the strobe being so close to turbo:

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...d.php?t=231907

See post 4: Swift and great response from Eagletac, including soldering tips


----------



## ntalbot (May 18, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> I seriously doubt there is any parasitic drain with these lights. They are not computer controled. The selector ring is a manual switch. The tailcap is a dumb single pole switch that breaks the connection between the two batteries. When I was doing the current measurements, there was zero draw until I turned the light on.



Was it off with the tail switch? I plan not to install the tail switch. I have been burned by parasitic drain before, so I would really appreciate you testing it just in case.


----------



## ergotelis (May 18, 2009)

Yes but a solarforce 950m is very big, it is much easier to control donut hole...


----------



## easilyled (May 18, 2009)

ergotelis said:


> Yes but a solarforce 950m is very big, it is much easier to control donut hole...



I have plenty of smaller P7 lights in which the donut is also less obvious.

I believe that the *apparent* die size and therefore the gap between the dies is magnified by the MC-E package and therefore bigger
when compared to the SSC-P7 even though the MC-E itself is smaller in actual size.

This would then mean that the donut should be more obvious in the MC-E, all other things being equal.

At least this is the wisdom that has been trotted out in a number of threads and it seems to be quite logical.


----------



## Dizos (May 18, 2009)

If anyone else was interested in using a Surefire FM24 beam shaper on this light, I tried it out. The FM24 diameter is too large for the M2 bezel (it is loose and falls off), so I shimmed it with a couple pieces of Pachmayr Pac-Skin. You can see a bulge from the shim at the top of this picture:







Shimmed it sits tight and it does a great job defusing the beam. I like the flip design for switching between spot and pure flood. It adds to the already bulky head of the light though and will not fit in the EagleTac pouch when attached. I'm just using a pouch designed for a 1 liter water bottle to carry it. I'll be taking it with me for 5 weeks in SE Asia and am looking forward to trying out the warm/neutral tint looking for wildlife.


----------



## brightnorm (May 18, 2009)

My selector ring is hard to turn. Is there any way to loosen it a bit? 

Brightnorm


----------



## clumma (May 18, 2009)

Dizos said:


> If anyone else was interested in using a Surefire FM24 beam shaper on this light, I tried it out.



Nice!! -Carl


----------



## dirtech (May 19, 2009)

brightnorm said:


> My selector ring is hard to turn. Is there any way to loosen it a bit?
> 
> Brightnorm



Mine is lubed quite thoroughly and moves fairly smoothly. Does yours have the lube? If not you could look for wear on the inside of the ring to see if its dragging in a particular spot then carfully smooth that area with something.


----------



## fairway1 (May 19, 2009)

I want to purchase one of these to keep in the tow truck. To be used to search for house numbers at night, but also used to light up a car for a tire change etc. Which one of these M2 models would you think is best suited for that?


----------



## BirdofPrey (May 19, 2009)

fairway1 said:


> I want to purchase one of these to keep in the tow truck. To be used to search for house numbers at night, but also used to light up a car for a tire change etc. Which one of these M2 models would you think is best suited for that?



For what you are wanting I'd go for the P7 model.


----------



## brightnorm (May 19, 2009)

dirtech said:


> Mine is lubed quite thoroughly and moves fairly smoothly. Does yours have the lube? If not you could look for wear on the inside of the ring to see if its dragging in a particular spot then carfully smooth that area with something.


 
Thanks, I'll check that out.

Brightnorm


----------



## brightnorm (May 19, 2009)

fairway1 said:


> I want to purchase one of these to keep in the tow truck. To be used to search for house numbers at night, but also used to light up a car for a tire change etc. Which one of these M2 models would you think is best suited for that?


I agree with BOP. I have both models and for general area illumination the P7, with its broader beam, is preferable. My only question is how far from the road are those house numbers? I haven't tested my lights for specific distances but the P7 should be OK unless the house numbers are unusually far away.

Brightnorm


----------



## 1dash1 (May 19, 2009)

brightnorm said:


> My selector ring is hard to turn. Is there any way to loosen it a bit?
> 
> Brightnorm


 
Brightnorm:

The power ring is removable, just slip it off like you would any other o-ring. Apply a light lubricant, re-seat the power ring. Be sure to use a non-reactive lubricant, say silicone or graphite, instead of a petroleum oil based product.


----------



## fairway1 (May 19, 2009)

brightnorm said:


> I agree with BOP. I have both models and for general area illumination the P7, with its broader beam, is preferable. My only question is how far from the road are those house numbers? I haven't tested my lights for specific distances but the P7 should be OK unless the house numbers are unusually far away.
> 
> Brightnorm


 

The neighborhoods I work in have very few street lights. Searching for peoples house numbers could be on the mailbox, on the door, above the garage. I am leaning towards the P7 model, but just want to make sure it has enough throw. Or, will the m2xc4 models be too much for up close illumination, such as walking around a car at night to check for pre-existing damage?


----------



## Glock27 (May 19, 2009)

I have an m2xc4 neutral tint. It works great for finding house numbers. 
Good throw with plenty of spill.
G27


----------



## Mike Painter (May 19, 2009)

fairway1 said:


> I want to purchase one of these to keep in the tow truck. To be used to search for house numbers at night, but also used to light up a car for a tire change etc. Which one of these M2 models would you think is best suited for that?



My light has three Luxion III in it.
It will show me house numbers at a distance far beyond where I can read them.
Unless you have vision far above 20/20 and can read numbers a long way off either light will be just fine.


----------



## 1dash1 (May 19, 2009)

fairway1 said:


> The neighborhoods I work in have very few street lights. Searching for peoples house numbers could be on the mailbox, on the door, above the garage. I am leaning towards the P7 model, but just want to make sure it has enough throw. Or, will the m2xc4 models be too much for up close illumination, such as walking around a car at night to check for pre-existing damage?


 
Under a 100 feet, I'd suggest that you would be much happier with the floodier M2 than the throwy M2X. Between a 100 and 300 feet, it just depends on whether you prefer a hot spot or a wide spot. Beyond 300 feet, the M2X would perform better.

As to your specific question about using the M2XC4 for a walk-around car inspection, the spill is adequate for such purpose on Low or Medium mode. However, personally, I would use my L0D or other EDC for such purpose. (Because of the "luggable" nature of the megalight, I would invariably carry a backup light suitable for tasks such as reading, finding keys, etc.)


----------



## chrisWELD (May 19, 2009)

... and there's always the option of getting the optional diffuser to plonk on the front even if you did go for the M2XC4 - then you'd have a nice flood at whatever level you put it on when you're working up close or lighting-up an area.

It'll be good to see how the diffuser option performs and to find out how much it will be too. Hopefully they'll make them available in a couple of weeks...


----------



## fairway1 (May 19, 2009)

1dash1 said:


> Under a 100 feet, I'd suggest that you would be much happier with the floodier M2 than the throwy M2X. Between a 100 and 300 feet, it just depends on whether you prefer a hot spot or a wide spot. Beyond 300 feet, the M2X would perform better.
> 
> As to your specific question about using the M2XC4 for a walk-around car inspection, the spill is adequate for such purpose on Low or Medium mode. However, personally, I would use my L0D or other EDC for such purpose. (Because of the "luggable" nature of the megalight, I would invariably carry a backup light suitable for tasks such as reading, finding keys, etc.)


 

I do carry a clicky that I use for my inspections, but I wanted to buy one of these M2 models for each of my trucks and I know most of my drivers do not carry any kind of light and just use the [email protected] that is in the truck now. Maybe I should just buy one of each?


----------



## brightnorm (May 19, 2009)

Another option is to keep your Eagletac as your "car light" and use your EDC light (assuming that as a Flashaholic you have one) like the Fenix PD30 or similar light as your tire-changing light. Better still, use a head-mounted light to keep both hands free.

Brightnorm


----------



## Mike Painter (May 19, 2009)

fairway1 said:


> I do carry a clicky that I use for my inspections, but I wanted to buy one of these M2 models for each of my trucks and I know most of my drivers do not carry any kind of light and just use the [email protected] that is in the truck now. Maybe I should just buy one of each?



A ten dollar plug in spot light will do just fine for what you want and unless you trust your drivers will last longer.


----------



## fairway1 (May 19, 2009)

Mike Painter said:


> A ten dollar plug in spot light will do just fine for what you want and unless you trust your drivers will last longer.


 

Yeah, but I guess it is just the flashaholic in me that wants these for the trucks.


----------



## 1dash1 (May 19, 2009)

For such industrial purpose, I'm not comfortable with recommending the M2-series. It might not be rugged enough to take the abuse that your maglites go through. 

(The head-heavy nature of the M2-series flashlights makes it a little clumsier to hold - meaning that they will be dropped more, if you're not careful. It also means that, when dropped, the head will be the most likely thing to be hit - again, increasing the potential for damage. There's also the issue of how well the water seals work. I don't know if you want to rely on your drivers being extra careful when handling the flashlights. :thinking

So what would I recommend...

... Unless you personally take charge (pun intended ) of the recharging, I'd suggest sticking with primaries. So, we're talking about a flashlight that is tough, bright, throwy, and runs on primaries. Also, it shouldn't be so small that it disappears in the truck cab.

I'd suggest that the Fenix TA30 or TK10, Eagletac T10LC2, or Olight M30 might better suit your purposes. (_Of these, the only one that I am personally familiar with is the M30. I can vouch that it will do quite well for your stated purposes, but it might be more flashlight than you really need.)_

You might also consider the Tiablo ACE-G, MG RX-1, Jetbeam M1X and Fenix TK40.

And pick up a *bright* lanyard for each flashlight so that they are easier to handle and less likely to get lost, a few examples: here here here here & here. Personally, I like the ones with glow-in-the-dark ornaments, saves me a lot of groping in the dark.

For industrial use, I recommend that you use a steel split-ring to thread through the flashlight's lanyard hole, then attach the lanyard to the split-ring. (Most lanyard holes are not beveled, consequently, over a fairly short period of time, the lanyard will cut. For home use, a cut lanyard isn't normally a big deal. Out on the road, you might lose the flashlight.) And I counsel just the opposite for home use - the steel split ring quickly wears away the anodized finish, so I always use something softer and periodically inspect/replace the worn tether.

P.S. These recommendations are based on the flashlight being used by your truck drivers. If you are buying the flashlight for your own use at work, I think the M2-series will do just fine. Indeed, I bought the M2C4X for working in the field and am not worried about the drawbacks.


----------



## fairway1 (May 19, 2009)

Great advice 1dash1, thanks for the post.


----------



## brightnorm (May 19, 2009)

I compared the total brightness (ceiling bounce) between the M2C4/P7 and the M2XC4 (6000K) and the M2XC4 was very distinctively brighter. Based on quoted lumens it should be the other way around. I repeated the test several times using different angles and heights, trying to adjust for the different beam types, but the M2XC4 was always brighter. Both lights had fresh PILAs.

I suspect I may have an under performing M2C4. I also noticed that when I looked closely at the P7 it seemed as though the emitter was covered by a very subtle film, sort of like an extremely subtle diffuser. It's hard to clearly describe this and unfortunately I don't have a camera. The light was certainly bright but should have been brighter than the M2XC4.

Has anyone else compared these two lights. If not, is anyone willing to try it.

Brightnorm


----------



## Ryanrpm (May 19, 2009)

Haha.

Not many of us have the money for both lights!

You know, the P7 dome is a silicone isn't it? Maybe a swipe with rubbing alcohol and let dry will clear it up.


----------



## jirik_cz (May 20, 2009)

brightnorm said:


> Has anyone else compared these two lights. If not, is anyone willing to try it.



Not a big surprise for me. I have Solarforce T700 (1 year old 3xCree Q5). And it is also brighter in ceiling bounce test and in light box than SSC P7/MC-E lights. 

Imho, many of the MC-E/SSC P7 lights have exaggerated lumen ratings...


----------



## easilyled (May 20, 2009)

I have read the same comment quite a few times now about the M2X having more overall brightness compared to the M2.

So I wouldn't worry unduly.

The manufacturer claim of 900 lumens total output for the M2 is completely unrealistic.

It will never achieve anything like this. 600 lumens seems to be the ballpark value for these quad-die lights.

3 Separated R2 emitters can be pushed harder and as each single-die emitter is much farther apart than the individual dies in the P7,
the heat-sinking is more efficient so less output is lost when the current warms them up.

So it should be no surprise that the M2X is capable of being brighter, both theoretically and in practice too.


----------



## applevision (May 20, 2009)

brightnorm said:


> I compared the total brightness (ceiling bounce) between the M2C4/P7 and the M2XC4 (6000K) and the M2XC4 was very distinctively brighter. Based on quoted lumens it should be the other way around. I repeated the test several times using different angles and heights, trying to adjust for the different beam types, but the M2XC4 was always brighter. Both lights had fresh PILAs.
> 
> I suspect I may have an under performing M2C4. I also noticed that when I looked closely at the P7 it seemed as though the emitter was covered by a very subtle film, sort of like an extremely subtle diffuser. It's hard to clearly describe this and unfortunately I don't have a camera. The light was certainly bright but should have been brighter than the M2XC4.
> 
> ...



I have to agree.

I received both the M2C4 and the M2XC4 (cool) from 4sevens. I am DELIGHTED with both but compared them as such:

I popped in 2 AW 18650s in each. Some overall impressions:

Fit & Finish is top-notch! Just gorgeous lights!
They are hefty but not crazy big, I feel like a non-flashaholic would think they are a little thick but actually, compared to a 4D [email protected] or some such light, they are fairly compact.

Now, once you pick them up, different story... they are HEAVY! Not in a bad way, but wow, these lights have some mass. The one thing I don't like is that they are fairly top heavy (especially the multi-cree M2XC4--more on the differences in a moment!), and I find less comfortable to carry in the overhand 'tactical' mode.

That said, without the clicky and carried "underhand" it feels great and the selector ring works beautifully!

As for the UI, I'm going to have to +1 to the others: silky smooth and brilliant, BUT needs detents or clicks and, really, ought to have strobe to the Left or removed. I keep hitting strobe which gives me a bit of a headache... If I could just get rid of strobe that would be enough for me since the ring is so smooth and allows you to set your brightness so easily.

Comparison between the two:
1. I actually prefer to carry and hold the M2C4 P7 model vs. the multi-cree M2X as the head on the M2X is a bit heavier making it seem even more top heavy! 

2. The color of light is fantastic. I have to say that the P7 is a bit warmer than the multi-cree but not by much. In fact, the cool M2X is amazing and not that "cool" at all--I'd put it right with (or perhaps better than?!) my Fenix TK11 which has my favorite tint of all my lights! So overall, A+ here and for the cool M2X: A++!

*3. Brightness is amazing, especially when you compare it to your old cannons--Fenix TK11, Pelican 7060, etc. It's devastatingly bright! Now, I know that the P7 model is "rated" at 900 lumens (best case from the emitter, of course) and the M2X is "rated" at 800 lumens (same caveat), but I really feel that the M2X is brighter in every regard, including ceiling test. Of course it's hard to tell and there is emitter variability, so YMMV, but wow--if I had to impress someone, the multi-cree is the next level up. So I think that the initial instinct of the flashaholics here to go for the multi-cree (see, for example, that thread with the poll on which one folks were going to get) was spot-on. 
*

I still love the P7 and am excited to play with it, but the M2X is superior both in throw (clearly) and in my samples even in spill/flood characteristics. In looking around dark rooms in my home, they both did an insane job, but the M2X just seemed to have more punch!

4. Beam characteristics: building on the last point, the multi does have a complex pattern that is "floral" while the P7's is very smooth and devoid of all rings! The multi has a much more intense hotspot while the P7 does have this silky smooth transition from hotspot to spill. In function, perhaps not so important, but very beautiful to look at.

Conclusions:
This is a contender for light of the year!
If I had to pick one, I would go M2X, though, ridiculously, something about the P7 keeps drawing me towards it. It's the one I keep reaching for to play with. The weight/balance is just a touch better which seems to make all the difference in my hand. The quality of the light is also so nice and smooth and is so fundamentally different from the ringy Cree beams we are used to. Both kick a lot of butt and would be amazing Hand Cannon Duty lights, likely blowing away your regular light. 

Whoo hooo!


----------



## extremetito (May 21, 2009)

easilyled said:


> I have read the same comment quite a few times now about the M2X having more overall brightness compared to the M2.
> 
> So I wouldn't worry unduly.
> 
> ...



Maybe the claim of 900 lumens is unrealistic out the front (or even at the emitter, where ~850 might be the average for the bin), but I was hoping that this light (M2C4) might approach the 740+ lumens obtained by the Legion II MC-E light. Has anyone yet measured these EagleTac lights on an integrating sphere? I've been waiting for some reviews that include numerical outputs before pulling the trigger on the M2.


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (May 21, 2009)

extremetito said:


> Maybe the claim of 900 lumens is unrealistic out the front (or even at the emitter, where ~850 might be the average for the bin), but I was hoping that this light (M2C4) might approach the 740+ lumens obtained by the Legion II MC-E light. Has anyone yet measured these EagleTac lights on an integrating sphere? I've been waiting for some reviews that include numerical outputs before pulling the trigger on the M2.


Do not expect any production light to approach Legion-II's performance.


----------



## Helmut.G (May 21, 2009)

I would guess around ~600 lumens otf for the M2 (P7 version) if it's really driven hard.
the LED bin spec is 800 lumens at ideal conditions. in real use the led will heat up and the lumens will go down. reflector and lens losses lower the figure further.


----------



## applevision (May 21, 2009)

I can't wait to see if *MrGman *will do them in the sphere!


----------



## MrGman (May 21, 2009)

Outdoors Fanatic said:


> Do not expect any production light to approach Legion-II's performance.


 
Well, one of us knows the real answer to that. I already published the pictures, the rest of the data is being held in the vault of secret truth, till at least next week. G.


----------



## MrGman (May 21, 2009)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/sets/72157615785637890/show/


did you guys not see these yet???? The M2XC4 Cool R2 beast is in here. G


----------



## applevision (May 21, 2009)

MrGman said:


> http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/sets/72157615785637890/show/
> 
> 
> did you guys not see these yet???? The M2XC4 Cool R2 beast is in here. G



Ah! I hadn't seen the updates...

Oh dear... I guess I'm going to have to get a Legion II! (Like there was a doubt even for a second! Ha ha!)

*MrGman*, if it's okay, I've selected the two relevant images and am reposting them here--if you prefer that I take them down, I will do so immediately:







They are not "night and day", per se, but I think the Legion II is putting out SIGNIFICANTLY more light... I would love to see how the P7 fares as well, but my guess is (having them both right here--the P7 and the triple Cree) that the P7 would be even less...

:huh:


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (May 21, 2009)

MrGman said:


> Well, one of us knows the real answer to that. I already published the pictures, the rest of the data is being held in the vault of secret truth, till at least next week. G.


That's awesome! (I hope you got to test the rest of the competitors as well: Fenix TK40, Olight M30, Jet M1X...)

Cheers!


----------



## neoseikan (May 21, 2009)

It's great.
One of my question is:

How do you think about the recent OP reflector of Legion II?
Kurapica want a reflector with deeper orange peel, so that he can use Legion II within 10 meters without the too bright hotspot.
Is it a good idea to replace recent OP reflector with the new one?

How about the others lights such as M2's beam in short-range?


----------



## Metatron (May 22, 2009)

well folks, i recieved mine yesterday, used it at work for an hour or so, and all the tiny screws came loose, and i mean all of them. its a piece of junk for sure, just another that will go forgotten.


----------



## Ryanrpm (May 22, 2009)

Metatron said:


> well folks, i received mine yesterday, used it at work for an hour or so, and all the tiny screws came loose, and i mean all of them. its a piece of junk for sure, just another that will go forgotten.



:shrug::thinking::sigh:

My advice? Take advantage of EagleTac's lifetime warranty on this light and have replacement parts sent your way. I have one in my hands, and it is hardly a piece of junk.


----------



## qip (May 22, 2009)

Ryanrpm said:


> :shrug::thinking::sigh:
> 
> My advice? Take advantage of EagleTac's lifetime warranty on this light and have replacement parts sent your way. I have one in my hands, and it is hardly a piece of junk.




what are your initial impressions beamshots etc


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (May 22, 2009)

neoseikan said:


> It's great.
> One of my question is:
> 
> How do you think about the recent OP reflector of Legion II?
> ...


You may want to offer this new reflector as an option/spare part. I don't think the average Legion buyer would want to sacrifice throw... Just my 2 cents.

Cheers.


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (May 22, 2009)

qip said:


> what are your initial impressions beamshots etc


There is a ton of reviews, pics and beamshots of the new EagleTac megalights, check it out.


----------



## Metatron (May 22, 2009)

Ryanrpm said:


> :shrug::thinking::sigh:
> 
> My advice? Take advantage of EagleTac's lifetime warranty on this light and have replacement parts sent your way. I have one in my hands, and it is hardly a piece of junk.


when i look at my collection, i dont see another with any screws at all, this to me is a flaw. the idea of this light is good, the beam and its driving features are great but the dozen or so 3mm long loose screws isnt acceptable. i mean what r they going to send me, more loose screws? this is poor engineering to say the least, might try some locktite on the threads, failing that, its up for sale.


----------



## applevision (May 22, 2009)

One of my screws did fall out as well--I agree this is not exactly what we expect normally, but the light is pretty solid beyond this. I don't want us to throw out the baby with the bathwater here... I have a feeling that the issues with the clicky (patent issues?) necessitated some last minute changes and hence the screws...


----------



## Kremer (May 22, 2009)

The screws are there since they saved $ by making the body in three pieces instead of machining it from one huge block.


----------



## Daniel_sk (May 22, 2009)

You could use threadlock to hold the screws in place.


----------



## Ryanrpm (May 22, 2009)

qip said:


> what are your initial impressions beamshots etc



I only have the M2X on loan from Russthetoolman for about a week.

Here are my initial thoughts. Build quality is excellent, I really love the brightness of Turbo mode. I'm impressed by how well the 3 reflectors/emitters merge into one. I give immense kudos to Eagletac for their reflector design. It performs.:thumbsup:

I'm not pleased with the form factor: The top heavy head, overall weight of the light, and large head. I know it came with a great holster which will protect the light, but it isn't something I want hanging on my waist. :shakehead It'd be better off strapped to my backpack or something else.

I'm also questioning the heat path to the body. I had the Sunlite 16w and M2X turned on max for about 5 minutes. After that time, the 16w was very warm, and the M2X was still room temperature. I will do more tests of this with longer times.

Beamshots are coming up!! Next week.......

I have a thread that is comparing the 16w, M2X and M1-X. ALSO, the Elektrolumens P7 Longthrow will be included!!! Stay tuned on that.


----------



## striwa88 (May 22, 2009)

Screws were a little loose on mine as well, but I got out this thing called a screwdriver and tightened them. Good as new!


----------



## swiftwing (May 22, 2009)

Ryanrpm said:


> I'm not pleased with the form factor: The top heavy head, overall weight of the light, and large head. I know it came with a great holster which will protect the light, but it isn't something I want hanging on my waist. :shakehead It'd be better off strapped to my backpack or something else.
> 
> I'm also questioning the heat path to the body. I had the Sunlite 16w and M2X turned on max for about 5 minutes. After that time, the 16w was very warm, and the M2X was still room temperature. I will do more tests of this with longer times.



I agree with the top heavy comment, but seeing that the whole head is probably a solid chunk of heatsinking Al that allows eagletac to say that we can run this on full blast till the batteries die, its a trade-off i'm willing to make. I've found that gripping half the head and half the body tube mostly solves the balance issue, its not as nice a grip as purely gripping the body tube for certain. I've been swinging the light around like sword .

How hot was the head block? I don't think there's meant to be much of a heat path to the body since it seems that the bulk of the heatsinking is designed to be done by the heavy head. The body's just not much material.


----------



## chrisWELD (May 22, 2009)

Aside from the stuff like detents, ease of going into strobe etc, from a form-factor point of view it might be interesting in the future if Eagletac offer an upgraded model with a choice of optional bodies:

1) The same head but with a wider voltage capability (buck) - eg upto 3x18650
2) Option 1 body - as is but with more robust screws
3) Option 2 body - 1 piece cylindrical 3x18650 body - battery change by removing end-cap. Would balance the head weight.
4) Aftersales option of a *robust* alu endcap with custom momentary forward clicky (don't know if this would still cause patent issues). Would also help to balance the head weight and offer better grip (backstop effect). 

Maybe 4) would have to be a custom job one of the CPF modders/builders could make (hint...)

....


----------



## Mike Painter (May 22, 2009)

Metatron said:


> well folks, i recieved mine yesterday, used it at work for an hour or so, and all the tiny screws came loose, and i mean all of them. its a piece of junk for sure, just another that will go forgotten.



So send it to me, why let it be forgotten?

People who purchase things like this from small vendors should expect that they are in essence Beta testers.

Perhaps pioneers is a better term. Pioneers are easy to spot, they are the ones with arrows in their back.


----------



## Wattnot (May 22, 2009)

I guess I should have mentioned all 3 of the review lights came with loose screws at the top and bottom of . . . . 

Oh wait, I DID.


----------



## Kiessling (May 22, 2009)

Just got mine, M2XC4.

While I think it is, generally speaking, a nice light with an interesting concept, I see several problems:

1) loose screws
2) waterproofing
3) cheap route for the body with screw and leakage problems. Should have been one block.
4) Strobe is really annoying when hitting it accidently. It will have to be deactivated manually.
5) Battera carrier, albeit nice, should be unnecessary. The body should provide this function. Too many parts and possibilities for problems. See above.
6) I don't think the selector ring will be able to endure a lot of abuse, but that is just a guess. 
7) I have doubts about the structural integrity of the 4 little screws connecting the body to the head. They have a lot os stress on them.

The light shows some weak point sin the concept itself, which bothers me, I have to admit. 


BUT ... in the end, I like it. I like it because it has a great interface, because it has an interesting form faktor, because it uses CR123 and because it is cute.

This is the first of the bigger LED canons that appeals to me.

bernie


----------



## dudu84 (May 22, 2009)

Kiessling said:


> While I think it is, generally speaking, a nice light with an interesting concept, I see several problems:
> 
> 1) loose screws
> 2) waterproofing
> ...



I second that, waterproof-ness issue and uneven spacing between modes showed that this light wasn't thorough tested before launch. The loose screws and inconsistency in accessories (some people get 1 battery tray, some get 2 and some even get none) mean poor QC. However, if all those issues are fixed, this is a very solid light IMO.
Mine unfortunately died after a few mins and I had to return it to the vendor :/

BTW, I thought the beam would have round-like hotspot as per review but mine had very ringy and flower-shaped beam, not to mention on Lo and Med, 1 LED was visibly dimmer than the other 2. I didn't have the chance to test it outside but I don't think the beam shape will affect practical usages anyway.


----------



## jzmtl (May 22, 2009)

Can you guys check something out? The clickie replacement kit I have received says "replacement kit II" on the little paper and does not include extra tray, do you people with extra tray say something other the "kit II"?


----------



## Kiessling (May 23, 2009)

kit II without extra tray here.


----------



## HKJ (May 23, 2009)

I wonder why nobody has talked about the standby current drain yet? It is considerable higher than for the TK40 and the M2 does not have any way to stop it, except to dismantle the light or mount the switch.


----------



## Kiessling (May 23, 2009)

It has a standby current drain? :sick2: :green:

That sucks big time, and I mean BIG time.

bernie


----------



## HKJ (May 23, 2009)

Kiessling said:


> It has a standby current drain? :sick2: :green:
> 
> That sucks big time, and I mean BIG time.
> 
> bernie




I had decided not to mount the switch, but I will reconsider that now. I do not like it to run my batteries down in 4 months.
But at least I has verified that it does not have any pwm and the strobe frequency is just above 8 Hz.


----------



## swiftwing (May 23, 2009)

Kiessling said:


> It has a standby current drain? :sick2: :green:
> 
> That sucks big time, and I mean BIG time.
> 
> bernie



I think that wattnot has mentioned that using the clicky switch will break the complete circuit in the battery tray and prevent the standby drain.

Given the design of the switching ring where there's no physical connection, i'm not surprised that there is a standby drain.

Kit II without the extra tray here as well.

The strobe really hurts. The few times i accidentally hit strobe while shining it at my wall at close range really gave me a headache and made me decide to do the plastic shim mod to lock out strobe.


----------



## Kiessling (May 23, 2009)

Oh boy. Another lesson learned. Almost every time I succumb to the seduction of the lights of those new manufacturers I end up being thoroughly disappointed. 

Oh well, that settles the issue at least. I'll play with it a bit and then bye bye to the light and back to quality stuff.

bernie


----------



## neoseikan (May 23, 2009)

sorry, wrong post


----------



## easilyled (May 23, 2009)

Kiessling said:


> Oh boy. Another lesson learned. Almost every time I succumb to the seduction of the lights of those new manufacturers I end up being thoroughly disappointed.
> 
> Oh well, that settles the issue at least. I'll play with it a bit and then bye bye to the light and back to quality stuff.
> 
> bernie



Don't give up yet on the mass-produced quad-lights. I think it won't be long before one that's just about perfect comes out.

selfbuilt's review of the Jetbeam M1-X was very favorable, but I am presuming that you were attracted to the shorter length of the Eagletacs.


----------



## Kiessling (May 23, 2009)

It's the UI and power source that makes all of them a no-go for me ... meaning multi-click programmable stuff and Li-Ion cells. This was the first one that showed promise, but no, they mess it up with poor design and execution. Too bad. 

I'll get over it I guess


----------



## HKJ (May 23, 2009)

Kiessling said:


> It's the UI and power source that makes all of them a no-go for me ... meaning multi-click programmable stuff and Li-Ion cells. This was the first one that showed promise, but no, they mess it up with poor design and execution. Too bad.
> 
> I'll get over it I guess



We are all different, I like 18650 as power source and think it is one of the best ways to power a light.
If Neoseikan get all his problems fixed, try a Legion II, it is a very good light (even with the problems) and it is only a tailcap longer than the M2.


----------



## easilyled (May 23, 2009)

Kiessling said:


> It's the UI and power source that makes all of them a no-go for me ... meaning multi-click programmable stuff and Li-Ion cells. This was the first one that showed promise, but no, they mess it up with poor design and execution. Too bad.
> 
> I'll get over it I guess



But you can use 3 CR123s (ie non-li-ion cells) in the Jetbeam M1-X

In addition the UI is a very simple one. When the head is tightened its on high, when its loosened slightly its on low.

Its true that you can set the lower setting to be whatever level you like, but you don't have to.

Anyway I'm dragging this thread off-topic so back to the Eagletacs.


----------



## Wattnot (May 23, 2009)

Okay, time to cool off here folks. 

I was going to get on here and scold some folks for spreading rumors about parasitic drain but I just did another test and low and behold, there is some. I don't understand why it would be needed on a light that has no memory function and a rotary switch. My guess is that this type of design calls for less components but who knows.

Anyway, I still see no dealbreakers for this light. The leakage I discovered was quickly corrected and the while the UI isn't perfect, it's not that bad either. Aside from the Surefire A2 or L1, etc., no UI is perfect. Even the Legion II has some delay for either coming on or going off or both (where you have to hold the switch?). 

So onto the parasite: I put my meter on the most sensitve scale (1ma) and found a .72ma (that is seven tenths of one thousandth of an amp) drain while the light was off. Even though it seemed silly, I then tested it with the optional clicky in the off position and it became zero. 

Now you folks can do some math on this for your own piece of mind. I just thought of something regarding the small drain: Everyone knows it's not good to store lithium ion rechargeables FULL. Well this tiny drain could possibly help extend the life of your batteries! Also, if you choose to install the tailcap clicky switch and keep it off when not in use, there is no drain at all. So the only issue I see where the drain might matter is for CR123 users who are NOT using the clicky tailcap. 


Enjoy!


----------



## HKJ (May 23, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> So onto the parasite: I put my meter on the most sensitve scale (1ma) and found a .72ma (that is seven tenths of one thousandth of an amp) drain while the light was off. Even though it seemed silly, I then tested it with the optional clicky in the off position and it became zero.
> 
> Now you folks can do some math on this for your own piece of mind. I just thought of something regarding the small drain: Everyone knows it's not good to store lithium ion rechargeables FULL. Well this tiny drain could possibly help extend the life of your batteries! Also, if you choose to install the tailcap clicky switch and keep it off when not in use, there is no drain at all. So the only issue I see where the drain might matter is for CR123 users who are NOT using the clicky tailcap.



You measurement match with mine.

The drain is no problem if you use the light daily, but if you plan on storing it for some time, you better remember to take out the batteries (or install the clicky and turn it off), or the batteries will get drained and that is not healthy for LiIon. This "tiny" drain is emptying the batteries in only a few months.


Oh, I forgot, I am not in the rumor business, I have a workshop with equipment to test a lot of electric stuff.


----------



## Metatron (May 23, 2009)

Mike Painter said:


> So send it to me, why let it be forgotten?
> 
> People who purchase things like this from small vendors should expect that they are in essence Beta testers.
> 
> Perhaps pioneers is a better term. Pioneers are easy to spot, they are the ones with arrows in their back.


what a load of cods. this was rushed, end of story. i assume they tightened the screws during the process of manufacture, so why not tighten fully? rushed. when u pay full asking price for anything, it should be 100% spot on. thats just my opinion.


----------



## brightnorm (May 24, 2009)

Deleted - answered


----------



## Mike Painter (May 24, 2009)

Metatron said:


> what a load of cods. this was rushed, end of story. i assume they tightened the screws during the process of manufacture, so why not tighten fully? rushed. when u pay full asking price for anything, it should be 100% spot on. thats just my opinion.



Of course it was rushed.People here were clamoring for it and pre-announcing a product like that has killed more than one business.
Screws to tight to remove or loose screws are one of the hall marks of early production runs when QC is not solidly in place, the workers are not experienced and working on a production line.
When the PC moved past the hobby stage after the IBM hit the market this happened all the time with new vendors. (admittedly loose screws were rarely a problem but getting a machine in where you could not get the case off because 4 of the 6 screws *could not* be loosened was common.)

It's one of the dangers of being an early adapter in any industry.


----------



## brightnorm (May 24, 2009)

Re durability of the light:

A few nights ago I was walking along the sidewalk, shining my M2XC4 at the top floor of a 30 story building. I didn't notice a slightly raised edge and fell flat on my face. As I went down I instinctively put my hands out which saved me from injury, but the Eagletac in my right hand hit the concrete with a loud SMACK! It survived with very small dings on the head and tail and worked perfectly. That was a really hard hit and the light came through beautifully.

Brightnorm


----------



## chanjyj (May 25, 2009)

I am thinking of purchasing this light but waterproofness (IPX8?) is a critical factor. It cannot be simply "splash proof" as some lights are due to the nature in which I'll use the light.

Anyone here can shed some light? From EagleTac's webbie they mentioned nothing about waterproofing.


----------



## SunFire900 (May 25, 2009)

I feel like I'm the luckiest guy in the world!

My M2X came with everything included that was supposed to be included.

All the screws were tight!!

Mine suffers from none of water leakage problems others bemoan.

I did not install the clicky since the "ring" works perfectly for me. I think that anyone can learn to use it if they just try. I can go from off to any stage of brightness or strobe and back again with little chance of error. It's kind of like learning to play a trombone.....no indents, no clicks or flashing lights to "tell" you what position you're in. You just know by the feel of it.

I don't understand why anyone would pay $$$ for a totally new light, put fully charged batteries in it and put it away for months on end without ever using it.

I love this light. It's everything I expected and more. It's a beauty.

It really sucks the batteries down fast on turbo.  I still have no idea of the amp draw of this light. Have I missed it somewhere?


----------



## Wattnot (May 25, 2009)

The water leakage problem, which was a tiny amount in the battery tube only, NOT the head, was quickly addressed and a conversation stopping solution was posted. Eagletac will send you a fix in the mail. By now I'm sure the fix is being done at the factory on the newly manufactured units.

That being said, the IPX8 standard, from what I've read on this board, is a loosely applied term with multiple definitions. Most of the lights talked about on this board carry the IPX8 designation which (don't quote me on the exact numbers) means it was tested at a depth of 1 meter for 30 minutes? Or is that 30 meters at 1 minute? Either way IPX8 does NOT make it a _dive light_. Not even close. It means if you drop it in the pool or show off to your friends by putting in the fish tank for a few minutes, you'll be fine.




chanjyj said:


> I am thinking of purchasing this light but waterproofness (IPX8?) is a critical factor. It cannot be simply "splash proof" as some lights are due to the nature in which I'll use the light.
> 
> Anyone here can shed some light? From EagleTac's webbie they mentioned nothing about waterproofing.


----------



## TAIGERSX (May 25, 2009)

chanjyj said:


> I am thinking of purchasing this light but waterproofness (IPX8?) is a critical factor. It cannot be simply "splash proof" as some lights are due to the nature in which I'll use the light.
> 
> Anyone here can shed some light? From EagleTac's webbie they mentioned nothing about waterproofing.


 
It looks like you've been searching for a dive light since the water-proofness is a critical factor for you. So here it is: http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=195451 . It can withstand the water at 100m under the water. What u are doing at that depth, I don't know but I hope this helps and :welcome:.


----------



## Mike Painter (May 25, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> That being said, the IPX8 standard, from what I've read on this board, is a loosely applied term with multiple definitions. Most of the lights talked about on this board carry the IPX8 designation which (don't quote me on the exact numbers) means it was tested at a depth of 1 meter for 30 minutes? Or is that 30 meters at 1 minute? Either way IPX8 does NOT make it a _dive light_. Not even close. It means if you drop it in the pool or show off to your friends by putting in the fish tank for a few minutes, you'll be fine.





> Temporary immersion is the* IPX7* test. This is a pre-set depth of 1m and a pre-set time of 30 minutes. During the test there should be no ingress of water to cause harmful effects.
> 
> The continuous immersion *IPX8* test, is set against a pressure and a time agreed between manufacturer and user. Again, during the agreed period, there should be no ingress of water in quantities sufficient to cause harmful effects. The test has to be more severe than the * IPX7* test.
> For *IPX8* the test states - ‘protected against long periods of immersion under pressure'. Hence the result of the test should be specific and clearly quantified i.e. *IPX8* 15 bar, illustrating that the product has been tested at a depth of 150 metres of water for a specified time.



So 1 meter for 31 minutes would work.
30 meters at any time *would* make it a dive light. The rotary switch would work but teh clicky would not after just a few feet.


----------



## StandardBattery (May 25, 2009)

Wow people seem to be very vocal these days about problems with this light. So many problems in the past people said nothing about.

Yes, the parasitic drain with the selector switch is disappointing, but I guess I was prepared for this based on my knowledge of electronics. Still I did hope they had a clever solution, but I really didn't expect it at this price point. I consider this light a bargain (M2XC4).

As I've mentioned in other threads, I'm loosening the head a couple of turns when not in use. If I was using this light very frequently I might not be happy with that solution, but then if I was using it frequently I'd be recharging frequently and it would not be an issue. So really this is mostly an issue for the infrequent users, or when there are prolonges periods of non use. I like the light without the tailcap so I prefer to loosen the head than to install the tailcap switch.

The screws on my light were also not super tight, they were not falling out though. Phillips #0 and tighten them up, I do like a problem that can be quickly fixed. I'll be loosening them once more though for the o-rings. The missing o-rings might also partially explain why the screws are a bit loose.

It's only been a short while, but I'm very happy with this light still.


----------



## StandardBattery (May 25, 2009)

jzmtl said:


> Can you guys check something out? The clickie replacement kit I have received says "replacement kit II" on the little paper and does not include extra tray, do you people with extra tray say something other the "kit II"?


 


Kiessling said:


> kit II without extra tray here.


 
Mine is "M25 Clicky Replacement Kit" and it contains the extra tray.


----------



## chanjyj (May 25, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> The water leakage problem, which was a tiny amount in the battery tube only, NOT the head, was quickly addressed and a conversation stopping solution was posted. Eagletac will send you a fix in the mail. By now I'm sure the fix is being done at the factory on the newly manufactured units.
> 
> That being said, the IPX8 standard, from what I've read on this board, is a loosely applied term with multiple definitions. Most of the lights talked about on this board carry the IPX8 designation which (don't quote me on the exact numbers) means it was tested at a depth of 1 meter for 30 minutes? Or is that 30 meters at 1 minute? Either way IPX8 does NOT make it a _dive light_. Not even close. It means if you drop it in the pool or show off to your friends by putting in the fish tank for a few minutes, you'll be fine.



I know. IPX8 is being loosely used nowadays just like the term "aircraft aluminum" (what the heck is that? anything can be aircraft aluminum".)

However, I'm not looking for a dive light. But I need something that can withstand being dropped into the water. Won't be more than 1 metre in depth, or more than 30mins at one time.
To make it simpler, it has to be as "waterproof" as the Fenix TK10 or Fenix T1.


----------



## chanjyj (May 25, 2009)

TAIGERSX said:


> It looks like you've been searching for a dive light since the water-proofness is a critical factor for you. So here it is: http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=195451 . It can withstand the water at 100m under the water. What u are doing at that depth, I don't know but I hope this helps and :welcome:.



nada, not a dive light. See my above post. It must be "dunkable". *Full immersion in water but in depths not exceeding 1m, and not for an extended period of time.*


----------



## chrisWELD (May 26, 2009)

removed as you didn't want a dive light - posted before reading the rest of the thread..


----------



## houtex (May 26, 2009)

This light started as a WOW light for me at first. I took it with me to South Texas this weekend and it became a real tool. the holster was no use to me at all . I rigged a camera strap to it and away we went, the hogs never had a chance. The way we used it this weekend was PERFECT. Low for walking and high when we needed it. I did go into strobe a couple of times but went right back to high. Something this bright,this small, with these modes, I can't think of another light that would have worked like this.


----------



## Zeruel (May 26, 2009)

My eagle has landed...

I would like to substantiate most users' comment on this monster.

:thumbsup:
- Premium quality
- SS bezel
- Hot spot's bright, mine's a M2X
- Tension is just right for selector ring
- Nice essential pouch
- Single hand operation is easy
- Generously lubricated

:thumbsdow
- Head is heavy
- Very easy to activate strobe, no indication or indentation
- If I'm not wrong, plastic lens is used (depending if it's a good or not to you)


----------



## brightnorm (May 26, 2009)

With the strobe fix (semi-permanent or temporary as described elsewhere), along with the waterproof-improving washers just received, my Eagletacs are nearly perfect except that the selector ring is hard to turn with my injured thumbs, even when well lubed. But that is my problem, not a design flaw.

BTW, the lens is glass.

Brightnorm


----------



## kwarwick (May 26, 2009)

My M2XC4 Neutral White arrived today. Two issues I've noticed right away:

1) All 3 LEDs flicker on lowest level, not noticeable in any other levels.

2) O-ring for optional clickie switch is slightly over-sized so won't stay in the grove. I'm going to try putting the o-ring in the freezer to get it to shrink down slightly so that it will fit.

I can also confirm the strobe mode is annoyingly easy to activate. I'll be considering completely disabling or adjusting the activation position.


----------



## StandardBattery (May 26, 2009)

kwarwick said:


> *...*
> 1) All 3 LEDs flicker on lowest level, not noticeable in any other levels.
> 
> 2) O-ring for optional clickie switch is slightly over-sized so won't stay in the grove. I'm going to try putting the o-ring in the freezer to get it to shrink down slightly so that it will fit.
> *...*


#1 does not sound good. You may have to return the light. Check your battery and contacts, but it really does not sound good.

#2 this issue was identified by Eagletac, I'm not sure if it applies to all kits, or just some of them. They recommend transplanting the 0-ring from the other cover. Contact EagleTac.


----------



## V8TOYTRUCK (May 26, 2009)

Nice, a flashlight that looks like a Canon L series lens  That alone will make me get one!


----------



## kwarwick (May 27, 2009)

StandardBattery said:


> #1 does not sound good. You may have to return the light. Check your battery and contacts, but it really does not sound good.
> 
> #2 this issue was identified by Eagletac, I'm not sure if it applies to all kits, or just some of them. They recommend transplanting the 0-ring from the other cover. Contact EagleTac.



When first engaged (in low) the light will flash bright for a split second and then dims down and begins a rhythmic flickering that morphs into a more distinct pulsing as the light warms up. If I run the light on high for a bit and switch back to low I lose the low completely. The flickering is also barely visible in the other levels. Based on the symptoms I'm guessing this is a defective driver. It is definitely not the batteries nor holder as I tried powering it directly from a different 2 cell 7.4V pack and the symptoms are exactly the same.

Regarding #2: Transferring over the o-ring from the standard tail cap also does not work well as it tends not to stay in place and shift to the inside when tightening down the screws for the cap.

Definitely not a happy camper to wait this long and then receive a defective light. :scowl: I've emailed Eagletac to see what they say.


----------



## Wattnot (May 29, 2009)

Along with the mentioned improvements to the next batch of the M2 line, for the folks who already bought one (or two, or three!), EagleTac informed me you will soon be able to buy the new laser marked ring directly from EagleTac as an accessory. :thumbsup:


----------



## jtice (May 29, 2009)

How about a ring that doesnt allow you to go into strobe?
I am tempted to glue something in mine.

Other than that my light is doing well, everyone at camp about crapped their pants when I fired it up.

~John


----------



## kwarwick (May 29, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> Along with the mentioned improvements to the next batch of the M2 line, for the folks who already bought one (or two, or three!), EagleTac informed me you will soon be able to buy the new laser marked ring directly from EagleTac as an accessory. :thumbsup:


 

Sorry, what are these improvements? Eagletac is going to replace my defective light, but if there are some significant improvements coming I might want to delay slightly and get the improved version.


----------



## Justin Case (May 29, 2009)

Has anyone tried the light with a handgun yet? I don't mean mounted on a rail. I mean using one of the usual gun+light methods like Harries.


----------



## Wattnot (May 29, 2009)

kwarwick said:


> Sorry, what are these improvements?


 
Sorry, I thought everyone saw the other thread and didn't want to repeat it but:

Improved weight balance between the head and tail
Improved LED center alignment (even though I found nothing wrong with mine)
Laser printed/labeled control ring
Larger screws made of stainless steel
Improved waterproof seal overall
Complete battery tray with clicky (not sure what this means exactly)
An M2 screw driver

And best of all (but not as good as a click or detent) Increased separation between turbo and strobe.




Justin Case said:


> Has anyone tried the light with a handgun yet? I don't mean mounted on a rail. I mean using one of the usual gun+light methods like Harries.


 
This light with a handgun? Yikes. They should but a handgun rail on the LIGHT! :laughing:


----------



## Zeruel (May 29, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> Along with the mentioned improvements to the next batch of the M2 line, for the folks who already bought one (or two, or three!), EagleTac informed me you will soon be able to *buy* the new laser marked ring directly from EagleTac as an accessory. :thumbsup:





Wattnot said:


> Sorry, I thought everyone saw the other thread and didn't want to repeat it but:
> 
> Improved weight balance between the head and tail
> Improved LED center alignment (even though I found nothing wrong with mine)
> ...



Guess it doesn't pay to be guinea pigs....


----------



## Wattnot (May 29, 2009)

Zeruel said:


> Guess it doesn't pay to be guinea pigs....


 
Hey, it's not THAT bad! Most of that stuff if "fluff." The weight and balance is no big deal. I found nothing wrong with the alignment . . . . my beam is even round on the triple emitter models. The laser printed ring is available for the old lights as are screws and o-rings. Everyone should have a screwdriver already so the ONLY thing the first purchasers are missing out on is the increased spacing in the modes.

Besides all of that, the concept of "public as beta testers" has been going on forever with everything from nails to rockets.


----------



## Justin Case (May 29, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> This light with a handgun? Yikes. They should but a handgun rail on the LIGHT! :laughing:


Sometimes I get the feeling that the light manufacturers have completely forgotten the "tactical" part of tactical light, and think that tactical simply means "bright".

The ad copy on the Eagletac web site says that the M2 is a "compact, hand‐held tactical flashlight." So how suitable is it for "hand-held, tactical" use such as with a handgun in Harries, Ayoob, Chapman, Rogers, neck index, or whatever?


----------



## selfbuilt (May 29, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> Besides all of that, the concept of "public as beta testers" has been going on forever with everything from nails to *rockets*.


That reminds me of Chuck Yeager's famous line about the original Mercury program astronauts being nothing more than "spam in a can." :laughing: 

FYI, EagleTac will be sending me a P7 M2C4 from the next batch to review, and I will compare the results to my existing first round M2XC4 review.


----------



## BirdofPrey (May 29, 2009)

Justin Case said:


> Has anyone tried the light with a handgun yet? I don't mean mounted on a rail. I mean using one of the usual gun+light methods like Harries.



Yes. Its awkward at first but manageable.


----------



## Mike Painter (May 29, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> This light with a handgun? Yikes. They should but a handgun rail on the LIGHT! :laughing:



Stop where you are or we will try to get this out of the holster and pointed in your general direction.


----------



## Glock27 (May 29, 2009)

How is the change in weight distribution going to be achieved?
I could see the wall thickness of the battery tube being increased. It would be cool if it was milled from a billet and accepted 18650 without a carrier and just a sleeve for primary's.

Shaving weight from the head might screw up the excellent heat sinking V1 has.
G27


----------



## Justin Case (May 29, 2009)

BirdofPrey said:


> Yes. Its awkward at first but manageable.


Can you expand on this? What flashlight technique did you use? What was awkward? How did you overcome it? Are you using the tailcap button?


----------



## brightnorm (May 30, 2009)

Glock27 said:


> ... It would be cool if it was milled from a billet and accepted 18650 without a carrier and just a sleeve for primary's.


 
That may not be possible. If it accepted 18650's without a carrier the interior diameter might be too small to accommodate cr123 carriers.

Brightnorm


----------



## swiftwing (May 30, 2009)

Justin Case said:


> Sometimes I get the feeling that the light manufacturers have completely forgotten the "tactical" part of tactical light, and think that tactical simply means "bright".
> 
> The ad copy on the Eagletac web site says that the M2 is a "compact, hand‐held tactical flashlight." So how suitable is it for "hand-held, tactical" use such as with a handgun in Harries, Ayoob, Chapman, Rogers, neck index, or whatever?



Well you could clobber someone with this, i have to admit the body tube grips really really nicely in my hands.:devil:

As for the improvements, i don't really care about most of the things, only the larger screws and the improved water proofing appeals to me. Overall, i'm still very pleased with my M2C4. Now if only eagletac would take the 4AA neutral white MC-E comment i made when registering my M2C4 seriously.


----------



## Justin Case (May 30, 2009)

Wattnot said:


> Okay, time to cool off here folks.
> 
> I was going to get on here and scold some folks for spreading rumors about parasitic drain but I just did another test and low and behold, there is some. I don't understand why it would be needed on a light that has no memory function and a rotary switch. My guess is that this type of design calls for less components but who knows.
> 
> ...



If the light uses something like one of the ATMEL TinyAVR PWM controllers to implement the different lighting modes, those chips have various sleep modes, some of which draw on the order of 1 mA and others in the uA range. When using the clicky tailcap, effectively that is like disconnecting the circuit, so that the controller can't draw any power.

The saving grace is that the recommended cells for this light have fairly robust capacity. If you use 18650 cells, you will probably drain them in about 4-5 months, excluding any additional drain from actual illumination usage. But if this light could accommodate 16340 cells, then the shelf life would probably be only about a month or so, which IMO is poor.

Regardless, however, there is really no good reason for such a high parasitic drain when controllers like the TinyAVRs have a sleep mode that pulls only microamps.


----------



## 9x23 (May 30, 2009)

I understand there may be a triple 18650 battery tube in the works, and that would certainly balance things up quite a bit and solve the waterproofing issue too. I'd be the first to buy one if they released that as an accessory item since I find the 2 cell handle, while quite serviceable, is somewhat awkward in the hand. I'd rather have a larger round handle with an extra battery in it. Besides, if they went with a triple battery tube it would likely be round, which would also be an improvement in terms of waterproofing as well since you wouldn't need to have screws any longer holding together the battery body. Just make a one piece body (or two pieces if the tailcap is separate) with threads to screw directly to the head assembly.

9x23


----------



## brightnorm (May 31, 2009)

9x23 said:


> I understand there may be a triple 18650 battery tube in the works, and that would certainly balance things up quite a bit and solve the waterproofing issue too...


 That is one of the advantages of this light:http://www.light-reviews.com/we_storm/review.html 

Brightnorm


----------



## BirdofPrey (May 31, 2009)

Justin Case said:


> Can you expand on this? What flashlight technique did you use? What was awkward? How did you overcome it? Are you using the tailcap button?



I tried it with the Harries Technique. I'm sure other ways would work but when I was LEO this was what we drilled on and therefore its what I do now.

I'm not using the tac switch. What I did at the range was tighten the lanyard around my wrist (right hand). I can let it drop, draw my weapon (right hand) with the light hanging free. As I bring the firearm up I take hold of the light with my left hand and take my position under my right and **** back to offer bracing. This of course is under the circumstance of already having the light turned on as I suppose this wouldn't work well trying to turn the light on from this position unless you became good at doing so with your pinkie.

The awkwardness came from the fact that the handle is not round. Not really a hinderance, just not what I'm accustomed to. I think that having some time on the range with said light, it wouldn't be a problem at all. The size is something else to get used to. I'm accustomed to drilling with the A9. There is quite a difference here.

I do a LOT of drills that practice technique on human antagonist. However, the M2 would likely come into play when hiking and coming upon an aggressive animal. Therefore, the technique I mentioned above would work well for that. Not so much a human target. For that, the A9 (or similar light) would be better with a tail switch. If people like the switch on the M2, then I suppose it would be fine as well.


----------



## fairway1 (Jun 1, 2009)

I got my M2XC4 on last Friday. I took it out of the box, loaded up two 18650's and started playing with it. I did not have any trouble hitting the turbo although the spacing does seem rather short and odd. When I was ready to put it away I noticed and oval shaped O-ring on the floor. I am not sure where this came from or where it goes. I did not install the clicky and that is still in the package. So, does this o-ring go at the top of the battery tube or the bottom?


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 1, 2009)

fairway1 said:


> I got my M2XC4 on last Friday. I took it out of the box, loaded up two 18650's and started playing with it. I did not have any trouble hitting the turbo although the spacing does seem rather short and odd. When I was ready to put it away I noticed and oval shaped O-ring on the floor. I am not sure where this came from or where it goes. I did not install the clicky and that is still in the package. So, does this o-ring go at the top of the battery tube or the bottom?


If it maintains its oval shape outside the light, and actually has square edges instead of being cylindrical along its length, it is probably from the top where the head plate is. See my M2XC4 review here for pics showing the two o-rings during disassembly. It may have been an extra in the package, or else the screws holding the head plate in would need to be quite loose.


----------



## Justin Case (Jun 3, 2009)

BirdofPrey said:


> I tried it with the Harries Technique. I'm sure other ways would work but when I was LEO this was what we drilled on and therefore its what I do now.
> 
> I'm not using the tac switch. What I did at the range was tighten the lanyard around my wrist (right hand). I can let it drop, draw my weapon (right hand) with the light hanging free. As I bring the firearm up I take hold of the light with my left hand and take my position under my right and **** back to offer bracing. This of course is under the circumstance of already having the light turned on as I suppose this wouldn't work well trying to turn the light on from this position unless you became good at doing so with your pinkie.
> 
> ...



Thanks.

The requirement to start with the light on and what I assume to be great difficulty to turn off the light in Harries IMO are huge weaknesses. Basically, it precludes any sort of light discipline that you'd like to apply to a situation. Can you try out the tailcap button option to see how well that works?

Any particular reason that you are drawing a pistol with about a pound dangling from your wrist? I can't imagine that a boat anchor can help your draw. Why not use the light with your left hand and put the lanyard around your left wrist?


----------



## BirdofPrey (Jun 4, 2009)

Justin Case said:


> Thanks.
> 
> Can you try out the tailcap button option to see how well that works?



After hearing all of the horror stories about stripped screws and what not, I just decided it wasn't worth the hassle of putting the tail cap on.



> Any particular reason that you are drawing a pistol with about a pound dangling from your wrist? I can't imagine that a boat anchor can help your draw. Why not use the light with your left hand and put the lanyard around your left wrist?



Because I feel most comfortable with the light in my right hand and I'm not counting on using it in a situation where I count on it being a major problem. If I'm investigating a bump in the night, I won't be using the M2. I'll be carrying the M2 when hiking and activities such as that. I'm much more prone to encountering a dog/coyote/rabid shrew in that situation and therefore the weight isn't a major concern of mine. Not bragging but I can draw fast as hell and to be honest, the extra weight affects me minimally in a competition of "draw and fire" against a buddy of mine. 

Would it affect me in the heat of the moment if something were truly happening? Possibly but its not a major concern of mine at this time.

One last thing, the reason I carry it on my right wrist with lanyard and let it drop is also because I don't carry it in a position to makes itself readily transitionable to the Harries technique. I carry it like you might carry a maglight when on a long walk. There isn't an easy way to switch to the appropriate hold using just the left hand. However, when letting it drop and dangle from my right hand it is extremely simple and more of a gross motor movement to then sweep in with my left hand to take the light up into the proper hold. 

I won't say there isn't a better way because often there is for someone else. It just seems to be what works for me. I suppose given time to decide what I want to do, before going and searching an area, then yes, I'd likely just carry it in my left hand and draw my weapon into a position sol carry or just carry low but thats not the kind of situation I'm likely to be in when hiking.


----------



## brightnorm (Jun 22, 2009)

CAUTION! Do not trust the M2 lanyard clips!

My M2XC4 took a tumble onto a wooden floor from about three feet. The light was fine but the metal clip had split open; the metal itself had broken. I tested the metal with a 7" wire cutters and it easily cut right through using very little pressure. 

I am always careful to use my lights with lanyards around my wrist when outdoors and I depend on them for securing the light, especially on rough or dangerous terrain. I am getting rid of these flimsy clips on my M2's and substituting better ones, or just knotting the lanyards. Despite the ample-appearing lanyard attachment, its design makes tail-standing the light somewhat awkward regardless of what lanyard you use.

I am surprised to see such an inadequate accessory on such a high quality light.

Brightnorm


----------



## weklund (Jun 29, 2009)

brightnorm said:


> Caution, Do not trust the M2 lanyard clips!
> 
> My M2XC4 took a tumble onto a wooden floor from about three feet. The light was fine but the metal clip had split open; the metal itself had broken. I tested the metal with a 7" wire cutters and it easily cut right through using very little pressure.
> 
> ...



Same here. I simply let my M2 free fall from my hand while the lanyard was secured around my wrist and the clip snapped in half. Luckily my light hit the carpet. This is a serious flaw in the lanyard / M2 connection. I would remove the clip immediately and replace it with a Stainless Steel clip if you are going to use the lanyard. I was amazed at how easily it broke apart. "BEWARE".........:devil:







This Type Of Stainless Steel Micro Clip with or without a swivel from LightHound.com would work fine.


----------



## brightnorm (Jun 30, 2009)

I hope others read these posts. Very important.

Brightnorm


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jun 30, 2009)

Good to know. Guess I'll take mine off once I get home.


----------



## strinq (Jun 30, 2009)

That's a little disappointing. WIll hunt for a better metal clip for mine. My M2xc4 is arriving today.


----------



## EagleTac (Jul 12, 2009)

Hey all,

I agree the previous clip design aren't too strong. We have stronger clip available. I can send some away if you need one.

Nicole


----------



## learnyee (Jul 13, 2009)

Hi there, I was wondering is there a good online site that sell this light and low S&H charges, I am living in Malaysia and I cant seems to be able to find this light at ebay. Anyone can help?


----------



## EagleTac (Jul 13, 2009)

Try our dealer section page. You will find a local dealer there.

Nicole :tinfoil:


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jul 20, 2009)

EagleTac said:


> Hey all,
> 
> I agree the previous clip design aren't too strong. We have stronger clip available. I can send some away if you need one.
> 
> Nicole


I would definitely like to follow up on this stronger clip. I forgot to remove my lanyard as I intended and discovered the exact same problem this weekend whilst camping with my M2X.


----------



## wojtek_pl (Jul 20, 2009)

Hi. I just got mine. Nice and bright but has some serious design flaws. I mean what kind of engineer designed battery tube and it's sealing ? IP-X8 for this flashlight ? You gotta be kidding... Any external water pressure will push the seal into the battery tube and flood the flashlight. So, yes, for 2 cm deep puddle it may work but not deeper.

And the whole battery tube is held in one piece by four tiny screws which cannot even be tightened properly, because this will squeeze the seal into the battery compartment.
This is a serious engineering mistake.

I got mine with a lot of dust on the inside of the lens. Do you know how to dismantle the head? Do I have to take the whole head apart ?

Ergonomics also is not thought out. Battery tube/handle is too short and rear click tailcap has "wings" that make holding the flashlight quite uncomfortable.

Overall:
Head - very good and solid, except dust inside (again, where it came from and is it really watertight or waterproof at all)
Battery tube - poor design quality, without really deep thought. 
Gives a lot of light with nice warm color (mine is Neutral White). But it will be hard for me to trust it. My Maglite 2D modified with SSC P4 gives me more confidence...

For the price I expected better overall engineering. External finish is very good. I suspect that design was made by marketing people. 

Can we get sometime a new battery tube for three 18650 ? Or at least better built for two 18650 ?


----------



## elliowb (Jul 21, 2009)

wojtek_pl said:


> And the whole battery tube is held in one piece by four tiny screws which cannot even be tightened properly, because this will squeeze the seal into the battery compartment.
> This is a serious engineering mistake.


Although I generally like the light, I have to agree with you on this issue. The seal has already been snagged by the battery holder and I had to loosen the four screws and reinstall the seal.



wojtek_pl said:


> Ergonomics also is not thought out. Battery tube/handle is too short and rear click tailcap has "wings" that make holding the flashlight quite uncomfortable.


I'm thinking of putting some black electrical tape on the corners to soften it a bit. There's no reason to make the corners so sharp.

Has anyone noticed a tint shift in the R2 cool white version. I'm not certain, but it seems that mine has shifted toward a more greenish tint than when I first got it. When I first got it, I compared the beam to my only other decent light, a Fenix LD2 Q5, and I didn't notice a huge color difference, but now it seems pronounced.

-- Bill


----------



## wojtek_pl (Jul 21, 2009)

Overloaded LEDs may change the color... 

Anyway, I'll like the flashlight probably. I'm always dissapointed when I get new light but later I get used to it. With expensive one or the one with high expectations too...

I'm affraid it may break when it will fall down from some height. Though the head is so heavy it will be falling head first.


----------



## Lite_me (Jul 21, 2009)

elliowb said:


> Has anyone noticed a tint shift in the R2 cool white version. I'm not certain, but it seems that mine has shifted toward a more greenish tint than when I first got it. When I first got it, I compared the beam to my only other decent light, a Fenix LD2 Q5, and I didn't notice a huge color difference, but now it seems pronounced.
> 
> -- Bill


Not here. In fact, this light has thee most neutral looking beam of all my lights. This could be partially due to the fact that it's a multi-emitter light. 
Giving it a nice.. mix. :shrug: 

Now, on low, it does _lean _ever so slightly towards green. But unless replying to a question like yours, I wouldn't ever even mention it. For a 'cool' emitter based light, it's very nice. The white light it puts out makes it seem all the brighter. It's quite impressive. 

I had an opportunity to 'show it off' this weekend at a family gathering in the dark countryside and everyone who individually witnessed it went, "WoW! :huh:


----------



## Glenn7 (Jul 21, 2009)

maybe some of you guys got a rare lemon - but IMO this light (ok its not perfect) is one of the best lights I have bought to date - its one of the if not brightest in its class https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/232725


----------



## easilyled (Jul 22, 2009)

Glenn7 said:


> maybe some of you guys got a rare lemon - but IMO this light (ok its not perfect) is one of the best lights I have bought to date - its one of the if not brightest in its class https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/232725



Sounds like these lights are well designed optically and electronically.

Just a pity that the physical design has not worked out better.

The flat side by side design for the body tube is always going to require less than straightforward solutions for the attachment of a tail-piece.

It just hasn't worked in this case.

I will never buy this light in this form while the tailcap is held on by some flimsy screws that come loose.

Seems to me that if Eagletac had opted for a traditional design with 3 18650s side-by-side in a round cell-tube then all these problems would have been avoided.

There would have been a longer runtime, the tailcap could have threaded in securely with no need for any accessory screws, and the light would also not be top-heavy.

Maybe this is the way to go for future EagleTac quad-die lights.


----------



## Glenn7 (Jul 22, 2009)

easilyled said:


> Sounds like these lights are well designed optically and electronically.
> 
> Just a pity that the physical design has not worked out better.
> 
> ...


Have to agree with you on that - and it could be an easy fix by just making a new 3 gang battery tube that screws on in place of the old one - heck we'd even pay for it - so it would be a win win :thumbsup:


----------



## applevision (Jul 22, 2009)

Glenn7 said:


> Have to agree with you on that - and it could be an easy fix by just making a new 3 gang battery tube that screws on in place of the old one - heck we'd even pay for it - so it would be a win win :thumbsup:



100% genius!

EagleTac! This is it!! Make a new batt tube with the triple 18650 design and we are golden!! I would pay $25 for it... maybe even $35... hard to pay much more for the metal tube but that'd be sweet!


----------



## 9x23 (Jul 22, 2009)

applevision said:


> 100% genius!
> 
> EagleTac! This is it!! Make a new batt tube with the triple 18650 design and we are golden!! I would pay $25 for it... maybe even $35... hard to pay much more for the metal tube but that'd be sweet!



About 2 months ago I asked Eagletac's marketing director, Nicole, if they would consider making a round triple or quad 18650 battery tube since it would solve many waterproofing issues and extend runtime. She responded that she already "submitted the tri-18650 setup request" so I'm hoping it will come to fruition soon.

9x23


----------



## Lite_me (Jul 23, 2009)

This would be pretty cool, but I hope it will still have a tail switch so the parasitic drain could be easily shut down.


----------



## strinq (Jul 24, 2009)

I would get the tube if they come out with it. Longer runtimes is just awesome...1.5 hours at ~600 lumens is pretty nuts.


----------



## Phaserburn (Jul 24, 2009)

I would definitely buy a 3x18650 body.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jul 24, 2009)

I'd be somewhat interested in one, however the bonus of the 2 cell body is that it better fits with 2 bay chargers. Plus I find it dang comfortable. I just wish it was better in the waterproofedness arena.


----------



## elliowb (Jul 25, 2009)

Lite_me said:


> Now, on low, it does _lean _ever so slightly towards green. But unless replying to a question like yours, I wouldn't ever even mention it.


Thanks for your reply. Mine is definitely most pronounced on low. I only began to notice it after about 10 days of use. Maybe I'm just being too picky, but relative to a Q5 emitter, it's considerably greener.



> She responded that she already "submitted the tri-18650 setup request" so I'm hoping it will come to fruition soon.


I hope that does come out, I think I'd get one if it wasn't too pricey.

-- Bill


----------



## Wattnot (Aug 2, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> I'd be somewhat interested in one, however the bonus of the 2 cell body is that it better fits with 2 bay chargers. Plus I find it dang comfortable. I just wish it was better in the waterproofedness arena.


 
I just finished installing the EagleTac provided washers on all three lights. I did the same seal test I did for the initial review and all 3 passed! I was unable to blow any air through, even on the one with the clicky cap installed. 

EagleTac has assured us that the head is sealed and will guarantee that, and the washers seal the body so I'm officially amending my review to say that the light now meets the claimed waterproof standard (provided you do the mod to your old one, or buy one with the mod installed as all new ones are).


----------



## clumma (Aug 2, 2009)

Great, for you. I bought an M2 also. Where are my complimentary washers? Will anyone take apart the head for me and clean the dust out of it (including the dark speck on the LED package that came with my light)?


----------



## clumma (Aug 12, 2009)

Vernon said:


> I posted some pics of the M2 about three months ago (page 5). I finally received my Legion II this past Wednesday, and after using the L2 for a few nights, I'm very impressed with the finish, balance, UI, and output. Though the wait was arduous and sometimes frustrating, I think Neo has finally found the right mix of quality and design to make a near perfect product.
> 
> My light arrived with zero flaws. The only thing missing was a little lube on the threads, but that was easy to take care of myself. The finish is perfect and the HA color matches throughout. I popped three Tenergy cells in, turned the ring, and enjoyed the rediculously bright, even beam. The UI is very easy and intuative - it's quite simple to customize the setting as well.
> 
> Compared to my Eagletac M2 (3xQ3), the MC-E in the L2 produces a more balanced diffused beam with the OP reflector but still has the ability to throw like the M2. The donut produced by the MC-E is minimal (if even noticable at all). My initial thoughts are that I like the L2 much better: it's more balanced, feels much more solid in my hand, the UI and selector ring are superior, and frankly it just looks better. The only thing I prefer with the M2 is the fact that I chose the Q3 warm tint option - really nice outside in the woods.



The M2 costs much less than Legion II, and is a 2 x 18650 light instead of a 3 x 18650 light. I don't think the two can really be compared.

-Carl


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (Aug 12, 2009)

clumma said:


> The M2 costs much less than Legion II, and is a 2 x 18650 light instead of a 3 x 18650 light. I don't think the two can really be compared.
> 
> -Carl


Much less? The EagleTac costs $152.99 and Legion-II goes for $170.00. That's a negligible difference. And using 3x18650 only increases runtime, not output nor throw.


----------



## clumma (Aug 12, 2009)

Outdoors Fanatic said:


> Much less? The EagleTac costs $152.99 and Legion-II goes for $170.00. That's a negligible difference. And using 3x18650 only increases runtime, not output nor throw.



It also increases size. For this reason alone I consider them in a different class. As to price, either the price of the L-II came down or I misremembered.

Are newer beamshots of the Legion-II available? Last ones I saw showed significant beam quality issues.

-Carl


----------



## DM51 (Aug 13, 2009)

Some off topic posts have been deleted. 

neoseikan... you are well aware of the CPF Advertising Policies. Please take more care to observe these policies and Rule 6.


----------



## Mike Painter (Aug 13, 2009)

9x23 said:


> About 2 months ago I asked Eagletac's marketing director, Nicole, if they would consider making a round triple or quad 18650 battery tube since it would solve many waterproofing issues and extend runtime. She responded that she already "submitted the tri-18650 setup request" so I'm hoping it will come to fruition soon.
> 
> 9x23



I'm a big fan of the "over-under" form factor and two of my lights have it. Both are dive lights.
Mold the unit as one piece and get rid of (or drill for) the tail switch.
They would save a lot of money and have the option of a cheap 2x2 upgrade.

For me there is a very limited range where a tail switch allows turning it on with one hand and I rarely carry in that position anyway. I don't think it would be missed.


----------



## funkychateau (Oct 2, 2009)

chrisWELD said:


> On this note, I thought you all might be interested in adsl_keeki's fix for the strobe being so close to turbo:
> 
> http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...d.php?t=231907
> 
> See post 4: Swift and great response from Eagletac, including soldering tips


 
I get a "webpage cannot be found" error when trying to follow that link. Is it just me?


----------



## kwarwick (Oct 2, 2009)

funkychateau said:


> I get a "webpage cannot be found" error when trying to follow that link. Is it just me?



try: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/231907


----------

