# What is it with new CPFers and throw?



## Paul_in_Maryland (Mar 6, 2006)

Does it seem to you that newcomers to CPF are more interested in throw than more experienced CPFers? If so, why? Is it that throw is what draws them in, but a more balanced beam is what they ultimately seek?

I just don't get this single-minded search for throw per dollar, throw per watt, throw per unit of length, or any other measure, be it absolute or relative.

Users of high-end bicycle lights don't seek out throw above all else. They understand the value of a broad beam. (Of course, many use two lights: One for throw, the other for flood.)

So I guess I have two questions:

Do you agree that newbies seek out throw more than non-newbies?
If so, why newbies?
At the risk of offending: I'm reminded of a fake radio spot I heard back in the 80s: "Cadillac--for 50 years, the choice of men with small p_____s."


----------



## Pydpiper (Mar 6, 2006)

My take..
I think the term "throw" may have a broader venue to a newbie who isn't already in tune with all of our terminology. I translate the word throw with a newbie as the amount of light a tool can produce, without prior knowledge of reflector size in comparison to the distance a light can illuminate an object it can be a difficult thing to comprehend. 
I think a newbie sees the term throw and automatically assumes that the more light a tool can produce the farther it can project. I can't help but reflect on some of the notions I once relied on when it came to my train of thought with a flashlight...
The more light the farther it throws right? No, but without a bit of depth it is a hard concept to swallow.
Ahh, to be a newbie again and just wanting a $100 light that does it all...


----------



## greenLED (Mar 6, 2006)

I'd appreciate some links where I can read up on all these people preferring throw recently, as that is not my feeling. Thanks.


----------



## MuleSkinner (Mar 6, 2006)

I am a newbie and figured the "throw" part to be better for me. This was because I specifically wanted the light for frog gigging and coon hunting. The throw part I believe will help me spot there eyes better from a distance. Gosh I hope I didn't mess up. I got nearly 200.00 bones in this light


----------



## greenLED (Mar 6, 2006)

What light did you get? As long as it has some sidespill along with the throw, you'll be OK.

It's all in the application and how a person uses a light, that's why I'm confused as to the reference to new people having different preferences; doesn't make sense to me.


----------



## wasBlinded (Mar 6, 2006)

I'm with Paul on this, and have often thought the same to myself. I remember when I first began investigating this forum, I felt I needed a light or two with lots of throw, and bought a couple. I still use them on occasion, but they taught me that for 90%+ of what I actually use a flashlight for, a broader beam is much more useful. As such, I like my Aleph2 lights more than the Aleph1 and Aleph3 - or at least I use them far more often. This is something that comes with experience, I guess.

On the other hand, I love playing with my most 'throwy' light, a 5 mw green laser pointer. It isn't of much real use to me, but I can't get over the lovely beam and throw.....


----------



## JonSidneyB (Mar 6, 2006)

I have wondered that myself.

There is a place for throw and when you need it there is no substitute. In the real world I can think of times when throw is needed but I think those are not the most common uses.

In the real world the medium beam with good spill is the most useful to me when doing daily tasks.

I will admit when playing with a light throw is more fun. Throw is good for when I want to see what the dogs are barking at across the cornfield behind my home.

Search, some military, and police applications perhaps. For most real work, nice broad beams are best.

I don't fault throw, I just think it is over desired.

just my 2cents.


----------



## Topper (Mar 6, 2006)

I think Pydpiper is correct as to "throw" meaning different things to some new folks. As for my likes "Throw" is way more fun. "Flood" is way more useful 95 percent of the time and yes there are even times when less light is far better.
That should make things clear as mud.
Topper


----------



## Pydpiper (Mar 6, 2006)

Where I live if you don't have throw you may as well not have a light, outside anyways.


----------



## dcarch8 (Mar 6, 2006)

As a newbie, I am not that interested in "deep throw".

I am very interested in the external looks (industrial design) of an object, and how an aesthetic statement is elegantly inspired by function.

dcarch8


----------



## Paul_in_Maryland (Mar 6, 2006)

greenLED said:


> I'd appreciate some links where I can read up on all these people preferring throw recently, as that is not my feeling. Thanks.


I tried seaching titles only for new + member, new + throw, and so on, but I couldn't find examples. But I'll bet that many of us will relate to the folllowing caricature of a typical first post:

"Greetings. I've been lurking a while and thought it was time to introduce myself. My name is Benighted. I'm looking for something not too large--maybe keyring-size--that can light up my woodshed from a quarter-mile away. I don't need a lot of runtime; just 30 minutes. I'm willing to spend what it takes, but I'd prefer to spend no more than $75. Which models should I look at?"​


----------



## MuleSkinner (Mar 6, 2006)

greenLED said:


> What light did you get? As long as it has some sidespill along with the throw, you'll be OK.
> 
> It's all in the application and how a person uses a light, that's why I'm confused as to the reference to new people having different preferences; doesn't make sense to me.



I got a Stinger 75000 with one of fivemegas Mods which included the Boro lens installed with new reflector and black bezel, battery adapter kit and running a CA1499 bulb. The batterys are 2 Pila 600P Li-ion batterys.

:sweat:


----------



## Galiphrey (Mar 6, 2006)

dcarch8, I think you hit on something that is actually a large part of the interest and appeal in this pursuit, but is seldom actually identified as directly as you've done. I'm with you: the industrial design of the object is one of the most interesting factors, though I think some would be hesitant to admit that <maybe not>.

Anyway, perhaps one reason the newbie is concerned with throw-per-watt or per-dollar and so forth is that it's an easy thing to quantify. It's such a large field of information that the newbie may choose to start in with easily quantifiable decisions, even understanding at the time that they're too basic, but just in order to have SOME decision point that they can key off of right off the bat, to wet their feet a little bit. Later, they'll expand, and they know this going in, but they have to go in, first. Some processes are hard to short-cut. Learning things and discovering things are totally different.


----------



## PoliceScannerMan (Mar 6, 2006)

Throw is good, spill is great. Let us thank you for these lights, Amen.


----------



## Sturluson (Mar 6, 2006)

I would be surprised if folks new to the flashlight world *didn't* want throw above all else. Throw can be equated to fps/velocity in a firearm, or hardness/rhc in a knife. It is, simply, the most easily understood "spectacular" thing.

After a while, you understand that the most spectacular thing may not be the only thing. You understand that a bullet with decent mass and average velocity may be a better hunting round that a faster bullet, that a very hard knife steel can be too brittle and too hard to sharpen, and that decent spill is what most people need in most flashlight applications.

By the way, this desire for throw above all else is not confined to newbies. I've seen veterans here who value throw above everything. Ranking at the top with throw is price and exoticity. These folks are trophy hunters more than users, and are found in any hobby. Not a bad thing at all, but something to recognize.

(By the way, I'm a newbie here myself, by I've hung around lights a bit over the years, and other interests...)


----------



## Coop (Mar 6, 2006)

Throw is for playing, Flood is for serious use... Thats we should buy them both!!


----------



## cheapo (Mar 6, 2006)

I dont know if you would call me experienced, but I have been on the forums for over a year, and I am a HUGE fan of throw. However, over the year or so, I did learn that I dont want only throw, I want sidespill.... never been a fan of optics.

-David


----------



## photovoltaic (Mar 6, 2006)

dcarch8 said:


> As a newbie, I am not that interested in "deep throw".
> 
> I am very interested in the external looks (industrial design) of an object, and how an aesthetic statement is elegantly inspired by function.
> 
> dcarch8



Actually, what dcarch8 talks about here is one of the reasons why I got into the hobby. I enjoy really nice, quality made things. I bought an Innova and thought - wow, this is pretty nice. I remember the first time I laid my hands on my E2e and I was astounded by the small size of the thing. I turned it on and was blown away. I also really, really appreciate the high quality milling and metalwork that went into the flashlight. 
For me, throw was not an issue at all. I was actually more interested in having a light that would allow me to pitch a tent in complete darkness. For that, I needed (what I thought at the time) was a good balanced light and I bought into Surefire's marketing. Well, I'm glad that I did. I could definately set up a tent with my E2e. But I've found that it is more useful that I had first ever imagined. I'm a minister and I typically walk through the church at night to make sure everything is locked up for the evening. I like having a bit of a broader beam - helps with getting around more and I can see more within the cone of the beam. 
Also comes in handy when I'm walking the dogs - I've got enough spill light to avoid dog pooh in the yard, but I can reach out and watch the dogs with the light when the wander a bit away from me. 
I've also bought different lights for different reasons. My E2e is turning out to be my EDC, but I also bought a E1L to attach to the brim of my baseball cap when hiking at night in the woods. (Reason: because it was small and the light lasts a long time) I ordered an A2 on Saturday just because I thought it was cool. :rock: Actually, I bought the A2 because I thought that it would be another good camping light - I could read while in my tent/have low light in my tent and not worry about batteries running down, but be able to spot kids out in the woods who are trying to run off on me if I needed to, all in one light, easy to carry light. So, I've bought 3 Surefires with 3 different things in mind for them. 
True, I wouldn't say that any of my flashlights have a really broad beam (especially the E1L) - but it is a quality beam that beats the heck out of the MagLite that I was using before. I can just "see more" now with these flashlights, if that makes sense. Then again, I might be trying to justify the huge $$ I paid for them.


----------



## dcarch8 (Mar 6, 2006)

Galiphrey,

Very well said. All one needs to do is go to the Museum Of Modern Art (NY) and see the amazing design solutions of everyday objects.

Some how the Euroupeans seem to do much better in this department.

BTW, I am not implying that there are no good designs here in CPF.

dcarch8


----------



## greenLED (Mar 6, 2006)

I see what you mean, Paul.
Maybe people think brighter= throw?


----------



## Pydpiper (Mar 6, 2006)

Everyone is saying the same thing with different words, from different perspectives.


----------



## Bob_G (Mar 6, 2006)

If it's true that newbies orient on throw, I think it's because many oldies do too  It's easily the most discussed beam aspect overall I think, and I've never understood it. Well, I do understand it, it's like horsepower in cars or whatever the most obvious aspect of "power" in any essentially guy hobby. Lot of psychology too I suppose - most people do what they do because that's what most people do. In other words, thinking for yourself isn't exactly a defining human characteristic. 

I think there being some here at CPF who do think for themselves is what caused me to stick around long enough to become a semi-regular. Of course they're usually wrong, but that's okay :devil:


----------



## Navck (Mar 6, 2006)

M*gs got the throw part...

I personally like the HDS EDC style beam, but having a turbo head thats removable and reattachable would be useful if I want to use my light outdoors


----------



## thesurefire (Mar 6, 2006)

greenLED said:


> I see what you mean, Paul.
> Maybe people think brighter= throw?



I concur. I think the general public, in terms of lights, thinks, the farther away a flashlight can light up an object, the brighter it must be, hence the more throw a light has, the brighter it must be. As we all know, this isn’t the case. Lumens = overall brightness, Lux = throw (brightest point in the beam)

I personally like throw and flood equally, and have just ultimately decided to EDC 2 small lights, one that throws, and one that floods. The flood light gets 90% of the total use.


----------



## boostmiser (Mar 6, 2006)

Throw = the _WOW_ factor to those that don't know any better. I know that was me. I wanted great throw. Doughnut hole...what's that? Bad Rings, so what. Look how many Mags are sold. They're big which means they're 'WOW'. 
If I showed my neighbor how far my A2 would throw then how far the Stion would throw, they would say WOW to the Strion. But as I've come to learn, the A2 is a much more useful and practical light.


----------



## Haz (Mar 6, 2006)

When i started amassing my collection of flashlights as a newbie, a common way to show others how good my lights were to shine the light at a distance, such as a tree, or a building. If it was able to shine far, that was deemed a good flashlight!. Rarely did i shine the light in a room with a ceiling bounce test, and compare the total light output.

I guess my eyes at that time was not focussed on the overall output, but by the intensity of the spot in the centre.

I believe the reason for this stems from collecting cheap AA, C, and D incandescent lights from supermarkets at the beginning, and most of these lights for me did not have good throw, due to poor reflector design. Some had strange beam shape due to the reflector being poorly shaped, some with donut holes at a further distance, and basically spluttered beam going in a non-uniform direction. My best flashlight was a maglite which has excellent throw, and i could make the spot of the light very tiny, and focused.

Even most of my friends whom i show my flashlights to, tend to ask for a beam shot at a distance to compare the lights, so i guess it's a simple no-brainer way to compare lights. 

These days i realise the usefulness of flood lights, and I'm finding it easier to accept, and it is more useful for day to day application.


Haz


----------



## chevrofreak (Mar 6, 2006)

I used to care about throw, now I care about flood.

But then again I'm the guy that thinks 9mm Luger is better than .45ACP


----------



## Lurveleven (Mar 6, 2006)

MuleSkinner said:


> I got a Stinger 75000 with one of fivemegas Mods which included the Boro lens installed with new reflector and black bezel, battery adapter kit and running a CA1499 bulb. The batterys are 2 Pila 600P Li-ion batterys.
> :sweat:



Don't worry, you have made a wise choice with that setup! I don't know of any setup that small that gives as much light.

Sigbjoern


----------



## tstetz (Mar 6, 2006)

I'm possibly one of the newbies that prompted this post 

To me "throw" equates to distance. Main reason I want a light with throw is for work. My belt light has a good flood but I find it deficient at distance. I have a number of great close range lights but nothing that really reaches out well. 

I know I'm not nearly as educated on the technology and terminology as many of the members here so perhaps I'm not articulating my needs/wants appropriately.


----------



## fieldops (Mar 6, 2006)

I think there have been alot of threads lately on throw. Many of them involving the SL PP 4AA lux or Inova T3, Striker etc. Its probably just a "how far will it shine" thing. We all eventually find out that we need different lights for different tasks and therefore need to spend alot more money:laughing:


----------



## joema (Mar 6, 2006)

*Pydpiper*: _"My take..I think the term "throw" may have a broader venue to a newbie who isn't already in tune with all of our terminology..."_

I agree and I've wondered the same thing as Paul, but never posted anything.

It seems lots of people are always wanting more, more, more, throw. Yet sometimes they don't want the consequences -- a progressively narrower beam and a big reflector. A laser has more long range throw than even a Megaray, but it's not generally useful for illumination.

Another example are the posts wanting a small 1-cell pocket light with great throw. That is very difficult to achieve, just from an optical physics standpoint. A small light means a small reflector which means the emitter/reflector size ratio will be small, which means the beam will be somewhat broad.

I think people sometimes use "throw" as a loose term for "power" -- they want a powerful light that reaches a long way. In fact throw is only partly related to that. 

Because of the inverse-square law, it takes much more output power to achieve the same throw as a lower power but narrower beam light. You quickly run into fundamental battery/current limits unless you make the beam a lot narrower.

If you have a big enough reflector you can make a very narrow beam which has great throw. But a super-narrow beam is not generally useful, outside of specialized situations.

It would be great if a single light simultanesously had a medium-width beam, bright spillbeam, superb throw and no power limitations. Unfortunately that would probably take zero point energy


----------



## DonShock (Mar 6, 2006)

I think the main reason that throw is a hot topic for newbies, and for flashaholics too, is that when you are using a flashlight for throw it is easy to notice the shortcomings and say "This isn't performing well enough." When you are using a flashlight up close, you can still see "good enough" even if the beam quality is poor. So I think most newbies end up here in the search for something better after noticing a lack of throw with the typical store offerings. It's not until you actually see and use a good quality, evenly flooded beam that you appreciate how much more useful it can be for more up close work.

I actually ended up here after finding a light with a good floody beam and trying to research other similar lights. After looking at all the different Mag mods, I got a little more into throw. As we all know, each light has it's positives and it's negatives. Often it's not until you can actually try them for yourself that you know for sure what you'll like.


----------



## Topper (Mar 6, 2006)

I wonder.
Topper


----------



## rabbit (Mar 6, 2006)

I am a newbie and I think the 'throw:rock: ' thing is just personal preference, I would probably start to go for 'flood' only after some time but right now I can't see anything wrong with that. Some people likes fast car, some people likes 4x4.


----------



## Trashman (Mar 6, 2006)

A lot of people (all?) are just very impressed by throw. I know that Fivemega prefers throw (and brightness) over all else. He doesn't really even like the stippled reflectors. I think his reflector of choice is always the smooth one. So, it's not only the newbies that want a lot of throw. But, the reason I think most of them are looking for the big throwers, is because they haven't yet gotten a lot of exposure to the element of beam quality. Many may not even know what the difference between a smooth and cruddy beam, because they've just never given it any thought or notice.


----------



## MSI (Mar 6, 2006)

Different tasks have different needs, and that is why I often have to carry several lights. I find a pure flood is usually the most useful at close distance (i.e. reading, indoor, tent), but even at close distance a more concentrated beam can be more useful, e.g. if you need to enhance the structure of an object.

As the object you are interested in are farther and farther away from you, I find the beam has to be increasingly narrower, not only to get enough light in the hotspot, but also to prevent you from blinding yourself from nearby reflections. So if you had two lights with the same lux, one very bright flood and one narrow beam thrower, the narrow beam thrower would often be more useful at lighting things up at distance even though it produced less lumens.


----------



## thezman (Mar 6, 2006)

I'm a relative n00b, but don't blame me. :duh2: 

I read this forum for 6 months before I joined, and my first and only hotwire is a Mag74 with a heavy stipple.

To me, a wall of light is where it's at. But that's just my preference.


----------



## cerbie (Mar 6, 2006)

Sturluson said:


> I would be surprised if folks new to the flashlight world *didn't* want throw above all else. Throw can be equated to fps/velocity in a firearm, or hardness/rhc in a knife. It is, simply, the most easily understood "spectacular" thing.


Yes. I'm quite new, and not an addict to flashlights; and I really started looking because I got a light with tons of throw. One of those big Mag lookalikes with tons of LEDs. It offers a good *wow*, but is not terribly useful for anything I've wanted it for. I can see uses for that level of throw, from reading here, but I don't have them.

My Arc-P isn't much of a *wow* light, except for the size...and that I've found more uses for it than I thought I would, where my Mag mini and big unregulated throw-meister have been collecting dust except in power outtages. The plain, non-spectacle of utility has gotten me interested in getting a couple more lights (without the keychain size limitation!).

If I had gotten a light that was smaller, I'd probably have made the mistake of wanting spectacular throw right away. It's like good old MHz: a simple metric that is easy to work with; but not a quality metric for *overall usefulness*. There are uses for throw, but a wide spill is not eye-catching.


----------



## Paul_in_Maryland (Mar 6, 2006)

On a similar note, consider the range of focal lengths offered in camcorders and digital cameras. Experiences photographers appreciate the value of a wide-angle shot--say, 20 to 28mm. But angles like these are unheard of in camcorders and rare among digicams.

Let's say that a company's engineers can design a lens with a 10:1 zoom ratio. Will Marketing tell them, "Make s a 28 to 280mm zoom? or 24 to 240mm? No, because wide angle doesn't sell in the big-box stores. LONG focal lengths sell.

So what do we get? Digicams will 38-380mm lenses, and Sony camcorders with wide angles that start at 47mm. Want wide angle? Get an accessory lens.

Want a Surefire incandescent flashlight with flood? Get a Beamshaper.

Even Wolf Eyes has given in. Their new lamps cast a beam that isn't nearly as wide as their old beams. I can only assume it's that people felt that the old lamps weren't "bright" enough.


----------



## ScottyJ (Mar 6, 2006)

People new to the religion (I am new here, but have owned and loved lights for quite a while) like to show their flashlights to friends, and throw will probably give the most wow factor. I remember when I first got into surefires, I would tell a friend to shine his maglight at a distant object and then I would blast it with my M4....very good wow factor. Just my .2 cents.


----------



## CoffeeAchiever (Mar 6, 2006)

Interesting thread. As a very new newbie, I can offer my perspective on throw as a defining characteristic of high end flashlights. 

Throw is obvious and can be quite impressive. When you first experience what can be described as a hand held searchlight it makes a lasting impression. The horsepower and firepower analogies presented in previous posts to this thread ring true for me. Very few people actually need or can even use a 500hp engine, 50 cal rifle or an AE Light PL14 "Photonic Cannon" but there's no denying that these things are fun! 

Since I am so new to high end/high quality flashlights, I have yet to acquire a really powerful thrower for myself. I quickly discovered that overall beam quality was more useful to me and more easily and inexpensively attainable than throw. Less can be more. 

My old 3C and 2AA Maglites and a Coleman florescent lantern were my benchmarks for portable lighting until I discovered CPF. The Mags' artifact filled, poor quality beams were always a little annoying but I just learned to live with them. Now that I own a SureFire 6P and several textured lamp assemblies for it, there's just no going back to the doughnut hole hotspots and whorl-filed spillbeams of my Maglites! The Coleman florescent is still a keeper. 

I've been a CPF member for just under one month. In this short time, I've been exposed to a great deal of "enlightenment" freely shared by the senior members of this community. I've acquired a few descent flashlights for myself and discovered the "free lumens" concept. Like many other CPF members, I'll probably end up with more lights than I "need" but I'm having fun. For what it's worth, effective runtime, beam quality and parts interchangeability are my current priorities.


----------



## Sway (Mar 6, 2006)

Could be they are looking for and need throw (if they understand the term?) Like when I stumbled up to CPF’s door step several years ago looking for a *very bright light = throw*.

What’s wrong about needing or wanting throw  

Later
Kelly


----------



## oilp8ntr (Mar 6, 2006)

As another newbie, I have to agree with CoffeeAchiever. Before finding this forum almost a month ago, maglite was the best light in the house. After years of mild frustration, I finally decided to do the research and look for some quality tools to fit my need. After pouring over these threads night after night, I found that the U2 fit my needs perfectly... then a Caribbean, and an Amilite T3... (I think I also see a PD and an Eagle in my future...).

Now that I am caught up in this world of high quality lighting tools, and thoroughly enjoying it, I find that I want the best in each in category for each need or purpose. Throw is one of the more sexier aspects to this hobby.
Throw is also one of those WOW factors and I find myself asking questions in search of a top performer, and learning in the process.

So, as a newbie, I might contend that throw, for its intended purpose, is just as important to a "seasoned vet" as it is to a newbie, but since newbies are still in the learning process, they are asking many more questions...


----------



## JonSidneyB (Mar 6, 2006)

It might be alot about what brought people here in the first place. I once needed a good light and didn't have one. I have sence taken it beyond practical but at the same time I still have a practical side. I use my lights more than some out here do just because of where I live.

I think when you start doing real tasks with lights...your tastes change.


----------



## Icebreak (Mar 6, 2006)

Maybe I've been here too long? I thought the 2005 guys _were_ the new CPFers.

As has been stated, throw is the easiest quantifier. It does loosely correlate to brightness. Sheer power correlates better. Throw is also the hardest thing to achieve. Once good throw is attained it can then be managed. 

Different tools for different applications...yes. I've a ROP 1200 using a PMR that is stippled on purpose. One of my Mag85s is stippled on purpose. A2? Love it.

Yet, for most of my outside purposes I've stayed with throwers and one in particular that does almost everything. A perfectly focused WA1166 driven to a white color using a smooth reflector. The output is complicated. There is good sidespill and/or corona. The beam (not the sidespill) also contains an extended bow tie pattern, a hotspot, and a sub-hotspot. I align the filament of the bulb to the switch so that the bow tie is horizontal. I use the bow tie to see the landscape.

Take this complicate beam into the woods. The use becomes intuitive even to the unenlightened. The spill shows what is very close. The bow tie shows what is before me and left/right. The beam shows what is in the direction of my interest. The hotspot punches through to what is beyond that. The sub-hotspot can be aimed to beyond even that.

Since each aspect of the complicated beam is brighter the closer it exists to the center of the beam, none of any of these aspects' specific benefits are lost. Take that stippled Mag85 into the woods and the return from the closer trees/bushes/foliage is so bright that the distant objects, though lit, are hard to see.

The same concept works in an ambient-light-rich urban environment or a darkish city park.

Change a tire or look for someone's lost keys in the grass? Sure, the floody is great. For most uses outside I want the increasingly brighter, stepped benefits of the different components that make up a complicated, perfectly focused thrower rendering dimensional ability. I'm not looking at the beam. I'm looking at the targets dimensionally.


----------



## LEDcandle (Mar 6, 2006)

Powerful throw is more impressive looking at first glance, and so-called noobs (that includes me  ) love impressive bright lights.

Noobs also like to look into flashlights and also blind their friends; and this is best achieved with high lux lights. "OUCH! That's bright!!" is how a flashlight's brightness is measured .

Also, a throwy light can be beamshaped easily via a 'shaper or diffused lens but a floody light can't be made into a light saber without having to manufacture a whole turbohead for it.


----------



## Flying Turtle (Mar 7, 2006)

Thinking back a few years when I found the LED Museum and CPF it was the little lights that really caught my attention. I'd always had some kind of spotlight for the big jobs, but was especially attracted to unusual one or two cell pocket lights. Having a bunch of throw can certainly be useful, but for 90% of my needs a little Arc, Peak, Photon, etc. is perfect.

Geoff


----------



## GhostReaction (Mar 7, 2006)

The 'throw' factor in a light was the one that got me so interested in flashlight. 

My very first sighting of a 'powerful' light was when a friend (12 years old kids we were back then) shone his dad tightly focused mag 2D onto a fence across a football field. 
It was like, WOW. My 2D big red flashlight cant do that. 

Throw = Power 
Lightsaber = Power < newbie thinking

I believe theres nothing wrong with that. Its a start anyway. 
Once a newbie gets hooked to CPF (I m included), things will be viewed differently.
:twothumbs: Cheers to CPF for every knowledge I gained :twothumbs:


:wave:
P.S.: Hey Jack! you still got your dad's 2D mag? I ve got a Barn Burner coming!
wanna go shine at the old school fence?? :naughty:


----------



## Raven (Mar 7, 2006)

Paul_in_Maryland said:


> Does it seem to you that newcomers to CPF are more interested in throw than more experienced CPFers? If so, why? Is it that throw is what draws them in, but a more balanced beam is what they ultimately seek?
> 
> I just don't get this single-minded search for throw per dollar, throw per watt, throw per unit of length, or any other measure, be it absolute or relative.



Because you need excellent throw to get any use out of a flashlight during a heavy rainstorm, and people all along the Gulf coast are preparing hurricane kits, and might have discovered this website while doing research on what flashlight to buy.

It all boils down to:

throw
spill
duration
size

Few people rank them in the same order of importance.


----------



## mdocod (Mar 7, 2006)

the most impressive light I own is the thor... even though it is HUGE in size, and is not of convenient design, it is still the most impressive when shown off to others. the multi-thousand lumen region, with a tight spot in the center, and enough spillpower to light up an acre in front of you, there is no question that this light provides enough of both to illuminate just about anything effectivally, with a booster or an HID setup, it would be even cooler- since modifying mine- the lowbeam now operates at full brightness, and can be used in conjunction with the high-spot beam, with just the low beam on I get a HUGE half moon flood of light that litterally lights up thousands of sqaure meters of landscape in front of you.

.... the interesting thing is that, you can get over 200 lumens out of the size of a 3x123 light (using rcr123s and one of the nicer efficiant 12V lamps out there)... for the size (volume of space), this is actually much BRIGHTER than a thor per cubic inch, which to me makes it a more impressive light... even though I am somewhat of a newb still (in terms of how long i've been around here). I have come to really like the beam of the small lamps found in lithium lights, a smooth splotch and decent spill around it- the reality is that the larger beam makes actually getting information about what you are looking possible- a tight spot is fun, but doesn't give you contextual information about what you are looking at beyond "ouch, too bright." 

I have found mag light beams to be completally useless, up close they provide a pencil thin spot of light that would have to be swept over an area 10 times to get a good feel for what the area contains. and far off, they basically provide a patheticly dim spot that isn't bright enough or large enough to gather usefull information about what the beam is pointed at. (speaking of a 3D mag with mag-xenon bulb)


----------



## brooklynhammer (Mar 7, 2006)

I guess I qualify as the newest newbie here (see post number.) The days I've spent on CPF and Quickbeam's site have strained both my eyes and what's left of my brain. I don't think I've ever come across a subject on the Internet with a more helpful and knowledgeable collection of enthusiasts! Thanks to you I've been rethinking what I should be looking for in a flashlight. It's now clear that I'm supposed to buy a whole slew of lights. But that's the whole point of the vast and insidious CPF conspiracy of which you're all a part!

There was a time I thought the only decision was between the straight and bent Boy Scout lights. Now there's throw, output, runtime, size, beam smoothness/size/color, etc., etc., etc. How do you expect me to find the time to actually use my flashlights?

Indispensable as the the charts, reviews, and comments have been, the outdoor beam shots have been the most enlightening. Because of them, I'm now seriously considering an L4 for its relatively broad coverage (and possibly a KL1 for the rarer moments when throw is more important.) And that CR2 Ion flood looks awfully useful, especially in close quarters. But for the time being I'll play with the Caribbean that should arrive on Wednesday (along with a Dorcy Super 1W for another location.)

I guess it's like hi-fi. Only by listening over time--not just reading reviews--can you get what you really want in equipment. It's going to take time using different lights before I know which lights float my boat. (I hope no one anticipated "... light up my life?")


----------



## SCblur (Mar 7, 2006)

I think throw is more impressive to newbies. It is easy for somebody to be impressed by the novel ability to brightly light a small area several hundred yards away with something the size of a minimag. More immediately impressive, say, than a flood beam that puts out more lumens overall, but may be less bright to the naked eye for it's lack of a bright hotspot. I was definitely into throwy lights at first, but after using them for a while, I have wised up. I've realize that a more uniform beam with some sidespill is ideal and less disorienting than a 'hot-spot only' light.

I think it's cool at first, but after the novelty wears off, and we newbies find ourselves actually using our lights in real-world applications *imagine that* we find ourselves desiring more practical beams. 

That's just been my experience, who knows.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Mar 7, 2006)

I like both throw and spill. When outside I depend on more throw than spill, but when I want spill I just reach for another light. If I want both in one light, I carry my Tigerlight, or sometimes my Aleph III with DB1000, U bin Lux III. When I was a newbie, I was not stuck on throw, nor spill, just lights, lights, lights.

Billl


----------



## Sub_Umbra (Mar 7, 2006)

What is it with new CPFers and throw?

I actually hadn't noticed.

I'm sure that some come here with throw in mind, however. I'm not as much of a spilly guy as most here -- but most of my lighting tasks involve using lights with spill. 1% of my tasks are VERY throw intensive. I can see that some may come here looking for a light just for a few tasks that they are having trouble with.

I know that when I need throw nothing else will do and for some of those tasks spill is both a distraction and a waste of light I'd rather put somewhere else -- usually in a tight little spot with a whole lot of other light a long ways away. 

During six weeks on the ground without any power in New Orleans last year I only used my throwers a total of a couple minutes _for all of their use combined_ but there is no way I'd want to have to repeat those few minutes without them.

I don't think it's all semantics or not understanding the lingo. If I was looking for a thrower to solve a real world problem and I heard of CPF this is where I'd ask for help.


----------



## Delvance (Mar 7, 2006)

Welcome to CPF Brooklynhammer!  




Paul_in_Maryland said:


> "Greetings. I've been lurking a while and thought it was time to introduce myself. My name is Benighted. I'm looking for something not too large--maybe keyring-size--that can light up my woodshed from a quarter-mile away. I don't need a lot of runtime; just 30 minutes. I'm willing to spend what it takes, but I'd prefer to spend no more than $75. Which models should I look at?"
> ​


 

I'm one of the n00bies around...and yes, i like throw =P. Why do i like throw ? Because where i live, there is almost always fairly strong ambient lighting thus the need for spill dissappears. Even so, my throw lights still give off a pretty good sidespill. But then again, the whole "brighter light = further throw" mentality may be burnt in my head as well...when i was a kid, i always favoured whichever one of my cheapie lights could throw the furthest...

As to why i like my lights throwy ? Besides there being alot of ambient light where i live. It's because i don't really have a REAL need for them (ie. i'm not a LEO, i don't work in dark places etc) so when i use (play with) my lights, it's quite fun illuminating things a long way away...whereas a flood light outdoors, is not much fun to play with. I guess it comes down to personal preference and requirements huh...​


----------



## Canuke (Mar 7, 2006)

You don't suppose this  had anything to do with it?

Throw is just like 600mm telephoto lenses, .454 Casull handguns, Hummer H1's and double-double (2x2 CPU core) workstations... they have their specialized uses, and the rest is just the "Hey y'all, check this out!" factor. 

There's a reason why they are called BEAMshots. Spill does not thrill. :nana: That's why I just shake my head at those knocking the no-spill beams from the Inova X1 and River Rock 2aa... if I wanted spill, I'd just get one of the dozens of competitors with it (and I do have several of those).


----------



## 270winchester (Mar 7, 2006)

As far as I can remember the vast majority of newcomers around ere are obsessed about throw, since the measuring stick of the maglite is "hey ma, look how far I can shine this mag". 

It's just a natural progression


----------



## magic79 (Mar 7, 2006)

greenLED said:


> I see what you mean, Paul.
> Maybe people think brighter= throw?


 
Bingo Greenie!


----------



## uz2busmc (Mar 7, 2006)

I'm a newb aswell, but my primary concerns were overall brightness in hopes of getting decent spill with throw. Altough for my work, throw is more important, well... for the locations I happen to be working at the time. I'm actually going to buy another bezel to increase throw, but if it looses to much spill, I'll have to go back to the original.


----------



## GhostReaction (Mar 7, 2006)

brooklynhammer said:


> I guess it's like hi-fi. Only by listening over time--not just reading reviews--can you get what you really want in equipment. It's going to take time using different lights before I know which lights float my boat. (I hope no one anticipated "... light up my life?")



Welcome Brooklynhammer. 

Hope you will enjoy the fine lights as much as you enjoy hi-fi.


----------



## FlashInThePan (Mar 7, 2006)

Everyone has made good points; I think that most newbies come to CPF searching for a more powerful flashlight, and seek "throw" because they equate it with a more powerful light. Indeed, as many have mentioned, it's also a really easy benchmark to use - "my light can illuminunate that distant tree, and yours can't. Ha!"

But here's another possibility: it might be because newbies more commonly use their flashlights *outdoors,* where the objects that need illumination are further away (and thus require that throw!).

In contrast, us flashaholics will use any old excuse to fire up a flashlight. Since a lot of that use is inside, a flood beam is much more useful. 

Just my two cents.

- FITP


----------



## Skyclad01 (Mar 7, 2006)

270winchester said:


> As far as I can remember the vast majority of newcomers around ere are obsessed about throw, since the measuring stick of the maglite is "hey ma, look how far I can shine this mag".
> 
> It's just a natural progression


 
I would have to say that pretty much hits the nail on the head. "The further the flashlight can shine = the more power it has = the better the flashlight" is pretty much the mentality of newcomers (myself included). I think the main thing is that we (newbies) usually assume that it will also have a balanced amout of flood as well. That is something we dont realize.

For example, the LEDBeam gives excellent throw, but it really lacks in side spill. For me when I got my LEDbeam, I knew it would have throw, but I didnt know would lack in sidespill. So I was a little dissapointed in that aspect. In comparison, my XM-3 certinatly doesnt have the throw that the LEDbeam has, but it is equally (if not more so) usefull than the LB due to it having twice the amout of sidespill.

So now when I buy a new light, I am more aware of the different charaterstics of the beams of each light. So I am no longer in that frame of mentality of "The more it throws = the more light it has = the better the flashlight"


----------



## Lurveleven (Mar 7, 2006)

Great post Icebreak.

I think you'll find that professional users (i.e. SAR, Police, Firemen) are throw oriented because that is what they need, at least that is what I find I need 90% of the time for SAR. Average Joes appear to be more flood oriented, using their lights for houshold tasks.

Sigbjoern


----------



## Nyctophiliac (Mar 7, 2006)

Hmmm... Contentious.

I care about throw,output,optics and engineering differently depending on mood, activity, practicality etc.

After all , one wouldn't wear one set of clothes for all seasons whether working,playing,excersising,seducing,etc. etc.

The idea that newbies obsess about one point, throw, is a sweeping generalization coupled with a crass joke about manhood!

By the way...I'm [email protected] like a hamster, and I don't care! :naughty:


----------



## OutdoorIdiot (Mar 7, 2006)

Well, I'm new to CPF, so I though perhaps I should say something on this subject.

When I first started becoming fussy about flashlights, I must admit that I saw "throw" as being the most important factor.

Now, as a more experienced and discerning flashlight customer, I take into account all the factors of a flashlight: I consider the battery consumption, brightness, beam quality, colour temperature, build quality, and all the other factors. Then I apply the following rules to decide whether I buy the flashlight:

Throw =


----------



## Paul_in_Maryland (Mar 7, 2006)

Some of you have pointed out that urban washout makes flood pointless and throw more critical. That makes sense to me. It's the same reasoning behind the push for faster wireless networking: No one "needs" 100 megabits per second to cruise the Net on a laptop PC from the living room couch. But most of this bandwidth will be attenuated by walls and floors; that's why you need a large gross value.

The comment about stereo reminded me of an exchange I once had with a roommate. We were watching LA Law, and the episode involved a pair of hot blonde twins who had "been with" one of the firm's lawyers (and soon, with a second).

Me: "What is this fascination with twins?"
Roommate: (pause) "You know what it is? It's the difference between mono and stereo."


----------



## SilverFox (Mar 7, 2006)

As a relative newbie myself...  

The first thing I look for in a review of a light is its throw. I usually am using a light to identify things further away, or in shadows in high ambient light conditions. I like spill also, but my prime objective is to illuminate things that are some distance away.

Perhaps I am "far sighted..." :nana:

Here is my thought process... I look at Doug's (Quickbeam) charts and although the throw values are given in meters down to 1 lux, I view them as foot candles down to 1 foot. Since 1 foot candle at 1 foot is equal to 10.764 lux at 1 meter, I end up with roughly 10 times the light falling on the object I am trying to see. 

For example, the TigerLight has a throw of around 145 meters, down to 1 lux. For me, I view that as at 145 feet I will be able to clearly see an object in minimal ambient light conditions, at around 72 feet I will be able to see in higher ambient light conditions, and at around 36 feet I will be able to light up a shadow in bright sunlight.

Things change when I am working in close quarters, or it is completely dark. I become "near sighted" in those conditions and prefer a good flood beam.

I would guess that if you spend most of your time on a boat or involved in search and rescue, you would lean toward throw, but if you spend most of your time trying to figure out wiring inside a computer case, flood would be better.

It all depends on what you are doing...

Tom


----------



## tron3 (Mar 7, 2006)

Paul_in_Maryland said:


> ...
> So I guess I have two questions:
> 
> Do you agree that newbies seek out throw more than non-newbies?
> If so, why newbies?...




Well, I'll toss in my 2 or 3 cents.

When I was a young ignorant flashaholic (No comments, guys!) I associated throw with power. There is something thrilling about lighting something too far out for you to even see detail. It was like having a laser light.

As long as I have throw, do I need anything else? For some reason, people would rather pan the light up and down, and side to side to see the large object, rather than have a spot light. Maglites were supposed to be the best of both worlds, but that broken halo effect didn't do us much good.

In short, I'd say it is inexperience. If you want that much throw but have no legit reason for it, it's just a toy for you. *A TRUE flashaholic has one of each.* :naughty:


----------



## mdocod (Mar 7, 2006)

reminds me of this time I visted checker auto(evening, dark out)- and out in front one of the employees was trying to help a lady put in a new battery- they barrowed the floor model THOR and had it pointed at the battery from less than 2 feet away.... talk about using a throw monster in the most useless possible way, lol. It was reflecting so much light back OUT from the intense spot that they probably would have been able to see better, unblinded, in the low lighting conditions anyways.


----------



## the_beast (Mar 7, 2006)

This may have been mentioned before (I didn't read the second page), but I think the reason newbie's favour throw is because it is the ONLY thing you can measure properly. All light meters measure throw, and saying a light will go x meters means something to someone who has no lights to compare.

I know there are other ways to measure output than using the integrating sphere (like Doug's box idea), but these measurements are useless until you have a light in your hand that acts as a reference. How many people off the street will know what a 10 lumen light (for flood or throw) will look like anyhow? But say 'this light goes further than that one' is understandable by everybody.

Basically I don't think newbies are obsessed with throw (speaking as a newbie myself). I just think that until you have a few lights (and are therefore probably not a newbie any more) you don't have anything else to compare.

And still as a newbie, possibly my most often used light has zero spill and relatively good throw (for it's size/output) and that is why I use it. My Dorcy 1AAA (with optic) is great for finding your way through a dark cinema without disturbing anybody  . I also prefer it when inside my computer case, as it only lights up what I need to see at once, and I don't get too many reflections of the inside of the case. Spill isn't always good, even for a dim light.


----------



## RAF_Groundcrew (Mar 7, 2006)

For maximum throw, I have my Thor with 130w bulb, for a little less throw, and a light I can carry round, I have my M4, for everything else, I make do with SF 6P, M2, or more often, my L1, which has a F04 diffuser fitted, to even out the beam, which is too tight for indoor use, but quite good outdoors, for such a modest 1 cell light.

Surefire puts a lot of sales pitch mileage into their perfect beam 'no holes', and generally, with reflectors and lamps, this is true. When the light is coming from LEDs, or through lensed optics, the beam can be less than perfect, and this can be annoying at times, my Orb RAW has a hole in the middle of the beam at close range, it could be the focus of the LED is off little, but beyond 2 feet, it doesn't matter.


----------



## Paladin (Mar 7, 2006)

I lived with a couple of Maglites and a SF 6P quite happily for many years. When I needed to make a large hole in the darkness I just accepted that a 12 volt. light plugged into a cigarette lighter would be needed.

What sparked my interest was the Gen I KL-3, hardly a throw monster! Streamlight TL-2 LED's have been my favorite EDC since I found them. And the night I turned on a TL-3 xenon while pointing it at a pad of paper a foot from my well dilated night adapted peepers merely reinforced the practicality of "less light".

Here in West Texas in open areas like around our city reservoir you can use all the throw imaginable. I like to drive out there during the cycle(new?) when the moon is absent or almost so. An M4 is a nice tool for nocturnal walks along a shoreline when you need to decide "Honey, is that a dog or really large coon?".

We really had an incident where some fellow walkers asked my wife if a large furry critter over on some rocks was her dog. We did not have our animal with us, so we went to look. And Paladin crawled up and took a flash camera photo of a "looked waist high in the dark!" coon which was kind of agitated about the attention. The sight would have been much more enjoyable from about 30 yards farther away, I assure you!

This flashoholism can still be as inexpensive and rewarding as any other "hobby" activity for the DIY type. That's something I think is cool about CPF, the chance to build/buy/own something that gives personal satisfaction while being of considerable utility value.

Paladin


----------



## maxilux (Mar 7, 2006)

I don´t understand this threat, will you have a flashlight only to show?
to clean? for high price? what´s the problem?
I think a flashlight is to make light in the dark in the first!!
I (and i can speak only for me) need no flashlight for Showtime.
A had a car to drive, and a TV-Set to look, a pen to write and so on.
The newbies are at the roots, they are not infectet with the SF-Virus and others modern problems that no one needs realy.


----------



## stogiez (Mar 7, 2006)

I'm a noob and here's why I went for throw at first. As my sig line states I got tired of having this big ol' bat hanging off my belt when my friends and I were out plinking frogs and other critters at night out on a ranch near the watering holes. But the Mag was all I knew. It got pretty heavy/awkward swinging around a 4-6 D light while taking aim with a 22LR pistol in the other hand. It just doesn't work.

Enter Flashlightreviews.com TADA! Starting reading and learning. A lot. Learned about throw, output, and everything else. The comparisons helped tremendously. My PT Surge, Scorpion, and G2 were a perfect balance of throw, size and COST. Especially the Surge. Used it to "spot" bunnies when a hand held spot got too hot.

Tried to start EDC the Scorp, and/or G2 but they are too big for a pocket. That's when I decided to go smaller for the pocket. Started looking at those, and now--

My name is Stogiez, and I'm a flashaholic.




Having said that, I now am looking forward to my next trip to my buddy's ranch with UV lights. He had a scorpion crawling on his boot while he had his feet kicked up. It would be very nice to be able to spot them in the dark out on the porch. Or even on the floor in the house, getting up in the middle of the night.


----------



## Icebreak (Mar 7, 2006)

Lurveleven -

It's a little difficult to describe dimensional use of a dimensional beam. Thanks for the confirmation it was understandable.


----------



## mdocod (Mar 8, 2006)

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/110313


----------



## Babo (Mar 8, 2006)

Paul_in_Maryland said:


> I just don't get this single-minded search for throw per dollar, throw per watt, throw per unit of length, or any other measure, be it absolute or relative.
> 
> Users of high-end bicycle lights don't seek out throw above all else. They understand the value of a broad beam. (Of course, many use two lights: One for throw, the other for flood.)
> 
> At the risk of offending: I'm reminded of a fake radio spot I heard back in the 80s: "Cadillac--for 50 years, the choice of men with small p_____s."



A variation on your Cadillac commercial: "(brand) bicycles--for 50 years, the choice of boys....or grown men who can't afford a Cadillac."

Some folks venture outside and would like to illuminate
things more distant than the cables behind their X-Box.


----------



## Sub_Umbra (Mar 8, 2006)

Babo said:


> ...Some folks venture outside and would like to illuminate
> things more distant than the cables behind their X-Box.


/LOL -- Slaps knee


----------



## cave dave (Mar 9, 2006)

Well I must be the only person on CPF who joined looking for efficiency. Most Lumens per Watt at the smallest size and lightes weight. Those are still my main interests. I still find a 15 Lumen light to be the all around most useful, and have yet to find a use for tight throw except for playing around and spotting deer in my yard.
So what is throw actually good for. Here is the list so far:
1) Frog Gigging
2) Search and Rescue
3) Spotting Deer and other wildlife (see 1)
4) Blinding your friends because you are immature (PS I'll admit I did this yesterday with the Stenlight)
5) any others...


----------



## tracker870 (Mar 9, 2006)

Many newbies figure out eventually that
Throw is good for some things,
Spill & Flood are good for other apps.
Somewhere in the middle can be great!


----------



## Icebreak (Mar 10, 2006)

cave dave -

I don't think you are at all alone in a an initial and continued quest for efficiency. Several cavers here I believe. Scuba guys I think need heavy power + efficiency = predictable runtime. Long distance runners, cyclists and sled drivers may rank efficiency highly.

_ "1) Frog Gigging
2) Search and Rescue
3) Spotting Deer and other wildlife (see 1)
4) Blinding your friends because you are immature (PS I'll admit I did this yesterday with the Stenlight)
5) any others..."_

The list is longer than that. Law Enforcement, Military Operations, First Responders, Security Professionals, Ranching, Farming...Outdoorsmen, fishing, hunting kayaking and yes, hiking. Sure, a nice LED headlamp is outstanding for hiking but if the trail affords a view into a valley...light it up with a thrower and enjoy.

No kidding. Not 30 minutes ago, as I was pulling up to the house, I saw a neighbor milling about his truck. I parked and then asked if he needed help. He explained he was breaking into his vehicle because he'd locked the keys in it. He had a 2D in his pocket and was confident he could handle the situation but was happy I offered help.

How did I help? An A2 would have been good. A tri-lux III would have been good. Well, of course I had an led keychain light and a single LuxIII available but when I exit a vehicle at night when I come home 9 times out of 10 I've got a big thrower in my hand. I didn't shine the hotspot of the 6C Mag66 at his target. I used the white sidespill to illuminate his work. At any time we could have lit up anything neighborhood quickly.

Dimensional use of a Dimensional beam.

I'll add one more to the list. Authoritative ownership of night time urban and suburban environments by the good citizens.


----------



## JimH (Mar 10, 2006)

cave dave said:


> So what is throw actually good for. Here is the list so far:
> 1) Frog Gigging
> 2) Search and Rescue
> 3) Spotting Deer and other wildlife (see 1)
> ...


6) Amazing your friends and new aquaintances when camping out
7) Turning off streetlights
8) Encouraging that a**hole doing 55 in the fast lane to get out of your way 
9) Finding that wooden bridge you used as a landmark after you've missed your turn on the trail (in the dead of night, of course).
10) Finding something else that looks similar to a trail after you've decided to do your own trail blazing.
11) Spotting your dog for the oncoming car to see after he gets loose in the middle of the street
12) Showing the local fire and rescue crew the inadequacy of their government funded lighting implements


----------



## Flakey (Mar 10, 2006)

i seem to recall that there are no "new" cpfers that own a tank light. nuff said. throw is always desireable for me. i doubt many new cpfers are buying kumkangs and x990s. i think the ability to throw a beam as far as your eyes are capable of seeing is pretty darn impressive! im currently loking for a 5inch or larger reflector for my mag100 project


----------



## KevinL (Mar 10, 2006)

13) Blinding other flashaholics who want to see if your light really is blinding
14) Spotting whoever, or WHATEVER the hell it is coming down the path you THOUGHT was deserted. The more range you have, the longer away you can ID, and the bigger the headstart if you have to run for it! (real experience)
15) Outdoors. They're like, uh, big places. 


All that having been said the majority of my lights are flood beams.. although some can reach pretty far by sheer virtue of the amount of lumens coming out the front.


----------



## CM (Mar 10, 2006)

Throw is more or less a novelty for me these. While it's true that I desire some throw on occassion and there is a light or two in my collection for that, I have trimmed down my collection of lights to those that have 1) long run time 2) good short to very short range flood. My Arc's have survived all my downsizings, and I still own a gen 1 KL1 (the first KL1 I ever bought) modified with a TWOH Lux III and IMS reflector for 4.5 hours of solid light. I was also obsessed with throw during my earlier CPF adventures but I think I have "aged" gracefully into a pragmatist :nana:


----------



## dcarch8 (Mar 10, 2006)

OK, I have the final answer.  

I saw this in a movie, therefore it must be true. 

 

I forgot the name of the movie. A whole gang of hirsute cavemen were jumping up and down dancing and yelling, showing off their new discovery to their cavewomen (also hirsute) *Fire*!!! Man-made foot-candles!!!

 

I deduct, hence, the desire for throw and lumens are in fact instinctual and primordial. As doctor Phil can tell you when an instinct drive is not satiated timely, epi emotional distress will manifest in various forms of anti-social deviant expressions. 

 

So fellow CFPers, new or old, don't deny and suppress your need to flip (or twist) that switch and throw a beam in your neighbor’s eyes across the street. It's all for the good of humanity.

dcarch8


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Mar 10, 2006)

For about as long as I can remember (Pre-CPF by a LOT!) I've always favored beam over everything else. I was messing with the PR base trying to center up bulbs LONG ago.

I don't really have any particular "Throwers", but my Hotwire stuff reaches out there just fine!

That said, for 95% of my light needs my Lambda made 3W drop in through a stock Minim*g reflector does fine!


----------



## LuxLuthor (Mar 10, 2006)

I think this question has nothing to do with new users vs. experienced users that was asked on the first page.

It has to do with activities and functions. For example, I exclusively use my FM Mag85 1300L or Mag1331 750L with SMO reflectors whenever walking around outside, as I want to see skunks, raccoons, cats, dogs, fox, moles, etc. from as far away as possible. This is where I use my lights 80% of the time.

Conversely, I use a MOP reflector Mag, SF-M4, SF-L2, MiniMag, or Fenix inside or in small outside area.

I bought an X990, and XeRay lights for similar outside reasons as a new CPF member.


----------



## glyphin (Mar 11, 2006)

photovoltaic said:


> I'm a minister [...] I ordered an A2 on Saturday just because I thought it was cool. :rock:



LOL, anybody else see what's funny? (hint: it's the origins/imagery of the rocking smiley)


----------



## cerbie (Mar 11, 2006)

glyphin said:


> LOL, anybody else see what's funny? (hint: it's the origins/imagery of the rocking smiley)


Nah, the corna is cool. *I'm* not ready to argue with a dead little Italian lady, her living little old headbanging god (well, he's 64...), nor Mr. Clinton (who's colored locks hypnotize his prey!). :rock:


----------

