# EagleTac T100C2



## AardvarkSagus (Apr 8, 2009)

Well EagleTac is at it again. This time it's the T100C2. It even handles 18650s! What'dya think?

CLICK FOR SLIDESHOW


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (Apr 8, 2009)

That's great!

Thanks for sharing.


----------



## EngrPaul (Apr 8, 2009)

Nice, thanks for the introduction.

However, I'm hoping for a 3X MP-E light from them. :naughty:


----------



## Mjolnir (Apr 8, 2009)

Wow. Eagletac is sure going to have a hit on their hands! 
It is a little more than the P100C2, but the 18650 capability is definitely worth it. If the P100C2 is any indication, this should be fully regulated on both CR123's and 18650s. 
The pictures show it as being a decent amount larger than the P100C2. It seems like the modes are switched by a spring loaded ring on the back of the head, since the threads are anodized.

Thankfully, this light has a "Pre-centered emittor [_sic_] for Pleasing Beam" , so it hopefully won't have the off centered emitter issue that the P100A2 was reported to have.


----------



## FlashCrazy (Apr 8, 2009)

A great feature is that it's regulated on a single 18650... not too many multi-battery option lights are. :twothumbs


----------



## Toaster (Apr 8, 2009)

The included battery magazine to stop rattle with primary cells is a nice touch for such an inexpensive light. Kudos to Eagletac for that. And also for giving us a light that is regulated on both CR123s and 18650s and is guaranteed to do so from the manufacturer. It's about time already! :thumbsup:


----------



## BigBluefish (Apr 8, 2009)

Another neat light from EagleTac.:thumbsup:

But I'm still waiting for the "P100C" - the compact, single cell version of the P100C2.


----------



## Mjolnir (Apr 8, 2009)

If Eagletac could only manage to get these lights in some brick and mortar stores (where surefires are sold), they would probably be able to sell a fair amount of them. 
On a somewhat unrelated note, Flashcrazy, I noticed that you don't sell the Eagletac T10L on your site. Is there any specific reason for this?

Also, the specs state that the T100C2 will have 35 percent more throw than the P100C2. Does that mean this light will have nearly 10,000 lux at 1 meter?


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 8, 2009)

Nice slide show AardvarkSagus!

I really like the idea of the CR123 battery magazine! I wonder how many other flashlights it's going to fit? :thinking:


----------



## kyhunter1 (Apr 8, 2009)

It's good to finally get to see some pics and specs on this light. Ive known about it since last week. Should be a awesome light. With the awesome beam and throw in a smooth reflector, and flat regulation on single 18650 and primary cells, Eagletac will put alot of the other manufacturers out of business if they dont SHAPE UP and give us what we want. 
as soon as it is available!!!!!!!!!


----------



## EPVQ30 (Apr 8, 2009)

i like the smaller size of the P series.. it works for my applications.
however, the features on the T series are awesome!


----------



## MichaelW (Apr 8, 2009)

I am really liking the Cree xp-e.
Hopefully in the near future EagleTac will have neutral white or warm white offerings, via the xpe.


----------



## FlashCrazy (Apr 9, 2009)

Mjolnir said:


> If Eagletac could only manage to get these lights in some brick and mortar stores (where surefires are sold), they would probably be able to sell a fair amount of them.
> On a somewhat unrelated note, Flashcrazy, I noticed that you don't sell the Eagletac T10L on your site. Is there any specific reason for this?
> 
> Also, the specs state that the T100C2 will have 35 percent more throw than the P100C2. Does that mean this light will have nearly 10,000 lux at 1 meter?


 
I think so too... great performance/quality for the money. The P100C2 is in the neighborhood of 6000 lux, so I'd expect about 8000 lux from the T100C2. 
I pm'ed you the answer to your other question to me... just because that would be Dealer-specific discussion and per CPF rules I can't post that here, only in the Dealer forum on CPF Marketplace. :thumbsup:


----------



## Chao (Apr 9, 2009)

Thanks for the news, T100C2 also use C850 light engine, same engine as in P100C2:thumbsup:


----------



## PhantomPhoton (Apr 9, 2009)

I'd like to see a runtime test before I'll believe it is fully regulated on both CR123 and 18650. But if it is... :goodjob: Eagletac.

Now What I'd really like to see is a fully regulated 18650 P series (EDC-able, no big head) with a neutral XP-E.

Oh yeah and a Tri (or more) XPE would be nice too. Using the same M2 2x18650 body and selector ring... and of course the option for a neutral tint. :devil:


----------



## makuyo (Apr 9, 2009)

i think it does regulate on both CR123 and 18650, the difference is just a larger head and a larger body to accommodate 18650.. thats all... just a big brother for P100C2...

btw, i thought the M2 does come with triple XP-E R2 led?
its the M2Xc4 i guess for that... the other one is M2C4 uses a P7 led...

i've seen it here..
refer 2nd post on that page...
http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/971884/+20
(hopefully its ok for me to put this link)


----------



## MichaelW (Apr 9, 2009)

They are xr-e's
They are driven really hard on turbo.

If EagleTac did make a triple xp-e, then the diameter of the head could come down.


----------



## makuyo (Apr 9, 2009)

MichaelW said:


> They are xr-e's
> They are driven really hard on turbo.
> 
> If EagleTac did make a triple xp-e, then the diameter of the head could come down.




guess it is XR-E for the tri-R2..

does the new T100C2 is using the same driver like P100C2..??


----------



## harddrive (Apr 9, 2009)

Looks great. The P100C2 has become one of my favourite lights and I think this could be up there too :thumbsup:


----------



## phantom23 (Apr 9, 2009)

Why they made it bigger, why? P100C2 is so great because it's small.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Apr 9, 2009)

Bigger head = better focus. Bigger body = 18650 support & weapons mount capability.


----------



## phantom23 (Apr 9, 2009)

But also bigger, less EDC flashlight. There's a huge difference in hand between 141x31mm and 124x25mm. Check these two flashlights. First one is 121x26mm (almost like P100), second one - 130x31mm (10mm shorter than T100). Difference is really noticeable. For those who wants better focus and mount capability - T10LC2 is perfect.
P100C2 with 18650 battery tube wouldn't be any fatter because current body (2xCR123 or 17670) is thinner than head.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 9, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> Bigger head = better focus. Bigger body = 18650 support & weapons mount capability.


Exactly, couldn't have said it better myself! 
I'm guessing  we'll se a remote switch tail cap available for this model someday.


----------



## Mjolnir (Apr 9, 2009)

phantom23 said:


> But also bigger, less EDC flashlight. There's a huge difference in hand between 141x31mm and 124x25mm. Check these two flashlights. First one is 121x26mm (almost like P100), second one - 130x31mm (10mm shorter than T100). Difference is really noticeable. For those who wants better focus and mount capability - T10LC2 is perfect.
> P100C2 with 18650 battery tube wouldn't be any fatter because current body (2xCR123 or 17670) is thinner than head.



If the T100C2 was smaller, it would be a P100C2. I don't see any downside of the light being larger. People who want a smaller light should buy the P100C.
I think it is good that they are offering a light that can fit 18650s.


----------



## phantom23 (Apr 9, 2009)

But it's very similar to T10LC2. People who want bigger light buy T10LC2, those who want smaller - P100C2. But what about those who want smaller but still 18650 compatible light? Jetbeam Jet-III ST is a little bit expensive and has inefficient circuit (and not much throw).


----------



## VF1Jskull1 (Apr 9, 2009)

another single 18650 to add to my light collection.


----------



## TONY M (Apr 9, 2009)

It sounds like a fantastic light at a fantastic price. If it really has great regulation on 18650s then


----------



## bioman (Apr 9, 2009)

Is this a budget version of the T10LC2?


----------



## makuyo (Apr 9, 2009)

bioman said:


> How is this one different that the T10LC2?



i believe the factor is a much more better flat regulation on 18650..
it really beats out other lights with flat regulation in it's class...:thumbsup:
well it is proven already with the P100C2 on 17670, i dont see why not on the T100C2..


----------



## Mjolnir (Apr 9, 2009)

Phantom23, the T10LC2 costs $20 dollars more than the T100C2, and does not have flat regulation on an 18650. Therefore, it is _not_ the same as the T10LC2... It has a different LED, and costs less. It also cannot tailstand, while the T10LC2 can. 
They do not fill the same niche. I think there is definitely a place for the T100C2 as it is now.


----------



## phantom23 (Apr 9, 2009)

T100C2 has 45% of flat and 55% with no regulation. It's the matter of emitter Vf which is lower in XP-E.

I think there's more space for P100LC2(?) because there's no simple, cheap, bright and 18650 powered flashlight on the market.


----------



## PhantomPhoton (Apr 9, 2009)

phantom23 said:


> I think there's more space for P100LC2(?) because there's no simple, cheap, bright and 18650 powered flashlight on the emarket.



I agree. Jetbeam had the ST for awhile, but that's it for quality made EDC 18650 lights. 

Does someone have a link to a runtime graph of the P100C2 on 17670? Maybe I missed that review. :shrug:


----------



## VF1Jskull1 (Apr 9, 2009)

i'm hoping someone can compare it to the Urnabeam Beacon with level select rotary tailswitch.


----------



## phantom23 (Apr 9, 2009)

Here you go.

Jetbeam is almost 2x more expensive, has inefficient circuit and much less throw.


----------



## makuyo (Apr 9, 2009)

PhantomPhoton said:


> I agree. Jetbeam had the ST for awhile, but that's it for quality made EDC 18650 lights.
> 
> Does someone have a link to a runtime graph of the P100C2 on 17670? Maybe I missed that review. :shrug:




here u go.. post #95
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/225153&page=4
hehe, thats a cool looking regulation for me
(ops.. im late a lil bit)


----------



## Mjolnir (Apr 9, 2009)

phantom23 said:


> T100C2 has 45% of flat and 55% with no regulation. It's the matter of emitter Vf which is lower in XP-E.



First of all, where are you getting these numbers? The T100C2 has the same driver as the P100C2, which was shown to have virtually flat regulation for far more than 45% of the runtime. According to the graphs (in the "eagletac P100 series unboxing and first impressions" thread), it maintains constant output for the majority of its runtime, then drops steeply and seems to go into a very low mode for a short time. I don't know where you are getting your "45% regulated" number from, since I don't see any evidence of this anywhere. 
I also don't really see what you are saying about the head being too large. It seems only a few millimeters wider than the body tube. I don't see how they could have designed the head any thinner and still had it fit on top of the body tube, expecially since the mode switching is achieved by a ring at the back of the head. Remember, they also have to fit o-rinngs and threads on the head, which adds width. I doubt they could make the head (or the entire light) any thinner without compromising some aspect of the light. It takes a bigger battery, so it is going to be somewhat larger.


----------



## phantom23 (Apr 9, 2009)

As I said - it's the matter of Vf. Cree doesn't check it so it varies much. With low Vf emitter regulation wil be excellent. With high Vf - 45% regulated (manufacturer claim), 55% unregulated.

P100C2 has 25mm diameter. Jet-III ST has 25mm as well and fits everything nicely.


----------



## harddrive (Apr 9, 2009)

phantom23 said:


> As I said - it's the matter of Vf. Cree doesn't check it so it varies much. With low Vf emitter regulation wil be excellent. With high Vf - 45% regulated (manufacturer claim), 55% unregulated.
> 
> P100C2 has 25mm diameter. Jet-III ST has 25mm as well and fits everything nicely.



The manufacturer claims by using an 18650 you "ADD up to 45% constant output runtime". The way I understand it they are saying you get 45% longer regulated output by using the 18650 (presumably compared to 2 x cr123). I don't think they are saying the regulated output is only for the first 45% of the runtime.


----------



## 1996alnl (Apr 10, 2009)

You know what guys

I'm really starting to like EagleTac..


----------



## PhantomPhoton (Apr 10, 2009)

Thanks for the links guys. If it is indeed the same driver... well then it is very tempting. Hmmmmm.... ...


----------



## 276 (Apr 10, 2009)

I like it.:twothumbs


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Apr 10, 2009)

I am fairly certain it is the same exact driver for the new light as the P100C2. Everyone was incredibly happy with the output and regulation on that one for both 2xCR123A and 17670 (and 2xRCR123 if I remember correctly) Why would they want to throw a wrench in the works and use something different?


----------



## Phaserburn (Apr 10, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> I am fairly certain it is the same exact driver for the new light as the P100C2. Everyone was incredibly happy with the output and regulation on that one for both 2xCR123A and 17670 (and 2xRCR123 if I remember correctly) Why would they want to throw a wrench in the works and use something different?


 
Agreed. The runtime graph for the P100C2 using a 17670 was ruler flat. Looks good to me!

They made the head bigger to get, "35% more throw".

Looks like they got the led centered in the slideshow. Sorry, I couldn't resist that one...


----------



## makuyo (Apr 10, 2009)

my P100C2 had a good centered led... 
it happens that the P100C2 produces a much more pronounce donut hole in the beam..
i read that some off-centered emitters are better because of less noticeable donut hole...
hopefully this problem is solved with the new reflector for T100C2 since the donut hole in my P100C2 is really bugging me!!


----------



## Dole (Apr 10, 2009)

This really looks like a sweet light for the price but I'm a little bit worried by things I've heard and problems with the P100 and whatnot... Can we assume that the T100C2 is going to be flawless?


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Apr 10, 2009)

What problems have you heard about the P100 series? I hadn't heard any of those yet. I know the P10 series had some slight issues but nothing earth shattering.


----------



## euroken (Apr 12, 2009)

It seems there are a lot of similarities between the lights, looks, function, and performance...quite a bit of difference in price though..


----------



## harddrive (Apr 12, 2009)

But it looks like the "cheaper" one will have a smoother beam and be regulated on a 18650. :twothumbs


----------



## EPVQ30 (Apr 12, 2009)

unless this light is going to be used on the field, i will not upgrade my P series any time soon.


----------



## 1996alnl (Apr 12, 2009)

harddrive said:


> But it looks like the "cheaper" one will have a smoother beam and be regulated on a 18650. :twothumbs


 
And the "cheaper" one looks more expensive..to me anyway.


----------



## djblank87 (Apr 12, 2009)

Anyone aware if EagleTac is going to offer a spacer ring so one could remove the cigar/tactical ring?


----------



## StandardBattery (Apr 12, 2009)

Clearly meant to compete with the TK-11 head on. I noticed the marketing bs also states "... build like a tank"... ha ha That seems like a direct reference to the so called Fenix "T"ank series. 

Maybe we'll find out EagleTac really is a Fenix Offshoot.

Specs look really good and since Fenix don't seem to be able to get anymore R2 for their TK-11, the shootout will be interesting.

It is a little annoying though that the lights look so similar. I hope they at least rounded all the sharp edges on the ring.


----------



## Zeruel (Apr 12, 2009)

Makes me wonder.... could both come from the same factory?


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Apr 12, 2009)

I wouldn't think that just because they look somewhat similar that they would be coming from the same factory. It is obvious that Eagletac is wanting to compete against the Fenix TK series. Looks like they are doing a fair job. I can't wait to see what this one looks like in the long term.


----------



## bigfish5 (Apr 12, 2009)

i think im onboard with this light, i have a t10c2 and it is great, but when i ordered 2 of the p100a2's to give away, they seemed to be just as bright, and throw about the same. My only issue with the t10 was the fact that with 2 aw rcr123's i only saw about 45 minutes on high, the t100 is going to be flat regulated for 3 hours on high "SWEET".


----------



## Toaster (Apr 12, 2009)

In case anyone's still wondering about the regulation, this slide should put rest any doubts. C850 is the same circuit specified for the P100C2.


----------



## 1996alnl (Apr 12, 2009)

Can't wait for the beamshots from this light..


----------



## euroken (Apr 12, 2009)

Just out of curiosity, assuming you already don't own them, how many would choose this light over Olight M20 Premium and why? would the price be the only reason?

I'm thinking, Olight M20 Premium in terms of performance, functions, and usability would over take T100C2 all across the board no?

I'm asking because I thought many companies would try and out do Olight M20 but really haven't seen a lot of competition. Seems like producing another light similar to TK11 R2 is a step backwards or idling...just a thought...

ps
I'm not trying to be biased here...I don't have any Olight or Eagletac torches...just a constructive curiosity...


----------



## Toaster (Apr 12, 2009)

Olight M20 performance on 18650 is quite poor. Peak output on 18650 cell is only around 83% of that compared to running on 2xCR123. In addition it is running direct drive on high with 18650 so output is constantly falling. T100C2 on the other hand is set to deliver flat regulation and same peak output on both 2xCR123 or 18650 cell. It may be similar in performance and function to a TK11 R2 but it comes in at just 60% of the cost. Same performance at almost half the cost certainly counts as a step forward in my book.


----------



## FlashCrazy (Apr 12, 2009)

djblank87 said:


> Anyone aware if EagleTac is going to offer a spacer ring so one could remove the cigar/tactical ring?


 
Nope, no need for a ring.  With the cigar grip ring removed, there aren't any threaded or bare areas left to cover.


----------



## harddrive (Apr 13, 2009)

FlashCrazy said:


> Nope, no need for a ring.  With the cigar grip ring removed, there aren't any threaded or bare areas left to cover.



Sounds good! Have you seen or handled a prototype Flashcrazy?


----------



## FlashCrazy (Apr 13, 2009)

harddrive said:


> Sounds good! Have you seen or handled a prototype Flashcrazy?


 
No, sure haven't.  The info was directly from EagleTac...


----------



## richardcpf (Apr 13, 2009)

I was about to order the P100C2 when I saw this, for $10 more I could get better throw, 18650 support (the official flashaholic battery) and extra accesories, so why not.

*What I can't undertand is if both uses the C850 engine why the P100C2 has flat regulation from 3.7-8.4v and the T100C2 doesn't.*

Eagletac says semi-regulation below 3.4v but anyways I dont think there are much power left from a <3.4v cell. Waiting for runtime graphs...


----------



## phantom23 (Apr 13, 2009)

richardcpf said:


> I was about to order the P100C2 when I saw this, for $10 more I could get better throw, 18650 support (the official flashaholic battery) and extra accesories, so why not.


Because it's significantly bigger than P100C2.



richardcpf said:


> *What I can't undertand is if both uses the C850 engine why the P100C2 has flat regulation from 3.7-8.4v and the T100C2 doesn't.*
> 
> Eagletac says semi-regulation below 3.4v but anyways I dont think there are much power left from a <3.4v cell. Waiting for runtime graphs...


They have buck only circuits (not buck-boost) which means they're regulated as long as battery voltage is higher than emitter Vf. But, as we all know, Cree doesn't check the Vf (like SSC or Luxeon) and:
1. Eagle-Tac uses selected emitters with low Vf.
2. Preproduction sample has low Vf. production ones varies a lot like here:



XP-E use the same dies so the differences are the same and sometimes it's much higher than 3,4V (e.g. 3,7V - 1 hour regulated, 2 hours unregulated).


----------



## euroken (Apr 13, 2009)

Toaster said:


> Olight M20 performance on 18650 is quite poor. Peak output on 18650 cell is only around 83% of that compared to running on 2xCR123. In addition it is running direct drive on high with 18650 so output is constantly falling. T100C2 on the other hand is set to deliver flat regulation and same peak output on both 2xCR123 or 18650 cell. It may be similar in performance and function to a TK11 R2 but it comes in at just 60% of the cost. Same performance at almost half the cost certainly counts as a step forward in my book.


 
I was primarily basing my thoughts on information from review forum. Even with direct drive, doesn't M20 run close 3 hours to 50% brightness on high? Just hope that flat regulation on high mode wouldn't decrease the runtime. 

And just caught my eye..."EagleTac 18650 Li-ion" batteries??? Did they make batteries before?


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Apr 13, 2009)

They've made batteries for a little while now, but I haven't seen much info on them.


----------



## djblank87 (Apr 13, 2009)

FlashCrazy said:


> Nope, no need for a ring.  With the cigar grip ring removed, there aren't any threaded or bare areas left to cover.


 
Thanks Jay.


----------



## bigfish5 (Apr 13, 2009)

can someone please clear this up for me, will the t100c2 have a nice flat regulation like the p100 series? It says something about being regulated until the battery gets down to like 15% or something like that. When i saw a 3 hour runtime on high i was thinking atleast 2.5 of that would be regulated?


----------



## phantom23 (Apr 13, 2009)

'bigfish5' read post #64...


----------



## bigfish5 (Apr 13, 2009)

im a newb when it comes to this stuff,, so only 1 hour of the 3 hour runtime will be regulated. That takes a little of the wind out of it for me. My t10c ran bright until it pretty much just shut off, it sounds like this light is going to fade???


----------



## 1996alnl (Apr 13, 2009)

Toaster said:


> Olight M20 performance on 18650 is quite poor. Peak output on 18650 cell is only around 83% of that compared to running on 2xCR123. In addition it is running direct drive on high with 18650 so output is constantly falling. T100C2 on the other hand is set to deliver flat regulation and same peak output on both 2xCR123 or 18650 cell. It may be similar in performance and function to a TK11 R2 but it comes in at just 60% of the cost. Same performance at almost half the cost certainly counts as a step forward in my book.


 
Couldn't of said it better myself.:thumbsup:


----------



## PhantomPhoton (Apr 14, 2009)

bigfish5 said:


> so only 1 hour of the 3 hour runtime will be regulated.



No that is very likely incorrect. If you look at the runtime graphs of the P100C2 they stay in regulation for most of the charge on the 17670 cell. Supposedly the T100C2 has the same circuit, so it should have a very similar runtime graph on an 18650. I won't believe it until I see a graph or test it myself, but it sounds like a home run to me.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Apr 14, 2009)

Looks like this light might be the reason to get my first EagleTac.


But I was really excited about another preorder light and it got recalled.


I will try to wait on a review first but it looks pretty unlikely!


----------



## phantom23 (Apr 14, 2009)

PhantomPhoton said:


> No that is very likely incorrect. If you look at the runtime graphs of the P100C2 they stay in regulation for most of the charge on the 17670 cell. Supposedly the T100C2 has the same circuit, so it should have a very similar runtime graph on an 18650. I won't believe it until I see a graph or test it myself, but it sounds like a home run to me.



As I said. Circuit isn't everything! It works only when battery voltage is higher than emitter forward voltage. But Cree doesn't chck that so it's a lottery. With lover Vf, let's say 3,3V it is regulated almost to the end (like in mentioned P100C2). But when Vf is higher, for example 3,5-3,6V it's regulated for 50%. And as I said - it *IS* Cree lottery. One P100C2 is regulated nicely while the other one (not tested) is direct driven for most of the time. T100C2 uses the same circuit so it behaves exactly the same.


----------



## 1996alnl (Apr 14, 2009)

I think the best lights are the ones that are regulated for 85% or so of the batteries life.
Think about it. it's nice to know when the battery is getting low.

I had a bad experience last summer while i was camping.I was using a light with 100% regulation when i took a walk to the comfort station.
It was a 5 min walk in pitch dark i mean pitch dark you can't see your hand in front of you.
Well on the way back to the campsite the light gave up the ghost with no warning.

I stopped dead on my tracks. Stood there for a few seconds to see if my eyes would adjust to the darkness,no luck.There was no moonlight at all pertruding through the trees,i was in complete darkness.

Then i remembered i had a Fenix LOD on my keychain and i had my keys in my pocket.
Whew! Now i always carry a spare battery with me.

These new lights from EagleTac have raised the bar a bit. I'm sure other manufacturers will follow suit.
Excellent quality,smooth beam,great runtimes on a single 17670 cell and regulation for 85-90%.
I think i'll pick up the T100C2 when it comes out too.


----------



## EagleTac (Apr 14, 2009)

phantom23 said:


> As I said. Circuit isn't everything! It works only when battery voltage is higher than emitter forward voltage. But Cree doesn't chck that so it's a lottery. With lover Vf, let's say 3,3V it is regulated almost to the end (like in mentioned P100C2). But when Vf is higher, for example 3,5-3,6V it's regulated for 50%. And as I said - it *IS* Cree lottery. One P100C2 is regulated nicely while the other one (not tested) is direct driven for most of the time. T100C2 uses the same circuit so it behaves exactly the same.


 
That's correct. CREE doesn't sort their LED VF, but we do. 90% of the XPE VF lays between 3.4V to 3.5V, which is consistance with CREE PCT. 

Nicole


----------



## phantom23 (Apr 14, 2009)

Thanks. That's what I was thinking in #1 here:


phantom23 said:


> But, as we all know, Cree doesn't check the Vf (like SSC or Luxeon) and:
> 1. Eagle-Tac uses selected emitters with low Vf.
> 2. Preproduction sample has low Vf. production ones varies a lot like here(...)


And it's great! Shame P100C2 doesn't fit 18650 cells (like Jet-III ST does) and T100C2 is too big... (10mm longer than T10L)


----------



## Sgt. LED (Apr 14, 2009)

EagleTac said:


> That's correct. CREE doesn't sort their LED VF, but we do. 90% of the XPE VF lays between 3.4V to 3.5V, which is consistance with CREE PCT.
> 
> Nicole


:twothumbs Yeah, I'm getting one!


----------



## 1996alnl (Apr 14, 2009)

Sgt. LED said:


> :twothumbs Yeah, I'm getting one!


 
yep,me too


----------



## Phaserburn (Apr 14, 2009)

I'd love to see a beamshot vs the P100C2, which I already have.


----------



## radu1976 (Apr 15, 2009)

'That's correct. CREE doesn't sort their LED VF, but we do. 90% of the XPE VF lays between 3.4V to 3.5V, which is consistance with CREE PCT. '


So what would that mean ? That basically T100C2 will have pretty much the same good regulation as P100C2 on RCR123s and 18650s ? Am I right ?


----------



## tancg87 (Apr 17, 2009)

Just curious.. Can the tailcap rubber boot be change? Lets say different colours or GITD types..

Thanks..


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Apr 17, 2009)

I would imagine it can be if it is constructed in any way similar to EagleTac's other P10 or P100 series lights. They all are easily disassembled.


----------



## alk007 (Apr 17, 2009)

tancg87 said:


> Just curious.. Can the tailcap rubber boot be change? Lets say different colours or GITD types..
> 
> Thanks..



Yes, i changed rubber boots on all my EagleTacs to pale blue ones (from DX). Very nice!


----------



## Valmet62 (May 6, 2009)

*Is the Eagletac T100c2 shipping yet?*

I was wondering if anyone has got theirs and could post their impressions.

Valmet62


----------



## DM51 (May 6, 2009)

*Re: Is the Eagletac T100c2 shipping yet?*

Valmet62... there's already a thread about this. It was not necessary to start a new one. I'm merging them.


----------



## hsotnicam (May 6, 2009)

Still waiting patiently.
I hope the tactical cigar ring is better than that crappy detachable lanyard rings of the p100's.:sick2:


----------



## djblank87 (May 7, 2009)

In case those who did pre-orders have not been told. Two vendors that are selling these have said they will be getting them in today 5/7/2009. 

Maybe someone other then the vendors will have one in their hands by Saturday.


----------



## johnny3073 (May 7, 2009)

FlashCrazy said:


> I think so too... great performance/quality for the money. The P100C2 is in the neighborhood of 6000 lux, so I'd expect about 8000 lux from the T100C2.
> I pm'ed you the answer to your other question to me... just because that would be Dealer-specific discussion and per CPF rules I can't post that here, only in the Dealer forum on CPF Marketplace. :thumbsup:


 
According to Light-Reviews.com as of 4/27 the P100C2 tested 7470 lux.

http://http://www.light-reviews.com/eagletac_p100c2/

7470 + 35% = *10,000+ lux* 

3 hours of regulated 10K lux goodness with a 18650 is INSANE. Oh yeah, and I can buy 2 of them for the price of an M20...which I will definately be doing.

If this impressive little monster came with an R2 emmiter and a low (<10 lumens) setting with 100+ hours of light, I would buy a whole box of them.

I would absolutely LOVE to see this light with:

R2

Low ~ 10 lumens 100+ hours
General ~ 55 lumens 20 hours

With a twist of the bezel, Bam! 220+ lumens for 3 hours.

I think EagleTac might have a home run on their hands. :twothumbs


----------



## 1996alnl (May 7, 2009)

Whoa! 10,000 lux..that's a serious thrower.
It'll hold it's own against a TK11 and M20 and it's much more affordable.

Way to go EagleTac


----------



## cjs4760 (May 12, 2009)

Hi all,

Can someone confirm that the AW Protected 18650s fit and work in the T100C2? I have the newest ones from AW w/ the button top, but would like to know the (+) head engages properly past the rev. polarity protection.

Thanks!
Chris


----------



## Mjolnir (May 12, 2009)

I think it is safe to assume that they do fit. The positive end of the AW cell seems pretty standard, so it should fit in the T100C2 (i'm 90% sure).


----------



## FlashCrazy (May 12, 2009)

cjs4760 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> Can someone confirm that the AW Protected 18650s fit and work in the T100C2? I have the newest ones from AW w/ the button top, but would like to know the (+) head engages properly past the rev. polarity protection.
> 
> ...


 
Yep, they fit/work just fine.


----------



## Sgt. LED (May 13, 2009)

Are we going to get a review on this one?


----------



## richardcpf (May 13, 2009)

Mine is arriving in few days along with the M2X cool and the stanley HID spotlight. Will post pics and comparisons...


----------



## cjs4760 (May 13, 2009)

FlashCrazy said:


> Yep, they fit/work just fine.



Thanks FlashCrazy :thumbsup:

Mjolnir, you may know this already, but the buttons on the AW protected LiIons (at least my 18650s) aren't quite as "proud" of the top as on other cells, especially primaries. So, just wanted confirmation.

Now -----> 


Chris


----------



## AardvarkSagus (May 13, 2009)

Sgt. LED said:


> Are we going to get a review on this one?


I was told I would receive one, but I haven't heard any further details yet...


----------



## MichaelW (May 13, 2009)

This T100C2 would be a great candidate for the cree xp-g.
300 lumens otf sounds about right, in cool-white.
250 neutral-white & 200 warm-white


----------



## Sgt. LED (May 13, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> I was told I would receive one, but I haven't heard any further details yet...


 
:thinking: 
Well I hope you get one since your reviews are thorough and are approached from a user/layman's perspective that I appreciate and you don't skimp on the pics.
:thumbsup:


----------



## Mjolnir (May 13, 2009)

RichardCPF, don't compare it with the Stanley! It will steal all of its glory, trust me. In comparison, the Eagletac will probably seem about as bright as a half dead incan minimag.


----------



## Neo9710 (May 13, 2009)

I was just about to make a decision between the Olight M20 and the Fenix! Maybe I should wait till a review comes in! Someone PM me where I can order this light from!


----------



## Sgt. LED (May 14, 2009)

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/231456
OK, take a quick read through this thread.


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (May 14, 2009)

Neo9710 said:


> I was just about to make a decision between the Olight M20 and the Fenix! Maybe I should wait till a review comes in! Someone PM me where I can order this light from!


www.eagletac-store.com


----------



## Neo9710 (May 14, 2009)

HMMMMM..Now Im just getting ancy...


----------



## Schwartz (May 14, 2009)

I just got mine and have been checking it over. Its nowhere near dark here but it looks like there is a dark spot in the center. The LED doesn't appear to be perfectly centered. I don't see any fingerprints on the lens but there is what I would consider a fair bit of dust under it and on the reflector. So far the switch seems to only work 85% of the time. It will click on fine but the light won't turn off until I click it one or more times. I'm not sure what to think about that I wonder if it will get better with use. The rest of the light seems pretty nice. I don't know quite what to think so far; it has a couple issues but I guess you get what you pay for. Seems plenty bright. I have a L2D and a TK20 and this is brighter than either of those.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (May 14, 2009)

Sgt. LED said:


> :thinking:
> Well I hope you get one since your reviews are thorough and are approached from a user/layman's perspective that I appreciate and you don't skimp on the pics.
> :thumbsup:


I just received shipping confirmation that mine is now on it's way (as is my M2XC4 by the way). Impressions in this thread (of the T100) and review soon afterward on my site and probably here as well.


----------



## harddrive (May 14, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> I just received shipping confirmation that mine is now on it's way (as is my M2XC4 by the way). Impressions in this thread (of the T100) and review soon afterward on my site and probably here as well.



Can't wait for another of your excellent reviews :thumbsup:


----------



## Neo9710 (May 14, 2009)

harddrive said:


> Can't wait for another of your excellent reviews :thumbsup:



Me too!


----------



## Schwartz (May 14, 2009)

Well after playing around outside with it for a while I think I am going to like this light. The dark spot in the center of the beam isn't too bad. It throws pretty far with usable spill for walking. The switch isn't acting any better but I'll see how that is after a bit of use. I'm guessing the switch guts can be removed by using something in the two holes in there?


----------



## Mjolnir (May 14, 2009)

If you have an issue, send an email to Eagletac's customer support. They should be able to help you. There is no need to "deal with" a defective product if you can get it fixed or replaced.


----------



## Sgt. LED (May 14, 2009)

Yep, comes right out. My switch is good so you either have a bum one or it just needs taken out, lubed, and put back in.


----------



## harddrive (May 14, 2009)

Sgt. LED said:


> Yep, comes right out. My switch is good so you either have a bum one or it just needs taken out, lubed, and put back in.



You happy with the T100C2 overall Sarg?


----------



## Sgt. LED (May 14, 2009)

Yes I am. I personally see this light as being what the Fenix TK11 was supposed to be but didn't deliver. Others might not feel the same but I have my opinions. All I see being better on the TK11 is the thicker bezel ONLY if you were planning on bashing things. I plan on carrying it so I welcome the proportions of this bezel!

It's tough, well regulated, bright, throws very well but still gives you usable spill, decently heatsinked, waterproof, good knurling-everywhere, doesn't roll, and the light doesn't look goofy if you want to remove the grip ring. 

The beam is very interesting! It throws like an XR-E in a smooth D26 reflector but instead of getting a meager spill that is ringy you get a bright OP like spill that is pretty smooth. In a head to head with a Deerelight smooth R2 WH driven at 1.2A it appeared that the throw was nearly equal. It wasn't. I was being mislead by the bright spill of the XP-E. If you looked at just the hotspot of each at good distance the XP-E spot was not spreading out as fast as the XR-E. Also the lumen count of the Deerelight module is a bit higher. I wish I knew the drive level on this Eagletac. 

There is a slight donut but it isn't very strong. The click is kind of loud but it's a good solid feeling switch. There is a tint shift in mine. On low it looks to be 5000K and on high I would estimate it at 6200K. 

All I need is a diffuser, a lower low of 30L, and tail-standing and it would be superb. OK maybe give me a R2 WH XP-E in it driven at 1A too!!!!


----------



## harddrive (May 15, 2009)

Thanks for the run down. Looking forward to mine arriving even more now.....


----------



## hsotnicam (May 15, 2009)

I just got mine. It feels pretty solidly built; however, it's acting a little odd. 

When changing modes, unlike p100c2, I can only loosen the bezel by about 1/8 revolution. if turned pass 1/4, it starts to light up intermittently.
This is annoying because I'm use to turning the bezel at least 1/3 of a revolution for mode switching.

If I push the clicky switch just to the point that it clicks, it won't stay on. I have to click it real good and deep to ensure that it stays on (sometimes it just won't stays on, it's like a lottery)(friction in the switch?)

The beam pattern isn't as smooth as my p100c2, due to non-centered emitter. Throws pretty good though.

Oh, and the cap of the battery magazine looks all scratched and messed up...

To me, it's pretty defected alright...


----------



## Neo9710 (May 15, 2009)

Hmm...Out of the few that are out, a couple of them are complaining that they are defective... Im going to give it a week or so to see if this continues. My mouse is already over the "BU" button but itll **** me off if I get a defective one as my first real light...


----------



## Schwartz (May 15, 2009)

I registered the light using the info on the registration card. I mentioned the LED being slightly off center, the dust under the lens, and the switch not working right. A few hours later I got an email from Nicole asking for my shipping address to send me a replacement switch assembly. I was pleasantly surprised; I wasn't even remotely expecting a response from the registration comments. :thumbsup:

After playing around with the light a few more hours tonight the LED being slightly off center and the dust still doesn't kill it for me. I am really liking this light.

My battery magazine cap is messed up looking too. I'm not really bothered by that because I am using a 18650 and even if I wasn't it is probably still fine. Maybe it was sanded to remove excess plastic which is better than getting cut on it.


----------



## hsotnicam (May 15, 2009)

Schwartz:

How far can your turn your bezel while keeping the light function as normal?
I'm trying to determine if that condition is normal or should I have it replaced


----------



## Schwartz (May 15, 2009)

hsotnicam said:


> Schwartz:
> 
> How far can your turn your bezel while keeping the light function as normal?
> I'm trying to determine if that condition is normal or should I have it replaced



When it is tightened all the way down and turned on it doesn't take much to hit the next level when unscrewing it; 1mm or maybe 2mm at the most. From there I can turn it just over 1 rotation before the light turns off. With the light off I can turn it anywhere I want without it coming on. Mine seems to be working as intended with the exception of the switch.


----------



## Mjolnir (May 15, 2009)

Is the tailcap tightened down all the way? If it isn't the light will not stay on because of the anodization.


----------



## hsotnicam (May 15, 2009)

Thank your for the confirmation, Schwartz!
I just contact the kind people at 4sevens, and they agree to ship the replacement as soon as they got the return shipping confirmation number from me.

Mjolnir: Yes, the tail cap is fully tightened.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (May 15, 2009)

I just received my T100C2 from Mike at PTS! I am very impressed. My unit has none of the stated issues thus far. Perfectly centered LED. Switch appears 100% reliable (i.e. no reason to doubt thus far) and no dust under the lens. My battery carrier also appears to be sanded, but I assume that it was done because it was acutally tested prior to shipping to guarantee that it was the correct dia. to fit in the tube. A positive in my view. Good thing it was too, since it is quite a tight fit. 

Review to follow...just give me a couple days to gather my impressions.


----------



## Sgt. LED (May 15, 2009)

GREAT!


----------



## bigfish5 (May 15, 2009)

i recieved my t100 yesterday, it came just as expected. good looking light, no problems with the finish. works perfectly , just as the 4 eagletacs i have purchased before it. I can see a very small dark area in the hotspot, but only when i am shining on a whitewall at a few paces. This beam is not like my previous eagletacs. This light is much more "throw" oreinted, but is still has alot of spill. I like the light alot. it will really reach out their very nicely, but you can still put it on low, and walk a trail with it, but at just a few feet away the hotspot is pretty bright on low.


----------



## jhc37013 (May 15, 2009)

I actually got a T100C2 today by accident. I ordered a P100C2 from 47's but instead got a T100, now worries I planned on getting them both anyway. I have no function problems like mentioned by people above. 

I just came in from outside and I am very impressed when comparing it to my TK11 R2. The throw actually seems better than the TK and the head is much smoother to rotate vs. the TK. The beam tint is also a little better not as much blue/purple. One thing I noticed right off is their is no Cree rings which surprised me with this smooth reflector. The hot spot is really tight which may be why it appears to throw further than the TK11. There is also plenty of spill.I really can not believe what a bargain price this is. If one were to ask me what light to buy even if the price was even I would probably say the T100, and I am a huge Fenix fan. I think this is the first light I didn't clean and lube it came peferctly clean and very nicely lubed, I can see no reason to clean and lube again. 

This is my first EagleTac and I have to say it is a very nice intruduction to their brand. A+


----------



## richardcpf (May 15, 2009)

Just got mine. This is definetly a throwy flashlight, the hotspot is tigher than my TK11R2. Very impressed.

At first I thought it was smaller than my TK11, but in fact it is longer and thicker in the body.






You can hardly tell which is which if you grabbed one in the dark. Size and weight are almopst the same. The T100C2 throws better, but the TK11 is overall brighter.

I will be posting a small review soon.


----------



## jhc37013 (May 15, 2009)

Nice pic richardcpf, I to thought it was smaller before I did a side by side comparison. I think it may feel smaller because the head is slightly thinner and it feels better balanced. The TK is a little more top heavy. I really like the knurled head to.


----------



## Zainal Abidin (May 17, 2009)

Looking at the picture, T100C2 will have deeper reflector than TK11. I bet T100C2 will have longer throw and more tight beam than TK11


----------



## Zainal Abidin (May 19, 2009)

Zainal Abidin said:


> Looking at the picture, T100C2 will have deeper reflector than TK11. I bet T100C2 will have longer throw and more tight beam than TK11


 
Finally received my T100C2 this afternoon. Will compare the performance with TK11, Jetbeam J3M. Looking into the reflector, it is confirm that T100C2 has deeper reflector compared to TK11


----------



## AardvarkSagus (May 21, 2009)

Review posted


----------



## Corvette6769 (May 22, 2009)

EngrPaul said:


> Nice, thanks for the introduction.
> 
> However, I'm hoping for a 3X MP-E light from them. :naughty:


 
I am familiar with the Cree XR-E, XP-E, MC-E, and the new XP-G, but what is a MP-E?


----------



## phantom23 (May 22, 2009)

There's no such thing like MP-E. It's just an idea to put four XP-E dies (which are bigger) into MC-E.


----------



## Nightstalker1993 (May 26, 2009)

Light-Reviews just recently did a review on the light....

http://light-reviews.com/eagletac_t100c2/

Check out the crazy runtime graphs! Perfectly flat on all batteries! :twothumbs:


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (May 26, 2009)

EagleTac must use some form of an Alien Circuitry! Look at those charts...


----------



## Mjolnir (May 26, 2009)

They seem to have a buck circuit, and apparently they hand pick the LEDs with low Vf's so regulation is maintained.


----------



## Nightstalker1993 (May 26, 2009)

Well, since the TK11 is probably the closest competitor to the T100c2, i think it would be fair to compare the 2 graphs...

T100c2





vs

TK11





I bet Fenix is peeing in their pants now after seeing the runtime graphs of the T100c2


----------



## Sgt. LED (May 26, 2009)

Well whatever they use/do I hope they keep it up. 
I also hope other makers start looking at their competition and take notice. They might feel it in their wallets soon if not.


Nightstalker1993 said:


> I bet Fenix is peeing in their pants now after seeing the runtime graphs of the T100c2


----------



## Mjolnir (May 26, 2009)

Nightstalker, that is the graph for the normal TK11, not the R2 version. Apparently the R2 LEDs in the TK11 have a lower Vf, so the regulation is better.


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (May 26, 2009)

Mjolnir said:


> Nightstalker, that is the graph for the normal TK11, not the R2 version. Apparently the R2 LEDs in the TK11 have a lower Vf, so the regulation is better.


The TK11-R2 version is no longer in production, it was a limited run.


----------



## bullettproof (May 26, 2009)

The T100C2 is an amazing light.The XP-E is so tiny its hard to belive it produces so much light.Supposedly this light is driven at 850ma.I think it could beat a DBS R2 if Nailbender did his 1.4A driver mod to it.

I think since the XP-E is so tiny and powerful that its chip size to reflector ratio is greatly increased.So for its scale size the reflector is like an R2 with a A10 reflector.If you drove the XP-E hard I think it would be amazing.I bet if you took a DBS and put a XP-E in it the results would be mind blowing.


----------



## Mjolnir (May 26, 2009)

The TK11 R2 is still for sale. I think there were some issues due to shortages of R2 LEDs, but I don't think they stopped making them altogether. Where did you hear this?


----------



## phantom23 (May 26, 2009)

4sevens sold the first batch and they didn't know will there be another one (as you said - R2 shortage). But they're still available.


----------



## [email protected] (May 26, 2009)

Outdoors Fanatic said:


> The TK11-R2 version is no longer in production, it was a limited run.


I'll confirm they are back and the new ones have "TK11 Premium R2" engraved on the head.


----------



## Mjolnir (May 27, 2009)

According to Eagletac's newly redesigned website, they are going to be offering an alternative tailcap that can allow tailstanding on the T100C2.


----------



## Sgt. LED (May 27, 2009)

Oh, gonna have to order that. :thumbsup:


----------



## 1996alnl (May 27, 2009)

I think EagleTac is making the competition a little...um,shall we say a little red under the collar right now.


----------



## ResQTech (May 27, 2009)

1996alnl said:


> I think EagleTac is making the competition a little...um,shall we say a little red under the collar right now.



I'd have to agree from their lights that I have sampled... Quality products at an amazing price point.


----------



## Sgt. LED (May 27, 2009)

_"EagleTac, we're kickin' Fenix to the curb.".........._ It's got a catchy ring to it.
Not that I actually think they are, yet. In time perhaps so. 
I'm going to  for a year and see what actually develops.


----------



## clumma (May 28, 2009)

Outdoors Fanatic said:


> The TK11-R2 version is no longer in production, it was a limited run.



Also its regulation isn't that much better; see my TK11 vs. T10L review. Also it has a doughnut. Also it cost twice as much as the T100C2.

-Carl


----------



## Schwartz (May 28, 2009)

I got my M2 washer kit today. Looks like it came directly from the factory in China. Also included was the replacement switch for my T100C2. Pretty impressive service from EagleTac. :thumbsup:


----------



## ResQTech (May 28, 2009)

Schwartz said:


> I got my M2 washer kit today. Looks like it came directly from the factory in China. Also included was the replacement switch for my T100C2. Pretty impressive service from EagleTac. :thumbsup:



Is that a tail-standing switch?


----------



## Schwartz (May 29, 2009)

ResQTech said:


> Is that a tail-standing switch?



No it was just the guts to replace the stock one; switch, board, and spring assembly.


----------



## vitekboi (Jul 3, 2009)

does anyone know if there will be an xp-e r2 model for the t100c2? i'm about to order the q5 but not sure if i should hold out for any newer leds


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 3, 2009)

I just got mine today.  The finish seems very simular to the Quark lights.


----------



## strinq (Jul 3, 2009)

Just got my tailstanding switch from my local dealer. 
It is extremely stable. :thumbsup:
Downside is that the switching is also quite a bit harder making momentary switching a pain, but hey at least I have options.


----------



## MichaelW (Jul 3, 2009)

vitekboi said:


> does anyone know if there will be an xp-e r2 model for the t100c2? i'm about to order the q5 but not sure if i should hold out for any newer leds



How about the xp-G?


----------



## recDNA (Jul 3, 2009)

Needs a moonlight mode and a strobe IMO


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 3, 2009)

recDNA said:


> Needs a moonlight mode and a strobe IMO


Get a Quark light for moonlight mode, the 2 cell lights are rated to run 30 days and are smaller & lighter.


Are you a Terrorist? Are you a Veteran? 
http://www.prisonplanet.com/homeland-security-trains-scouts-to-fight-terrorism.html


----------



## strinq (Jul 3, 2009)

recDNA said:


> Needs a moonlight mode and a strobe IMO


 
Then ur looking for a Quark.
This is a $45 light compared to the $69 Quark.
No other tactical lights have moonlight and strobe together. At least not that I'm aware of.


----------



## PLI (Jul 4, 2009)

Hi 
I've just received mine today and I wonder
if I can use unprotected cells with this
flashlight!! 

I guess that , if the regulation electronic circuit
don't cut the electricity off , the 18960 unprotected
cell will be killed. :thumbsdow

So my question is: can I use those unprotected
18650 battery on this flashlight without fear (to
kill my batteries ) ?


----------



## strinq (Jul 4, 2009)

When you use the unprotected cells and suddenly see the turbo output drop to about 50%, its a kind of warning for u to change ur batts. I might be mistaken though... I personally use that as a guide.


----------



## recDNA (Jul 5, 2009)

In a review on another website I read that the T100C2 and the P100C2 are primarily "throwers" and offer little flood. 

Is that true? The P100C2 seems like a bargain compared to the Quark CR123 X 2 but I do want some flood at close range (around 10 feet).


----------



## Mjolnir (Jul 5, 2009)

I don't own either, but apparently the P100C2 has a larger hotspot than the T100C2, so it should be more "flood" oriented. However, neither are particularly "floody" lights, since they have small emitters and smooth reflectors.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jul 5, 2009)

I, having reviewed both lights in question, would definitely agree that both of these lights are throw oriented, however, that being said they do have use close in as well. The use of the XP-E LEDs in these lights brings back the concept of a beam corona that fills out the transition between spot and spill in a way we haven't seen since the luxeon days. They still both prove to be quite versatile at short distances.


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 6, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> I, having reviewed both lights in question, would definitely agree that both of these lights are throw oriented, however, that being said they do have use close in as well. The use of the XP-E LEDs in these lights brings back the concept of a beam corona that fills out the transition between spot and spill in a way we haven't seen since the luxeon days. They still both prove to be quite versatile at short distances.


 I have ordered an Olight M-series diffuser filter for my T100C2, I'll let yall know how it fits.


----------



## strinq (Jul 6, 2009)

I've have compared and used both. They are both throw lights. 
The P100 has a larger spill and larger hotspot. 
Both still perfectly usable for close distances.


----------



## JKL (Jul 6, 2009)

I agree .


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jul 6, 2009)

Out of curiosity, how many of you have removed the cigar grip ring from your T100C2? I just couldn't get used to mine. Completely uncomfortable if you ask me. Well made, but I felt it needed a little bit of flexibility to make it useful.


----------



## djblank87 (Jul 6, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> Out of curiosity, how many of you have removed the cigar grip ring from your T100C2? I just couldn't get used to mine. Completely uncomfortable if you ask me. Well made, but I felt it needed a little bit of flexibility to make it useful.


 
I removed it so it would fit in my V70.


----------



## strinq (Jul 6, 2009)

I left it on just because it prevents it from rolling around. 
I still think some sort of built in anti-rolling feature (cornered parts) on the body itself would've been better.


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 6, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> Out of curiosity, how many of you have removed the cigar grip ring from your T100C2? I just couldn't get used to mine. Completely uncomfortable if you ask me. Well made, but I felt it needed a little bit of flexibility to make it useful.


 I like mine better with the grip ring.


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 6, 2009)

I just got my Olight M-series diffuser and it is too big for the T100C2 but it does fit the Fenix TK10 pretty well.


----------



## recDNA (Jul 6, 2009)

LightWalker said:


> I just git my Olight M-series diffuser and it is too big for the T100C2 but it does fit the Fenix TK10 pretty well.


 
Darn...I was hoping...


----------



## MiniLux (Jul 6, 2009)

LightWalker said:


> I have ordered an Olight M-series diffuser filter for my T100C2, I'll let yall know how it fits.


 
Already tried this, the M20 diffusers are way larger than the T100C2 head. You would have to use something suitable (tube, thick O-rings or the like) to fill up the gap :shrug:

I have some T-series diffusers on the way, maybe those will fit better 

MiniLux


----------



## Sgt. LED (Jul 6, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> Out of curiosity, how many of you have removed the cigar grip ring from your T100C2? I just couldn't get used to mine. Completely uncomfortable if you ask me. Well made, but I felt it needed a little bit of flexibility to make it useful.


 
I took off the stock ring. I then took the grip ring off of a SF C2 and sliced the tab off it. Now my T100C2 has a nice rounded rubber grip ring. The ring fits perfectly and is comfy.


----------



## JKL (Jul 6, 2009)

Good choice !


----------



## turan8 (Jul 6, 2009)

hello all i was considering this light for duty use, however i was wondering what type of switch does it use? 

Reverse, forward, forward clicky?


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jul 6, 2009)

turan8 said:


> hello all i was considering this light for duty use, however i was wondering what type of switch does it use?
> 
> Reverse, forward, forward clicky?


It uses a very nice protruding forward clicky.


----------



## turan8 (Jul 6, 2009)

so it can do temp on like my nightcore DI?


----------



## strinq (Jul 6, 2009)

Yes sir it can do a momentary on.


----------



## turan8 (Jul 6, 2009)

Thanks for the replies!


----------



## dig-it (Jul 7, 2009)

I`ve got my second Eagletac model coming. Curse you people! Curse my teachers for teaching me to read! Curse my parents for giving me the curious gene!

lovecpf


----------



## notsobrite (Jul 7, 2009)

has anyone figured out how to take the head off? i wanted to try some diffuser film but can't get it off:shakehead


----------



## recDNA (Jul 7, 2009)

Why doesn't Eagletac ever offer a model with strobe for emergencies?


----------



## dig-it (Jul 7, 2009)

recDNA said:


> Why doesn't Eagletac ever offer a model with strobe for emergencies?


 
Why don`t you ask them?

http://www.eagletac.com/contact.html


----------



## recDNA (Jul 7, 2009)

Somebody here might know too but thanks for the link.


----------



## strinq (Jul 7, 2009)

the m2 has strobe...


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jul 7, 2009)

The new upcoming T20C2 will have strobe capability along with the option of a 5 lumen low.

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/231734


----------



## recDNA (Jul 7, 2009)

strinq said:


> the m2 has strobe...


 
Thanks. I knew folks here would know. I was looking at the smaller models. I don't like the shape of the M2 so I didn't check it out in detail.


----------



## recDNA (Jul 7, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> The new upcoming T20C2 will have strobe capability along with the option of a 5 lumen low.
> 
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/231734


 
Thanks...sounds good as long as the clip can be easily removed. Boy do I hate clips and cigar grips. I'm not crazy about crenulated bezels either. Once a light is labeled "tactical" I kind of forget about it. I actually read part of that thread but I missed the part about the strobe.

I see why I missed it. Message 1 seemed like a cut and paste from the manufacturer's specs and it doesn't mention strobe. I did find it in post 10.


----------



## FlashlightsNgear.com (Jul 7, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> The new upcoming T20C2 will have strobe capability along with the option of a 5 lumen low.
> 
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/231734


 I dont think the T20C2 has a strobe mode, unless its been added in the last few days


----------



## recDNA (Jul 7, 2009)

d1live said:


> I dont think the T20C2 has a strobe mode, unless its been added in the last few days


 
Darn.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jul 8, 2009)

d1live said:


> I dont think the T20C2 has a strobe mode, unless its been added in the last few days


https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2999844&postcount=32

Third picture down states "Forward clicky with strobe".


----------



## MichaelW (Jul 8, 2009)

Isn't this strobe like the strobe on the Inova T4/T5, you do a double press?
'To activate strobe output, press the button twice when the light is turned on, regardless of output mode'
low -> strobe, Fun!

T20C2 says no strobe mode in low, oh well.


----------



## recDNA (Jul 8, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2999844&postcount=32
> 
> Third picture down states "Forward clicky with strobe".


 
Wow. Looks like an excellent light. I'm happy that I can throw away the clip and cigar grip but I wish they offered a non-tactical model without the strike bezel...but if the price is right I'll live with it!

What concerns me is they're throwing in a bunch of stuff I don't want or need..the filters, the clip, the bezel. Those things will raise the price...likely to territory I don't care to traverse. If it costs as much as a Olight Warrier I don't need it.

My best shot may be months down the road when (I hope) they'll offer the same light without the add-ons for less $$$


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jul 8, 2009)

Well, I haven't heard the price on this one yet. Who knows, maybe the add-ons are optional and not included...


----------



## recDNA (Jul 8, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> Well, I haven't heard the price on this one yet. Who knows, maybe the add-ons are optional and not included...


 
That would be great. I'm hoping for $69.99 or less...LOL


----------



## strinq (Jul 8, 2009)

recDNA said:


> That would be great. I'm hoping for $69.99 or less...LOL


 
Highly doubt that.
Probably around $80-$100


----------



## recDNA (Jul 8, 2009)

strinq said:


> Highly doubt that.
> Probably around $80-$100


 
Now we're up into Olight M20 territory. No reason to buy an Eagletac if that's the case.


----------



## EvilPaul2112 (Jul 8, 2009)

Anyone know where I can purchase several tail-stand tail caps for the T100C2? I cant seem to locate them anywhere....


----------



## strinq (Jul 8, 2009)

recDNA said:


> Now we're up into Olight M20 territory. No reason to buy an Eagletac if that's the case.


 
Because the Olight is better in your opinion?


----------



## recDNA (Jul 8, 2009)

strinq said:


> Because the Olight is better in your opinion?


 
No basis for comparison...but I think of the Eagletac as traditionally being less expensive for comparable products with Olight. I'm trying to keep my next purchase under $70. For all I know the Eagletac could be twice as good.


----------



## MerkurMan (Jul 8, 2009)

EvilPaul2112 said:


> Anyone know where I can purchase several tail-stand tail caps for the T100C2? I cant seem to locate them anywhere....


Mike over at PTS carries them. www.pts-flashlights.com


----------



## Tohuwabohu (Jul 9, 2009)

EagleTac just announced a new version of the T100C2: T100C2 Mark II


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jul 9, 2009)

Sweet! Can you imagine how nice of a beam this would be with an OP reflector?


----------



## MichaelW (Jul 9, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> Sweet! Can you imagine how nice of a beam this would be with an OP reflector?



Exactly, it already throws plenty well. So until the xp-g shows up, this is the new 'hotness'

and Q4 neutral-white


----------



## Mjolnir (Jul 9, 2009)

For the T20C2, it says "MSRP starting at $80." It will also be available with a Q4 neutral tinted LED. And apparently, it is "unique aerodynamic." Based on their MSRPs of the other lights, it will probably start somewhere in the 70 dollar range.


----------



## 276 (Jul 9, 2009)

Was the difference between the T100C2 and the the new Mark II ?


----------



## phantom23 (Jul 9, 2009)

276 said:


> Was the difference between the T100C2 and the the new Mark II ?





Tohuwabohu said:


> EagleTac just announced a new version of the T100C2: T100C2 Mark II


----------



## 276 (Jul 9, 2009)

I read that but it looks the same to me. Other than switching the reflector out for an OP, if that's the only thing.


----------



## phantom23 (Jul 9, 2009)

New reflector, new accessories and kits, different orings, thicker head walls, laser mode markings and that's all.


----------



## vitekboi (Jul 9, 2009)

nooooo and i had just ordered the regular t100c2 a couple days ago :mecry::mecry::mecry:


----------



## recDNA (Jul 9, 2009)

MichaelW said:


> Exactly, it already throws plenty well. So until the xp-g shows up, this is the new 'hotness'
> 
> and Q4 neutral-white


 
Is the XP-G expected to put out higher lumens from the same voltage? If so how much?


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 9, 2009)

Tohuwabohu said:


> EagleTac just announced a new version of the T100C2: T100C2 Mark II


 
They say the new light has 35% more throw over the P100C2, same as the original T100C2, but the new light has an OP reflector. :shakehead

It looks like a new reflector and some new marketing.


----------



## SuperLightMan (Jul 9, 2009)

vitekboi said:


> nooooo and i had just ordered the regular t100c2 a couple days ago :mecry::mecry::mecry:


Seriously. I just got my new (regular) T100C2 just a week ago. From what i've heard, smooth reflector gives a better throw, so i'm assuming the MKII will have less throw. Someone feel free to correct me if i'm wrong about this.


----------



## phantom23 (Jul 9, 2009)

OP reflector is optional.


----------



## vitekboi (Jul 9, 2009)

yea OP is optional, the old t100 has a et25 reflector and the mark2 has et26. not sure if theres much difference?


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 9, 2009)

SuperLightMan said:


> Seriously. I just got my new (regular) T100C2 just a week ago. From what i've heard, smooth reflector gives a better throw, so i'm assuming the MKII will have less throw. Someone feel free to correct me if i'm wrong about this.


 That is correct, the smooth reflector will give better throw. I just got mine last week also but I think I like the original one better than this new one, because the new one has a bulky, heavy head like the Fenix TK10.


----------



## copperfox (Jul 9, 2009)

I'm happy about the OP reflector. IMHO, one of the only flaws of the P100A2, and main thing that kept me from buying the old T100C2 was the smooth reflector. It throws great, but there are some minor artifacts. In my experience, the finish doesn't affect the beam throw that much unless it's a heavy stipple; the new T100C2 should still throw well.


----------



## jhc37013 (Jul 9, 2009)

So when is the Mark II for sale I havn't found any info on release date yet.


----------



## FlashCrazy (Jul 10, 2009)

jhc37013 said:


> So when is the Mark II for sale I havn't found any info on release date yet.


 
The Mark II can be ordered by dealers now, so you should start seeing them for sale sometime next week.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 10, 2009)

I'm the 10,000th viewer! Woo Hoo!!! :twothumbs


----------



## strinq (Jul 10, 2009)

copperfox said:


> I'm happy about the OP reflector. IMHO, one of the only flaws of the P100A2, and main thing that kept me from buying the old T100C2 was the smooth reflector. It throws great, but there are some minor artifacts. In my experience, the finish doesn't affect the beam throw that much unless it's a heavy stipple; the new T100C2 should still throw well.


 
Have u personally seen the beam on the t100c2?
Its wayyyy smoother than any Q5, the artifacts are very negligible. Don't even have to mention real life usage. I've only tested 2 lights so I'm not sure if i actually got freak lights that are smooth though. But I'm guessing its overall pretty smooth.
So I am wondering if u really need an OP for this light.
It was clearly meant to be a throw light anyway (the flood is small compared to other lights). 

I've compared side by side an OP and a smooth reflector on the same model of light, it does affect throw a little bit (which is noticeable). 

Personally the changes isn't fantastic enough to make me get it to replace the original one. The bezel already seems fine to me unless someone wants to use it as a hammer...
I don't want the optional OP seeing that the beam is already very smooth and i want the THROW.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Jul 10, 2009)

The T100C2 MKII seems like a step backwards from the things I find most appealing about the first version.

I have 0 interest in this one. :ironic:


----------



## strinq (Jul 10, 2009)

Sgt. LED said:


> The T100C2 MKII seems like a step backwards from the things I find most appealing about the first version.
> 
> I have 0 interest in this one. :ironic:


 
How can it be a step backward?
The improvements are:

1. An optional OP reflector, you still can choose smooth.
2. Additional laser engravings (i guess aesthetically more pleasing, doesn't really have a huge practical benefit since its just a 2 mode tight/loose head and the head doesn't really get too hot). 
3. Stronger bezel. It's actually good, but I find mine adequate.
4. Inclusion ofa holster and lanyard (bonus). 
5. Better waterproof ability. Again, I found mine adequate.

It's overall an improvement actually but not a huge one to warrant a purchase for owners of the previous version. But new buyers do get all the extras.


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 10, 2009)

strinq said:


> Have u personally seen the beam on the t100c2?
> Its wayyyy smoother than any Q5, the artifacts are very negligible. Don't even have to mention real life usage. I've only tested 2 lights so I'm not sure if i actually got freak lights that are smooth though. But I'm guessing its overall pretty smooth.
> So I am wondering if u really need an OP for this light.
> It was clearly meant to be a throw light anyway (the flood is small compared to other lights).
> ...


 
My T100C2 has a smooth beam, not as smooth as my Fenix TK10 though. I have three lights that have XP-E emitters now and they all have nice smooth beams.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Jul 10, 2009)

Not a step backwards, a step backwards from the things I like. I suppose I was not clear enough.

I like the smooth beam from a smooth reflector that does not cost you any throw.
I like the lesser amounts of engravings.
I like that the bezel was not thicker or heavier.
_Sure I give you the fact that having a holster shipped with the light is good._
I liked the waterproofing it had since mine never leaked.


----------



## MichaelW (Jul 10, 2009)

So the original T100C2 has the ET25 smooth reflector
and the new T100C2 mk2 has the ET26 smooth, or optional orange peel.

Is this new ET26 reflector an actual engineering change, or just marketing?
I would hope that it actually improves throw at the cost of ringiness.

The new marketing could be 40% more throw over P100C2 with new smooth, and 30% with new OP (which is only slightly less than the 35% with T100C2-mkI)


----------



## strinq (Jul 10, 2009)

The 5% wouldn't be noticeable but its still quite an improvement.
I wonder how they did it.
Better reflection material? Extra 'smoothness'? Very interesting.


----------



## copperfox (Jul 10, 2009)

strinq said:


> Have u personally seen the beam on the t100c2?
> Its wayyyy smoother than any Q5, the artifacts are very negligible. Don't even have to mention real life usage. I've only tested 2 lights so I'm not sure if i actually got freak lights that are smooth though. But I'm guessing its overall pretty smooth.



I have the P100A2. The reflector is a bit smaller than the T-, but otherwise similar. Mine has a faint dim spot in the center of the hotspot which can be distracting to me, even in "real world" use. It has the best throw of any 2xAA light according to Selfbuilt's reviews. IMHO, a LOP reflector would clean the beam up while still allowing good throw. The XP-E is nice, but it isn't perfect.


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 10, 2009)

copperfox said:


> I have the P100A2. The reflector is a bit smaller than the T-, but otherwise similar. Mine has a faint dim spot in the center of the hotspot which can be distracting to me, even in "real world" use. It has the best throw of any 2xAA light according to Selfbuilt's reviews. IMHO, a LOP reflector would clean the beam up while still allowing good throw. The XP-E is nice, but it isn't perfect.


 
It looks pretty perfect in my Quark lights and my Eagletac T100C2 has a tight bright hotspot which blends pretty smoothly into the spill, no rings, with a smooth reflector. Maybe it just depends on the reflector and focus.


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 10, 2009)

strinq said:


> The 5% wouldn't be noticeable but its still quite an improvement.
> I wonder how they did it.
> Better reflection material? Extra 'smoothness'? Very interesting.


 
Maybe they polished it.


----------



## strinq (Jul 10, 2009)

copperfox said:


> I have the P100A2. The reflector is a bit smaller than the T-, but otherwise similar. Mine has a faint dim spot in the center of the hotspot which can be distracting to me, even in "real world" use. It has the best throw of any 2xAA light according to Selfbuilt's reviews. IMHO, a LOP reflector would clean the beam up while still allowing good throw. The XP-E is nice, but it isn't perfect.


 
Nothing is perfect.
You must have gotten a slightly 'bad' unit then.
I got a P100A2 for my friend and was playing with it for about a week. No dim spots or anything. In fact, it's smoother than my T100C2 cuz the T100 has a very very slight donut that's hard to notice unless ur really observing it. 
Have you seen the Quark beams? My friends P100A2 comes pretty close.


----------



## EagleTac (Jul 10, 2009)

Hello all,

You guys are quick!

The bezel on the new T100C2 is stronger, but it does not change the overall weight.

The reflector curve on the original T100C2 reflector and the T100C2 MKII reflector are the same. The T100C2 MKII offers light orange peel finish reflector as an option to minimize the dark center spot and smooth out the beam more evenly.

Nicole


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 10, 2009)

Thanks for the update Nicole,
The OP reflector sounds like a good option and thanks for doing what Fenix could/would not do.


----------



## vitekboi (Jul 10, 2009)

the throw on the original is pretty nice


----------



## harddrive (Jul 11, 2009)

EagleTac said:


> Hello all,
> 
> 
> The bezel on the new T100C2 is stronger, but it does not change the overall weight.
> ...



Hi Nicole

Are the overall dimensions of the bezel still the same? I'm hoping the head is still 3.1cm diameter.


----------



## MerkurMan (Jul 11, 2009)

I'm interested to know how the waterproofing has been improved. Thicker/more o-rings? Different locations? The product page notes that the operation is now smoother. Was that an issue on the MkI?

Just trying to decide whether to cancel my current order and wait for the MkII, or just stick with the original.


----------



## phantom23 (Jul 12, 2009)

MerkurMan said:


> I'm interested to know how the waterproofing has been improved. Thicker/more o-rings? Different locations? The product page notes that the operation is now smoother. Was that an issue on the MkI?


Read this:


> Now T100C2 Mark II operates smoother and still maintains excellent waterproof ability.


It says it's the same, not improved. It's smoother now but it was smooth before, no issues in MkI.


----------



## EagleTac (Jul 12, 2009)

The head still measures 3.1cm exactly.

The waterproof ability between the original MKI and MKII are the same. It's just that the tension of the o-ring has been adjusted slightly, so it requires less force to switch between turbo and general mode. Also it requires less force to twist the tail-cap while swapping batteries. 

Nicole


----------



## PLI (Jul 13, 2009)

When this flashlight will be avalaible for order ? :wave:


----------



## EagleTac (Jul 13, 2009)

PLI said:


> When this flashlight will be avalaible for order ? :wave:


 
Very soon. Check the eagletac-store.com over in CPFMP. 

Nicole


----------



## MalayanTiger (Jul 15, 2009)

Great to see an improved version. Will anodizing be improved too? My one week old T100C2 already looks like 1 year old. Even the anodizing on my M2XC4 has started to chip. How about releasing versions in Natural HA? In terms of performance, the T100C2 is :twothumbs! Now, only if we could buy a light built like a Surefire and outputs like an Eagletac.


----------



## Anto (Jul 15, 2009)

Any way we can swap out reflectors on our end instead of buying a whole new light?


----------



## alohanole (Jul 30, 2009)

Mark II is out! Eagle-tac store has them listed now...

I want one bad...my quark 123^2 tactical warm arrived today, and I want another light! 

I guess the bug has bitten me. lovecpf


----------

