# SureFire - what's the fascination?



## etc (Oct 12, 2007)

Looking at the catalogue, the lumens aren't that impressive from any of their LED units, nor from incans.. but the price tag sure is impressive. 

Like the A2 Aviator - 50 lumens from the Xenon, and 3 from LED, and retails at $195? C'mon. E2L and others follow the same 

I've never really been a fan of Fenix, but I just got one with one of the newer LEDs in and "wow'. And it's not the latest and greatest, mine has been superceded by better LEDs. Costs an order of magnitude less. 


Poor value!!


----------



## Size15's (Oct 12, 2007)

We can (and I'm sure will) try to explain.

However, I am confident that you'll understand why you can't judge SureFires on their specs when you handle them.

If you really want to know why SureFires are fascinating to us I urge you to find a SureFire Dealer you can handle the products for yourself.

Al


----------



## HeadCSO (Oct 12, 2007)

When you get a Surefire in your hand - it just feels so right. :thumbsup:


----------



## WildChild (Oct 12, 2007)

etc said:


> Looking at the catalogue, the lumens aren't that impressive from any of their LED units, nor from incans.. but the price tag sure is impressive.
> 
> Like the A2 Aviator - 50 lumens from the Xenon, and 3 from LED, and retails at $195? C'mon. E2L and others follow the same
> 
> ...



Brightness is not always everything! I was like that, always looking for the brightest LED flashlight I could find. SF wasn't that impressive to me about the runtime on expensive batteries. Then came the new Cree powered lights. I wanted first to get the L1 because of the 2 levels but I finally chose the E2L as my first SF. 45 lumens (real lumens outside the window). When I got the light, I've been really impressed by how it was small, by how the anodizing looked though, by the build quality and... Those 45 lumens really impressed me! Not the brightest but with the optic you get a throw between my L2D-CE on high and turbo and enough spill for close range use. At this level, you get a flat 9h regulation on 1 set of batteries. "Expensive" CR123 batteries that can now last for a much longer time? Why not? The first set of batteries lasted for more than 1 month and half and I played much with, including 2 week end of camping with a lot of use. In the two following months I then got the G2L for my car (backup light, lithium powered for Québec cold winters) . This one just doesn't feel like cheap plastic. For example, I made some fingerprints on the lexan window and I cleaned it, no scratch! A Maglite window would be scratched like crazy with only one cleaning... Finally... I decided to get the L1 I wanted first. I just got it and it is now my EDC. Long runtime on low, bright high level with much throw... I'm using it with one of the "dead" batteries of my 1st set from the E2L. In fact, one died before the other and the good one seems to give much runtime on the L1. As Size15 said, you cannot judge them before handling one of them. Also, SF support is outstanding! The switch on my E2L broke in the first week. It was a quick fix by oiling the switch but I still called them and they sent me a new tailcap. The new one had the same design and I saw here that a newer design was available... It failed after 3 clicks but again, I could repair it fast... Called them again about that, telling them that I heard about a new design, and I got a 2nd replacement with the new design, much more smooth and reliable. They seems to listen to their customers and it's a good thing.


----------



## mossyoak (Oct 12, 2007)

btw way the a2 is more like 80/12 in the lumens dept.


----------



## tino_ale (Oct 12, 2007)

Granted SF are *high* quality flashlights, but if they could be as good electrically as they are mechanically, it would be even better. But SF is a large company and I don't see them moving as fast as Fenix for example... bummer. Imagine : the very latest bin available in a SF body? Wow


----------



## Elliot (Oct 12, 2007)

If the Gov't or someone else was buying my light ; sure I's say "I need a Surefire." Or if we were back in the year 2005 - Surefire was the way to go. But things are moving almost too fast and now I'd rather buy 3 or 4 really good lights, or maybe even 10 to 20 DX type lights to play with.


----------



## FASTCAR (Oct 12, 2007)

I agree that SF is overpriced and no better then most lights we talk about here.

Few years ago SF was maybee the best ..only because there was no Wolf Eyes, Deree, Olite and such.


----------



## Gunner12 (Oct 12, 2007)

There is a reason why many solders, LEO, and the like use Surefire. Bomb proof construction, simple to use, and good customer service.

Brightness and rating(Surefire also uses minimal out the front lumens, unlike maximum bulb/LED lumens like many other companies) aren't everything.

But I also agree that Surefires are a bit overpriced, look at WolfEye, similar performance, similar build quality, more choices and cheaper too.


----------



## BSCOTT1504 (Oct 12, 2007)

If low price and high output are your main criteria when buying a light, then Surefire is not for you....


----------



## SilverFox (Oct 12, 2007)

Hello Etc,

I find the SureFire beam very valuable... The construction is good too.

It is interesting that different people place value on different aspects of a light. I find the SureFire beam is a wonderful mix of hot spot and spill, in just the right proportions.

Tom


----------



## 270winchester (Oct 12, 2007)

*backing out of the room slowly*

not touching this one with a 60 foot pole.



etc said:


> Looking at the catalogue, the lumens aren't that impressive from any of their LED units, nor from incans.. but the price tag sure is impressive.
> 
> Like the A2 Aviator - 50 lumens from the Xenon, and 3 from LED, and retails at $195? C'mon. E2L and others follow the same
> 
> ...


----------



## tvodrd (Oct 12, 2007)

Back in the '80's the stock Minimag was the cat's meow with me and my camping buddies. Next stop was the Bucklight (UK design) 4AA Xenon which blew it in the weeds. I was first with a SF 6R. (Who could afford 123's in those days!) Rest is history!

Larry


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Oct 12, 2007)

This is a baiting thread folks. Follows on the heels of many other Surefire baiting threads that very often end bad. No wonder PK stays off CPF.

Bill


----------



## Brozneo (Oct 12, 2007)

Its the quality and realiability that gets me - Quality is outstanding!


----------



## Patriot (Oct 12, 2007)

I've stated before that at times I've run hot and cold for Surefire. But when it comes right down to the short list of serious lights, they're a very good balance of everything that a great light needs to be. Other lights that approach Surefire's out of the box performance and quality (there aren't many IMO), are very similar in price. As you probably already know, if you take into account the "fudge factor" of these listed manufacturer specifications, and Surefire's ultra-conservative nature, they still perform very respectably. On the quality side, regarding construction and electronics, Surefire really seems to go the extra mile. When I compare my x200 weapon light to other manufacturer's lights, it always seems to remain my favorite and in a category of it's own regardless of price. The same goes for the Scout and the M900s. They're just better designed in my opinion.


----------



## Numbers (Oct 12, 2007)

This could be viewed like any other quality versus quantity issue. To each his own but for me having a few high quality lights is better than having many of lesser quality. Personally I dont have the urge to constantly buy new lights - one (or two) new SF's a year will do nicely. 
In the end you get what you pay for, and one of those components (for me at least) is pride of ownership - knowing you own a light that is among the very best. 
Additionally, my older SF's that have been upgraded and replaced will make a nicer collection than most other brands that are much more "frequently upgraded". 
In the end we all buy what fascinates each of us, no?


----------



## etc (Oct 12, 2007)

I would likely buy a SureFire if I could get one running on common AA cells: Alkalines, Lithium and NiMH. Or maybe C/D cells. I have all my lights standardized on these.

I think I could probably find a used one on Ebay for a much more reasonable price than retail.

I am sure SureFire is a good product. However, the thing is, when getting these expensive $100+ lights, you have so many options, especially from custom made lights on this forum. In terms of pure output, they blow away anything made commercially for a comparable price, or less.

Well, yeah, if I pay top coin for a light, I do as a matter of fact expect it to have the latest and greatest LED in it and 100-200 lumens *and* good run time. Not keeping up with it means obsolesence or loosing huge part of the market to more innovative companies. Same thing happened to MagLite for example.

I cannot believe than some guy like Elektrolumens gets in his garage and makes a few LED lights on a shoestring budget that exceed anything MagLite and SureFire have ever made, beating these dinosaurs with multi-million R&D budget. 

Fenix is another fairly innovative product. I don't know that their quality is as high as SF or even MagLite, but they are astounding little lights that sell for a fraction of SF price.


----------



## nuggett (Oct 12, 2007)

made in the USA


----------



## Norm (Oct 12, 2007)

etc said:


> Looking at the catalogue, the lumens aren't that impressive from any of their LED units, nor from incans.. but the price tag sure is impressive.
> 
> Like the A2 Aviator - 50 lumens from the Xenon, and 3 from LED, and retails at $195? C'mon. E2L and others follow the same
> 
> ...



+1

To all those that say "once you've had one in your hand" well folks I listened to all off you, bought 3 different models and I still don't get it. They are nice lights but defiantly over priced. I never kept any of them for more than a week. SureFires insistence on using primary batteries to main warranty is a pain, why wouldn't you want a light that can run much more economically on rechargeable batteries? aren't we supposed to be conserving resources and cutting down on land fill?
Norm


----------



## etc (Oct 13, 2007)

If they put the latest-and-greatest LED in them, then I would consider one. They, and MagLite are slow moving dinosaurs in this age of LEDs developing by the minute.

I got the latest-and-greatest Cree LED in a Fenix only to find out it got superceded by Rebel... even brighter. That little 2AA light produces an astounding amount of light, for its size and cost (around $50). Granted, it's user interface sucks. I am just trying to be objective. If I drop a nice coin on a light, I want to be able to justify it. Good lights they are. But good value? Not sure.

Plus, all these cells like 123 and CR2 are expensive, harder to find and is another issue with Surefire. They could break into the market by offering standard cells like AA or C. I have no lights in CR123 nor have any reason to confuse the logistics I have. 

All That of course is not an issue if the cells are gov-paid for!

Would I take a Surefire as a gov contractor? Well, yes, I would!


----------



## zk188 (Oct 13, 2007)

Surefires are great, but what are they offering that you cant get for cheaper at nearly the same quality? For example Pila,Wolfeyes,Deerelight,Olight,Fenix,. I love my L1 but surefire really needs to lower there prices.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 13, 2007)

etc said:


> I would likely buy a SureFire if I could get one running on common AA cells: Alkalines, Lithium and NiMH. Or maybe C/D cells. I have all my lights standardized on these.
> 
> I think I could probably find a used one on Ebay for a much more reasonable price than retail.
> 
> ...


 
In the hope that this doesn't degrade into another "Surefire vs. Fenix" topic, allow me to respond to the points you've brought up.

Surefire's are _not_ General Purpose lights. Mostly made for LEOs, military personel, and anyone who needs or wants a tough-as-nails-going-to-work-under-extreme-conditions light. Surefire does make some rechargeable models. But for the most part, if you are unwilling to use 123A cells; chances are that you won't be happy with their offerings. 

You'll likely be able to get a Surefire for less than retail, on eBay. But the lights are popular enough that you're not likely to see huge savings. 

Once again, (and I've lost track of how many times this has been posted) if all that matters to you is output; DX has a lot of cheap lights that should make you very happy. But personally, I look for other things. Overall quality, durability, reliability..... All things that matter to me. That's what you get with a Surefire light. Brightness is far from everything. There's a reason why you generally _don't_ see LEOs and soldiers using the brightest models from DX. But you do see them using Surefires. 

Unfortunately, it seems you don't understand Surefire's main customer base. It's definitely not all of us on CPF. If Surefire turned into a company that only cared about offering the "Latest & Greatest" in flashlight technology, they would end up losing their main customer base. "Latest & Greatest" also means unproven technology. The last thing that many LEOs and soldiers want to think about is whether or not their lights are going to work, when they need to use them in identifying potential threats which are hiding in the night. When their lives might depend on a reliable light, I seriously doubt they would want to use a piece of technology without a proven track record. What you refer to as "obsolete," others see as reliable, dependable, proven technology that just works when needed. 

(One example: I have yet to see anything that puts out a wall of light, like a SF L4. And I mean, from a smaller-sized body at a less expensive price. And you definitely won't find a "Latest & Greatest" Cree, in an L4.... Last time I checked, "obsolete" is usually reserved for when something new has proven itself to be better, overall; than an existing product or piece of technology. Yet I don't see an L4-Killer anywhere. And when it does get kicked off of the Hill.... most likely, it'll be by a future Surefire model).

Maglite and Surefire continue to outsell Elektrolumens. And it's not that Elektrolumens are poor quality lights. Far from it! But all three are very different companies. There are a variety of ways to measure success. But if you're going to do it based on the very popular concept of money, Maglite and Surefire are not worried about competition from Elektrolumens. 

Even Die-Hard Fenix fans will admit that their favorite brand doesn't have the reputation for rugged reliability and overall quality that Surefire enjoys. Many of them say they care more about output & price, than rugged reliability that they themselves might not need from their lights. 

But here's a thread that shows what I mean....

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/176954

It sounds as though output, price, and the latest and greatest in technology are the factors most important to you. In that case, I doubt you'll ever find a Surefire model you'll be happy with. As for me, I tend to favor Surefire's rugged reliability and overall quality, along with their use of proven technology. To each his own.


----------



## carrot (Oct 13, 2007)

I have experienced all sorts of interesting, completely random failures of other lights. I am not easy on my lights, for sure, and I have never had a problem with a Surefire that wasn't easy to fix, like a bulb change or lubing up the click switch. On the other hand, I have somewhat less confidence in some other (to be unnamed) manufacturers whose products I have had fail completely randomly and without any noticeable reason. There are few flashlights I trust as much to work as my Surefires. Since I carry flashlights as not just a convenience, but as a possible emergency tool and for work, I expect them to be reliable. Surefire is just that, and I happily pay a premium for nice things, especially when they have proven themselves worthwhile.


----------



## woodrow (Oct 13, 2007)

Many of us who are here are so because of Surefire. My first "Real" flashlight was a SF 6p back in 89-90, when nothing even came close. I have bought well over $1400 worth of SF lights since then, and have spent over $1000 in 123a's feeding them. My edc light of choice was a gpz with the p61 lamp in it. 

Then came the Cree lights. 

I am one of the lucky ones who work within 200 yards of a SF dealer (sportsmans warehouse) so I can play with the lights before buying them. I am not as impressed with their new stuff as I was with their old, but I still respect the company. I will most likely treat myself to a new 6p cree version just for nostalgia sake alone. 

Now most of the lights I am excited about are made by Lumapower, Fenix, AE ect... but I look forward to SF coming up with another winner. My old SF lights have all been sold or given away (except an old e2) But I hope to buy new ones in the future.

Again without SF, many of us would not be here, and their might not even be a CPF...let alone many of the 123a based lights we enjoy today.


----------



## bestcounsel (Oct 13, 2007)

When one goes into harms way, one needs a rocksolid, tactical efficient light and surefire gets it done. 

There something about "made in china" that makes feel that a light made in china is not rocksolid, tactical efficient.....

It easy for one to say "my made in china" light is good to go when one does not make a living going into harms way. (no offense)


----------



## tino_ale (Oct 13, 2007)

Made in China or made in the US doesn't mean anything. It's all about design, MFG tolerance, QC and so on... those specs and choices are specified by upper management, which ironically is often foreign based.

Somehow people tend to associate China with poor quality, it's plain wrong.


----------



## etc (Oct 13, 2007)

> But here's a thread that shows what I mean....

Well, I hear you - 

Yeah, that's true. I also have a Fenix L2D-CE that has suddenly, completely and without an explanation, died after 2 weeks of usage. I did it use it on Turbo the whole time. Dropped it maybe once on day 1. Never got wet, or under sun, or anything. The stupid thing went dead, and did so when I needed it. I got the issue resolved since then.. but It does give me reservations using it when the chips are down. In a cave or something. 

Whatever equipment you have, drive it real hard, test it before deployment. I've had lots of gear fail in the testing mode actually. 

The "Digital" Fenix interface is really not that good at all... I want one click, not multiple.

Fenix - Neat little lights they are, but need lots of debugging. Better grip is another complaint.

Needless to say, DX stuff is absolutely the worst disposable crap you can find and likely an utter waste of $, aside from maybe giving gifts. Bright it is, but I don't know. I never got anything serious there, except for a set of keychain lights on coin batteries. I had one fail out of 10. It's just a keychain light that you squeeze, how can it fail? Obviously, the QC is not there. DX stuff is the kind you want to give you to your old aunt who can use it for a year without changing batteries. 

I wish Surefire and / or Maglite got off their @sses and fired and then hired a bunch of people (possibly from the Modders forums here on CPF) and came out with some semi-custom [email protected] stuff that was not equaled anywhere. 

Their stuff *was* impressive was back 10 or even 5 years ago when there was no competition and LED meant a 5mm little dim bulb. 

I submit most of Surefire's success is because of the clients it deals with. When you are paid with tax money, innovation is not necessarily desired, there is no real stimulus for it. As I said, I would surely take a Surefire if it was given to me and $1,000 in cells too. When you got to pay your own cash, you will shop around possibly. There are quality alternatives, not necessarily China's finest Fenix.


----------



## mossyoak (Oct 13, 2007)

surefire doesnt need to make kick A$$ lights, thats not their forte' if you havent figured that out yet you probably never will. they founded the company to fix a problem (bright compact lights for LEO) and they did that extremely well. they dont have to be the brightess to be the best, they balance runtime and overall durability with brightness. also, if you were to compare their lumens specs with other companies lumen specs surefires numbers will be lower almost every time. but in actual use the surefire will blow the other light away. the tragically under estimate their lumen counts on all their lights that way you wont ever be disappointed by one of the lights.


----------



## Bror Jace (Oct 13, 2007)

"Made in China" is certainly a roll of the dice as *tin_ale* said, but it is not necessarily an indicator of poor quality.

If I'm shelling out top $ for a light, I want the best of the best in all categories ... most reliable, best quality finish, latest bulbs/emitters, etc ...

Really troubling is the number of threads here about Surefires that don't work, specifically their clicky switches. Whassup wif dat?:thinking: For a Surefire price they should be indestructible ... a failed Surefire switch should be a rare collector's item ... like a double-struck coin from the U.S. Mint.

I find it somewhat fascinating that something that requires near-nano precision like a thumb drive can cost $20-$50 ... while a Surefire flashlight can cost $100-$200. I just don't get it. If they were essentially making these lights to order, I might be able to understand it ... but see above, you can't get the latest an greatest emitters available in these, one of the highest priced lights on the market. :shrug:

I have paid serious $ for the best of the best in the past ... but I now look back with a fair amount of regret. I bought an Autococker paintball gun in 1997. Back then it was THE gun ... the gun the real pros use. By the time I added a custom barrel to it, a motorized hopper, etc ... I probably had $600 into it ... and knew guys that had custom guns with flashly anodizing costing _twice_ that much.

Truth is, the gun really wasn't worth that much (looking at what you get when you work with it) and was even fairly crude in a lot of ways. Competion has since caused the price to drop. Today, a much nicer gun that, mechanically works the same as mine, can be had for half what I paid for my Autococker a decade ago.

But as long as the government is buying them with our tax dollars, and as long as they maintain a cult-like following in certain LEO and military circles, I don't see Surefire pressured into "correcting" their price structure.

I won't rule out buying a Surefire ... but I can't see it happening anytime soon, either.


----------



## Size15's (Oct 13, 2007)

etc said:


> I wish Surefire and / or Maglite got off their @sses and fired and then hired a bunch of people (possibly from the Modders forums here on CPF) and came out with some semi-custom [email protected] stuff that was not equaled anywhere.
> I submit most of Surefire's success is because of the clients it deals with. When you are paid with tax money, innovation is not necessarily desired, there is no real stimulus for it.


People just don't get it - just because SureFire doesn't involve CPF with it's R&D and 'skunkworks' special projects work - doesn't mean they doesn't exist. Far from it - from my perspective this side of SureFire continues to be the most important work they do. It's completely different from the production-side of SureFire.
Anyone who has been to one of PK's CPF parties knows SureFire has plenty of products that are never released to the public.
To suggest that SureFire are sitting on their asses rather than developing new products shows that they don't really understand SureFire at all.

I realise that this isn't the relationship we'd like to have with the world's finest illumination tools company but we're not Special Forces - our needs are not defined by the need to prevail in the war on terror. For SureFire to allocate resource to CPF would be akin to having engineers go out for a cigarette break and natter with the kids in the street.

Al :green:


----------



## lightemup (Oct 13, 2007)

All I will say is that I believe that Surefire make reliable, bright, reliable, compact, reliable, ergonomic, reliable flashlights. 

My interest in them is twofold: as a tool and as a "fascination" as you put it. 

Tool wise, my above sentence pretty much says it all. 

"Fascination" wise, they are FUN IMHO! People collect some pretty strange things. Some people spend money drinking or gambling, or collecting stamps. Part of what I like to do is collect quality torches, which at this stage for me has been mostly Surefires. 

Surefires are well machined, have a high level of Q.C. and have a high level of compatability (i.e. Surefire Lego). They are fun gadgets, and I like being involved in the community (namely cpf  ) of individuals with like interests. To my mind, whats not to like?

Everyone's got preferences, opinions and personal experience. I learnt the other day that alot of people prefer side switches to rear switches. There was a guy who was saying how Surefire could learn from maglite and its superior design. This left me scratching my head, but each to their own! And I also like maglites (admittedly mainly through nostalgia  ) 

I am personally getting a little frustrated with this Anti Surefire Banter on cpf, if people don't like them / can't afford them / like something better then that is great, buy and use something else! This rubbish about lack of research on their behalf, I scratch my head as to me they are leading the way when you are comparing apples to apples: Surefire, Streamlight, Inova, Maglite, Pelican and Blackhawk. 

At present from my personal experience, my preference and my intended usage no other flashlight brand currently compares to Surefire in brightness, compactness and reliability. That is my opinion, and my opinion alone! 


So there you go, my screen name is lightemup, and I am a Surefireaholic!


----------



## Size15's (Oct 13, 2007)

Just a note on conduct - if members consider there is baiting going on - please report the post (using the button) or alert a CPF Staff member by email or pm. We'll look into it and take appropriate action as appropriately appropriate to us.

I am aware that to stifle people's desire to be negative about SureFire would have them far less to write about. I don't think this can be justified by suggesting there are better, more constructive, more life-affirming, more fulfilling uses of ones time and efforts.

Al :thinking:


----------



## etc (Oct 13, 2007)

* Really troubling is the number of threads here about Surefires that don't work, specifically their clicky switches. Whassup wif dat? *


I've heard the same thing, too. 
My guess is, they outsourced the switch production to you-know-where. It's the global trend. Of course, any hard data substantiating or denying it would be most welcome. Anyway, reading things like that does not exactly inspire confidence in non-Surefire people. 

I am a Fenix fan, I admit it. But I am not blindly following the Fenix cult. In fact, I am their biggest critic and will tell you all the faults more so than their cheerleaders. Same for Surefire. I need brutally honest opinion, not cheerleading or rhetoric. I don't think I am truly happy with anything. 

These lights are made by large corporations who are very slow to move or innovate, slowed by budget issues and a large bureaucracy. SureFire, MagLite and others. 

There are several people on here who make absolutely astounding custom lights in their garages without commericial parallel anywhere, by any standard you want to choose: Lumens, quality, attention to detail, run time, etc. If you are gonna spend $200, get something like that. 

Perhaps the SureFire bashers cannot afford them. It's the case with me. I think a $50 light is expensive. If I do spend several times that on a light, it better be gov funded and if I have a $10,000 budget, and I talk to SureFire to get a discount, and training perhaps, and support and spare parts - that's something else.

The level of support is critical, and quickly to address the issues and send spare parts. This is the reason Linux software cannot take over windows in the IT world - it's a better product but has a different support paradigm. Windows has better support from the maker. 

Will DX support my $4.99 light when it fails?

I will make this prediction, that in a few years SureFire will be completely outsourced to Asia, like almost everything has and is. Surefire or not, get the domestically-made stuff you want now, and keep it forever, as these are the last domestically-made tools IMO...


----------



## pfccypret (Oct 13, 2007)

Surefires are definitely good quality. But I think equal quality flashlights with better output can be found for lower prices.


----------



## etc (Oct 13, 2007)

Good point. IN order to be price-competitive, Surefire will have to outsource the production elsewhere. That's assuming they want to be price competetive, no real indication I've seen.


----------



## Size15's (Oct 13, 2007)

etc said:


> My guess is, they outsourced the switch production to you-know-where. It's the global trend. Of course, any hard data substantiating or denying it would be most welcome...
> I will make this prediction, that in a few years SureFire will be completely outsourced to Asia, like almost everything has and is. Surefire or not, get the domestically-made stuff you want now, and keep it forever, as these are the last domestically-made tools IMO...


SureFire have not outsourced any production or assembly to Asia - SureFire are committed to making their products in America, by Americans.
Where they don't manufacturer the components themselves they outsource to American companies that also manufacture in America.
I know this because PK assures me this is the case. I consider us to be friends and that he isn't lying to me.
Obviously the LED's such as Seoul Semiconductor are part American, finished in South Korea but there's no secret there.

SureFire have consistently demonstrated that they have no need to compete on price, although that does not mean they don't pass on savings to the user where possible (examples: SF123A batteries and the G2).

I will make this prediction of my own:
I predict SureFire will be the last flashlight manufacturer to be able to honestly say their products are Made in America of American origin.

Al


----------



## alanagnostic (Oct 13, 2007)

I don't believe Surefire will be producing lights abroad anytime soon. They sell a premium product and they don't want their image tarnished. They are kind of like Apple...they both make high-quality products that sell to niche markets.

I get tired of these kinds of threads. I like Surefires. I think some of their lights are worth the money. If you don't, don't buy them. I don't sit around here badmouthing other light manufacturers. Everybody is free to choose whichever lights they want to buy. If you've never owned a Surefire and you can afford one, give it a try. If you don't like it sell in on BST.


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 13, 2007)

With the current generation of LEDs in cinjunction with the CR123 battery and driver technology ... there is only so much one can achieve. Eithe rruntime, or brightness, or a blend of both. This is true for SF and all others.

A great illumination tool is characterised by other things than just brightness. With the new LEDs, brightness ceased to be an interesting criterium for small handheld lights. Everyone can make something small and bright. 

I used a Fenix P1D-CE ... small and bright, great lumens per dollar. However, the interface sucks big time, the thing is not working reliably after a few weeks, and when I give it to another person, they usually can't use it right away. Not so with a SF. KISS interface. Always doing what you want it to. Usually making light.




> I got the latest-and-greatest Cree LED in a Fenix only to find out it got superceded by Rebel... even brighter.



Congrats. You have been caught by the trap of the "bin of the day". The handful of lumens that every new LED is brighter than its predecessor doesn't change a thing in reality ... but it makes you buy multiple copies of insufficient lights instead of spending some cash on a substantial tool.




> SureFires insistence on using primary batteries to main warranty is a pain, why wouldn't you want a light that can run much more economically on rechargeable batteries?



Because I do want a light that works when I need it, that doesn't need my attention when I don't need it, that can be refueled everywhere and asap and that does not include additional things that could stop to work.
Don't assume that just because CPFers do want rechargeable everyone does. I for example don't. I gave my Li-Ions all away.




> I cannot believe than some guy like Elektrolumens gets in his garage and makes a few LED lights on a shoestring budget that exceed anything MagLite and SureFire have ever made, beating these dinosaurs with multi-million R&D budget.



And you are right in not believing so. Except if you're talking brightness only, but in doing so, we're isolating one factor of the tool "flashlight" and in doing so, we're falsely attributing all importance to this one factor.




> Surefires are great, but what are they offering that you cant get for cheaper at nearly the same quality?



U2, L1, L2, E2L, M6, ... just show me !




> Today, a much nicer gun that, mechanically works the same as mine, can be had for half what I paid for my Autococker a decade ago.



And you can have that because someone did all trhe work and developped that initial gun back then. Without their investment, you would not have your much nicer gun today. This is what SF did and is still doing.

See all the clones? 

bernie


P.S.: When looking at the big picture I see a shift in CPF's focus and attention ... a shift from a broader approach to illumination tools to a focussed spot on brightness and price. While those criteria are perfectly acceptable per se, excluding the rest and maligning all that is different for having a focus somewhere else ... this IMHO is unacceptable, and it is what is happening in these halls lately. I would very much like to change that back. We're loosing a lot perspective and vision with our current path, and we won't be at the cutting edge of illumination technology much longer.


----------



## maxilux (Oct 13, 2007)

Forget it


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 13, 2007)

With regards to Surefire's tailcap issues, I can honestly say that I've never encountered one single problem with them. Not saying I don't believe those CPFers who have had problems. But sending the light back to where you bought it from, for an exchange, is not that hard. Generally when you get a good SF tailcap switch, it tends to stay that way.

I own 6 different SF models.

E2e, E2d, L4, L5, C2, G2 (two of them). 

The L5 was a Display model. The place I bought it from gave me two new SF 123A cells for free. No tailcap issues with that one either.


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 13, 2007)

maxilux said:


> @etc, This are questions i ask myself for many years, but notice: never say something against SF in this forum, i make this mistake some years ago.




Interesting conclusion. What would you expect? Or what would you want?
Stating a negative opinion about a leading manufacturer and everyone just agrees? Avoiding discussion and expecting agreement about a statement that is obviously contrary to a lot of people's opinions? On a discussion board? Sure.

This quote above is baiting, it is inappropriate and immature.

When looking at this thread ... I see a lot of very good points raised and discussed, as it should be. We would not need a discussion board if we agreed on everything.

HOWEVER, going beyond the discussion of the topic at hand and attacking the integrity of members arguing pro-SF is unacceptable and rude. And this is exactly what I really can't stand lately. 

Just because YOU do not like something does not mean ALL OF US don't have to like it. The world does not turn around you. The Golden Rule seems long forgotten, and a narrow minded "my opinion smashes them all"-attitude is slowly filling up these halls.

It is about time this chages back. :sigh:

bernie


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 13, 2007)

maxilux said:


> @etc, This are questions i ask myself for many years, but notice: never say something against SF in this forum, i make this mistake some years ago.


 
*Wait a minute*... Now that's going too far! 

CPF has never stopped me from criticising Surefire's business practices. Never! I have not recieved a single PM or e-mail from Al or any of the other Admins or Mods, telling me to stop. I have posted numerous times that while I love all of the SF models I own, I don't like the company's business practices. (And I've gone into detail about those practices). None of my criticising posts were ever deleted by an Admin or Mod. 

I've posted, on more than one occasion that SF should have issued a recall for the U2 model. A significant percentage of SF customers got U2s that didn't work _right out of the box._ Customers were told to send their's in and wait. (Some international customers ended up waiting for _months_). 

Once again, no post deletion. No warnings to stop expressing my honest opinions on CPF.


----------



## Size15's (Oct 13, 2007)

Monocrom,
You mean you never got those emails?
What about the dead horse's head?
Al


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 13, 2007)

Size15's said:


> What about the dead horse's head?


 
Looks good, stuffed & mounted on my wall.


----------



## boosterboy (Oct 13, 2007)

i have a feeling a lot of people who criticize Surefire probably never owned one, or bought their weapon's light for use with a weapon.

don't judge a company's product that you have never used.


----------



## maxilux (Oct 13, 2007)

Forget it


----------



## R11GS (Oct 13, 2007)

How many "why SF?" threads are there every month 'round here? If you don't have one and/or you don't get it, why ask? Seems like it's gotta be either baiting or ignorance....













But *anyone*, please tell me where to get a competitive light to my 6P with red flip lens. An incandescent (for color rendering) with comparable beam quality, brightness, size and construction with a red flip lens. Please oh starters of the "why SF?" threads, tell me where. Unlike most of you folks, I'm not baiting. I'm truly and honestly interested in where I can find a comparable light to my 6P plus red flip at whatever price. Maybe you know where. I haven't looked that hard since it has lasted me so many years with no problems, but I haven't found one. And oh "why SF?" thread starters, if you can't tell me where to find that comparable light, then the "why SF?" question has at least one very good answer for you....


----------



## WildChild (Oct 13, 2007)

etc said:


> * Really troubling is the number of threads here about Surefires that don't work, specifically their clicky switches. Whassup wif dat? *



About the tailcap issue, mine died after one week, then the replacement came after 1 month (I'm in Canada... I heard that intl service can be sometime long). The replacement was of the same model and then died after 3 clicks. Another replacement came after 2 weeks (standard shipping delay from USA -> Canada). This one is of a newer modem and seems more reliable! I asked for this new design since I saw it before on CPF. It shows to me that they won't leave issues unsolved and their response time was fast (I called them). It also shows they are aware of the problem with those tailcap and they modified it! In fact... it seems that not all those old Z57 will die and they are easy to fix. Also, it seems they work better after some time. The product worked, but the failure rate was probably too high and they improved it. 



Monocrom said:


> I've posted, on more than one occasion that SF should have issued a recall for the U2 model. A significant percentage of SF customers got U2s that didn't work right out of the box. Customers were told to send their's in and wait. (Some international customers ended up waiting for months).



About product reall, it seems they did right with the new L1... Many of them started to flicker after 2-3 minutes on high. Based on what many dealers said, they were recalled and new stock arrived fast after. We can call this an improvement!


----------



## Size15's (Oct 13, 2007)

Size15's said:


> What about the dead horse's head?





Monocrom said:


> Looks good, stuffed & mounted on my wall.


Talk about turning a frown upside down!

What's the fascination with SureFire?
Heck! Even those who don't like the products or the company can't stop talking about SureFire! They too are fascinated by SureFire...

Al


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 13, 2007)

maxilux said:


> Thanks for the validations


 
You mean the ones that prove you're wrong about CPF muzzling Users who critisize Surefire. And the fact that your probably a troll?

Those validations?

Oh, you're Welcome! :lolsign:


----------



## LightJaguar (Oct 13, 2007)

I was in the US military for four years and never saw a Surefire or any decent light the whole time I was there. I gave a Fenix L2D-CE to my best friend (a USMC Sergeant) and he was very impressed by it. Now he uses it all the time while in the field and in his civilian life. 
If Surefire does have some kind of contract with the DOD, then their high price is understandable. Just about every contractor that deals with the US government makes a pretty good profit. People in the government don’t mind paying double the price for something that can be had for much cheaper. It’s not their money that they are wasting. Many times you can’t even go out and buy something from a regular store because of some clause in some contract. 
A good example would be our drug intervention class we were required to take. The military had a contract with a company to pay them for everyday there was supposed to be a class. If for some reason there were not enough people to take the class or the instructor could not make it, the military was required to pay for that day. The instructor could call in sick and the military would pay regardless. 
I own a few Surefires and I think they are pretty good flashlights, but not worth the price or hype that some people have about them.


----------



## Elliot (Oct 13, 2007)

Why don't we all talk about something we can all agree on - like Hillary Rodham Clinton:devil:

Elliot


----------



## maxilux (Oct 13, 2007)

I own a few Surefires and I think they are pretty good flashlights, but not worth the price or hype that some people have about them. [/QUOTE]


Thanks !! That is the same i always talk about, and not more !!


----------



## Bushman5 (Oct 13, 2007)

Size15's said:


> People just don't get it - just because SureFire doesn't involve CPF with it's R&D and 'skunkworks' special projects work - doesn't mean they doesn't exist. Far from it - from my perspective this side of SureFire continues to be the most important work they do. It's completely different from the production-side of SureFire.
> Anyone who has been to one of PK's CPF parties knows SureFire has plenty of products that are never released to the public.
> To suggest that SureFire are sitting on their asses rather than developing new products shows that they don't really understand SureFire at all.
> 
> ...



true, but we (CPF) are ones MOST LIKELY to buy their skunkworks products, we have the dough! (and why does Surefire NOT release their secret stuff to the public? what do they have to gain by not letting us buy/use their stuff?)


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 13, 2007)

maxilux said:


> I
> Thanks !! That is the same i always talk about, and not more !!



No, you don't. In case you do not realise it ... your earlier posts in that thread are attacking members and not posts, they are baiting and don't show any sign of a discussion with the purpose of exchanging opinions and observations. 

This is unacceptable and counterproductive.


_________________________

On the tailcap issue ... yepp, big screw-up :green:

bernie


----------



## Bushman5 (Oct 13, 2007)

Elliot said:


> Why don't we all talk about something we can all agree on - like Hillary Rodham Clinton:devil:
> 
> Elliot



Only Hillary can make pant suits look HAWT! ! :thumbsup:


----------



## maxilux (Oct 13, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> No, you don't. In case you do not realise it ... your earlier posts in that thread are attacking members and not posts, they are baiting and don't show any sign of a discussion with the purpose of exchanging opinions and observations.
> 
> This is unacceptable and counterproductive.
> 
> ...




No, then sorry that i find not the right words.
But see what you write, when someone writes something you dont want, read again yor text. where is the difference ??


----------



## seery (Oct 13, 2007)

The fascination is a company that puts absolute heart and soul
into everything they do.

The type of heart and soul that all the folks around the world in
harms way can greatly appreciate.

I've been putting Surefire illumination tools to work since 1993
and will continue to do so for many many years to come.

THANK YOU Surefire. Keep up the good work, it's greatly appreciated.
:twothumbs


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 13, 2007)

The difference: I am attacking posts and opinions, you are attacking members and accusing a whole forum of manipulation pro SF.

There isn't any problem to disagree on a subject, and to exchange opinions and experiences. This is why we're here. 


Example:

_"I do not like Surefire because I had two DOA tailcap switches and this is unacceptable for a light of this class. I might buy again once they resolve their QC problems."
"I never had such a problem, all my SF lights are workhorse for years, but I wish they were offering newer technology quicker, like Fenix does."
_--> quite acceptable statements, worthy of answers and discussion_

"Surefire users hype their overpriced lights to save face and cover their stupid buys."
"Yeah right, but pay attention what you say, this forum usually quickly suppresses all users attacking SF"
_--> unacceptable. attacks on members and not on a topic for discussion. Attack on the integrity of CPF. Baiting and Trolling basically.

bernie


----------



## maxilux (Oct 13, 2007)

@bernie

At no time i say anything against any member.

All my posts are my opinion.

Where is your problem, when in my opinion SF is overpriced???

(you say this example, not i)


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 13, 2007)

This:



maxilux said:


> @etc, This are questions i ask myself for many years, but notice: never say something against SF in this forum, i make this mistake some years ago.



and the "Thanx for the validations"

... are attacks against the members defending SF and against CPF as a whole. They are basically accusing CPF of oppression and manipulation of members and opinions and those posts are not contributing anything to an on-topic discussion. Instead, they are sparks to kindle flames with no other apparent goal.

My examples were purely hypothetical.

bernie


P.S.: I have no problem with your opinion that SFs are overpriced. I am willing to discuss this opinion for the n-teenth time, if the need arises. But I am not willing to discuss it under the bad weather of ad hominem attacks that devaluate me and CPF prior to engangement in a discussion.


----------



## maxilux (Oct 13, 2007)

When you think so

In German: man zieht sich immer den Schuh an der einem passt.

You can translate it.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 13, 2007)

maxilux said:


> When you think so
> 
> In German: man zieht sich immer den Schuh an der einem passt.
> 
> You can translate it.


 
So can anyone who uses a free internet translator program. 

Nothing wrong with wearing a shoe that actually fits.


----------



## maxilux (Oct 13, 2007)

That is not a question of translate, this is a question of understanding.
No you can write what you want, this i my last post to this.


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 13, 2007)

maxilux said:


> When you think so
> 
> In German: man zieht sich immer den Schuh an der einem passt.
> 
> You can translate it.



I might have considered your offer if it wouldn't be so impolite and had actually something useful to say.

But I see Mr. Monocrom already provided a suitable translation 

bernie


----------



## tebore (Oct 13, 2007)

Ok moving away from Asian SF clones or Fenix's 

You still got Mag which we can easily drop in bulbs to get ROPs and Pelican or Streamlight. But how does SF do it? How do they get the prices they demand? Those companies have good support and good products. 

To a lesser extent we now also have companies like Novatac.

I can understand back in the 90s NOOOOO ONE had a good pocket sized light out and how SF could get the following it did. The advances it had out were darn good. I guess my point is they seem to have dropped off or slowed in the innovation side yet they ask for same in compensation. 

(PS I ain't bashing SF, I have a secret want for a SF 9P with a SRTH Turbohead or an M3Turbo. I just love those Turboheads)


----------



## MikeLip (Oct 13, 2007)

I don't know the answers to the question, except to note that comparing a Surefire to a USB memory stick is not valid. There is no machine and hand work in a USB stick, and lots in a Surefire.

However, I will point out that there are other lights in the ballpark of Surefire, such as Tiablo. And their prices are comparable. So the pricing model is probably pretty realistic.

Look at it this way - when you buy a Surefire, if you are not some kind of nutcase (for instance a SPF member) it's probably going to be your last flashlight. Based on that, and amortizing the cost of the light over your (hopefully) long life, the thing is practically free! You will have bought several cars, possibly a couple houses, put a kid through college, and still have the same light. Sure, a Maglight would also still be alive, but over that kind of time scale the difference in price is non-existent. Plus the SF is smaller and brighter for it's size.

All good justifications. I'm rather proud of them. No go get one and stop arguing!


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 13, 2007)

tebore said:


> (PS I ain't bashing SF, I have a secret want for a SF 9P with a SRTH Turbohead or an M3Turbo. I just love those Turboheads)


 
You're not the only one considering a 9P body with an M3 head. But the conversion turns out not to be as simple as just switching heads. You might want to check out this thread on CPF....

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/177230


----------



## Size15's (Oct 13, 2007)

Bushman5 said:


> true, but we (CPF) are ones MOST LIKELY to buy their skunkworks products, we have the dough!


Oh I disagree.
How many special SureFires have been made for CPF members, at the request of CPF members?
Since when have CPF members ever put their money where their mouths are and actually paid for anything even remotely specially for SureFire?
By your post I would assume that SureFire Dealers supplying CPF members are just crawling over themselves to provide special anodised colours, custom laser etching etc etc. And those are the easy specials. What about custom bezel-rings, body styles, in-demand adapters etc?

No. It's a sad state of affairs when the biggest market for special SureFires is the Asian market. Think Porcupines as an obvious example.
I find it crazy that the Americans are going cheap Chinese whereas the Asians are buying top of the range American. In fact I don't find it crazy because its sad.



Bushman5 said:


> (and why does Surefire NOT release their secret stuff to the public? what do they have to gain by not letting us buy/use their stuff?)


SureFire has, on occasion released excess stock from special projects - the original Beast. Some of the 'DARPA' models (aka PKEF's). Where do they end up? Not often in the hands of CPF members that's for sure!

Perhaps the reason why SureFire isn't sharing special products with CPF members is because even if they could make more then they needed for their .mil and .gov type customers - the prices would not interest CPF members. If you think the 'mass-produced' products are expensive...

No. CPF is not an important market for SureFire. It shows no evidence to me of being worthy of special attention by an organisation finding it hard to keep up with demand as it is.
This must annoy people - not only do SureFire produce expensive products, they produce products CPF members don't really want, and SureFire doesn't seem to care either.

Al


----------



## NickDrak (Oct 13, 2007)

Elliot said:


> If the Gov't or someone else was buying my light ; sure I's say "I need a Surefire." Or if we were back in the year 2005 - Surefire was the way to go. But things are moving almost too fast and now I'd rather buy 3 or 4 really good lights, or maybe even 10 to 20 DX type lights to play with.


 
This is a perfect example of exactly why Surefire lights are well worth the asking price. One Surefire light will outlast & outperform 3-4 "really good" or 10-20 cheap DX lights in every category except for maybe the ol' "white-wall" beamshot test. One of the main reasons that SF doesnt jump on the latest bin tech to hit the market, is because of Surefires target end users who need the most reliable & rugged technology available, not the latest& greatest, unproven technology to hit the streets this week. 

And im sorry, if anyone really believes that Wolf Eyes, LumaPower or any of the other "quality" Chinese light companies build quality is truly equal to Surefires, you are indeed out of your minds.


----------



## Patriot (Oct 13, 2007)

Bushman5 said:


> Only Hillary can make pant suits look HAWT! ! :thumbsup:


 

:eeksign:..........jk....


etc, I think you answered your own question several times as to why Surefire costs more that most other flashlight. You mentioned your Fenix failures, poor grip issues and questioned the quality of other manufacturers including DX. When it comes right down to the specific thing that you don't like, it's that SF doesn't integrate the newest LEDs. If you could buy an L4 with Q5 in it, this thread wouldn't even exist and you probably wouldn't have an issue with the price. What many of us are saying is that having the latest LED doesn't make or break the deal for us. We appreciate many more things about SF than the LED bin.


----------



## zk188 (Oct 13, 2007)

Can we just stop all this surefire is so much better quality than any chinese light, heres a question what makes surefire quality so much better than everything else? because it sure aint that huge sum of money you paid for it some of you guys think price=quality this is far from true.


----------



## bones_708 (Oct 13, 2007)

Well ZK the fact that they use better raw materials, better machining, better finish, than 99% of other lights has a lot to do with why people like surefire. As to the price, show me a light of equivalent quality and type that costs much less than a surefire. Many that are close are even more expensive. Add in the no question warranty, the number of different lights, and Surefire should get some points for pioneering a whole class of lights how can anyone trash surefire?


----------



## Patriot (Oct 13, 2007)

bones_708 said:


> Well ZK the fact that they use better raw materials, better machining, better finish, than 99% of other lights has a lot to do with why people like surefire. As to the price, show me a light of equivalent quality and type that costs much less than a surefire. Many that are close are even more expensive. Add in the no question warranty, the number of different lights, and Surefire should get some points for pioneering a whole class of lights how can anyone trash surefire?


 
+1 to what bones said

and ZK, are you under the impression that top quality shouldn't cost more? Do you own a Surefire? Have you had the opportunity to hold a P3D in one hand and and L4 in the other. There are some very nice lights out there for half the price but the materials, machining, finish are not up to the same standards. No matter what the product, going the extra mile will in some cases add exponentially to the end price. 

Most people would not be able to tell the difference between a $500 binocular and a $2000 binocular but it doesn't mean there isn't a difference. State-of-the-art (in any category) will always cost exponentially more than good or even great products.

Tell me what your hobbies are and I'll give you examples of how small product improvements usually cost substantially more to the consumer.


----------



## zk188 (Oct 13, 2007)

Yes i own a M3 serial number A025480 and an C3 serial number A022340 and an M6 head with Leef 2x18650 body, i also use to own an L4 i am just saying that there is a point when you are just paying for the name.


----------



## Size15's (Oct 13, 2007)

zk188 said:


> i am just saying that there is a point when you are just paying for the name.


Yes - that point is after you've been using your SureFire everyday for several years and the other manufacturers products have long since worn out or broken.
SureFire make products that are durable and reliable for the serious user to use every day for years and years. Further, SureFire is an American company that will be around for years and years and will be there in the event you need support.

This A2 was accidentally damaged in a fire. 





The owner produced it at SureFire's booth at a SHOT Show and was given a brand new A2 in exchange - without hesitation. I was standing right there at the time. I was not surprised because SureFire supports its products - even when users shoot themselves and the flashlight catches the bullet. 
The A2 owner was surprised and very impressed.

Al


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 13, 2007)

zk188 said:


> .... i am just saying that there is a point when you are just paying for the name.


 
That's only true if the quality behind the product wasn't that great. One example of this would be the "Smith & Wesson" name which the company has allowed to be used on products of inferior quality. (Compared to the level of quality that one expects from an S&W handgun). You pay a premium for S&W knives made by Taylor Cutlery. While far from being junk, they're level of quality is below what it should be for a knife with the S&W name on it. So in that case, yes; you're mostly paying a premium for a name....

But "Surefire" is more than just a name. When you buy a light with the Surefire name on it, you know there is quality behind the name. (Okay, so there have been tailcap issues with some Surefires. Personally, never had such a problem on any of mine. Just test out the tailcap when you get a Surefire. If it works reliably, chances are it will continue to do so. If not, exchange it for another example of that SF model). Overall Quality is what you get with Surefire. Some of us are willing to pay a premium because it's more than just a name stamped on a barrel.


----------



## 276 (Oct 13, 2007)

I have never said anything when i see these threads or topics because i love surefire. I dont enjoy spending the money sometimes, but i will i have no complaints about there incandesent models, i think the only thing i ever wanted from them was a brighter U2 Ultra or Kroma but i wouldn't trade or give up the ones i have for any of the brighter lights out there like the fenix models,etc. Just recently i bought the 6P Defender when i have three other lights with the same output like that from them. I just cant get enough of there lights. I still will buy an led module from someone else and put it in my surefire , either way i will always have a surefire.


----------



## Bolster (Oct 13, 2007)

*Newbie's Perspective*

I'm new here. I thought this was a wonderfully informative discussion, having not heard it before. I'm sorry so many of you consider it "baiting." As someone who doesn't have a dog in this fight, I got a whole bunch of my questions answered about SF, which I needed, because I'm considering a SF purchase right now. 

I think it's really important for you insiders and experts to have these wrangling sorts of discussions (minus the 'ad hominum' shots, of course) because they really clarify the issues and "shine a light" on the pros and cons. I'll definitely be coming back to CPF for good discussions like this. Please don't self-censor. 

Some of us are trying to learn from y'all, and it's great to be able to hear from all sides in such debates. Also, staunch brand supporters, you are not doing your brand any favors when you try to shut down the discussion. To a newbie such as myself, who doesn't know a Cree from a Seoul, it sounds like you're so ego-invested in your brand, that you're no longer evaluating a product on its merits. 

Thanks for the education. Please keep the free flow of debate going. I'm reading and learning.


----------



## fieldops (Oct 13, 2007)

I have found that Surefire really does stand by its products like no other. I had an E2L fall into a high speed fan last year. It was really cut up (but still worked!). I sent it in to inquire about a new body for it. They sent back a completely new light, no questions asked! For them it is the cost of doing business, and insurance that their customers will always come back knowing that their purchases will be continually operable...no matter what!


----------



## etc (Oct 13, 2007)

Patriot36 said:


> :eeksign:..........jk....
> 
> 
> etc, I think you answered your own question several times as to why Surefire costs more that most other flashlight. You mentioned your Fenix failures, poor grip issues and questioned the quality of other manufacturers including DX. When it comes right down to the specific thing that you don't like, it's that SF doesn't integrate the newest LEDs. If you could buy an L4 with Q5 in it, this thread wouldn't even exist and you probably wouldn't have an issue with the price. What many of us are saying is that having the latest LED doesn't make or break the deal for us. We appreciate many more things about SF than the LED bin.



Well, essentially you are correct. 
Keep one thing in mind is that ppl here on CPF don't represent even the hardcore Surefire or any other brand fanatics, I think they are way more fanatical than that. And that means they are more demanding than the average user, by far. They demand innovation in the form of brute lumens, x is vs. y, and they equally demand reliability. 
They demand more from their EDC lights than what's commercially available. Good enough is not good enough, they want to push to the max. 

A light is for illuminating things, and reliably so, and if you can get a Mini-Mag sized unit to throw 200 lumens, that's impressive. Lumens is a high criteria on the list for me - but I admit lumens aren't any good if the unit itself breaks, as happened to me.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 13, 2007)

*Re: Newbie's Perspective*



Bolster said:


> .... Please keep the free flow of debate going. I'm reading and learning.


 
Problem is, this isn't the 1st, 2nd, or 10th such topic of discussion on CPF. Since you're new here, this is obviously new to you. But some of us are getting sick and tired of responding to the same things over and over and over and.... you get the idea.

Rather than having more such topics, you'd be better off typing in the name of a flashlight company into the search bar; and reading through the threads that come up. (Trust me on this, the Search feature on CPF works a lot better than on some internet forum sites).


----------



## zk188 (Oct 13, 2007)

It seems that some of you just cant see past your brand loyalty, i use my C2 all the time it is one of my favorites but there is a point when youre are paying for more than the highest quality materials then your paying for the brand name. Also i have to agree on surefire standing by there products they sent me an free replacement MN10 no questions asked when my other one failed, this brings up another point that any flashlight is as prone to failure as the next one.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 13, 2007)

zk188 said:


> .... this brings up another point that any flashlight is as prone to failure as the next one.


 
However, it is safe to say that the failure point of a Surefire product is not going to be the same as a much cheaper "Made in China" light.


----------



## KingGlamis (Oct 13, 2007)

No doubt SureFire makes great lights. But I'm sick of hearing about "quality, machining, etc." Some of us, probably many of us, me for sure, only care about the amount of light output and that a light works everytime you turn it on. I would buy a light made out of a cardboard tube if it was bright and cheap. I could absolutely care less if the machining of one light is better than another because I'm going to scratch it up anyway.

Here's something to think about. Do you look "at" your flashlight or do you look at the things it "illuminates?" The whole reason for owning a flashlight is to illuminate things. I judge lights by the quality of the beam, not the quality of the aluminum tube that houses the important stuff.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 13, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> .... I judge lights by the quality of the beam, not the quality of the aluminum tube that houses the important stuff.


 
So you want a light that's bright as Hell, and works reliably, but you don't care one bit about ".... The quality of the aluminum tube that houses the important stuff."

It never occured to you that, just perhaps, reliability and the overall quality of a light go hand-in-hand?


----------



## zk188 (Oct 13, 2007)

Yarr! this is getting mentally tiring, and this thread makes as much sense as a one legged Rockette.


----------



## Bolster (Oct 13, 2007)

*Re: Newbie's Perspective*



Monocrom said:


> Problem is, this isn't the 1st, 2nd, or 10th such topic of discussion on CPF. Since you're new here, this is obviously new to you. But some of us are getting sick and tired of responding to the same things over and over and over and.... Rather than having more such topics, you'd be better off typing in the name of a flashlight company into the search bar...



I hear you. If only education worked that way, it would be convenient. (I'm an educator.) Yes, I get tired of giving the same material a thousand times, and answering the same quesions a thousand times, but students need to hear it fresh, live, relevant, and updated, or they don't learn. Knowledge doesn't have a long shelf life. Otherwise we could just videotape old lectures and tell students to search the video archives. 

Now, if CPF is a country club, a relatively closed group of like-minded individuals, then I understand--don't rock the boat. But if its purpose is knowledge, which I think it is, then these discussions are righteous and necessary. My 2 cents.


----------



## KingGlamis (Oct 13, 2007)

Monocrom said:


> So you want a light that's bright as Hell, and works reliably, but you don't care one bit about ".... The quality of the aluminum tube that houses the important stuff."
> 
> It never occured to you that, just perhaps, reliability and the overall quality of a light go hand-in-hand?


 
Well my SuperFire (cheap Chinese light) is as bright or brighter than any SureFire in its class and only cost me $23 (I've seen them as low as $18). I use it every day and night and have not had one problem. So if I have not had one problem, why should I spend ten times as much for the same results just because a light says SureFire on it? :wave:


----------



## BSCOTT1504 (Oct 13, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> Well my SuperFire (cheap Chinese light) is as bright or brighter than any SureFire in its class and only cost me $23 (I've seen them as low as $18). I use it every day and night and have not had one problem. So if I have not had one problem, why should I spend ten times as much for the same results just because a light says SureFire on it? :wave:


 
You shouldn't Glamis...just keep buying your superfires!!! :thinking:


----------



## KingGlamis (Oct 14, 2007)

BSCOTT1504 said:


> You shouldn't Glamis...just keep buying your superfires!!! :thinking:


 
I will, thanks for your approval.


----------



## Bror Jace (Oct 14, 2007)

If the number of "Why Surefire" threads is becoming a bother, why not merge the more substantive ones and make a sticky out of it?

Honestly, I think it's a common debate issue ... and should be allowed on this forum ... as long as things don't get personal, etc ... If some people are tired of the discussion, they should not bother reading the thread.

And of course, I've seen threads where someone who is not a soldier or a LEO is looking for a nice light and someone else inevitably chimes in: "Just get a Surefire and forget about it." Well, some people (myself included) are not quick to simply throw money at a problem ... and in many cases, it would be foolish to do so.

As *Monochrom* stated about S&W ... there is always the suspicion among brand names that cost a great deal more: "Am I paying mostly for the name?" The more people _are_ willing to throw money at a problem, the more people out there will falsely claim a qualitative advantage to a product that So, thinking this through carefully is _not_ a bad thing. 

Truth is, for most relatively simple objects/tools, the law of diminishing returns sets in quickly. Compare a $5 flashlight to a $25 flashlight to one costing $250 ... and the task is navigating in the dark. All three will probably allow the user to do what they need to do ... and most will find a solution to the problem closer to $5 than $250. That doesn't make them stupid ... hey, that might even make them smart.

After all, we are talking about a tube to hold batteries, a switch, possibly some regulation circuitry and an emitter ... not exactly quantum physics. The emitter part is the hardest and those technology demands are on the semiconductor companies that make them, not the assembler of the flashlight itself.

I'm in a position that if I wanted to buy $3,000 worth of lights tomorrow, I could. No significant financial pain, no checking with the missus, etc ... My question will always be: Are the expensive ones _really_ worth it?

Yet, there is always the temptation ... but a few here who (credibly) claim they've experienced them ... but still feel it's more hype than anything else. I know some people have a hard time appreciating true quality ... but it's hard to judge.

So, for now, I'm keeping my powder dry ... and when I get the urge for a new gadget, I get a light significantly less expensive than the offereings from Surefire.


----------



## Wolfhound 9K (Oct 14, 2007)

SureFire lights have a reputation as being some of the highest quality built lights on the market. The light body itself is extremely high quality, everything from heat sinking to aesthetics.

I like to get both of both worlds, and use SureFire's C2 Centurion body for it's superior heat sinking, combat grip, and pocket clip with an after market drop-in CREE module for brightness :twothumbs


----------



## zk188 (Oct 14, 2007)

I see a bad moon rising.


----------



## McGizmo (Oct 14, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> Well my SuperFire (cheap Chinese light) is as bright or brighter than any SureFire in its class and only cost me $23 (I've seen them as low as $18). I use it every day and night and have not had one problem. So if I have not had one problem, why should I spend ten times as much for the same results just because a light says SureFire on it? :wave:


 
What SureFire lights are in the same class as your SuperFire (Is that a for real name!?!?  )

Can you define this "class" please?

Beyond the scope of this thread, China need not meet us in any battle if we are willing to give them our industry and future. :thinking: I would be happy to show SuperFire more respect if they were willing to show even a modicum of respect and a good start would be with a new name!!

Hey maybe China could subsidize some of the manufacturers to the point that they simply gave away their product! That would be tough on competition! :green:



> No doubt SureFire makes great lights. But I'm sick of hearing about "quality, machining, etc." Some of us, probably many of us, me for sure, only care about the amount of light output and that a light works everytime you turn it on. I would buy a light made out of a cardboard tube if it was bright and cheap. I could absolutely care less if the machining of one light is better than another because I'm going to scratch it up anyway.


 
I can understand you being sick of hearing about "quality, machining,etc" especially if a cardboard tube would suffice. To each his own. I am frankly sick of reading names that are obvious in their intent to imitate and capitalize on recognition earned legitimately.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 14, 2007)

*To: zk188 -*

I thought my question was fair. Do you believe a Surefire light will fail at the same point as a cheap "Made in China" light?
~~~~~~~~~~

*To: Bolster -*

Usually these "Surefire vs. fill in the blank" threads degenerate rather quickly. (Some faster than others). Using the Search feature will often reveal some threads that are only a couple of months old. Especially when it comes to discussions regarding Surefire. It's not as though you'll find ancient threads that advocate the "Duck & Cover" method of choosing a light.
~~~~~~~~~~

*To: KingGlamis -*

Well, as I posted earlier in this thread; not all flashaholics need Surefire's level of rugged dependability. And if it comes with a large price-tag, some of them don't want it either. But here's the thing, I'm a flashaholic who wants it. And I'm willing to pay a premium in order to get it. So are a lot of other folks. Including LEOs and soldiers. I know that my Surefires will work, even when covered in dirt or mud. Can you honestly say the same about your light? 

If your cheap, Made in China light falls out of your hand and hits the sidewalk, will it still work? (Yeah, I know; you can just buy another one. But what if you needed it to keep working, right then and there). 

I can understand why some CPFers think Surefires are over-priced. If sheer output is what matters most to you, and your light isn't something that is a vital piece of equipment on a dangerous job; then I can understand why some CPFers feel the way they do.


----------



## KingGlamis (Oct 14, 2007)

Wolfhound 9K said:


> The light body itself is extremely high quality, everything from heat sinking to aesthetics.


 
Thanks for making my point. I guess some people pay for a feature that has absolutely nothing to do with the purpose of a light... which is producing light.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 14, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> Thanks for making my point. I guess some people pay for a feature that has absolutely nothing to do with the purpose of a light... which is producing light.


 
Cheap quality barrel = damaged if dropped which = damaged batteries which = flashlight stops producing light. 

There's reason why cardboard isn't used for making flashlight barrels.


----------



## zk188 (Oct 14, 2007)

What i ment was that all lights are equally prone to failure Just like every thing is equally prone to failure Monocrom, have you durability tested surefire lights Against all the other "cheap" brands how do you they are more durable? because they said so, Here is a good read. http://www.flashlightreviews.com/features/loyalty.htm


----------



## KingGlamis (Oct 14, 2007)

Monocrom said:


> *To: zk188 -*
> 
> *To: KingGlamis -*
> 
> ...


 
I've dropped it twice, still works. I've used it in the rain, still works. But my normal use does not involve dropping and mud/rain/snow, so I think I'll be OK with my purchase. And if it does fail, I have 1-2 other lights on me at all times, so no biggie. But the fact is, it hasn't failed.

Now let's switch the question back to you... have you owned a SuperFire or UltraFire light? It sounds to me like you haven't, so you have no idea what their quality is. However, if you have, please give examples of the failures that you have had. I read these forums every day and I don't see people complaining about SuperFire or UltraFire failures.


----------



## KingGlamis (Oct 14, 2007)

Monocrom said:


> Cheap quality barrel = damaged if dropped which = damaged batteries which = flashlight stops producing light.
> 
> There's reason why cardboard isn't used for making flashlight barrels.


 
Are you kidding? I have never, ever, ever, seen any light that has a cheap enough body that will allow the batteries to be damaged when the light is dropped. Not even the cheapo plastic lights. Hell, you can drop bare batteries on the ground and they will live through it.


----------



## NA8 (Oct 14, 2007)

I used to work for a company similar to surefire. They eventually split into two companies, one for the military contracts and the other for commercial applications. It got ugly after that so I hope surefire stays one company. 

One thing bugs me though, I keep reading threads about soldiers who carry all kinds of different flashlights, and I wonder just where all the military surefire orders are going. I have visions of fat cats sitting around with a bunch of flashlights in their desk drawers.


----------



## djblank87 (Oct 14, 2007)

This thread is like talking about religion and politics with people, opinions will always very from one side of the table to the other and in the end we will all still most likely disagree.


With that said, I like Surefire products and there warranty. I have never had a problem with any of there products at all. Surefire is a leader and will continue to be a leader that other companies who even now have more up to date technology, will still look at Surefire to see what there going to do next. 


Surefire lights are bright right out of the box, tough as hell and the give you plenty of options to upgrade/modify your light all day long i.e. SF Lego's. With Surefire are you paying a little more for the name? Probably. But your also paying for quality that has been proven over and over and over and over time and time again. 


Your paying for something that Military/LEO/SAR/Fire Departments/DPS/BLM/FBI/CIA and every other alphabet soup agency out there consider the best, something you can pickup and it will always work, no matter what the terrain, climate, country etc. 


Respect for Surefire would be a nice thing to see around here more often, because that $25.00 light that you got off of some (no name mentioned) website was probably inspired by Surefire in some way shape and form, it doesn't mean your $25.00 light is bad, but it in most cases it is a replica of the original.


----------



## Bolster (Oct 14, 2007)

*Good Question. Test it.*

Has anybody done torture tests of the various flashlights we're talking about, SureFire vs SuperFire vs Fenix vs Whatever? Number of feet dropped, number of feet dunked for how long, amount of recoil survived, when does failure occur? 

The SFers are making a good point that a SF may be superior despite cost and luminescence, for certain applications, if there truly is a significant durability advantage. 

If these tests have been performed, could someone give me a link please? 

Wolfhound: aren't you messing with SF's strongpoint (reliability) when doing such a mod? If you really want SF's rock solid reliability, wouldn't you stick to stock?


----------



## NA8 (Oct 14, 2007)

Find the Surefire in the first chart  

Single-123A Flashlight Runtime Comparison
http://www.flashlightreviews.com/features/runcomp.htm

Good thing they're so high quality, eh ? :devil:


----------



## KingGlamis (Oct 14, 2007)

*Re: Good Question. Test it.*



Bolster said:


> Has anybody done torture tests of the various flashlights we're talking about, SureFire vs SuperFire vs Fenix vs Whatever? Number of feet dropped, number of feet dunked for how long, amount of recoil survived, when does failure occur?
> 
> The SFers are making a good point that a SF may be superior despite cost and luminescence, for certain applications, if there truly is a significant durability advantage.
> 
> ...


 
Even though things happen, we probably all try NOT to drop our lights. So a drop-test should be last on the list of criteria for a light.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 14, 2007)

*To: zk188 -*

LOL ! Thanks for the link. But I read that article months ago, when I first discovered the site. A better read would be my previous posts in which I openly criticized Surefire for their (in my opinion) less than ethical business practices. Even went into detail about those said business practices. But I guess everyone loves labels. And perhaps it's just easier for you to label me as a Surefire Purist who will never agree with you.... instead of recognizing that, oh yes; some folks do indeed see the value of a Surefire without being blindly devoted to a brand.

I'll make things easy for you. Some of my first posts were about recommending the Brinkmann Maxfire LX over a Surefire G2. I own both, both have the same output and runtime. But the Maxfire is easily found in Target or Wal-Mart, and for about half the price of a G2.... Sorry if you thought you were responding to a Surefire fanatic. Your mistake. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

*To: KingGlamis -*

There's a good reason why you don't see folks complaining about failures of their SuperFires or Ultrafires.... Folks expect a helluva lot more out of a Surefire light than they do out of those brands. If one of those brands fail, no big deal. Just buy another one. You don't expect rugged dependability out of those brands. You do with Surefire. There's a reason why soldiers aren't trying to get their hands on an Ultrafire or SuperFire before being shipped out. Not to say that cheaper lights are bad. I've got an L600 coming in from Lighthound. The rechargeables I'm going to use are from Ultrafire. (So is the charger). It's not a light that'll be used regularly or at work. If it was, I'd be looking more closely at a SF M4, M6, or 10x Dom.

I have and do own cheap lights. (Not the two brands you mentioned though). Failures would include, one or more LEDs on a cluster light not working right out of the box, spacers or other parts dropping out of a light when unscrewing the bezel, (parts that should have remained attached either to the bezel or barrel of the light).... and you're going to love this one. I keep a no-name, cluster LED light on my desk; next to my computer. I literally just picked it up to look at it.... and dropped it about 2 inches onto the wooden desk. It went out. Now I hit the tailcap switch, it lights up at less than full power, and one LED no longer works. I kid you not. This happened _just _now. (And removing the battery-carrier and re-inserting it doesn't help)..... Oh yeah, I'm wasting my money buying Surefires. Sorry if that sounded a bit too sarcastic. But I'm not exaggerating when I say it fell from only 2 inches off the desk. 

I'm not kidding about the barrel either. Perhaps it was a rare lemon that squeezed by Mag's Q.C. dept., but the barrel on a Mini-Mag I purchased years ago was _that _bad.


----------



## bones_708 (Oct 14, 2007)

It's like buying a car. By KG's standards the only thing that matters is how fast it is and maybe the mileage. Ignore how it looks, safety standards, fit and finish, reliability, comfort, ect. All that matters is how far it will go and how long to get there. Bentleys are expensive as hell but are you really arguing that it's no better than a Chevy? I don't trash people for buying Chevys and I also don't blame people for getting a Bentley if they can afford it and want to do so.


----------



## pfccypret (Oct 14, 2007)

Quite a bit of difference between a car and a flashlight. For one, a car is a much significant investment.

Although, look at it this way. If you are just tooling around a city, a few miles each day. You probably wouldn't mind a car that isn't as safe or not as comfortable. Where as, if you are if you taking the car across the country several times a year, you might expect a little more. And you also are going to pay more.

I also see Monocrom's point. There are nothing wrong with cheap flashlights around the house. I have a maglite that I use for most simple house hold stuff. It works, batteries are cheap and I don't really care if I leave it outside or I lose it. Not a big deal.

Whereas, with a surefire, many people who use them are in situations where the flashlight can very well mean life or death. You can drop a surefire off a building, run it over, dunk it in water and still be confident that it will light up. You simply don't get to from brands like "SuperFire". 
That being said, I think equal quality can found for cheaper...but it's rare. You can be confident that a sure is going to work...you don't really get that with "off brands".

Look it this way, I have 10 no name brand "police" flashlights. Ripoffs of the Surefire 6P. Also have a 6P, the no name flashlights, have had two melt and one stop working when I dropped it....No problems with the 6P. The 10 no name flashlights were cheaper then the 6P (could literally get 30 for the price of a 6P), but not something I would trust my life with.


----------



## ausbump (Oct 14, 2007)

Surefire lights are great.

I just don't understand why SF fans need to attack other manufactures about their supposedly shoddy manufacturing. Surely surefire lights speak for themselves?

They're pretty dim compared to modern offerings, but they're tough. Lots of other manufacturers are delivering great lights as well, and many of them do come close to/exceed surefire lights in quality and output.

It seems that many people have wrapped their buying habits in patriotism. Chinese /= bad
American manufacturing is pretty good. So's modern chinese manufacturing. Anyone who places a blanket statement about china's manufacturing (as 'inferior') is kidding themselves. The technology being used is the latest, and many companies have the best QC in the world. We wouldn't argue that all american autos are the best in the world. There are plenty of other good car manufacturers. The same goes for flashlights.

SF people - relax. The product speaks for itself. Fenix products also speak for themselves. They're both great
SF won't suit everyone, and neither will Fenix.


----------



## ringzero (Oct 14, 2007)

Monocrom said:


> *Wait a minute*... Now that's going too far! CPF has never stopped me from criticising Surefire's business practices. Never!...No warnings to stop expressing my honest opinions on CPF.




I've owned two Surefire models, L1 and G2, but I am by no means a Surefire fan.

I've repeatedly criticized SF clicky switch reliability, SF customer service, and SF prices many times on CPF without ever having my posts censored.

In a few threads that grew especially heated, I even used terms like:

"Surefire Koolaid Drinkers"
"Surefire Cultists"
"Surefire True Believers"

none of which was ever censored.

So, I can honestly say that CPF is fairly tolerant of criticism of Surefire.

.


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 14, 2007)

ausbump said:


> I just don't understand why SF fans need to attack other manufactures about their supposedly shoddy manufacturing. Surely surefire lights speak for themselves?


 
Did you ever notice that more or less all those "Why SF" or "SF vs X" threads are initiated by anti-SF people? Where do you see threads like "Why Superire when you can have SF"?

I am tired that a brand of lights I came to like is attacked repeatedly ... AND ... at the same time, the "attackers" present themselves as the victims. 

bernie


----------



## ausbump (Oct 14, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> Did you ever notice that more or less all those "Why SF" or "SF vs X" threads are initiated by anti-SF people? Where do you see threads like "Why Superire when you can have SF"?
> 
> I am tired that a brand of lights I came to like is attacked repeatedly ... AND ... at the same time, the "attackers" present themselves as the victims.
> 
> bernie


Not sure what you're insinuating. But I like all lights (with the exception of my first headlamp, which died on me at several critical moments). I like SF, Fenix, even the cheap brands. It doesn't have to be one or the other!

But there will always be people who need to justify their purchases by putting SF/Fenix etc down. We needn't worry about them - I for one am pleased with all my lights :twothumbs never mind what anyone else says, as my enjoyment is not controlled by what anyone else thinks of my fav light/light manufacturer, but rather the fun I have with the lights myself.


----------



## Lobo (Oct 14, 2007)

Whoa, boy. Here I was, starting to write a lengthy post when I fortunately enough realised the futility of my proceedings.

*Starts humming on "Why can't we be friends" while backing slowly out of the room*

:grouphug:


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 14, 2007)

ausbump said:


> Not sure what you're insinuating. But I like all lights (with the exception of my first headlamp, which died on me at several critical moments). I like SF, Fenix, even the cheap brands. It doesn't have to be one or the other!
> 
> But there will always be people who need to justify their purchases by putting SF/Fenix etc down. We needn't worry about them - I for one am pleased with all my lights :twothumbs never mind what anyone else says, as my enjoyment is not controlled by what anyone else thinks of my fav light/light manufacturer, but rather the fun I have with the lights myself.


 

The enjoyment or choice of the lights is not the problem. I can do that alone like a grown-up.  
It is the enjoyment of CPF that worries me. Because there we depend on one another.

bernie


----------



## Varmint1 (Oct 14, 2007)

I have about 15 Surefire lights and probably 10 Fenix. Two of the Fenix lights (an L1P and L1T) are sitting in a drawer because they quit working. One was a gift I had given to my brother. He gave it back because it quit and I gave him a E2L.

I have no idea where I ordered the particular Fenix lights from so I have no idea where to send them back to. I figure they probably aren't still covered anyways.

I have had a tailcap issue with one Surefire. I called them and they sent me a new one free of charge in a couple of days.

I just ordered a P1D Q5 last night because it sounded pretty awesome.


----------



## Patriot (Oct 14, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> Did you ever notice that more or less all those "Why SF" or "SF vs X" threads are initiated by anti-SF people? Where do you see threads like "Why Superire when you can have SF"?
> 
> I am tired that a brand of lights I came to like is attacked repeatedly ... AND ... at the same time, the "attackers" present themselves as the victims.
> 
> bernie


 
Exactly!

ausbump, this thread wasn't started my Surefire fans proclaiming or boasting about their lights' superiority. :shakehead

zk188 earlier linked us to quickbeam's Flashlight Review site in post #100 (under different context). http://www.flashlightreviews.com/features/loyalty.htm I wonder how many 'person type' #2s are posting in this thread?


----------



## djblank87 (Oct 14, 2007)

I think it's time for another CPF group :grouphug:. 

I would like to also add that while reading this whole thread for the second time I was taking my third A2, this one (Green) out of the box and "O My" is it a beauty. :nana:


----------



## lightemup (Oct 14, 2007)

Hey dj, i've got a green A2 that'll soon be on its way to me, i'm green with envy  What can we use the green led for?


----------



## BSCOTT1504 (Oct 14, 2007)

Dj and lightemup, I'm getting ready to sand the LEDs on my green A2. I hope it works as planned....


----------



## Bror Jace (Oct 14, 2007)

Well, you can't really blame newbies for asking what the fuss is all about. As for members that already have a couple hundred posts here before starting a thread like this, I can't vouch for them.

People with a bone to pick or people that buy Fenix lights then wonder _should_ get their threads locked up and be personally warned ... then banned if they keep it up.

I'm just glad that civil discussion is allowed (better if it is encouraged) about the different lights and the "Are they worth it?" question.

I still struggle with the last one. Why? Because I know there are plenty of real world examples when you are merely paying for just a name ... and/or because it's "the brand the pros use." I was a Firefighter and we used to see a tool or a piece of gear that was originally civilian but adapted for fire use ... at a significantly increased price. Why the increased price? Because sold by this new company, it has (some of the price used to pay for liability insurance, no doubt).

I have seen Tippmann paintball guns used by police as riot suppression gear ... but at _triple_ the price. Why? Because police departments were buying them ... and they didn't know they could get the _same exact thing_ down at the Splat Shack for a lot less. Heck, I could buy a stock Tippmann, add a bunch of genuinely useful modifications to the gun and still come in well under what the police paid for their "Pepperball projecting device." :shakehead

Point being, that people who buy these inflated items I mentioned are exhibiting a certain amount of ignorance and/or foolishness. Those of us who consider ourselves thinkers (as opposed to sheeple) want to avoid this.

Thus the question: "What's so special about Surefires?" 

Is Surefire another example of paying for hype and or brand name? Probably not entirely ... but to what extent, I have no idea and _some_ people that have gone down the Surefire path may not be able to answer this question honestly either. They might have become too emotionally attached to the brand and unable to judge it objectively. This happens with all kinds of brands, why not Surefire as well?

And some big brands are just junk. I know some people think Fram oil filters are the cat's meow ... but in truth they have the poorest construction of all the main brands. People who aren't afraid to think and do a little research know better. 

I guess that's why I see this type of discussion as useful.

*Monocrom*, I don't doubt for a second that you had outages. flickering, etc ... problems with a cheapie cluster light. I have the same ... and would never use one in a life or death situation ... but I have walked deep into the woods in the dead of night with one ... and a back-up in my pocket. 

Actually, I don't see any use in comparing a discount Chinese cluster light to a Surefire. I just don't see why people can't make a quality flashlight ... even here in the United States ... using quality components and price it at about half what Surefires typically gow these days. I mean, is it _that hard_ to make a quality barrel with good threads and a good finish? You could make a batch of a million of them at a time to save money. How often would you have to update a 2xAA barrel ... or a 2xCR123 barrel?? 

Clicky switches should also be old hat. Same for other light components like reflectors, bezels, etc ... Circuitry can be the difference between a light with good runtime and a mercilless battery vampire ... but circuitry is especially cheap these days. 

The differences in aluminum alloys should only account for a couple bucks per light ... unless you go with something more exotic like titanium that can be difficult to machine.

The hardest part for a flashlight is the emitter ... and that will be handled by someone else and be merely assembled by the flashlight company.

Again, I don't want to compare the ultra-cheapies to Surefire ... I _really_ have my eye on some middle ground. Because after all, we are not talking about laser surgery equipment here.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 14, 2007)

Bror Jace said:


> .... Because after all, we are not talking about laser surgery equipment here.


 
Surefire is more than just a name on a barrel. There is real quality behind their lights. Just because Surefire is the no-brainer option for high-quality, tough as nails, reliable lights; doesn't mean that thinking-men are going to pick something else. Same with buying a Toyota Camry. If you want a reliable, safe, quality car that isn't likely to spent a lot of time in the shop; the Camry is the no-brainer option. Doesn't mean that a thinking-man is going to steer clear of a Toyota Dealership. A "no-brainer" is something that many folks of varying degrees of intelligence can agree upon. 

Sure you're going to end up paying a premium for a Toyota or a Surefire. But that's expected.... based on the reputations that both have earned, and the level of quality you can expect; based on those reputations. 

I personally have tried to find an existing company that can compete with and be (at least) just as good as Surefire when it comes to overall quality and rugged reliability. (Like I said, I don't like a lot of the company's business practices). Some have come close. But there was always something lacking.... something that was important when it comes to what I look for in an EDC or high-quality light.


----------



## KeyGrip (Oct 14, 2007)

SureFire being totally based in the US plays a huge part in the price. I am not saying that because I believe things made in America are inherently better than things made in China, but that things in America just cost more. Labor, research and development, materials, and the transportation of those materials are all more expensive because of things like a higher minimum wage. R&D alone is huge for SureFire. Remember that they don't sell all of the products they develop. Some of them go exclusively to an organization through contract and some are experimental concept lights. When you buy a 911, you're not paying Porche for just the car, you're also funding their racing program so that they can build another LeMans LMP2 prototype. Technology used in that vehicle will eventually make it to a future production car, and so on. I don't believe SureFires are the best lights on the market, but they *can* be the best *for a certain situation.* Too many people take the hype generated by advertising and stigma and assume that they're the best in the world. Just my .02 lumens.


----------



## fieldops (Oct 14, 2007)

I think you need to remember where all of this started. Surefire were the ones who invented these kinds of lights. There was no Superfire or Ultrafire at the beginning. Surefire came up with a great product line based on needs of their potential customers. There was no real innovation by the "clone companies". All of the work had already been done for them. 
Does this mean I dislike any of the Ultrafire lights and the like? No I own enough of all of them. I like my inexpensive lights too. They are fun and work ok. I just think it's a bit silly to compare a company like Surefire with a company who just copied an existing concept. Are the Ultrafire lights getting better? Yes, and I think we are seeing more and more innovation from Fenix and others. This is a good thing for all of us. It keeps companies on their toes and creates more competition. Let's not try, however, to create equivalence between them and Surefire. There is a long way to go. It just isn't there yet.


----------



## KingGlamis (Oct 14, 2007)

KeyGrip said:


> SureFire being totally based in the US plays a huge part in the price. I am not saying that because I believe things made in America are inherently better than things made in China, but that things in America just cost more. Labor, research and development, materials, and the transportation of those materials are all more expensive because of things like a higher minimum wage. R&D alone is huge for SureFire. Remember that they don't sell all of the products they develop. Some of them go exclusively to an organization through contract and some are experimental concept lights. When you buy a 911, you're not paying Porche for just the car, you're also funding their racing program so that they can build another LeMans LMP2 prototype. Technology used in that vehicle will eventually make it to a future production car, and so on. I don't believe SureFires are the best lights on the market, but they *can* be the best *for a certain situation.* Too many people take the hype generated by advertising and stigma and assume that they're the best in the world. Just my .02 lumens.


 
I don't see any evidence of Surefire R&D. They are way behind the times in the LED light department. And their incans don't require any R&D. It's old technology. When Surefire catches up to Fenix I might consider buying one.


----------



## KeyGrip (Oct 14, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> I don't see any evidence of Surefire R&D.



As Fieldops said the evidence can be found in the curren flashlight lineup as well as the models they just released. Keep in mind that we (as the normal public) still don't see the fruits of much of their labor.


----------



## Khaytsus (Oct 14, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> I don't see any evidence of Surefire R&D. They are way behind the times in the LED light department. And their incans don't require any R&D. It's old technology. When Surefire catches up to Fenix I might consider buying one.



When Surefire introduces new technology, you can be assured it's been overheated, supercooled, dropped, hit, attached to various weaponry in use, and put to other extremes.

You don't 'get' Surefire, that's fine. You value price over quality. That's fine too. Why argue about it?

And no, I'm not drinking the koolaide, I only have one Surefire. I can't *afford* them. I still love my E1e (see signature), but I use the P2D CE all the time now because of the low output with higher output (than the E1e) at a twist.


----------



## KingGlamis (Oct 14, 2007)

Khaytsus said:


> When Surefire introduces new technology,


 
Still waiting...


----------



## PPGMD (Oct 15, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> Still waiting...


 
I guess you missed the new P60L heads, and the updated LED lights.

Sure they didn't bring them out as fast as Fenix and other companies, but flashlight geeks aren't their main market. They make well made lights for LEO, military, and other similar markets.

I moaned when the P60L was only 60-80 lumens compared to the 120+ from the various 3rd party heads (like my Gene Malkoff head in my G2Z). But then I was given a 6PL, this light is great, just enough light for almost all my uses, but with a 10 hours battery life, and it's much better built then my Fenix lights that I bought for longer battery life.


----------



## Flying Turtle (Oct 15, 2007)

I was certainly a skeptic about their relative value until I recently had a chance to handle and play with a friend's L1, L2, and U2. The difference in quality and robustness is so evident even a non-flashaholic would recognize it immediately. Now I own an L1 (best present I've received in years, thanks to bondr006) and I can't hardly put it down. Like has been said, the lumen ratings are very conservative/accurate. The 65 lumens from this L1 easily out-throw my L2Dce. Most folks may not need this much quality, but for really not much more than the competition you can get one of the best.

Geoff


----------



## Patriot (Oct 15, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> Still waiting...


 
KG, maybe surefire just isn't for you and that's perfectly cool. Enjoy your Fenixs. I know that I enjoy my Fenixs a whole bunch. I have six of them of varying models. To be honest, I've been getting more use out of them than my surefires lately. I like the efficiency and long run-time and they're great tools around the house and beyond. Sometimes I require a light that I might have to use in a risky or heavy duty application and that is often when I reach for a surefire scaled to the task I might be trying to accomplish. 

Most of the surefire owners here appreciate many of the current offerings of quality lights. Most surefire owners I know enjoy and purchase many brands...not just surefire. There are only a couple of members here that continue to have zero understanding about the value that some members find in their surefire products. After 125 posts of people sharing their opinions it seems that some can't come to the understanding the LED technology is not at the top of their list of requirements. You might not be in tune to recognize the differences between a surefire and another light and that's ok. I don't think anyone here looks down on you because you're not interested in surefire so please pass along some consideration for people who appreciate something that you might not.


----------



## bestcounsel (Oct 15, 2007)

Now, dont get me wrong, i do appreciate a good low cost light too...

I have a Docy Metal Gear 1 watt lux and a dorcy 3 led headlamp in my truck as back ups to my surefires....

In fact, dorcy is my "low cost" favorite...


----------



## MikeSalt (Oct 15, 2007)

I am not yet the owner of a Surefire, yet I have done more than my fair-share of bashing. However, I now appreciate that as soon as you own one, the cost justifies itself. A2 Aviator will be my first Surefire. I'll pick one up when I am on holiday in the States next year.


----------



## djblank87 (Oct 15, 2007)

lightemup said:


> Hey dj, i've got a green A2 that'll soon be on its way to me, i'm green with envy  What can we use the green led for?


 
Hey lightemup, 
For me the green led is just better for my night vision vs. the red. I carry the A2 in my pocket at work every night just as a backup. I work graveyards and have to checks on the hospital I work at.

Stuff like checking work orders that other employees were supposed to finish :huh: and reading them while walking the property is easier with the green, to me it is just easier on my eyes and I re-adjust faster. 

I would use my TL or my 7060 to read the paperwork but for seem reason I just can't see after I try that .

As for the sanded LED's BSCOTT1504 I did own an A2 with sanded red LED's that was done by another CPF member and it will kill the throw no question there. But to me it looked a whole lot cleaner if that makes any since :thinking:. Other than that I do not see a whole lot of difference.

Also, MikeSalt good choice for your first Surefire........A2 right out of the gate, great choice.


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 15, 2007)

> I don't see any evidence of Surefire R&D. They are way behind the times in the LED light department. And their incans don't require any R&D. It's old technology. When Surefire catches up to Fenix I might consider buying one.



A few examples of SF R+D:

- CR123 based high-powered and high quality incans. SF invented this class of lights.
- A2 Aviator ... regulated incan with LEDs as low power option with different beam characteristics
- LOTC
- U2 
- Kroma family 
- the Beast II ... HID with LED that runs on CR123 AND Li-Ion
- Mini-Beast (proto)
- Titan
- etc.

Show me another flashlight manufacturer that has invented and pioneered so much. And what we see is only the tip of the iceberg.

Not liking SF for whatever reason is no problem, talking about it is no problem ... BUT ... bashing SF for no apparent reason except not liking it ... is just plain unfair to all those who do like the lights.

bernie


----------



## NA8 (Oct 15, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> I don't see any evidence of Surefire R&D.



They do some interesting things. Do a search here for SAIC and Surefire.


----------



## R11GS (Oct 15, 2007)

I'm not saying noboby else makes one, but I have yet to find another incandescent light manufacturer with flip-lens'.


----------



## bouncer (Oct 15, 2007)

OK here it is If Fenix DOES IT for you all the power to you they make very good lights I've looked at them and still looking for ME if I need multi levels I'll carry two lights or more e1L with beam shaper and two L4's But in The spirit of Charlton Heston. They can have my surefire when they pull it from my cold dead hands.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 15, 2007)

Another bit of Surefire R&D:

L4 

Still King of the Hill when it comes to size vs. output. Wall of light achieved with "outdated" technology.... That no other company can equal.... Even with a Cree. 

Show me another light that small and powerful that you can clip onto a pocket. 

As far as output, Streamlight rates their inca Scorpion at 114 lumens. Surefire rates their G2 inca at only 65 lumens.... Gee, I wonder why my G2 is significantly brighter than my Scorpion?? 

Possibly because Surefire gives their lumens rating where it counts, out the front? Hmm.... could be.


----------



## djblank87 (Oct 15, 2007)

I say we all meet up some time next year and have a big massive fist fight about which companys is better :twothumbs

Ok, for real though knocking Surefire is getting so old !

To the people who do not get or dislike Surefire:
Ok, no problem we all understand and really it is no big deal. 

To the people who like Surefire:
Ok, no problem we all understand and really it is no big deal.

From the cheapest light to the most costly one, as long as it lights up it is good to go! Each his own.


----------



## KaliS-Pugilist (Oct 15, 2007)

wow...this is really entertaining. almost as good as the glock, springfield-XD, s&w M&P, debates that go on in the shooting forums...lol

i wanna see a flashlight fight break out and someone get beamed...

ps...im an XD guy by the way.


----------



## lightemup (Oct 15, 2007)

I have a x300 coming somewhere over the Pacific as we speak, and a green A2 not too far behind. Boy am I in trouble with the other half 

I do wish Surefires were easier on the hip pocket, but with my cost benefit analysis they are worth it to me  Now i'm off to b/s/t to try and fund said new acquisitions


----------



## greenLED (Oct 15, 2007)

KaliS-Pugilist said:


> i wanna see a flashlight fight break out and someone get beamed...


Been there, done that already. :laughing:


----------



## McGizmo (Oct 15, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> I don't see any evidence of Surefire R&D. They are way behind the times in the LED light department. And their incans don't require any R&D. It's old technology. When Surefire catches up to Fenix I might consider buying one.


 
Where would you be looking for this evidence and what are your credentials as an investigator? 

At this point, I doubt SF has any reason to share their R&D any more than they have to as evidenced in available product and recognizable by someone capable in the art. 

For instance, in what ways would you have SF "catch up to Fenix"? 

I would guess that what seems like lagging and lack of being at the "edge" with a companhy like SF is a consideration for stability in product line and life expectancy of an item. SF does not move at the same speed that current LED technology has been changing. Many companies can and do and for them there is opportunity during a time of rapid change. 

I would submit that the market here on CPF is most interested specifically in the changes brought about by new technology and certainly supportive of companies bringing new products to market ASAP. Larger, less in tune markets could care less about differences that are most important to some of us.

In terms of R&D and SF, had you been around longer and a member when SF was still letting the public glimpse what they were up to, I doubt you would ask about R&D!!! Did you ever see the pages of protos shown on PK town? Have you ever been in PK's office? Did you catch a pic shown a few years ago of the A2 electronics sitting in a bowl of water while powering the lamp and LED's? This was a study on the effectiveness of conformal coatings. Can you name any flashlight manufacturer who touts their special conformal coating and explains the values therein? I can't. I do understand the difference this can make though.

If SF goes direct to the mill for a specific and non typical aluminum alloy for their lights because they prefer the advantages it provides in terms of durability and yet they don't "spell this out" are they targeting a consumer who would be as happy with a cardboard tube? I doubt it.

If SF's primary objective was to be first to host the latest and greatest LED regardless of how it integrated into their on going product line or actually enhanced the overall performance and design goals of a particular design then I would bet that they would and could stay ahead of all of the competition in these terms; price considerations aside.

I don't give a hoot if I am considered a SF fan boy or not. I am a fan boy of sound research and development and a fan boy of optimal design and integration in quality products. I believe SF's size and established market demand hinders them from quickly reacting and changing as a result of new technologies. I also believe that at a slower pace, they are likely to better integrate and utilize new technologies because they take the time to really "know" and understand these technologies.

I don't know how many threads I have seen over the years where the main thrust was "who will be first to use xxx?" At a hobbiest's level, I have been in the forefront here many times. Fun and exciting times to be sure! However R&D is in conflict with being first because R&D implies time required PRIOR to implimentation or integration and offerings.

You have expressed no value in R&D and an interest solely in the latest and brightest and to heck with the package beyond rudimentary functionality. That's your choice and interest and you are entitled to them. 

Send me a new, hot off the line LED and I will have it operational and packaged in a flashlight within a week. I will provide drawings for production parts within 2 weeks. Allow a month for expedited manufacture and 6 weeks later a new flashlight will hit the streets. This will likely make some number of CPF members happy. Is this a sound business plan? Well possibly if a select group of CPF members is the target market and one is willing to have ever changing and dying off products to be offering up. Is this a smart business plan for a larger less finicky market interested in getting one flashlight and not staying on top of an ever changing list of products? Hardly!

The SF 6P provides the same service and function today that it did 20 years ago. 20 years ago it was a singularity. Today it has been copied probably more often than any other technical or tactical flashlight. Of course by now it is being updated with a LED light engine. I would guess I did my first LED mod to a light like the 6P a number of years ago. Aftermarket LED liight engines have been out now for perhaps a couple years. SF has introduced their own LED module for the 6P this year. Was SF first with such an update or upgrade? Hardly! Perhaps they will be last though! :shrug:

If you haven't seen any indication of R&D with SF it may be due to the fact that A) you haven't had access to view it or B) you wouldn't recognize or understand its manifestation in a finished product if you were looking at it. :shrug:

You say you are waiting but I doubt that you are or have any interest in the first place.

Given your criteria for what constitutes a desireable light, I doubt SF will ever meet your needs or desire and I also doubt SF has any interest in doing so based on such criteria. Fortunately at present, there are many other manufacturers who do seem in sync with your wishes. I am happy for you!


----------



## djblank87 (Oct 15, 2007)

McGizmo has spoken people! :scowl:

Endth Thy Surmon!


----------



## pfccypret (Oct 15, 2007)

Like I've been saying:

Surefire=Refined quality. Overpriced, but definite quality that you can trust to work. I say they are overpriced, but I carry one in my bag at work. Why? Because I am confident it will work when I need it.

Fenix=Some of the latest and greatest technology at affordable prices. Good light, but I wouldn't want to drop it from any height and then depend on it to work.


----------



## fieldops (Oct 15, 2007)

Surefire is and likely will be the leader in light development for some time to come. Look at the DARPA lights submitted for testing. These are just the ones we know about. Size15s could probably write a long novel about just some of the R&D at Surefire. It is interesting to note that you didn't see any of the Ultrafire or similar lights being DARPA tested. This is true of NATO as well. That's because serious application lights need to be developed and produced by a well founded company with an emphasis on life or death tools. this takes nothing away from Fenix or Ultrafire. It just means that somebody has to make lights at very high standards for serious use. I love my Fenix lights. I use them more than any other light. I like playing with the ultrafire lights and DX lights etc. I also realize that if my butt is on the line, the lights in my bag will likely include a Surefire. Why? because when your butt is on the line, you want any advantage in performance and reliability that you can get. I personally feel more reassured knowing that my light was thrown out of windows, run over and otherwise "abuse tested". If I have to pay more money for it, then so be it.


----------



## Lightguy27 (Oct 15, 2007)

Originally Posted By Monocrom
*(One example: I have yet to see anything that puts out a wall of light, like a SF L4. And I mean, from a smaller-sized body at a less expensive price. And you definitely won't find a "Latest & Greatest" Cree, in an L4.... Last time I checked, "obsolete" is usually reserved for when something new has proven itself to be better, overall; than an existing product or piece of technology. Yet I don't see an L4-Killer anywhere. And when it does get kicked off of the Hill.... most likely, it'll be by a future Surefire model).*

I completely agree. I am a die hard outdoors man and have put my L4 through the ringer.I have a fenix and a couple river rocks and there all good lights. But my surefire L4 is the one that I know will get me home safe. It has been ran over by atv's, dropped in to muddy lakes and rolled down a stretch of mountain, and time after time I know that it'll fire up, and get me home. That is what I pay for when I buy a Surefire.


----------



## Lightraven (Oct 15, 2007)

Surefire caters to its government customers like no other flashlight company--and few government contractors.

It seems that most Surefire products have a story about a SEAL or Green Beret who needed a ----------- that -------------s and Surefire made it. "Surefire, can you make an infrared beacon to attach to my parachute harness so I can link up with my HALO team at night in midair using night vision goggles?" I strongly suspect the Leopard sniper scope light was a recommendation of an LAPD SWAT sniper (Surefire consultant) who has an M4 paracorded to his sniper rifle telescope. 

Lumapower and Fenix cater to CPF and flashlight hobbyists. But the fact that well known military and law enforcement units use Surefire is a latent endorsement of their products--like Kimber and Heckler and Koch.


----------



## McGizmo (Oct 15, 2007)

djblank87 said:


> McGizmo has spoken people! :scowl:
> 
> Endth Thy Surmon!


 
I am not clear on this message here but clearly I failed to qualify my comments as being those of one CPF member; one individual and with no more or no less right to express their opinions or observations. 

Whatever floats your boat and ultimately, it is what it is whatever that might be. Words and talk don't change this though they may change one's perceptions or assumptions. :shrug:


----------



## who (Oct 15, 2007)

Let me borrow Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign slogan, “It’s the Economy, Stupid". Underling all this Surefire vs. this or that is a social issue, simple economic 101. Go to any other forum and you will see:

Mercesdes (BMW, Lexus, Porsche) vs. xxx
Mark Levingson (B&W, Magnepan) vs. xxx
Apple vs. xxx
Sig&Sauer vs. xxx


----------



## Bror Jace (Oct 15, 2007)

_"Go to any other forum and you will see: Mercesdes (BMW, Lexus, Porsche) vs. xxx"_

Yeah, but Mercedes are pieces of $#it! :thumbsdow

(I'm fairly serious on that one these days. :naughty: )

Actually, I am really glad this thread was started. The critics had some good points about LED technology and the SF defenders (especially *McGizmo*) chimed in with some clear-cut examples of top-notch engineering and features that count for everything in the real world when gear is put to a torture test.

Sure, the stories about the defects and bad switches will remain in my head, but they do seem like they are the oddball cases and SF's defect rate is probably lower than most, if not all manufacturers. I'd love to see independent stats on this ...but I can't imagine I ever will. 

I probably won't be buying any Surfires anytime soon, but I have come away from this discussion feeling that the lights _are_ more than just an over-hyped name ...

... and I'm a hard sell. :twothumbs


----------



## Patriot (Oct 15, 2007)

KaliS-Pugilist said:


> im an XD guy by the way.


 
Well, better than an M&P for sure!


----------



## KingGlamis (Oct 16, 2007)

McGizmo said:


> Where would you be looking for this evidence and what are your credentials as an investigator?
> 
> At this point, I doubt SF has any reason to share their R&D any more than they have to as evidenced in available product and recognizable by someone capable in the art.
> 
> ...


 
Wow, quite a response. I guess I ruffled some feathers. Look, I'm not trying to start a war here, but I am entitled to my opinion. I won't respond to each and every sentance you posted. But I'll just say this. I'm in the $100 or less market for flashlights and in that price range SureFire just doesn't offer something for me. And after holding and using several flashlights at a local store that has them available with fresh batteries, I was not impressed. That's just my opinion. I don't need perfect machining. I need "light." You bring up great points about the tech that SF has implemented. Great for SF and SF customers. I can respect that quality. I just can't justify paying for it when my much cheaper lights have worked flawlessly for months being used daily.

We can agree to disagree. I like all flashlights, I just think some are not worth the money. Maybe if I had more spare cashola I would think differently, but I don't.

One final comment... who in the heck drops their flashlight on a regular basis? I try very hard to NOT let that happen. In the past year I have dropped a flashlight twice, and both times each light kept working. So having a light that can take a beating is not an issue for many people.


----------



## djblank87 (Oct 16, 2007)

McGizmo said:


> I am not clear on this message here but clearly I failed to qualify my comments as being those of one CPF member; one individual and with no more or no less right to express their opinions or observations.
> 
> Whatever floats your boat and ultimately, it is what it is whatever that might be. Words and talk don't change this though they may change one's perceptions or assumptions. :shrug:


 

McGizmo, I was putting it simply to those who did not understand your post that you made every point that one should need to not knock Surefire when they think they know everything about there R&D department or about Surefire at all. 

Once again as you do almost every time you took time out to explain things that you personally know about Surefire. Stuff that some of us would never get to see or people we would never get to talk to like PK. 

So by my above stated post I simply meant you made just about every point one would need to stop the Surefire bashing. Therefore all the rest of us can stop talking about things we do not know about. 

It was in respect to your knowledge about lights, how they work and the Surefire company as a whole. I posted it because I respect your opinion and I wish others would take the time to read your post and understand that they might not know as much as they think. :thumbsup:


----------



## The Porcupine (Oct 16, 2007)

I was just about to press "submit reply" on a lenghty reply when this happened:





The "monochrome monster" placed herself on the keyboard and deleted my long and philosophical post...! Guess the %"#¤ cat is smarter than I am!


----------



## djblank87 (Oct 16, 2007)

darn cats, mine did the same to me about a week ago.


----------



## MikeSalt (Oct 16, 2007)

Bror Jace said:


> Yeah, but Mercedes are pieces of $#it! :thumbsdow



That is so true. During the UK summer floods I saw more broken down Mercedes than any other car. There I was, in a mk1 Punto costing 30x less driving through the puddles at full speed without the engine missing a beat!:devil:


----------



## USM0083 (Oct 16, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> One final comment... who in the heck drops their flashlight on a regular basis? I try very hard to NOT let that happen. In the past year I have dropped a flashlight twice, and both times each light kept working. So having a light that can take a beating is not an issue for many people.



It is for LE and Mil, who are notorious for not taking care of things that they didn't pay for. We have SF forearm lights on my MP5s (1st Gen) and the finish is shot off of them where they sit below the muzzle. The lenses on a couple are suffering from severe powder burns, but they still work.


----------



## USM0083 (Oct 16, 2007)

The Porcupine said:


> I was just about to press "submit reply" on a lenghty reply when this happened:
> 
> The "monochrome monster" placed herself on the keyboard and deleted my long and philosophical post...! Guess the %"#¤ cat is smarter than I am!



Cats are physical embodiments of the devil. :devil:


----------



## TORCH_BOY (Oct 16, 2007)

Its the Name and reliability, the price is the only thing that has stopped me from buying SureFire are their huge prices


----------



## LED61 (Oct 16, 2007)

WOW!! long thread!! 

FWIW, I own an M6, an A2, and a Kroma....some of the priciest lights in their class from Surefire and I´m delighted. I buy them and use them because luckily I can afford them and because they serve their specific purpose best.

And having said that, I take no offense at KG´s comments or anyone else´s.

Perhaps what troubles me most is the degree of defensiveness with which some prominent members of this forum attack the poster, not the post, when the slightest critique against Surefire comes about. 

Seems to me some comments are being taken way too personally.


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 16, 2007)

LED61 said:


> Perhaps what troubles me most is the degree of defensiveness with which some prominent members of this forum attack the poster, not the post, when the slightest critique against Surefire comes about.
> 
> Seems to me some comments are being taken way too personally.



If you perceive a great deal of defensiveness ... then there must be a reason to it. It is good that you are troubled by this, because I am, too. One way of looking at the mess is to ask oneself where that defensiveness comes from?
Then you could ask yourself if your other perception, the point about massive and inappropriate reactions to "the slightest critique" might not be correct? Because it would not explain the illogical behaviour of those prominent members you are talking about. There must be more to it than that. 
After those questions ... and maybe some research in the archives ... you might evetnually come to a conclusion that explains this strange and troubling behaviour of some of our elders.

Sometimes, comments are taken personally simply because they are. Either by intent or accident, but the result is often pretty much the same.

It is about time we re-establish some proper netiquette about discussion and mutual respectful behaviour. Dissent is not the problem, the way how it is managed on the board is.

bernie


----------



## R11GS (Oct 16, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> Look, I'm not trying to start a war here, but I am entitled to my opinion. I won't respond to each and every sentance you posted. But I'll just say this. I'm in the $100 or less market for flashlights and in that price range SureFire just doesn't offer something for me.



You may not be trying to start a war but you sure seem to want to fan the flames! :laughing:



The 6P is $58 and it is not the least expensive SF. This is an incandescent light and there aren't a lot of incandescent lights that can compete with this light at this price. If you'd like to try out my 6P, I live close by (I'm 101-Elliot) and I'm more than happy to let you see it up close and in personal and decide whether they are worth $58. They may not be worth that for you. If not, so be it But for a light I bought nearly a decade ago, $6/yr seems very reasonable for this particular light.

I say to each his own. I don't own any SF LED lights. I have some LED lights, but they tend to get "circulated" by new ones too often. This is primarily due to the emitter technology that is moving so quickly. But for an incandescent - well the only incandescent lights I own at all are SF's. That 6P is cheaper per month than any of the LED lights I have. And like I have already said twice in this thread (and in other SF bashing threads), show me a competitive light that has a red flip lens. So far the only response I've gotten to that is a PM showing Wolf Eyes. Same price range and their lens doesn't appear to be anywhere near as nice as the SF.


Someday LED's might be able to compete with incandescent for what I use the 6P or brighter lights for. But they sure as heck aren't there for me yet. Until then?


I encourage you to take me up with the offer and play with the 6P. It may not change your mind, but you might understand that it has its value. It may not have its value for you, but it has its value for some.


----------



## LED61 (Oct 16, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> If you perceive a great deal of defensiveness ... then there must be a reason to it. It is good that you are troubled by this, because I am, too. One way of looking at the mess is to ask oneself where that defensiveness comes from?
> Then you could ask yourself if your other perception, the point about massive and inappropriate reactions to "the slightest critique" might not be correct? Because it would not explain the illogical behaviour of those prominent members you are talking about. There must be more to it than that.
> After those questions ... and maybe some research in the archives ... you might evetnually come to a conclusion that explains this strange and troubling behaviour of some of our elders.
> 
> ...


 


Bernie, I have done research on the subject and this is my first comment on it. I have found numerous threads--even in the HID forum regarding the beast--in which the "bashing" or negative critique tone does not even come close to the tone of the rebutal. I realize Surefire is the gold standard, but when you have a standard to measure against it is also natural for negative comments or bashing to emerge. And that´s fine by me. If the matter goes deeper than meets the eye, maybe there should be a new rule prohibiting threads or posts that bash Surefire.

respectfuly

Alberto


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 16, 2007)

LED61 said:


> Perhaps what troubles me most is the degree of defensiveness with which some prominent members of this forum attack the poster, not the post, when the slightest critique against Surefire comes about.


 
Slightest?....

Threads like this one pop up with annoying regularity. And although this one remained relatively civil, such could not be said of many of the other similar topics. Also, as has already been pointed out, they don't get started by Surefire owners wanting to gloat about how superior their favorite brand is, compared to others. 

It's always someone wanting to know, "Why are Surefires so over-priced?" Or "Why do you Surefire owners just blindly buy anything with Surefire stamped on a light?" 

Thing is, these threads are typically insulting. Not just towards Surefire, but to those of us who choose to spend out hard-earned money on their lights. On other, similar threads, I've seen Surefire owners have their intelligence questioned. Why? Simply because they didn't choose to buy some bright-as-Hell, cheap torch that wouldn't likely survive a 2-foot drop onto a feather pillow. 

You don't see posts by Surefire owners that belittle flashaholics who can't afford to buy Surefires, or who choose not to spend that much on a light. However, I have seen posts from the other side. Posts in which it is claimed that Surefire owners are so quick to defend their lights because perhaps they have Buyer's Remorse. (Surefire model purchased, flashaholic realized the light was not so great, couldn't return it for whatever reason, and thus feels compelled to defend the purchase of a Surefire).

One, that's just a blatant insult.

Two, despite far from being rich, I can honestly say that I have _never_ regretted any of my Surefire purchases. That's just me. If someone has Buyer's Remorse, send the light back or sell it on B/S/T. (Used Surefires aren't exactly very difficult to sell).

The thing is, these threads are often one-sided. (And it's not the Surefire owners making fun of flashaholics who buy cheaper lights). The Surefire bashing has gotten to the point where even critics of the company (such as myself) are getting fed up with seeing them. There are so many of these threads that, if someone was truly interested in why Surefires tend to cost more than other lights, they'd be better served reading through old threads that have dealt with this issue several times over.

Why start a new one?.... Other than to take more pot shots at the company, and its customers.


----------



## who (Oct 16, 2007)

Bror Jace said:


> _"Go to any other forum and you will see: Mercesdes (BMW, Lexus, Porsche) vs. xxx"_
> 
> Yeah, but Mercedes are pieces of $#it! :thumbsdow


This is exactly my point. Bringing up any product name and it will generate strong responses. One might as well enjoy the purchase and do not look back. If it turns out bad then move to a different brand next time.

However, we should always value calm and informed opinions, for example, the one from McGizmo.:twothumbs


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 16, 2007)

Alberto ... Monocrom made some imoprtant points that my posts wanted to make, too, but seemingly failed 

I can deal with people questioning SF over and over, critisizing them, not wanting them, ... whatever, you get it. This is CPF's diversity and it is encouraged.

BUT ... I can no longer stand it that my intelligence is insulted, that I am cursed as rich and arrogant buying SF, that my reasons for buying SF are just discarded and frowned upon as either immoral or just plain false.
I miss tolerance, I miss my good times enjoying my lights. This is actively ruined by tons of SF-bashing threads lately. Most of those doing so seem to favour cheap lights, and maybe this is why the issue always gets clouded in a "SF vs X" way ... where in the end ... it is just SF bashing, and SF-buyer-bashing, too.
I feel a certain mob-mentality there, and frankly, I can no longer accept being chased and laughed at for buying a flashlight.

Do you remember the latest thread about the Beast II? It's title began "Who in their right mind ...". 
You get the idea? And I have seen a bazillion of those threads over the years. Threads that don't wanna talk flashlights, but instead want to insult manufacturers and members alike.

This I cannot accept. 



bernie


P.S.: a new rule won't change a thing. We do not want more rules, but less. A change must come from within, and every change needs awareness as a first step. Which is why I take my time and accept the flak I get with this thread, for example. Awareness. For a better CPF eventually. It is as simple.


----------



## MikeLip (Oct 16, 2007)

You overpaid capitalist! :nana:

I just pulled the trigger (I hope) on not only a Surefire, but an outdated Surefire - a U2. I can't wait! The U2 has been the object of much lust on my part since it came out! Yeah, it has the old Luxeon emitter. Yeah it's several year old tech. But it's Surefire, and it's got what has to be one of the best UIs ever put on a flashlight! And it will by heavens WORK every time I need it to. That counts!


----------



## js (Oct 16, 2007)

McGizmo said:


> . . .
> 
> I would guess that what seems like lagging and lack of being at the "edge" with a companhy like SF is a consideration for stability in product line and life expectancy of an item. SF does not move at the same speed that current LED technology has been changing. Many companies can and do and for them there is opportunity during a time of rapid change.
> 
> ...





monocrom said:


> Threads like this one pop up with annoying regularity. And although this one remained relatively civil, such could not be said of many of the other similar topics. Also, as has already been pointed out, they don't get started by Surefire owners wanting to gloat about how superior their favorite brand is, compared to others.
> 
> It's always someone wanting to know, "Why are Surefires so over-priced?" Or "Why do you Surefire owners just blindly buy anything with Surefire stamped on a light?"
> 
> ...



Indeed. Very a pro pos comments here by McGizmo and monocrom, in my opinion.

And, let me post a link to my SF A2 thread, because one of the main reasons I wrote it was to address questions like the one posted by the originator of this thread:



> "Looking at the catalogue, the lumens aren't that impressive from any of their LED units, nor from incans.. but the price tag sure is impressive.
> 
> Like the A2 Aviator - 50 lumens from the Xenon, and 3 from LED, and retails at $195? C'mon. E2L and others follow the same
> 
> ...



Poor value? Well, that depends on your values, doesn't it? Read my A2 thread for a lengthy response to this sort of comment.

For me, the essence of the problem with questions like this is *LACK OF RESPECT!* And, as monocrom points out above, it usually gets worse. It usually degenerates to the point where those defending SureFire buying choices won't even be taken at our word! The critics know our own motivations and decisions better than we do in some cases! (Or think they do) How freaking crazy is THAT? It usually happens like this:

"Why'd you waste your money on xxxx?" - (insulting question, right? Not a question that implies openness and respect).

"Well, because of the following reasons . . ." - (response ignores the implied insult and tries to calmly and clearly list some reasons and considerations)

"Oh, yeah, of course you'd say that. You have to find some way to justify all that money you wasted so you don't feel stupid for having wasted it."

And, at this point, of course, I tend to get mad and "defensive". Count on it.

And what's even worse is that often these sorts of posts are made by *PEOPLE WHO DON'T EVEN OWN A SUREFIRE - WHO MAYBE HAVEN'T EVEN HANDLED ONE*. And that's just laughable.

You,

can't,

judge,

a light,

by,

a collection,

of numbers found online.

Period.

A light is a good value if you value the light as much or more than you value the purchase price. It depends on the buyer.

For me, the SF A2 is worth significantly more than it's retail price. There is no other light that comes close to being what I need and want in an EDC. And I'm pretty sure that will continue to be the case for years to come.

Poor value? I don't think so. For me, the SF A2 is a godsend. THAT's the "fascination".


----------



## jeffb (Oct 16, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> Wow, quite a response. I guess I ruffled some feathers. Look, I'm not trying to start a war here, but I am entitled to my opinion. I won't respond to each and every sentance you posted. But I'll just say this. I'm in the $100 or less market for flashlights and in that price range SureFire just doesn't offer something for me. And after holding and using several flashlights at a local store that has them available with fresh batteries, I was not impressed. That's just my opinion. I don't need perfect machining. I need "light." You bring up great points about the tech that SF has implemented. Great for SF and SF customers. I can respect that quality. I just can't justify paying for it when my much cheaper lights have worked flawlessly for months being used daily.
> 
> We can agree to disagree. I like all flashlights, I just think some are not worth the money. Maybe if I had more spare cashola I would think differently, but I don't.
> 
> ...


----------



## McGizmo (Oct 16, 2007)

Short Version and in response to the subject of Facination with Surefire:

My facination with Surefire stems from my interest in design and function and form and how new inovation and technologies become manifest in well considered and developed products. Price is of no concern for me as I likely am not in the market for one of SureFire's lights and should one of them actually spurr a desire for ownership, I can either choose to buy one or not but I allow them their right to set a price and understand my right not to buy if the price exceeds my needs or wants. :shrug:

I can appreciate a light without owning it.

~or~

The long ramble:



KingGlamis said:


> Wow, quite a response. I guess I ruffled some feathers. Look, I'm not trying to start a war here, but I am entitled to my opinion. I won't respond to each and every sentance you posted. But I'll just say this. I'm in the $100 or less market for flashlights and in that price range SureFire just doesn't offer something for me. And after holding and using several flashlights at a local store that has them available with fresh batteries, I was not impressed. That's just my opinion. I don't need perfect machining. I need "light." You bring up great points about the tech that SF has implemented. Great for SF and SF customers. I can respect that quality. I just can't justify paying for it when my much cheaper lights have worked flawlessly for months being used daily.
> 
> We can agree to disagree. I like all flashlights, I just think some are not worth the money. Maybe if I had more spare cashola I would think differently, but I don't.
> 
> One final comment... who in the heck drops their flashlight on a regular basis? I try very hard to NOT let that happen. In the past year I have dropped a flashlight twice, and both times each light kept working. So having a light that can take a beating is not an issue for many people.


 
We can agree to disagree and we can even appreciate others points of reference as being different than ours and possibly even relate to those points of reference with understanding. What helps is honest and open dialogue where offense and defense is kept in check.

There used to be even more blatant SF bashing, IMHO, and one could expect it to rear up anytime a new SF offering became the topic. This was often well in advance of the offering becoming available to the members. Wild speculation as well as presumed over pricing were often the foundation.

If and when price is an issue (often the case with SF) I consider it dishonest not to include this issue as an issue and especially if it is a core issue. I have seen an underlying logic in the past where A) the person could not afford a particular SF light and as a result, B) the argument was put forth that the SF light was overpriced and this position would be supported with all kinds of critical comments which basically would undermine the value of said light. It was as if since _I_ can't afford this light this light is not worth its asking price and let me tell you why.... Heck, I can't afford this light plain and simple! It's value to me is consequently not in keeping with its price but its potential or inherrent value, in general, is not determined by my personal budget.

There are numerous threads where I am convinced that posters talk about business, marketing and profits without having any indication of them knowing how business works. SureFire probably has the largest engineering staff of any flashlight manufacturer and this I would guess is by a quantum magnitude! They design and first article all kinds of lights which never make the lineup. This is R&D and this comes with a significant price tag. This expense must be covered in the profits of those items which do get sold or the company won't stay solvent. Fortunately for SF they have a large market and a market willing to pay the asking price on their offerings. I would guess that the percentage in profit on a single item sold that goes to cover this R&D is not so great that the item is priced out of marketability. That is a guess. 

Someone is entitled to claim that a particular light is not worth the asking price. That is their opinion. As to why it is not worth the asking price, this may be purely on the individual's level and based on their financial status or they may have a reason based on excessive profit margins burdening the light or based on what I would call overkill in design and construction relative to the person's need VS the lights potential. One doesn't need a bullet proof light if there aren't going to be bullets flying in their arena of use.

There are legitimate levels of comparison where any Fenix or SmartFire light may be compared to any SureFire light. However there are more specific and comprehensive levels where, IMHO, the grounds for comparison do not support the comparison; apples VS oranges.

Names and marketing hype aside, I believe many if not most of the lights on the market are honest lights and the price is appropriate on the light whether it is $5.99 or $359.99. 

If a member touts the merits of the $359.99 light simply motivated because they could afford this light and in needs of justifying this purchase then to me this is as suspect as the person bashing the $359.99 light on the grounds that they only have a budget that will support the $5.99 light. Both lights are what they are and this must be understood independent of selling price before one then compares intrinsic value and value to person to the light's selling price. Is a light worth its selling price? Well is this question asking the worth to the person or the worth in a general sense?

I could design a light and have some made that cost $500 to manufacture. This would be real and legitimate costs. I could offer the light for $400 which would represent a loss of $100/ light. No one could argue that this light is too expensive in terms of _real_ costs. However the design could be such that the light is a definite POS by anyone's standards and all would agree that the light is not worth its price!

In many of the SF bashing threads I recall through the years, it always boiled down to price but not price compared to real and likely costs of manufacture but price VS an individuals budget and an individuals assesment of perceived value to them, in particular. 

The information I may use to decide whether or not to buy a particular light is hopefully legitimate and logically processed. I may come to CPF to gain additional insight and information with which to make a purchase decision. My decision to buy or not buy does not reflect as a vote either for or against the light itself and if I am to provide an opionion on this light for others, I owe it to them to keep my personal "scale" out of my comments or to be clear and upfront when this scale is applied.

If I have a $100 ceiling on flashlights and this is based on my finances as well as experience that I need not spend more than $100 on a light to get the value and utility that I seek, what does this say about lights that sell for over $100? Do I need to be critical of them to justify the fact that I am not in the market for any of them? Is "out of my price range" sufficient justification and explaination? I think so. Can I evaluate these lights and discuss their merits and short comings and perceived value even though I would not have one? I think so. I have seen many members do just that. I have also seen and read posts where envy of those who can't "play" as well as boastfulness of the fortunate with no budget constraints have clouded and derailed a thread for the others.

Price is a critical element of consideration when a purchase decision is on the table. Price need not even be considered if an item is being discussed and evaluated in terms of design, function and features. For some of us, CPF is strictly about what should we buy and what should we get and this is tempered by our personal budgets. For others, there are interests in these lights well beyond our personal needs and wants and they can be discussed and considered regardless of price and with no concern for price. In many ways, those not in the market for a light are in a better place to discuss and evaluate the light on its own merits and independant of prices.

In the quote above, personal justification is mentioned. Is personal justification required in a discussion on the fascination of SureFire? I don't believe it is and if it *is* in play then it really helps to mention this as has been done now, in the quote above.

There recently was a thread on a Tank Light for sale and from what I could gather, the asking price was really a good deal and of course the tank light would be one most impressive light to be able to play with! I simply am not in the market for a tank light but I could afford to buy this one but not with any strech of the imagination in terms of justification! Now if this thread were a discussion thread and not a for sale thread, would I go into that thread and bash the light because I didn't need or want it? Would I go into the thread and simply state that I didn't need such a light? Is there any value in either of those "contributions" to such a thread? 

When a thread is initiated, it has a chance to grow and have a foundation and structure expand. This is through contributions made by posters. The foundation and structure can also be modified by others as they see a need to do so. It can also be damaged and undermined by destructive contributions. The active and participating members in the thread control its outcome and value to both themselves as well as those who simply read it.


----------



## Numbers (Oct 16, 2007)

Wow the energy expended on this thread!
If any publicity is good publicity SF would be thrilled.

Imagine a thread XXXBrand - what's the facination? 
I dont think there would be almost 3500 views and 200 responses, (and not done yet). 
That alone tells you something.
Taking shots at the top dog is standard practice in any endeavor.


----------



## NickDrak (Oct 16, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> One final comment... who in the heck drops their flashlight on a regular basis? I try very hard to NOT let that happen. In the past year I have dropped a flashlight twice, and both times each light kept working. So having a light that can take a beating is not an issue for many people.


 
I drop my lights all the time. Not on purpose, but it happens quite regularly when you are running around in the streets chasing bad guys. I have used my Surefires as impact weapons when the need arises. Hell, I have even thrown my Surefire at a guy before. So owning a light that can take a beating is a requirement for me, and many millions of other Police Officers, Soldiers, and Firefighters all over the world.


----------



## ringzero (Oct 16, 2007)

Monocrom said:


> You don't see posts by Surefire owners that belittle flashaholics who can't afford to buy Surefires, or who choose not to spend that much on a light.




Au contraire....

I've observed Surefire owners belittling other brands - and by extension the people who own them - many times on CPF.

I've seen posts similar to this: "I buy only Mercedes, Rolex, Sig, and Surefire. If you can't afford those brands, tough luck. Make do with lesser products."

Many, many times, I've seen Surefire owners bragging that their lights are superior to Mags. Duh - I'd certainly hope so, given the huge price difference.

If you go back and check through those Surefire discussion threads mentioned earlier, you'll be hard put to find one without some Surefire owner bashing Mag.

In some ways, Surefire owners remind me of Apple computer owners.

Both companies make expensive products that are among the best, and arguably the very best, in their respective categories.

But, both Surefire and Apple owners often create ill will toward their beloved products, simply by the way they relate to owners of competing products.

.


----------



## pfccypret (Oct 16, 2007)

Yep, equipment takes a lot of punishment in law enforcement. Sometimes you are fighting with someone and drop a light sometimes you just have a lot going on and you simply drop it. Or you can be like me when you are bored, throw it up in the air, make it spin and try to catch it...that tends to lead to dropped lights.

To Nick, I find that hinged cuffs are better for throwing at people....department supplies those..I have to buy my own lights


----------



## alanagnostic (Oct 16, 2007)

Wow, I'm surprised this thread still has legs.

I haven't read all the responses but the fact that so many members will defend Surefire should tell you something. I have several Surefires and I have been happy with each and every purchase. There are many lights by Surefire, however, that I consider too expensive. They simply do not represent good value to me...they don't have the characteristics that I find valuable.

I see this kind of thread on other sites, espcially on gun sites. I happen to like revolvers but I don't have much interest in semi-autos. I can't tell you how many times I've read about how revolvers are "for the oldtimers" or "outdated" or "why would anyone buy a revolver?". I personally think it's funny and I try not to take offense. I know what I like and that will not change because someone else calls me an old foggie (which I'm not:nana. I know a lot of people would think we are all nuts to spend $xxx on a flashlight. Luckily the only person that I really have to answer to is myself. Some revolvers and some Surefires represent a good value to me.

Tolerance of other people's opinions and views is a very good thing. Life is really difficult if you're constantly trying to convince others to believe what you do. I disagree with people everyday of my life...I just don't always tell them or try to convince them how wrong they are. Their position often seems wrong to me but I'm absolutely sure it makes sense to them.

Paraphrasing a quote from someone more intelligent than me..."I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend, with my life, your right to say it." Freedom to speak and disagree with someone else is a wonderful thing.


----------



## MikeLip (Oct 16, 2007)

alanagnostic said:


> I see this kind of thread on other sites, espcially on gun sites. I happen to like revolvers but I don't have much interest in semi-autos. I can't tell you how many times I've read about how revolvers are "for the oldtimers" or "outdated" or "why would anyone buy a revolver?".




Revolvers? WHEELGUNS??? Come on - get with the 19th century, man! 

(says the owner of a half dozen S&W revolvers of various calibers - and ONE semi-auto)


----------



## Lightraven (Oct 16, 2007)

Seeing as a .22 caliber revolver killed one our guys in a gunfight to the death, I wouldn't denigrate it, either.

What people think they know is tested in the crucible of personal experience. This is where the qualities of firearms, flashlights, body armor and the character of men and women is discovered. There are often surprises that challenge conventional wisdom and they can be communicated in a forum, such as this, but because these experiences are well outside the norm, the majority of people will have the opposite opinion.

I drop my flashlights occasionally and see my coworkers do the same. Sometimes from my hand, sometimes from the holster/holder/pocket. When and if Surefire is supplanted by another company in the hands of soldiers, spooks and cops, I'll have to give the issue more thought.


----------



## Qoose (Oct 16, 2007)

Actually, I kind of like the Surefire/Revolver analogy. They may be older styled, but they *will* work.


----------



## joema (Oct 16, 2007)

etc said:


> ...I also have a Fenix L2D-CE that has suddenly...died after 2 weeks of usage....The stupid thing went dead, and did so when I needed it...The "Digital" Fenix interface is really not that good at all... I want one click, not multiple...Better grip is another complaint...I wish Surefire...got off their @sses....Their stuff *was* impressive was back 10 or even 5 years ago when there was no competition and LED meant a 5mm little dim bulb...I submit most of Surefire's success is because of the clients it deals with...


The above shows some reasons Surefire lights are valued highly. They rarely go dead, they have intuitive interfaces, the physical texture and grip is well engineered.

Those may seem like simple things but many of Surefire's competitors haven't figured it out yet. In these respects, it's not Surefire that needs to get moving, but their competition.


----------



## 270winchester (Oct 16, 2007)

Js said:


> You,
> 
> can't,
> 
> ...



that pretty much sums it up.



Qoose said:


> They may be older styled



and you base that statement on......

I suggest you read through this thread before making a blanket statement like that.


----------



## Qoose (Oct 16, 2007)

I was refering to the revolvers when I said older styled. However, if you are saying that Surefires are not reliable, then I have missed something from this thread. 

I've been following this thread since it was created. Some people were saying surefire needed to improve and stuff some newer emitters and such into thier lights. Like you quote, you can't judge a light by numbers posted on the internet, and I do acknowledge that many lights are better in brightness. I got my surefire because I wanted reliability, and a warranty to back it up. If I wanted the latest and greatest in brightness, I'm not going to be looking at Surefire.

What I do want is to be able to throw my light to a horde of zombies, and use its light to find said zombie that ate light, tear out said zombies throat, and stick the light in my pocket.


----------



## Lightraven (Oct 16, 2007)

Yeah, that's all well and good but everybody knows that zombies eat. . .

BRAAAAAAAIIINNNNNSSSSSS!!!!!!


----------



## nerdgineer (Oct 16, 2007)

Qoose said:


> Actually, I kind of like the Surefire/Revolver analogy...


I differ a little. While both a revolver and an automatic both push out bullets, they differ considerably in how they do it whereas a Surefire pushes out photons in _exactly _the same way (part-to-part analagous components) as other typical incan or LED flashlights, so discussions of differences are only in the "quality" realm and not in the "operation" realm.

For example, a revolver can skip past a dud round with a single pull of the trigger, which no automatic can. 

The difference between a Surefire and another representative flashlight is less than that. It is perhaps more like the difference between, say, a classic Colt .45 auto vs the latest plastic DA wondergun (underlug mount for laser, more capacity, and on and on) or (in cars) between a Hummer and all other cars. Just my 2 cents...

For the record, I'm a revolver fan myself (got twice as manywheelguns as semi-autos) but own no surefires (too cheap...).


----------



## Qoose (Oct 16, 2007)

Light Raven:
Fine, I would like to be able to stuff my SF in a zombies throat, to keep him from biting, and so people can find a half decayed man in the dark by the torch in his mouth. Also, I could use it to hold my light while I find my shotgun, and from the SF stories, blast the zombie in the head, pick up the light, brush off the brains, and stuff it in my pocket. 

Nerdgineer: 
That is actually what I'm getting at. A revolver can get past a failure and skip to the next round. If I drop it in the mud, have a dud, or a bullets not in the chamber exactly, I'm not too worried. Another pull, and chances are I've got lead flying downrange. Not even that much of an malfunction. Another pull of the trigger is much easier than clearing many auto malfunctions. I call that reliability.

Now with an autoloader, it's a different story. If I drop it, theres a chance that a bullet will not feed. Tap, Rack, Bang. Even if well drilled, it's not as easy as pull. They have thier advantages, but in reliability, I'd go with a revolver. 

Admittely, I wasn't thinking about pushing photons vs bullets and thier operation. My mind just clicked, SF = reliable = Revolver


----------



## Patriot (Oct 16, 2007)

The Porcupine said:


> I was just about to press "submit reply" on a lenghty reply when this happened:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Maybe she was after your mouse...hehe


----------



## alanagnostic (Oct 16, 2007)

Qoose: That's really the reason I like Surefires and revolvers too. To me Surefire and revolvers both equal reliability. And I know that semi's are reliable too but if I'm in a really stressful situation I don't want to have to worry about releasing a safety or clearing a jam. I just want the most idiot-proof gun and light that I can have....and the most reliable. Semi's are fun to shoot, but I'm trusting my life to my revolver and my Surefire.


----------



## nerdgineer (Oct 16, 2007)

What I was saying is that Surefire does NOT equal revolvers. 

Revolvers are actually _different_ from semi-autos.

Surefires are functionally the SAME as other lights and therefore must base their claims of reliability of based on claims of better quality or statistical proof or some such.
Using the gun analogy, Surefires are more like someone claiming a SIG Neuheusen P-9 is better than a Ruger 9 mm and that's why it costs 3 X as much...


----------



## KingGlamis (Oct 16, 2007)

jeffb said:


> KingGlamis said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, quite a response. I guess I ruffled some feathers. Look, I'm not trying to start a war here, but I am entitled to my opinion. I won't respond to each and every sentance you posted. But I'll just say this. I'm in the $100 or less market for flashlights and in that price range SureFire just doesn't offer something for me. And after holding and using several flashlights at a local store that has them available with fresh batteries, I was not impressed. That's just my opinion. I don't need perfect machining. I need "light." You bring up great points about the tech that SF has implemented. Great for SF and SF customers. I can respect that quality. I just can't justify paying for it when my much cheaper lights have worked flawlessly for months being used daily.
> ...


----------



## jeffb (Oct 16, 2007)

KingGlamis said:


> jeffb said:
> 
> 
> > Well I'm finished with this thread but I felt I should correct you. I was not the original poster of this thread.
> ...


----------



## MeanMike (Oct 18, 2007)

from a LEO's point of view..

Up until recently, there was very few selection of reliable high output small lights with momentary on tailcaps.

Surefires are dependable, bright, and tactical.

Even now, look for a light in the $100 range that can fit on a duty belt (with tons of crap already on it), has a momentary on tailcap, is reliable and bright and has a belt holster which wont allow accidental discharge. There arent many.

In the past year, MANY LEO's have gone with the gladius night-ops and Insight H2X... From what I see my fellow officer's purchasing, these things are definitely biting into surefire's sales.

Momentary on rear tailcap, LED, Multiple levels of output, ease of adjustment, and strobe.... The downside which I dont like is the batteries. I very much dislike the cr123a's. Ive always had extremely bad luck with them (batteries constantly dead when I need it).


----------



## js (Oct 18, 2007)

Errr . . .

MeanMike? Question for you:

Don't most SureFire's use CR123A's?

The only lights that don't are the rechargeable SF's: 8NX, 9AN, etc. and 10X, and I guess there is a rechargeable version fo the 6P.

But, in any case, if you've had bad luck with CR123A's I am willing to bet that you weren't using Duracell Ultra's or SureFire cells, right? I have been using nothing but Duracell Ultra 123's for a year now, and they have been perfectly consistent, not a single bad or even weak cell amoung them. Granted, I've only purchased 120 of these so far, so the sample size isn't huge, but others report the same experience, and disection of various 123 brands by NewBie revealed that Duracells were made somewhat differently, and better, and SilverFox's testing puts Duracell near the top of the heap performance-wise.

Because, one of the advantages of Li-Mn-02 primary cells is *VERY LONG SHELF LIFE*. So if your batteries are constantly dead when you need them, something is wrong, either with your particular batteries, or perhaps with your light (???). If your light were constantly drawing a small amount of power, for the uC interface for example, that would drain your cells dead in short order.

Anyway, in my experience, SF's are dependable, bright, tactical. But so are CR123A's (well, not "bright" exactly. hehe. But you get my point). However, other than a brief trial of Titanium 123's, I've only ever purchased SF or Duracell 123's. (And the Titanium's I bought (30 of them) all died due to high self-discharge rate. -- so, there you go. Makes both our points perhaps?)


----------



## MeanMike (Oct 18, 2007)

js said:


> Errr . . .
> 
> MeanMike? Question for you:
> 
> ...



Yep, surefires use the cr123a's, and I personally dont like it, but i have to make due with whats available (although a drop in cree and 17500's are about to be ordered)

Ive tried the surefire batteries, along with duracells, and numerous other types of brands. There could be a parasitic draw on the light.. but im also much rougher on lights than others. All day long the light, which is mounted on my belt, is being exposed to hours of direct hot sunlight and being struck by passing objects... No idea what it is, and checking for parasitic draw on a light doesnt seem to be as easy as on a car.


----------



## MikeSalt (Oct 18, 2007)

MeanMike said:


> All day long the light, which is mounted on my belt, is being exposed to hours of direct hot sunlight and being struck by passing objects...


 
Just be careful Mike, mistreating those primaries may be the end of you...

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/120888


----------



## MeanMike (Oct 18, 2007)

MikeSalt said:


> Just be careful Mike, mistreating those primaries may be the end of you...
> 
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/120888



theres no other choice when forced to go into a dark house. Going in without a light could just as easily be the end of me.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 18, 2007)

Although my experience with 123A cells isn't as extensive as js,' I've also had excellent results with both the Duracell and Surefire versions. I've used Streamlight's version in my SL models with no problems as well. 

If it's just one of your lights that seem to be draining the cells, it's possible there's something wrong with the light itself.


----------



## sween1911 (Oct 18, 2007)

I think the most wonderful invention that would do the most good to humanity is to create a telecommunications infrastructure that would deliver a mild but memorable electric shock through the keyboard when they submit yet another post on the internet asking why people buy Surefire's because they're expensive and do the same thing that lower priced lights do.

Now THAT would be fascinating.


----------



## bondr006 (Oct 18, 2007)

Where can I send my donation to aid in the R&D and production of this invention???


----------



## DM51 (Oct 18, 2007)

sween1911 said:


> I think the most wonderful invention that would do the most good to humanity is to create a telecommunications infrastructure that would deliver a mild but memorable electric shock through the keyboard when they submit yet another post on the internet asking why people buy Surefire's because they're expensive and do the same thing that lower priced lights do.
> 
> Now THAT would be fascinating.


Why only a _MILD_ electric shock??


----------



## MikeLip (Oct 18, 2007)

DM51 said:


> Why only a _MILD_ electric shock??



LOL! I was thinking the same thing! Maybe connect the mains right to the keyboard and hold the breakers in!


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 18, 2007)

MikeLip said:


> LOL! I was thinking the same thing! Maybe connect the mains right to the keyboard and hold the breakers in!


 
Maybe make it an intelligent system so that legit criticisms can be posted, but blatant bashing gets a shock.


----------



## 22HERTZ (Oct 18, 2007)

ringzero said:


> Au contraire....
> 
> I've observed Surefire owners belittling other brands - and by extension the people who own them - many times on CPF.
> 
> ...



You know, I too was wondering what the hype was for Apple computers. So I bought one. I no longer have a need for a PC. Yeah it was expensive...but it works so seamlessly. Everything works how I want when I want...no driver conflicts, no virus threats, no crashing, or any other crap I got tired of dealing with. So far ALL third party software has worked just as advertised with no conflicts. I love it!


A while ago I was looking into buying a pistol. I read some forums and found people swore by HK, but they were more expensive than most of the competition. Well I went put my hands on a lot of different brands of pistols, but not HK. I decided I kind of liked one but held off for the time. Later while out looking around again I ran across a HK and said "what the hell let me try it out" 
It fit my hand perfect and has never jammed with any brand/type ammo Ive fed it. if you read up on HK you'll see innovation and use of high quality materials.

For a car I own a Honda Accord. My next car will be a Honda (or Acura TL:thumbsup 197,000 miles NO problems other than usual wearables. I took the head off at around 150,000 miles because of a valve lash job gone wrong (my fault) and was suprissed to see the factory hash marks in the cylinder walls, and just a barely noticeable lip at the top proving very little wear. Some people said Honda's are just broken in at 100K miles. I am a believer now. This car been the best car I have ever owned.

Ive found you get what you pay for. Reliability counts for a lot. I also place a high priority on things that "just work"

Seems like whenever I cheap out it either doesn't work everytime, or I have to fiddle with it, or I had to settle for something I wasn't particularly happy with.

I find the high price things that most complain about are the things that just work, are reliable, usually have high resell value and simplify my life by knowing when I need it to work it will.

I don't understand the cheap mentality. I understand needing something and not having much money so you get what you can, but some people cheap out and deal with crap that isn't reliable has no resell value and is a hassle to deal with..:shrug:


----------



## Patriot (Oct 18, 2007)

> nerdgineer said:
> 
> 
> > The difference between a Surefire and another representative flashlight is less than that. It is perhaps more like the difference between, say, a classic Colt .45 auto vs the latest plastic DA wondergun (underlug mount for laser, more capacity, and on and on)quote]
> ...


----------



## 22HERTZ (Oct 18, 2007)

1911=jammomatic in my experience


----------



## MikeLip (Oct 18, 2007)

22HERTZ said:


> 1911=jammomatic in my experience



Then there is something wrong with either the magazine, feed ramp or the ammo. Or some combination of the three . 1911s aren't real happy with anything but ball unless some work is done on them.


----------



## BSCOTT1504 (Oct 18, 2007)

Monocrom said:


> Maybe make it an intelligent system so that legit criticisms can be posted, but blatant bashing gets a shock.


 
:goodjob:


----------



## Lostification (Oct 18, 2007)

Hi everyone. This is my first post on the forums and this is the first thread that caught my eye. Now, I'm not sure if this is against the rules or anything, but this is the reason that I have been carrying a Surefire. Please remove it if it is against the rules.







However, I've found that Surefires tend to be rather large for every day carry. They are better for hiking, camping, and more tactical use such as for police, emt, fire, and military. But now I am looking at ?Fenix? LED lights that would fit on my keychain and fit on my budget. Something that would be easier to carry everyday at work and such.

This is how I see it, different lights for different uses, to each there own. I don't see what there is to argue about. :thumbsup:


----------



## KeyGrip (Oct 18, 2007)

Lostification said:


> This is how I see it, different lights for different uses, to each there own. I don't see what there is to argue about. :thumbsup:



That is the very best way to look at it. :welcome: And unless that image is hotlinked to another site, it should be okay to use.


----------



## MikeLip (Oct 18, 2007)

Just got a Surefire after a long absence from them. I have been buying Fenix, Olight, Tiablo and a Dereelight. The SF in question is Ye Olde U2(e). Man, this thing may be several years dated tech, but it's a ROCK. I had forgotten how completely solid a higher end SF is. No it's not a thrower like my Olight T20 Q5 or Tiablo A9S. But it sure lights a room. The operation is like a piece of precision machinery. The Dereelight tailcap switch is closest to the U2s, but even it falls just a hair short. Everything is solidly built and seems like it ought to last until the sun burns out.

I think my next toy just has to be an L1.


----------



## Lostification (Oct 18, 2007)

KeyGrip said:


> That is the very best way to look at it. :welcome: And unless that image is hotlinked to another site, it should be okay to use.


 
Thank you for the welcome, sir/mam! 

The image is hosted on photo bucket, but I'm not sure what you mean. If it's ok, it's ok, and I'll keep using the same method to post pictures. PM if it's not ok.

Again thanks.


----------



## KeyGrip (Oct 18, 2007)

You're welcome (it would technically be "sir"). Photobucket is fine. Hotlinking is linking directly to an image on another site. Third party hosting sites like photobucket are fine.


----------



## DM51 (Oct 18, 2007)

Lostification said:


> Hi everyone. This is my first post on the forums...
> 
> This is how I see it, different lights for different uses, to each there own. I don't see what there is to argue about. :thumbsup:


It is interesting that it is someone with his very first post on CPF who gets this 100% right. 

Welcome to CPF, Lostification!


----------



## Lostification (Oct 18, 2007)

DM51 said:


> It is interesting that it is someone with his very first post on CPF who gets this 100% right.
> 
> Welcome to CPF, Lostification!


 
Haha, honestly... I've just seen this kind of case before regarding types of knives. 

From forum moderating experience, forums really are wonderful things if we can all come to not necessarily an agreement, but an understanding.

Have a good one guys! :thumbsup:


----------



## Bolster (Oct 18, 2007)

*Report from Nellis AFB re SureFire*

Greetings all. I am just finishing some training at Nellis AFB in Las Vegas, and this is a report of what I heard from our soldiers regarding flashlights. 

During my lecture I mentioned I’m a budding flashaholic, and the soldiers laughed. Then they said, almost in chorus, “SureFire!” and one guy said his SureFire put out 60 lumens of light, enough to temporarily blind a person. I said that I could not afford a SF yet, but was hoping to soon, and in the meantime I had this Fenix L2D R100. I reached in my bag and turned it on (advertised as 175 lumens) and shown it around, and the soldiers squinted and said, “Whoa, that’s bright!” So I passed it around. About half the soldiers played with it, the other half were disinterested, and just passed it along. 

Then the guy who said that his SF put out a blinding 60 said that the lens on it cracked as soon as he hit the ground in Iraq. Another chimed in and said she had picked three SFs out of the sand while she was there, because soldiers toss them when they stop working (burned out bulb, is all, and she replaced the bulbs and they started working again. Imagine that, the sands of Iraq littered with SFs!). I tried to buy one of these from her on the spot, and we’ll see if she will actually sell. I hope she does. 

Then a guy in the front who was apparently in the procurement line said that a whole batch of SFs were paid for and never arrived, and he had to contact the BBB before he could shake them loose, and then they finally arrived in Iraq, but now he was permanently sour on SF. 

And then one guy said that SFs with 123 batteries gave no warning of the batteries going low, they just suddenly stop in the middle of whatever you’re doing, and a bunch of soldiers agreed with that. 

So the allegiance to SF lights was a mixed bag in my class, with positive sentiments prevailing. Just thought you’d be interested to hear what I heard from the guys and gals on the ground. That’s the report from Nellis AFB.


----------



## Bolster (Oct 18, 2007)

*Lostification*

Hey Lostification ... nice to see you here, knifebro!


----------



## bondr006 (Oct 18, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> Do you remember the latest thread about the Beast II? It's title began "Who in their right mind ...".



I really, really regret starting that thread Bernie, and I sorely apologize for doing so. Yes, I was once a member of the SF bashers club....and then Bernie enlightened me by gifting me with a L1 CREE. Now I check B/S/T regularly for good deals on SF's. Once you have had one in your hand, it is very hard to be satisfied with something less. I have been at both ends of the flashaholic spectrum now, and can assuredly say that I would trust mine and my family's lives to nothing less than a Surefire. Sure I have some other nice lights to play with, and some of them even come close to SF quality(Notice I said close), but I never leave the house without at least one of my Surefire lights on my person.


----------



## ringzero (Oct 19, 2007)

22HERTZ said:


> You know, I too was wondering what the hype was for Apple computers. So I bought one...Ive found you get what you pay for. Reliability counts for a lot. I also place a high priority on things that "just work"




I'd agree that if you want a computer that "just works" - and don't mind paying a somewhat higher price - Apple is probably the way to go.

Many computer enthusiasts avoid Apple computers for a variety of reasons which I won't get into here.

But, those aren't people who put a very high priority on "just works." Typically they're interested in higher performance and have 'roll your own' computers, or else very expensive modded machines.

.


----------



## pfccypret (Oct 19, 2007)

This debate seems to center around

Group A: New technology is cool...I want the brightest light

Group B: Gee a bright light is good...but I need something I can absolutely depend on.

Group C: Lights are cool...I like one of everything.

Seems like everything has a valid point. And it's all good.

No?


----------



## alanagnostic (Oct 19, 2007)

I'm definitely in Group B. I'll bet a lot of members here can fit themselves into one of those categories.


----------



## Patriot (Oct 19, 2007)

pfccypret said:


> This debate seems to center around
> 
> Group A: New technology is cool...I want the brightest light
> 
> ...


 
Nice wrap-up pfccypret! That sums thing up pretty well. I'd have to add a version footnote to some Group A'ers though,

Group A 1.1: New technology is cool and I want the brightest light. If it isn't the brightest but yet it cost more..it must be an indication of insanity.

I think I'm somewhere between B and C group myself. I seem to like every light that has at least a reasonable amount of quality.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 19, 2007)

*Re: Lostification*



Bolster said:


> Hey Lostification ... nice to see you here, knifebro!


 
You guys from BF?

Yeah, I put buying new tactical folders on hold for two reasons:

1- Concentrate on buying new lights. 

2- Found a way to use Emerson's Wave feature with enough reliability to stake my Life on it. Got 3 folders that feature it.... I'm good for now. :thumbsup:

*~~~~~~~~~~~~~*

Regarding Surefire Incas:

Yeah, they *do* turn off suddenly when there's not enough juice in the 123A cells to power the light. (The cells are far from dead, they still work in my Inova X5 after pulling them from my Surefires. Bit dim, but still lights up).

I have a neat little nylon / velcro belt pouch (very tiny) that securely holds two extra 123A cells. It's a homemade thing that's professional quality. Made by a former employee of a B&M store that sells Surefies here in NYC. 

I've heard of folks who just tape 2 extra cells around the barrel of their inca Surefires. 

One easy solution is to buy LED Surefires. My L4 dimmed to the output you'd get from a stock mini-Mag with a fresh bulb and batteries, when the cells no longer could give the light full power. (Yeah, not great. But definitely better than the light just shutting off while you're using it). 

For the troops, Surefire's *L* series is probably a better bet than the Inca models.


----------



## boosterboy (Oct 19, 2007)

ringzero said:


> In some ways, Surefire owners remind me of Apple computer owners.
> 
> Both companies make expensive products that are among the best, and arguably the very best, in their respective categories.
> 
> ...




Apples and Oranges.

Surefire is made in America, with government contracts, with something called an existent Customer Service department. They are for a no-questions asked RMA policy. A majority of Surefire owners also depend on their light for work/survival, so they DON'T care about rechargeables setups or unpractical brightness levels, they care about reliability and the ability to quickly swap in spare parts and spare batteries.
Surefire can't endorse Lion setups to regular people, you might end up with exploding flashlights or houses being burned down, their lights have to be idiot proof. (Yes, i know lithium primaries can blow up too, but that's the same odds as you getting into a car accident).

Apple stuff is the same stuff as i86 machines, different operating systems, it's all made in China or Taiwan. The only difference is that Apple controls the entire manufacturing process to insure their hardware work WITH ONE set of software, while every other operating system works with thousands of combinations of hardware. Material wise, it's the same electronics.

People need to stop judging/attacking others for what they spend their money on, it's their money, let them do what they want.


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 19, 2007)

bondr006 said:


> I really, really regret starting that thread Bernie, and I sorely apologize for doing so. Yes, I was once a member of the SF bashers club....and then Bernie enlightened me by gifting me with a L1 CREE. Now I check B/S/T regularly for good deals on SF's. Once you have had one in your hand, it is very hard to be satisfied with something less. I have been at both ends of the flashaholic spectrum now, and can assuredly say that I would trust mine and my family's lives to nothing less than a Surefire. Sure I have some other nice lights to play with, and some of them even come close to SF quality(Notice I said close), but I never leave the house without at least one of my Surefire lights on my person.



No need to apologize at all. A lot of good (=tolerance and open mind) have come out of this one. I am sorry for mentioning specifically this thread, but is was the only title I had ready to use in my memory ... 

bernie


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 19, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> No need to apologize at all. A lot of good (=tolerance and open mind) have come out of this one. I am sorry for mentioning specifically this thread, but is was the only title I had ready to use in my memory ...
> 
> bernie


 
Here's two off the top of my head....

1- Ultrafire C2 vs. Surefire L4
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/173189

2- Fenix P3D vs. Surefire E2e
(Sorry, can't find link.... I recall that one got particularly bad).


----------



## ringzero (Oct 19, 2007)

boosterboy said:


> Apples and Oranges....Surefire is made in America, with government contracts....Apple stuff is the same stuff as i86 machines, different operating systems, it's all made in China or Taiwan....




This is all true, but it isn't really germane to what I wrote about Surfire and Apple.

Both companies offer a lineup of among the most expensive, but also among the very best, products available in their particular market segments, irregardless of where those products are manufactured.

Some - not all - owners of Apple and Surefire products exhibit a similar set of attitudes that can be really annoying to those who choose not to buy Apple or Surefire products.




boosterboy said:


> People need to stop judging/attacking others for what they spend their money on, it's their money, let them do what they want.




Wonderful advice. CPF would be a more harmonious place to visit if everyone took this advice to heart.

.


----------



## SilverFox (Oct 19, 2007)

Hello Bolster,

I would suggest that you expand your training to include some basic flashlight use training...

Most of the SureFire lights last about an hour on a set of batteries. With a little training, it is very easy to notice the difference in brightness and whiteness of the beam, signaling that the batteries have run down. From bright white to slightly dim is a gradual progression. I will admit that from slightly dim to shut off can be very rapid.

However, it critical applications I would not think of going out with partially used batteries any more than I would go out with a half empty magazine in my gun. The secret to using flashlights in critical applications is to constantly feed them fresh batteries, and to have spare lamps.

It should be standard practice to change the batteries with fresh batteries before every critical use. Batteries are cheap, and fresh batteries are cheap insurance against the light crapping out at an inopportune time.

It is my humble opinion that people get hung up on trying to get the last bit of energy from their cells. If you want to collect partially used cells and use them around camp in non critical applications, great, but for critical use, change the batteries and start the mission with fresh cells.

Tom


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 19, 2007)

SilverFox said:


> .... It is my humble opinion that people get hung up on trying to get the last bit of energy from their cells. If you want to collect partially used cells and use them around camp in non critical applications, great, but for critical use, change the batteries and start the mission with fresh cells.
> 
> Tom


 
You just made a great case for using rechargeable lights. Especially since most can be "topped off."

Ironically, I'm not really a fan of recharegeable lights. :shrug:


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 20, 2007)

No ... a good case against rechargeable lights. A partially drained primary-fed light can be re-fueled in the field everywhere ... a rechargeable cannot, or at least causes way more trouble to do so.
I love primaries.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 20, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> No ... a good case against rechargeable lights. A partially drained primary-fed light can be re-fueled in the field everywhere ... a rechargeable cannot, or at least causes way more trouble to do so.
> I love primaries.


 
I do too! ....

But must admit that there are certain lights that I'd prefer as rechargeables. Such as anything over 400 lumens that isn't likely to be taken camping or too far from a car's charger.

Daily use, still prefer primaries. My 2D Maglite w/ MagLED served me well for several months at work.


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 20, 2007)

I know that there are situations that need rechargeables. But I as an armchair flashaholic do not need them, they are nothing more than trouble.
And I admit that I like not liking them :nana:


bernie

P.S.: except maybe when replacing the batts in the SF M6 :sick2:


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 20, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> I know that there are situations that need rechargeables. But I as an armchair flashaholic do not need them, they are nothing more than trouble.
> And I admit that I like not liking them :nana:
> 
> 
> ...


 
LOL ! 

Did you see the thread about the poor guy who's M6 blew up after using non-Surefire 123A cells?

Ironically, the barrel is too thick on the M6 for me to hold onto it securely. I have at least a couple of cases of 123A Surefires and I can afford an M6. (Wish the runtime was a bit longer with the HOLA though). But not likely to buy one, and not because of cost!


----------



## asdalton (Oct 20, 2007)

Monocrom said:


> Did you see the thread about the poor guy who's M6 blew up after using non-Surefire 123A cells?



I thought that it was a _Pelican_ M6.


----------



## joema (Oct 20, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> No ... a good case against rechargeable lights. A partially drained primary-fed light can be re-fueled in the field everywhere ... a rechargeable cannot, or at least causes way more trouble to do so.
> I love primaries.


My HDS U60 works fine on both primary CR123A and various types of rechargeable RCR123A cells -- both protected and non-protected. If a rechargeable cell goes dead in the field, the light works fine on primary cells.

If HDS can do this, I don't see why Surefire cannot.

Maybe some of the CPF old timers can corroborate this -- I vaguely recollect years ago when the U2 was being designed, a Surfire person sought feedback on CPF to ensure the U2 would work with both 18650 and 2x CR123A cells. The light was later redesigned to essentially eliminate the 18650 option. Does anybody remember that?


----------



## R11GS (Oct 20, 2007)

asdalton said:


> I thought that it was a _Pelican_ M6.



SF M6 died...now what?


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 20, 2007)

asdalton said:


> I thought that it was a _Pelican_ M6.


 
Actually, I think it's both!

As in, two different threads, each dealing with an M6. One from Pelican, the other from Surefire. Can't seem to find the Pelican thread. But I do recall reading a thread about a Pelican model that blew up. (I think the owner mixed a partially depleted cell and a new one in the tube).


----------



## NickDrak (Oct 20, 2007)

R11GS said:


> SF M6 died...now what?


 
That was a faulty battery related issue. It was not an issue related to the quality or any type or malfuntion relating to the light at all. Poor example to try and make a negative point, if that was indeed you intent.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 20, 2007)

NickDrak said:


> That was a faulty battery related issue. It was not an issue related to the quality or any type or malfuntion relating to the light at all. Poor example to try and make a negative point, if that was indeed you intent.


 
Can't speak for R11GS, but it seemed to me that he was simply correcting another CPFer who thought I had mistakenly mentioned a Surefire M6 blowing up, instead of a _Pelican _M6. 

You are correct that it was a battery issue that caused the SF M6 blow-up. But the light *did* blow up because of those batteries. I don't believe R11GS was trying to suggest it was the light itself that was faulty. All he did was provide a link to the thread in question. 

Now if he had posted, "Surefire M6 sucks! Here's why..." and then posted the link, I could understand why you'd get a bit upset.


----------



## R11GS (Oct 21, 2007)

Please don't accuse me of something I was *not* doing...






I was only referring the link. 




Monocrom said:


> LOL !
> 
> Did you see the thread about the poor guy who's M6 blew up after using non-Surefire 123A cells?
> 
> Ironically, the barrel is too thick on the M6 for me to hold onto it securely. I have at least a couple of cases of 123A Surefires and I can afford an M6. (Wish the runtime was a bit longer with the HOLA though). But not likely to buy one, and not because of cost!


 


asdalton said:


> I thought that it was a _Pelican_ M6.


 



R11GS said:


> asdalton said:
> 
> 
> > I thought that it was a _Pelican_ M6.
> ...


 



NickDrak said:


> R11GS said:
> 
> 
> > SF M6 died...now what?
> ...


----------



## Bort (Oct 21, 2007)

Thanks to the original poster for starting this thread. After following for several days, I now have a Surefire L1 in the mail headed to my house!


----------



## nyyankeefen (Oct 21, 2007)

Bort said:


> Thanks to the original poster for starting this thread. After following for several days, I now have a Surefire L1 in the mail headed to my house!



I did the same..I've had mine for 2 days now, went hiking with it last night. You won't be dissapointed


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 21, 2007)

The SF L1 looks so innocent, has conservative specs and on a white wall, the beam is not top notch. But boy ... outside ... this light has ground coverage almost like my U2. They did an awesome job with that optic ... perfect beam.

The U2 initially had battery tubes that could accomodate 18650, had then a plastic insert to prevent it and are now machined so that no 18650 would fit, not even after a diet.
Why ... I dunno. SF didn't explain it to us. And they didn't consult with us upon 18650 compatability either.

bernie


----------



## nyyankeefen (Oct 21, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> The SF L1 looks so innocent, has conservative specs and on a white wall, the beam is not top notch. But boy ... outside ... this light has ground coverage almost like my U2. They did an awesome job with that optic ... perfect beam.
> bernie



The L1's high (65 lumnes) is as bright at my p3d on turbo (IIRC 160 lumens) its one of the first edition cree's, not a rebel


----------



## joema (Oct 22, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> ...SF didn't explain it to us. And they didn't consult with us upon 18650 compatability either...


I'm positive I remember a thread where during the U2 design phase (maybe beta testing phase) a Surefire employee was discussing U2 battery compatibility. The CPF feedback was make sure an 18650 will fit, and I vaguely recollect Surefire making some changes to provide this.

Maybe it was a dream. Would be interested if any other old-timers remember this or anything similar.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 22, 2007)

joema said:


> I'm positive I remember a thread where during the U2 design phase (maybe beta testing phase) a Surefire employee was discussing U2 battery compatibility. The CPF feedback was make sure an 18650 will fit, and I vaguely recollect Surefire making some changes to provide this.
> 
> Maybe it was a dream. Would be interested if any other old-timers remember this or anything similar.


 
Not an old-timer.... But sad to say that SF probably doesn't care about CPF opinions. We're not a large enough customer base for them. If they offered more rechargeable models, 18650 use wouldn't matter. 

Is a clip-carried rechargeable too much to ask for? :sigh:


----------



## js (Oct 22, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> The SF L1 looks so innocent, has conservative specs and on a white wall, the beam is not top notch. But boy ... outside ... this light has ground coverage almost like my U2. They did an awesome job with that optic ... perfect beam.
> 
> The U2 initially had battery tubes that could accomodate 18650, had then a plastic insert to prevent it and are now machined so that no 18650 would fit, not even after a diet.
> Why ... I dunno. SF didn't explain it to us. And they didn't consult with us upon 18650 compatability either.
> ...



Bernie,

I've been thinking about getting an L1 at some point. Which one do you have? The newer one with the TIR?


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 22, 2007)

Yes, the newest generation. The TIR produces a round and relatively large spot that is just right for anything within a fwew dozen yards. The spill is there for the near field, but in medium distances it is the sport only that provides the field of vision. Very interesting optic indeed. Just not that pretty on a white wall.
I am usually a reflector-guy ... but this optic ... never will I exchange it.
bernie


----------



## McGizmo (Oct 22, 2007)

_JS_,

I have one of the new L1's as well and like Bernie, I think it is the most impressive (for my needs and wants) TIR optic I have seen but I admit to not having been exposed to many of the current lights. In addition to an optic that gives a beam I like, considering that the L1 uses a contemporary high flux LED, drives the LED at reasonable and efficient current levels in regulation at both outputs(I believe) and has been reduced some in length for its single CR123 package, I think the new L1 is one of the best choices one can make if seeking a production, high quality, flashlight. If friend or family (none of which are tactical types) were ask me for a recomendation for a good quality, all around light, the L1 would probably be top of the list. Again this is based on my personal experience and I am ignorant of many other solutions presently available; especially the good bang for the buck imports.


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 22, 2007)

That said, I am giving my parents and brother one for X-mas. They were impressed, too, and have aging Surefire's.


----------



## JimmyM (Oct 22, 2007)

It seems this is a "why can't you see that a Ford truck is better" type discussion. Basically, everyone is discussing "value" which is purely subjective. Personally, I don't think SureFires are all that valuable to ME. These are all opinions based on one persons value judgement.
Honestly, if I were going into "harms way" i'd want reliability over lumens. But the most dangerous thing I do is play with my kids without wearing a cup, therefore my value judgement is different. DX lights are just fine for me.
I think I'll start a "GMC trucks are better than Chevy trucks" thread somewhere.


----------



## NoFair (Oct 22, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> No ... a good case against rechargeable lights. A partially drained primary-fed light can be re-fueled in the field everywhere ... a rechargeable cannot, or at least causes way more trouble to do so.
> I love primaries.


 
That is what is so great about the old U2, HDS and a select few others: One can use both

I really dislike having less than 50% left in my light so I used to have heaps of half drained cr123s lying around. Now it is 18650s and 16340s for everything and cr123s as spares. 

BTW: Will the new SF L1 accept rechargeables? I'm kind of tempted


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 22, 2007)

JimmyM said:


> It seems this is a "why can't you see that a Ford truck is better" type discussion.



No, it isn't. Maybe you should re-read the thread to be able to comprehend a few of the problematic points of this whole "issue".

bernie


----------



## 270winchester (Oct 22, 2007)

the new Cree Surefires have turned out to be some of the most utilitarian lights I have yet to own. I have the L1 and the E1L. Their efficiency is pretty darned good even when being compared to CPF-level lights.

The L1 in particular is nothing short of spetacular. a year and half ago if we wanted a light that puts out 65+ lumen for 1.5 hours, we would have to drive a Lux III with 2 or 3 cells, or a lux V with 3 cells, now a little one cell light can do that. All that for 135 dollars retail makes it a bargain(remember how much HDS U85s were going for?)

I concur with Bernie and Don that the new TIR optic in the new Cree SFs are great. Then again I have always been a big fan of TIRs, to the point that I wished the newer high-end lights can be compatible with TIRs, I guess I'm just weird like that. I like the evenly distributed beam one can get with TIRs andn ot waste too much light in spill, which small lights tend to do.


----------



## bouncer (Oct 22, 2007)

JimmyM said:


> DX lights are just fine for me.



Hey if DX lights do it for you and you feel thats all you need or can afford or whatever all the power to ya. Me I've been in situations where my surefire has saved my butt used as small impact weapon lighting dark alleys keeping undesireables away from me not too far outside Boston so I kinda like my surefire.


----------



## JimmyM (Oct 22, 2007)

The first 30 posts appeared to be a discussion of why SureFires ARE worth so much money. "If you're in harms way...", "Just feel one in your hand" and the like. The word "worth" carries a lot of personal value judgement. I didn't bother reading the following 8 pages of posts.
Please delete my post if you feel is it was in response to a misinterpretation of the entire thread versus the the first page impression.
Sorry, dude.



Kiessling said:


> No, it isn't. Maybe you should re-read the thread to be able to comprehend a few of the problematic points of this whole "issue".
> 
> bernie


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 22, 2007)

JimmyM said:


> The first 30 posts appeared to be a discussion of why SureFires ARE worth so much money. "If you're in harms way...", "Just feel one in your hand" and the like. The word "worth" carries a lot of personal value judgement. I didn't bother reading the following 8 pages of posts.
> Please delete my post if you feel is it was in response to a misinterpretation of the entire thread versus the the first page impression.
> Sorry, dude.



How do you expect to participate in a discussion while not having read 8 of the nine pages of the topic? As a general piece of advice ... if you do not bother following a discussion, then please do not bother responding.

If you are involved in this "issue" then this thread is a good read as it stayed civil and was somewhat productive, too.

bernie


----------



## JimmyM (Oct 22, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> How do you expect to participate in a discussion while not having read 8 of the nine pages of the topic? As a general piece of advice ... if you do not bother following a discussion, then please do not bother responding.
> 
> If you are involved in this "issue" then this thread is a good read as it stayed civil and was somewhat productive, too.
> 
> bernie


OK. Got it.


----------



## bondr006 (Oct 22, 2007)

Well Bernie....That first L1 sure did a number on me. It did not take me long at all to realize just what value the Surefire lights had in them. It wasn't all that long ago that my collection consisted totally of Fenix and cheap DX lights. Since then, I have sold all but one of my original collection, plus items from a few other hobbies to fund the new collection you see in my signature. Not all my new lights are Surefire's, but the Surefire's are by far my most prized and will remain in my collection long after the others have been sold, given away, or traded away for something else. The other lights are nice lights, and not the normal cheap DX lights, but the Surefire's are the ones that I would depend on to guard mine and my family's life with in any situation. 

I have two L1's now. Both have been modded by Milkyspit. The first one is a milky smoothie that is a great all round utility light. The second one is an L1 on steroids. I kept the TIR optic, and had Scott put in a CREE Q4WC emitter along with a MadMax circuit that has boosted the output to 160+ lumens. It is also focusable from a wide spot down to the nice blindingly bright spot that the TIR optic gives it. What a throwing little pocket rocket this thing is. I just can't seem to put it down. It just amazes me what a little 1 x 123a cell light can do. This thing rivals or out does most of my 2 x 123a cell lights...the Tiablo A9S Q5 being the exception. 

I also love my U2 Ultra. How black and sleek that light is. It is my favorite of all my lights, as no others surpass it in utility. It is my go to light for searching for things, walking around the house after everyone is in bed, and night time walks. It has a beautiful creamy white beam with a barely noticeable donut that can only be seen on a white wall. The feel of it in my hand is hard to describe. It is just fits with a feel of substance and balance, like a fine tuned piece of equipment. Best of all I got it for $160.00 in mint condition over at CPFMP.

Last but not least is my L2. Another fine, well thought out piece from Surefire. I also had this one modified by milkyspit. He put an SSCP4 USWOH emitter in it with a SOB1000 circuit, pushing its output to 200 lumens. Talk about a wall of light....this is another SF on steroids.

I love all my Surefire's, and will be watching for new models in the future. I have decided that I like the 2 level lights the most (my U2 being the exception), and will be likely to collect any new SF 2 level models they come out with. Some people just can't see the value of the Surefire over other lights....(most of whom that have never owned or even used a Surefire). This may be subjective(I think in reality, open minded, honest, and objective), but when you get your hands on one and feel the superb craftsmanship, exquisite engineering, well thought out design, the aggressive knurling, ease of use, quality and substance, and just the sense of well being knowing that you have a light you can depend on in any given situation......couple that with a life long, no questions asked warranty, and truly World Class Customer Service....*Then you will know* why those of us who do own Surefire's believe there is no better value in the hand held lighting market today. It's as the saying goes..."A real no brainer". I never leave home without one....

Rob Bond

My babies...


----------



## djblank87 (Oct 22, 2007)

bondr006 said:


> Rob Bond
> 
> My babies...


 
:bow::bow::bow:! Nice stock of SF's you have there :thumbsup:


----------



## Numbers (Oct 22, 2007)

Nice Pix!
Anyone have any idea if the upgraded L2 is going to get any shorter. In the photo it certainly looks more than the length of one battery longer than the new L1 (which I believe is shorter than the prior version).


----------



## KeyGrip (Oct 23, 2007)

Numbers said:


> Nice Pix!
> Anyone have any idea if the upgraded L2 is going to get any shorter.


 
The new L1 is shorter because of redesigned circuitry, so I assume they are going to give the new L2 the same treatment.


----------



## js (Oct 23, 2007)

Don and Bernie and others,

Thanks for your comments on the new L1. I think I may be SOLD! on it. I just love that two-stage LOTC, the same one used in the L2 and A2, both of which I have.

My L2 is a thing of beauty. For my taste it has the perfect tint LED beam. It is soft/warmish with absolutely no artifacts that I can see. I love that it runs for 18 hours on low, and is 2/3's as bright as my Arc LSH, which only runs for 2.5 hours. And the high beam, of course, is stunning. All flood, but stunning nonetheless.

So, I really like the sound of this new L1 w/ TIR. Thanks again!


----------



## The Porcupine (Oct 23, 2007)

Interesting turn this thread took! Another new SF L1 owner signing in here and it is an outstanding little light for sure!


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 23, 2007)

Jim ... just to make sure you know ... the L1 is not a light for a white wall hunter, the beam dies have some artifacts that are not critical in real life usage, but they do appear on a flat white surface.
bernie


----------



## bondr006 (Oct 23, 2007)

Here is a shot of what the L1 beam looks like on high with the TIR optic. I like it a lot. Seems as though the SF TIR is very efficient...

I think I need my sunglasses...


----------



## DM51 (Oct 23, 2007)

OOOOH!!! Does the beam really make those pretty flower-shaped artifacts?


----------



## bondr006 (Oct 23, 2007)

Dang! I was hoping no one would notice....

Really....I have no white walls in my house, so the only thing I could find was a roll of white patterned wrapping paper. I really need to find a roll of matt finish white paper.


----------



## js (Oct 23, 2007)

Bernie,

Not a problem fo me! Despite my comments about my L2, I'm really not a white-wall hunter. On the contrary. Heck, I don't even mind my SF A2 low beam! But I *do* appreciate overall TINT of the beam (which is what I love about my particular L2), and the CCT of an incan, for example.


----------



## MikeLip (Oct 23, 2007)

DM51 said:


> OOOOH!!! Does the beam really make those pretty flower-shaped artifacts?


----------



## bondr006 (Oct 23, 2007)

Hope you guys are having a good time with that...:nana:


----------



## bondr006 (Oct 23, 2007)

Well jeeesh!! I hate to admit it but, now I feel about as dumb as a rock. I took all those pictures, and I just now figured out that the other side of the wrapping paper is plain white...


----------



## da.gee (Oct 23, 2007)

All this talk of SureFire fascination. Ordered an E2L.


----------



## this_is_nascar (Oct 23, 2007)

Damn. I just stumbled across this thread and it's resparked my interest in the L1, so I did what anyone in my shoes would do. I ordered one of them.

Don-Bernie, howdy guys. I hope life has been treating you and your families well.


----------



## nyyankeefen (Oct 23, 2007)

this_is_nascar said:


> Damn. I just stumbled across this thread and it's resparked my interest in the L1, so I did what anyone in my shoes would do. I ordered one of them.
> 
> Don-Bernie, howdy guys. I hope life has been treating you and your families well.



Isn't it funny how this thread caused so many people to purchase new surefires....like they forgot what they liked about the brand and someone had to remind them.....
new L1 for me....my favorite surefire so far and my new edc:twothumbs


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 23, 2007)

Hey TIN ... nice to see you around again! :wave:
Long lost comrade 

bernie


----------



## McGizmo (Oct 23, 2007)

Ray,
What Bernie said! 
Thanks for the kind words. The sun rose this morning as did both I and my wife and I was able to see it so all is well here. Best to you and yours as well.

On topic, one facination with SF is how it can be the spark to get folks from different walks and lands to join in dialog! :nana:


----------



## Patriot (Oct 23, 2007)

bondr006 said:


> Dang! I was hoping no one would notice....
> 
> Really....I have no white walls in my house, so the only thing I could find was a roll of white patterned wrapping paper. I really need to find a roll of matt finish white paper.


 

Haha!!  The flowers were the first thing that I noticed. I was going to rib ya, but saw that someone else already did...lol.

Hey, can I ask you what size those GID rings are around all your surefires heads and where you normally purchase them? Thanks


----------



## bondr006 (Oct 23, 2007)

I got them from Sigman HERE at MarketPlace. I got the 19mm ones for my 120P, but they fit well on my SF bezels. He has many different sizes, and they are only 6 for $2.00 shipped.

Rob

BTW....The L1 beam shot has no flowery artifacts now wiseguys....:nana:



Patriot36 said:


> Haha!!  The flowers were the first thing that I noticed. I was going to rib ya, but saw that someone else already did...lol.
> 
> * Hey, can I ask you what size those GID rings are around all your surefires heads and where you normally purchase them?* Thanks


----------



## Hitthespot (Oct 23, 2007)

Now I've been known to shoot from the hip, and after this reply I'll wear my vest, but It seems we over look some things. While I whole heartedly believe there is a lot of creedence in Monocrom's comments on unproven technology there is another side to that story. First let me say I own two Surefires and like them both. They have served me well. I bought them sometime ago when they "were the brightest" along with being one of if not the best light for a personal EDC. Times are a changing my friends. Surefire is not the only kid on the block. When other companies start making brighter, stronger, less expensive lights someone better pay attention. I remember many years ago one of the big three executives staitng that Japanies car companies were not competition. Especially their customer base. Well we all know how that turned out. If Surefire continues to have older technology, be more expensive, and not offer the latest features as there available, and others will offer all this at a less painfull price, look out. And who ever said CPF is not their main customer base, whaooooooooo. When customers talk you better listen. I ready plenty of posts hear stating just what I'm talking about. Today's CPF'er may be tomorrows Police Captain or tomorrows General. And if you don't think Wolfeye, Olight, Fenix, Jet, Novatec, and on and on, is already cutting deeply into Surefire, your kidding yourself. So I say what's the facination you ask. Well it's quckly disappearing.


----------



## MikeLip (Oct 23, 2007)

Things were just too calm here! 

Tiablo maybe is up there with Surefire in terms of build quality. Fenix? I have two, they aren't even close. Dereelight? I have a CL1H. Nope, not there. But they have potential. Some of the lights are brighter? Yeah, my Tiablo A9S blows my Surefires away. Some lights are brighter, some aren't. But put your life on the line it's gonna work quality? Not yet. 

And now back to the show!


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 23, 2007)

Hitthespot said:


> Now I've been known to shoot from the hip, and after this reply I'll wear my vest, but It seems we over look some things. While I whole heartedly believe there is a lot of creedence in Monocrom's comments on unproven technology there is another side to that story. First let me say I own two Surefires and like them both. They have served me well. I bought them sometime ago when they "were the brightest" along with being one of if not the best light for a personal EDC. Times are a changing my friends. Surefire is not the only kid on the block. When other companies start making brighter, stronger, less expensive lights someone better pay attention. I remember many years ago one of the big three executives staitng that Japanies car companies were not competition. Especially their customer base. Well we all know how that turned out. If Surefire continues to have older technology, be more expensive, and not offer the latest features as there available, and others will offer all this at a less painfull price, look out. And who ever said CPF is not their main customer base, whaooooooooo. When customers talk you better listen. I ready plenty of posts hear stating just what I'm talking about. Today's CPF'er may be tomorrows Police Captain or tomorrows General. And if you don't think Wolfeye, Olight, Fenix, Jet, Novatec, and on and on, is already cutting deeply into Surefire, your kidding yourself. So I say what's the facination you ask. Well it's quckly disappearing.




Well, I hope that some other finally catch up. I want more lights that are pleasing to me.

Honestly ... do you think that those defending SF and critisizing some issues CPF has right now in regards to discussion quality (that would be me, for instance  ) are hostile towards other high quality lights? And defend SF no matter the cost or reality?
Well, rest assured, this is not the case.


The lights are what they are and should be treated as such, and we should be talking about lights and not about the state of mind of the members buying them.

bernie


----------



## this_is_nascar (Oct 23, 2007)

I've always had certain beefs with SF. My prior comments are well documented and can be found by Searching, so I won't rehash them here. It all comes down to what you're looking for and if you're an "Average Joe User" or a "connoisseur of lighting products". At the end of the day, the milling and craftsmanship of a SF light is 2nd to none.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 23, 2007)

Hitthespot said:


> Now I've been known to shoot from the hip, and after this reply I'll wear my vest, but It seems we over look some things. While I whole heartedly believe there is a lot of creedence in Monocrom's comments on unproven technology there is another side to that story. First let me say I own two Surefires and like them both. They have served me well. I bought them sometime ago when they "were the brightest" along with being one of if not the best light for a personal EDC. Times are a changing my friends. Surefire is not the only kid on the block. When other companies start making brighter, stronger, less expensive lights someone better pay attention. I remember many years ago one of the big three executives staitng that Japanies car companies were not competition. Especially their customer base. Well we all know how that turned out. If Surefire continues to have older technology, be more expensive, and not offer the latest features as there available, and others will offer all this at a less painfull price, look out. And who ever said CPF is not their main customer base, whaooooooooo. When customers talk you better listen. I ready plenty of posts hear stating just what I'm talking about. Today's CPF'er may be tomorrows Police Captain or tomorrows General. And if you don't think Wolfeye, Olight, Fenix, Jet, Novatec, and on and on, is already cutting deeply into Surefire, your kidding yourself. So I say what's the facination you ask. Well it's quckly disappearing.


 
The last time I heard the expression about how Times are changing, was in a certain song..... Looks like they didn't change all that much. 

Nope! Surefire certainly is not the only game in town. Especially if Brightness, Cost, (and to a lesser extent) Runtime are more important to you than a light that is likely to survive everything expect a close-range shotgun blast. The part about other companies making stronger lights?.... Please tell me who! I'll honestly go out and get one of their models! But chances are, its a company sorely lacking in other aspects of overall quality. 

American automakers weren't just beaten by better cars from Japan.... they gave up the car market when Japan began to show signs of trying to seriously compete! The Big Three chose to concentrate on truck sales instead. Why did they give up on a significant share of the market? I have no clue! Seems stupid to me! But yeah, the Big Three stopped competing on a serious level; with the exception of a handful of models like the Mustang and the Corvette.

Once again, if you offer the latest features on lights *just* as they become available, you are offering unproven technology. Technology that might fail. Normally, no big thing. Unless you're a soldier, police officer, or SWAT team member who *needs *his chosen light to work, no matter what! Surefire would actually lose a significant chunk of their customer base, if they did what you are suggesting. 

I said CPF is not Surefire's main customer base. Other CPF Regulars agree with that statement.... some with rather large Surefire collections. With the exception of Wolf-Eyes, all of those companies you mentioned above are not competing for Surefire's customer base. And none have the same overall quality. You left out the one company who's lights argueably come the closest to Surefire, in terms of overall quality.... Pila. And to be kind, their distribution is less-than-great. But even Pila falls short in other aspects. A lot of companies come close.... Inova, Pentagonlights, and yup; Wolf-Eyes. But they still fall short in some way, when it comes to overall quality. 

I don't like many of Surefire's business practices. So believe me, I have been looking elsewhere! Unlike GMC and Chevy trucks, Surefire doesn't have a twin.


----------



## Hitthespot (Oct 23, 2007)

Amen! I agree with you sir. My main point is no company can afford to be complacent and I'm sure you can agree with that.


----------



## Spence (Oct 23, 2007)

*etc*......He just doesn't get it and never will. You can always see it in their attitude. Just write him off and let him go be happy with his budget prices and inflated lumens, after all, I'm sure he's disappointed with the fact SF's don't offer strobe and SOS.


----------



## 270winchester (Oct 23, 2007)

never mind


----------



## Patriot (Oct 24, 2007)

Hitthespot said:


> Amen! I agree with you sir. My main point is no company can afford to be complacent and I'm sure you can agree with that.


 
I just wanted to step in and say that it's really not accurate that Surefire has been "complacent." Many times from our perspective it may seem that way but not only are they not that far behind, but they're innovative and designing new products. I think much of their time over the past several years has been spend developing products for the military. Often, if a person really takes a hard at their objection to Surefire it turns out that it's the LED technology. The newest LEDs are brighter and more efficient. Surefire could certainly get their hands on a few thousand Q5s and start soldering them into lights if they desired too. The thing is....they don't want to....yet. They've always tested the heck out of everything before releasing new products and my guess is that they'll continue doing the same thing. Most of their customers are more concerned with reliability and consistency than they are with being the newest or brightest. 

We CPFers are enthusiasts. We tend to go a bit overboard with the brightest and most efficient just like a computer gamer goes a little crazy when a new video card comes out. He has to have it because he wants the fastest thing around .... even though his current card runs his games just fine he want a few extra frame per second, like some of us want a few extra lumens. For most of the world a decent video card is enough just like for most of the world a decent flashlight is enough. When an organization has a requirement to take the flashlight to the next level it's usually going to be in the department of maximum reliability since every LED light these day is already bright. Enthusiasts have to remember that that see things differently that the way that most of the consumer worlds sees things. We all have to admit that we're all a bit fringe around here. If the rest of the world knew that we got all hyped up about 6% increase in output or runtime just because we like lights they'd think we were all nuts.


----------



## Patriot (Oct 24, 2007)

Spence said:


> *etc*......He just doesn't get it and never will. You can always see it in their attitude. Just write him off and let him go be happy with his budget prices and inflated lumens, after all, I'm sure he's disappointed with the fact SF's don't offer strobe and SOS.


 
Not that etc can't defend himself, but I thought you should know that he was seeing both points of view when he made his last post. I don't know if saying that "He doesn't get it and never will" is all that constructive. It sounded to me like he wasn't happy with the failures that he was having with brand x light and who knows, he might decide reliability is worth the price.



> etc's quote: A light is for illuminating things, and reliably so, and if you can get a Mini-Mag sized unit to throw 200 lumens, that's impressive. Lumens is a high criteria on the list for me - but I admit lumens aren't any good if the unit itself breaks, as happened to me.


----------



## LED61 (Oct 24, 2007)

Monocrom said:


> Once again, if you offer the latest features on lights *just* as they become available, you are offering unproven technology. Technology that might fail. Normally, no big thing. Unless you're a soldier, police officer, or SWAT team member who *needs *his chosen light to work, no matter what! Surefire would actually lose a significant chunk of their customer base, if they did what you are suggesting.


 

I'm not sure if I'm buying into this. I bought a McGizmo XR-19C when the cree first came out--very bright, very efficient--I'd trust it and its performance any day just as much as a Surefire.


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 24, 2007)

Yeah, and this is good. BUT ... McDon is a one-man-show doing cusotm stuff, he can adopt way easier than a big company ... AND ... imagine if there was a problem with the Cree and it would have degenerated in 100 hours of use ... that could be a major armageddon for SF. So they have to be sure before selling a new technology. And even then mishaps happen. Think L1 ... :sick2:




> *etc*......He just doesn't get it and never will. You can always see it in their attitude. Just write him off and let him go be happy with his budget prices and inflated lumens, after all, I'm sure he's disappointed with the fact SF's don't offer strobe and SOS.


This is another example of an ad hominem attack attacking the poster and not the post, or at least mixing the two. Even if one tended to feel like this and even if it could be true ... it is unacceptable to post it. 
Be constructive, attack the post and not the poster. And if you have to say something to the poster or about the poster ... be polite and friendly.
On the long run it will pay off. For all of us.

That is what we used to call our "friendly CPF atmosphere". I'd like that back. 

bernie


----------



## lightemup (Oct 24, 2007)

:grouphug: +1 with Bernie.

In related news I haven't been on much in the last couple of nights, been too busy playing (cough, I mean configuring / testing  ) with my x300 and Cree L1. I'm detecting a little jealousy in the camp, my L4 and x200a don't seem impressed with the new kids on the block :touche: :wow: 

I should be putting a couple of lights on b/s/t to fund the purchases, but I really don't want to. Wish me luck in holding my ground


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 24, 2007)

LED61 said:


> I'm not sure if I'm buying into this. I bought a McGizmo XR-19C when the cree first came out--very bright, very efficient--I'd trust it and its performance any day just as much as a Surefire.



It's already been mentioned. But yeah, huge difference between lights made by a company; and those handmade by one guy with a reputation as a genius for unwavering attention to detail. 

Imagine how much better each Surefire would be if they were all handmade. (Ignoring the fact they'd be far more expensive with far fewer owners).


----------



## MikeLip (Oct 24, 2007)

bondr006 said:


> Well jeeesh!! I hate to admit it but, now I feel about as dumb as a rock. I took all those pictures, and I just now figured out that the other side of the wrapping paper is plain white...


----------



## DM51 (Oct 24, 2007)

[mince] I do wish he hadn't changed that nice pretty picture he did with the lovely flowers on it [/mince]


----------



## bondr006 (Oct 24, 2007)

Fine, fine, fine....Glad to see you guys are still finding the humor in this....but I'll be damned if I'm changing the paper back...:nana:


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 24, 2007)

-


----------



## LED61 (Oct 24, 2007)

True that the Don is a one of a kind guy, and I´m very pleased to be the owner of one of his fine lights, but I haven´t heard of a terribly big number of Cree´s or Rebels failing have you ? Tailcap switches have failed much more than LED´s --to be of cocern anyway. I´m still not sold, there must be other reasons.


----------



## bondr006 (Oct 24, 2007)

Am I seeing double, or are Monocrom's posts 297 and 293 the same?


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 24, 2007)

LED61 said:


> True that the Don is a one of a kind guy, and I´m very pleased to be the owner of one of his fine lights, but I haven´t heard of a terribly big number of Cree´s or Rebels failing have you ? Tailcap switches have failed much more than LED´s --to be of cocern anyway. I´m still not sold, there must be other reasons.



I don't think Surefire has as many tailcap issues as sometimes gets implied. The switches on all of mine are reliable.

It could be that Surefire wants to be absolutely certain that the newer LEDs are 100% reliable in their lights, before adopting them across the board. Til then, there's always the L1 Cree.


----------



## bondr006 (Oct 24, 2007)

I have not had any of my switches malfunction either.


----------



## McGizmo (Oct 24, 2007)

Patriot36 said:


> ........ Surefire could certainly get their hands on a few thousand Q5s and start soldering them into lights if they desired too. The thing is....they don't want to....yet. .........


 
Not to put you on the defensive here because this is not my intention at all but I believe SF got a hold of high flux Crees before others and in fact undermined the chance of others at getting these high flux Crees! I know I had a confirmed order for Q5's before Cree had even publically anounced their existance (talk was of Q2 and Q3 back then) and I ultimately didn't receive shipment because the yield was less than expected and all of it went to SureFire. This information came to me from my domestic source for these LED's and there was no reason for it not to be accurate. 

I believe a lot of the beefs with SF here on CPF boils down to lead times in development, production, tooling and due to marketing paths. If we want something now and can't have it, bummer!! SF does not communicte with CPF in terms of their road map, R&D and other areas which by default become speculation. Oh well.

Ironically, for SF to be more proactive and come to market quicker, they would have to reduce the process times at many levels and this could result in less than 100% tried and true production parts. Heck, you could see things like faulty switches surface after a short useage time if there were indeed some bug in them. If a market won't allow for extensive testing of final product then the market itself becomes part of this final testing phase. And yes, my comments in this paragraph are also part of the speculation mentioned previously.

Competition is competition by definition. If new competition sets new parameters or standards (or lack of standards for that matter) then the game alters and is influenced by consumer support of the new competition. If lower prices are a driving force then competitiors need to cut corners and costs to compete. If timing to market is a driving force then competitors need to quicken their processes to compete.

Back to the facination with SureFire. Well it's facinating to me to see all of the new LED advances and the stability in the market because of this is compromised and upset. I find it interesting to see how established and top end companies like SureFire navigate in this mine field. I believe this year early on there was a press release by Cree anouncing a partnering with SureFire and more recent there was a similar press release with Seoul coming out as partnering with Cree.

I was mentioned in this thread a few posts back. Did any of you catch any Cree or Seoul press releases stating they had partnered with me? :nana: For that matter, were there press releases mentioning any of the other quick to market flashlight manufacturers who have been feeding the CPF hunger for latest technologies?

"the times they are a changin'" was mentioned here. Another line from that song: "and the first one now will later be last.." 

How does a company known for its stability and overall quality in product and service fare in times of high flux and instability? Well how is SureFire doing? Not just how is SureFire satisfying us on CPF but how are they doing overall in the "big picture"? Certainly the number of competitors has grown big time! I also suspect with the advent of LED's that the market for LED flashlights itself has grown significantly.

Presently and certainly on CPF there is success for lights which have very very short horizons of life expectancy (not that the light will fail but its market acceptability will). Some companies and smaller individual concerns are geared to perform in these short lived programs and opportunities. Larger companies with annual product lines for instance simply must design and produce items with longer market cycles. :shrug:

Whether some of you allow it or not, I believe SF has more time, energy and funding devoted to R&D than any other flashlight company. They don't follow as a rule. They lead with their successes and lick their wounds with their failures while others benefit by not following the mistakes. For SF to continue in this vein, the market must support their efforts with purchases of their product. I believe this is obvious. 

I sugest that those of you not inclined for what ever reason to buy a SF light not come down too hard on those which do buy SureFire. I believe to varing extents, many of the alternatives to SureFire now available in the market are a result of design and engineering funded and created by SureFire. If the "art" is to continue to grow and improve then there needs to be more R&D and this needs to be funded somehow.

One way of measuring the strength of a person or company is to see how well they can continue on after making a blunder or mistake. poop happens and the true mettle can be viewed after it happens and how it is dealt with and overcome. To some extent: "That which won't kill you will make you stronger"?

SureFire won't succeed in the market because of a few blind fan boys on CPF nore will it fail because of a few blind critics on CPF. 

I for one am curious as to what they will be doing tomorrow and the month after. I consider them pioneers and explorers in portable illumination tools and I find their work facinating as well as instructive. They claim "smaller, better, brighter" and with more competition the bar gets raised. I don't expect them to respond tomorrow to a new light that was brought to market yesterday by someone quick in the field but I do expect that in a longer run all that is good and sound in the art will be carried on in future product offerings. 

My main concern is that price alone put a pressure on the niche and top end lights to the point that they suffer a loss in quality based on cost alone. I think the planet needs the relief of longer life cycle items and less replenishment and disposable goods. Solid state lighting could easily succumb to the short cycles of other electronics and this is a boon to sales and manufacturers but it is a burden on resources.

I would enjoy seeing the revolution in solid state lighting bring more lights into the citizens of the world who presently have none. It would be a real shame if landfills see a growth in disgarded flashlights. I don't know if planed obsolescence is a consumer myth or manufacturer's intent. It is ironic when the market itself defines obsolescence and not the useful life of the product itself. In a free market, the consumer is king but that doesn't mean the consumer is a good and benevolent king! There is responsibility and accountability here but is it accepted? :shrug:


----------



## NA8 (Oct 25, 2007)

Can you assemble a "surefire" out of aftermarket parts now ? 

McClicky tailswitch, some tube, a stainless steel head (was that for a surefire?) and a Malkoff dropin ?


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 25, 2007)

NA8 said:


> Can you assemble a "surefire" out of aftermarket parts now ?
> 
> McClicky tailswitch, some tube, a stainless steel head (was that for a surefire?) and a Malkoff dropin ?


 
Yup!

But..... You *will* need an actual Surefire head. (All the other pieces are built around it). :thumbsup:


----------



## NA8 (Oct 25, 2007)

This won't do the job ? 

http://www.lighthound.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=3079


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 25, 2007)

NA8 said:


> This won't do the job ?
> 
> http://www.lighthound.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=3079


 
I like Lighthound. They got some good $#^%!

But without an actual Surefire head, all you've got is an imitation Surefire Lego. You can use that head on a Surefire body for a rugged-as-Hell light. But you need at least something on the light, like the head, to be the genuine article.


----------



## Patriot (Oct 25, 2007)

McGizmo said:


> Not to put you on the defensive here because this is not my intention at all but I believe SF got a hold of high flux Crees before others and in fact undermined the chance of others at getting these high flux Crees! I know I had a confirmed order for Q5's before Cree had even publically anounced their existance (talk was of Q2 and Q3 back then) and I ultimately didn't receive shipment because the yield was less than expected and all of it went to SureFire. This information came to me from my domestic source for these LED's and there was no reason for it not to be accurate.
> 
> I believe a lot of the beefs with SF here on CPF boils down to lead times in development, production, tooling and due to marketing paths. If we want something now and can't have it, bummer!! SF does not communicte with CPF in terms of their road map, R&D and other areas which by default become speculation. Oh well.
> 
> ...


 

No problem at all Don. That's the difference between your insider knowledge and my speculation. That's a very interesting fact about Surefire and how they did indeed get the high flux LEDs....they just didn't put them in lights yet. I guess that's just another piece of evidence that Surefire is always ahead of the game even when some people believe that the product doesn't reflect they're ahead in sheer light output. Who knows, maybe we will see a Q5 in an L4 or L2 one of these days.


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 25, 2007)

My guess is you see a Q5 already in their L1 and E2L. Those got impressice specs ...
Just a IMHO guesstimate


----------



## mossyoak (Oct 25, 2007)

i just bought a cree e2l tonight because of this thread.


----------



## bondr006 (Oct 25, 2007)

Well, I'm getting ready to order an 6P Defender and put this drop-in in it. Should satisfy my facination with bright LED's for awhile. :naughty:

My 5 year old little man has become quite a Jr. Flashaholic. He EDC's my very first LED, a River Rock 1xAA 1 watt. Carries it in his pocket everywhere. Well, I've decided to get him the new 6P LED and put a Z59 tail cap on it to make it a clickie for him. What do you guys think? Is a 6P LED a good first SF for an aspiring flashaholic? I showed him a picture of it, and he's real excited about it.


----------



## McGizmo (Oct 26, 2007)

This guy was a tadpole a couple weeks ago:

















Once one is interested, the word spreads..






For those who hunt in the night like these baby toads..........


----------



## da.gee (Oct 26, 2007)

mossyoak said:


> i just bought a cree e2l tonight because of this thread.



I'm two days ahead of you. Reading this thread made me buy one too. I'm holding it in my hot little hands right now!


----------



## DM51 (Oct 26, 2007)

McGizmo said:


> This guy was a tadpole a couple weeks ago:


 


LOL, give him a couple more weeks, and he'll be like THIS:


----------



## NA8 (Oct 26, 2007)

mossyoak said:


> i just bought a cree e2l tonight because of this thread.



Damn good flashlight.


----------



## bondr006 (Oct 26, 2007)

Well, upon further consideration and contemplation...I've decided to get the little man an E1L Outdoorsman instead. It will fit his hand better, it takes only one battery(less battery's to change), still has a run time of 10 hours, and after showing him a picture of it....he said, "that looks like your L1. I want it!" So, I think the E1L will be a better light for my little man. What do you all think? The 6PL or the E1L?


----------



## alanagnostic (Oct 26, 2007)

It just amazes me this thread is still active. It looks like quite a few members have rekindled their interest in Surefire lights and bought some new ones. I have to say I'm considering an L1 myself. Everybody keeps bragging about it.:twothumbs


----------



## Bort (Oct 26, 2007)

Kiessling said:


> My guess is you see a Q5 already in their L1 and E2L. Those got impressice specs ...
> Just a IMHO guesstimate


I received my new L1 yesterday, and it is very bright, the spot is much brighter than my Fenix l2d ce p4. If it has a Q5 in it, it wouldn't surprise me. 
I very happy with the L1. It is really an impressive piece of workmanship.


----------



## MikeLip (Oct 26, 2007)

alanagnostic said:


> It just amazes me this thread is still active. It looks like quite a few members have rekindled their interest in Surefire lights and bought some new ones. I have to say I'm considering an L1 myself. Everybody keeps bragging about it.:twothumbs



The new L1 is amazing. You won't regret it!


----------



## R11GS (Oct 26, 2007)

bondr006 said:


> Well, upon further consideration and contemplation...I've decided to get the little man an E1L Outdoorsman instead. It will fit his hand better, it takes only one battery(less battery's to change), still has a run time of 10 hours, and after showing him a picture of it....he said, "that looks like your L1. I want it!" So, I think the E1L will be a better light for my little man. What do you all think? The 6PL or the E1L?




I was going to respond to your first post and suggest that the 6P, while a very nice and rugged light might be just a bit too large for not only a five year old's hands, but his pocket!



So my own opinion is that a single cell light is likely much more appropriate. But I almost hesitate to suggest that perhaps it would also be better to stick with a AA light vs. a 123. Personally, I am not paranoid at all about single cell 123 lights, but I still might consider a AA more appropriate for a five year old due to the remote but real potential for lithium trouble; even if it is simply battery disposal or carrying a spare. But that would likely move you away from SF...


----------



## R11GS (Oct 26, 2007)

McGizmo said:


> This guy was a tadpole a couple weeks ago:......


Now how could that toad have possibly been a tadpole just a couple of weeks ago? Impossible! Tadpoles are little guppy like creatures that swim around and breath water. They are like little fishes. Toads are fellows that get big, jump around on the ground and breath air! It would take..... magic! A kiss from a princess? What are you suggesting??? You cannot possibly believe that anyone on this forum is that stupid! This must be baiting! Moderators! Stop him! He's trying to start a flame war in this otherwise civil thread!


----------



## McGizmo (Oct 26, 2007)

Patriot36 said:


> No problem at all Don. That's the difference between your insider knowledge and my speculation. That's a very interesting fact about Surefire and how they did indeed get the high flux LEDs....*they just didn't put them in lights yet*. I guess that's just another piece of evidence that Surefire is always ahead of the game even when some people believe that the product doesn't reflect they're ahead in sheer light output. Who knows, maybe we will see a Q5 in an L4 or L2 one of these days.


 
_*Highlighting*_ by me.

I don't know what the LED's ultimate destiny is or was but do you know for a fact that these LED's haven't been installed in lights presently on the market? One of the real short comings with SF at least from a CPF point of view is the lack of information provided by SF. If we assume that a manufacturer hasn't done something unless they instruct us to the contrary then we will be making false assumptions and often.

Back to the facination aspect, I don't take SF lights apart anymore for a number of reasons and not limited to the fact that often now, they are not conducive to dismantling. However when I would take them apart I was often impressed with the design and method of construction as well as materials and components used. Many of us could care less what is "under the hood" but that doesn't alter the fact that there is something under the hood and what is there may be quite elegant and sophisticated.

I recall some times when the SF A2 was under the scrutiney of some CPF members and being compared, on the surface (IMHO), to some much less sophisticated and complex, import lights. One need only take an A2 head apart and look at the machining and milled pockets in it with its integrated reflector and try to find another example of such a well designed and precision head. Is it necessary to integrate the reflective surface into the head itself? No. Are there advantages in doing so? Yes. On the same vein, one only need take a SF X200 and gut it and check out the billet body to appreciate the level of complexity and clever engineering.

I would venture that discussions of SF run into trouble with proponants as well as detractors on CPF once price and cost enters the topic. Obviously this is a real consideration for buyers as well as would be buyers but the lights have their features and qualities which can be considered and compared without addressing the aspect of price. In some ways, it is easier to understand and appreciate an item for what it is before one filters its attributes on a cost/price analisys. For me, my facination with SF is independent of price considerations because I don't really care off hand how much they cost. I can view the lights and try to fathom their design and features and functions with no thought about purchase. If I deem my interest is such that I would like to own one then I can decide if the price is in line with my desire and interest. My facination with flashlights is priceless. My holdings of flashlights does have a price involved and the justification is purely and simply my business and no one elses. :shrug:


----------



## Patriot (Oct 26, 2007)

McGizmo said:


> _*Highlighting*_ by me.
> 
> I don't know what the LED's ultimate destiny is or was but do you know for a fact that these LED's haven't been installed in lights presently on the market? One of the real short comings with SF at least from a CPF point of view is the lack of information provided by SF. If we assume that a manufacturer hasn't done something unless they instruct us to the contrary then we will be making false assumptions and often.


 
I definitely don't know what the LED's (Q5's) ultimate destiny is or war. The comment that you changed to bold probably should have had a question mark behind it instead...oops. Sometimes I'm probing and not realizing that I'm asking questions while doing it. Yes, for me to assume that high flux LEDs are not in retail Surefires right now is pure assumption. They very well could be couldn't they? It never even crossed my mind before you eluding to the possibility. I remember when Surefire first used the Luxeon and it was well known because they advertised that fact. It seems these days they're a lot more secretive to what they're using. I'm sure someone, maybe yourself even, will open up Surefire Crees soon and we'll all know what they're using. Not that it really matters but as flashoholics and Surefire enthusiasts, it's kinda neat to know.


----------



## tvodrd (Oct 26, 2007)

I quit following this thread a few days ago, but came across a couple-week-old article from the Orange County Business Journal that someone clipped for me at work. It was to the effect the "Private Equity" folks have infused/are infusing $50 Million into SF, which will be used for expanding production and increasing development. Some tidbits from frequently poor recollection:

Approximately half their sales are to our military and large LEO groups like the FBI. Other half to "sportsmen" and LEO's (and CPF. :green: )

Their sales are $50-150M/yr. (It's a secret.)

A light can be 3 years in development.

They are spread over 5 facilities. (I've only been to two.)

They have ~500 employees


I'd have heavily linked this post, but after signing up on line, find that the archived article would cost $3, and I don't know what the print subscription costs. Again, I have the clipped article at work- forgot to bring it home. I suppose I could scan and email it to interested friends next week. It is some serious insight on SF!

Larry


----------



## ShortArc (Oct 26, 2007)

Larry,
If it isn't too much of a pain to scan, I would certainly be interested. 
Willem.


----------



## tvodrd (Oct 26, 2007)

Hi Willem, Just bought the article, and pasted it into notepad. I theenk I have your email. 

Edited the post, and the article is 2 months old! (Memory- the second thing to go!)

Larry


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 26, 2007)

Please PM me the article, Larry.

I would appreciate it.


----------



## sgtgeo (Oct 26, 2007)

I like SF, had a 6P way back like everyone else. Used a "Quick 2 see" mount to put it on my Rem. 870.

That was the only SF I had for years. Then I found this site, my first few "new" lights were" ARC LSH-P, ARC AAA, ARC AAA RGB, and a SF E1e with KL1 head. This head was my first mod. I removed the crappy bluish emitter and put in whatever was hot at the time can't remember now.

These first lights were all top of the line quality lights, I still have them all. I now buy a variety of lights Fenix included, I have several. IMHO the latest greatest Fenix lights are GREAT to impress the non-flashlight people. When they see a 100+ lumen beam shoot across a field seemingly out of you closed fist they are baffled as if you have some alien technology or something.

That being said Fenix will never be Surefire or ARC

I have a SF M951 with a 1 cell extender and a CREE drop in on my AR15. Brighter the the SF incan LA's better throw and 3 hour run time. AND if i drop the AR and it lands right on the light i bet it will stillwork fine. I somtimes feel if i drop a fenix the complex UI will get screwed up or it will stop working all together.

Bottom line Fenix is great all around flashlight, Surefire is a hardcore tool that lights up


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 27, 2007)

Thanx Larry :thumbsup: :kiss:  !!
bernie


----------



## ShortArc (Oct 27, 2007)

tvodrd said:


> Hi Willem, Just bought the article, and pasted it into notepad. I theenk I have your email.
> 
> Edited the post, and the article is 2 months old! (Memory- the second thing to go!)
> 
> Larry


 
Got it Larry!
Thanks...dinner on me when you finally make it East Coast.
Cheers.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 27, 2007)

Thanks for the PM, Larry.

Much appreciate it. :thanks:


----------



## bondr006 (Oct 29, 2007)

Well, the E1L came for my son today. You should have seen his eyes light up when I opened that box and gave him his first Surefire. He is a true flashaholic. He is sleeping with the light, and did not let go of it for a minute today. What a neat little light it is. Tiny little thing that packs a real punch. I just ordered the 6PD w/BOG 230 Lumen Drop-in. I cannot wait to get my hands on that one. Anyway...a few pics of the new E1L...














....................................................................................................................*The *
...................................................................


----------



## perungestal (Aug 23, 2008)

People say that white-walls shot and output isn't SF ess, but hello, isn't that some kind of quality to?

Buying a SF would mean the ultimate light with an outstanding output, perfect buildquality and perfect white-wall shots, anything else is a shame imo, especially for the pricetag.

Imo I would rather get my self a tk10 or likewise. Great buildquality (very thick tube and surroundings) and excellent output.

It's like replay-jeans and a pair of levis, same quality, different pricetag (and ofc all about those kids who wanna have exatcly the same clothes as everybody else. 12 or 17, doesn't matter.)

I woudn't say no to a SF though, as long as I don't pay for it.


----------



## Tempest UK (Aug 23, 2008)

perungestal said:


> People say that white-walls shot and output isn't SF ess, but hello, isn't that some kind of quality to?



That's a good question.

Is the perfect white tint that so many white-wall hunters crave _really _such a good thing? Why is it good? What practical difference does the tint of an LED make, when LEDs in general wash out colour? Surely that problem is only worsened by a completely white tint.

Completely disregarding the merits of certain tints, perhaps the more important point is that most people who use SureFires on a daily basis, for work or otherwise, probably wouldn't notice. How the colour of the beam appears on a white wall is simply a non-issue, and speaks nothing of the quality of the light. 

Furthermore you've made the common mistake of judging SureFire in the context of CPF. If CPF didn't exist, or if CPF had never existed and no CPF member had ever bought a SureFire, then SureFire probably wouldn't even notice. We're an extremely small fraction of their customer base, and what matters to CPFers might go completely unnoticed by the people that better represent SureFire's target customers. 

Whilst we're an extremely small group, we have developed extremely high standards and increasingly unreasonable demands. This seems to be particularly true when it comes to many members' views of SureFire. 



> Buying a SF would mean the ultimate light with an outstanding output, perfect buildquality and perfect white-wall shots



Why? I never thought that's what buying a SureFire meant. Why do SureFire have to be "perfect" and "the ultimate"? More to the point, why do they have an obligation to be "perfect" and "the ultimate" by your standards, such as those that expect perfect white tints? They don't. 

Companies with big reputations tend to cook up high expectations, but this seems to have been blown completely out of proportion on CPF when it comes to SureFire. 

Regards,
Tempest


----------



## perungestal (Aug 23, 2008)

Tempest UK said:


> That's a good question.
> 
> Why? I never thought that's what buying a SureFire meant. Why do SureFire have to be "perfect" and "the ultimate"? More to the point, why do they have an obligation to be "perfect" and "the ultimate" by your standards, such as those that expect perfect white tints? They don't.
> 
> ...


Not by my standards, but when comparing to other lights. A SF should imo outstand i felix in runtime, buildquality and brightness when compared to similar products except the pricetag. 

I can fully understand people who buy those things, classical, US made etc but I'm missing one thing, the overall ownage.

I can refer to carmakers. I love my 80's porsche, though you can modefy a ford to do the same thing, but the soul is still in the porsche, there is something special about those cars that can't be created in a volvo, ford, toyota (great quality btw) etc.

I can to 100% accept the soul and spirit in a SF, but not the outstanding quality compared to light within 60-90usd range.


----------



## carrot (Aug 25, 2008)

Surefire is not the perfect light. It is the perfect user.


----------



## etc (Aug 25, 2008)

When will SF introduce 2xAA cell configuration?


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 25, 2008)

etc said:


> When will SF introduce 2xAA cell configuration?


 
When they market their own brand of AA batts? I wonder if the profit off batt sales at this point is more than they make off lights. I buy Surefire batts to use in my Fenix P2D...good batts.


----------



## etc (Aug 25, 2008)

They *can* make a decent lite off AA cells. It has been done. I want SF quality in AA cell platform. 

Even if they restrict it to Lithiums and NiMH for decent perfrormance.


----------



## kramer5150 (Aug 25, 2008)

perungestal said:


> People say that white-walls shot and output isn't SF ess, but hello, isn't that some kind of quality to?
> 
> Buying a SF would mean the ultimate light with an outstanding output, perfect buildquality and perfect white-wall shots, anything else is a shame imo, especially for the pricetag.
> 
> ...




*People say that white-walls shot and output isn't SF ess, but hello, isn't that some kind of quality to?*

_Not exactly... IMHO white wall beam-performance is not as useful as in the field evaluation. Cree rings, as annoying as they are indoors, are almost a non-factor outdoors, in the field or anywhere except a white wall. IMHO of course:thumbsup:_

*Buying a SF would mean the ultimate light with an outstanding output, perfect buildquality and perfect white-wall shots, anything else is a shame imo, especially for the pricetag.*

_I used to share this opinion. When I first came here I thought the most expensive light should be the brightest, throw the farthest, flood the brightest , flood the farthest...etc...etc... Now after using several different lights, I have come to realize that its MORE about picking the right tool for the job, than pure light output. There are times where ~200 Lumens can blind you and be counter-productive and prevent you from seeing. For such applications a lower lumen torch or multi-mode can be preferable. So, its about picking the right light for the job/task. I still do think that a high $$$ light should offer a lifetime of durability with bomb-proof reliability, and have a feel of heft and robustness. IMHO thats a strength of BOTH the 6P and the higher-end Fenix lights._

*Imo I would rather get my self a tk10 or likewise. Great buildquality (very thick tube and surroundings) and excellent output.*

_Certainly you are not alone in that regard. I chose a 6P on ebay for $41 shipped. There are dozens of under $30 drop in modules to pick from that will put it on the same playing field as a Fenix. The deal-breaker for me was the unlimited lifetime warranty and replacement parts that come with the Surefire. That to me out-weighed any of the other physical differences. The 6P is far from perfect, but if its strengths align with your personal preferences its a real winner. Think of it this way... with all the available replacement parts, drop in modules and lifetime parts support, *you will never need to buy another flashlight*. I fully expect my 6P to be alive and kicking 20-30 years from now. If it does not I will be pissed and will flame it to no end here on CPF... when I'm 65:laughing: _

*It's like replay-jeans and a pair of levis, same quality, different pricetag (and ofc all about those kids who wanna have exatcly the same clothes as everybody else. 12 or 17, doesn't matter.)

I woudn't say no to a SF though, as long as I don't pay for it.*


----------



## StoneDog (Aug 25, 2008)

etc said:


> When will SF introduce 2xAA cell configuration?


 
Maybe when they see there is significant demand in the marketplace? 

CR123's are pretty much the standard in tactical lights now - have been for a while. Others have listed, I'm sure, the benefits of these types of batteries so I won't go into it.

I will say that of all of the lights I've owned (been in this too long) SF is the only brand that has never, ever given me a problem. Even the Scorpion, old but still my favorite, has issues compared to SF.

Jon


----------



## xevious (Aug 26, 2008)

Don said a few things I had considered before but not dwelled on much. And I can see now how he's right. Surefire makes lights for the long haul. The quality is definitely there, no doubt about it. From other posts I've seen on CPF, the impression I get is that a lot of folks feel that lumens-power rules. Ultimately, it doesn't. Yes, it's nice to have a brighter light, especially if it is more efficient so runtime isn't affected by the power increase over dimmer lights. But what about usable light? Are the other brightness modes dim enough? What kind of battery longevity do you get on lower modes? But the emitter is only half the story. Everything else about the light needs to be rock solid for dependability. Surefire seems to pay close attention to every component of a flashlight. Yes, there are some other companies that also show signs of very good quality. But pick up a Surefire and use it, then take an equivalent size/power flashlight from a less expensive manufacturer and use it--you can feel the difference. To me, that's part of what Surefire is all about. The other contributor to the fascination is Surefire customer service. They are very devoted to customer satisfaction and have fantastic warranties that others can only dream about.


----------



## Monocrom (Aug 26, 2008)

etc said:


> When will SF introduce 2xAA cell configuration?


 
Scroll down, go to page 2.

You can thank SilentK for finding the website.

LINK ~ http://www.surefirekorea.com/board/board.html?code=surefire_board2


----------



## Size15's (Aug 26, 2008)

Monocrom said:


> Scroll down, go to page 2.
> 
> You can thank SilentK for finding the website.
> 
> LINK ~ http://www.surefirekorea.com/board/board.html?code=surefire_board2


What page of a thread a post is on depends on the view settings of each individual member. Better to indicate the post number of the thread which is the # number on the top right of each post along with the red/yellow card icon etc.

Note that the AA tube was a proto-type (of which there have been several over the years) and there is no production schedule for an AA battery body.


----------



## Monocrom (Aug 26, 2008)

Size15's said:


> .... and there is no production schedule for an AA battery body.


 
True. But at least other flashaholics can see that a 2AA body is something Surefire has experimented with.


----------



## etc (Aug 26, 2008)

StoneDog said:


> Maybe when they see there is significant demand in the marketplace?
> 
> CR123's are pretty much the standard in tactical lights now - have been for a while. Others have listed, I'm sure, the benefits of these types of batteries so I won't go into it.
> 
> ...



123's have no advantages over Lithium AAs. 700 Mah vs. 2000+ mAh capacity. But only disadvantages: NiMH AA's have higher capacity and run time. Plus can use regular alkalines if nothing else is available. 

SF needs to have a AA based lite.


----------



## Size15's (Aug 26, 2008)

etc said:


> 123's have no advantages over Lithium AAs. 700 Mah vs. 2000+ mAh capacity. But only disadvantages: NiMH AA's have higher capacity and run time. Plus can use regular alkalines if nothing else is available.
> 
> SF needs to have a AA based lite.


Your point of view has been expressed throughout the decade or so I've been interested in SureFires and been part of online communities.
SureFire appears to take a different point of view, that we have seemingly been unable to influence.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Aug 26, 2008)

etc said:


> 123's have no advantages over Lithium AAs. 700 Mah vs. 2000+ mAh capacity. But only disadvantages: NiMH AA's have higher capacity and run time. Plus can use regular alkalines if nothing else is available.
> 
> SF needs to have a AA based lite.



The ability to use rechargeable batteries would be a convenience for many CPF'ers, but the rest of the world is using primary batteries to power their lights, and the CR123 is one of the most efficient primary batteries around at this point. SF is apparently not just catering to the needs of CPF, and is looking at the bigger picture, consumer wise. 

Between you and me, and the rest of CPF, I think that SF did do a little bit of catering to the interests of CPF, when they produced the first U2's and the Titanium Titan, and maybe other lights as well, but not many.

Bill


----------



## NoFair (Aug 26, 2008)

For military lights using one type of batteries is a good thing. With CR123s all major brands are good.
With AAs only NIMH and Lithiums will give decent performance. 

Soldiers (from experience:shakehead) never seem to be able take care of issued kit so NIMHs will be drained and dumped...

Lithium AAs are just as expensive as CR123s and currently not easily available except from Energizer. 

Way too many soldiers would put regular alkalines in their lights (don't know or care better) and get dismal performance..

When incans ruled CR123s were even better; Lithium and NIMHs don't have the same voltage and blown bulbs would happen too often.

With civilian use the advantages for Surefire are probably smaller, but I can imagine the amount of calls to customer support from AA light users using cheap AAs and not getting anything like the performance they expected...

Sverre


----------



## LightJaguar (Aug 26, 2008)

The only reason why Surefire has not come out with a AA flashlight is simply because they don't want to produce one. Kind of like the way Maglite works and refuses to upgrade their product line. It's probably easier for them to just concentrate on their CR123 based lights.
In the military AA and D batterie type flashlights are used more often then CR123s. That also includes the so called "tactical" lights. In the military a Cheap plastic double D can quickly fill in the shoes of a "tactical" light. That's especially true for the Marines who do not get a lot of the fancy equipment that the other branches get.


----------



## StoneDog (Aug 26, 2008)

etc said:


> 123's have no advantages over Lithium AAs. 700 Mah vs. 2000+ mAh capacity. But only disadvantages: NiMH AA's have higher capacity and run time. Plus can use regular alkalines if nothing else is available.
> 
> SF needs to have a AA based lite.


 
(I can't believe I let myself get sucked into this.)

No they don't. You _want_ SF to offer an AA based light, but that does not mean they _need_ to. The only thing they _need_ to do is keep their customers happy and make a profit in the process. So far they are succeeding.

NiMH and Lithium AA's are no closer to the perfect power source than CR123s. NiMH have limited shelf life unless you go eneloop and I think those have lower capacity. To that end, how many non-flashaholics really want to deal with the additional logistical burden of keeping a set of charged batteries at the ready? See the reference to soldiers dumping dead batteries above. Lithium AA's have been, in my experience (went through at least 60 Energizer L91's over the years) less reliable that the 3v Lithium batteries, especially when used in series/parallel. I wouldn't even think of trying to run something like an SF M6 off a bank of Lithium AA's - I tried to run a Mag85 off of a big bank of series/parallel L91's fresh from the box and invariably one would die in a matter of minutes. That does NOT happen with quality CR123's.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 26, 2008)

While I feel it would be great to have a Surefire AA option...just doesn`t matter...plenty of other companies offering quality AA lights.


----------



## asdalton (Aug 26, 2008)

Bullzeyebill said:


> The ability to use rechargeable batteries would be a convenience for many CPF'ers, but the rest of the world is using primary batteries to power their lights, and the CR123 is one of the most efficient primary batteries around at this point.



This is pretty much the way I think about it.

The ability to use AA cells has a mass-market advantage over lithium primaries *if* alkalines are suitable. But high-performance, current-hungry applications is exactly where alkaline cells fall down. Fenix is able to make AA/AAA lights, because they cater heavily to a niche market of users (us) who are already willing to fiddle with rechargeable batteries.

And let's face it, most of the rechargeable batteries and chargers marketed to general consumers over the past 20 years are crap. It's only with the recent availability of LSD NiMH cells that there is any real chance of AA rechargeable cells competing with alkalines beyond specialized applications. Perhaps if that happens, Surefire will consider releasing a light that uses AA cells.


----------



## kramer5150 (Aug 26, 2008)

AA alkalines should never be used in any CPF-worthy flashlight for the simple reason that they leak. IMHO they are OK for PR-based dollar-store junk, but any light that is commonly loved and discussed here deserves better treatment than that.

Two CR123 primaries have enough voltage to run the DC-DC converter as a buck circuit (IE more efficiently). Two AA Lithiums in series is only 3Volts (at most). Not enough to "efficiently" drive Cree emitters with forward voltages in the 3.7Volt ballpark (sometimes more). Now, thats IF you are wanting the MOST lumens from your light like most CPF'ers. If run time is more important than Lumen output from the emitter then certainly AA Lithium could have its advantages.

:thumbsup:


----------



## Kiessling (Aug 26, 2008)

Please continue the discussion about SF and AA cells in this current thread:

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2605219#post2605219

Thanx !

bernie


----------



## wacbzz (Oct 8, 2008)

I will certainly step forward and say that I got rid of my L4 and a G2 to buy a Pelican light. And much to the consternation of SF fanboys everywhere, it wasn't a hard thing to do. Having owned several SF flashlights, I can honestly say that while they were good lights, they were not any better/worse than what I have right now. Among those that I do have is a 6P/M60 combination, but this bomb of a light can be obtained without the SF shell and be just as reliable/strong. 

There once was a man that said:

*If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.*

in SF's case-

"all the military uses them" 
and 
"put one in your hands and you will see why"
and
"I would trust my life with a SF"

All loaded BS. Not everybody in the military uses them. I've had plenty of SF's in my hands and never felt like they were the best out there. And finally, many peoples lives are saved each and every day by something far less "great" than a SF...just read here.

The "best" light is what you have available when you really need it. The above story only verifies that.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Oct 9, 2008)

wacbzz, you are right. A Surefire light does not have to be the best light for everyone, as you have found out for yourself. For others, it may be that a Surefire is the best light for them. We all have out choices. Yes, some CPF'ers go a little overboard defending Surefire lights, but you can expect that on a forum with several thousand members. What I get from your post is a certain distain for those who do laud Surefire products, and that is not the CPF way, not my way, and not the way of the vast majority of CPF'ers. Better to be polite, and figure another way to make your point.

Bill


----------



## kramer5150 (Oct 9, 2008)

I wasn't terribly impressed with the HA Pelican M6 at my local Frys... it was OK for the price and B&M availability but its bezel had some sharp edges that were cutting into the body-tube O-ring. Some lube would have fixed it, but still, thats an inexcusable design flaw for a USA made $65 light.

One of the nice things about Surefires is their modular assembly. You can mix and match parts to suit your personal preferences, and piece together a really customized light.

I am not defending Surefire one way or another... I am merely stating my observations.


----------



## Zen|th (Oct 9, 2008)

Im with you Bill, 

I dont think this thread will ever come to a halt since every CPF-er is

defending their own favourite flashlight brand. For me, I just love 

*SureFires *( I do not know why but i just do), I do not care what people 

may think of me for spending so much on a piece of light, but if by buying 

it makes me feel contented and satisfied,

why should I stop buying it...? (unless I want to try something 

else). So if whatever particular flashlight brand 

makes you feel very comfortable when using it then go on with it..

Because there is no point convincing each other on which brand is the

best or how good is it compared to other brands. 

Personally, if one wants to get the brightest light within a certain budget, 

SureFire is not the brand for you honestly speaking.


----------



## Monocrom (Oct 9, 2008)

wacbzz said:


> There once was a man that said:
> 
> *If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.*


 
I agree 100%.

Folks have been fooled. They should get rid of their over-hyped Surefire lights. But who has time to do that in this hectic Day & Age?

Therefore, I'm offering my services free of charge to the CPF community. Members should PM me for my contact info.

Then, they can mail me all of their Surefire lights. I shall then dispose of them properly..... even if I get hundreds of these lights.


----------



## SureAddicted (Oct 9, 2008)

etc said:


> Looking at the catalogue, the lumens aren't that impressive from any of their LED units, nor from incans.. but the price tag sure is impressive.
> 
> Like the A2 Aviator - 50 lumens from the Xenon, and 3 from LED, and retails at $195? C'mon. E2L and others follow the same
> 
> ...




Well, lol, I bet you don't find them poor value now, now that you have a SF. Every light has a different application, you wouldn't use a M6 to walk the dog, and you wouldn't use a E2L in a tactical environment. I bet all A2 owners are happy with their light, and once your happy with a chosen light, price comes a distant second.


----------



## DM51 (Oct 9, 2008)

Bullzeyebill said:


> … you are right. A Surefire light does not have to be the best light for everyone, as you have found out for yourself. For others, it may be that a Surefire is the best light for them. We all have out choices. Yes, some CPF'ers go a little overboard defending Surefire lights, but you can expect that on a forum with several thousand members. What I get from your post is a certain distain for those who do laud Surefire products, and that is not the CPF way, not my way, and not the way of the vast majority of CPF'ers. Better to be polite, and figure another way to make your point.


That is a very good post indeed by Bullzeyebill, and I am sure the majority of members will agree with what he says.
 
The thread is now >350 posts and too long, so it can close now.


----------

