# JETBeam M2S comparative review



## I came to the light... (Feb 13, 2010)

JETBeam recently released the M2S, their latest and greatest high-powered searchlight. It is very similar to their M1X, with a few differences which will be the focus of this review.

The key difference between the two flashlights is that the M2S runs a Luminus SST-50 LED at 4A, while the M1X runs a CREE MC-E LED at 2.8A. The M1X is rated at 700 emitter lumens and 450 out the front lumens, which the M2S bumps up to 1000 and 750. However, it can only run this high for 3 minutes before switching to 480 emitter lumens, and it cannot use smaller rechargeables like 16340s or 17500s. No word yet on 18500s, but 4A is well above the rule-of-thumb max current of 18500s, 3A. The SST-50 LED also results in a smoother beam pattern, without any hint of a donut hole.












These flashlights are built to throw, so how do they perform? Very well, to say the least. However, comparing the two leads to a somewhat unexpected result. While the M2S is clearly brighter at 1 meter, the M1X maintains a tighter beam - see the review for long distance beamshots. 
Highest lux readings at 1 meter: 
M1X: 24900
M2S: 34500

The rest of my review can be found here: http://sunriseinfo.us/reviews/m2s/

Outdoor beamshots are up.


----------



## Partywaggin (Feb 13, 2010)

Thanks for the update! No glitches or quirks in the UI thus far I presume?

Wes


----------



## berry580 (Feb 13, 2010)

max lux readings at 1 metre i presume?

thx


----------



## coolperl (Feb 14, 2010)

18500 should be safe to use. Those "4A" is the current to the LED, not current drawn from li-ion cells. I'd be surprised, if current draw measured on the tailcap exceed 2.5A. If Jetbeam didn't screw up the driver, 18500 are ok to use.

You are not the only person with this strange UI behaviour oo: Another user reported the same problem. It seems that Jetbeam was in big hurry releasing this flashlight :shrug:


----------



## Fusion_m8 (Feb 14, 2010)

As a guide, The LF Seraph P7 sees 2.8A at the emitter, but draws about 1.6A from the batteries. If its 4A at the emitter, I doubt its anymore than 2.5A as coolperl mentioned. Still, best to use 18650s as most 18500s would just be about maxed out, unless IMR cells are used.

I was a little confused after reading the sunrise review, first the author said: "These flashlights are built to throw, so how do they perform? Very well, to say the least. And yes, the M2S does appear to throw much further, judging by 1 meter lux measurements." 

Then the author retracted that statement and said: "The results were not what I expected from comparing the beams indoors or the lux readings, and my verdict has been edited accordingly. Even on boost the M2S barely equals the M1X - I would actually say the M1X throws a tiny bit further. The discrepancy was caused by differing rates of divergence; the M2S's beam spreads out faster than the M1X's." 

Then in the verdict again the author says: "While not offering vast improvements over the M1X, the M2S is clearly an improvement, and a strong contender for the best LED searchlight as of the writing of this review. The M2S trades lux per lumen for a smoother beam and larger spot, and makes up for the loss with a boost mode that pumps out more than enough lumens to surpass the M1X's throw, and the overall output of most if not all flashlights in its class."

*So what is it? Does the M2S outthrow the M1X or not???* In another review, which I cannot understand because I do not read/speak Korean, it appears from the outdoor beamshots that the M2S does have a bigger, more intense hotspot than the M1X, which leads me to believe that the M2S should out throw the M1X.



coolperl said:


> 18500 should be safe to use. Those "4A" is the current to the LED, not current drawn from li-ion cells. I'd be surprised, if current draw measured on the tailcap exceed 2.5A. If Jetbeam didn't screw up the driver, 18500 are ok to use.
> 
> You are not the only person with this strange UI behaviour oo: Another user reported the same problem. It seems that Jetbeam was in big hurry releasing this flashlight :shrug:


----------



## berry580 (Feb 14, 2010)

what strange UI behavior are we talking about here?:thinking:


coolperl said:


> 18500 should be safe to use. Those "4A" is the current to the LED, not current drawn from li-ion cells. I'd be surprised, if current draw measured on the tailcap exceed 2.5A. If Jetbeam didn't screw up the driver, 18500 are ok to use.
> 
> You are not the only person with this strange UI behaviour oo: Another user reported the same problem. It seems that Jetbeam was in big hurry releasing this flashlight :shrug:


----------



## coolperl (Feb 14, 2010)

Well, judging from beamshots, M2S isn't as outstanding thrower as many expected... Not to mention M1X better tint.

By the way, some time ago, another user posted link to Thai (I believe) review:

http://www.thaicpf.com/webboard/index.php?topic=1484.msg12577;topicseen#msg12577

berry580, I was talking about light behaviour when using 'head-loosened' mode. Every time, you switch the light off/on, when head is in the 'loosened' position, the light will switch modes (even if turned-off for longer period). To avoid that, you must always turn off/on flashlight in turbo mode. Just read the linked review and M2S thread in marketplace.


----------



## I came to the light... (Feb 14, 2010)

I am sorry for the confusion. My internet connection shut off last night while I was in the middle of updating my review, and before I could respond to posts here. You will find that the review is now updated with beamshots, a revised verdict, interface description (and an issue), and ceiling bounce measurements. From now on I'll clearly differentiate between an early verdict and one post-beamshots 

Wes, thank you for mentioning that - I tend to just use massive lights like this one on max, something the M2S does just fine. I did in fact find a rather serious flaw with one UI, which I wrote about in the new section of the review. 

Berry, yes, they are at 1 meter, sorry for the confusion. 

coolperl, thanks for the clarification. However, I think I will wait for official word before trying my only pair of 18500s  As for the tint, the SST-50 is definitely cooler, although I wouldn't say one is always going to be better than the other. 

Fusion_m8, I'm really sorry, reading it the way it was presented to you I would be utterly confused too  . It should make sense now. I would say they throw about equally, and perhaps the M1X throws a tiny bit further. I can try to take a picture showing beam divergence later tonight, but all I have is a point-and-shoot, so it may be hard.


----------



## brianch (Feb 14, 2010)

Well let's hope the RRT-3 performs better! M2S doesn't look like that much of an upgrade of the M1X as of now. Maybe future versions will change this.


----------



## Lightcrazycanuck (Feb 14, 2010)

brianch said:


> Well let's hope the RRT-3 performs better! M2S doesn't look like that much of an upgrade of the M1X as of now. Maybe future versions will change this.


 

+1:thumbsup:


----------



## rickypanecatyl (Feb 14, 2010)

Great review! Thanks!

So is the M2S a more "all around" flashlight? The numbers actually sound good to me - throwing almost as far as the M1X but with 50% more lumens.


----------



## I came to the light... (Feb 14, 2010)

rickypanecatyl said:


> Great review! Thanks!
> 
> So is the M2S a more "all around" flashlight? The numbers actually sound good to me - throwing almost as far as the M1X but with 50% more lumens.



Yes, I'd say so, based primarily on the fact that the beam is more comfortable for everyday use. You're right about the numbers, but keep in mind that that's only for 3 minutes, while the M1X can stay at 450 OTF.


----------



## Dioni (Feb 14, 2010)

Thanks for the comparisson, and really its not what I expect too. But maybe I was expecting too much. :/


----------



## vaughnsphotoart (Feb 14, 2010)

Thanks for the review. I just bought my M1X before this was released, and this review makes me feel better. I thought I had just missed the upgraded version, but with the compromises the M2S makes it sounds like a light with different intent. I'll stick with my M1X.

And I echo the comment of brianch... I hope the RRT-3 is a better performer.


----------



## bullettproof (Feb 14, 2010)

< CATAPULT


----------



## neoseikan (Feb 14, 2010)

Dioni said:


> Thanks for the comparisson, and really its not what I expect too. But maybe I was expecting too much. :/



The LED manufacturers really did good job day by day, I believe that's the power to help us getting better lights, but 50% more lumens will only make the eyes feel a bit brighter, maybe 10% in our minds. That's a hard work to amaze we flashaholics. Because we have heard and seen too much great things.


----------



## Fusion_m8 (Feb 15, 2010)

I came to the light... said:


> Fusion_m8, I'm really sorry, reading it the way it was presented to you I would be utterly confused too  . It should make sense now. I would say they throw about equally, and perhaps the M1X throws a tiny bit further. I can try to take a picture showing beam divergence later tonight, but all I have is a point-and-shoot, so it may be hard.



No need to apologize! You've doing a great job, its just that I was trying to make sense of an incomplete review. Its all good now. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

When my M2S arrives and if it doesn't impress compared to my Seraph P7, I'll either sell it or swap it for an M1X v4!


----------



## slag (Feb 15, 2010)

I came to the light,
It appears you ran both the M1X and M2S in the standard 3 cell configuration, is that correct? I assume you used primaries as 3 RCR's wasn't advised in the M2S? 
I was certainly enthused about this light until I read in another thread about the UI issues. This is the biggest reason I would stay away at this point, as being able to turn the light on at the low setting (as standard, if chosen as the daily use setting) is not only appealing but almost necessary. I do hope this is remedied in a revised edition (or even that current editions can be updated). 
Also, since the M1X OTF lumens on high are spec'd to be similar to the M2S on mid, would you say that this is evident in your comparison?
Thanks!


----------



## flashfiend (Feb 15, 2010)

Not to burst the bubble. But I think the m2s mid is 450 emitter lumens not otf.


----------



## neoseikan (Feb 15, 2010)

flashfiend said:


> Not to burst the bubble. But I think the m2s mid is 450 emitter lumens not otf.



If it's 450 Emitter Lumens, then the current on LED might be about 1.5A.
If it's 450 OTF Lumens, then might be 2.8A.
If you can read the current on the tailcap, then that can be tell easily.
After all, it's a mid mode, and quite safe for the LED.
Yours, Neoseikan


----------



## I came to the light... (Feb 15, 2010)

slag said:


> I came to the light,
> It appears you ran both the M1X and M2S in the standard 3 cell configuration, is that correct? I assume you used primaries as 3 RCR's wasn't advised in the M2S?
> I was certainly enthused about this light until I read in another thread about the UI issues. This is the biggest reason I would stay away at this point, as being able to turn the light on at the low setting (as standard, if chosen as the daily use setting) is not only appealing but almost necessary. I do hope this is remedied in a revised edition (or even that current editions can be updated).
> Also, since the M1X OTF lumens on high are spec'd to be similar to the M2S on mid, would you say that this is evident in your comparison?
> Thanks!


 
Yes, both were running on 3 new CR123As. 

I can't image they won't fix the UI issue. It doesn't even require another edition - those are for improvements, not fixes. 

The M2S is actually rated at 480 emitter lumens on medium, not 450 OTF. I updated that a while ago on my website, but I forgot to update this preview, sorry. Anyway, it is noticeably dimmer on medium than the M1X is on high, though it goes without saying that it is still insanely bright.


----------



## slag (Feb 15, 2010)

I came to the light, 
Thanks for the info/clarifications. It will be interesting to see what the M2S will do for runtime on 3 primaries, especially on high. 

You're definitely right, the UI should be fixed for those current owners (or soon to be owners). I am curious if this UI glitch is applicable to the entire manufacturing run or ? 

I guess I'll be waiting to see the cost of the upcoming Raptor 3, as well as for confirmation that it can run on 6 primaries.


----------



## Fusion_m8 (Feb 16, 2010)

After reading this review and considering my needs, I've just changed my order of the M2S to the M1Xv4 with BugOutGear. These guys are fantastic to deal with! **HIGHLY RECOMMENDED**


----------



## brianch (Feb 16, 2010)

The SST-50 vs MC-E is sort of like the R5 vs R2/Q5 for me. I wasn't that amazed by the throw of the R5. Yes the output was higher but those R5s just didnt do a great job of throwing light, at least in my experience. In this JETBeam example it seems like the SST-50 does output more light but doesnt do a great job at concentrating the light into a beam. MC-E still wins there I guess. Lets hope JETBeam makes some modifications to change this.. Maybe a redesigned reflector.


----------



## berry580 (Feb 16, 2010)

i think that will mean an even deeper and/or wider reflector


----------



## LowFlux (Feb 16, 2010)

I don't like the UI. The M1X with IBS is far superior to the M2S that essentially has a 3 mode switch for low. With this UI strobe is not hidden, and all you have a light that is at best a dedicated searchlight that happens to have other modes. If you want low, you have to turn on high first, or have been in strobe last.

If the low mode only had memory... :shakehead


----------



## swrdply400mrelay (Feb 16, 2010)

Can you measure lux at 5m, then use that to calculate lux for 1 m?


----------



## Fusion_m8 (Feb 17, 2010)

Exactly! I already have the Seraph P7 that puts out a massive wall of light(600+lumens), the last thing I want to pay for is a duplicate of the Seraph P7 by buying the M2S. I know from experience that M1Xv1 out throws the Seraph P7 and the TK30 by a significant margin, getting the M1Xv4 should hopefully, be what I'm looking for.

Perhaps the RRT-3 will be the SST thrower that the M2S isn't.



brianch said:


> The SST-50 vs MC-E is sort of like the R5 vs R2/Q5 for me. I wasn't that amazed by the throw of the R5. Yes the output was higher but those R5s just didnt do a great job of throwing light, at least in my experience. In this JETBeam example it seems like the SST-50 does output more light but doesnt do a great job at concentrating the light into a beam. MC-E still wins there I guess. Lets hope JETBeam makes some modifications to change this.. Maybe a redesigned reflector.


----------



## kengps (Feb 17, 2010)

LowFlux said:


> If the low mode only had memory... :shakehead


 
Actually it does have memory....but in their infinite wisdom, they decided you would want to advance to the next mode the next time you turned it on. 

Example: If you last used low in "Daily" mode....it will always start again in strobe. Used Mid last time? It will always start in low. That requires memory. Why they decided (or screwed up the programming) to advance a mode is idiotic.


----------



## kengps (Feb 19, 2010)

I find it hard to believe those who say the M1X will out throw the M2S. Numbers I read are 34,900 Lux for M2S, and 26,800 for M1X. There is a very noticable difference in throw between 480 and 1000 lumens on the M2S. The Lux of the M2S is nearly identical to the RRT-1 (My testing in the field confirms the RRT-1 vs M2S) Comparos I seen with the M1X and RRT-1, the RRT-1 won hands down. But all that doesn't matter to me anymore because the UI is a total deal breaker. As mentioned before...the UI is illogical (I'm being nice). Why oh why would you give the light memory, only to use it to advance a mode each time you turn it on?? Here are some more facts....It will not work with AW 18650's. As described to me from the Dealer I bought it from "It is designed to work with batteries with a positive nub" All Jetbeam had to do was reduce the diameter of the positive contact by a millimeter or so to not hit the plastic case of the flat top batteries. So simple. I asked the Dealer about future fixes to the UI and was told that "Jetbeam designed it that way, and I don't think there is anything to change or fix" OK great. The dealer will not take the light back without a 20% restocking fee because "there is nothing wrong with it". If anyone can think of a reason why a UI would advance a mode on each start instead of the last one used...I'm all ears. Having to tighten the bezel before each start to enter Max mode , and then unscrew the bezel to get back to the memorized mode is completely insane. I don't believe for a minute that Jetbeam will leave the UI as it is. People are going to be upset when they realize it is for all practical purposes a one mode light with a troublesome procedure to turn the light to a lower setting (and get the last one used) I wonder if Jetbeam will update all the early buyers? Anybody have experience with Jetbeam in this regard?

I will echo what "I came to the light" said in his review regarding the UI..."This is a somewhat major defect" Amen


Funny....just got my new RRT-0 in the mail. You have to rotate the selector ring Clockwise from low-high. My RRT-1 you rotate Counter-Clockwise low to high. They should fire their UI designer immediately.


----------



## Fusion_m8 (Feb 19, 2010)

I also found it hard to believe at first, however, those lux readings were taken at 1m. But what will the lux readings be at 50m or more? If the M2S beam diverges more than the M1X as pointed out in the sunrise review, the M1X will out throw the M2S at further distances.

BUT what _really_ broke the deal for me with the M2S was the fact that after 3mins, it is actually a dimmer light than the M1X. :sigh: Which doesn't suit my needs at all since the last thing I want is to keep turning the light on/off to maintain the brightness, especially during times when I'm concentrating on locating _that noise_ that is coming from the bushes in my backyard...:sick2:


Perhaps I'm too impatient to wait for a M2Sv2 which hopefully would have eliminated the 3min turbo mode for a normal user-controlled hi-lo-15hz strobe mode.


----------



## BugOutGear_USA (Feb 19, 2010)

kengps said:


> Actually it does have memory....but in their infinite wisdom, they decided you would want to advance to the next mode the next time you turned it on.
> 
> Example: If you last used low in "Daily" mode....it will always start again in strobe. Used Mid last time? It will always start in low. That requires memory. Why they decided (or screwed up the programming) to advance a mode is idiotic.



This is not accurate.

The light will always come on in the mode you selected (Daily Mode) as long as you turn it back to Max Mode before shutting the light off. Example: If you want to keep strobe as your second mode turn head to max mode and shut light off. Want to go back in strobe mode? Click light on and turn head...strobe mode is back again. As long as you always turn the light back to Max Mode your secondary mode will be locked in.

Regards,
Flavio
BugoutGearUSA.com
JETBeam USA
888-221-5498


----------



## kengps (Feb 19, 2010)

I was referring to starting the light in Daily mode..... IOW you cannot start the light in daily mode at the last setting you had. If you do start the light in daily mode first...it will advance one mode ahead from the last one you used. My point being...why not just have the light start in daily mode at the last mode used? Why advance one mode? There are reasons why someone would want to start in low for example, without having to fire it up at 1000 lumens first!!! Can you see why someone may like to be able to turn the light on and off as needed in low for example without having to keep twisting the bezel to max and untwisting again for low every time you turn the light on? I think the UI engineer at Jetbeam is (the R word)...Here is another (the R word)-ed move. The RRT-1 and RRT-2 advances high to low by turning the ring CCW. The RRT-0 high to low you turn it CW! Did the engineer forget which way the ring turned on the other Raptor models? They need a new UI engineer. As some other reviewers have stated "this is a somewhat major defect" The light obviously has memory otherwise it would not start in the same daily mode when you go thru the procedure (1000 lumens when you turn it on, then unscrew the bezel to arrive at you last daily mode) So why not put that memory to use by having it work when you turn on the light in Daily mode without advancing one additional mode? And while they're at it....reduce the diameter of the positive contact by a millimeter or two, so it will work with AW 18650's without having to put spacers/magnets in there. 

Update: Just discovered the outer brass ring surrounding the center contact is inert (no continuity) So all they need to do is make the center positive contact stick up about 1.5-2mm higher to make contact with flat tops.


----------



## berry580 (Feb 19, 2010)

hmm... interesting
No idea what going on in Jetbeam's designing room.
I've always been a fan of Jetbeam's aesthetic design and their IBS UI (and the M version), they seem to be working backwards nowadays *sigh*


----------



## kengps (Feb 19, 2010)

They are beautiful lights. I think that is their biggest appeal...styling. Nothing else is as sexy as a jetbeam. Not sure about quality control as of late either. My RRT-1 had a raggedy aluminum ring lying under the head. It was a big fat 360 degree shaving that got left in there when it was turned. It was still loosely attached to the battery tube.







Lovely huh? Fortunately it didn't get into anything electrical.


----------



## SwarfWorks (Feb 19, 2010)

I agree the UI seems whacked out. It makes no common sense. I have a M1X and seems to work fairly well. Could they not have kept it the same (or at least close)??

I've been planning on selling the M1X for a new RRT3 when they finally come out, but this flaw makes me really nervous. I think the M1X rocks, but with the RRT3 having the UI of my RRT0 (selector ring), I'll buy on in a heartbeat. But if they do something dumb like the M2S(crewup), I'd be really fried. If they do it right, I'll be happy.


----------



## kengps (Feb 20, 2010)

Make sure you check the return policy of who you buy it from then . A dealer I purchased mine from says "Jetbeam designed it that way. There is nothing wrong with it, nothing to fix" So that'll be a 20% restocking fee. I purcased an expensive light once from Flashlight Connection, and they on the otherhand gave me a 100% refund when I didn't like it. Of course they require it be as new, etc. That is perfectly understandable. Dealers are supposed to back up the products they sell when the Manufacturer screws it up. Guess who'll I'll buy from next time? Plus, I'll never buy a newly introduced light until they have been reviewed first. I'm really waiting to see whether Jetbeam will step up to the plate and correct my UI. I have no doubt they'll be changing the programming on the UI. But will they update mine??? I'm guessing Jetbeam is from China? They spell "Tatical" differently there. Tried to email them directly but the big holiday runs through the 22nd, so no response yet.


----------



## I came to the light... (Feb 21, 2010)

I'm not sure if everybody understands this: the UI is glitchy, but the intended UI has not been changed. The fact that the UI sucks is a problem with these first defective M2Ss, but we have no reason to believe the entire series will be this way. As for dealers saying nothing is wrong with it, that's just plain wrong, and I would hope that analysis is revised, quickly. 

Flavio, I understand what you're saying, but the point is that the manual says otherwise. And the UI that the manual describes seems to be much easier to use. 

People, keep in mind that the comparison is to what I believe is the furthest throwing mass-production MC-E flashlight. Sure, the M2S doesn't break records in this new market, but it is still an excellent thrower. 

kengps, I actually had to change my conclusion, because I was sure the M2S would throw further due to the 1m lux readings. However, long-distance testing proved otherwise. I'll see if I can get a shot illustrating beam divergence tonight. 

I second that it will not work with AW 2600mAh 18650s. I think that is a failure on both ends - who would want to make a flashlight that only works with some people's supplies? And AW's new batteries clearly do not always improve contact as he says they do. However, I also tried 2xAW 2600 18650 with magnets to extend the contacts with no results, so I'm not sure what went wrong there. 

As for JETBeam's aesthetic design, I agree, it's some of the best out there. I would nominate the RRT-1 for the sexiest mass-production flashlight :thumbsup: My M1X's quality was also a step above Fenix and the crowd, but then again, I haven't had the same feeling about any of my other JETBeams. 



Fusion_m8 said:


> After reading this review and considering my needs, I've just changed my order of the M2S to the M1Xv4 with BugOutGear. These guys are fantastic to deal with! **HIGHLY RECOMMENDED**



+1, definitely my go-to guys for JETBeam. 

swrdply400mrelay, sure, just give me a minute to set it up.


----------



## kengps (Feb 21, 2010)

Agreed...the UI described in the manual is a logical sequence. If my light worked as described in the manual I would be tickled pink. ######'s "revision" to the instructions doesn't mean the light now "has nothing wrong with it. Nothing to fix. Jetbeam designed it that way. that'll be a 20% restocking fee if you return it" The UI as decribed in the instructions is great. It is the same as many other brands out there now which access turbo mode with a tight bezel, and the lower modes with a loosened bezel. And none of the other manufacturers require you to start in Turbo mode....or lose the saved "Daily Mode" memory. There are reasons why someone would want to turn-on the light in "low" first, without having to visit MAX mode first.


----------



## berry580 (Feb 21, 2010)

I think its a temporary fix, but you can't be serious that this sort of interface is 'normal'.


BugOutGear_USA said:


> This is not accurate.
> 
> The light will always come on in the mode you selected (Daily Mode) as long as you turn it back to Max Mode before shutting the light off. Example: If you want to keep strobe as your second mode turn head to max mode and shut light off. Want to go back in strobe mode? Click light on and turn head...strobe mode is back again. As long as you always turn the light back to Max Mode your secondary mode will be locked in.
> 
> ...


----------



## kengps (Feb 21, 2010)

I just want the dealer to back-up the product they sell and deal with Jetbeam on the customers behalf. (That's what Authorized dealers do...Hint Hint) I have a Fenix that uses this type of UI and it's great. The Jetbeam manual describes it working the same as the other manufacturer's Twist Bezel UI's. If you turn the M2S on in "Daily Mode"...it DOES remember the last mode used in "Daily Mode"...It just uses the memory to give you the next mode in line....instead of the last one used. An OBVIOUS programming glitch. The requirement to Start in MAX mode first, is not the way it was intended or described in the manual. Telling me that "oops, Jetbeam forgot a step in the manual" is no excuse.


----------



## swrdply400mrelay (Feb 21, 2010)

I came to the light... said:


> swrdply400mrelay, sure, just give me a minute to set it up.



Thanks, I was just wondering if this might be helpful just in case the beams have not fully converged yet at 1 m.


----------



## kengps (Feb 26, 2010)

Jetbeam has revised the M2S manual to reflect the screw-up (or poor design) of the UI. You cannot turn the light on in Daily mode without it advancing a mode. IOW it is impossible to turn the light on in Mid mode unless you last used strobe mode before turning the light off. The only way to get the mode you last used is to turn it on with the bezel tightened in Max mode, and then turn it out for the memorized mode last used. Insane. They either have no idea how other manufacturers do twisty UI's with memory....or they know they screwed it up, and changed the manual to fit the screw-up.


----------



## coolperl (Feb 26, 2010)

I think, they have revised the manual, because it's easier and cheaper for them. The whole pill exchange would be pretty expensive...

The proper UI in this kind of light is not a difficult thing to do. And I bet, Jetbeam knows exactly how to do it. They've just (by some reason) screw it up and due to high cost of this mistake, they don't want to fix it and pretend this is normal.

Every older Jetbeam light (Jet I pro, C-LE V1.2 & V2, Jet II Pro, etc.) had mode momory. The M2S doesn't require some special tricks - it should have the same implementation as these older lights. So the daily mode should work exactly the same as UI in older (above mentioned) lights, even IBS would be possible. The only difference is that "turbo" mode requires separate patch in circuit. That's not a big deal...

Why they screw it up so badly, I have no idea :shrug:. For sure this is a glitch in programing the processor. One additional single line in processor code would solve this problem.

This kind of glitch in UI and the company attitude will definitely kill a lot of future deals ...:thumbsdow


----------



## pwatcher (Mar 3, 2010)

coolperl said:


> I think, they have revised the manual, because it's easier and cheaper for them. The whole pill exchange would be pretty expensive...
> 
> The proper UI in this kind of light is not a difficult thing to do. And I bet, Jetbeam knows exactly how to do it. They've just (by some reason) screw it up and due to high cost of this mistake, they don't want to fix it and pretend this is normal.
> 
> ...


 
I'm surprised BugOutGear doesn't seem interested in addressing?


----------



## desertrat21 (Mar 3, 2010)

I have no Jetbeams... for no intentional reason I just never got around to grabbing one. The M1X was a huge temptation... I got very close to pulling the trigger on that one many times. The donut hole held me at bay since I had other MC-E lights that already fit the bill (and had better beamshapes). When the M2S was announced I finally felt myself moving toward the precipice. I was going to pull the trigger. Life's been busy and my purchase was delayed... now I see that the M2S seems to be getting more criticism than praise (and not just here). I guess my Jetbeam collection will have to remain a figment of imagination until they get some of these issues squared away. I'm concerned that such a major UI glitch could make it through testing and production without being caught. It seems like real-world use of the M2S would be an exercise in frustration.


----------



## Brigadier (Mar 3, 2010)

kengps said:


> Jetbeam has revised the M2S manual to reflect the screw-up (or poor design) of the UI. You cannot turn the light on in Daily mode without it advancing a mode. IOW it is impossible to turn the light on in Mid mode unless you last used strobe mode before turning the light off. The only way to get the mode you last used is to turn it on with the bezel tightened in Max mode, and then turn it out for the memorized mode last used. Insane. They either have no idea how other manufacturers do twisty UI's with memory....or they know they screwed it up, and changed the manual to fit the screw-up.


 

Well, based on my use with the Jet-III M and it's twisty UI, this is very puzzling as JetBeam has demonstrated that they can do it. :thinking:


----------



## kengps (Mar 3, 2010)

Jetbeam is entirely capable of building a proper UI. They simply screwed up somewhere between design and production. A bad line in the code caused it to advance a mode each time it's turned on. The thing to contemplate is the fact that Jetbeam will not fix the problem. They instead change the manual to cover their screw-up, and will quietly fix it on newer production. If you were in early you're SOL. As I recall there were early problems with the M1X, and RRT-0 also. AFAIK Jetbeam hasn't fixed anything. They revised the instructions on the RRT-0 with some "Battery conditioning" sequence to make it work right. Of course they fixed it on batch 2. Tell you this...I will not be buying the new SST-90 light. Good luck early buyers. And hope no problem shows up later on. You're on your own. This company has difficulty making flashlights that work the first time out. My opinion of Jetbeams now is that they put more money into styling than mechanics. Think Italian cars....beautiful garage queens.


----------



## ejot (Mar 3, 2010)

pwatcher said:


> +1, and I'm disappointed in BugOutGear too...


+2; Very disappointing and surprising, both from JB and BOG :thumbsdow
It's a shame, as I really like the couple JetBeams I've had and had counted on checking out more... :shakehead

edit: What is also remarkable is that this glitch was not noticed in testing or QC. Or they noticed and just released it anyway.


----------



## LowFlux (Mar 3, 2010)

My $0.02...I think Jetbeam wanted to update the M1X and had to make it different in more than just the emitter. Think about it - if it had the same UI, everyone who owns a M1X would be unhappy because they don't have the emitter or access to the newer light engine. If they gave it a different UI it would be different enough from the M1X that [not as many] people would cry foul and it could launch it's own appeal.

I just don't see why someone would want to turn a light on max before shutting it off to "save" your second mode. :shrug:

I'm a fan, I have the M1X, III-M, RRT 1 and 2; I just haven't had the interest in either the RRT-0 or M2S. :sigh: Here's hoping the RRT3 delivers...


----------



## kengps (Mar 3, 2010)

LowFlux said:


> I just don't see why someone would want to turn a light on max before shutting it off to "save" your second mode. :shrug:


 
I've seen that described as the procedure, but it is incorrect. You can turn the light off in any mode. But you must turn it on in Max mode first, to get back to your saved mode. Otherwise it will come on in the next mode inline.


----------



## ejot (Mar 4, 2010)

LowFlux said:


> My $0.02...I think Jetbeam wanted to update the M1X and had to make it different in more than just the emitter. Think about it - if it had the same UI, everyone who owns a M1X would be unhappy because they don't have the emitter or access to the newer light engine. If they gave it a different UI it would be different enough from the M1X that [not as many] people would cry foul and it could launch it's own appeal.


I just don't buy this. 

If the goal was the introduction of a new UI, it very likely (a) would be correctly documented in the first release of the manual and (b) would _make some sort of sense_. A thousand brief lumens in your face at 3am when you get up to use the john is hardly "appealing", something JetBeam presumably understands. There is simply no logical justification for the operation of this UI. 

A programming glitch is the only plausible explanation here. The sad part is the lack of responsibility taken by the manufacturer or vendor to "make it right".


----------



## kengps (Mar 4, 2010)

Just to add some new news.......Jetbeam finally answered my email after a week and a half.....told me they'd refer my complaint to the engineering department for "Evaluation of my claim" That was 1 week ago. Haven't heard a word on their "evaluation". Two and a half weeks, and counting. Personally I think they should have shipped me a new light-engine. They should exchange them all, and use the cores to build new ones with the corrected board/programming. I'm not asking for a whole new flashlight.


----------



## LowFlux (Mar 4, 2010)

kengps said:


> I've seen that described as the procedure, but it is incorrect. You can turn the light off in any mode. But you must turn it on in Max mode first, to get back to your saved mode. Otherwise it will come on in the next mode inline.


Thanks for the clarification, kengps. I empathize with the frustration you are going through, I know I'm disappointed too as I have high expectations for Jetbeam after the Jet-IIIM and M1X.



ejot said:


> I just don't buy this.
> 
> If the goal was the introduction of a new UI, it very likely (a) would be correctly documented in the first release of the manual and (b) would _make some sort of sense_. A thousand brief lumens in your face at 3am when you get up to use the john is hardly "appealing", something JetBeam presumably understands. There is simply no logical justification for the operation of this UI.
> 
> A programming glitch is the only plausible explanation here. The sad part is the lack of responsibility taken by the manufacturer or vendor to "make it right".


 If you purchase a HID, you wouldn't expect the light to have a low mode. It's the *M*ilitary *2* *S*earchlight. However, my point is not that it's an intuitive UI but instead that Jetbeam's goal was to do something to make the M2S different from the M1X. If it was identical in everything but emitter, M1X owners would be upset that there is no upgrade. As it is, I'm keeping my M1X - dark spot in the middle and all. :twothumbs

IIRC the manual was written here in the USA and not in China. I also think Jetbeam has overvalued the demand for output over an intuitive UI - CPFers want both.


----------



## Steve'O (Mar 5, 2010)

I shake my head after reading this thread. Yet another ****-up by jetbeam.
All on this forum who bought this light and are unhappy should return for a full refund. It may teach them an important lesson to get things correct first time.

What is jetbeam trying to achive with M2S anyway ?
Take a look at the reflectors in the review, its obvious from the photo's that the m2s reflector has a heavier textured finish than m1x reflector.
Is there any wonder it doesn't throw how it ort to throw.

Oh my, what were they thinking of with this one.


RRT-3 anybody.....????? :thinking:


Not for me Thanks !!


----------



## I came to the light... (Mar 13, 2010)

I too am disappointed the JETBeam elected not to fix the UI issue, and have added to the verdict in my review accordingly. At least searchlight use is not affected. 

On a separate note, while this light doesn't take us to new levels of throw, it is still the brightest single LED I've laid hands on. It even bests the output beast, the Legion II SST-50, for three minutes at least.


----------



## neoseikan (Mar 14, 2010)

I came to the light... said:


> I too am disappointed the JETBeam elected not to fix the UI issue, and have added to the verdict in my review accordingly. At least searchlight use is not affected.
> 
> On a separate note, while this light doesn't take us to new levels of throw, it is still the brightest single LED I've laid hands on. It even bests the output beast, the Legion II SST-50, for three minutes at least.



Hi, I will agree that M2S has a bigger head to get better throw ability.
How do you think about the total output at the first 3 mins?


----------



## I came to the light... (Mar 14, 2010)

neoseikan said:


> Hi, I will agree that M2S has a bigger head to get better throw ability.
> How do you think about the total output at the first 3 mins?



After the first three minutes the Legion II is brighter. As I've mentioned, the M2S's max mode is really only a short burst, unlike the Legion II, which I've seen tested at several hours in perfect regulation. 

I'm not trying to bash either light, but both do have their uses.


----------



## I came to the light... (Mar 18, 2010)

swrdply400mrelay said:


> Can you measure lux at 5m, then use that to calculate lux for 1 m?



I'm sorry, I said I would get this but got caught up then forgot. Anyway: 
M1X: 1,048
M2S: 1,192
The M2S is still higher, but the two are closer together, which supports my suggestion that the M2S diverges more rapidly.


----------



## Tora (Mar 26, 2010)

Look here for comparative outdoor shots of the M2S / M1X / Catatpult. They are shown at the end of this German reviewer's breakdown of the M2S.

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=jojoselected#p/u/22/JsS23h3FrEU

There are 113 other reviews - mostly of flashlights - many popular ones. :thumbsup:


----------



## Dioni (Mar 26, 2010)

Tora said:


> Look here for comparative outdoor shots of the M2S / M1X / Catatpult. They are shown at the end of this German reviewer's breakdown of the M2S.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=jojoselected#p/u/22/JsS23h3FrEU
> 
> There are 113 other reviews - mostly of flashlights - many popular ones. :thumbsup:


 
Great link, there are many good reviews. Thanks! :twothumbs


----------



## SHADE02 (Mar 25, 2011)

what about the m2s v2, with the 10min max output, and smooth reflector?


----------

