# The NEW H502 "Wet Poll" - Is Your H502 Waterproof?



## Bolster (Aug 18, 2012)

Edit: Poll now closed. See post #29 for analysis. 

Given we lost data on the previous "H502 Wet Poll," and given that I received several criticisms (with which I agree!) for setting up the poll badly, I propose we start over here. The objective is to see if there is a systematic leakage problem with the new H502, or if there's not a systematic leakage problem with H502. 

This poll will _not_ be anonymous as the previous one was--your username is attached. The purpose of this is to help reduce the number of "drive-by shootings" the poll may (or may not) be receiving. We should be able to match your vote to a post with a description (and hopefully a photograph) in the thread. 

You get to determine how you test your light, of course, but many people dip the light in a glass of water, or take it into the shower. (One brave soul sent his through the washing machine and dryer!) The H502 is rated IPX8, and according to ZL's website it _should_ survive 2 meters depth for 30 minutes. *PLEASE DESCRIBE YOUR TEST*, whatever it may be.

*PHOTOS are STRONGLY ENCOURAGED*. (I wish I could require them!) Photos help us verify real owners and real cases. (Anyone can just _say_ they own an H502 and that it does or doesn't leak.) Ideally we should be able to match your vote to a photo of either (a) the light during the test or (b) the light after the test, showing it either dry or wet inside. The poll's open for two weeks. We can do another later if we like. 

Also it would be interesting if you could list any bias you may have either toward or against ZL. Wouldn't it be interesting if fans found no leaks and detractors found leaks. 

Finally, to both "fans" and "haters" of ZL: Please don't fabricate data one way or the other. We're trying to get a valid measure here. Thanks!


----------



## Bolster (Aug 18, 2012)

I put my H502 in a glass of water for 15 minutes. The emitter was probably 1" below the surface of the water. I had no water ingress, so mine survived a shallow dunk. The test was weeks ago. The light continues to work as new and gets used regularly. 







During the test there were a few bubbles that appeared on the light (you can see them in the photo), but on examination I noticed they came from air trapped in the cooling fins that was coalescing into bubbles.

Full disclosure: My BIAS, to the extent I can identify it: I currently own 5 ZL headlamps and have given 2 as gifts to family so by definition I'm a "fan" because I've purchased multiples. I have not had any leaks or fails on these 7. (I also own Spark, Petzl, Irix, Energizer. The _only_ reason I don't own SF is because I don't use 123 cells) My postings here on CPF often reference the water ingress failures that ZL had on the early H501s (which I think was a major failing and largely contributed to CPF discussions of how ZLs are unreliable) and I think it would be deplorable if ZL didn't learn from that mistake. I also criticize ZL for refusing to fit a threaded bezel to their lights, and for spotty communications and slow customer service. So I guess that also makes me a "critic." So I'm a "fan/critic" of ZL. I have no association with any headlamp company.


----------



## Ezeriel (Aug 18, 2012)

I just opened the battery chamber and sucked on the lens of the light.... not waterproof at all.


----------



## Bolster (Aug 18, 2012)

Ezeriel said:


> I just opened the battery chamber and sucked on the lens of the light.... not waterproof at all.



Now I realize I needed two more response options: "I did *not* get my H502 wet and it is *not* waterproof," and to balance that, "I did *not* get my H502 wet and it *is* waterproof." I appreciate that you explained your methodology in the thread, thanks. (I foresee yet another poll: "Did you suck on your H502 and get air?")

I think maybe we count your vote as a "theoretical fail." Because in theory, if you can get air through the lens area, you would expect leakage at some depth or force, once external pressure is equivalent to what your mouth can generate. Fair enough?

Again, thanks for explaining your test in the thread. We need that from everyone who posts a pass or fail.


----------



## Bolster (Aug 18, 2012)

Ezeriel said:


> I just opened the battery chamber and sucked on the lens of the light.... not waterproof at all.



I've been pondering this test. How much suction can a human generate? The research was difficult because it almost always ended in someone making an oral sex joke, but I finally found some data. 

This response says -4 psig, which would be about 10 psi. This post says 7psi. 

How much pressure is at 2 meters depth, for which the ZL is rated (assume sea level)?

0 meters is 14.7 psi, and 2 meters is 17.6 psi, the difference being 2.9 psi. 

Someone check my math, but it appears human mouth suction can generate the inverse (ie, suck vs blow) of maybe 3x the pressure of being underwater at 2m. The implication would be that a human might be able to approximate a brief 6m test by sucking, if the assumptions and calcs are correct. (...and 2m makes my ears hurt!)


----------



## climberkid (Aug 18, 2012)

I placed my H502 in a Nalgene bottle with room temp water on M1 for 20 minutes. Tada! No leakage. Not sure how else to try it but I feel like I could be a little more rough. Maybe the shower test.

I will post pictures when I get wifi.

-Alex


----------



## Ezeriel (Aug 18, 2012)

Bolster said:


> Now I realize I needed two more response options: "I did *not* get my H502 wet and it is *not* waterproof," and to balance that, "I did *not* get my H502 wet and it *is* waterproof." I appreciate that you explained your methodology in the thread, thanks. (I foresee yet another poll: "Did you suck on your H502 and get air?")
> 
> I think maybe we count your vote as a "theoretical fail." Because in theory, if you can get air through the lens area, you would expect leakage at some depth or force, once external pressure is equivalent to what your mouth can generate. Fair enough?
> 
> Again, thanks for explaining your test in the thread. We need that from everyone who posts a pass or fail.



yeah mine was a total fail... and the most I could ever blow on one of the tire gauges was 4 psi.. and I was no where near putting out that kind of pressure, lol

it's harder to drink a McDonald's shake than is it to suck air through my H502



and before anyone asks, I just superglued the lens down, and yes I know I should have sent it back, and yes that is how zebralight gets feedback.. blah blah blah

I-forget-who, sent theirs back.. a 6 week wait


----------



## Esko (Aug 19, 2012)

Bolster said:


> The H502 is rated IPX8, and according to ZL's website it _should_ survive 2 meters depth for 30 minutes.



As I described in the lost thread, this is not IPX8, *it is only IPX7* (there is no time limit for IPX8).

I had some comments about the validity of the old tread but didn't have time to answer before the forum crashed and the thread was lost. I guess they might be unnecessary now.


----------



## Ezeriel (Aug 19, 2012)

quoting from zebralight's site, for the H502, under -Main Features and Specifications- it says

"Waterproof to IPX8 (2 meters, 30 minutes)"


----------



## Esko (Aug 19, 2012)

Esko said:


> (there is no time limit for IPX8)





Ezeriel said:


> quoting from zebralight's site, for the H502, under -Main Features and Specifications- it says
> 
> "Waterproof to IPX8 (2 meters, 30 minutes)"



It does say that, but it is wrong. IPX8 is for *continuous submerging* in manufacturer specified depth. If it can stand only 30 minutes, it can't be IPX8. It should be specified as IPX7, which is 1 meter for 30 minutes.

Wikipedia


----------



## Grizzman (Aug 19, 2012)

My H502D is still waterproof, or at least to the extent that I've tested it. I filled up my 32 oz Nalgene water bottle with luke warm water, and dropped in the light, which was turned onto the M1 setting. No bubbles were present coming from the light, but the head's fins definitely trap and hold onto bubbles quite well. 

I turned the bottle onto it's side so I could roll the light back and forth along the bottle's side from bottom to top, and opposite. This knocked off almost all the bubbles attached to the light's exterior. I then did some quick inversions of the bottle for more light agitation, and sat it down for about 20 minutes. 

I picked up the bottle, and shook it up and down, with a 12" stroke length at a speed of....ya, whatever. I shook it to the point that it was bouncing off the top and bottom of the bottle with more force than it would likely ever experience out in reality.

Result......no leaks, lens fogging, etc.

The only way to really prove that any of what I typed is true, would be a 20 minute video showing me doing it, and that would be way too much effort.

In short, it's waterproof, and now very clean.

Grizz


----------



## sadboy (Aug 19, 2012)

I can attest my H502d is waterproof based on my second attempt at a shallow dunk test. As I stated in the previous thread, my H502d functioned perfectly underwater and meets my particular needs as a waterproof flashlight should. This time around, the only observation I can add is that I'm not sure about some of the material's resilience to rust (in particular, the inner part of the rim surrounding the button). In any case, it's negligible. I always take extra measures whenever I dry my flashlights.

In short, for me, my H502d has no problem getting wet.


----------



## Philonous (Aug 19, 2012)

Stuck it in a glass of water for about 30 minutes, pressed switch, no issues.


----------



## Zeruel (Aug 19, 2012)

Dunked it, clicked on, switched modes, swished it around. No water seepage.

Blew hard into the switch recess with tail cap removed. No air seepage.


----------



## Bolster (Aug 20, 2012)

I tried the "suck" test around the lens and *got air* -- noticeably more air with the cap off than on (got air both ways, due to insufficient lip seal I'm guessing--seems I get a little air on anything I try, so that must be my lip seal). 
_
*On the other hand*_, I did a 15 minute dunk test with no issues. So now I have questions about whether getting air on the suck test should mean an automatic fail. According to my calculation above, the "suck" test appears it could be 3x more severe, pressure-wise, than Zebralight's 2m standard. And then there's the issue of lip seal, too. 

(And it's also possible I "blew the seals" by sucking on it so hard! Does ZL warranty for sucking too hard on your light? LOL!!)


----------



## eh4 (Aug 20, 2012)

I wish that I had an H502 to contribute a test result with, but I do have a few comments that might be of use.

The ZL website states that the H502 is made with the battery compartment "completely sealed" from the electronics.

On my H51 the switch will click down just from low air pressure during the suck test and stay depressed until I let the pressure equalize, kinda hurts my lips a bit. From that I'd bet that it's good for a couple or 5 meters of water for any reasonable time period.

Also, if anyone wants to do one, two or more meter testing then consider using pvc pipe. Cut length, cap bottom, set vertically, fill with hose.


----------



## Bolster (Aug 20, 2012)

Anybody remember the final score on the survey that got wiped out by the server crash? Wasn't it 4 fail out of 11?

Esko -- question -- are you sure "continuous submersion" doesn't include 30 minutes? At first read I thought "continuous submerging" meant basically it could stay underwater forever, but after thinking about this, that can't be so; virtually nothing would pass that. I'm wondering if it just means uninterrupted submersion at something greater than IPX7, for a time and depth as specified by the mfgr. I don't know, just asking. But as I read the link posted above, and parse it like Bill Clinton could parse "it depends on what the meaning of is, is" I can see a way to read the IP ratings so that 30min @ 2m (which is what ZL claims) > IPX7, because that's 30min @ 1m. Seems some wiggle room here for an IPX8 rating. How about 30min and one second at 1m plus 1mm, what would that be? Who's to say that 30min couldn't be considered "continuous"? Not being argumentative, just confused by the sloppy definition of IPX8. If 30 min isn't 'continuous,' is 31 minutes?

Given the ambiguity, I think maybe ZL should be claiming "IPX7 Plus." But I'd like to know the minimum standard to claim IPX8.


----------



## Esko (Aug 21, 2012)

Bolster said:


> Anybody remember the final score on the survey that got wiped out by the server crash? Wasn't it 4 fail out of 11?



That was the last I saw, and before the escalated discussion about the validity, it was 3 and 10 I think. There had been 3 described failures in different threads so IMHO the the most important information came through the number of passed and reported lights. The numbers were low of course and I doubt they will be much higher in new thread.



Bolster said:


> Esko -- question -- are you sure "continuous submersion" doesn't include 30 minutes? At first read I thought "continuous submerging" meant basically it could stay underwater forever, but after thinking about this, that can't be so; virtually nothing would pass that. I'm wondering if it just means uninterrupted submersion at something greater than IPX7, for a time and depth as specified by the mfgr. I don't know, just asking. But as I read the link posted above, and parse it like Bill Clinton could parse "it depends on what the meaning of is, is" I can see a way to read the IP ratings so that 30min @ 2m (which is what ZL claims) > IPX7, because that's 30min @ 1m. Seems some wiggle room here for an IPX8 rating. How about 30min and one second at 1m plus 1mm, what would that be? Who's to say that 30min couldn't be considered "continuous"? Not being argumentative, just confused by the sloppy definition of IPX8. If 30 min isn't 'continuous,' is 31 minutes?



A fair question... So, I went ahead and checked the actual standard (its number is 60529). The descriptions for "characteristic number 8" are really short, shorter than the descriptions for other numbers. Which is due to it's nature, it seems. The standard states that the conditions are based on agreements between manufacturer and user, but they must be more severe than for IPX7. Here is some short quotes:



> Test means:
> 
> Immersion tank
> Water-level: by agreement





> Duration of test:
> 
> by agreement



Well, thank you Wikipedia. According to the current Wiki article, there should be no time specified. However, in actual standard, manufacturer can specify it. So, the description in Wikipedia was wrong, and naturally, I was wrong, too. Sorry. The IPX8 rating that Zebralight provides is valid.

However, once we started to check the actual standard, I want to present one more short quote for IPX8 (emphasis mine and the clarification in brackets mine):



> Unless there is a relevant product standard, the test conditions are subject to agreement between manufacturer and user,
> but they shall be more severe than those prescribed in 14.2.7 (IPX7) and they shall take account of the condition that the
> enclosure will be continuously *immersed in actual use.*



So, unless there is a flashlight specific standard that says otherwise, IP Code standard states that the equipment must be usable in said depth. If you use your headlamp under water, how do you do it? By letting it stand still at the bottom of tank (which is the test method for IPX7)? No, you turn it on and off, adjust brightness, move around, look up, look down, etc. So, considering that, IPX8 is really more demanding than IPX7.


----------



## Bolster (Aug 21, 2012)

Esko said:


> A fair question...



Ah. Thanks for the research. Personally I am dubious of all Wikipedia entries, I suspect they're largely sourced by unemployed advocates of various stripes. Wikipedia has been "fully penetrated" as far as I'm concerned, and many have been the times that Wikipedia has led me astray. 



Esko said:


> There had been 3 described failures in different threads...



The three described failures... Q8iGunner (shower), DavidT (I don't remember how it failed, dunk maybe). Who was the third? Looking other old threads, not finding the third...

I found another report of "pass" in the ZLH502 thread not reported here. Jacklight said "my H502 survived a trip through the washer and dryer in my shorts pocket..."


----------



## Empire (Aug 21, 2012)

My iToaster has a waterproof case


----------



## Esko (Aug 21, 2012)

Bolster said:


> Ah. Thanks for the research. Personally I am dubious of all Wikipedia entries, I suspect they're largely sourced by unemployed advocates of various stripes. Wikipedia has been "fully penetrated" as far as I'm concerned, and many have been the times that Wikipedia has led me astray.
> 
> The three described failures... Q8iGunner (shower), DavidT (I don't remember how it failed, dunk maybe). Who was the third? Looking other old threads, not finding the third...
> 
> I found another report of "pass" in the ZLH502 thread not reported here. Jacklight said "my H502 survived a trip through the washer and dryer in my shorts pocket..."



The rather few Wikipedia articles I have read have usually been fairly accurate (as far as I know), or alternatively they have dealt with subjects that I have already known to require skeptical views... This however is a subject that should be easy to get right, because there is lots of people that have access to the actual standard and lots of people that need it in their work, too.

I remember that it was 3 failures in the lost thread. Two before it and the third one posted in the thread, stating that he is the third (I have a cached version at home and if needed, can check it late tomorrow). Based on this old response from riccardo.dv, I guess he was the third (or first) one.


----------



## Bolster (Aug 21, 2012)

Esko said:


> ...riccardo.dv, I guess he was the third (or first) one.



Good find, thanks.


----------



## skycamnz (Aug 25, 2012)

My ZL 502 has survived all the water I've thrown at it so far. Will make further comment in the thread http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?342695-Attempted-drowning-ZL-H502-going-down soon once I've resurrected it


----------



## fiberguy (Aug 25, 2012)

I didn't give mine any of the fancy IPX-8 tests or anything like that, but it's survived 3 nights of working outdoors in the rain now. Probably 30 minutes to an hour/night. When I remember, I'll bring it in after work and give it a nice little dunk or wear it while I shower. I'll get back with more updated info when that happens.


----------



## Jacklight (Aug 25, 2012)

My wife sent my 502D through the washer and dryer in my shorts pocket. It survived. When I opened the battery compartment it was dry inside and there was no sign of moisture in the len's area either, but its possible the dryer had something to do with that. That was about a month ago and so far no problems.


----------



## sbbsga (Aug 30, 2012)

I was washing my hands earlier and decided to try my luck after nearly 2 months of ownership. Never had it properly wet before, the worst was droplets from wet hands.

The H502 had just been turned off from H1 after a few minutes of usage. It was a little warm when water flowed around it. I patted it dry, turned it around so the glass faces me and I saw a drop of water behind the glass. Oops!

I know how it got in so I decided to tap the droplet to the edge of the glass and turned it on H1. After a few seconds, it was pushed out. Now, the exit was either at glass-bezel or bezel-body or both. So I guess the entry point was around there too. Anyway, a little bit was still left inside after the initial drying, so I repeated the steps until no more can be seen. I also blew out the water around the button just in case.

All the modes and programability are still fine; no dampness in the battery compartment and it is still on H1 after a fresh Eneloop just to be sure.

It failed IPX-8 but survived. Your mileage may vary. All the best!


----------



## beastie boar (Sep 2, 2012)

Since my last post in this thread disappeared during the latest (?) server crash and because scientifically valid experiments must be repeatable, I redid the test with my H502d about 3 hours ago, albeit with some "slight" enhancements.
Condition of sealing prior to test: oring lubed with olive oil some days ago (yeah I know that some inferior oring materials might dissolve, but the problem did not occur yet with any of my lights to which I applied it [surefire, streamlight, zebralight arc, fenix, [email protected]].
- 15 min on H1 to heat up light
- turn light off and without any delay sink it in rain water barrel filled with more than 47 cm of water and clip turned sideways, at which light is attached to dental floss for 40 min
- pull on dental floss rapidly so light is lifted out of water at let it immediately sink again; repeated 50 times; during this procedure the light turned on twice due to the forced involved
- sink light for another 60 mins
- take light out of water, rinse with tap water and let it dry while being turned on

Result: Not the slightest signs of water ingress detectable until now. If this should change I will surely post an update.
No photos, sorry. You'll have to take my word for it.


----------



## skycamnz (Sep 2, 2012)

beastie boar said:


> Since my last post in this thread disappeared during the latest (?) server crash and because scientifically valid experiments must be repeatable, I redid the test with my H502d about 3 hours ago, albeit with some "slight" enhancements.
> Condition of sealing prior to test: oring lubed with olive oil some days ago (yeah I know that some inferior oring materials might dissolve, but the problem did not occur yet with any of my lights to which I applied it [surefire, streamlight, zebralight arc, fenix, [email protected]].
> - 15 min on H1 to heat up light
> - turn light off and without any delay sink it in rain water barrel filled with more than 47 cm of water and clip turned sideways, at which light is attached to dental floss for 40 min
> ...



Think it's safe to say your light has successfully passed the waterproof test! A very testing experiment. Great work!


----------



## Bolster (Sep 2, 2012)

Poll Summary: 

I set this poll to run for two weeks, and it's now closed. It got nearly 1,500 views, so it received plenty of exposure. 

The previous (anonymous) poll, which got lost in the server crash, ended with 4 fails out of 11 trials (36% fail). There was some concern expressed that the anonymous poll allowed 'fans' or 'haters' to post bogus tests. So with this repeat non-anonymous poll, we have *1 fail *(sbbsga) *out of 10 tests *(10% fail), and I think the tests are fairly well described. I realize that the poll results say 2 fails out of 11 tests, but one person reporting a "fail" based it on being able to force air through the lens area with the "suck-test", without conducting an actual wet-test. My wet-test passed, and I could also force air through the lens area, so that puts the suck-test in doubt as an accurate "proxy" test. The suck-test may be a much more rigorous test than intuition tells us. 

Then we have the issue of two water fails being reported in other threads: Q8iGunner, & Riccardo.dv. [Edit: DavidT's issue, previously reported here, was not water related, so removed.] Why these users did not post in this thread is a mystery. 

The issue of more fails reported in the anonymous test is also interesting. It does raise the issue of how many of those reports were drive-by shootings (or drive-by helpings). Unless of course they were all from people who decided not to answer the new poll, for some unknown reason. 

Personally, I have lost faith in anonymous polls here on CPF. I think the opportunity for monkey-business it allows, is too large. I also have concerns that brand loyalty, or brand hatred, causes people to fudge data to help or hurt a favored or disliked brand. This makes no sense to me, but, the possibility exists. I propose that polls in the future ask people to identify themselves by screen name. (We're all anonymous with our usernames anyway). At least a non-anonymous poll allows readers to probe for information, ask follow-up questions, etc, which I think is good.

Regards whether ZL has a "problem" or has "no problem" with the H502 waterproofing is, of course, up to your interpretation. It's definitely a "low-n" test with few responses, but it's better than wild speculation. If you go strictly on this poll, you might think 10% is in the acceptable range for uncontrolled self-tests of unknown rigor, or you may not. It's hard to come to a conclusion on the basis of a single clear fail. On the other hand, if you count both reported fails in this thread (even the suck-test one, which would mean you'd have to count mine as a failure too, even though mine passed a dunk test, so that would make it three) and add them to the three others reported elsewhere, that seems like a lot of fails. However, in that case, you don't have a denominator, just a numerator. You don't know if that's 4 (or 6) out of 13, or 130, or 1300. So this poll didn't give us any unambiguous answers, but I think the safest interpretation is to take the poll at face value, which is one fail of ten, and to admit we need about 4x that data before we could start having much confidence in the results.


----------



## climberkid (Sep 2, 2012)

I am glad you did the poll again. You led discussion and responded very well. Thanks for taking the time you have to help the forum. I wish we had more people who spent as much time on here as some of us do! 


-Alex


----------



## Grizzman (Sep 3, 2012)

Unfortunately, it would take several magnitude more than the responses we received in this pole to come to an adequate conclusion as to the effectiveness of the design.

All I can say is that if you are concerned with your light......get it wet and see what happens, preferrably not right before you'll need it for real.

Thanks for the effort, Bolster.

Grizz


----------



## Esko (Sep 3, 2012)

Bolster said:


> The previous (anonymous) poll, which got lost in the server crash, ended with 4 fails out of 11 trials (36% fail).



I am sorry, I didn't read your previous question carefully enough (not my native language). I believe it was 4 fails and 11 passes, ie. 15 trials.

Once we started to speculate, I would like to add a few points.

If your light fails the test, it is of course a lot more probable that you tell about it in discussion forum. However, how many active CPF members always perform waterproof tests to their new lights? I doubt that it is very common. Now, how many of those people did buy this special reflectorles full flood headlamp? My guess is, only a little fraction of those people. I believe we are talking about a pretty small group of people here.

Now, some reports and concerns pop up and a poll is created. If you don't regularly test your lights but decide to do it AFTER a poll is set up, it is much more probable that you report the results, whether it was a fail or a pass.

Another thing that I would like to ask is, how common it is that once a new light is released (regardless of brand), users report water leaking into those new and newly released lights? A single report? Or a couple reports? Is that normal? Common? Every month? Once a year? This is a sincere question since I seldom follow discussions regarding single flashlight models, and have never seen these kind of reports before.


----------



## Bolster (Sep 3, 2012)

I'm fairly certain the previous poll didn't get up to n=15, but I could be wrong. The reason I think this, is I remember fretting that "11 people isn't very many to answer the poll." 



Esko said:


> If your light fails the test, it is of course a lot more probable that you tell about it in discussion forum.


 
Very true. This is where problems will pop up for sure. For example, I've noticed several long-running discussions of problems with the SF Saint. It's generally regarded as a very high quality light, but you might not get that impression if you read all the failure reports here on CPF. I'm suspicious it's as you say, a quality light with vocal critics. 



Esko said:


> Now, how many of those people did buy this special reflectorles full flood headlamp? My guess is, only a little fraction of those people.


 
Perhaps; on the other hand, with the main H502 thread logging 140 _thousand_ views, we can say there was a lot of interest in the H502, and that might translate into high sales. Only ZL knows. 



Esko said:


> Another thing that I would like to ask is, how common it is that once a new light is released (regardless of brand), users report water leaking into those new and newly released lights? A single report? Or a couple reports? Is that normal? Common?



The frequency is totally and completely biased, of course, by the general interest in the light and how many people purchase it. Nobody's reporting the Dosun headlamps leak--hardly anybody owns them. Whereas ZL is far and away the most popular, most owned, and most discussed light on this forum, so inevitably there would be more discussions of failures of ZL, _even if the base rates of all lights were exactly the same. 
_
That's why the denominator (that is, the question, "out of how many?") is so important. You can't draw conclusions by examining the numerator alone. The denominator corrects for frequency of ownership (popularity). 

It's remarkable, but you'll have people look at this poll like this, that has a numerator and a denominator, and say, "you can't determine anything by that" (with some justification, since it's low-n) and then they'll jump to a conclusion based on examining the numerator all by itself (in other words, just the number of times they see a problem mentioned, without factoring ownership size). I believe that's called the "baserate fallacy," that people are prone not to consider base rates before coming to conclusions about incidents.


----------



## Esko (Sep 3, 2012)

You are right, we were talking about 11 trials only. It is weird though, since I think I reviewed the results first at 3 fails and 10 passes, and later with 4 fails and 11 passes. Not sure any more. :shrug:



Bolster said:


> Esko said:
> 
> 
> > Another thing that I would like to ask is, how common it is that once a new light is released (regardless of brand), users report water leaking into those new and newly released lights? A single report? Or a couple reports? Is that normal? Common?
> ...



I guess I didn't ask precisely enough. I am not talking about headlamps only. 4Sevens flashlights are popular in CPF. How many models have received leaking reports as new? What about Surefires (another popular brand)? Fenix? Sunwayman? Eagletac? Nitecore? Jetbeam? Thrunite? Were they considered as "normal"? The flashlight section has ten times more threads and answers than headlamp section, but I don't browse those threads much. I wish someone could enlighten me about the leaking issues. How common are they among new lights?


----------



## Beacon of Light (Sep 26, 2012)

I will not purposely try to submerge my H502 or even my new H51s. I did by accident leave a H50 in my pocket of shorts I had packed on my trip to California a few weeks ago. It was in a leg pocket so I didn't know it was in there. Well after pulling the laundry out of the dryer my heart sank when I saw the H50. The tailcap was closed so thank God I didn't back out the threads to interrupt parasitic drain. I opened the cap and everything was dry, but I wasn't convinced no damage was done, so I put cap back on and tightenened it and voila! The darned thing worked like if nothing ever happened! I remember reading this thread about the H502s not being waterproof so I was sure the older H50 was most definitely NOT waterproof considering it was an older inferior design. Well I was pleasantly surprised and I will never make that mistake again.


----------



## Cunha (Oct 15, 2012)

Backing the cap off should not make your light fail to be waterproof. The O ring only makes contact with the side of the tail cap anyways, it doesn't need to be compressed by the tail cap to create a seal. It should be fine. 

If I didn't trust my Zebralights to be waterproof I would just throw them away. I suck tested mine and then put it in water and it did not get water inside.


----------



## vtunderground (Oct 18, 2012)

For what it's worth... I've used my Zebralight SC51F under 6' of water, and it hasn't leaked. I personally trust Zebralight as much (or more) than most other non-dive lights.


----------



## moozooh (Feb 27, 2013)

I haven't posted here, have I... I recently got another H502d as a birthday gift to a friend; it had a stiffer switch with rubber cover that felt a little differently.

Anyway, I put both mine and the new one under a faucet—quite a better test than merely dunking it in a glass in my opinion. While they were covered with the water stream, I rotated the lights to make sure all sides are thoroughly drenched, pressed the switch a number of times, and so on. No signs of leaking anywhere.


----------



## lightcycle1 (Mar 1, 2013)

I have a daily used 1.5-2 yr old H51nt that's out for repair. The switch failed or something came loose with the electronics in the head.

I ordered a new H502d to use while the H51 is out of my hands. I'll have 2 of them when I get my original back or the replacement. 
I will not intentionally submerge either one to attempt to force a failure to prove a point.

I have had my H51 out in pretty good rains, no problems. The worst case scenario for me will be that I drop either one in the drink for a few moments while night fishing
or something stupider, like in the toilet. (Which will make me grimace and go ewwww but I will happily fish it out by hand.)

So if it happens to take on water through accidental exposure and it fails, I'll take it up with Zebralight at that time. Zebralight addressed my problems with my H51 promptly
and with no hassle so I'm not worried about their response to any failure of any kind.


----------



## Bolster (Mar 2, 2013)

lightcycle1 said:


> I will not intentionally submerge either one to attempt to force a failure to prove a point.



Ah, but your timidity _does_ prove a point nonetheless! J/K, perfectly understandable. Still, your statement borders on the melodramatic. I don't submerge to force a failure. If the light wishes to fail of its own volition, I merely give it the chance while it's still under warrantee. And happily, none of my ZLs have failed. I'm now of the mind that _any_ light with an IPX7 or 8 rating should get a dunk when new. I'd rather find out immediately and rectify the problem straight away.

Do I dunk out-of-warrantee lights? Not on your life!


----------



## lightcycle1 (Mar 4, 2013)

Nothing timid about it I only have 2 ZLs 1 is out for repair right now and I don't feel like soaking the other 1 in water having it possibly fail and having to ship that 1 out and waiting another 6 to 8 weeks for ZL to return it under warranty replacement. 

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


----------



## rojos (Mar 4, 2013)

Bolster said:


> I'd rather find out immediately and rectify the problem straight away.
> 
> Do I dunk out-of-warrantee lights? Not on your life!



Yup. Better to find out now while it's under warranty than later when it's out of warranty.

Would be nice if Zebralight's warranty was 3 years instead of just one. That would help a lot with peace of mind.


----------



## Cavannus (Mar 30, 2013)

My H502w has just survived a complete cycle in my washing machine. Complete cycle included the highest "white" temperature mode, pre-wash, extra-rince (edit: no spin though).

It seems that mine is actually waterproof, I don't see any trace of moisture behind the lens or in the battery compartment and it works normally.
:twothumbs


----------



## pyro1son (Mar 30, 2013)

Cavannus said:


> My H502w has just survived a complete cycle in my washing machine. Complete cycle included the highest "white" temperature mode, pre-wash, extra-rince, highest spin mode.
> 
> It seems that mine is actually waterproof, I don't see any trace of moisture behind the lens or in the battery compartment and it works normally.
> :twothumbs




I think that should be the new IPX8 standard


----------



## Cavannus (Apr 1, 2013)

Actually I didn't dare to test my Zebra under the shower -- so when I saw the lamp behind the window of the washing machine, I thought I had to buy a new one! I saw it during the rince phase, so I just had time to turn off the spin mode.


----------



## Woods Walker (Apr 5, 2013)

lightcycle1 said:


> Nothing timid about it I only have 2 ZLs 1 is out for repair right now and I don't feel like soaking the other 1 in water having it possibly fail and having to ship that 1 out and waiting another 6 to 8 weeks for ZL to return it under warranty replacement.
> 
> Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2



He does have a point.


----------



## Tre_Asay (Jan 16, 2016)

I am going to go ahead and raise this thread up, I just got my H502c a few days ago. 
It worked great on a campout over the weekend using it as a flashlight even though it was below freezing and I was probably not getting more than 70 lumens out of the alkaline battery. Well Today I went ahead and took it into a hot tub and also a swimming pool. 
It was at about 1 meter depth continuous for over 30 minutes (with a lot of button pressing to change modes) and at one point more than 2 meters for a few seconds in cold (55 F) water. I have it with me now and there is no sign of moisture behind the window or in the battery compartment. The tailcoat has a very robust o-ring so I was mostly worried about the head at the aperture and button.

I think that this light will serve me well for a while, and I think that I would buy another one if it needs upgrading or replacing.
:twothumbs


----------

