# Why the dislike for Maglites?



## SARLights (Aug 10, 2010)

Hello, I was just browsing the forums, and noticed that a lot of people talk about "[email protected]" almost as if they consider them to be in the same class as $1 wal-mart lights.
I may be wrong, but it seems very prevalent to me. 
I was just wondering what the reason for this is, not trying to make an argument for them or anything.
Why?

Cheers

-SARLights


----------



## joe1512 (Aug 10, 2010)

I too am curious about this. What exactly does [email protected] stand for? I thought maybe some odd copyright thing or people being cute.


From a CPF point of view, maglites are kind of the standard. They are well built and have lots of aluminum, but their emitters are pretty weak, even the LED versions. So they make fairly large heavy and poor flashlights to a trained CPFer.

Still, many people here love to modify Maglites and Ive personally seen many very well done mods and its hard to beat a maglite for getting a solid host for cheap.


----------



## Chucula (Aug 10, 2010)

I think almost every CPF member over the age of 18 has at least one maglite somewhere. They are venerable lights but outdated, dinosaurs of the flashlight world. But because of their age, there are lots of modifications available, and the design is iconic, so people still get them. 

Heck, I bought a AAA and AA minimag pack a few weeks ago just to stick in some LED upgrades I found online.


----------



## kingofwylietx (Aug 10, 2010)

I'm not aware of any general dislike of Mags in here. Stock Mags are fairly weak compared to other products out there if you are looking at pure lumens, but they are very popular (tons of mods available). I interpret the spelling as similar to people calling McDonalds 'Mickey D's'.


----------



## Mr Bigglow (Aug 10, 2010)

I stick up for maglites all the time- in the C and D versions, they are excellent self defense items that also emit a certain amount of light. But seriously folks, try the veal.  

But seriously-seriously, when stuck on a dark road with dubious people slowing down to take a look, give me a maglite to hold. And if large batteries happen to be what you can get, what else are you going to use?


----------



## Rat6P (Aug 10, 2010)

I believe the brand was started by a Mr Maglica.........hence the name of the lite.

Some would say that maglite has sort of dropped the ball in terms of staying current with all the new advancements we have been seeing in the last few years.
They were certainly the benchmark back in the day (IMO).
Regardless, they make sweet hosts.


----------



## hoongern (Aug 10, 2010)

joe1512 said:


> I too am curious about this. What exactly does [email protected] stand for? I thought maybe some odd copyright thing or people being cute.



I'm not sure about CPF as a whole, but I always understood [email protected] to mean a Maglite which had been modded/changed in some way. After it's been modded, it's not _really _a "Maglite" per say, hence the name change.

At least, I used to call my Maglite 2D a..well.. Maglite, until I modded it, and now it's a [email protected] (Maglite 2D body w/ FM CL-1909 bulb for 2000 lumens)

Don't know about the rest, though.


----------



## Fulgeo (Aug 10, 2010)

Some of the newer LED based Mags have decent throw, runtime and utility. I love 3D Mags as the basic base for most of my mods. They just fit my hand well and are not too heavy to carry on a 5 mile walk. I even have a 6D Mag or two. Why do you ask? So when the SHTF and the flesh eating zombies walk the earth and in your darkest moments you will see your uncle Fulgeo cresting the horizon as the light throwing pipe swinging CPFer I am!:thumbsup:


----------



## dougw (Aug 10, 2010)

I am planning on acquiring a 3D Maglite to use as a host for some future LED projects. Is it better it get an incandescent or a LED light.


----------



## Rat6P (Aug 10, 2010)

Sounds reasonable to me.
Never really thought about it before.
You learn something new everyday
Thanks.




hoongern said:


> I'm not sure about CPF as a whole, but I always understood [email protected] to mean a Maglite which had been modded/changed in some way. After it's been modded, it's not _really _a "Maglite" per say, hence the name change.
> 
> At least, I used to call my Maglite 2D a..well.. Maglite, until I modded it, and now it's a [email protected] (Maglite 2D body w/ FM CL-1909 bulb for 2000 lumens)
> 
> Don't know about the rest, though.


----------



## LED_Thrift (Aug 10, 2010)

[email protected] does indeed make a well machined product for a fair price. Their product development may be slow, but for the larger high-volume companies this is a common complaint. 

People here are resentful of [email protected] because they were overly-aggressive in suing other companies, many of which are now out of business. The companies were trying to innovate and break into the flashlight market and Mag tries to kill them by litigating. I believe that the spelling of [email protected] was a sarcastic way of keeping it less visible on the web to their legal dept.


----------



## Paul_in_Maryland (Aug 10, 2010)

Their advertised output was a sham because, more than any other brand, their incandescent filaments performed notoriously poorly once the average cell voltage dipped below, say, 1.4V.


----------



## Fulgeo (Aug 10, 2010)

dougw said:


> I am planning on acquiring a 3D Maglite to use as a host for some future LED projects. Is it better it get an incandescent or a LED light.



Hey Dougw! Your question has the potential to start a big argument since alot of CPFers have major opinions on the subject on which is better. Dig thru a few threads and you will see what I mean. It usually starts a flame war. That being said why not build 2 X 3D Mag mods and decide for yourself? Each design has advantages and disadvantages. A good place to start would be to build a SSC P7 mod and a WA1185 mod. Use your google-fu!

Happy mods!


----------



## TooManyGizmos (Aug 10, 2010)

~

I guess .... simply cause we've moved past em .... to better things .

Mag lights are the 80's & 90's Tech.

We are now in the 21st century of lights !

Why use a C or D cell as long and as fat as your forearm ........

when you can now use one with the same brightness and reach .... that fits in your pocket ?


~


----------



## SARLights (Aug 10, 2010)

LED_Thrift said:


> I believe that the spelling of [email protected] was a sarcastic way of keeping it less visible on the web to their legal dept.




That's an interesting reason. So far we have two reasons why people do that. Any others? :laughing:


----------



## PCC (Aug 10, 2010)

I've read here on these forums somewhere that the use of [email protected] instead of MagLite is so that Google searches don't turn up a billion results pointing back to CPF.

I'm one of those folks who love to buy MagLites to use as hosts. Even the LED ones are nothing more than hosts to me.



dougw said:


> I am planning on acquiring a 3D Maglite to use as a host for some future LED projects. Is it better it get an incandescent or a LED light.


The only real advantage of the Rebel 3D MagLED over the 3D MagLite is that you get the deeper reflector. This should result in a few more Lux directed down range than the older reflector. The non-Rebel MagLED and incandescent MagLites have a shallower reflector. You can install a Rebel MagLED reflector in one of these lights but the reflector will hit the end of the body of the light when you screw the head all the way down because they cut the threads on the body tube shorter on the Rebel MagLEDs. The Rebel MagLEDs can take both long and short reflectors. The Rebel MagLEDs are slightly longer overall than the older MagLEDs and regular MagLites to compensate for the longer reflector.


----------



## carrot (Aug 10, 2010)

A lot of people lost respect for Maglite when they sued the original Arc Flashlight into oblivion.


----------



## DM51 (Aug 10, 2010)

Some people called their mods [email protected], M&gs etc to make it easier to find them here using a search.


----------



## Swedpat (Aug 10, 2010)

I understand that it's a difference between the opinion of stock Maglites (who are out of date by a large margin) and Maglite as a modding host. 
I have many Maglites (just see my collection linked in the signature), and the only one I use in stock condition is MagCharger. The MiniMaglites are the only flashlights in my collection who I have just for collecting purpose. Soon I am waiting for a coming NEOFAB 1000+ lumens dropin to 5 or 6D...

Regards, Patric


----------



## Jash (Aug 10, 2010)

Mags rock! I don't care what anyone says about the size, company ethics or what else. If it weren't for Maglite, there would be a few thousand less flashaholics in the world (and that's bad).

Stock mags are a poor example of a flashlight though. As a host for modding, they are second to none as you can choose any battery format and any drop-in modification you can dream of. You can't get 1000+ lumens out of a P60 size drop-in with any kind of useful runtime.

Here is a very good reason to own a mag. And things are only going to get brighter and better as time goes on. One thing that won't change in the world is people who want to mod their mags.


----------



## kramer5150 (Aug 10, 2010)

I love my D mags. I have always considered a D-1185 in an OP reflector like a poor mans SF-M6.

My most used mag is a D-ROP 3853-L. With 2x26650 cells its my whitest tint incan... whiter color temperature than my SF-A2.


----------



## Locoboy5150 (Aug 10, 2010)

I *love* Maglites! As stated by so many others, I like them for their relatively low price which makes them ideal for modification projects. I just don't have the nerve or budget to modify an expensive light like a Surefire M6 or Fenix TK40, but $15 for a D cell Maglite is something that both my wallet and my stomach can handle, even if I mess up a couple of times and have to buy another new Maglite to start all over again. Good luck doing that with another comparably sized light for a modification project.

I also like the simple and classic shape of Maglites. They just feel so good in my hands and because they've been around for so long, they're immediately familiar like when putting on an old pair of faded blue jeans.

I like them so much, my latest light is a modified silver 2 D cell Maglite. It's not modified *too* much with just a simple Terralux TLE-300M-EX drop in, a UCL lens, and a FiveMega 6 AA battery holder, but I'm *very* happy with the results.

My backup EDC almost since I bought it in about 1985-ish is a black 2 AA Mini-Maglite. It has been modified, but I still like it and I still use it. I never leave home without it strapped to my belt in a holster. No, it's nowhere near as fancy as my main EDC, a Fenix LD20, but it just works and works well so I have no urge to replace it with anything new.

I will always like Maglites! Well...except for the Solitaire. I bought one of those when they first came out due to my positive experience with my Mini-Maglite. One was too many!


----------



## march.brown (Aug 10, 2010)

With this dropin , you can't dislike Maglites any more.

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/277748

Even my Wife loves her modified 2C with two 18500 Li-Ions ... It wasn't originally done for her , but I got outvoted.
.


----------



## mtnbikergt (Aug 10, 2010)

I bought a Maglite XL100 about a month ago and it is a whole lot different than past maglite's (which I have many). Puts out 83 lumens according to Maglite (seems much higher though) and has extremely good throw! I hope this light is a huge success for Maglite and they build upon it for future lights.


----------



## Track Terror (Aug 10, 2010)

I'm new here but I think Maglites are kind of seen in the same light as Bose. They came out in the early days with a top quality product (for the time) and made money hand over fist. 

Instead of using that money to continualy strive to get better and better and remain on the cutting edge they became a fat cat and just swallowed up that money and kept doing the same thing over and over relying on the name recognition to make sales. 

In the meantime everyone and their brother made huge strides leaving them in the dust with only name recognition keeping them viable.


----------



## KiwiMark (Aug 10, 2010)

I love my Maglites - more light and better colour than my LEDs and being bigger they hold more watt-hours of power giving a strong light for longer than a smaller light does. Maglites are my favourite hosts!

I do have a couple of 2xAA Minimags that I don't really like, but I keep 'em as potential loaners. They have 5-mode Nite Ize switches and Nite Ize LED drop ins.

I have a few D cell hosts - 4 x 2D, 1 x 3D, 2 x 4D & 1 x 6D.
The 6D runs 6 x 4000mAh NiCd D cells and a 3854-H bulb.
One 4D runs 4 x 10Ah NiMH D cells and a Malkoff LED dropin.
The other 4D runs 5 x IMR 26500 cells and an Osram 64458 bulb - good for lighting up an large area REALLY brightly, or starting newspaper on fire.
The 3D runs 3 x 32600 Li-ion cells and a 64430 bulb through an AlanB programmable regulated driver - max is about 79W from the 30W bulb.
One of the 2D lights is running a 64430 bulb through an AW soft start switch from 2 x 32600 cells.
The other 3 2D lights are all running 2 x 32600 cells and a ROP bulb:
- 3854-H, 2" deep reflector
- 3854-L, 2" deep reflector
- 3853-H, bi-focal reflector

All my Maglites have the polycarb lens replaced with a glass one and all the D cell lights except for the Malkoff drop-in one have an aluminium reflector.

A stock Maglite may not be much of a light, but there is plenty of potential to improve the performance and have some fun doing it. It is also cool that they look like ordinary poor performing lights until you power the suckers up.


----------



## selfbuilt (Aug 10, 2010)

hoongern said:


> I'm not sure about CPF as a whole, but I always understood [email protected] to mean a Maglite which had been modded/changed in some way. After it's been modded, it's not _really _a "Maglite" per say, hence the name change.





LED_Thrift said:


> People here are resentful of [email protected] because they were overly-aggressive in suing other companies, many of which are now out of business. The companies were trying to innovate and break into the flashlight market and Mag tries to kill them by litigating. I believe that the spelling of [email protected] was a sarcastic way of keeping it less visible on the web to their legal dept.





SARLights said:


> That's an interesting reason. So far we have two reasons why people do that. Any others? :laughing:


I've only been around here for 4 years now, but the @ spelling was prevalent then. I recall searching at the time, and most threads on the topic pointed to LED_Thrift's interpretation (although the modders definitely used it as well).

My understanding was that it had fallen into ironic usage, in the sense that Mag was such a "dirty" word around here that the CPF obscenity filters would catch it (hence need for "[email protected]").

Kinda funny actually, like the common usage of Rat Shack, Home Despot, and Crappy Tire for a few familiar retailers.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 10, 2010)

I have a soft spot for Maglites. My first "real" flashlight was a 3 D-cell Maglite that I bought around 20-years ago and which I still have stuffed in my dresser drawer, and I carried a 2AA Mini Maglite with my for years as a television news photographer. Even though I now carry the best of the best -- a high CRI Ra Clicky -- I'll always have a fondness for Maglites.


----------



## Kestrel (Aug 10, 2010)

The Solitaire AAA. :green:

If that isn't enough, there were the the half-dozen Minimags I've owned where most of them developed intermittent electrical contacts in the head area. :green::green:

None of my other lights have exhibited anything like this rather frustrating tendency. :green::green::green:


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 10, 2010)

Look at my list of lights. I diffently like mags, for a long time they provided some of the best bang for your buck, and even thought the output always left something to be desired, the build and materials were always top notch. However, my biggest problem with the maglites were it's fatal design flaw, the cammed reflector. This is a major design flaw, IMHO, that dosen't give the light any advantages and lots of disadvantages. Mag should have taken a look around at other design's years ago, realised this flaw, and went with some type of textured reflector instead. Alot of people I know actually don't mind the size or heft or a maglite, it's the **** poor beam quality that turns them off. No disrespect towards Mr. Maglica but, you would think that in the design room years ago, when the beam was shined on a wall, he would have said to himself, geez, we've got to go back to the drawing board, this is terrible.


----------



## SARLights (Aug 11, 2010)

selfbuilt said:


> I've only been around here for 4 years now, but the @ spelling was prevalent then. I recall searching at the time, and most threads on the topic pointed to LED_Thrift's interpretation (although the modders definitely used it as well).
> 
> My understanding was that it had fallen into ironic usage, in the sense that Mag was such a "dirty" word around here that the CPF obscenity filters would catch it (hence need for "[email protected]").



Interesting...thanks for your input!


----------



## KiwiMark (Aug 11, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> you would think that in the design room years ago, when the beam was shined on a wall, he would have said to himself, geez, we've got to go back to the drawing board, this is terrible.



If he had fivemega working for him then the problem would have been solved long ago!


----------



## Monocrom (Aug 11, 2010)

hoongern said:


> I'm not sure about CPF as a whole, but I always understood [email protected] to mean a Maglite which had been modded/changed in some way. After it's been modded, it's not _really _a "Maglite" per say, hence the name change.


 
Nope! Not at all.

It's a way of talking about the product and showing one's discontent or dislike with the company/owner.

(And sometimes discontent or dislike is too soft a term for it.)


----------



## Chrontius (Aug 11, 2010)

Track Terror said:


> I'm new here but I think Maglites are kind of seen in the same light as Bose. They came out in the early days with a top quality product (for the time) and made money hand over fist.
> 
> Instead of using that money to continualy strive to get better and better and remain on the cutting edge they became a fat cat and just swallowed up that money and kept doing the same thing over and over relying on the name recognition to make sales.
> 
> In the meantime everyone and their brother made huge strides leaving them in the dust with only name recognition keeping them viable.



Mag hasn't sat idly on that cash; instead of upgunning their products, they focused on lowering costs and wholesale prices haven't gone up since they introduced their product - despite inflation.

Can't say that about Surefire.

On the other hand, there are some cheap and easy things Mag could do to make their products a whole lot more awesome. Light orange peel reflectors would be widely appreciated, I think, and they could certainly start making the high-pressure-xenon bulbs standard equipment. Also, moving the Solitaire to LED would be great - I've heard it described thus: "I've seen brighter matches, with better runtime!"

Also, they certainly have in-house ability to make battery cassettes - they could introduce a 6AA model using the 2D body and 6D xenon bulb without significant work. I'm running that configuration in a cheap Indonesian Rayovac plastic torch with cheap Chinese 3AA-D cassettes, and it works wonderfully.

The MagCharger could have been NiMH or two-cell lithium ion _years_ ago with minimal changes.

At least they're getting out of the innovation slump now.


----------



## carrot (Aug 11, 2010)

I have also heard (this is probably just hearsay) that Maglite's R&D has been cranking away for years making all sorts of (amazing) products that we have never seen and in all likelihood will never see. Some say that Tony Maglica is the driving force that keeps many of these things buried.


----------



## Burgess (Aug 11, 2010)

The Mini-Maglite served me well, for Decades.


My story is here:


https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/141266


:candle:
_


----------



## ANDREAS FERRARI (Aug 11, 2010)

I believe the problem the average CPFer has with Maglite is the size of the light compared to its output and not the quality of the product. 

The size of lights Maglite produces is dictated by the size of batteries commonly available to consumers.While we can use 9P size lights powered by 3-cr123's the average person is forced to use 6 D-cell size lights to get the same voltage and output.


----------



## Monocrom (Aug 11, 2010)

ANDREAS FERRARI said:


> I believe the problem the average CPFer has with Maglite is the size of the light compared to its output and not the quality of the product.


 
Back before I became a flashaholic, I owned a handful of lights. 3D model kept in my car, two 2AA Mini-mags, and a 2D disposeable model from G.E.

The 3D lasted longer than the other Maglites. (Three years.) Before falling apart in my hands; literally. One of the Mini-mags did the same. The other one sneaked by Q.C. (Barrel was far too soft.)

The G.E. light lasted for 12 years with infrequent use at home. 

On a more recent note, I bought a 4D Maglite to use with a TerraLux drop-in. The threads in the head were so bad, I had to buy another 3D Maglite just to get a head that would screw on properly to the 4D body. 

I wish the quality components used in the MagCharger were also used in the more common, non-rechargeable, Maglites.


----------



## CKOD (Aug 11, 2010)

I'd also expect it to be some CYA for some of the vendors on here. They do a non-insignificant amount of buisness, and probably dont want to run into issues with trademarks. Selling something as "Maglite drop in P7 LED module" or something like that, could be taken as implying something was made my mag.

Plus its easier then Maglite™


Maglite is a trademark of Mag Industries, xyz seller has no affiliation with Mag Industries


With every post.


----------



## ANDREAS FERRARI (Aug 11, 2010)

CKOD said:


> Plus its easier then Maglite™
> 
> 
> Maglite is a trademark of Mag Industries, xyz seller has no affiliation with Mag Industries
> ...



Now there is an explanation I have never heard before.Great thinking CKOD!!!! :twothumbs


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 11, 2010)

carrot said:


> I have also heard (this is probably just hearsay) that Maglite's R&D has been cranking away for years making all sorts of (amazing) products that we have never seen and in all likelihood will never see. Some say that Tony Maglica is the driving force that keeps many of these things buried.


That sounds unlikely.


----------



## broadgage (Aug 11, 2010)

As many other post, maglights are solidly built but rather old fashioned compared to some other brands.
I still use them, and recomend them especialy to non-flasholics. The use of standard, cheap and long lasting batteries is a plus. 123 are far too expensive retail for general use, and explode if defective or misused.

Most CPF members can purchase 123 lithium cells cheaply, would not even think of trying to charge them, and are aware of the dangers of mismatched cells in series.
But for the man/woman in the street, alkalines are simple, cheap and foolproof. Even if misused they dont explode or catch fire but only leak.

A 2D maglight with a 0.5 amp halogen bulb gives 24 hours acceptable light from alkaline cells, and at least 6 hours on zinc/carbon cells.
An LED drop in of low power gives hundreds of hours light, or a high power drop in gives a similar run time to incandescent but with a lot more light.
A spare bulb in tail cap is very useful, esp for the average user who otherwise would not have a spare available.

Untill recently my EDC was still a stock minimag, with a second as backup, though I have moved with the times and now EDC ones with teralux LED modules. I still like the reassurance of the spare incan bulb in the tailcap just in case the LED module fails, though this has not yet happened.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 11, 2010)

Chrontius said:


> Also, moving the Solitaire to LED would be great - I've heard it described thus: "I've seen brighter matches, with better runtime!"


I gave my wife a little button-cell key chain light I got free with a Lighthound order, and she immediately ditched her Solitaire.


----------



## mrartillery (Aug 11, 2010)

How could you not love a host with literally hundreds of different mod options, whether it be incan or led? Cheers to you Tony! :twothumbs


----------



## flashfan (Aug 11, 2010)

Do I dislike or resent Gaglites? No. I absolutely _detest_ them. The lights themselves are ho-hum, but company "policy" is the kicker for me. 

It all started to come to light years ago when a lawsuit was filed against Arc/Peter--IIRC, the lawsuit, or at least part of it, had to to with the _lettering_ on the head of the Arc AAA. Not engineering, not "intellectual" design, etc., but the the way in which the Arc name was inscribed on the flashlight. (My memory could be faulty on the details, so do _not_ take my word for it.)

The catalyst for me, was a magazine article covering an interview with the head honcho. Tony seemed "proud" about the _$70+ million_ he had to spend (at that time) on suing others to protect his rights. As if that weren't enough, the information regarding money spent on lawsuits was actually "featured" on Gaglite's _homepage_ at the time. It was subsequently removed, but for me, the die was cast.

Granted, some of the lawsuits probably had merit, but $70+ _million_ worth?!? Too excessive for me, and a prime example of my sigline.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 11, 2010)

flashfan said:


> Do I dislike or resent Gaglites? No. I absolutely _detest_ them. The lights themselves are ho-hum, but company "policy" is the kicker for me.
> 
> It all started to come to light years ago when a lawsuit was filed against Arc/Peter--IIRC, the lawsuit, or at least part of it, had to to with the _lettering_ on the head of the Arc AAA. Not engineering, not "intellectual" design, etc., but the the way in which the Arc name was inscribed on the flashlight. (My memory could be faulty on the details, so do _not_ take my word for it.)
> 
> ...


 

Yeah, they even tried suing ID software for using a flashlight in the game Doom 3 that had a beam that "resembled a maglite's unique beam". The claim was ridiculos at best, I'm not sure what the outcome was though, hopefully maglite lost, I'm only saying that because it was one of the dumbest lawsuit's against another company I ever heard of. Shame on them.


----------



## jamesmtl514 (Aug 11, 2010)

I've owned about 20 Mags.
From my first red Solitaire AAA which I still have, but has a shattered lens because the newer Solitaire replacement bulb was longer than the older design, to the latest addition, my 3rd 3D LED. 

I still plan on buying a few 6Ds to Have around the house by the doors. 

I rather have a D cell Mag in my hand than a 1000+ lumen cute Ti light when there's someone at the door....


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 11, 2010)

flashfan said:


> It all started to come to light years ago when a lawsuit was filed against Arc/Peter...


I really can't fault Mag for that because the Arc was, at least by appearance, practically a carbon copy of the Solitaire, right down to the Solitaire's distinctive packaging. Mag had a legitimate grievance since the similarities were striking.

I also can't fault them for protecting their intellectual property in general.


----------



## KiwiMark (Aug 11, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> I also can't fault them for protecting their intellectual property in general.



It's also a bit crazy to fault them on how much they have spent to protect their property - remember that they are sold worldwide and legal action to stop a US company importing & selling clones from China would not stop similar importers in Australia or the UK. Maybe for a company the size of Maglite spending $70+ million on protecting their rights isn't much at all.

I agree that suing ID Software for using a distinctive Maglite beam pattern does seem a bit silly. Of course that may not have been a very serious lawsuit, maybe just a publicity stunt to get Maglite in the news (did it ever actually go to trial?).

I have seen plenty of Maglite clones, usually shoddily made just trying to get sales from people that recognise the distinctive Mag look.


----------



## etc (Aug 12, 2010)

I was a miglite fan for years. 
But I picked up a Surefire 9P and was shocked how much more solidly built it was. Everything about it was an order of magnitude better than miglite. Just look at the thread of body to tailcap. Much thicker, difficult or impossible to cross-thread, the body walls are much thicker too. Seems a lot more difficult to damage.

the other reason, with my discovery of Surefire Lego and 123 and 18650 cells, I haven't used D-based miglites for years. Just no reason for them anymore, for me. I still keep some for emergency and long runtime but in actuality never use them. Whatever for, when you can have a Surefire 9P sized lite that generates 400 lumens or maybe is brighter than a car headlight.

Clearly though, SF is not for everyone and certainly not for the average consumer. that's the segment and the price point miglite targets and rather well.


----------



## Monocrom (Aug 12, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> I really can't fault Mag for that because the Arc was, at least by appearance, practically a carbon copy of the Solitaire, right down to the Solitaire's distinctive packaging. Mag had a legitimate grievance since the similarities were striking.


 
Are we talking about the same two lights??

I'm sorry, but if a person honestly can't tell the difference between a Solitaire and an Arc AAA-P; then they need some serious prescription glasses. As for the packaging, I can't recall a single example where an Arc light was packaged with the words "Maglite" written across the blister pack.

I knew the founder of Maglite was sue-happy. But I had no idea he sued Arc for lettering. I mean come on, lettering?? That would only make sense if Arc put the words "Maglite Solitaire" around the bezel of their models. That's not sue-happy, that's just ridiculously petty to an immature degree. It's something you'd expect out of a 2 year-old, instead of a grown @$$ man. But that's just my personal opinion.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 12, 2010)

Monocrom said:


> I'm sorry, but if a person honestly can't tell the difference between a Solitaire and an Arc AAA-P; then they need some serious prescription glasses.


The external appearance of the lights were similar enough that consumer confusion was a real possibility regardless of one's need for prescription lenses.



Monocrom said:


> As for the packaging, I can't recall a single example where an Arc light was packaged with the words "Maglite" written across the blister pack.


Of course it didn't say "Maglite", but the way the flashlight and battery were packaged at an angle in the blister pack was identical to how Maglite packaged their Solitaire. It was quite obvious that the Arc was being promoted as a direct competitor to the Mag Solitaire, but Arc could have taken steps to make their product more distinctive, and apparently the courts agreed.



Monocrom said:


> I knew the founder of Maglite was sue-happy. But I had no idea he sued Arc for lettering.


That was part of it, but it was more the overall striking similarity in appearance that sunk Arc. They probably would have been fine if they had added some unique cosmetic flourishes to the casing rather than sticking so closely to the Solitaire design.


----------



## raco (Aug 12, 2010)

Many people think Maglites are outdated because they saw this commercial:






What this commercial don't tell is that the Maglite (with the LED bulb) has a runtime of 44 hours, while the Surefire has a runtime of 1.25 hours. Which means that with the Surefire, you need 35 sets of batteries (= 1.2 kilograms, twice the weight of 4 D cells) to reach the same runtime.

So I'd tell the makers of this commercial: wait 1.25 hours and take a picture again.

Of course, Maglite could make a flashlight with a huge output and a short runtime. But there are so many flashlights like that on the market, what would be the point? A MagLED 4D really gives enough (if not too much) light for most usages.

I like the 4D MagLED because I can use it during one week for camping with only one set of batteries, without the need of replacing the batteries 35 times. And if I need more batteries, I can buy them anywhere.

Plus, it is is very cheap.

So I really think this is a good product, with no equivalent on the market.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 12, 2010)

raco said:


> Many people think Maglites are outdated because they saw this commercial:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 


I absolutely couldn't disagree more. The logic of "having to change batteries 35 times" is ridicilous. Yeah the mag might run for 44hrs but you failed to mention that all that 44hrs it will comstantly dim from the moment it's switched on, the quality of light produced is extremely poor with ring holes and shadows, and the damn thing weights so much that you don't even want to carry it. So next time you need your 8lb maglite with it's 44hr runtime of poor output and you didn't bring it cause it's too big and heavy, I'll just pull my 6P LED out of my pocket with 2 extra batteries (22hrs worth of quality runtime) and then we'lll see what you have to say. After reading your post I'm thinking you've never used a surefire.


----------



## etc (Aug 12, 2010)

Good point...

The only reason SF is not more popular vs miglite is because it's a different price point. Miglite is good at its price point but that's about the only good thing I can think of it. Good value yes, but not even close to other possibilities, SF and others. 

BTW, the new LED Migilites are not that cheap, close to 40 FRNs I think?


----------



## raco (Aug 12, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> Yeah the mag might run for 44hrs but you failed to mention that all that 44hrs it will comstantly dim from the moment it's switched on


No, the output is constant during 43hrs20min. See this graph:







ebow86 said:


> the quality of light produced is extremely poor with ring holes and shadows


I don't see those problems with my Mag when I set the focus correctly, but maybe I would see them if I'd light a white wall, like in lab conditions. I have been using this light for years in real conditions, and such problems never bothered me.



ebow86 said:


> and the damn thing weights so much that you don't even want to carry it


Actually I find it quite easy to hold in the hand. I have been doing speleology for years with it, sometimes crawling on the ground, and I never felt really bothered by its weight. The belt holder is very conveniant when you want to free your hands. I understand it can be a problem for some people, though.



ebow86 said:


> So next time you need your 8lb maglite with it's 44hr runtime of poor output and you didn't bring it cause it's too big and heavy, I'll just pull my 6P LED out of my pocket with 2 extra batteries (22hrs worth of quality runtime) and then we'lll see what you have to say.


Are you talking about this flashlight ? Surefire's website says its runtime is 60 minutes, and unlike the Mag, it will dim from the moment it's on:


----------



## alpg88 (Aug 12, 2010)

for flashaholic maglites are hosts, i have many mags , but not one is stock, i'd be embarrassed to be seen with stock maglite.
so far i modded.

2d p7, fm deep reflector, fm 6aa holder, dx 5 mode driver.
2d terralux 300 module, 6aa holder with 6 lithium's AA's, green flash cap.
4c rop high, 6x 5\4 nimh sub c, bifocal FM reflector.
4d, dual bored, 6x18650, wa 1185, fm deep reflector, white flash cap.
4d aw soft start, FM throw master head, 4x26650 cells, osram 15v150w bulb.
4d par 36 fm head, 4515 bulb, 6 nicd sub c, white flash cap.
4'5d (3d +88mm extension) 3xp7, der witchel kit, 4x32650 protected cells, white flash cap.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 12, 2010)

raco said:


> No, the output is constant during 43hrs20min. See this graph:


It drops almost immediately from 100% down to 50% and then hovers at 50% for the rest of the battery life. Not terrible, but it's not the best performance graph I've ever seen. Compare that to something like an Ra Clicky which can give you the same output as your 4D Maglite at 50% (around 20 lumens if we're being charitable) with similar run times in a package that you can fit into your pants pocket - not to mention the vastly superior beam which lets you use more of the light coming out of the flashlight. Plus CR123 batteries are small and weigh almost nothing, so carrying a few spares on you is a piece of cake. Try doing that with 4 D-cells. 

Now ask yourself why you're lugging a baseball bat with you through caves. Maybe you use it to fight off the wampas. 



raco said:


> Are you talking about this flashlight ? Surefire's website says its runtime is 60 minutes, and unlike the Mag, it will dim from the moment it's on:


That's an incandescent light. The newer 6P's with an LED emitter have different performance characteristics. And even then the 6P incan is putting out about 3x the amount of light as your 4D Mag at 50%, so it's not exactly an apples to apples comparison.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 12, 2010)

raco said:


> No, the output is constant during 43hrs20min. See this graph:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 



No offfense but I can tell your knowledge regarding surefire lights is limited. The graphs and links you provided is incandescent's, I am refering to the 6P LED. I think once you use a light like a surefire, quark, fenix, jetbeam, etc, you will see how outdated, dim, and oversized a maglite truly is. And if you don't see any problems with the beam of your mag, try using a fenix or surefire then go back to the mag and post your thoughts and opinions, I think they will change quite a bit, you won't even want to look at the mag. IMO, beam quality is one of the most important factors in a lights performence, and this is where maglite's fall short. What good is 500 lumen OTF torch if the beam is full of holes and rings?

That graph might show a constant level of output (which I almost have to question), but what is not shown is how dim that output is, and how poor the beam quality is. Look at my list of lights, I own all the LED mag's, I know from experience.

Raco, take a look at the quark and fenix lineup, these lights have multiple levels of output very good runtime. I can carry my Fenix TK10 with 2 sets of batteries, have 1/5 the weight and size of your 4D mag, and have the same amount of runtime, meanwhile having excellent beam quality and regulation. So in the long run your 4D mag might have good runtime, but at a cost of weight, size, and poor beam quality? There are too many tradeoffs there just for some extra runtime.


----------



## mrartillery (Aug 12, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> Yeah, they even tried suing ID software for using a flashlight in the game Doom 3 that had a beam that "resembled a maglite's unique beam". The claim was ridiculos at best, I'm not sure what the outcome was though, hopefully maglite lost, I'm only saying that because it was one of the dumbest lawsuit's against another company I ever heard of. Shame on them.



Wow, what a dumb claim. :fail: Doom was so pixelated how could they tell?


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 12, 2010)

mrartillery said:


> Wow, what a dumb claim. :fail: Doom was so pixelated how could they tell?


 

pixelated? Sorry, I think your thinking about the old doom game, which didn't feature any flashlight's. Doom 3 was released in 2004 and wasn't pixelated In any sence, pixelated or not, yes it was a dumb claim.


----------



## raco (Aug 12, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> Compare that to something like an Ra Clicky which can give you the same output as your 4D Maglite at 50% (around 20 lumens if we're being charitable)


I don't think the output is as low as 20 lumens. It would mean than my Fenix L0D is brighter than my MagLED 4D, but it's not.



the.Mtn.Man said:


> with similar run times in a package that you can fit into your pants pocket


I didn't know this light. I searched the web and saw that its runtime can reach 23 hours but I only found the output measured in lux, not lumens. If it can really give as much light as a 4D Maglite (in the mode that has a runtime of 23 hours), then for sure it's cool.



the.Mtn.Man said:


> Now ask yourself why you're lugging a baseball bat with you through caves.


Yes, I wonder why but unfortunately I want to stick to "classic" alkaline batteries. I dislike having one chance out of 4000 of explosion.



the.Mtn.Man said:


> That's an incandescent light.


Oops, sorry. I found "surefire 6P" via google and I didn't think of the possibility of two different lights with the same name.



ebow86 said:


> No offfense but I can tell your knowledge regarding surefire lights is limited.


That's true. You partly convinced me. At least the Maglite is very cheap, solid, and has a really huge runtime. You can't buy it and feel ripped off, I guess. Also, I find it weird that no manufacturer has made a light that has the same output than the Maglite, the same runtime, but is smaller. Or a light that has the same weight/size and runtime but with a more powerful output. What we have is dozen of lights that are hard to compare with the Maglite because all the characteristics (runtime, size, output) are very different.


----------



## John_Galt (Aug 12, 2010)

raco said:


> No, the output is constant during 43hrs20min. See this graph:



Ok, let's see... A very, very quick drop from 100% output, to, say, about 55% output... Then there are a few dips...

As opposed to a Ra, which would display constant 100% (@ 25 lumens, very comparable to the Mag's output) output, for, oh, say 4-6 * hours (being extremely conservative here), before beginning a series of clearly defined step-downs in output. A change of batteries allows another 4+ hours of runtime.

All with a much nicer, more usable beam pattern, and at a tiny fraction of the weight and bulk.

The Ra wins.

----------------------------------

"*" Using Henry's statement that each 2 levels down from 100% doubles runtime (at least).


----------



## mrartillery (Aug 12, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> pixelated? Sorry, I think your thinking about the old doom game, which didn't feature any flashlight's. Doom 3 was released in 2004 and wasn't pixelated In any sence, pixelated or not, yes it was a dumb claim.



Lol, sorry I misread. I had the original Doom, this is what I was comparing it to.


----------



## etc (Aug 12, 2010)

Miglite's pencil like beam is only useful outside and only useful for throw. Marginal for tasks under 25m. 

Malkoff M60 drop-in module for example has a much more useful 8-degree beam, an all-purpose design. I have used it for a year or two and think it's almost impossible to improve upon for 99% of situations. I also have a d based miglite with another Malkoff drop in, and it's also pencil sharp but at least much brighter. I keep it only for outside situations where I need throw. 

You can focus the miglite to flood but then it looks horrible. 

The latest LED version of miglite I admit is pretty good, comparable to Malkoff in its brightness.

The size efficiency is really low for miglite. I don't mind a big lite. But I would want at least 1000 lumens if I carried such a big stick with me. Then I could justify it.


----------



## raco (Aug 12, 2010)

John_Galt said:


> The Ra wins.


Yes, provided that you change the batteries every 4 or 6 hours.



etc said:


> The size efficiency is really low for miglite.


Is it possible to have more light with the same (or better) size and runtime? If it is possible, then I'd like to see it.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 12, 2010)

raco said:


> I don't think the output is as low as 20 lumens. It would mean than my Fenix L0D is brighter than my MagLED 4D, but it's not.
> 
> 
> I didn't know this light. I searched the web and saw that its runtime can reach 23 hours but I only found the output measured in lux, not lumens. If it can really give as much light as a 4D Maglite (in the mode that has a runtime of 23 hours), then for sure it's cool.
> ...


 


Quark lights have compairable runtimes on their lower settings, and the quality of light will far exceed that of the 4D mag, all in a package that fits in your pocket. To be honest I really don't understand why you are defending the 4D mag anyway, it has so many cons that the long runtime is worthless IMHO. And the 4D LED mag is actually outdated even compaired to other maglite's, the new LED mag's use the rebel emitter and aren't avialable in 4D size.


----------



## KiwiMark (Aug 12, 2010)

It's funny reading about the comparisons between a Mag 4D and a Surefire - I doubt that they are direct competitors to each other. For the typical user they either want a large heavy light or they don't and they either want to pay the price of a Surefire or they don't.

For me, as a flashaholic, things are a bit different. If we are talking about a Mag 4D LED then my experience matches neither sides claims. I don't get 43 hours of light and I don't have the output immediately drop to 50%. I get about 10 hours from 4 10Ah LSD NiMH cells, but the output is excellent. The beam does NOT look like the one in that picture, even though I am using a stock reflector - I find my beam to be really good, decent hotspot and useful spill, no rings noticeable in real world usage. No small light will match the output I have and run for more than 2 hours on rechargeable batteries. Of course as a flashaholic I have an LED emitter that was not made by Maglite, so I don't have the same set-up as the man in the street that pops into the store and buys a Mag 4D.

As a flashaholic I don't have to worry about the weight of a 4D either. I only have the solid feel and much greater heft of a Mag 4D if I want it, otherwise I have plenty of other options I can go with. I always have the Nitecore D10 R2 in my pocket and a bunch of other lights at home that I can grab. I have Nitecore, Olight, Fenix, Quark, Jetbeam, Surefire, ITP, Liteflux, MG and Zebralight to choose from as well as Maglite. I don't EDC a Mag 4D, I choose much easy to pocket lights for that purpose. But I have my Maglites for around home and I can (and do) take them camping or whatever.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 12, 2010)

raco said:


> Yes, provided that you change the batteries every 4 or 6 hours.
> 
> 
> Is it possible to have more light with the same (or better) size and runtime? If it is possible, then I'd like to see it.


 

Quark maelstrom will put out 22 lumens for 22 hours. And that 22 lumens will be much better and useful that the 4D mags. So lets see here, I can carry a huge 4D mag around becasue it puts out 44hrs of runtime in a poor, dim, unfocused beam, or I can carry a small quark with 4 extra batteries, have 66hrs of high quality light. Oh, did I mention I can fit all of it in my shirt pocket? I think you will come to find out that if you are fighting an uphill battle if you continue to try and convince people that a 4D mag is superior to all the pocketable highly effecient LED's that are avialable to us today.


----------



## KiwiMark (Aug 12, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> I think you will come to find out that if you are fighting an uphill battle if you continue to try and convince people that a 4D mag is superior to all the pocketable highly effecient LED's that are avialable to us today.



I think that you will find the average Joe that buys a Mag 4D and uses it 'as is' just doesn't care. The flashaholics like me will just take a 4D and add a good LED drop-in that gives MUCH more than 22 Lumen.

I'm a bit curious about the Mag LEDs now though. I have never used a genuine Maglite LED, I only have incan bulbs or other brand LED drop-ins. Do Maglite LEDs really have a fraction of the efficiency of the current Q5 and newer ones? If Maglite LEDs are even half as efficient then they should have either much more than 43 hours run time or much more than 22 Lumen output. My Malkoff drop-in allows me 10 hours (non-declining) run time from 10Ah NiMH cells and the output is claimed to be >200 Lumen, maybe the OTF output is only 150 Lumen (I don't have a way to test it) but even so . . .


----------



## raco (Aug 12, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> Quark maelstrom will put out 22 lumens for 22 hours. And that 22 lumens will be much better and useful that the 4D mags.


I haven't measured it, but I'd be surprised if a 4D MagLED would not give much more light than 22 lumens. 22 lumens is what you get with a Fenix L0D, with its single AAA battery, in mid mode... On CPF, some people say the Mag gives 50 lumens, some say less than 20, I can't find a reliable source of information but I'm pretty sure it's much more than 22 lumens.



ebow86 said:


> So lets see here, I can carry a huge 4D mag around becasue it puts out 44hrs of runtime in a poor, dim, unfocused beam, or I can carry a small quark with 4 extra batteries, have 66hrs of high quality light. Oh, did I mention I can fit all of it in my shirt pocket? I think you will come to find out that if you are fighting an uphill battle if you continue to try and convince people that a 4D mag is superior to all the pocketable highly effecient LED's that are avialable to us today.


I told you before that you partly convinced me. What would totally convince me is a flashlight that is smaller than the Mag, but has the same (or better) output and runtime.


----------



## alpg88 (Aug 12, 2010)

show me a sf that can do this, i assume everyone understands what it is.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 12, 2010)

I don't get it, what is it?


----------



## carrot (Aug 12, 2010)

Guys I'm laughing so hard that I nearly fell out of my chair. Please continue.


----------



## KiwiMark (Aug 12, 2010)

raco said:


> I haven't measured it, but I'd be surprised if a 4D MagLED would not give much more light than 22 lumens. 22 lumens is what you get with a Fenix L0D, with its single AAA battery, in mid mode... On CPF, some people say the Mag gives 50 lumens, some say less than 20, I can't find a reliable source of information but I'm pretty sure it's much more than 22 lumens.



I am not too sure that the L0D on medium is truly 22 Lumen (often what is claimed is NOT what you get) - a true 22 Lumen output is actually a respectable amount of light. For a Mag 4D I think that it would be better to swap to this: http://www.batteryjunction.com/tle-1f.html for more output and still 40+ hours of run time, without spending much at all.

From what I have read it sounds like 100% from a MagLED may be around 50 Lumen, but then it drops VERY quickly to not much more than 1/2 output due to overheating. Maybe the MagLED emitters are as bad as people are saying. But it isn't like there are no other options from other vendors that would improve the output from a Maglite.


----------



## carrot (Aug 12, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> I don't get it, what is it?


It's a Maglite-turned ballistic weapon. I forget whether the light still works, but there's also a MiniMag version of this.


----------



## alpg88 (Aug 12, 2010)

carrot said:


> It's a Maglite-turned ballistic weapon. I forget whether the light still works, but there's also a MiniMag version of this.


 yep, .410 and light still works.


----------



## raco (Aug 12, 2010)

KiwiMark said:


> For a Mag 4D I think that it would be better to swap to this: http://www.batteryjunction.com/tle-1f.html for more output and still 40+ hours of run time, without spending much at all.


Thanks. I never considered an upgrade but why not, especially if it does what you say.


----------



## carrot (Aug 12, 2010)

raco said:


> I haven't measured it, but I'd be surprised if a 4D MagLED would not give much more light than 22 lumens. 22 lumens is what you get with a Fenix L0D, with its single AAA battery, in mid mode... On CPF, some people say the Mag gives 50 lumens, some say less than 20, I can't find a reliable source of information but I'm pretty sure it's much more than 22 lumens.
> 
> 
> I told you before that you partly convinced me. What would totally convince me is a flashlight that is smaller than the Mag, but has the same (or better) output and runtime.


Why must it have better output AND runtime? (Of course many lights do...)

Isn't it simply enough to be able to pocket it? Instead of lugging around a couple pounds of dead weight?


----------



## KiwiMark (Aug 12, 2010)

raco said:


> Thanks. I never considered an upgrade but why not, especially if it does what you say.



At that price it has to be worth a try.


----------



## Chrontius (Aug 12, 2010)

raco said:


> No, the output is constant during 43hrs20min. See this graph:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's disingenuous to compare the MagLED to the incandescent P60. Not that the P60L is _great_, but it's a lot better than the P60 for runtime and regulation.

The most recent Surefire LED head on FLR is this one:







ebow86 said:


> Yeah, they even tried suing ID software for using a flashlight in the game Doom 3 that had a beam that "resembled a maglite's unique beam". The claim was ridiculos at best, I'm not sure what the outcome was though, hopefully maglite lost, I'm only saying that because it was one of the dumbest lawsuit's against another company I ever heard of. Shame on them.



I **hated** that #$%*ing flashlight.

It was the first thing to go -- I took someone's beamshot of a Surefire L4 and subbed it in for that uselessly tight, disappointingly dim thing ID thought was dramatic.

And then installed the Duct Tape mod, giving all of my conventional guns the equivalent of a ScoutLight bolted on somewhere. And the plasma cannons? Their accelerators should have had enough muzzle glow to light the way, but I couldn't get that patch to work. :shrug:

I think he was embarrassed by Doom3's "realistic" flaslight.


----------



## raco (Aug 12, 2010)

carrot said:


> Why must it have better output AND runtime? (Of course many lights do...)
> 
> Isn't it simply enough to be able to pocket it? Instead of lugging around a couple pounds of dead weight?


Because when only one characteristic changes, the comparison is easy. If Maglite's technology is _so_ outdated, then I guess its competitors could make a flashlight with the same runtime (43+ hours) and same output (whatever it is) but significantly smaller. If you know such a light, then please tell me about it.

There are lots of lights with better output, smaller size, but much less runtime (from a couple of hours to 20 hours, we're far from 2 days of runtime). That's why I'm not sure that Maglite is that much dominated by its competitors. Especially when you consider the price, which can't be ignored when judging the quality of a product. How much does a Mag 4D costs? 30 dollars?


----------



## raco (Aug 12, 2010)

Chrontius said:


> It's disingenuous to compare the MagLED to the incandescent P60.


For sure, but it was not made on purpose.


----------



## carrot (Aug 12, 2010)

raco said:


> Because when only one characteristic changes, the comparison is easy. If Maglite's technology is _so_ outdated, then I guess its competitors could make a flashlight with the same runtime (43+ hours) and same output (whatever it is) but significantly smaller. If you know such a light, then please tell me about it.
> 
> There are lots of lights with better output, smaller size, but much less runtime (from a couple of hours to 20 hours, we're far from 2 days of runtime). That's why I'm not sure that Maglite is that much dominated by its competitors. Especially when you consider the price, which can't be ignored when judging the quality of a product. How much does a Mag 4D costs? 30 dollars?


If you're going to demand proof that another flashlight is both brighter and runs longer than the Maglite, I'm going to have to demand proof from you that the Maglite is indeed as bright and does run as long as you say.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 12, 2010)

raco said:


> Because when only one characteristic changes, the comparison is easy. If Maglite's technology is _so_ outdated, then I guess its competitors could make a flashlight with the same runtime (43+ hours) and same output (whatever it is) but significantly smaller. If you know such a light, then please tell me about it.
> 
> There are lots of lights with better output, smaller size, but much less runtime (from a couple of hours to 20 hours, we're far from 2 days of runtime). That's why I'm not sure that Maglite is that much dominated by its competitors. Especially when you consider the price, which can't be ignored when judging the quality of a product. How much does a Mag 4D costs? 30 dollars?


 
You really don't get the point do you? What good is that extra runtime when the light weighs a ton, is huge, and the majority of that runtime is extremely poor.
How many CR123's could be carried when compaired to the size and weight of just 4 d cell batteries? 16? 20? Your argument here in this thread is flawed, and I hope someday you have the opprunitiy to use a small, high output, efficient, long running CR123 based light, then you will realise how ridicilous your "runtime is best" argument is. I mean that in a respectful way, and I'm not saying it to try and start a thread war, it's just my opinion.

PS, I have a maglite 4D and it has one of the worst pea soup tints I've ever seen, I'ts actually the worst of the older gen maglite's. If you like them so much check out the 3D version, it superior to the 4D in tint and output.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 12, 2010)

carrot said:


> If you're going to demand proof that another flashlight is both brighter and runs longer than the Maglite, I'm going to have to demand proof from you that the Maglite is indeed as bright and does run as long as you say.


 


Agreed, he is the one making the extrodonary claim about the maglite, therefore the burden of proof should be on him.


----------



## Kestrel (Aug 12, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> Yeah, they even tried suing ID software for using a flashlight in the game Doom 3 that had a beam that "resembled a maglite's unique beam".


That's so awesome, you could actually see all the artifacts, rings, and holes in the 'beam' during gameplay? :ironic:


Folks, just a friendly heads-up here, if this becomes a

Maglite vs SF
Maglite vs Quark
Maglite vs Ra
Maglite vs DX/KD ;-)
bashfest/flamefest, I don't see that bright of a future for this thread...


----------



## KiwiMark (Aug 12, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> Agreed, he is the one making the extrodonary claim about the maglite, therefore the burden of proof should be on him.



I must have missed that - could you expand on that a little and enlighten us about what the extraordinary claim is? To me it seems a bit ridiculous to claim a light would have any problem running for 40+ hours with moderate output when running from 4 D cells. Considering the size and weight of the Maglite I would think that it would be surprising if it couldn't live up to those claims.



carrot said:


> If you're going to demand proof that another flashlight is both brighter and runs longer than the Maglite, I'm going to have to demand proof from you that the Maglite is indeed as bright and does run as long as you say.





ebow86 said:


> You really don't get the point do you? What good is that extra runtime when the light weighs a ton, is huge, and the majority of that runtime is extremely poor.



I think that the arguments here are getting a little silly. How can other flashlights have both more run time & more output and weigh a small fraction of what a Mag 4D does? As quoted the 4D weighs a ton and is huge - obviously it can contain a large storage of power to either run longer or have more output or a combination of both. If the MagLED is crap then swapping to a Terralux or other LED would fix that - for as little as $12.29 - http://www.batteryjunction.com/tle-1f.html

Like raco I would like to see a small easily carried light that can run for longer at a higher output named - such an extraordinary claim needs to be justified to be believed.

As to "What good is that extra runtime when the light weighs a ton, is huge, and the majority of that runtime is extremely poor." 
The answer is obvious: if the user of that light doesn't mind the size & weight and finds the output perfectly satisfactory for their needs then it should be pretty darned obvious what good it is to anyone that thinks 1 second about it. To try to argue that "I don't like big heavy lights therefore they are no good" is just being silly - if you don't like them then use something else, it doesn't make them useless to the people that like a bigger and heavier light (or at least have no objection to the size or weight).

At home the lights I reach for the most often are my Maglites - admittedly they are not exactly standard, but I like the output and don't care about the size or weight. It is only for EDC that I wouldn't consider using any of my Maglites, because for that purpose I DO care about the size & weight. The highest output lights I have are Maglite - the small LED lights don't even come close. The light I own with the longest runtime on full output is also a Maglite, again the small LED lights don't even come close. The only non-Maglite incan I have is a Surefire A2, but it has less output (a fraction of the output) & less runtime than several of my Maglites - its only saving grace is that it is easily pocketed.


----------



## Jash (Aug 12, 2010)

This is reason enough to own a maglite, or two as they are available in 4500k and 6500k.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 12, 2010)

KiwiMark said:


> I must have missed that - could you expand on that a little and enlighten us about what the extraordinary claim is? To me it seems a bit ridiculous to claim a light would have any problem running for 40+ hours with moderate output when running from 4 D cells. Considering the size and weight of the Maglite I would think that it would be surprising if it couldn't live up to those claims.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

I am not an expert, but I would believe, that of all the different batteries out there that power modern flashlights, the absolute worst that any modern flashlight can use would be the D cell alkaline. The extrodonary claim here is that basically, no small CR123 based LED light can do what the 4D cell maglite can do, in terms of the balance of output and runtime, to me that is an extrodonary claim. 


And I can't believe anyone would compair a maglite to a surefire A2, or even have them in the same sentence, that's almost criminal You say you have a maglite that has better runtime and output than the A2, what maglite are you refering to?


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 12, 2010)

Kestrel said:


> That's so awesome, you could actually see all the artifacts, rings, and holes in the 'beam' during gameplay? :ironic:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 


Yes, artifacts and all, the games set in the year 2145 and apparently mag has still never learned a way to produce a good beam On a side note, I am a pretty big gamer, have been since the early 90's, and I can honestly say doom 3 is one of my favorite games of all time, definetly top 3.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 12, 2010)

KiwiMark said:


> If the MagLED is crap then swapping to a Terralux or other LED would fix that - for as little as $12.29 - http://www.batteryjunction.com/tle-1f.html




For some time my primary "worklight" was a 3D Maglite with the Terralux drop in, I can't vouch for the 4D but my combo just seemed to last weeks of night duty and even when I decided to pop in some new "Alkies" it still had usable light output, I purchased 20+ cells when I got it and I've still got at least 10 of those so 44h from whoa-to-go (dead flat) highly probable IMHO :thumbsup:

Still makes a great


----------



## Locoboy5150 (Aug 12, 2010)

At least stock Maglites will *always* be good for this...


----------



## carrot (Aug 12, 2010)

KiwiMark said:


> I think that the arguments here are getting a little silly. How can other flashlights have both more run time & more output and weigh a small fraction of what a Mag 4D does? As quoted the 4D weighs a ton and is huge - obviously it can contain a large storage of power to either run longer or have more output or a combination of both. If the MagLED is crap then swapping to a Terralux or other LED would fix that - for as little as $12.29 - http://www.batteryjunction.com/tle-1f.html
> 
> Like raco I would like to see a small easily carried light that can run for longer at a higher output named - such an extraordinary claim needs to be justified to be believed.



Since raco argues that the Maglite sets the benchmark for all other lights to be measured against, it only makes sense that we know the details of what that benchmark are so that we can properly assess how other lights measure up. 

Hence, the onus of proof rests on raco: as he is the one who is making the claims that the Maglite is significantly brighter than 22 lumens and runs for two days straight. He dismisses the fact that the Maglite runs at approximately 50% of its peak output for the 43 hours and 20 minutes as shown in the FlashlightReviews.com runtime graph, and he also dismisses the Quark as probably being dimmer than the Maglite at the output setting that is most appropriate for this discussion. 

We will take the figure of 43h20m into account, since this is from a trusted source. However, we will also note that this is the runtime for the *old* MagLED, which uses a Luxeon III instead of a Luxeon Rebel as the newer ones do. It is at this juncture that I will submit that raco's wildly unsubstantiated claim, "I'd be surprised if a 4D MagLED would not give much more light than 22 lumens" is based upon pure conjecture. Since it is impossible for the eye to give a reasonable lumens rating thanks to the logarithmic nature of the human senses, we must discard this anecdote. So as it stands, the first generation 4D Maglite LED runs for 43h20m, at an unspecified level of output. Since we have to be able to compare to *something,* let's just say it's 22 lumens, same as Quark on Low, for argument's sake.

Additionally, we only know currently what 4sevens rates the Quark 123^2 as having a minimum runtime (no runtime tests have been published): he states on his website that the Quark on Low runs for at least 20 hours at at least 22 lumens, which is a pretty reasonable amount of time, but we also know from Selfbuilt's reviews that the Quark on Medium runs for nearly EIGHT hours, when 4sevens specifies the Quark as running for at least 4.5. It's not that big of a stretch to assume that the runtime on Low is also understated. We also know that at 50mA it's quite reasonable to expect a ballpark of 20+ lumens, so we'll carry on believing that. At this point we could call it a draw. But we won't, since being technically-minded people we want something better than some wild guesses. Before we go off whining that the 2xCR123 form factor is not a fair comparison to 4xD, let me point out that it is indeed very fair: they both have about 6V and in fact the D cell has a slight advantage at 12,000mAh compared to the CR123's measly 1,500mAh. (These numbers taken from Energizer.com's datasheets.)

Luckily, we have mathematics on our side. 4sevens specifies that the Quark powers the LED at 50mA on Low. We'll assume that this is exactly as stated, since I do not have a DMM handy, nor do I have an opened Quark head. 

Referring to the Cree XP-G datasheet, we see that at 50mA, the XP-G (as used in the Quark series) has a forward voltage of 2.7V. It's not a completely safe assumption that the Quark drives the XP-G at 2.7V at 50mA but we'll pick these numbers to start off with. 

I'm going to do some math now, and since I never did very well in the electronics part of Physics I could be wrong here but I'm pretty sure I'm not:

2.7v * 50mA = 0.135W = the Watts going into the XP-G LED
0.135W / 6.0v = 22.5mA = the current being pulled from two CR123's as in the Quark 123^2
1500mAh / 22.5mA = 66.66h = the amount of hours of theoretical runtime that the Quark 123^2 has

Now, we all know (or should know) that no circuit is 100% efficient. Energy is commonly lost in the form of heat or sound/vibrations. We also know that buck circuits are considerably more efficient than boost circuits, but that's not part of this discussion. The Quark uses a buck circuit. Let's say that the Quark's buck driver is 85% efficient. That's pretty good. So we have:

66.66h * 85% = 56.66h = the amount of estimated runtime with an 85% efficient circuit

But carrot! The Quarks are Chinese-made junk! How could they possibly have such a good circuit?

Well okay, putting aside the fact that the Quarks are actually pretty good lights and quite representative of many Good Things in the flashlight business, that the Chinese are actually very capable and good circuit designers, and that the CEO David Chow in Atlanta, Georgia does a hefty amount of the design work on these boards, we'll say that the Quark might have a pretty awful circuit. Let's say it's got a 65% efficiency. That's not that great, but we can pretend it also accounts for a whole number of unknowns.

66.66h * 65% = 43.33h = the amount of estimated runtime with a 65% efficient circuit

Wow! That means the Quark 123^2 can indeed be as "good" as a Maglite, especially if we go by raco's numbers that he is so insistent upon: 22 lumens at 43.33 hours of runtime!

About here I'm supposed to put a "QED" but I was never big on proofs. Instead I'll say "so there."


----------



## Monocrom (Aug 12, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> The external appearance of the lights were similar enough that consumer confusion was a real possibility regardless of one's need for prescription lenses.


 
Even looking at the basic outline of the two lights, it's blatantly clear they look nothing alike. Looking down the business end, once again; nothing alike. Even holding each in your hand, with eyes closed; nothing alike.




> Of course it didn't say "Maglite", but the way the flashlight and battery were packaged at an angle in the blister pack was identical to how Maglite packaged their Solitaire. It was quite obvious that the Arc was being promoted as a direct competitor to the Mag Solitaire, but Arc could have taken steps to make their product more distinctive, and apparently the courts agreed.


 
I think having packaging that says "Arc" is distinctive enough. As far as the courts, I learned something important from a real judge once. He said there's an old saying among judges. "Sometimes wrong. But never in doubt." A lawsuit over lettering clearly belongs in the former category.




> That was part of it, but it was more the overall striking similarity in appearance that sunk Arc. They probably would have been fine if they had added some unique cosmetic flourishes to the casing rather than sticking so closely to the Solitaire design.


 
Once again, I can look at both lights from different angles, and see clear differences. Sorry, but this is an example of a retarded lawsuit made even worse by the fact that the lawyers Arc hired were clearly incompetent. An intelligent attorney would have gotten the case thrown out.


----------



## KiwiMark (Aug 12, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> I am not an expert, but I would believe, that of all the different batteries out there that power modern flashlights, the absolute worst that any modern flashlight can use would be the D cell alkaline. The extrodonary claim here is that basically, no small CR123 based LED light can do what the 4D cell maglite can do, in terms of the balance of output and runtime, to me that is an extrodonary claim.


 
This is where you are wrong - the D cell alkaline battery actually holds a lot of power and if you drain it slowly you can get a really good run time. However the greatest failing of the Alkaline battery (if it doesn't leak) is its inability to hold the voltage under higher loads - they are complete rubbish for high drain devices. Take a look at a D cell battery, feel the weight and compare it to a CR123a cell - there is definitely a lot of energy stored in the D cell.

I have never defended the Alkaline batteries though, I don't really like 'em and I don't personally use 'em. I prefer rechargeables and even use rechargeables in my 16340 lights (like the Olight Ti Infinitum in my jacket pocket) including my Surefire A2.



ebow86 said:


> And I can't believe anyone would compair a maglite to a surefire A2, or even have them in the same sentence, that's almost criminal You say you have a maglite that has better runtime and output than the A2, what maglite are you refering to?



If you read carefully you would also notice that I said my Maglites are not stock. My 2D ROP low (3854-L) can run for 2 hours at a lot better output than my A2 does, and little wonder - 2 x 32650 Li-ion cells have a hell of a lot more power than 2 x 16340 cells! My 4D with the Malkoff LED drop-in outputs a lot of light (rated at 230 Lumen IIRC) and can run for 10+ hours from my 4 x 10Ah NiMH cells. When you look at 5Ah Li-ion 32650 cells and 10Ah NiMH cells you really do get a lot of power to run a bulb/emitter.

My Mag 3D can run for as long as my A2 (comparing with the incan bulb only) but can put out 79W of beautiful bright white incandescent light from its 35W 6V bulb when run at 10V. My 3D is regulated, but unlike the A2 it has variable output and I can ramp up or down from 3V to 10V. Admittedly the 3D has cost me quite a bit more than my Surefire A2 did - but it is a more powerful light with more sophisticated electronics.

My Mag 4D incandescent puts out more light and can be used to start newspaper on fire -WAY more output than the A2, but not so much run time. That one falls behind the A2 by a lot for run time - less than 1/4 in fact.

For its size the Surefire A2 is great - so much better then my 2 X AA Minimags any night of the week! But the smaller size limits how much chemical energy you can have stored in there - my 2D or 3D or 4D or 6D Magites can hold one hell of a lot more power.


----------



## carrot (Aug 12, 2010)

KiwiMark said:


> This is where you are wrong - the D cell alkaline battery actually holds a lot of power and if you drain it slowly you can get a really good run time. However the greatest failing of the Alkaline battery (if it doesn't leak) is its inability to hold the voltage under higher loads - they are complete rubbish for high drain devices. Take a look at a D cell battery, feel the weight and compare it to a CR123a cell - there is definitely a lot of energy stored in the D cell.


This rock over here is pretty damn heavy. I'd say it's got a whole load more energy than a CR123 or a D-cell too.

While it is true that the D has a significantly higher capacity than the CR123, it is also important to note that weight is not a valid factor in determining the amount of electrical capacity something has, however you can say it has higher potential energy, as you've just lifted it off the ground or table and that act gives it potential energy.


----------



## KiwiMark (Aug 12, 2010)

carrot said:


> Wow! That means the Quark 123^2 can indeed be as "good" as a Maglite, especially if we go by raco's numbers that he is so insistent upon: 22 lumens at 43.33 hours of runtime!



What if we switch to the $12 1W Terralux emitter at 50 Lumen which should still be able to run for 40+ hours?


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 12, 2010)

Then why do zero manufactures (other than maglite) have any intrest in D cell alkalines? You can go on all day on how much capacity a D cell has, the fact remains I'll take a CR123 or even a AA battery anyday over ANY D cell, and I believe 98% of the users here would also.


----------



## carrot (Aug 12, 2010)

KiwiMark said:


> What if we switch to the $12 1W Terralux emitter at 50 Lumen which should still be able to run for 40+ hours?


Lots of if's. If the Terralux is indeed 50 lumens, OTF instead of at the emitter, if the rating is at peak output or for the long tail where the voltage of alkalines drop off from the nominal 1.5V, and if you'd still consider it a Maglite at that point. 

If you want to play the what-if game, that's fine, but we can play what-if all day and not get anywhere. Without solid numbers we have not much to go on but pure speculation. 

Certainly, given the super high capacity of the D-cell we can expect pretty high runtimes, but at the cost of high output, of which we cannot have since high output requires high current draw, and that is one place where alkalines fall flat on their face. So here's a what-if for you: what if I expect no less than 80 lumens for 7 hours? 200 lumens for 2 hours? Will the Maglite still hold up, what-if you had a drop-in and all? I must apologize for you getting in the crosshairs. I have no qualms with Maglite drop-ins, simply the claim that a Maglite represents the pinnacle of performance, which it cannot due to several flaws in the overall package. (Poor heatsinking, high-resistance springs, relatively inefficient driver, and the use of alkalines, to name a few.)

raco's key point is that the MagLED, (which presumes its stock form) is an unbeatable package. It is this claim that I am disputing.


----------



## Jash (Aug 12, 2010)

Okay, is this a mag vs. everyone else, or a D cell vs. everything else?

I've got a 3D (not maglite) with an XP-G that can shine 200ish lumens without any drop in output for 15+ hours, then run for another week with usable light. And that's off alkalines too. Find me a small light that can do that.

Don't get me wrong, most of my lights are 2AA or single CR123, but there is still a place for big lights with large capacity batteries and the ability to install massive heat sinks to get lots of reliable lumens. Maglite simply happens to be the maker of the best value for money C-D cell lights on the planet, for modding purposes of course.

And I doubt this thread will see too much more life before it gets closed.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 12, 2010)

raco said:


> I don't think the output is as low as 20 lumens.


The Mag brand LED drop-in, which is what you said you were using, is rated at 50 lumens, so a 50% drop brings you down to 25 lumens, and that's assuming that 100% of the light produced by the LED makes it out of the front of the flashlight, which I can assure you is not the case (Mag has some of the worst optics in the industry), so assuming your Maglite running at 50% produces as much as 20 lumens is an _extremely_ generous estimate. That's not even taking into account the fact that what LEDs are rated and what they actually produce can differ by as much as 40% (LED manufacturers rate their LEDs assuming ideal conditions).



raco said:


> I didn't know this light. I searched the web and saw that its runtime can reach 23 hours but I only found the output measured in lux, not lumens. If it can really give as much light as a 4D Maglite (in the mode that has a runtime of 23 hours), then for sure it's cool.


It can, and that's a flat discharge. HDS lights are some of the most technologically advanced in the industry.



raco said:


> Yes, I wonder why but unfortunately I want to stick to "classic" alkaline batteries. I dislike having one chance out of 4000 of explosion.


To my knowledge, there is only a chance of explosion with mismatched cells. If you're running a single CR123 cell then the chances of explosion are pretty much slim to none.



raco said:


> You partly convinced me. At least the Maglite is very cheap, solid, and has a really huge runtime. You can't buy it and feel ripped off, I guess.


It depends on what you're looking for, but with low-priced, high-quality lights on the market from companies like 4Sevens and Fenix, Mag no longer has the price advantage it used to.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 12, 2010)

Monocrom said:


> Sorry, but this is an example of a retarded lawsuit made even worse by the fact that the lawyers Arc hired were clearly incompetent.


You're begging the question.

Let's just agree to disagree, k?


----------



## KiwiMark (Aug 13, 2010)

carrot said:


> here's a what-if for you: what if I expect no less than 80 lumens for 7 hours? 200 lumens for 2 hours? Will the Maglite still hold up, what-if you had a drop-in and all? I must apologize for you getting in the crosshairs. I have no qualms with Maglite drop-ins, simply the claim that a Maglite represents the pinnacle of performance, which it cannot due to several flaws in the overall package. (Poor heatsinking, high-resistance springs, relatively inefficient driver, and the use of alkalines, to name a few.)
> 
> raco's key point is that the MagLED, (which presumes its stock form) is an unbeatable package. It is this claim that I am disputing.



I must be reading a different thread - I can't recall seeing the standard MagLED or the Alkaline D cells being touted as the be all and end all anywhere in this thread. I have just re-read each post in this thread by raco and I don't think he has said anything significant above and beyond:
- He likes the really long run time.
- The size & weight aren't an issue to him.
- He has no problem with the beam pattern.
- The output level seems to be fine for his uses.
- In terms of run time for the output he doesn't believe that the Mag 4D can be beaten.

My opinion:
Alkalines are rubbish and to prove it you throw them away when they are flat - I use 10Ah NiMH rechargeables in my long run-time Mag 4D. I have never been a fan of using alkalines in Maglites and never realised that the use of alkalines was compulsory.

I have never used a MagLED, but I have read that they aren't very good due to heating up and the output dropping to ~55%.

With my Malkoff LED drop-in it would be too easy to get 80 Lumen for 7 hours - I believe that I get over twice that output for ~10 hours. The Malkoff drop-in DOES have good heat sinking and works very well with an otherwise stock Mag 4D.

For 200 Lumen for 2 hours - that's too easy to beat too. I can go incan and get 500+ Lumen for 2 hours from a Mag 2D. That is done using 2 x 32650 Li-ion cells and a 3854-L bulb. My Mag 4D w/Malkoff would be outputting somewhere close to 200 Lumen and it runs for 10 hours.

Now it might be also worth considering that raco is new here and does not deserve to be torn apart just because he likes a light that other people feel is too big and heavy for THEIR tastes. How about we play nice and let other people have preferences different to our own?


----------



## WDG (Aug 13, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> I really can't fault Mag for that because the Arc was, at least by appearance, practically a carbon copy of the Solitaire, right down to the Solitaire's distinctive packaging.



Anyone have pics of the Arc from then? The ones I've seen look nothing like the Solitaire I used to have, so I assume Arc changed the design?


----------



## Monocrom (Aug 13, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> You're begging the question.
> 
> Let's just agree to disagree, k?


 
Totally K. :buddies:


----------



## TedTheLed (Aug 13, 2010)

because Mag is a big bloated irrational litiginous bully of a company that uses it's deep pockets to monopolize the flashlight business by driving the competition into bankruptcy with court costs..
How they (and rich people) use the courts should be a crime.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 13, 2010)

KiwiMark said:


> I can't recall seeing the standard MagLED or the Alkaline D cells being touted as the be all and end all anywhere in this thread.


Maybe I'm reading into raco's posts, but when he continually presented his 4D Mag LED as the one to beat in terms of output and run times, he was effectively declaring it as the standard against which other lights must be compared. That being the case, we're going to need something better than "It looks pretty bright to me" in order to make any kind of meaningful comparison.


----------



## KiwiMark (Aug 13, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> Maybe I'm reading into raco's posts, but when he continually presented his 4D Mag LED as the one to beat in terms of output and run times, he was effectively declaring it as the standard against which other lights must be compared.



You couldn't quote his posts that say that could you? I don't want to read the whole thread again and I just don't recall reading anything to suggest that raco thought that the 4D Mag LED was the one to beat in terms of output. Feel free to post a quote to disprove what I'm saying. The Mag 4D has plenty of battery power available and has a REALLY long run time for the output level, with a better heatsinked drop-in it has the capability of performing even better.

I think maybe you are right, you are reading into raco's post - seeing more than he is writing. He has said he thought it would be outputting more than 22 Lumen, he never mentioned knowing the actual output figures or believing the output to be spectacular.


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

carrot said:


> raco's key point is that the MagLED, (which presumes its stock form) is an unbeatable package. It is this claim that I am disputing.


No, I didn't say that ;-).



the.Mtn.Man said:


> Maybe I'm reading into raco's posts, but when he continually presented his 4D Mag LED as the one to beat in terms of output and run times, he was effectively declaring it as the standard against which other lights must be compared. That being the case, we're going to need something better than "It looks pretty bright to me" in order to make any kind of meaningful comparison.


I didn't say that either. There is no single light that is the standard against which other lights _must_ be compared, of course.

I can understand that many people dislike Maglites. But when I read this forum or other forums, I'd say it's rather hate than dislike. To my mind, this is unfair. If you want to mock something, this light is more appropriate:






Of course they are big lights, and I never said it was a quality. For me, considering that they are cheap, size is their only serious flaw (though I must admit that when I bought my 4D, I wanted to buy a 6D instead because it was bigger, but the shop ran out of stock so I bought a 4D). I realize that lab tests can show many other flaws, but those lights are really more than useable in *reality*. I have been using my 4D for years and I never told myself « _damn light, I don't see very well, I'd need a brighter light with a better beam_ ». It does the job, really. It can light very far and bright enough. It is reliable. And is not expensive at all. But it's big. And it's no surprise that the light that has the best runtime is the biggest light, and not the brighest.

If I was making the same reflexion you guys do about Maglites, but for cars, then I'd have to trash my 50000 dollars Audi because it is sooooo behind a 200000 dollars Ferrari, which is itself sooooo behind the 2 millions dollars Bugatti Veyron. I guess rich people would say "a 50000 dollars Audi? That's crap. It's slow and noisy". Actually this is a very good car, it's fast, reliable, and can drive me wherever I want just like most cars. But yes, in scientific tests, it is absolutely beaten by many other cars (except that it probably has better runtime ;-) ).

Actually I don't own that 50000 dollars Audi, it's just for the sake of comparison ;-). I don't even know if such a car exists, but you get the point. I can't say that the latest Cree LED is not more efficient than the LED in the Maglite I bought years ago. I can't say that D cells are the cutting edge technology. But I think I can say that Maglite is not ridiculous.




Locoboy5150 said:


> At least stock Maglites will *always* be good for this...


Yeah, at least . I remember once when a guy threatened my with his 6D Mag. Believe me, I was pretty scared.


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

KiwiMark said:


> I think maybe you are right, you are reading into raco's post - seeing more than he is writing. He has said he thought it would be outputting more than 22 Lumen, he never mentioned knowing the actual output figures or believing the output to be spectacular.


If you hadn't wrote this, I could have thought that my english is worse than I thought and that what I write is not what I want to say ;-). English is not my mother tongue.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 13, 2010)

KiwiMark said:


> I don't want to read the whole thread again and I just don't recall reading anything to suggest that raco thought that the 4D Mag LED was the one to beat in terms of output.


He hasn't said it explicitly, more by implication.



KiwiMark said:


> The Mag 4D has plenty of battery power available and has a REALLY long run time for the output level, with a better heatsinked drop-in it has the capability of performing even better.


Nobody is disputing that a modded Maglite or one using third-party drop-ins is capable of pretty good performance. What we're discussing is stock Maglite technology which is undeniably inferior to even "budget" brands like Fenix or Quark. Heck, even a Quark MiNi AA (25 OTF lumens for 8-hours) will give his 4D Maglite a serious run for its money, and it's no bigger than your index finger! Bring a 4-pack of AA batteries with you and we've more than covered that magic 45-hour run time with considerably less bulk and weight than a 4D Maglite.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 13, 2010)

raco said:


> I realize that lab tests can show many other flaws, but those lights are really more than useable in *reality*.


And in reality, a stone is usable for pounding in nails, but I'd rather use a proper hammer. In other words, Maglite gets the job done, but it's not the best tool for the job.


----------



## Fulgeo (Aug 13, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> Then why do zero manufactures (other than maglite) have any intrest in D cell alkalines? You can go on all day on how much capacity a D cell has, the fact remains I'll take a CR123 or even a AA battery anyday over ANY D cell, and I believe 98% of the users here would also.



I do not want to be "Trollin" or to be "Trolled" but I completely disagree with this post. The D cell and for that matter lithium LiMnNi Rechargeable 26650 cells are my favorite form factor. Second place would be AA cells. I trust the chemistry of NiMH over CR123 cells. Especially when the light is at the side of the bed that I sleep in. Over all I like building a flashlight based on a 3D Mag that uses LSD NiMH D cells. This also gives me the option to use readily available D cell primary batteries in an emergency. This thread is interesting since for the most part people have a love/hate affair with Mags. I would say that the Mag D flashlights ( and to a lesser extend Mag C ) are the most popular mod hosts represented on this form. When I get a stock Mag or for that matter any flashlight in my hands I think/dream about how to make it better. This theme seems to be pretty consistent in most CPFers. 

Happy Mods!


----------



## alpg88 (Aug 13, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> Nobody is disputing that a modded Maglite or one using third-party drop-ins is capable of pretty good performance. What we're discussing is stock Maglite technology which is undeniably inferior to even "budget" brands like Fenix or Quark. Heck, even a Quark MiNi AA (25 OTF lumens for 8-hours) will give his 4D Maglite a serious run for its money, and it's no bigger than your index finger! Bring a 4-pack of AA batteries with you and we've more than covered that magic 45-hour run time with considerably less bulk and weight than a 4D Maglite.


 
i agree, however you guys comparing a corvette and pick up truck


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 13, 2010)

alpg88 said:


> i agree, however you guys comparing a corvette and pick up truck


A Quark MiNi AA costs the same as a D-cell Maglite.


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> He hasn't said it explicitly, more by implication.


Honestly, I never meant to say that the best flashlight is made by Maglite, neither explicitly, nor by implication. I meant to say that regarding Maglites as ridiculous lights is unfair.



the.Mtn.Man said:


> And in reality, a stone is usable for pounding in nails, but I'd rather use a proper hammer. In other words, Maglite gets the job done, but it's not the best tool for the job.


To have light, the best tool is a flashlight. To pound nails in, the best tool is a hammer. A high-end light and a low-end light are the same tool: a light. A high-end hammer and a low-end hammer are the same tool: a hammer. But they are of different quality. Maglite is not a tool, it's a brand that makes tools known as flashlights. When using a flashlight, of whatever brand, in order to have light, you are not using the wrong tool.

Knowing this, some lights are better than others for some lighting jobs. If all you need is to see the keyhole of your door in the dark, then the best light to do this is probably a 1 dollar keychain light, which is as low-end as you can get. When I go camping and need a couple of hours of light every day during a week, then a Maglite *may* be the best light, because I don't have to carry it (I just put it on the ground in my tent), because it gives me enough light (it's not difficult to light a small tent), and because I can be 100% certain that I won't have to replace the batteries a single time. This remain true even if Cree just released a new LED that is 10% more efficient.


----------



## carrot (Aug 13, 2010)

raco said:


> Knowing this, some lights are better than others for some lighting jobs. If all you need is to see the keyhole of your door in the dark, then the best light to do this is probably a 1 dollar keychain light, which is as low-end as you can get. When I go camping and need a couple of hours of light every day during a week, then a Maglite *may* be the best light, because I don't have to carry it (I just put it on the ground in my tent), because it gives me enough light (it's not difficult to light a small tent), and because I can be 100% certain that I won't have to replace the batteries a single time. This remain true even if Cree just released a new LED that is 10% more efficient.



Didn't I just prove to you that there are smaller flashlights that are as bright and run as long?


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

carrot said:


> Didn't I just prove to you that there are smaller flashlights that are as bright and run as long?


Sorry if I missed something, but please give me an example. I repeat that I believe that many lights are more efficient than the Maglites, which is obvious.


----------



## carrot (Aug 13, 2010)

raco said:


> Sorry if I missed something, but please give me an example. I repeat that I believe that many lights are more efficient than the Maglites, which is obvious.


Just a few posts above yours, I calculated the effective runtime of a Quark 123^2T. I showed that it runs, even in the worst case, as long as the Maglite and as bright for a much smaller package.

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3487461&postcount=94


----------



## dhouseng (Aug 13, 2010)

raco said:


> Sorry if I missed something, but please give me an example. I repeat that I believe that many lights are more efficient than the Maglites, which is obvious.



How about the eagletac M2XC4? 40 lumens for 55 hours.


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

carrot said:


> Just a few posts above yours, I calculated the effective runtime of a Quark 123^2T. I showed that it runs, even in the worst case, as long as the Maglite and as bright for a much smaller package.
> 
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/3487461&postcount=94



Thank you. Is this this light you're talking about? The website says:



> Moonlight: 0.2 lumens for 30 days, (1ma)
> Low: 4 lumens for 5 days (10ma)
> Medium: 22 lumens for 20 hours (50ma)
> High: 85 lumens for 4.5 hours (250ma)
> ...



A 4D Maglite has 100% more runtime for the same output (even though I still have huge doubts about the fact is gives only 22 lumens, but let's say it's true) but still, I admit that considering the size, this is impressive. This light is probably much more efficient than a 4D. But I won't buy it because my 4D does the job and because I don't want to use cr123a batteries. I had a 2xAA (NiMH) light that exploded once, I don't want to see that again. As someone said on CPF, the risk of explosion with cr123a is probably around 1 chance out of a few thousands (he calculated 1 out of 3600 if I remember correctly), so unless you really *need* it, it is, in my opinion, a bad choice (considering risks vs benefits). I'm considering buying a 1xL91 light like the Fenix LD10, for when I need a small light.


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

dhouseng said:


> How about the eagletac M2XC4? 40 lumens for 55 hours.


Thank you for the idea, but I want to avoid li-ion batteries.


----------



## morelightnow (Aug 13, 2010)

Fulgeo said:


> I do not want to be "Trollin" or to be "Trolled" but I completely disagree with this post. The D cell and for that matter lithium LiMnNi Rechargeable 26650 cells are my favorite form factor.
> 
> 
> > That's exactly what I'm trying to make all my lights use. A123 may not have the most capacity but I like its long life cycle. I rarely use my lights on the max setting for very long because i don't need that much light so capacity has never been an issue yet.
> ...


----------



## alpg88 (Aug 13, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> A Quark MiNi AA costs the same as a D-cell Maglite.


so ??


----------



## ryaxnb (Aug 13, 2010)

I'd like to make a case for maglites. Sure, theyre not the best flashlight, but they're very cheap, focus on driving down costs, made in the USA and quite durable.
Take the MiniMag Rebel 2AA. Lasts about 3 hours in regulation on alkalines, then another 2 or 3 more at reasonable brightness. You guys may not like alkalines, and even i have 6 123A batteries on hand and 4AA Lithium cells, but the average consumer is going to use alkalines and besides they are VERY cheap, in store you can get em for $.50 a battery or less.
If you can name a $20 flashlight thats durable like a maglite, runs for 5 hours of good light output on alkalines, has 45 lumens of brightness for several hours ( on alkalines), and is small and tiny like a miniMag 2AA, id love to see it. Personally, I think the MiniMag 2AA fills a niche, the "cheap long-runtime 2AA flashlight". Most 2AA flashlights comparable in runtimes on alkalines (e.g. the Fenix LD20 R4 will last longer on certain modes) are going to be more expensive. 
And of the lights you can find in a retail store for $20, i think the MiniMag 2AA is going to be your best bet, if i had online as an option id look elsewhere, but with retail, your quite limited and Mags are durable, they last a long time, and they are cheap.
Mag also makes some other neat products, like the XL100 which lasts well over 5 hours on alkalines, has infinite modes and is probably the cheapest well-built infinite mode flashlight available at as low as $35-40.
And the Mag 3D Rebel, say what you will about D cells but they are a good size for medium-brightness lights that you expect to last a while. The mag 3D cell light is a great light to store in a cupboard or a refrigerator, knowing that if the power goes out for days, itll last 10 or so hours at least at a brightness of about 30-70 lumens.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 13, 2010)

raco said:


> Honestly, I never meant to say that the best flashlight is made by Maglite, neither explicitly, nor by implication. I meant to say that regarding Maglites as ridiculous lights is unfair.


Is it unfair to say that a PC running a 386 processor is outdated when compared to modern technology? No, it's not. Rather, it's a simple statement of fact.



raco said:


> A high-end light and a low-end light are the same tool: a light. A high-end hammer and a low-end hammer are the same tool: a hammer.


Broadly speaking, yes, but not all hammers -- or flashlights -- are created equal. A poorly balanced hammer made with second rate materials is not as effective a tool as a properly balanced hammer made with hardened steel.



raco said:


> When I go camping and need a couple of hours of light every day during a week, then a Maglite *may* be the best light, because I don't have to carry it (I just put it on the ground in my tent), because it gives me enough light (it's not difficult to light a small tent), and because I can be 100% certain that I won't have to replace the batteries a single time. This remain true even if Cree just released a new LED that is 10% more efficient.


None of this changes the fact that Maglite technology is outdated and that you could get at least comparable benefits (and a much nicer beam) with a flashlight that can slip inconspicuously into your pants pocket (yep, no leaving it behind at the campsite because it's too bulky to carry with you. )

I want to echo what someone said earlier: if you ever got your hands on a decent modern flashlight, you'd never touch your beloved Maglite again.


----------



## alpg88 (Aug 13, 2010)

my local home depo sells 3d and 2aa rebels in one pack for 29.99


----------



## ryaxnb (Aug 13, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> Is it unfair to say that a PC running a 386 processor is outdated when compared to modern technology? No, it's not. Rather, it's a simple statement of fact.
> 
> 
> Broadly speaking, yes, but not all hammers -- or flashlights -- are created equal. A poorly balanced hammer made with second rate materials is not as effective a tool as a properly balanced hammer made with hardened steel.
> ...



I throughouly disagree. Though i believe raco is being stubborn about not wanting to use lithium or NiMH batteries which are clearly superior chemistry (says my 1x123A light which is brighter than my 2xAA light ,) on alkalines and even on NiMHs, maglites have a place. they are incredibly cheap for a quality flashlight. They can be bought as good gifts because of the price and the alkaline thing (e.g. MiniMag rebel would make a great gift) and the UI is dead simple, with hi mode first so if your "grandma" cant figure out multi-mode, she doesnt have to. 
All i can say is that although i would no longer consider a maglite my best flashlight by any means if i got a LD20 R4 or PD20 R4, i would consider it to still have a "place" in my collection; a place as a battery-sipper that runs well on alkalines and is a good secondary flashlight. I would also consider it for gifts more so than the PD20, which has difficult to figure out multimode setup and short runtime on the highest mode, meaning that multimode use is pretty much mandatory .


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> Is it unfair to say that a PC running a 386 processor is outdated when compared to modern technology? No, it's not. Rather, it's a simple statement of fact.


I said "saying that Maglites are ridiculous is unfair". I didn't say "saying that Maglites are outdated is unfair". They _are_ outdated, like I said (in this post). By the way, my computer is outdated but I won't run into a store to buy another one, and do it again every year for the sake of being up to date.



the.Mtn.Man said:


> Broadly speaking, yes, but not all hammers -- or flashlights -- are created equal.


That's exactly why I was trying to tell you.




the.Mtn.Man said:


> I want to echo what someone said earlier: if you ever got your hands on a decent modern flashlight, you'd never touch your beloved Maglite again.


I own a decent modern flashlight (ITP A6 Polestar). It is much more brighter and lighter than my Mag 4D.


----------



## alpg88 (Aug 13, 2010)

my mags start from 500lm, and go up to 6000lm.


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

ryaxnb said:


> Though i believe raco is being obstinate about not wanting to use lithium or NiMH batteries which are clearly superior chemistry (says my 1x123A light which is brighter than my 2xAA light ,) on alkalines and even on NiMHs


I don't feel I need them enough to justify their use (and their risk of explosion). I can manage to have enough light without such batteries.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 13, 2010)

** removed at moderator's request **


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 13, 2010)

ryaxnb said:


> maglites have a place.


I agree. In a trashcan right next to the junk mail.

(Calm down, I'm joking. )

While I feel that Maglites are undeservedly disparaged around CPF, I don't see a need to pretend they're anything other than what they are: cheap (and cheaply made) mass market products that feature a lot of design compromises.


----------



## carrot (Aug 13, 2010)

raco said:


> Thank you. Is this this light you're talking about? The website says:
> 
> 
> 
> A 4D Maglite has 100% more runtime for the same output (even though I still have huge doubts about the fact is gives only 22 lumens, but let's say it's true) but still, I admit that considering the size, this is impressive. This light is probably much more efficient than a 4D. But I won't buy it because my 4D does the job and because I don't want to use cr123a batteries. I had a 2xAA (NiMH) light that exploded once, I don't want to see that again. As someone said on CPF, the risk of explosion with cr123a is probably around 1 chance out of a few thousands (he calculated 1 out of 3600 if I remember correctly), so unless you really *need* it, it is, in my opinion, a bad choice (considering risks vs benefits). I'm considering buying a 1xL91 light like the Fenix LD10, for when I need a small light.



I calculated the actual estimated runtime of the Quark, which is better than the manufacturer's stated claims by 100%. See my proof for details


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

carrot said:


> Jeez, are you dense. I calculated the actual estimated runtime of the Quark, which is better than the manufacturer's stated claims by 100%. Read my damn proof.


Usually, manufacturers overestimate their runtime. It would be very surprising than the real runtime of the Quark is twice what the manufacturer says! If you had measured it then I'd trust what you say, but your way of calculating the runtime seems very theoretical.


----------



## ryaxnb (Aug 13, 2010)

raco said:


> I don't feel I need them enough to justify their use (and their risk of explosion). I can manage to have enough light without such batteries.


A made-in-USA 1x123A battery has no risk of explosion. these are the same batteries pros are using in their $1000 SLRs without problems, and that Energizer is selling without warning labels. Dont worry, even if you connect 2 in series, so long as they are new-out-of-box from the same brand and are reliable cells (e.g. Rayovacs, Energizers, Duracell, Surefire, or BatteryStation USA) there is bascially no risk at all of exploding, far less than 1 in 3000. these batteries explosion chance is much much lower, almost imperceptible, so long as you use well-made batteries and dont put half-used 123As in your lights  :candle:


----------



## ryaxnb (Aug 13, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> *comment removed


 Minimags have their place, but that does not mean other flashlights are not superior. Almost all fenix or nitecore lights outclass the mags, and of course a surefire will outdo a mag easily, but these lights cost much more. I was more comparing to the Romisens, ITPs, Ultrafires and SpiderFires of the world, with an eye towards "grandmas use". In that context, Minimag is not the best either, but its competitive and available widely.
Edit: hey, im enlightened now! wow, that was quick :-D


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

ryaxnb said:


> A made-in-USA 1x123A battery has no risk of explosion.


I'll try to find an example of a made-in-USA 1x123A battery that exploded.



ryaxnb said:


> there is bascially no risk at all of exploding, far less than 1 in 3000. LOL, that would mean there was one explosion per 5 lights or so considering how many battery changes the lights go through, and thats baloney.


No, the calculation was based on the number of CPF members who had an explosion, compared to the total number of members.


----------



## DM51 (Aug 13, 2010)

Tempers appear to be fraying, and this thread is degenerating into impatience and rudeness. carrot, the.Mtn.Man and ryanxb... you need to edit your posts please, to remain within the bounds of what is acceptable.


----------



## ryaxnb (Aug 13, 2010)

DM51 said:


> Tempers appear to be fraying, and this thread is degenerating into impatience and rudeness. carrot, the.Mtn.Man and ryanxb... you need to edit your posts please, to remain within the bounds of what is acceptable.



What should i edit in my posts.... i will make some preliminary editing PM me if its not enough


----------



## ryaxnb (Aug 13, 2010)

raco said:


> I'll try to find an example of a made-in-USA 1x123A battery that exploded.


remember, it should be new-in-box batter[ies] And not different brands connected together. These are the basic safety rules to follow, if you do you should be fine.



> No, the calculation was based on the number of CPF members who had an explosion, compared to the total number of members.



Many members, to save money, do not follow these rules 100%. This slightly increases the risk, as does connecting a very large number of 123As together (4, or 6).


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 13, 2010)

DM51 said:


> Tempers appear to be fraying, and this thread is degenerating into impatience and rudeness. carrot, the.Mtn.Man and ryanxb... you need to edit your posts please, to remain within the bounds of what is acceptable.


No temper here. I even included a friendly smiley to indicate that my comment was lighthearted. Regardless, I have removed my post at your request.


----------



## Swedpat (Aug 13, 2010)

Jash said:


> This is reason enough to own a maglite, or two as they are available in 4500k and 6500k.



Interesting thread. I have several Maglites and use them with Malkoff dropins (exception is MagCharger). And the picture shows another reason to own a Maglite. The 4500k option will be my choice! 
Anyway I thought about one more advantage with a (C or D) Maglite: it's more difficult to misplace(and not find) compared to smaller modern LEDs...


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 13, 2010)

KiwiMark said:


> You couldn't quote his posts that say that could you? I don't want to read the whole thread again and I just don't recall reading anything to suggest that raco thought that the 4D Mag LED was the one to beat in terms of output. Feel free to post a quote to disprove what I'm saying. The Mag 4D has plenty of battery power available and has a REALLY long run time for the output level, with a better heatsinked drop-in it has the capability of performing even better.
> 
> I think maybe you are right, you are reading into raco's post - seeing more than he is writing. He has said he thought it would be outputting more than 22 Lumen, he never mentioned knowing the actual output figures or believing the output to be spectacular.


 


Kiwimark said "I don't want to read the whole thread again and I just don't recall reading anything to suggest that raco thought that the 4D Mag LED was the one to beat in terms of output"

Check out raco's first post kiwimark, post #53 here's the quote "So I really think this is a good product, with no equivalent on the market. "



Now, the key words here are " no equivalent on the market", maybe you missed that part when you reread the whole thread. Kiwimark, your argument isn't valid, you are stating that raco never claimed that the 4D mag LED was the one to beat in terms of output and runtime. Raco has continually stated throughout the thread that there is no light that can match his 4D mag in terms of output and runtime, and if there is he would like to see it, and has continually asked for examples to prove him wrong. There are other posts of his tourting the "superiority" of his magLED over any other light, claiming that there's nothing that can match it in terms of runtime and output. If you would like I can go back and find other examples of this throughout the thread and quote them for you.

Remember, Raco is the one who started this whole thing, his first post on the subject was a direct compairson between a surefire and his maglite, making claims of it's superiority over the competition.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 13, 2010)

raco said:


> I don't feel I need them enough to justify their use (and their risk of explosion). I can manage to have enough light without such batteries.


 

I'll admit that my knowledge of batteries is limited but I think I is foolish to not use CR123 batteries because of "their risk of explosion". I believe that as long as a individual takes care in using them correctly they will probably never have a issue with them. Is there a chance my pedal could stick to the floor someday in my car, definitely, does that stop me from driving? No


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> Check out raco's first post kiwimark, post #53 here's the quote "So I really think this is a good product, with no equivalent on the market. "


Do you know an equivalent light? I think it is the only light with those characteristics (enormous runtime, intermediate brightness, alkaline cells, cheap price, and unfortunately, big body). If you know an equivalent light, then please name it.




ebow86 said:


> I'll admit that my knowledge of batteries is limited but I think I is foolish to not use CR123 batteries because of "their risk of explosion". I believe that as long as a individual takes care in using them correctly they will probably never have a issue with them. Is there a chance my pedal could stick to the floor someday in my car, definitely, does that stop me from driving? No


Yes, some people also says that having an explosion is like winning the lottery. It's all a matter of expected value. If I could have the same probability of winning the lottery than I have to see a CR123A exploding, then I'd be extremely rich by now.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 13, 2010)

raco said:


> Do you know an equivalent light? I think it is the only light with those characteristics (enormous runtime, intermediate brightness, alkaline cells, cheap price, and unfortunately, big body). If you know an equivalent light, then please name it.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, some people also says that having an explosion is like winning the lottery. It's all a matter of expected value. If I could have the same probability of winning the lottery than I have to see a CR123A exploding, then I'd be extremely rich by now.


 

You see, you just proved my point exactly. Your claim is this, there is no light out there that is better or superior than your last generation 4D maglite. To me that is what I clasify as an "extraordinary claim", therefore I believe the burden of proof rest's upon your sholders my friend. You are the one claiming that no light is superior, in terms of value, output or runtime. Ok, prove it.

Let me ask you, how many CR123 or even AA based modern LED lights in this price range have you ever owned or used? Lights like quarks and fenix's? Judging by your argument for the 4D mag throughout this thread, I would have to say none.


----------



## chanjyj (Aug 13, 2010)

raco said:


> Do you know an equivalent light? I think it is the only light with those characteristics (enormous runtime, intermediate brightness, alkaline cells, cheap price, and unfortunately, big body). If you know an equivalent light, then please name it.



No I do not. But then, I do not see a need for such long runtime at the cost of the gigantic battery.

The size of the 4D is already prohibitive. I don't ever see myself using it for more than 2h at one go, much less the 40+ hours you posted initially.

Alkaline - fine and dandy. Nothing I can say here.

Cheap price? I don't know how much they sell it for in the US, but in my country the damned thing is going for only $14.67 cheaper than a Surefire G2 :shakehead

Add to the fact that Energizer's new PRO2D1 is selling for the same price is maglite, with a 65 lumen rating for 15h using 2 'D' cells. And it sure looks more hardy. Even in the field of 'D' cell alkaline's maglite's facing some stiff competition.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 13, 2010)

raco said:


> Do you know an equivalent light?


It seems the 40-hour run time is the big sticking point with you, but there are no shortage of lights that are vastly superior in every other category and can produce a comparable amount of illumination as your Maglite on a single cell while still having respectable run times in the 10- to 20-hour range.


----------



## Robin24k (Aug 13, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> Let me ask you, how many CR123 or even AA based modern LED lights in this price range have you ever owned or used? Lights like quarks and fenix's? Judging by your argument for the 4D mag throughout this thread, I would have to say none.


You can't compare them to smaller pocket-sized lights, they aren't in the same class. Most people who buy D-cell lights want (or don't mind) the size of the light, and it's not necessarily just about brightness.

If you want to compare with Quarks or Fenixes, the 2AA LED and XL100 would be more fair. Personally, I value quality the most, which is why I own three 2AA LED Mini-Mags and two XL100's. Frankly, the build quality of the Made in China lights cannot compare to traditional Made in USA quality. The feel of the threads, the anodizing (ignoring type II or HA since that's a spec), customer service, warranty, etc.

Now, Surefire would be a good comparison with Maglite, but Surefire uses CR123 batteries, which makes them specialized. I don't want to have my lights use batteries that aren't used anywhere else around the house, so I stick with the common alkaline form factors and use alkaline, NiMH, or lithium primary, depending on the application.

Maglites aren't the greatest, but if you want a quality light, that's what I would recommend. That said, I wouldn't recommend them if you are looking for maximum brightness.


----------



## Foxfyre (Aug 13, 2010)

Owned 4 maglites. 

Two personally modded AA's (1 low dome luxeon, 1 cree), a three cell with a mag drop-in, and a 6 cell monster from a government auction.

Still have the modded lights and the three cell just out of mushy sentimentality.

Currently have more Quarks, Jetbeams, HDS, Muyshondts, and RA's than I care to carry at one time (but not for lack of trying :thinking

The maglites were fine at the time but in my personal experiences the others just seem to meet my needs better and fit more performance into smaller more managable packages.

You may find maglites work better for you. I say go for it :twothumbs. 

It all seems to come down to personal tastes and what each of us finds to be the best fit for our circumstances and needs.

Isn't the hunt fun? :huh:

I'm still waiting for my ultimate light (.1 to 1,000,000 lumens, 100 hour run time ,infinitely variable output, takes any available cell, made from indestructable self luminous unobtanium, light weight, pocketable and affordable :shrug: )


----------



## qandeel (Aug 13, 2010)

Foxfyre said:


> I'm still waiting for my ultimate light (.1 to 1,000,000 lumens, 100 hour run time ,infinitely variable output, takes any available cell, made from indestructable self luminous unobtanium, light weight, pocketable and affordable :shrug: )


 
+1


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 13, 2010)

Robin24k said:


> You can't compare them to smaller pocket-sized lights, they aren't in the same class. Most people who buy D-cell lights want (or don't mind) the size of the light, and it's not necessarily just about brightness.
> 
> If you want to compare with Quarks or Fenixes, the 2AA LED and XL100 would be more fair. Personally, I value quality the most, which is why I own three 2AA LED Mini-Mags and two XL100's. Frankly, the build quality of the Made in China lights cannot compare to traditional Made in USA quality. The feel of the threads, the anodizing (ignoring type II or HA since that's a spec), customer service, warranty, etc.
> 
> ...


 


No. Absolutely No. First off I would put the build of the fenix lights WAY above the quality of maglite's, even though they are made in the china, and I hate to say that. To claim a maglite's build is above typical fenix is yet another "extrodonary claim" in my mind. Cheap plastic lens, plastic reflector, thin aluminum tubing, etc. I don't mean this in a disrespectful way but, anyone claiming that a 2AA maglite has better build quality than a Fenix either has no knowledge of lights or has never owned one. I have a Fenix TK10, and I've owned a TK30, I would put the build of these lights 3 or 4 notches above the cheaply made maglites. There's a reason maglite's are cheap, cheap materials. I looking at your list of lights, I don't see any quarks or fenix's listed, If you don't own any then how can you make a compairson? I'm guessing you've never used one, if you did I am willing to bet you probably wouldn't be spending your money and more maglite's.

And saying that surefire would make a good compairson to a maglite except for the batteries it uses, I would love to react and comment to that but I am sure the moderators would either request I edit my post or threaten to ban if I didn't refrain myself.


----------



## alpg88 (Aug 13, 2010)

OMFG. 
i hear trolls crawl


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> You see, you just proved my point exactly. Your claim is this, there is no light out there that is better or superior than your last generation 4D maglite. To me that is what I clasify as an "extraordinary claim", therefore I believe the burden of proof rest's upon your sholders my friend. You are the one claiming that no light is superior, in terms of value, output or runtime. Ok, prove it.


I've said it before and I say it again: I'm not claiming that Maglite makes superior lights. In this post, I say that « they are outdated ».



ebow86 said:


> Judging by your argument for the 4D mag throughout this thread, I would have to say none.


See above.


----------



## Robin24k (Aug 13, 2010)

Again, those are specs. The plastic lens can come out for a glass lens. The plastic reflector is sufficient, especially for LED.

Yes, you are right, I have never owned any. However, I have done research about them before, and looking at high resolution pictures, attention to detail is lacking. Not to mention, brand new from the factory, those lights are often in need of a good cleaning to remove fingerprints, dust, etc. That should not be necessary on a brand new light.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 13, 2010)

raco said:


> I've said it before and I say it again: I'm not claiming that Maglite makes superior lights. In this post, I say that « they are outdated ».
> 
> 
> See above.


 


Correct, you're not saying maglite makes superior lights, you're claim is that no light can compair to your Maglite 4D LED in terms of output, runtime, and value, and you have asked for anyone to prove otherwise.


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

chanjyj said:


> The size of the 4D is already prohibitive. I don't ever see myself using it for more than 2h at one go, much less the 40+ hours you posted initially.


Yes, I never said a Maglite is suitable for everyone. As I said earlier, even a 1 dollar keychain light can be the best light is all you need is to light the keyhole of your door in the dark. There can be very different needs for light.



Robin24k said:


> customer service, warranty, etc.


Good point. I forgot it, but all Maglite lights comes with a lifetime warranty. Of course, who cares as the light is cheap? But still, you won't have to buy the same flashlight twice. The user manual says that if the light is no more available, then they'll replace it with a newer model.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 13, 2010)

Robin24k said:


> Again, those are specs. The plastic lens can come out for a glass lens. The plastic reflector is sufficient, especially for LED.
> 
> Yes, you are right, I have never owned any. However, I have done research about them before, and looking at high resolution pictures, attention to detail is lacking. Not to mention, brand new from the factory, those lights are often in need of a good cleaning to remove fingerprints, dust, etc. That should not be necessary on a brand new light.


 

That's not the point here. Your claim was Maglite's quality, not specs, are superior to the chinese made lights like fenix's. I called this claim out because I consider it to be bunk, when you do such a thing there's always someone to consider it troling. And I really don't want it to come across that way, and I'm not trying to critize someone because all they own is maglite's, look at my siginature, I own 8 or so (nearly all purchased before I was intrudced to quality lights), I just can't stand by and see someone who dosen't own a fenix or surefire claim that a maglite is equal or in this case better than a fenix.


----------



## Fulgeo (Aug 13, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> There's a reason maglite's are cheap, cheap materials. I looking at your list of lights, I don't see any quarks or fenix's listed, If you don't own any then how can you make a compairson? I'm guessing you've never used one, if you did I am willing to bet you probably wouldn't be spending your money and more maglite's.
> 
> And saying that surefire would make a good compairson to a maglite except for the batteries it uses, I would love to react and comment to that but I am sure the moderators would either request I edit my post or threaten to ban if I didn't refrain myself.



Almost took the bait but FulgeFish wisely spit it back out before the hook was set.


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> Correct, you're not saying maglite makes superior lights, you're claim is that no light can compair to your Maglite 4D LED in terms of output, runtime, and value, and you have asked for anyone to prove otherwise.


My claim from the start is that Maglites are not ridiculous. When I said "no equivalent", I meant "it makes sense to buy it for those who like this kind of lights" or "those lights have a reason to exists because some people like them" (even if you ignore all those who buy them to mod them). That's all.


----------



## Robin24k (Aug 13, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> That's not the point here. Your claim was Maglite's quality, not specs, are superior to the chinese made lights like fenix's. I called this claim out because I consider it to be bunk, when you do such a thing there's always someone to consider it troling. And I really don't want it to come across that way, and I'm not trying to critize someone because all they own is maglite's, look at my siginature, I own 8 or so (nearly all purchased before I was intrudced to quality lights), I just can't stand by and see someone who dosen't own a fenix or surefire claim that a maglite is equal or in this case better than a fenix.


Unfortunately, perception of quality is something that varies quite a bit from person to person. I can pretty quickly point out why a $2000 Dell Latitude laptop is superior to the average consumer machine, and I do tend to nit-pick. If I could get the opportunity to review a Quark or Fenix, I would definately approach it with an open mind and see whether or not the product is better than what the product materials seem to indicate. That said, I wouldn't spend money myself to purchase such a product.

The problem with Chinese made products are that quality varies too much for comfort, there are definately problems with QA. I guess what I'm getting at is that even if Maglite's quality may not be the best, it is consistent, and knowing what to expect and not being disappointed is why I think their quality is superior.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 13, 2010)

Fulgeo said:


> Almost took the bait but FulgeFish wisely spit it back out before the hook was set.


 

No one was setting out any bait FYI, that was my opinion, I wasn't trying to bait anyone. Can a person do that without being accused of trying to start a flamewar or being a troll? Apparently not.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 13, 2010)

raco said:


> My claim from the start is that Maglites are not ridiculous. When I said "no equivalent", I meant "it makes sense to buy it for those who like this kind of lights" or "those lights have a reason to exists because some people like them" (even if you ignore all those who buy them to mod them). That's all.


 

Once again the communication process is broken down. Your claim in whole is this, "my 4D maglite is unrivaled in terms of output, runtime and value, can anyone out there show me a flashlight that proves otherwise"? That's what you've been saying the entire thread, period, end of story. And who said anything about maglites being ridiculous? I don't recall that being said, now your're just making things up.


----------



## raco (Aug 13, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> Once again the communication process is broken down. Your claim in whole is this, "my 4D maglite is unrivaled in terms of output, runtime and value, can anyone out there show me a flashlight that proves otherwise"? That's what you've been saying the entire thread, period, end of story. And who said anything about maglites being ridiculous? I don't recall that being said, now your're just making things up.



Ok, if you absolutely want me to say it, then I'll say it: My 4D maglite is unrivaled in terms of output, runtime and value.

That's what I'm trying to tell you from the beginning!


----------



## Monocrom (Aug 13, 2010)

ryaxnb said:


> I'd like to make a case for maglites. Sure, theyre not the best flashlight, but they're very cheap, focus on driving down costs, made in the USA and quite durable.


 
Based on personal experience, I can't agree about that last part. I've found them to be anything but durable.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 13, 2010)

Robin24k said:


> The plastic reflector is sufficient, especially for LED.


Sorry, but no. Mag's plastic reflectors have traditionally done a poor job focusing the light, and they allow a lot of light leakage through the reflector itself. If you could turn one over, light would be visible through it. That means that light that could be coming out of the front is lost. Of course it's these kinds of design compromises that keep Maglites inexpensive.



Robin24k said:


> I have done research about them before, and looking at high resolution pictures, attention to detail is lacking. Not to mention, brand new from the factory, those lights are often in need of a good cleaning to remove fingerprints, dust, etc. That should not be necessary on a brand new light.


I'm not sure what pictures you're looking at that allow you to perform this kind of detailed assessment on "brand new from the factory" lights. If you're talking user photos then did it ever occur to you that the new owner handled the light before taking pictures?

I also find it a bit cheeky to discount a product based on such dodgy "research".


----------



## Robin24k (Aug 13, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> I'm not sure what pictures you're looking at that allow you to perform this kind of detailed assessment on "brand new from the factory" lights. If you're talking user photos then did it ever occur to you that the new owner handled the light before taking pictures?


Assuming reviews and unboxings were done on lights brand new from the factory, that would be it. If the reviewer handled the lights then put them back in the box for pictures, then I wouldn't know. But generally, most products from China have this kind of problem, it's not just lights. I don't expect lights to be any different, but I could be wrong. I've had the need to clean off many brand new goods from China due to oils, fingerprints, dust, etc.



the.Mtn.Man said:


> I also find it a bit cheeky to discount a product based on such dodgy "research".


Well, my experience, combined with some research that confirms my experience, led me to that decision. I'm quick to discount such products because of international sellers, high price, as well as difficulty/cost in returning if needed.


----------



## alpg88 (Aug 13, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> Sorry, but no.


yes it is sufficient enough, actually rebel reflector is great reflectors for leds, hard to find anything better, even moders that build sst90 use it. perfect curvature, and focusing spot.
if you knew thing or two about modding a light, you wouldn't say half of the ******* you said. it is entertaining thou.


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 13, 2010)

alpg88 said:


> yes it is sufficient enough, actually rebel reflector is great reflectors for leds, hard to find anything better, even moders that build sst90 use it. perfect curvature, and focusing spot.
> if you knew thing or two about modding a light, you wouldn't say half of the ******* you said. it is entertaining thou.


 

Now this is what I consider to be trolling at it's finest, yet he pointed out earlier in the tread that he could "hear the trolls crawling".


----------



## Monocrom (Aug 13, 2010)

Robin24k said:


> Again, those are specs. The plastic lens can come out for a glass lens. The plastic reflector is sufficient, especially for LED.
> 
> Yes, you are right, I have never owned any. However, I have done research about them before, and looking at high resolution pictures, attention to detail is lacking. Not to mention, brand new from the factory, those lights are often in need of a good cleaning to remove fingerprints, dust, etc. That should not be necessary on a brand new light.


 
Just to be clear, I don't mean the following as a personal insult towards you. However, one can't give an educated opinion about the products any company makes unless that individual has owned their products. Doing research is always a good idea. Looking at high res. pics is also a good idea. 

However, having owned seven different Fenix models, I can tell you that pics don't do justice to the lights. Probably the best example being the LD05 model. I haven't seen a single pic, professional or amateur, that captures the sheer robust quality and nature of that particular model. And that's just one example. I wasn't interested at first, having already bought a Preon kit; but decided to take a chance on it. And I'm glad I did! After several weeks of EDC, it has proven itself to be more than just a capable penlight. It is simply outstanding. Now having simply done research on it, or just looked at pics of it; I honestly would not be impressed. Owning one and using it, now that's a completely different story. I highly recommend it to anyone wanting a tough, durable, bright, penlight that is a bit bigger than your average light in that class.


----------



## Robin24k (Aug 13, 2010)

Yes, tempers are starting to flare again, but he does have a good deal of posts, so maybe his point is valid. A better attitude would make it more credible though.


----------



## Robin24k (Aug 13, 2010)

Monocrom said:


> However, having owned seven different Fenix models, I can tell you that pics don't do justice to the lights. Probably the best example being the LD05 model. I haven't seen a single pic, professional or amateur, that captures the sheer robust quality and nature of that particular model.


Exactly, this is what I was talking about! The problem I have is that I'm not impressed from product materials, and giving them a shot is risky because of international sellers and manufacturer. If I could walk into a store and take a look at them myself, I would be able to make a more educated decision, but the risk is too great for me to take a bite, so I can only go off what I can find.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 13, 2010)

Robin24k said:


> If the reviewer handled the lights then put them back in the box for pictures, then I wouldn't know.


Exactly. That's why you can't make the kind of detailed assessments you have based on a few pictures you found on Google.

As someone else said, if you ever got a Fenix or Quark -- or Surefire or HDS if you want go the other extreme -- in your hands you'd likely be suddenly disappointed with the quality of your Mag collection.


----------



## alpg88 (Aug 13, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> Now this is what I consider to be trolling at it's finest, yet he pointed out earlier in the tread that he could "hear the trolls crawling".


 
lmao. 
you still wrong.


----------



## the.Mtn.Man (Aug 13, 2010)

ebow86 said:


> Now this is what I consider to be trolling at it's finest, yet he pointed out earlier in the tread that he could "hear the trolls crawling".


But tell me his "rebel reflector is great reflectors for leds, hard to find anything better" comment didn't have you laughing out loud. :laughing:


----------



## ebow86 (Aug 13, 2010)

alpg88 said:


> lmao.
> you still wrong.


 

Wrong about what?


----------



## alpg88 (Aug 13, 2010)

the.Mtn.Man said:


> But tell me his "rebel reflector is great reflectors for leds, hard to find anything better" comment didn't have you laughing out loud. :laughing:


 prove me wrong


----------



## Monocrom (Aug 13, 2010)

Robin24k said:


> Exactly, this is what I was talking about! The problem I have is that I'm not impressed from product materials, and giving them a shot is risky because of international sellers and manufacturer. If I could walk into a store and take a look at them myself, I would be able to make a more educated decision, but the risk is too great for me to take a bite, so I can only go off what I can find.


 
I think there's a bit of confusion here. I mean if you research the LD05 and look at pics of it, it doesn't look like an impressive light at all. (The very opposite of checking out a company's specs regarding their products.)

Also, I got all of my Fenix lights from Lighthound.com right here in America. Excellent reputation. No need to deal with a questionable Seller. No need to wait possibly months to ship from the other side of the planet. 

With those positives, taking a chance on a light that really interests you is less of a risk.


----------



## Unforgiven (Aug 13, 2010)

Thread closed.


----------

