# New Surefire EB1 Clicky (Beamshots added) - Review and runtime results



## 880arm (Nov 27, 2012)

*Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

The new EB1 from Surefire has been a hot topic for debate as its release has neared. Admittedly, when I saw the first runtime chart graciously shared by Robin24k I was disappointed in the apparent lack of (fairly) level output I was accustomed to with the venerable E1B. However, regardless of what I thought then, it was a forgone conclusion that I would be buying one of the EB1's just as soon as I could get my hands on it.

Well, today is the day and the light has arrived. It comes packed in the same red outer retail box and inner black box that we have become accustomed to with Surefire lights. There are no surprises in the box, just a light (with battery installed), the warranty registration card, and a Surefire decal. Also, in case you were uncertain as to how the battery should be replaced, there is a very brief instruction manual :thumbsup:. All in all, just what you would expect to find. 

The packaging clearly identifies which type of switch is provided, as well as the rated outputs of 200 lumens on high (1.3 hours) and 5 lumens on low (40 hours). The packaging also indicates the other colors that are (or will be) available - silver and tan - apparently with all of them being mil-spec anodized.







The light itself measures in at 4.5" in length which is about 1/2" longer than the E1B it replaces. This extra length comes from both the head and tail which are each slightly longer than their counterparts on the E1B. As already noted in other reviews, the EB1 is compatible with other E-series heads but the tailcaps are not interchangeable. 







The head on the EB1 is distinctive, not just for its increased length, but also for its larger diameter, which at approximately 1 1/8" is slightly wider than the E1B head at its widest point. The head is essentially the same diameter from front to back and no longer has the contours found on the older E1B. Also, in a departure from previous E-series LED's a spring is used for the positive contact on the head. 

The tailcap on the clicky version has a large shroud which would seem to be effective at preventing accidental activation. I have large thumbs but I have no trouble reaching or activating the switch. The inside of the switch looks like a miniature version of the UB3T/M3LT tailcap and is notable due to its increased depth and much longer spring. I suspect this extra depth was added to accommodate the momentary tactical version of the switch. The light will tail stand, albeit somewhat wobbly, but it does not appear this was a design consideration. The button protrudes maybe 1/16" beyond the shroud.

The 2-way pocket clip is slightly longer than its counterpart on the E1B and adds a hole in the upper bend which could be used to attach a lanyard.






The business end of the light obviously uses an optic but it is different in appearance to the current generation E1B, LX2, or E2DL. It is difficult to tell from the photo but it almost appears as if the back side of the optic is coated with a reflective material. Also, the "bubble" over the emitter appears to be considerably smaller. (I will attempt to get a better photo later).






(Note: the three bright spots unevenly spaced around the optic are reflections from another light I was using in an attempt to illuminate the optic)

My initial impressions of the beam are as expected for a TIR equipped light. It has a very bright spot, small amount of spill, and some rings around the outer portions of the beam. There may be some degree of green tint to the beam but at full brightness it has not been overwhelming to me in the small amount of time I used it so far. The beam becomes very noticeably green on low. I will have a better idea of what this is like in the real world after some more use.

The output of the light, on fresh batteries, seems comparable to the LX2 and E2DL and this baby throws when compared to other TIR Surefires. I took some quick and dirty 5m lux readings which were then converted to the following 1m readings (readings taken after lights had been on for 30 seconds):


EB110,979E2DL8,746LX2 #1 (A24309)8,369LX2 #2 (A43439)7,992L1 Lumamax (on AW16340)7,373L1 Lumamax4,440E1B (110 lumen)4,279











The runtime charts are provided for reference and entertainment value only and can be used to prove almost any point you want to make. Hopefully the discussions in this thread will stay cordial and on topic as I would really hate to have my first review LOCKED! (Thank you for your consideration of this matter) 

All tests were performed with new Surefire CR123a's from the same retail box with all batteries tested prior to use (all were within .004V of each other). A home made light box was used along with an Extech 401021 light meter and datalogging multimeter connected to my computer. The charts below show the relative outputs of a variety of Surefire TIR equipped lights with the 100% value being equal to the E1B's output after 30 seconds.

First up, the EB1 is compared to a 110 lumen E1B and a 65 lumen (yeah right ) L1 Lumamax.






The EB1 and E1B curves intersect right around the 50 minute mark. The EB1 then reaches its 50% point shortly thereafter at 52 minutes and then reaches the 10% mark at 86 minutes. 

The next chart compares the EB1 to some of its 2-cell cousins the LX2 (two samples) and the E2DL to see how close it comes to these 200 lumen rated lights 






If the output of the other lights is any indication, the EB1 seems to put out a solid 200 lumens initially. Of the four lights it actually had the highest output initially before settling down to a more middle of the road level for the next 10 or so minutes. One thing is for certain, compared to all the others, my old EDC LX2 (A43439) is looking like an underachiever!

At the end of the day, this is about what I expected after seeing Robin24k's graphs. However, I know that in my usage, the light will rarely be on for more than 2 or 3 minutes at a time so I would expect more reasonable looking output levels after 30 minutes of use than what is reflected in the chart. If it gets me to an hour of real world use with good output I'm happy . . . but naturally the more time, the better.

*(Update 11/28/2012)* - Per Maxbelg's request I compiled output and runtime information on the L1 when powered by an AW16340 cell. In this configuration the L1 compares very favorably, in my opinion, to the EB1 for the duration of its battery life. In this instance, the L1 ran for 40 minutes before cutting off due to the battery protection circuit kicking in. 






Looking ahead, I plan to do some more testing to reflect some type of real world use similar to what others have suggested - 5 minutes on, 5 minutes off - but that will have to wait for another day. I would also like to take some current and voltage measurements to try and figure out the stepped (?) regulation that seems to be in effect through much of the discharge curve. Some have suggested this is due to the battery being unable to keep up but the numbers show some very distinct steps which seem to indicate something else is at work. Unfortunately, my new box of Surefire CR123a's is now empty :shakehead


*Outdoor Beamshots* (Added 12/1/2012)

The following beamshots were taken to give an example of the EB1's beam at a distance of 100 ft. and to compare it to a variety of well known 1 and 2 cell lights. The photos give an idea of the shape and size of each light's hotspot but the spill was considerably more spill than what is shown.

Surefire EB1 on high





Surefire E1B on high





Surefire L1 Lumamax on high (using 1xCR123a)





Surefire L1 Lumamax on high (using 1x AW 16340)





Surefire LX2 Lumamax on high





Quark 123 R5 on max





Surefire G2X Tactical





JetBeam RRT-0 S2 on high (using 1x AW 16340)





Surefire Fury on high





Cheapo "300 lumen" aspheric that was on sale for $5 






Overall I'm still excited about the light and can't wait to use it for something other than lighting up a box. I took a quick walk around outside with the EB1 and E2DL and quite honestly couldn't tell any difference between the two in performance. The EB1 puts out an intense beam and it definitely has some reach. I can't wait to try it out at work and in the "real world."

I'm still trying to get used to the "feel" of the light as it is somewhat different than my old E1B. So far it doesn't feel as natural in my hand as the E1B but part of that is a matter of getting used to a new light. I shall provide updates after I have used the light for a few days.


----------



## Viking (Nov 27, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

Great review.
And good to have some lux readings from different surefire lights to compare.


Can I ask how do you convert 5m lux readings to 1m readings ?


BTW
I think the first lux reading is from EB1 ( you have written E1B  )


----------



## seattlite (Nov 27, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

Can you lego the components with E-series lights. Would be nice to run the head on an E2D/E2DL body using 1x17670.


----------



## Robin24k (Nov 27, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Viking said:


> Can I ask how do you convert 5m lux readings to 1m readings ?


Surface light intensity (lux) x distance^2 = peak beam intensity (cd)


----------



## Viking (Nov 27, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Robin24k said:


> Surface light intensity (lux) x distance^2 = peak beam intensity (cd)



What does the up pointing arrow mean ( just before 2 ) ?


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Nov 27, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



> Can I ask how do you convert 5m lux readings to 1m readings ?



Do you multiply by 25 perhaps?


----------



## Robin24k (Nov 27, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Viking said:


> What does the up pointing arrow mean ( just before 2 ) ?


Exponent. Distance^2 = distance * distance.


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Nov 27, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

Robin24K's formula works for a point source but I would suggest that things might not be as simple for the far field light distribution of a somewhat collimated source like the EB1. If the light were ideally collimated, i.e. plane waves, the intensity would be the same at one meter and five meters, right?

Any thoughts?


----------



## Viking (Nov 27, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Robin24k said:


> Exponent. Distance^2 = distance * distance.



Okay , think I got it 


So for 5 meter readings , I shall multiply the lux reading by 25 , and then I have candela.

Right ?


----------



## Robin24k (Nov 27, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

Yes, but he already converted them to candela so you do not need to multiply them anymore. Lux at 1 meter would be equal to candela (although it would not be a good idea to use these values, as 1 meter is usually not enough distance for beams to fully focus).



Vox Clamatis in Deserto said:


> Robin24K's formula works for a point source but I would suggest that things might not be as simple for the far field light distribution of a somewhat collimated source like the EB1. If the light were ideally collimated, i.e. plane waves, the intensity would be the same at one meter and five meters, right?
> 
> Any thoughts?


I don't know the physics behind it (my background is electrical engineering), but that's the formula for peak beam intensity from the ANSI FL1 Standard...


----------



## Viking (Nov 27, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

Thank you Robin. I will of course not multiply the numbers anymore.


880arm.

Sorry for stealing your thread like that.


----------



## 880arm (Nov 27, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Viking said:


> Great review.
> And good to have some lux readings from different surefire lights to compare.
> 
> 
> ...



As the others suggested, I multiplied by 25. Also thanks for pointing out my typo. I wish I had a nickle for every time I typed E1B when I meant EB1.

That's what happens when I stay up past my bedtime :tired:


----------



## 880arm (Nov 27, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



seattlite said:


> Can you lego the components with E-series lights. Would be nice to run the head on an E2D/E2DL body using 1x17670.



You can lego the head onto any other E-series compatible light but I don't think the 17670 will work for you. See Vox's informative post in the other thread.


----------



## Bearlight (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

Thanks for the review, 880arm, and for the 'entertainment only' graphs, , will be interested to see your results for the on off, modes, it seems that the light is indeed brighter for the first 45 min, but drops off quickly after that... I wonder how obvious that will be to my eyes. I will definitely get one, but I am really impressed on the L1's performance, dispite it's age it held up well and appears to have the best performance runtime wise of the three, despite the fact that it is the oldest. I am eagerly awaiting my 'new' L1, (at least I don't have to wait long for that one!) I want to see how it holds up to my e1b. Looks like the money was worth it.
thanks again, and also to Robin24k who started it all :bow:


----------



## Maxbelg (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

Thanks for a great review. I have decided not to get this light. I just don't like flashlights with this type of poor regulation. Your needs might differ of course and regulation might not be important for your usage, but I prefer both the E1B and my L1. I especially like my L1 6th generation on IMRs! It would be interesting to see a graph comparing the EB1 to the L1 with RCRs in terms of total output and throw.


----------



## twl (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

The highlight of this EB1 light is the nearly 11k lux, and will be one of the best throwers in the EDC class. At least, it will at turn on, and for a little while thereafter.

While other lights do offer flatter regulation by far, this light has some things going for it, and it will perform equal or better than its E1B predecessor until the 50 minute mark.

So, I'd say that if you typically use your EDC light for short term use, and recharge batteries before 50 minutes, it's all on the up-side vs the E1B.
There are reasons some will really like this light, and reasons that some will hate it.
Classic SureFire.

I never intended to buy this light anyway, so it's of no concern to me, but I like to study the new lights coming on to the market, just for my own knowledge.


----------



## Maxbelg (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



twl said:


> ......... and recharge batteries before 50 minutes.........



I thought it was a no-no with RCR. Are you referring to LiPO4? The runtime will be less than 30 minutes then, so you'd have to recharge quite a bit more!

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...ureFire-EB1-Backup-200-Lumen-Flashlight/page8 POST 232

Of course the E1B doesn't run on RCRs either, but the L1 does and runtime on mine with IMRs is 40 minutes. That's why I'd like to see the output with this setup compared to the EB1 and especially lux comparison to the L1 on RCRs. If I have similar output and throw (lux) and similar or longer rechargeable runtime, I won't "upgrade" to the EB1 from my trusty L1.


----------



## twl (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Maxbelg said:


> I thought it was a no-no with RCR. Are you referring to LiPO4? The runtime will be less than 30 minutes then, so you'd have to recharge quite a bit more!
> 
> http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...ureFire-EB1-Backup-200-Lumen-Flashlight/page8 POST 232
> 
> Of course the E1B doesn't run on RCRs either, but the L1 does and runtime on mine with IMRs is 40 minutes. That's why I'd like to see the output with this setup compared to the EB1 and especially lux comparison to the L1 on RCRs. If I have similar output and throw (lux) and similar or longer rechargeable runtime, I won't "upgrade" to the EB1 from my trusty L1.



Well, I always use rechargeable batteries in my lights, so it is the way I think about things.
You could substitute "replace" as the word, instead of "recharge" and get the same meaning.


----------



## Maxbelg (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



twl said:


> Well, I always use rechargeable batteries in my lights, so it is the way I think about things.
> You could substitute "replace" as the word, instead of "recharge" and get the same meaning.



Yes and replace the 50 minutes with 25 minutes if you're using rechargeable batteries. That is my point exactly as I'm also using rechargeable batteries always. My L1 runs 40 minutes regulated on IMRs and is visually a LOT brighter than my E1B and even my LX2 so that is why I want them compared. My E1B ran close to 40 minutes on LiPO4, but it wasn't as bright as the LX2 but was well regulated.

So what I'm saying is that I'd like to see the E1B, EB1 and L1 compared on rechargeable set-ups. At this point in time I suspect that the EB1 is not an upgrade FOR ME compared to the L1 because of the RCR compatibility and output of my L1.


----------



## Quiksilver (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

How is the durability? 

Some of us buy SureFire not for the lumens, but for other factors. Do the internal parts look robust? Tailswitch feel strong? 

Obviously to some extent we are relying on SF reputation for durability, but is the build quality look to the same standard as say the old E1B or is it more in line with the build quality of the 6PX/G2X/Fury line?

E1B was very good in hand, not pleased that the EB1 seems to be a larger light in general. 

How does the weight compare?

My E1B measures 68g (no battery)


----------



## Quiksilver (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



twl said:


> The highlight of this EB1 light is the nearly 11k lux, and will be one of the best throwers in the EDC class. At least, it will at turn on, and for a little while thereafter.
> 
> While other lights do offer flatter regulation by far, this light has some things going for it, and it will perform equal or better than its E1B predecessor until the 50 minute mark.
> 
> ...



Could the addition of:

1. More lux

2. Spring on the (+) side of the battery compartment

... Be an indication that the EB1 can pull backup duty as a mounted weaponlight? 

E1B isn't shaped properly for weaponlight duty, and the lack of forward spring means recoil cuts the connection and can cause it to jump into low mode.


----------



## AZPops (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

Great write up! Thanks!


----------



## twl (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Quiksilver said:


> Could the addition of:
> 
> 1. More lux
> 
> ...



Maybe they(SureFire) might be thinking that, perhaps.
I really don't know what they are thinking.


----------



## Maxbelg (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Quiksilver said:


> How is the durability? Some of us buy SureFire not for the lumens, but for other factors........



From what I've seen, I'd suspect that the durability will be similar to the E1B/L1. Are there really people who buy Surefire for lumens, or do you mean throw (lux)? If you want more lumens there are a gazillion options, if you want more throw in a similar package options are limited. If I'm not looking for throw I prefer my HDS modded with a high cri Nichia 219 in this size, but for a nice throwy beam, the L1 on RCRs excels. It even has more throw than my LX2 and my M60W. If I can find a better thrower with similar runtimes on rechargeables in the same size and of similar quality, I'm interested. Therefore my initial interest in the EB1. So far I'm not convinced.


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Quiksilver said:


> Could the addition of:
> 
> 1. More lux
> 
> ...



There have been others who have commented on the apparent commonality of some sections of the EB1 and the X300 Ultra WeaponLight.



Quiksilver said:


> How is the durability?
> 
> Some of us buy SureFire not for the lumens, but for other factors. Do the internal parts look robust? Tailswitch feel strong?
> 
> Obviously to some extent we are relying on SF reputation for durability, but is the build quality look to the same standard as say the old E1B or is it more in line with the build quality of the 6PX/G2X/Fury line?



Here are some of my initial observations on the subject from another thread:



Vox Clamatis in Deserto said:


> The fit and finish of both versions of the SF Backup are excellent as expected and the lights appear to originate from the same manufacturing process unlike, for example, a SF 6P and a SF 6PX placed next to each other. These E1B's and EB1 seem to definitely be from the old school of SF construction i.e. it appears that they can be disassembled for repair rather than tossed and replaced like the SF 6PX and the Fury.
> 
> Whatever process SF uses to do the matte finish on the black Backups seems to work and wear well. Under bright light you can see some variation in the tint of the sections of the EB1 but it is so close that you would never notice it otherwise. It has been argued here that SF's are 'illumination tools', aesthetics don't matter to Rambo etc. but I do appreciate it when I get a good looking product for the premium price that I paid. Now, about that LED tint...



http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...n-Flashlight&p=4074045&viewfull=1#post4074045

The runtime plots published here agree with my brief experience with the EB1. It's really bright out of the box for a while and then the output rapidly drops.

As an added bonus, as the output declines the tint of the LED on my light automatically shifts toward that region where your eye is most sensitive (undoubtedly a brilliant design to counteract the reduction of lumens with time ). My EB1 gets greener and greener as the battery runs down.

I do appreciate the fact that LED SF's tend to have a long tail on the output curve that will get you to the battery change.

I realize as Quicksilver says folks buy SF for a lot of other reasons than the light output but I do think that it is a spec for discussion.

Did SF intentionally pass on better regulation in order to meet the advertised 200 lumen mark with a less expensive LED?


----------



## Maxbelg (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

S


Vox Clamatis in Deserto said:


> .......As an added bonus, as the output declines the tint of the LED on my light automatically shifts toward that region where your eye is most sensitive (undoubtedly a brilliant design to counteract the reduction of lumens with time ).........



I might have to get one after all: my L1 lacks this feature and stays a boring white even on low! No seriously I almost killed myself laughing!:laughing:


----------



## brianna (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

880arm very nice review. We can tell you put a lot of time and effort into it. I too am going to pass on the light. I just can't get passed the poor regulation.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

Nice review.

I'm just happy to see the EB1 is out there.


----------



## Foskey (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

Drool! Thanks for the very informative review. I must pick one of these up in the near future.


----------



## Mojer (Nov 28, 2012)

*Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

Hello,

I am still trying to decide between these two lights. I have read the reviews, looked at the graphs, ect. However, I am wondering what the overall actual real life experience between these two lights is (for those of you fortunate enough to have both). Is there a significant difference in throw, ect that is more noticable in the EB1? Any feedback on these two lights would be much appreciated.


----------



## Kestrel (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Mojer said:


> I am still trying to decide between these two lights. I have read the reviews, looked at the graphs, ect. However, I am wondering what the overall actual real life experience between these two lights is (for those of you fortunate enough to have both). Is there a significant difference in throw, ect that is more noticable in the EB1? Any feedback on these two lights would be much appreciated.


Hello Mojer, I have merged your thread with this new review thread. There has also been much recent discussion in the main EB1 thread (i.e. in the past few days) comparing the few EB1's already in private hands with the popular E1B - lux measurements, runtime, etc.


----------



## 880arm (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Maxbelg said:


> Thanks for a great review. I have decided not to get this light. I just don't like flashlights with this type of poor regulation. Your needs might differ of course and regulation might not be important for your usage, but I prefer both the E1B and my L1. I especially like my L1 6th generation on IMRs! It would be interesting to see a graph comparing the EB1 to the L1 with RCRs in terms of total output and throw.



Using an AW16340 my L1 hit 7,373 lux @ 1m (measured at 5m and converted to 1m result as before). As far as output is concerned, the L1, using a rechargeable, holds its own pretty well against the EB1. In my test, the L1 ran for 40 minutes before the battery protection kicked in.


----------



## 880arm (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Quiksilver said:


> How is the durability?
> 
> Some of us buy SureFire not for the lumens, but for other factors. Do the internal parts look robust? Tailswitch feel strong?
> 
> ...



The parts and pieces seem comparable in quality to the E1B. The bodies are essentially the same with the only major difference being the tail threads are extended to accommodate the longer tailcap. The innards of the two tail switches appear the same with the exception of the longer spring on the EB1 tailcap. The head on the EB1 does not feel as "dense" (for lack of a better word) as the E1B head but it does not feel insubstantial in any way. The threads on both lights feel essentially the same (after a small amount of lube).

According to the packaging, the EB1 is 12 grams heavier than the E1B.


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



880arm said:


> Using an AW16340 my L1 hit 7,373 lux @ 1m (measured at 5m and converted to 1m result as before). As far as output is concerned, the L1, using a rechargeable, holds its own pretty well against the EB1. In my test, the L1 ran for 40 minutes before the battery protection kicked in.



A late model L1 on an RCR123 is still hard to beat. The venerable XR-E handles the power just fine and the low level using the RCR is a little more that I want but it still lasts a long time. I like using rechargeables with the option of using primaries for backup in case the power is out for a while.

Your great plots above show that both the L1 and E1B attempt to maintain output in this single cell configuration. I just thought SF would be a little further along with the regulation and emitter by now in the EB1.

The good thing about having ten lights on the kitchen table for comparison is that my wife doesn't notice the new one... :devil:


----------



## 880arm (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Mojer said:


> Hello,
> 
> I am still trying to decide between these two lights. I have read the reviews, looked at the graphs, ect. However, I am wondering what the overall actual real life experience between these two lights is (for those of you fortunate enough to have both). Is there a significant difference in throw, ect that is more noticable in the EB1? Any feedback on these two lights would be much appreciated.



Well, after one day, my real life experience is that the EB1 absolutely kills the E1B with regard to throw and output, just as the specs would suggest. So far I am very impressed with the E1B's output. The beam tint on the two I have is noticeably different when comparing them side by side but I never really thought about it while using the light for its intended purpose. I'm curious to see how this plays out in the long run after I have gone through a few sets of batteries.

I don't have any beamshot comparisons to show you but I did snap a couple of pictures today that happen to illustrate why I like TIR based lights in general. In this instance I was wanting to look into the darkened area shown in the photo on the left. The distance to the front sill of the furnace was about 40 feet while the distance to the back of the darkened area of the sidewell is around 75-80 feet. In the second photo you can see how the tight beam illuminates the area perfectly without returning a ton of glare off the surrounding furnace structure. 

Again, this is no comparison between lights as I'm sure the E1B would have done the job, just not nearly as bright.

As a point of comparison, note the difference between the EB1 and the "headlights" on the hydraulic ram that can be seen reflecting off the front of the furnace.


----------



## Maxbelg (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



880arm said:


> Using an AW16340 my L1 hit 7,373 lux @ 1m (measured at 5m and converted to 1m result as before). As far as output is concerned, the L1, using a rechargeable, holds its own pretty well against the EB1. In my test, the L1 ran for 40 minutes before the battery protection kicked in.



Thanks so much for doing this!!! This is exactly what I wanted to know. For me personally your data proves that I don't "need" to upgrade just yet. The L1 still rocks! Having said this, I can see that the EB1 might be very interesting to those who don't use rechargeable batteries and want similar output. 

As far as rechargeable set-ups go: If I combine your chart with the one in this thread, post 232:
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...ureFire-EB1-Backup-200-Lumen-Flashlight/page8
I come to the conclusion that running the L1 and the EB1 on their optimal rechargeable set-ups gives the EB1 a bit more output, but shorter runtime. (+-25minutes vs 40 minutes). So on rechargeable batteries I personally still prefer the L1.


----------



## N/Apower (Nov 28, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

I won't be replacing my current M600C weapon light with an upgraded M300A any time soon. All the "tube" is forward of my hand, and the head isn't in the muzzle-blast yet, even on my 10.5", and the weight is negligible. 

Thank-you for data!


----------



## Quiksilver (Nov 29, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

has anyone measured the Area Under Curve comparison of E1B and EB1?


----------



## Maxbelg (Nov 29, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

The one thing that might entice me to buy the EB1 after all if is the runtime plot looks very different with intermittent usage. (i.e. that the poor regulation is actually thermal step-down or something like that).

Eagerly awaiting a runtime plot with intermittent (e.g. 5minutes on/ 5minutes off) usage as you suggested!!! Please 880arm when you find the time I'm sure this would be really useful information for a lot of potential buyers. Maybe we could send you some PP funds for some more batteries? :bow:


----------



## brianna (Nov 29, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Maxbelg said:


> The one thing that might entice me to buy the EB1 after all if is the runtime plot looks very different with intermittent usage. (i.e. that the poor regulation is actually thermal step-down or something like that).? :bow:



The poor regulation has nothing to do with thermal step down or something like that. It is caused by pushing the battery to the limit. It simply can not keep up with the power demand. Regulation going south like this is the result of lumen wars. In the end regulation will have to suffer to produce lots of lumens. I rather have a smooth regulation chart with less lumens, but that will never win the lumen war Surefire is playing with this new light.


----------



## N/Apower (Nov 29, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



brianna said:


> The poor regulation has nothing to do with thermal step down or something like that. It is caused by pushing the battery to the limit. It simply can not keep up with the power demand. Regulation going south like this is the result of lumen wars. In the end regulation will have to suffer to produce lots of lumens. I rather have a smooth regulation chart with less lumens, but that will never win the lumen war Surefire is playing with this new light.



Realistically, though, the new light kills the E1B for the first 45 minutes of run-time, and on 1 battery, I will take a step back and admit that yes, this is impressive and a true upgrade. Still, if the extra size of the M600C over the M300A, or E2DL over EB1 isn't a big deal, they are vastly superior.

How does the beam profile compare to the E2DL? How is spill, comparatively?


----------



## fresh eddie fresh (Nov 29, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

I have to agree, a lot of companies I like are trying to put out maximum brightness lights/drop-ins at the expense of runtime. Personally, I like to have just the right amount of light I need to get something done... anything more is sort of wasteful. 

Of course, it is nice to have at least one (or four) supermegabrightomg light in the collection!


----------



## Lodogg2221 (Nov 29, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

So if someone bought the EB1 Tactical version, with the non-click 2 stage, is it possible to use the EB1 head on the E1B body/tailcap and have a shorter overall length but still have the dual function click switch? Then you could have both functions, but one head and swap depending on preference?


----------



## Yourfun2 (Nov 29, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

To me this light is a big bummer. Lousy regulation, longer at both ends and tailcap not interchangeable. Is Surefire going to go away?


----------



## twl (Nov 29, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

Some people have very specific desires for long throw and a small body, and this is great for that use, as long as they can live with the run time and the sliding output.
This will be just the thing for some people.
Others will hate it.

If somebody really wanted to, they could put in a fresh battery every 15 minutes of use, to keep the max throw distance in demanding circumstances , and then use the partially depleted batteries for pocket light use in non-demanding applications later on.


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Nov 29, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



twl said:


> If somebody really wanted to, they could put in a fresh battery every 15 minutes of use, to keep the max throw distance in demanding circumstances , and then use the partially depleted batteries for pocket light use in non-demanding applications later on.



Surely you are not implying that SF is in the business of selling those pricey SF123A batteries?

Although I like the light, I hereby nominate the EB1 runtime curve for the King C. Gillette Marketing Award.


----------



## fresh eddie fresh (Nov 29, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Yourfun2 said:


> Is Surefire going to go away?



Flashaholics were never Surefire's target demographic. They definitely have been going in a different direction the past year or two... it is not what we are familiar with, but they are putting out some stuff I am really interested in (DM2!!!!) It seems for the most part, they are trying to put out easy to use right out of the box lights, trying to keep prices down, but also fighting the lumens war with Chinese flashlight companies. IMHO, the Fury won on all accounts.


----------



## Yourfun2 (Nov 29, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

The DM2 may be a must have to replace my E2DL. Need to see some reviews first. Trying not to get my hopes up like everyone did for the EB1. It is looking like Lego ability is going away 4 Surefire and that makes me sad.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 29, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Yourfun2 said:


> The DM2 may be a must have to replace my E2DL. Need to see some reviews first. Trying not to get my hopes up like everyone did for the EB1. It is looking like Lego ability is going away 4 Surefire and that makes me sad.



Yup, I've said it before. Looks like we are now at the tail-end of the Golden Age of SureFire.


----------



## 880arm (Nov 29, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Quiksilver said:


> has anyone measured the Area Under Curve comparison of E1B and EB1?



I'll give it a shot with the results through 3 hours. It should be noted that none of the lights were putting out anything remotely resembling their rated output after that time so I believe the results at 2 hours, give or take a little, are probably the most relevant. I don't know if this is the best way to present this information or if it will be meaningful.

The EB1 leads the pack up until the 96 minute mark when it is surpassed by the L1. As the test progresses to the point that the lights are more or less in moonlight mode the E1B continues to gain on the EB1 but never catches it over the 3 hour period. I cut the tests off at this point so I don't know how long the EB1 and E1B would have continued running but I don't think it would have ever caught the EB1.

The first chart just shows the cumulative readings over time (Reading 1 + Reading 2 + Reading 3, etc.):







The second chart shows the same results on a stacked area chart. If all three lights had identical results, the chart would look like 3 identical horizontal bars. Any variance from this results in bars of differing thickness (in proportion to the light's cumulative output at that point):





This chart highlights that for the first 30+ minutes the EB1 puts out nearly as much light as the E1B and L1 combined.

I hope this helps.


----------



## Viking (Nov 29, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



twl said:


> If somebody really wanted to, they could put in a fresh battery every 15 minutes of use, to keep the max throw distance in demanding circumstances , and then use the partially depleted batteries for pocket light use in non-demanding applications later on.



That will I only recommend for other *single cell* flashlights.
Otherwise it could be quite dangerous.


----------



## Flashlight Dave (Nov 30, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Yourfun2 said:


> To me this light is a big bummer. Lousy regulation, longer at both ends and tailcap not interchangeable. Is Surefire going to go away?



I believe that Size 15 once said that the Surefire L2 was a light that one should use on low with the occasional bursts on high. Perhaps we should look at the EB1 in this fashion. I am only referring to the tactical version which comes on low first. Most of people’s use of the light will be with the low and any use of high will only be for a couple of minutes or so. 

With that philosophy of use the lack of regulation on high should not matter. I do know that the light is not intended to be used in this manner but at least with the tactical version it should work fine. Most of us will use it in the role of an EDC light and not in its intended tactical light backup role.


----------



## twl (Nov 30, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Viking said:


> That will I only recommend for other *single cell* flashlights.
> Otherwise it could be quite dangerous.



I said it in the context of using it in the very same EB1, during use as a pocketlight.
I never mentioned it in the context of using in any other light.

I'm perfectly aware of battery safety issues.


----------



## Swedpat (Nov 30, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



seattlite said:


> Can you lego the components with E-series lights. Would be nice to run the head on an E2D/E2DL body using 1x17670.





880arm said:


> You can lego the head onto any other E-series compatible light but I don't think the 17670 will work for you. See Vox's informative post in the other thread.



I tried as well my E2L and E2DL with 17670. You can put in the battery a long way but not deep enough, the head can't be attached to the body. Too bad... :shakehead


----------



## Machete God (Nov 30, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*

Excellent review and tests, thanks for posting 880arm.


----------



## Yourfun2 (Nov 30, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Swedpat said:


> I tried as well my E2L and E2DL with 17670. You can put in the battery a long way but not deep enough, the head can't be attached to the body. Too bad... :shakehead



I'm running a 17650 Eagletac 1600 mah battery in my E2D. The 17670 is 2mm too long.

The 17650 is the same length of two CR123s and has the same capacity of a 17670.


----------



## Swedpat (Nov 30, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Yourfun2 said:


> I'm running a 17650 Eagletac 1600 mah battery in my E2D. The 17670 is 2mm too long.
> 
> The 17650 is the same length of two CR123s and has the same capacity of a 17670.



Actually I didn't know about that size! Where to get it?


----------



## RedForest UK (Nov 30, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Flashlight Dave said:


> I believe that Size 15 once said that the Surefire L2 was a light that one should use on low with the occasional bursts on high. Perhaps we should look at the EB1 in this fashion. I am only referring to the tactical version which comes on low first. Most of people’s use of the light will be with the low and any use of high will only be for a couple of minutes or so.
> 
> With that philosophy of use the lack of regulation on high should not matter. I do know that the light is not intended to be used in this manner but at least with the tactical version it should work fine. Most of us will use it in the role of an EDC light and not in its intended tactical light backup role.




But it would still matter, as the high output if the battery was half depleted would be severely reduced even from the point of turning on.


I get that the durability of the light is great, and the TIR optic with an XP-E gives a specific beam very well suited to a lot of purposes (although an XP-G2 would give more output with probably similar throw and XP-E2 should give more throw for similar output).


The main issue for me is simply it's size. I don't get why they make their 'backup' single cr123a light so long. For comparison, it's longer than the 750 OTF lumen (for over an hour) SC600.

In this sense circuit/emitter efficiency is secondary; a light could be only 1/3 as efficient as the EB1, the same size, and still beat it for output/runtime by taking an 18650.


I guess what I'm trying to say is that IMO size efficiency should be considered just as much as emitter and circuit efficiency, and this light seems to be very poor in that sense.


----------



## Robin24k (Nov 30, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



RedForest UK said:


> The main issue for me is simply it's size. I don't get why they make their 'backup' single cr123a light so long. For comparison, it's longer than the 750 OTF lumen (for over an hour) SC600.


There's a point where small size becomes a drawback. Not only would it be more difficult to grip, but thermal dissipation would be an issue because of the surface area. I think you will want to use an oven mitt to hold that 750 lumen light that is smaller than the EB1...


----------



## RedForest UK (Nov 30, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Robin24k said:


> There's a point where small size becomes a drawback. Not only would it be more difficult to grip, but thermal dissipation would be an issue because of the surface area. I think you will want to use an oven mitt to hold that 750 lumen light that is smaller than the EB1...



Yes, in a lot of cases a light can be too small. Though I'm not sure a 'back-up' is generally of these. Even if they did decide that making it smaller would not aid it's utility in any way they could perhaps have made a 2x cr123 light of the same dimensions, as other companies seem to do this very commonly. If they did so they could pack twice the watt hours of power in and I'm sure maintain flat regulation too.

With regards to heat dissipation it really shouldn't be a problem for an XP-E 200 lumen light to be even half of this size. The 750 lumen OTF SC600 is at the top of the output/size ratio but is actually fine, it hardly heats up on max at all when I take it out running (admittedly it is winter), and it can be left tailstanding for at least 10 minutes without getting uncomfortably hot (I would think this applies almost indefinitely as it didn't get noticably hotter in the last few minutes of that run). Zebralight did have to implement a thermal step-down to 500lumens after 5 minutes in case of unattended use, but if a 500 lumen light can run without overheating at the same size as the EB1 then I'm sure that a light much smaller than the EB1 could take the respective heat from a high bin XP-E driven at 200 lumens without breaking a sweat.


Too small is subjective, but personally I would say that the Nitecore D10 was ergonomically perfect. The EB1 is noticably larger than that.


----------



## Glock 22 (Nov 30, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

Awesome review, dead on accuracy.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Nov 30, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Swedpat said:


> Actually I didn't know about that size! Where to get it?



The 17650 will be unprotected and the 17670 protected. AW sells 17650's, also Lighthound, if I recall.

Bill


----------



## Yourfun2 (Nov 30, 2012)

*Re: New Surefire EB1 Clicky - Review and runtime results*



Swedpat said:


> Actually I didn't know about that size! Where to get it?


I got them from GoingGear. They are Eagletac Protected.


----------



## Quiksilver (Dec 1, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



880arm said:


> I'll give it a shot with the results through 3 hours. It should be noted that none of the lights were putting out anything remotely resembling their rated output after that time so I believe the results at 2 hours, give or take a little, are probably the most relevant. I don't know if this is the best way to present this information or if it will be meaningful.
> 
> The EB1 leads the pack up until the 96 minute mark when it is surpassed by the L1. As the test progresses to the point that the lights are more or less in moonlight mode the E1B continues to gain on the EB1 but never catches it over the 3 hour period. I cut the tests off at this point so I don't know how long the EB1 and E1B would have continued running but I don't think it would have ever caught the EB1.
> 
> ...



Excellent, thank you.

Has more meaning to me than some of the other runtime comparisons.

Seems to confirm that until the 70-80 minute mark, the EB1 is quite a superior light, followed by similarity to the E1B until lights out.


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Dec 1, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Quiksilver said:


> Seems to confirm that until the 70-80 minute mark, the EB1 is quite a superior light, followed by similarity to the E1B until lights out.



It seems to me to confirm that the E1B has a runtime curve gerrymandered to hit the 200 lumen mark for advertising purposes with little increase in efficiency. The area under the curves of the original runtime plots look comparable to my eye.

An unregulated light would have a great looking 'cumulative' runtime curve since it would not have the power loss of a regulation circuit, right? It would have a lousy (in my opinion) runtime curve since the output would steadily decline like an old incandescent. Sort of like the EB1, come to think of it. I realize that most LED emitters cannot be driven by a single cell lithium battery without some sort of active driver circuit.

It is amazing to me that the classic SF line can take so long to come up with an update only to have an 'old' emitter. The A2L Aviator is another example, the update was long awaited only to have the light issued with an old SSC P4 LED, anemic if you're looking for frost on the wingtip of a Boeing in my personal experience. I own several A2L's, great light etc., just an old main LED emitter. I guess you could say the SF A2L was an instant 'classic'.

Oddly, other threads here seem to indicate the SF has already gone to the new Nichia 219 emitters for an update in the value line of 6PX and G2X lights introduced only a couple of years ago. Wonder if the value line of SF's will go after the single cell or AA segments of the market?

I'm sure the debate about the runtime curve will continue but many of the other observations seem to be common to those of us who have the early EB1 deliveries:

Initial TIR beam is tight and bright.

The tint is greenish on low.

The EB1 tailcap seems to be deliberately designed not to Lego with earlier E-series compatible parts. [As pointed out in posts below, the EB1 head will fit on older E-series lights - Vox]

The clicky tailcap barely misses the ability to tailstand without wobbling, unlike the SF Z68 tailcap and the E2D tailcap.

AW rechargeables don't work in the EB1 (as with the L1, for example).

Fit and finish are comparable to earlier E-series SF's.


----------



## 880arm (Dec 1, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Vox Clamatis in Deserto said:


> I'm sure the debate about the runtime curve will continue but many of the other observations seem to be common to those of us who have the early EB1 deliveries:
> 
> Initial TIR beam is tight and bright.
> 
> ...



I agree, with one clarification. It is just the tailcap that can't be swapped with the older series. The head, as you noted in the other thread, is E-series compatible. 

To me it's the same as the UB3T and M3LT with their two-stage momentary tailcaps being incompatible with the C/G/P/Z-series bodies.


----------



## Lodogg2221 (Dec 1, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



880arm said:


> I agree, with one clarification. It is just the tailcap that can't be swapped with the older series. The head, as you noted in the other thread, is E-series compatible.
> 
> To me it's the same as the UB3T and M3LT with their two-stage momentary tailcaps being incompatible with the C/G/P/Z-series bodies.



So could you put the head on an E1B body and use its clicky? 

I was wondering about getting the tactical version and putting the head on the E1B body, but not sure it will work correctly with that tailcap....I think Robin mentioned they used different heads.


----------



## jturner97 (Dec 1, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

I was wondering if someone could try running their lx2 head on a single aw16340 and plug the results into the graph at the top of this thread.


----------



## 880arm (Dec 1, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Lodogg2221 said:


> So could you put the head on an E1B body and use its clicky?
> 
> I was wondering about getting the tactical version and putting the head on the E1B body, but not sure it will work correctly with that tailcap....I think Robin mentioned they used different heads.



Yes the EB1 clicky head works perfectly on an E1B body. I think Vox mentioned in one of his posts that was how he preferred to carry his. I have also tried it successfully on a Vital Gear FB1 body and, just for kicks, an LX2 body with a dummy battery. 

I do not know how the head from the EB1 tactical will behave when paired with a clicky tailcap. If it's anything like the head on my LX2 it will work, but with high mode only.


----------



## Robin24k (Dec 1, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

Both versions of the light use the same head.


----------



## 270winchester (Dec 2, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

I've got three E1B's, one I keep in the coat pocket, one in the brief case and one in the house, and the EB1 flat out destroys them. I've so far used mine off and on for a week or so now, total run time~45 minutes and it's still brighter than any of them. The runtime graph in the OP is spot on.

I'm not a big fan of the new clickie talcap so I threw the EB1 head on an E1B body with E2DL Tail cap, still compact and tail stands. I do foresee some confusion in the future when there are two "back up"body floating around though for people with older E series tailcaps.


----------



## Jkeone808 (Dec 2, 2012)

Awesome review! Thanks for the pics also. Can't wait to get my hands on my very own soon.


----------



## Lodogg2221 (Dec 2, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Robin24k said:


> Both versions of the light use the same head.



Thats great. Means I can get the tactical version and have the the clicky just by putting it on my E1B body! 
At least that settles which version Im getting....


----------



## 880arm (Dec 2, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



jturner97 said:


> I was wondering if someone could try running their lx2 head on a single aw16340 and plug the results into the graph at the top of this thread.



The LX2 head on an E1L body with 1x AW16340 looks like an overachieving E1B for about an hour. I terminated the test at 90 minutes but I don't think it would have run much longer before the battery protection circuit kicked in.

I had never considered that combination before and I was surprised at the results. Thank you for suggesting it.


----------



## jturner97 (Dec 2, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

Thanks for running that test I was wondering what the curve would look like.


----------



## Machete God (Dec 3, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Robin24k said:


> Both versions of the light use the same head.


Thank you Robin, for this choice morsel of information. 

Wouldn't this mean that the EB1T will actually switch modes if the user "clicked" the tactical tail switch fast enough? For example, if I wanted to manually "strobe" a target, will the light be alternating between high and low outputs each time it came on?


----------



## ldz (Dec 3, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

Nice review, can't wait to get it.


----------



## Robin24k (Dec 3, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Machete God said:


> Thank you Robin, for this choice morsel of information.
> 
> Wouldn't this mean that the EB1T will actually switch modes if the user "clicked" the tactical tail switch fast enough? For example, if I wanted to manually "strobe" a target, will the light be alternating between high and low outputs each time it came on?


No, the tactical version works the way it should. You can get a strobe effect by alternating between the momentary modes.


----------



## dbwebbsr (Dec 3, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

Anyone with a real world comparison between the new EB1 & an older E1B outfitted w/ an M31 in a VME head?


----------



## kyhunter1 (Dec 3, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

I own a VME/M31N setup, and had some playtime on a EB1. Both are 200+ lumens OTF. As far as beams, there is no apples to apples comparison. The EB1 is a throw beam, and the M31 is more a floody beam. Over all output is relatively the same between the two. The M31N has better output regulation on High than the EB1. The EB1's output declines almost like direct drive lights do. For the better part of an hour, the EB1's percieved output to your eyes will appear brighter than the M31 because of the intense hotspot produced from the TIR optic. But, the M31 hold's it's max output longer and will be brighter thru it's runtime. Hope this helps. 



dbwebbsr said:


> Anyone with a real world comparison between the new EB1 & an older E1B outfitted w/ an M31 in a VME head?


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Dec 3, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



dbwebbsr said:


> Anyone with a real world comparison between the new EB1 & an older E1B outfitted w/ an M31 in a VME head?



To add to kyhunter1's comments, I've just gone out into the woods and compared the clicky SF EB1 to an M61 in a VME head on an E1E body and an E1B tailcap with an AW RCR123 battery.

Since the design voltage range of the Malkoff M61 module is 3.4 to 9 volts, it runs close to full brightness on a single fresh rechargeable, however a lower voltage M31 on a CR123A will perhaps do a little better.

The total output between the two lights seems comparable but the EB1 has the expected tight TIR hotspot with little spill. At about ten feet the M61 seems to have the tighter central beam but at fifty yards it expands and dims in comparison to the EB1 which is a little pocket spotlight. The EB1 hotspot is smaller than the hotspot on the M61 but not by much. Much of the output of the M61 is in the generous spill and Gene uses only a portion of the potential aperture for the reflector which seems to me to limit the throw. Since most of the light output is concentrated in the EB1 hotspot, it easily out throws the M61 to my eye.

The heavy machined brass body of the M61 module is noticeable to me in the balance of the small light combination. Swapping heads of these lights yields two working combos of almost exactly the same length, the longer EB1 head and clicky tail cap balance with the corresponding shorter VME and E1B components. Batteries don't swap well in this case, the EB1 head doesn't like AW rechargeables and the single CR123A doesn't put out enough voltage to fully power the M61.

I thought I had bought an M31 a while back with the VME head but now I'm not so sure. Seems like Gene said that the M61 would work fine in one and two cell rechargeable configurations but the M31 would only work with a single primary battery. Like many of us, I bought a drawer full of E-series and 6P lego lights and tailcaps when they were on closeout a year or so ago.

It seems to me that with modern efficient small die emitters and a deeper reflector in a head the size of the EB1 you could get a great beam like that on the old SF U2's.


----------



## Yourfun2 (Dec 3, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

I bought the M61 with VME head for my E1B backup. I like running RCR's and the versatility of a high voltage head. I have found running high voltage heads works out better with the Foursevens too. Since the Malcoff head is so heavy, it may find a home on my E2D. Another reason for going with the HV head. Not sure what happens when the battery runs down? With the Foursevens, it goes into direct drive giving you lots of warning before dropping off.


----------



## dwestfall (Dec 5, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

Just got my EB1T yesterday and this is the first fail. Strobe it 7 times (7 flashes, sometimes 10) and it shuts down for 1 second.



Robin24k said:


> No, the tactical version works the way it should. You can get a strobe effect by alternating between the momentary modes.


----------



## Robin24k (Dec 5, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

I've already reported that issue to SureFire engineering, as well as LFP123A incompatibility, and there's been an in-line change to address these issues (there's also a pre-flash when low mode is strobed).

I'm not sure if the pre-order delays have to do with the lights being updated, but you can send the light to SureFire for a firmware update.


----------



## doctordun (Dec 5, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

That's a bummer. Get your new flashlight and have to immediately send it in for repair. Yea!

I hope mine is being delayed so it will be updated, so that won't be so bad. I will be really upset if I have to send it in.


----------



## Glock 22 (Dec 5, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

I've noticed a flash in mine as well. And it's been multiple times.


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Dec 5, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*



Robin24k said:


> I've already reported that issue to SureFire engineering, as well as LFP123A incompatibility, and there's been an in-line change to address these issues (there's also a pre-flash when low mode is strobed).
> 
> I'm not sure if the pre-order delays have to do with the lights being updated, but you can send the light to SureFire for a firmware update.



Has the available firmware update been officially acknowledged? Sometimes these product issues seem to be known and documented by engineering but unknown to some of the customer service reps in my experience.

If the EB1 can take a firmware update, perhaps it is indeed programmable, right? Will the USB dongle materialize for programming through the emitter? And, are there some click, click, press tailswitch Easter eggs to be found?

Also, if the firmware update can accommodate the different voltage curve of the LFP123A battery, will it also change the perfomance on the CR123A? Worth checking, I would say.



dwestfall said:


> Just got my EB1T yesterday and this is the first fail. Strobe it 7 times (7 flashes, sometimes 10) and it shuts down for 1 second.



Might not be a failure, the clicky does the same thing if you pulse the switch fast without pushing down to the click. If you pulse the EB1C switch slowly, the light will alternate modes indefinitely, pulse it quickly, you get the timeout after three high-low cycles.

Is it perhaps a debounce algorithm for the switch resetting? Or is there some manual programming software looking through the switch for a command sequence as in Henry's lights? His HDS light will flash in a brief error mode if they get clicks they don't understand and will in some situations seemingly send a coded serial or firmware number in the flashes.


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Dec 7, 2012)

*Re: Real life experiences - E1B vs EB1*

Looking inside the EB1 head at the electronics I'm surprised by the high parts count, kinda like the old U2 but with smaller boards. There are two printed circuit boards, at least one has components on both sides.

The controller chip looks to my untrained eye to be a Microchip Technology F24K22 with 16K of flash memory.


----------



## lapd.erik (Dec 8, 2012)

O Surefire, please get your heads straight with this new light and all future lights. I still want to see this American company ahead of the game like they used to be 5+ years ago.


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Dec 9, 2012)

lapd.erik said:


> O Surefire, please get your heads straight with this new light and all future lights. I still want to see this American company ahead of the game like they used to be 5+ years ago.



They do seem to be up to something with the EB1 electronics.

I am puzzled by physical complexity of the EB1 circuitry compared to other LED light designs, e.g. Gene's P60 dropins or David's Quarks. There are perhaps 60 surface mount component packages visible on the two circuit boards in the head of the EB1. Seems like a lot of parts overhead just to get two modes on a single cell LED light in 2012. Is this module also to be used in other small SF lights with a jumper cut or different code for two cell and rechargeable applications, perhaps?


----------



## Robin24k (Dec 9, 2012)

It's probably for programmability, which would explain the flash memory.


----------



## rocled (Dec 30, 2012)

I want to pull the trigger on one of these, but does anyone know if the regulation has been fixed on newer models?


----------



## Glock 22 (Dec 30, 2012)

rocled said:


> I want to pull the trigger on one of these, but does anyone know if the regulation has been fixed on newer models?




Probably not. It's a good chance it will stay the way it is.


----------



## jamesmtl514 (Dec 30, 2012)

I just got mine.
It looks even more ridiculous in person. E body with an extension. The tail cap it's so long.
It looks like all those mods were done spur of the moment to balance the weight and length of the head. 

They should have redesigned a new body, and allowed for conventional tail caps. The shroud is all but useless, wobble tail standing..seriously? 

All these nitpicks are right out the window once the light is actually used. The beam is flawless, tint is great and it's VERY bright.
It's a lot easier to switch back and forth from hi-low-hi than on the E1b, E2DL.

The 200lm E2DL is still brighter than the EB1, but not by much.


----------



## 270winchester (Dec 30, 2012)

jamesmtl514 said:


> I just got mine.
> It looks even more ridiculous in person. E body with an extension. The tail cap it's so long.
> It looks like all those mods were done spur of the moment to balance the weight and length of the head.
> 
> ...



Good assessment. The long tail cap would be noticed by previous E1B owners. But once you actually us the light you forget it quickly.

I have been using mine off and on for ~3-4 weeks now and it's still kicking the rear of the brightest amongst my three E1B heads. But I don't use it attached to an integrated sphere. 

Surefire has set a new bar for single cell light and I am interested to see what other light makers can come up with.


----------



## Tennessee Cattleman (Feb 15, 2013)

I have got a EB1 with the click switch. Great fit & finish with a very good beam. The way the click switch works is what sold me on this light.


----------



## brianna (Feb 16, 2013)

270winchester;4101941
Surefire has set a new bar for single cell light and I am interested to see what other light makers can come up with.[/QUOTE said:


> I would not consider a 200 lm single cell light that is pushing the limits of the battery, with poor regulation as setting a new bar of excellence. To me it looks like Surefire is lowering their standards by producing this light.


----------



## N/Apower (Feb 16, 2013)

brianna said:


> I would not consider a 200 lm single cell light that is pushing the limits of the battery, with poor regulation as setting a new bar of excellence. To me it looks like Surefire is lowering their standards by producing this light.



The TIR optic is what makes this light worth even discussing. It really is a game changer for many applications.


----------



## brianna (Feb 16, 2013)

Oh I agree I love the TIR optic. I would never own a regular reflector light again.


----------



## N/Apower (Feb 16, 2013)

brianna said:


> Oh I agree I love the TIR optic. I would never own a regular reflector light again.



TIR has it's place, as do reflectors. I prefer the wide beam of a reflector'ed light, but it takes roughly 200% as much OTF lumen to equal the throw of a TIR light. In my case, I am comparing an M31 in a VME head to an E1B. There would be no way this combo would perform like a weaponized EB1 head, though, which is what I am waiting for long-term. However, I can run a sapphire lens on the VME combo and it stands up so nice to muzzle-blast and carbon and whatnot from my SBR. The lens sits right about equal with the back of my suppressor or end of the ports on the flash-hider, depending, so this is meaningful.


----------



## 880arm (Feb 16, 2013)

Since this thread has been resurrected I suppose I can provide an update to my initial review after carrying the EB1 for nearly 3 months now. The output combined with the focused beam from the TIR optic suits my typical daily uses better than any other light I own and I still have some "wow" moments when I use the EB1 to reach out and touch something at a distance.

Unlike a lot folks, I rarely use this light in complete darkness. I am a safety specialist in an industrial facility and I'm normally in a well lit environment and just want to put some extra light on something so I can see it better or highlight it for someone else. The hot spot is bright enough to overcome the glare from overhead lighting, even when looking up at things near the ceiling, 70' - 150' away. Also, the tight beam is perfect for looking into or behind machinery as it reduces the amount of light that is reflected back at me. The pursuit of a light like this is what first brought me to this forum over a year ago.

Some follow-up on a few of my initial observations:

*Size*: At first the light just didn't feel "right" when I held it. The slight extra length and difference in the head made it feel completely different than my old E1B which it replaced. I made only a slight adjustment to my grip and this is now a non-issue. The extra length causes no problems for pocket carry and the 2-way clip is still the best design out there.

*Output*: Rated at "only" 200 lumens this light (and its predecessor the E1B) was never intended to be the brightest light available. As others have noted the appeal of this light is the TIR optic and the beam is magnificent for my purposes.

*Runtime/Regulation*: If I had a magic wand and could change any one thing about the light it would be to somehow give it flatter regulation (actually, I may just need to use the magic wand on the battery instead). This has already been beaten to death and it is what it is. However, if given the choice between the current configuration and one with 30% less output but more stable output, I would probably stick with what I have. As I mentioned above, the lux on target is important for my purposes and it's awfully nice to have this in a comparatively small package. This does mean that I change batteries slightly more often but that is a minor concern for me in the overall scheme of things.

*Quality*: After nearly 3 months of use, not always in the nicest of environments, I can't really tell any difference in the appearance of the light from when it was new. The anodize is perfect, the clip shows virtually no signs of wear and I would still describe it as "near mint." Operation has been flawless.

*Beam Tint*: The beam does have some green tint to it but this is not noticeable to me when using the light on high. Due to the run time tests I conducted I can verify that the tint does begin to shift to green as the battery is depleted but in real use I change to a fresh battery before this becomes an issue. I can't remember the last time I used the light on low.

This light definitely isn't for everyone. Just as a cabinet maker wouldn't use a 32 oz. framing hammer to build cabinetry, I wouldn't recommend someone getting this light if they just want to provide general area lighting or plan to use it for hours at a time. There are many other lights out there that would serve these purposes much better. If however, you have needs like mine or if you plan to use the light for its intended purpose as a high intensity BACKUP light then I have no problem recommending it.

As a measure of a tool's worth to me I will ask myself, "would I buy another one if I lost the one I have." With regard to the EB1, the answer is an unequivocal "Yes!"

On a related note, I wish I could say that with the EB1, I don't miss my old E1B. Unfortunately, I misplaced my E1B shortly after I took the beam shots in the first post of this thread and I still haven't found it! This drives me nuts, not because I want to carry it, but because I hate losing things!


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Feb 16, 2013)

jamesmtl514 said:


> I just got mine.
> It looks even more ridiculous in person. E body with an extension. The tail cap it's so long.
> It looks like all those mods were done spur of the moment to balance the weight and length of the head.
> 
> They should have redesigned a new body, and allowed for conventional tail caps. The shroud is all but useless, wobble tail standing..seriously?



I'm told by a dealer that SF is now listing an EB1 variant with a clicky switch and no shroud, the designation is EB1C-B-BK (or -SL or -TN, black, silver or tan) for a MSRP of $220 vice $225 for the shrouded version (EB1C-A-BK, -SL or -TN).

The tactical EB1 is EB1T-A-BK, -SL or -TN and its MSRP is also $220.

Has anybody seen one of these unshrouded clicky EB1's?


----------



## Lodogg2221 (Feb 16, 2013)

880arm said:


> As a measure of a tool's worth to me I will ask myself, "would I buy another one if I lost the one I have." With regard to the EB1, the answer is an unequivocal "Yes!"
> 
> On a related note, I wish I could say that with the EB1, I don't miss my old E1B. Unfortunately, I misplaced my E1B shortly after I took the beam shots in the first post of this thread and I still haven't found it! This drives me nuts, not because I want to carry it, but because I hate losing things!



Having recently misplaced my E1B, I can say that yes, I would replace it because I did. However, if I had not lost it, that money would have gone to the EB1. I dont like losing things either, and with regard to my E1B, I dont think its quite as bright as my lost E1B, but I liked it enough that I wanted another before they were unavailable new. Couldnt get an answer from any distributor that had backordering available, but it was my understanding that the E1B is discontinued by Surefire, and therefor no longer available if they dont already have them in stock. 
Anyway, the EB1 is still in my future, regulation be darned. 
Its been beaten to death, but if the light isnt for you, move along and find something that is. Its unhealthy to focus on negativity so much with regard to inanimate objects....better to be enthralled with something else than disappointed in something that wont change.


----------



## 880arm (Feb 16, 2013)

Vox Clamatis in Deserto said:


> I'm told by a dealer that SF is now listing an EB1 variant with a clicky switch and no shroud, the designation is EB1C-B-BK (or -SL or -TN, black, silver or tan) for a MSRP of $220 vice $225 for the shrouded version (EB1C-A-BK, -SL or -TN).
> 
> The tactical EB1 is EB1T-A-BK, -SL or -TN and its MSRP is also $220.
> 
> Has anybody seen one of these unshrouded clicky EB1's?



Interesting. I hadn't seen (or noticed) that part number before but I just googled EB1C-B-BK and found it available at one or two retailers.


----------



## brianna (Feb 16, 2013)

The Surefire catalogue shows these new models.


----------



## jamesmtl514 (Feb 16, 2013)

Lodogg2221 said:


> Its unhealthy to focus on negativity so much with regard to inanimate objects....better to be enthralled with something else than disappointed in something that wont change.


Quoted for truth my friend! :thumbup:


----------



## kelmo (Feb 16, 2013)

jamesmtl514 said:


> I just got mine.
> It looks even more ridiculous in person. E body with an extension. The tail cap it's so long...



I put my EB1 head on an E1e tube with a Z68. This set up is a lot easier to handle IMHO although now it looks like it should be shot out of a mortar.

I put an E1B head on the stretched tube and tail. I call it the "Eel" because it is long and slippery!


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Feb 16, 2013)

brianna said:


> The Surefire catalogue shows these new models.



I think you mean the 'brochure', I don't believe SF will have a full 2013 product catalog as they did in previous years:

http://www.surefire.com/brochures#

Thanks for pointing out that listing, hope some of the other stuff actually makes it to market as well!


----------



## mossyoak (Mar 2, 2013)

Will the F0X diffusers that work with the e-series work on the eb1?


----------



## Robin24k (Mar 2, 2013)

I doubt it, the bezel is wider.


----------



## mossyoak (Mar 2, 2013)

That's what I was afraid of. Hopefully they'll make a diffuser for it


----------



## 880arm (Mar 2, 2013)

Robin24k said:


> I doubt it, the bezel is wider.



Correct. The diffuser will almost stretch enough to slip on the EB1 but still won't fit.


----------



## mossyoak (Mar 4, 2013)

Anyone know if Surefire is planning to make diffusers and other filters to fit the EB1?


----------



## ThumperACC (Mar 6, 2013)

I know some have asked if the EB1 is regulated on low. 

Last night I ran my EB1T (running on a Titanium Innovations CR123, 1400mAh) down to the point that, on high, it was putting out ~5% of its original output on high when the battery was fresh. At this point the battery is pretty close to dead.

With this 'mostly dead' battery, the EB1T was putting out the same amount of light on low as it did, on low, when the battery was fresh.

So, while I cannot offer a runtime graph of the low output for 40 hours, I can tell you this:
- On a fresh battery I measured ~3200lux in my light box
- On a partially depleted battery (~20 minutes on high) it still put out ~3200lux in my light box
- On a very depleted battery (high output @5%) it still put out ~3200lux in my light box

My conclusion is that the EB1 is very well regulated on low. :thumbsup:

ThumperACC


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Mar 6, 2013)

Good info. What was your lux number for the high level at start up?


----------



## ThumperACC (Mar 6, 2013)

Bullzeyebill said:


> Good info. What was your lux number for the high level at start up?



193Klux at startup. 5 minutes on high, let it cool off. Turn it on high again, 193Klux at startup. It would drop by ~5-6% due to heatup over 5 minutes. I did the 5 minutes on high/cool off thing 3-4 times (pretty sure it was 4 but I don't remember exactly as it was over 4 days) and it was always 193K at startup and it would drop by 5-6% over 5 minutes due to heat.

Now, over those 4 days, the current draw went from 1500mA to around 2100mA required to produce those 193K lux. So, it would seem, as long as the battery can keep up, it is regulated on high.

Edited to add: If you do the math and believe that low is 5 lumens, that would seem to indicate that it puts out 300lm on high at startup.

ThumperACC


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Mar 6, 2013)

Comparing other lights you have access to that have a known lumen output, you could get a rough idea of the lumen output of your EB1. By known lumen output I mean a light that been measured on an IS via a member here on CPF. Also, check out Selfbuilt's reviews of lights that you might own, and get a baseline of approximate lumens output using your light box.

Bill


----------



## ThumperACC (Mar 6, 2013)

I have an HDS 170T clicky (Golden Dragon). I use this as my 'standard' since these are supposed to be individually calibrated. 

Doing a ceiling bounce test with the HDS and the EB1, I get ~250lm for the EB1. I have not compared the 2 in my light box. I will have to try comparing the 2 in my lighbox to see if there is any correlation with either of the other 2 measurements I have tried.

I suppose I could keep adjusting the lower modes on the HDS until I get ~3200lux (in my lightbox) and that would also give me another datapoint and an approximation of what the EB1 puts out on low.

ThumperACC


----------



## mossyoak (Mar 6, 2013)

Very good info. Thanks. 

As an aside, I called surefire. The filters and diffuser for the eb1 and all the other lights that will use this sized head (apparently its the new standard) will be available in 1-2 months.


----------



## tonywalker23 (Mar 6, 2013)

mossyoak said:


> Very good info. Thanks.
> 
> As an aside, I called surefire. The filters and diffuser for the eb1 and all the other lights that will use this sized head (apparently its the new standard) will be available in 1-2 months.



Good!


----------



## ThumperACC (Mar 6, 2013)

ThumperACC said:


> I have an HDS 170T clicky (Golden Dragon). I use this as my 'standard' since these are supposed to be individually calibrated.
> 
> Doing a ceiling bounce test with the HDS and the EB1, I get ~250lm for the EB1. I have not compared the 2 in my light box. I will have to try comparing the 2 in my lighbox to see if there is any correlation with either of the other 2 measurements I have tried.
> 
> ThumperACC



So I took a couple of measurements with my HDS:
HDS @170lm = 110Klux in my lightbox
HDS @120lm = 78Klux in my lightbox

The good news here is that the ratio of the 2 lux measurements is almost exactly the square root of 2, which is the level spacing on an HDS.

EB1 @high = 193Klux (193K/110K * 170lm = 298lm) also (193K/78K * 120lm = 297lm)
EB1 @low = 3.2Klux (3.2K/78K * 120lm = 5lm)

Looks like I get the same result. Whether I assume the low is 5lm or I measure the low against the HDS, it looks like the low is indeed 5lm.

Also, when compared against the HDS, I get 300lm at startup for the EB1.
Edited to add: I just looked up the datasheet. It seems that 300lm is the max LED lumens for this emitter (without optical losses from the flashlight). Looks like there is something wrong with the conclusion that the EB1 puts out 300lm out the front at startup (unless SureFire is overdriving the LED, which I doubt). I guess maybe I should trust my bounce test more, which comes to ~250lm at startup.

ThumperACC


----------



## MatthewSB (Mar 7, 2013)

N/Apower said:


> Realistically, though, the new light kills the E1B for the first 45 minutes of run-time, and on 1 battery



Which is why I can't figure out why people worry about the regulation. I think that a lot of flashlight hobbiests worry more about insignificant things, like numbers on paper, than they do about how effective a light is in real use.



Yourfun2 said:


> To me this light is a big bummer. Lousy regulation, longer at both ends and tailcap not interchangeable. Is Surefire going to go away?



Surefire will not go away, because their biggest customers are the Military and Law Enforcement, who don't care about 'lousy regulation' because they're more worried about being able to drop and run over their lights and still have them function.

Surefire is proven by 15 years of War. There are a lot of tacticool lights out there, but judging by their failure rates ('I dropped my $75 Chinese light and now it doesn't work' threads) Surefire is in zero danger of being replaced in places where light means life or death.



Flashlight Dave said:


> I believe that Size 15 once said that the Surefire L2 was a light that one should use on low with the occasional bursts on high. Perhaps we should look at the EB1 in this fashion. I am only referring to the tactical version which comes on low first. Most of people’s use of the light will be with the low and any use of high will only be for a couple of minutes or so.
> 
> With that philosophy of use the lack of regulation on high should not matter. I do know that the light is not intended to be used in this manner but at least with the tactical version it should work fine. Most of us will use it in the role of an EDC light and not in its intended tactical light backup role.



This is 100% what I've found to be the case.

I use my EB1T for about 3 hours a week, 3 minutes of which is on high. It's cool to have a bright light, and it is an absolute necessity every once in a while, but I'm more worried about preserving my night vision than I am impressing the racoons and coyotes that are the only ones around to see me in the early morning hours when I need my light.



RedForest UK said:


> The main issue for me is simply it's size. I don't get why they make their 'backup' single cr123a light so long. For comparison, it's longer than the 750 OTF lumen (for over an hour) SC600.



Because the E1B is almost too small for many men to use effectively. The 1/2" longer EB1T has been "just right" for everyone I've showed it to.

I have 150lb grip strength (thanks you Captains of Crush grip strength trainer!) and my E1B gets lost in my hand if I grab it the wrong way.



Mojer said:


> Hello,
> 
> I am still trying to decide between these two lights. I have read the reviews, looked at the graphs, ect. However, I am wondering what the overall actual real life experience between these two lights is (for those of you fortunate enough to have both). Is there a significant difference in throw, ect that is more noticable in the EB1? Any feedback on these two lights would be much appreciated.



I've used both for a few weeks. My E1B is great for urban use, where I'm more likely to need to blind someone, and I'm not as worried about losing my night vision with a bright flash because there's lights everywhere in the city. However, once I get out of town a ways I'm more likely to need my nightvision after I turn the light off, and less likely to need a big blast of light so I prefer the EB1T which turns on low mode first.

My advice to others would be this: the biggest difference between the two lights is not the brightness, it's the price and the operation. I would never pay $160+ for an EB1 Clicky, because I can't tell the difference between 110 lumens and 200 lumens in what I do. However, the EB1 Tactical is worth the extra money for the more intuitive push cap and the ability to preservenightvision by not forcing the user to cycle through high mode first.



dwestfall said:


> Just got my EB1T yesterday and this is the first fail. Strobe it 7 times (7 flashes, sometimes 10) and it shuts down for 1 second.



This is a design feature, verified by Surefire technician, as the light was originally intended to be programmable.

Unless the light is to be used for communicating using Morse Code, I'm not sure how this could be an issue, or how it could possibly be worth the time and expense to mail it to the factory.

I was worried about this myself when I got the light, and almost returned it. I decided to challenge Surefire on it first, and got ahold of a very knowledgable technician who pulled out his own EB1T to verify every question I had. This is now my favorite light. 

It's very easy to get caught up worrying about things that don't really matter, especially in a thread where most of the people maligning a light have never used the light in question


----------



## Robin24k (Mar 7, 2013)

MatthewSB said:


> Because the E1B is almost too small for many men to use effectively. The 1/2" longer EB1T has been "just right" for everyone I've showed it to.
> 
> I have 150lb grip strength (thanks you Captains of Crush grip strength trainer!) and my E1B gets lost in my hand if I grab it the wrong way.


Good point, I definately agree. I don't have large hands, but if the EB1 was smaller, the bezel could get blocked by my palm.


----------



## mossyoak (Mar 7, 2013)

I welcome the additional length, it makes it much easier to use. 

I honestly cant think if a time in recent memory when I have used an output of over 5-10 lumens for more than a few minutes at a time. The EB1T UI is perfect for that, i really like how you can jump to high from low and lock out the high level just by the position of the tailcap.


----------



## 270winchester (Mar 14, 2013)

ThumperACC said:


> 193Klux at startup. 5 minutes on high, let it cool off. Turn it on high again, 193Klux at startup. It would drop by ~5-6% due to heatup over 5 minutes. I did the 5 minutes on high/cool off thing 3-4 times (pretty sure it was 4 but I don't remember exactly as it was over 4 days) and it was always 193K at startup and it would drop by 5-6% over 5 minutes due to heat.
> 
> Now, over those 4 days, the current draw went from 1500mA to around 2100mA required to produce those 193K lux. So, it would seem, as long as the battery can keep up, it is regulated on high.
> 
> ...


That is very interesting. Thank you for that testing. So it seems the only time the EB1 does not exhibit a flat output curve is when used continuous for, I'm guessing here, 10 minutes or more at a time?


----------



## ThumperACC (Mar 15, 2013)

270winchester said:


> That is very interesting. Thank you for that testing. So it seems the only time the EB1 does not exhibit a flat output curve is when used continuous for, I'm guessing here, 10 minutes or more at a time?



It's more like accumulated runtime on high. After somewhere between 15 and 20 minutes (accumulated, whether all at once or in parts) on high the battery just doesn't have the oomph to keep up and provide the energy needed to let the driver stay in flat regulation.

I know this is more flat output run-time than on Robin24K's graph, but I'm using the Titanium innovations batteries which do a lot better than surefire (in keeping up their voltage) in high drain (like 2 amps). See SilverFox's post here for details on the battery performance.
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?67078-123-Battery-Shoot-Out (Note, look for "Titanium New" not "Titanium" in the data tables etc)

All in all and so far, I am quite happy.

ThumperACC


----------



## brianna (Mar 15, 2013)

I am a big fan of Surefire but I really do believe this light is a disappointment. For me to consider a light worthy of owning, I look for three important factors.
1) must be reliable
2) must be durable
3) must have good regulation

If these three basic factors are not met you might as well just purchase an unreliable cheap China light. 
Stop making excuses for Surefire producing an Expensive light that has regulation as bad as a disposable light.


----------



## Lodogg2221 (Mar 15, 2013)

brianna said:


> I am a big fan of Surefire but I really do believe this light is a disappointment. For me to consider a light worthy of owning, I look for three important factors.
> 1) must be reliable
> 2) must be durable
> 3) must have good regulation
> ...


----------



## brianna (Mar 15, 2013)

Lodogg2221 said:


>


I can say the same for all the excuses being made. It's a Surefire I expect better!!!


----------



## MatthewSB (Mar 15, 2013)

brianna said:


> I am a big fan of Surefire but I really do believe this light is a disappointment. For me to consider a light worthy of owning, I look for three important factors.
> 1) must be reliable
> 2) must be durable
> 3) must have good regulation
> ...



Since these lights are both reliable and durable, can you explain how the lack of "good regulation" will affect anything?

Will you really notice imperceptible differences in output as the light drops from 200 lumens to 100 over the course of an hour?


----------



## brianna (Mar 15, 2013)

The regulation is so bad why bother with it all? Might as well not even have a regulation circuit in this light. From what you said I'm sure you would never even notice the light getting dimmer by the minute.


----------



## MatthewSB (Mar 15, 2013)

brianna said:


> The regulation is so bad why bother with it all?



Because it doesn't matter, in real life. It's only effect is how it looks on graphs on a computer screen.



brianna said:


> From what you said I'm sure you would never even notice the light getting dimmer by the minute.



I wouldn't, and neither would 99% of people who buy these lights, who use low mode most of the time, and only occasionally punish their $3 battery on high mode.


----------



## 270winchester (Mar 15, 2013)

MatthewSB said:


> I wouldn't, and neither would 99% of people who buy these lights, who use low mode most of the time, and only occasionally punish their $3 battery on high mode.


Holy batman, you gotta buy from some CPF friendly dealers, they got 123s on sale for 1.50 or less aall teh time. 

I just got a set of AW LiFePo 3v R123s, guilt free lumens and flatter output in the EB1. Woo.


----------



## MatthewSB (Mar 15, 2013)

270winchester said:


> Holy batman, you gotta buy from some CPF friendly dealers, they got 123s on sale for 1.50 or less aall teh time.
> 
> I just got a set of AW LiFePo 3v R123s, guilt free lumens and flatter output in the EB1. Woo.




I use LIFEPO4 as well. You and I are in the tiny minority of SF users who use rechargeables.


----------



## 270winchester (Mar 15, 2013)

MatthewSB said:


> My advice to others would be this: the biggest difference between the two lights is not the brightness, it's the price and the operation. I would never pay $160+ for an EB1 Clicky, because I can't tell the difference between 110 lumens and 200 lumens in what I do. However, the EB1 Tactical is worth the extra money for the more intuitive push cap and the ability to preservenightvision by not forcing the user to cycle through high mode first.



You know, I got the EB1C with the tail shroud and I am glad I have it. One of the grips I have about the Surefire E-series tail caps is the rubber boot gets worn out way too quickly when I clip it to my front jeans pocket and drive with it. It's not a dig against Surefire as it happens to all tail caps with protruding rubber boots. THis and tail stand capability are probably why the LX2 tailcap ring was so popular.

Now if they made a EB1T tailcap with shroud.....do they?(I honestly don't know)


----------



## 270winchester (Mar 15, 2013)

MatthewSB said:


> I use LIFEPO4 as well. You and I are in the tiny minority of SF users who use rechargeables.



Awesome!

I used the same batteries in my E1Bs and I am exceedingly pleased that the freshly charged LiFePo's don't strobe for the first ~30 seconds EB1. I always had to run my E1B for ~1 minute so it woul settle in. Not a huge deal but it's ncie to just popa a new cell in and start using.

One side note, I tried the EB1 head on my E1B bodies with E1B, z57, z68, and the E2D tail cap(i own a few SFs as you can see ) and they all have trouble with LiFePo battery where it refuses to go into low. But the EB1 body and tailcap are perfect with the rechargables. No idea why.


----------



## ThumperACC (Mar 15, 2013)

brianna said:


> ...Stop making excuses for Surefire producing an Expensive light that has regulation as bad as a disposable light.



Hi Brianna,

I have to assume you were speaking to me.

Please don't misconstrue my posts as 'excuses'. I am sharing facts I've discovered, with others who may be interested.

I understand you are sorely disappointed with SureFire over this light and given that you've stated a light must have flat regulation to meet your needs I can certainly see why you'd be disappointed, but please understand that there are others here (myself included) who have different criteria and for us this light is a home-run. Scolding us like children for "making excuses" is not called for.

I am not a SureFire fanboi. I have many lights, some of which are US made and of equivalent quality to SureFire, but this is my first SureFire. I am an engineer (degree in electrical engineering and professional embedded software engineer) and I am very hard to please when it comes to technology.

Would I be happier if this light had flat regulation for ~1hr? The answer is maybe, because I suspect I'd have to accept one or more of the following compromises to achieve that:

Use a newer more efficient emitter
This would significantly reduce the throw because of larger die size (One of the main reasons I bought is for the throw)
Or we could increase the diameter of the head (It is already big for my requirements)

Use a larger battery (for me this light is as big as I want it, no bigger)
Reduce output
We know that flat regulation can be done at 110lm because we have the E1B (this is not enough output for my needs)
I really appreciate the 250-300lm I've measured and don't want less



So, as you can see, it's all about tradeoffs. For my needs, I feel SureFire has made excellent choices in the tradeoff arena.

With all that said, for the EB1, my choices are:

Run LiFePO4 batteries and get ~25 minutes of flat output on high followed by ~3 minute taper to dead
Run SureFire primaries and get what we see with Robin24K's graph
Run Titanium Innovations batteries and get ~20 minutes of flat output followed by a 55 minute taper to 5% of original output (this is still higher than low) (I stopped testing at this point).
Decide I don't like the runtime characteristics and sell the light or not buy it in the first place, then forget it exists.

I've chosen #3 for now, and I might explore #1 at some point but for now #3 is working for me.

Again, not making excuses, sharing and giving back to this great community.lovecpf


ThumperACC


----------



## ThumperACC (Mar 15, 2013)

270winchester said:


> ... Now if they made a EB1T tailcap with shroud.....do they?(I honestly don't know)



I know they make an EB1C-B which is the clicky without the shroud. So I guess there is a possibility of an EB1T-B (tactical with shroud) someday, though I don't think I'd hold my breath.

ThumperACC


----------



## tonywalker23 (Mar 15, 2013)

MatthewSB said:


> I use LIFEPO4 as well. You and I are in the tiny minority of SF users who use rechargeables.




Count me in the minority too!


----------



## Robin24k (Mar 15, 2013)

ThumperACC said:


> So, as you can see, it's all about tradeoffs. For my needs, I feel SureFire has made excellent choices in the tradeoff arena.


Thanks for the post, you saved me a bunch of typing. :thumbsup:

Engineering is all about tradeoffs, and I've tried to explain this many times to no avail. It's easy for us to understand, as we have a background in electrical engineering, but I think we're wasting time and energy (no pun intended) trying to explain to people who refuse to acknowledge first principles.



ThumperACC said:


> So I guess there is a possibility of an EB1T-B (tactical with shroud) someday, though I don't think I'd hold my breath.


I wouldn't count on it either...the shroud is to prevent accidental activation, which isn't an issue with two-stage tailcaps.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Mar 15, 2013)

brianna;4161697Stop making excuses for Surefire producing an Expensive light that has regulation as bad as a disposable light.[/QUOTE said:


> Brianna, you are beating a dead horse with your constant "poor regulation" comments. You made your point about that on 2/16/2013, and then 27 days later you charge into this this making the similar comments, and order members to "stop making excuses". This looks more like "trolling" than contributing to this thread; baiting members for responses. Please desist from this disruptive behavior.
> 
> Bill


----------



## 270winchester (Mar 15, 2013)

If this is of any interest to anyone, from the MDC thread it has been mentioned that it is not a massive risk(although still some) to run protected 4.2v RCR123s and get close to 500 lumens out of the MDC.

So naturally I went ahead and tossed in a protected 4.2v R123 in my MDC and lit both it and the EB1 up. The MDC produces a massive wall of light and good reach, but the efficiency of the TIR optic shows its advantage. For folks who demand absolute 200 lumens flat regulation and can live with a moderate throw light that can take 4.2v R123 and generate 400-500 lumens, they should get the MDC. For those who can live with some output drop over extended runs on primary 123s, but like the tight beam of the TIRs, EB1 is as good as it gets. Plus it works better than the E1B on LiFePo's so life is good either way.


----------



## kelmo (Mar 15, 2013)

270winchester said:


> ...like the tight beam of the TIRs, EB1 is as good as it gets...



I got to agree with you on this point. The gym I belong to is in a light industrial area and it gets dark outside of the parking lot at night. I keep my EB1 in my gym bag and get a kick out of sweeping the surrounding area on the way to my truck.


----------



## tonywalker23 (Mar 15, 2013)

My thoughts on the matter…

(First I am no electrical engineer. I got a $10 multimeter for Christmas and that's the extent of my electrical knowledge. I guess I don't qualify as a flashaholic either. I've got two surefires and two 47's. if I had money to blow I'd get all kinds of lights but so far as close as Ill get is reading cpf a little each day.)

Last night at work I was dead tired. Got home this morning and took a six hour nap. Had a dream that I got to work in an easy dept and sitting everywhere to use were apple iPads and surefire lights. Then I got out my defender and dropped it and it broke in half. I said its ok they've got a no hassle warranty. Then I woke up. 

I must be a prophet  I wake up and find this thread revived. 

I used to work at an apple store if anyone was a fanboy it was me. Every time there was a new product there would be someone who immediately would complain about why didn't they do this or that. I could give examples but the cycle was the same. Apple makes something new. Someone complains and says android has done that for years I get to work and people are lined out the mall to buy an 'inferior product.' Apple didn't design software or hardware for Linux hacking computer wizards. They make products that are simple to use, hold their value for a long time, and come with a very genourous warranty and repair program (our sound guy at church just got a brand new iMac still in the box bc his old iMac took longer to repair than he was told). 

I quit apple last year. Still read the rumor sites keeping up with products ill never buy but now my hobby has turned to flashlights. I could be wrong but I see a parallel. I wanted the backup since I saw it in the 2012 catalog. I could tell you several reason why each iPhone was missing something yet I've bought several. After reading this forum I learned why the eb1 was inferior in some people's minds. Yet I got one because it suited me just fine. I'll never come close to even knowing how to make a runtime chart of the lumen output anymore than edit ktext files in Mac OS X that could destroy the OS. 

I'm sure this sounds like rambling but it makes sense in my mind. Even after reading 800+ post about how bad the eb1 was I was like a kid on Christmas when it came in the mail last month and have had it in my pocket everyday since with the exception of going to work.


----------



## skyfire (Mar 15, 2013)

how do you all think the EB1 head will do on a 2xAA body? such as the E2L-AA body, using 2xAA lithiums.
with about double the stored energy, im thinking itll stay in regulation much longer, with longer runtimes.

i assumed surefire was going XM-L on many of their new models. im i mistaken with the EB1? any idea what emitter these are running?


----------



## Random Dan (Mar 15, 2013)

Wow, just looking at specs and realized that this is only shorter than the Fury buy 1 inch (which, wizards of math will tell you, is less than the length of the Fury's additional battery).


----------



## 880arm (Mar 15, 2013)

skyfire said:


> how do you all think the EB1 head will do on a 2xAA body? such as the E2L-AA body, using 2xAA lithiums.
> with about double the stored energy, im thinking itll stay in regulation much longer, with longer runtimes.
> 
> i assumed surefire was going XM-L on many of their new models. im i mistaken with the EB1? any idea what emitter these are running?



It runs quite well on 2xAA Eneloops. Don't know about lithiums. I posted some results from a runtime test in the original EB1 thread.


----------



## N/Apower (Mar 16, 2013)

For 45 minutes, the EB1 (which I hope to see come out as the M300B shortly for weapon mounted use in my application) will give me better illumination than an M300A. Poor regulation or not, this is great improvement, and for short blasts on a fresh battery, it will provide over 200% more illumination. This is extreme improvement.

I think I am seeing two mentalities at work, here. One is the kind that thinks a proper light review takes place indoors in front of a wall that doesn't have anything worth looking at on it, anyway, from about a meter away. The other, is someone that wants outdoor pix with people or trees or something so we can gauge how far off facial recognition, etc. is possible.

When I owned a Corvette, two kinds of us existed: Waxers, and drivers. Same thing, here.


----------



## skyfire (Mar 16, 2013)

thanks 880arm. i must have missed those pages in that thread heheh.
i also caught the tidbit about the new tailcap threading which is very interesting...
thanks again!


----------



## Maxbelg (Apr 6, 2013)

I finally got myself an EB1 tactical despite my initial decision not to. Here are my thoughts:

1. It will never be an EDC light for me. I don't want a throwy beam on low for general usage and most certainly not with a green tint :sick2:! On high the tint is nice and white.
2. My sample doesn't seem to run on LiFePO4 unless they are half run-down already, so it is a primary only light for me.
3. I don't mind the "poor regulation" as much as I thought I would. It is an amazing thrower and its LUX stays considerably more than my E1B (and even L1 on RCRs) until the battery is dead.
4. The beamshape is great! It has a perfectly round hotspot with nice even spill. There is no black ring around the hotspot and no rings either like with my E1B and L1 (they are quite faint).

So this seems like a great BACKUP light for when you might need some serious throw. Then the runtime curve is of no consequence because when you need it the battery will be fresh. My previous Backup E1B was more than a backup light and I EDC'd it for a long time. This light will truly be carried as backup only. EDC will remain a HDS (currently the 200 Rotary).

*To summarize: Buy this light if you want a bomb-proof pocket-thrower running off a single primary but don't buy it to replace your HDS or other great EDC light!

Just tried this again with LiFePO4 but no go and then I popped in an IMR 16340 and it worked! Is this safe???*


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Apr 6, 2013)

Maxbelg said:


> *Just tried this again with LiFePO4 but no go and then I popped in an IMR 16340 and it worked! Is this safe???*



It should *not* be safe. Circuit is meant to boost a CR123 with a voltage of 3 volts or less to the LED's rated forward voltage, which is at about 3+ volts, not 4.2 volts which an IMR can have when topped off. I'm surprised that the LiFe does not work well in your EB1. A runtime plot of an LiFe, in this thread or the other major EB1 thread, showed excellent regulation.

Bill


----------



## Maxbelg (Apr 6, 2013)

Yes, I saw the runtime plots with LiFe batteries but also read about others having problems with LiFe especially when fully recharged. How come I measure 2000mAh current draw and have normally functioning levels when its high level won't work at 3,3V (LiFe)? I measure the same current draw with somewhat depleted primaries. I posted some observations here.

Could it be that this isn't just a boost circuit? Others have mentioned how the electronics seem overly complex for a "simple" 2 level light. Couldn't this light be designed so that its driver works differently at different voltages? i.e. Could it be that this head is not only designed for both Clickys and Tactical switches but also for 1 and 2 cell bodies? Could it have a boost circuit at a certain voltage and a buck-boost at higher V? Anyhow I've tried it some more and so far everything is working exactly the same as with primaries.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Apr 6, 2013)

It is very interesting. It can run well with an IMR16340 that can output more current than a standard protected RCR123, both fully charged to about 4.2 volts, but can not run well with a LiFe, with a starting voltage of about 3.4 volts or so, and yet it also runs well with a common CR123. Sounds like an anomaly, or maybe you are correct, and the tactical EB1 might have a buck/boost circuit, but why no good performance with an LiFe?

Bill


----------



## Maxbelg (Apr 6, 2013)

Bullzeyebill said:


> It is very interesting........ Sounds like an anomaly..........
> 
> Bill



I guess we'll see whether they are all like this when others try it! 

That's why I was thinking that this head may work differently depending on voltage so that it could be used on 1 or 2 cell bodies? That would explain why it doesn't run well at 3,3V: too high for 1 primary and too low for 2. If this theory is correct it would explain the complicated electronics. It doesn't seem logical to make the electronics unnecessarily complicated and expensive unless there will be cost-savings by using the same head in various setups.


----------



## WilsonCQB1911 (Apr 7, 2013)

We know that the EB1 is not regulated. Does that mean that it is direct drive?

I'm concerned because one of the articles on HDS Systems website talks about direct drive LED lights and has the following to say:
 Another problem with direct drive flashlights is that power through the LED can be atdangerously high levels until the internal resistance of the battery increases sufficientlyto limit the power to safer levels. As a result, direct drive flashlights are usually less​reliable due to a higher LED failure rate.


----------



## Maxbelg (Apr 7, 2013)

WilsonCQB1911 said:


> We know that the EB1 is not regulated.......



We don't know this at all. It might not be well regulated but that doesn't mean it is direct drive. Take as an example the LX2 Head: On 2 primaries it is very well regulated but on a single its discharge curve looks like this.

EDIT: I decided to risk it and ran my EB1 with an *IMR 16340* continuously until the cell was depleted. Total runtime was *33 minutes*. I compared it visually regularly to my E1B and couldn't see any difference in output during the entire runtime. The last 30 seconds or so it went dimmer and there was a tint shift to the the greenish tint my example has on low. Voltage of the IMR cell was 2,6V but it jumped back to 3V within a few seconds and I'm recharging it at present. 

I'm going to continue using IMRs in my EB1: It seems to have a VERY flat runtime curve and more than 30 minutes with this type of output is great! Remember that the HDS 200 Lumen with burst switched off does only about 30 minutes as well with a RCRs and that's with an XPG. So am I overdriving this thing? It didn't get overly hot and output is the same as with a fresh primary. I'm going to continue using this setup but would appreciate others input.


----------



## ThumperACC (Apr 8, 2013)

Maxbelg said:


> We don't know this at all. It might not be well regulated but that doesn't mean it is direct drive. Take as an example the LX2 Head: On 2 primaries it is very well regulated but on a single its discharge curve looks like this.
> 
> EDIT: I decided to risk it and ran my EB1 with an *IMR 16340* continuously until the cell was depleted. Total runtime was *33 minutes*. I compared it visually regularly to my E1B and couldn't see any difference in output during the entire runtime. The last 30 seconds or so it went dimmer and there was a tint shift to the the greenish tint my example has on low. Voltage of the IMR cell was 2,6V but it jumped back to 3V within a few seconds and I'm recharging it at present.
> 
> I'm going to continue using IMRs in my EB1: It seems to have a VERY flat runtime curve and more than 30 minutes with this type of output is great! Remember that the HDS 200 Lumen with burst switched off does only about 30 minutes as well with a RCRs and that's with an XPG. So am I overdriving this thing? It didn't get overly hot and output is the same as with a fresh primary. I'm going to continue using this setup but would appreciate others input.



MAX, I get the same results with IMRs. Longer flat output. Runs great while the battery keeps up which is about 1/2 hour. Been doing this for a couple of weeks now. No heat issues running it on IMRs (or at least no more heat than primaries).

Lovin' it.

ThumperACC


----------



## Maxbelg (Apr 8, 2013)

ThumperACC said:


> MAX, I get the same results with IMRs...........



Great, thanks for posting your results!

Now it would be very interesting to hear the explanation of why mine doesn't work well at 3,3V (LiFePO4) and does work well at 4,2V (IMR). I am beginning to suspect that it works differently depending on the voltage (the way the HDS will treat a primary differently to a rechargeable based on the initial voltage). Could it be that the same head is meant for 2cell bodies as well? An EB2? Anybody?


----------



## Robin24k (Apr 8, 2013)

This is just speculation, but the EB1 driver could be similar to the one in the rechargeable lights (R1/UNR/UBR), which has two modes of operation surrounding a grey area that overlaps with fully charged LFP123A voltage. 

I don't think it would be a good idea to use it with a two-cell body, since all of the mentioned products are "single-cell" lights.


----------



## tonywalker23 (Apr 8, 2013)

Maxbelg said:


> Could it be that the same head is meant for 2cell bodies as well? An EB2? Anybody?



I've got an eb1t and a e2dl body. The eb1 head fits the defender body but I'm scared to press the tailcap. I ruined a $25 light once. I'd hate to ruin a $200 one.


----------



## Maxbelg (Apr 9, 2013)

tonywalker23 said:


> ........eb1 head fits the defender body but I'm scared to press the tailcap.......


I have 2 cell bodies as well which would fit but am not going to try either!



Robin24k said:


> This is just speculation, but the EB1 driver could be similar to the one in the rechargeable lights (R1/UNR/UBR), which has two modes of operation surrounding a grey area that overlaps with fully charged LFP123A voltage.....


That's what I thought as well: 2 different modes of operation based on the initial voltage (like the HDS treating rechargeables differently to primaries). This sounds like the most plausible explanation to me. It would be very nice to see discharge curves of an EB1 with IMR, but I don't have the necessary equipment or skill to do this. Hopefully someone else will do it someday. I suspect we'll see a very nice flat discharge.


----------



## 880arm (Apr 9, 2013)

I applaud you guys for your willingness to try out the EB1 with IMR's. I'm not an expert on battery chemistry but I think I remember Vox posting that his EB1 didn't work correctly using a RCR123 so I'm having trouble understanding why the IMR's work. Is it because the 16340 couldn't provide the amperage that the IMR does?

Keep up the good work!


----------



## Maxbelg (Apr 9, 2013)

880arm said:


> .......EB1 didn't work correctly using a RCR123 so I'm having trouble understanding why the IMR's work.............



I'm no expert at all but assume that it must be due to the high current draw that RCRs didn't work well. I haven't tried RCRs and am not planning to either as I'm very happy with the IMRs. Now I'm just waiting for someone with the necessary skills and equipment to do a proper runtime curve with IMRs!

When I read about the EB1 before owning one the main disadvantages for me were the discharge curve which was nowhere near as flat as the E1B and the fact that there seemed to be some problems with LiFePO4 usage. I assumed no 16340s! Now it seems it's compatibile with IMRs AND has a nice flat runtime curve with these! The only significant negative aspect of my EB1 is the green tint on low :green: which I can just live with.


----------



## ivanlee (May 31, 2013)

It can be use the surefire e1b tailcap???thx


----------



## 880arm (May 31, 2013)

ivanlee said:


> It can be use the surefire e1b tailcap???thx



:welcome: 

The E1B tailcap will not work on the EB1 body. However, you can use the EB1 head on the E1B body and use the tailcap that way.


----------



## seattlite (May 31, 2013)

880arm said:


> I applaud you guys for your willingness to try out the EB1 with IMR's. I'm not an expert on battery chemistry but I think I remember Vox posting that his EB1 didn't work correctly using a RCR123 so I'm having trouble understanding why the IMR's work. Is it because the 16340 couldn't provide the amperage that the IMR does?
> 
> Keep up the good work!



I tried the following cells and they all work in my EB1C-A-TN: IMR 16340; MP 3.6V RCR123; Solarforce 3.7V 16340.


----------



## 880arm (May 31, 2013)

seattlite said:


> I tried the following cells and they all work in my EB1C-A-TN: IMR 16340; MP 3.6V RCR123; Solarforce 3.7V 16340.



Good information. I never had the nerve to try it myself :twothumbs


----------



## Risky (Sep 5, 2013)

Does anyone know if all the EB1 tailcaps are interchangeable with each other (shroud, non-shroud, etc..)


----------



## BillSWPA (Sep 5, 2013)

Risky said:


> Does anyone know if all the EB1 tailcaps are interchangeable with each other (shroud, non-shroud, etc..)



I believe they can. I have the EB1T, which relies on the degree to which the switch is pressed and/or turned to select low or high. If I deliberately try to do so, I can quickly depress, release, and depress the switch to take the light into low mode on the second press, the way the non-tactical EB1 is supposed to work.


----------



## tongkang (Jan 23, 2014)

Been a while EB1 thread..but still best review around here imo 
@880arm,
dont know how to say this in correct words...any chance to add 200rotary in your review please? I'm sure it's help a lot for CPF gang here

Thank you


----------



## 880arm (Jan 23, 2014)

tongkang said:


> Been a while EB1 thread..but still best review around here imo
> @880arm,
> dont know how to say this in correct words...any chance to add 200rotary in your review please? I'm sure it's help a lot for CPF gang here
> 
> Thank you



I would love to but unfortunately I don't yet own an HDS light. However, one of these days I will get myself one and you can bet I will do a review on it. Thanks for the compliment.


----------



## 880arm (May 18, 2014)

I recently received a new EB1-T to go along with my EB1-C that was the original subject of this thread and I can confirm that there are several differences between my original EB1 and this newest one, aside from the fact one is a clicky and the other is the tactical version. For lack of a better way to tell them apart, I am going to refer to them as Gen 1 and Gen 2.

As far as appearances are concerned, the Gen 2 has the same finish and overall design with the most notable difference being the addition of the serial number and QR code to the head, as with other recent E-series lights. The body of this one sample also has its own serial number and QR code which may indicate SureFire is still working through a stock of bodies that have the old markings.





Things might get interesting if I ever need warranty service since it looks like I have two different serial numbers!




As far as function is concerned, I have not experienced any faulty mode switching like some users found with the early versions of the EB1-T. The Gen 2 EB1-T uses a true single-mode head so, for example, when swapping heads between the EB1-T and EB1-C, the EB1-T head provides only a single high mode of output. Operation of the tactical switch has been reliable and predictable although I have experienced a couple of instances where there was a brief high-output flash when going to OFF from constant-on low mode.

When operated in high mode, both versions of the EB1 make a faint buzzing sound that can be heard if I hold the light up to my ear. I would never have noticed this if someone had not mentioned it in the E1D Defender thread.

On the performance front, there are a few more differences beginning with the beam profile. Specifically the Gen 2 produces a beam with a somewhat larger and slightly less intense center hotspot and more sharply defined corona than the Gen 1.

The following photos were taken approximately 5 yards from the building and were intentionally underexposed to better show the beam profiles.
*
Gen 2 EB1-T Backup*





*Gen 1 EB1-C Backup*



Some quick and dirty lux measurements confirmed the difference in beam intensity with the Gen 1 EB1 clocking in at 10,671 lux and the Gen 2 at 9,268; thankfully, much less of a difference than we were led to believe by the specs in the 2014 SureFire catalog. In terms of reach, these measurements would translate into ANSI beam distances of 207 and 193 meters respectively. For real world application it is safe to say they are both fairly effective to about 100 meters, based on my experience (yours may vary).

There are no obvious differences in the optic used in either light so it appears the difference is in the LED, however, I can't see enough of it to have the slightest clue of what it may be. If I get a chance I will attempt some photographs to see if anyone else here will have a better idea. Overall the Gen 2 has a very slightly warmer tint and whiter beam than the Gen 1. It does not have the same beam profile and tint as the new E1D.

As far as the overall beam is concerned, the larger hotspot of the Gen 2 is more noticeable to me than its slight loss of throw. The spill beams are also different with the Gen 2 projecting a little bit more spill downrange but it doesn't transition as smoothly toward the edges.

The following beamshots were taken at a distance of 30 yards from the wooden swing but aren't the best for highlighting the differences in beam profile. Next time out I will take some better ones.

*Gen 2 EB1-T Backup*





*Gen 1 EB1-C Backup*



​
Finally we come to runtime, one of the most often maligned aspects of the original EB1. In this department, the Gen 2 shows some improvement.





Overall I would grade the changes as a success. I'm a fan of the SureFire TIR-equipped lights for their throw so I hated to hear the newer EB1 may have less of it, but the difference hasn't been that big of a deal. Aside from that, I like the larger hotspot and improved beam tint. There will probably be some who would still prefer the extra 5 or 6 yards of throw but I think most everyone will approve of the increase in runtime.

When I get a chance I will update the original post and my review with more details.


----------



## Robin24k (May 18, 2014)

Great work, Jim! Do you have any shots of the LED? Trying to confirm if it's Oslon Square or XP-G2...


----------



## tongkang (May 18, 2014)

Usefull update here,many thanks for the test..about your Gen1 EB1,are they fine with AW liFe?


----------



## Sean (May 18, 2014)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Thanks for the update!


----------



## 46Alpha (May 18, 2014)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

VERY helpful info, thanks! Other than ordering from SF, can anyone recommend a high volume dealer that will have the Gen2's vs the Gen1's?


----------



## 880arm (May 18, 2014)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



Robin24k said:


> Great work, Jim! Do you have any shots of the LED? Trying to confirm if it's Oslon Square or XP-G2...



With my photos it's hard to tell whether it's an LED, Bigfoot, or the Loch Ness Monster . 

The LED is too small to be either of the two you mentioned, if anything it looks about the same as the one in my original EB1. The newer (Gen 2) EB1 is #2 in the photo below. It's not very clear but at least you can get an idea of the relative sizes of the LEDs (click image for really big version).



​


tongkang said:


> Usefull update here,many thanks for the test..about your Gen1 EB1,are they fine with AW liFe?



I haven't tried any of the AW LiFe cells but I always use the K2 Energy batteries with all of my E-series lights. The Gen 1 EB1 is a little shaky on a freshly charged cell but after it's used a little bit, it works just fine. I haven't used the Gen 2 much with the rechargeables yet but it seems like it tolerates them much better.



46Alpha said:


> VERY helpful info, thanks! Other than ordering from SF, can anyone recommend a high volume dealer that will have the Gen2's vs the Gen1's?



Wish I could but I ordered this one from SureFire. I didn't know for sure whether I would receive the updated version or not but I wanted an EB1-T anyway.


----------



## Robin24k (May 18, 2014)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

EB1 #2 still looks like an XP-E to me...green PCB is a dead giveaway though.


----------



## DAN92 (May 19, 2014)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Thank you for the info 'jim, the difference is little perceptible between the two generations.



Robin24k said:


> EB1 #2 still looks like an XP-E to me...green PCB is a dead giveaway though.


where does the improvement if it is still an XP-E?


----------



## Robin24k (May 19, 2014)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



DAN92 said:


> where does the improvement if it is still an XP-E?


Step-down is controlled by firmware, but the new LED might be a higher bin.


----------



## DAN92 (May 19, 2014)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Robin',

Thanks for this precision.


----------



## tongkang (May 20, 2014)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Thanks,just asking due to my EB1 only on low with AW LiFe ...dont have the K2 batt to test out and expansive here to buy one compared to AW...please let us know if u had the chance to try it


880arm said:


> I haven't tried any of the AW LiFe cells but I always use the K2 Energy batteries with all of my E-series lights. The Gen 1 EB1 is a little shaky on a freshly charged cell but after it's used a little bit, it works just fine. I haven't used the Gen 2 much with the rechargeables yet but it seems like it tolerates them much better.


----------



## Sean (May 20, 2014)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



tongkang said:


> Thanks,just asking due to my EB1 only on low with AW LiFe ...dont have the K2 batt to test out and expansive here to buy one compared to AW...please let us know if u had the chance to try it



If the AW LiFe doesn't work then neither will the K2. The EB1 originally was released programmed to only work with primary CR123s.


----------



## tongkang (May 20, 2014)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Ok..got it,but with my old E1 body it work like normal most of the time,sometimes low only..on EB1 body cr123 and IMR works fine



Sean said:


> If the AW LiFe doesn't work then neither will the K2. The EB1 originally was released programmed to only work with primary CR123s.


----------



## recDNA (Oct 5, 2014)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

I hate greenage


----------



## RobertMM (Jan 26, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Well, the EB1 is finally getting bumped to 300 lm, with maybe an XPG2 as well like the E1DL. Better for those who like the two stage tailcap. 
Hopefully it'll be able to take 4.2V max as well.


----------



## MIKE969 (Jan 26, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



RobertMM said:


> Well, the EB1 is finally getting bumped to 300 lm, with maybe an XPG2 as well like the E1DL. Better for those who like the two stage tailcap.
> Hopefully it'll be able to take 4.2V max as well.



Source for this? I just ordered an eb1 on eBay. Just now...


----------



## MIKE969 (Jan 26, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Wow I just saw that the 2015 catalogue lists it at 300 lumens...but there seems to be contradictory info on this...if anyone can confirm the new output that would be great.


----------



## 880arm (Jan 26, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

The 300 lumen version was only announced last week during SHOT Show. It might show up on the market next week or it might take months. It's even possible they already made the change and just didn't tell anyone :shrug: 

What contradictory information are you speaking of?


----------



## ForrestChump (Jan 26, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...oducts-video&p=4592345&viewfull=1#post4592345


Sorry Jim. I was VERY CLEAR with them on the phone what I was inquiring about and why there was a discrepancy. 

This is EXACTLY what happened. I shot you an email with a heads up.


----------



## 880arm (Jan 26, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

I see. I will post a response there.

By the way MIKE969, :welcome:


----------



## ForrestChump (Jan 26, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Really wasn't looking to cause a stir, hence me asking for clarification several times. Both parties insisted they had accurate info.......???????????


----------



## IsaacL (Jan 26, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Sounds like a classic right hand doesn't know what the left is doing....haha


----------



## MIKE969 (Jan 26, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



880arm said:


> I see. I will post a response there.
> 
> By the way MIKE969, :welcome:



Thanks!

From what I read around here surefire is often slow in releasing updates or new products after announcing them anyways. I just hope I'll have the newest 200lm version. Worst comes to worst, I'll sell the 200lm eb1 and buy the 300lm version when it comes out!


----------



## ForrestChump (Jan 27, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

New intel,

Most recent update is Q1 by someone with a little more knowledge this time round, said it was an easy upgrade ( um yeah! ). Again, this is in SF time, they are omnipotent.....

We shall see..... or not.....


----------



## BigBluefish (Feb 9, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Well, maybe they'll drop the price on the now "old" 200 lumen versions. That last price increase was brutal. 
I think this is the first time I've ever quibbled over SF's pricing. 

OK, rant over. Probably OT, anyway. 

300 lumens does sound good. Though I don't know that in actual use it'll look much different than 200 lumens.


----------



## IsaacL (Feb 9, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

IMO, the EB1 should have been 300 lumens to begin with.

Of course, there is more to a light than just lumens. But...that doesn't mean output should remain at "x" forever. From a "first principles" perspective, I don't think single cell lights have reached an ideal output yet. For example, a single 60W bulb is ~800 lumens and most rooms have multiple lamps. 300 lumens may be adequate but I believe there's room for more. Just my .02

The technology has certainly come a long way since the early days and I'll probably pick up one of the new EB1's at some point. It's a great little light that just got better.


----------



## 270winchester (Feb 10, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



IsaacL said:


> IMO, the EB1 should have been 300 lumens to begin with.
> 
> Of course, there is more to a light than just lumens. But...that doesn't mean output should remain at "x" forever. From a "first principles" perspective, I don't think single cell lights have reached an ideal output yet. For example, a single 60W bulb is ~800 lumens and most rooms have multiple lamps. 300 lumens may be adequate but I believe there's room for more. Just my .02
> 
> The technology has certainly come a long way since the early days and I'll probably pick up one of the new EB1's at some point. It's a great little light that just got better.



Even today the list of >200 lumen single primary CR123 light with TIR is a very, very short list. Are there any on there besides the EB1 and E1D?


----------



## Slumber (Feb 12, 2015)

Are the Tan EB1's powder coated? I bought a like new Tan EB1 in the marketplace a few months back and although I'm not crazy about the color, the grip is MUCH better than the standard HA black. It feels similar to Cerakote or the finish on Armytek lights. Surefire should really consider using this finish on the black EB1.


----------



## IsaacL (Feb 12, 2015)

270winchester said:


> Even today the list of >200 lumen single primary CR123 light with TIR is a very, very short list. Are there any on there besides the EB1 and E1D?



The Elzetta Alpha is one. Also, HDS and LensLight both make non-TIR single CR123A lights that exceed 300 lumens. Considering the theoretical max for an XP-G2 is around 615 lumens and it only takes ~2W to hit 300, there is still some headspace for a higher turbo mode (at the expense of runtime of course). HKJ's tests indicate that CR123A's can handle 1-1.5A. 



Slumber Pass said:


> Are the Tan EB1's powder coated? I bought a like new Tan EB1 in the marketplace a few months back and although I'm not crazy about the color, the grip is MUCH better than the standard HA black. It feels similar to Cerakote or the finish on Armytek lights. Surefire should really consider using this finish on the black EB1.



Mil-Spec hard anodized. The texture is a result of the particular processing for tan IIRC.


----------



## Random Dan (Feb 12, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



270winchester said:


> Even today the list of >200 lumen single primary CR123 light with TIR is a very, very short list. Are there any on there besides the EB1 and E1D?


The above mentioned Elzetta Alpha and also the Armytek Prime are the only ones that i can think of.


----------



## Slumber (Feb 12, 2015)

IsaacL said:


> Mil-Spec hard anodized. The texture is a result of the particular processing for tan IIRC.



Thanks. I remember reading the heads of the colored G2X's were powder coated, so I assumed the Tan EB1 was as well. Whatever it is, it feels nice a grippy. If and when the 300 lumen version is released, I will probably opt for a tan, tactical switched version to go along with the Clicky I have now. 

Can anyone with a silver EB1 comment if it has a similar feel?


----------



## ForrestChump (Feb 13, 2015)

Slumber Pass said:


> Thanks. *I remember reading the heads of the colored G2X's were powder coated*, so I assumed the Tan EB1 was as well. Whatever it is, it feels nice a grippy. If and when the 300 lumen version is released, I will probably opt for a tan, tactical switched version to go along with the Clicky I have now.
> 
> Can anyone with a silver EB1 comment if it has a similar feel?



I need verification for this if anyone has any sources.


----------



## Slumber (Feb 13, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

This is where I read it. Post 729 of 6PX/G2X thread. I believe Size15 has/had a good bit of inside info. 

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...PX-G2X-Tactical-and-6PX-G2X-Pro-Thread/page25


----------



## 270winchester (Feb 13, 2015)

IsaacL said:


> The Elzetta Alpha is one.



Have you seen the beamshot comparisons between the ALpha and the EB1 200 version? I lol'ed when I saw it.

http://flashlightguide.com/2014/07/review-elzetta-alpha-modular-flashlight/

If that's the best 315 lumen alternative to a 200 lumen EB1, Surefire is not worried. 


> Also, HDS and LensLight both make non-TIR single CR123A lights that exceed 300 lumens.


I like HDS lights but it's not relevant in this discussion



> Considering the theoretical max for an XP-G2 is around 615 lumens and it only takes ~2W to hit 300, there is still some headspace for a higher turbo mode (at the expense of runtime of course). HKJ's tests indicate that CR123A's can handle 1-1.5A.



Yeah but then Briana will come and point out the poor regulation.


----------



## IsaacL (Feb 13, 2015)

270winchester said:


> Have you seen the beamshot comparisons between the ALpha and the EB1 200 version? I lol'ed when I saw it.
> 
> http://flashlightguide.com/2014/07/review-elzetta-alpha-modular-flashlight/


Yup, and I already disliked Elzetta's lights.  Not sure what lens angle they decided to go with but it's not very impressive.



270winchester said:


> If that's the best 315 lumen alternative to a 200 lumen EB1, Surefire is not worried.


No argument there. I'll take the SF every time. FWIW I've been referring to the new 300 lumen EB1, which will likely have the same XP-G2/optic combo as the E1D. As it stands now, it's serious hard to beat the EB1's XP-E + tight optic for throw.



270winchester said:


> I like HDS lights but it's not relevant in this discussion


Wasn't saying it is, just that a bunch of other companies upgraded their lights before SF got around to fixing (IMO) the EB1.



270winchester said:


> Yeah but then Briana will come and point out the poor regulation.


I've heard Briana's personal opinion a number of times. And I'm certainly no expert but the point of a turbo mode is raw output, right? It's not going to run for very long at that level :shrug: If runtime is the game, just switch the light to a lower level. We're all Surefire fans in this thread (I hope). 

@880arm, When are you getting a review sample to play with Jim :wave:


----------



## Grizzman (Feb 13, 2015)

For close range use, the Alpha's beam is very good. Does it throw as well as a Surefire TIR, nope. Does a Surefire TIR light up a room as effectively as an Alpha, nope.

They are two completely different tools, and as far as I'm concerned one of them is not "better" than the other.


----------



## 880arm (Feb 13, 2015)

ForrestChump said:


> I need verification for this if anyone has any sources.



I thought it was mentioned in the product listing but now I don't see it. It was in some of their literature somewhere because I remember looking it up when I wrote a review on the G2X series.



IsaacL said:


> @880arm, When are you getting a review sample to play with Jim :wave:



I don't know. I expect it to be just like the E1D but I will probably pick one up whenever they become available. 

Right now I'm more curious as to whether or not the silver and tan versions will still be around. They aren't mentioned in the catalog and are no longer listed on the website so I wonder if they are going the same way as the Foliage Green G2X and A2L Aviator.



Grizzman said:


> For close range use, the Alpha's beam is very good. Does it throw as well as a Surefire TIR, nope. Does a Surefire TIR light up a room as effectively as an Alpha, nope.
> 
> They are two completely different tools, and as far as I'm concerned one of them is not "better" than the other.



That pretty well sums it up. Even with its standard lens, the Alpha is what a lot of people would consider to be a "floody" light, especially when compared to a little thrower like the EB1.


----------



## IsaacL (Feb 13, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

FWIW I remember reading the same thing about the G2X. 

Noticed that as well. Really hope they don't discontinue the silver and tan. Those were the best colors!


----------



## ForrestChump (Feb 13, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

delete


----------



## Dingle1911 (Apr 9, 2015)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

I purchased an EB1 about a month ago to use with the Thyrm Switchback. I ended up using an E2E in can head with Veleno drop-in to reduce the length of the light and to give myself a floodier beam pattern. I knew it was a possibility and maybe I ended up with one of the earlier lights, but now I have a single mode light instead of 2 stage. I wish this light was like the LX2 where the light maintained 2 stage operation with any head installed. I am still pleased with the setup that I legoed together though.


----------



## radu1976 (Mar 14, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Sorry to bring back this thread but anybody knows if this flashlight runs in regulation with a RCR123 3.7V ?
It seems to be direct drive on CR123 - no regulation at all -.
Many lights aren't regulated on CR123s but hold a good - or perfect - regulation on RCR123s.
I remember that the older review for L1 on light-reviews.com was showing the L1 being perfectly regulated on RCR123 - for 35 min only though -
Any input would be appreciated.


----------



## RobertMM (Mar 15, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



radu1976 said:


> Sorry to bring back this thread but anybody knows if this flashlight runs in regulation with a RCR123 3.7V ?
> It seems to be direct drive on CR123 - no regulation at all -.
> Many lights aren't regulated on CR123s but hold a good - or perfect - regulation on RCR123s.
> I remember that the older review for L1 on light-reviews.com was showing the L1 being perfectly regulated on RCR123 - for 35 min only though -
> Any input would be appreciated.



I remember reading somewhere that the older EB1 wouldn't light up or flicker with 3.7V cells. 

That could change with the newer 300 lumen model about to hit the market though, as it SEEMS to have the same internals as the E1DL(9000 lux, same runtime specs in high and low, same hi-lo operation).
IIRC the E1DL worked well with 3.7V cells.


----------



## Sean (Mar 16, 2016)

I just got an EB1T. It appears to be the most current version labeled 200 lumens. To my surprise, not only does it work with LifePO4 cells but it also works with 3.7v 16650's. The light only works on high when attached to a clickie switch and burns no brighter on 16650's so it seems Surefire has updated the EB1 to work just like the E1D. I'm very happy with this, it's much better than the earlier version of this same light. And while I can verify that the 200 lumen EB1 does put out less light than the E1D (according to my meter), I can also state that I cannot see any practical difference in brightness between the two in side-by-side comparisons. Even the hotspot size is almost the same. I would bet this version is pushing more than 200 lumens.

You can tell if you have a newer EB1 if it has a QR code and serial number on the head.


----------



## wensynch (Mar 16, 2016)

Sean said:


> I just got an EB1T. It appears to be the most current version labeled 200 lumens. To my surprise, not only does it work with LifePO4 cells but it also works with 3.7v 16650's. The light only works on high when attached to a clickie switch and burns no brighter on 16650's so it seems Surefire has updated the EB1 to work just like the E1D. I'm very happy with this, it's much better than the earlier version of this same light. And while I can verify that the 200 lumen EB1 does put out less light than the E1D (according to my meter), I can also state that I cannot see any practical difference in brightness between the two in side-by-side comparisons. Even the hotspot size is almost the same. I would bet this version is pushing more than 200 lumens.
> 
> You can tell if you have a newer EB1 if it has a QR code and serial number on the head.



Weird.

I first tried an Olight RCR 16650 and the EB1 would only run on low level. Thought I read that this was the case only when fully topped, but it never opened up to high mode.

So, I ended up buying the Tenergy LifePO4. Work fine.


----------



## Sean (Mar 16, 2016)

Well I have an issue with the EB1. When I first opened it up and turned it on it flickered a bit and went into high or "almost high" mode with a soft press and when I pressed full on it went into high mode. I didn't really think much more than maybe too much lube on the threads. Then I put in my LifePO4 cell (purchased from Surefire) and the light works perfectly. After playing around a bit I put the Surefire primary back in and strangely enough it will not work in low mode (comes on 90% of max output). So I tried a different Surefire and then a Duracell CR123A and still no low mode. A soft press gets me 90% high output & some flickering. Full press gets normal high, no flickering. If I remove the EB1 head and put my E1D head on it works as the EB1 should, soft press for low and full press for high. So I don't think it's the tailcap. If I put the LifePO4 back in it works perfectly, every time. Low mode with soft press, high mode with full press and no flickering at all. I'm stumped. Why will the EB1 not work properly with the battery that came from Surefire, but will work with a LifePO4?


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Mar 16, 2016)

Sean said:


> I just got an EB1T. It appears to be the most current version labeled 200 lumens. To my surprise, not only does it work with LifePO4 cells but it also works with 3.7v 16650's. The light only works on high when attached to a clickie switch and burns no brighter on 16650's so it seems Surefire has updated the EB1 to work just like the E1D...
> 
> ...You can tell if you have a newer EB1 if it has a QR code and serial number on the head.



I've got an EB1C with the QR code and serial on the head. I just checked, it seems to also work fine with an AW RCR123 fresh off the charger. Thanks for the tip! :thumbsup:

I've also got an early (three digit serial) EB1C with the tail shroud. It blinks with a fresh RCR so I probably just never tried the rechargeable in the newer EB1C until I saw your post. I remember all the warnings posted here in years past about using rechargeables in a SureFire, e.g. you'll void the warranty, you'll go blind etc. The SF lights of the past five years appear to be more tolerant of rechargeable chemistries including the up to 4.2 volt Li-ion cells.

Amazon seems to be closing out the 200 lumen EB1C's with and without the tail shroud for less than half of the $220 list price though periodic flash sales (one ends in a couple of hours). I haven't found the EB1T's that cheap though, they were probably discontinued earlier and are already in short supply.


----------



## RobertMM (Mar 17, 2016)

Newest versions work with 4.2volt cells???

That's great! One of the primary reasons I put off buying the 200 lumen version was Liion incompatibility.

Now we can have the best throwing version, with 4.2V support(unofficial, that is).


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Mar 17, 2016)

RobertMM said:


> Newest versions work with 4.2volt cells???
> 
> That's great! One of the primary reasons I put off buying the 200 lumen version was Liion incompatibility.



Yep, and just to clarify, we are talking about late models of the 200 lumen EB1C and EB1T which I believe have two different heads. Or do they...? 

And the 4.2 volts is for a Li-ion battery fresh off the charger. Some other lights will only work after the voltage is bled down toward the nominal 3.7 volts of the cell.

On my EB2 AW RCR123's seem to work fine on high for a couple of minutes, then the light shuts down, perhaps due to thermal protection. It will cycle back on but I'm going back to the Tenergy LiFePO4's which I've been using in that light.



Sean said:


> Why will the EB1 not work properly with the battery that came from Surefire, but will work with a LifePO4?



I wonder if the light somehow attempts to calibrate itself, maybe not for battery voltage _per se_, but for differing resistances in the tailcap current path? I remember some of Henry's lights from years ago had a voltage reset procedure for different battery chemistries. Is it possible that the EB1T saw the higher voltage of the RCR123 and raised the threshold for mode switching accordingly?

When I did a teardown on my early EB1C I was amazed at the parts count and sophisticated microcontroller for a simple two mode light.


----------



## Sean (Mar 17, 2016)

Vox Clamatis in Deserto said:


> Yep, and just to clarify, we are talking about late models of the 200 lumen EB1C and EB1T which I believe have two different heads. Or do they...?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The newer EB1C & EB1T use different heads. 

I'm exchanging my EB1T for another. Should have the replacement tomorrow.


----------



## RobertMM (Mar 17, 2016)

Can it be that the 4.2V cell fried something in Sean's EB1T so now it doesn't have a low mode?


----------



## Sean (Mar 17, 2016)

RobertMM said:


> Can it be that the 4.2V cell fried something in Sean's EB1T so now it doesn't have a low mode?



I'm not sure how that would be the case since low mode didn't work when I took it out of the box new and tried the light for the first time with the provided surefire 123. Low mode didn't work until I used a surefire Lifepo4 cell.


----------



## recDNA (Mar 17, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Any new candela numbers?


----------



## tonkem (Mar 17, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Catalog says 9000 candela.


----------



## recDNA (Mar 18, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



tonkem said:


> Catalog says 9000 candela.


Thanks. I thought it might change with newer model. Surefure used to be famous for underestimating in their website.


----------



## Sean (Mar 18, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Just got my replacement EB1T and it doesn't work on low mode either. Low mode is like 80%-100% output & flickers, high mode is solid. So either I'm the unluckiest person in the world or their are a bunch of defective ones out there. And to add insult to injury the tint on the replacement is not as good as the first.


----------



## wensynch (Mar 18, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

^ You probably already know, but the EB1 w/ shroud always turns on on high mode and a light second tap to switch to low. Click fully after desired mode is activated. 

Seems to be a battery compatibility issue you are encountering, as it does turn on. I find it interesting how you are encountering the opposite effect to what I encountered with the RCR123a.


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Mar 18, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



Sean said:


> Just got my replacement EB1T and it doesn't work on low mode either. Low mode is like 80%-100% output & flickers, high mode is solid. So either I'm the unluckiest person in the world or their are a bunch of defective ones out there. And to add insult to injury the tint on the replacement is not as good as the first.



Ouch... Well, you know the traditional refrain from the CPF chorus: 'SureFire has great customer service!'

I feel your pain. I bought a couple of Titan-A's and both had mode switching problems. And, from posts here it seems that there are indeed a number of those lights even in recent serials with similar problems.

Doesn't the EB1-T use a resistor in the tailcap like the classic Lumamax lights (LX2 etc.)?

Is there some continuity issue with the tailcap from too much or too little lubricant? You know that drill. Clean out the tailcap and body threads and see if that helps. If not, get out the Nyogel 760G and thoroughly lube the parts to see if that is the solution.

And the fact that the earlier light worked OK with other battery chemistries still makes me wonder if the voltage change to sense the mode transition signal is somehow set for the higher voltage rechargeable cells.


----------



## Sean (Mar 18, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Yep, I called Surefire and the eb1t is enroute to them to replace it. That seems to be the only way to guarantee a properly working light.


----------



## tongkang (Mar 22, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Phone pic EB1 tailswitch







Vox Clamatis in Deserto said:


> Doesn't the EB1-T use a resistor in the tailcap like the classic Lumamax lights (LX2 etc.)?


----------



## Dave D (Aug 14, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

These are now being sold at reasonable prices on eBay since the 300 lumen version has been released, I couldn't resist a Surefire EB1C-A-BK, it's the 200/5 lumen model being sold for just under $90 new.

Looking at the photo's that the seller has posted it appears to be an early version, so it must be very old stock.


----------



## kj2 (Aug 14, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



Dave D said:


> These are now being sold at reasonable prices on eBay since the 300 lumen version has been released, I couldn't resist a Surefire EB1C-A-BK, it's the 200/5 lumen model being sold for just under $90 new.


Am looking at those as well. But customs fees keep me from buying. Plus, I rather have the 300lm version.


----------



## Dave D (Aug 14, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



kj2 said:


> Am looking at those as well. But customs fees keep me from buying. Plus, I rather have the 300lm version.



A friendly member offered to post it to me which helps keep costs down.


----------



## shrike2222 (Aug 15, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

I bought this EB1T-A-SL.
It's emitter is different with normal EB1.
I think this is XP-E2. As far as I knew, EB1's emitter is XP-E of 200lm version. 
When I saw this XP-E2 version, I thought this is 300lm version. But as 880arm's review, this is just little changed 200lm of EB1 not 300lm.







EB1 XP-E2(?)





EB1 XP-E


----------



## RobertMM (Aug 15, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



shrike2222 said:


> I bought this EB1T-A-SL.
> It's emitter is different with normal EB1.
> I think this is XP-E2. As far as I knew, EB1's emitter is XP-E of 200lm version.
> When I saw this XP-E2 version, I thought this is 300lm version. But as 880arm's review, this is just little changed 200lm of EB1 not 300lm.
> ...



Ooooh another variant?
Maybe SF wasn't satisfied with the lux they got from thr XPG2.

Do you notice any difference in output between them?


----------



## shrike2222 (Aug 15, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



RobertMM said:


> Ooooh another variant?
> Maybe SF wasn't satisfied with the lux they got from thr XPG2.
> 
> Do you notice any difference in output between them?



As you shown the 880arm's runtime graph, my two EB1s are almost same beam intensity.


----------



## rjking (Dec 31, 2016)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*



Sean said:


> Yep, I called Surefire and the eb1t is enroute to them to replace it. That seems to be the only way to guarantee a properly working light.



Was it replaced the second time? Is it working properly now? How was the tint this time?


----------



## Jose Marin (Aug 3, 2017)

*Re: Surefire EB1 Backup Review*

Back to the 16340 discussion, i know its proven they work in the eb1 but do they work in the e1b does anybody know?


----------

