# McClicky tailcaps



## signal 13 (May 6, 2010)

Can anyone comment on the ruggedness & reliability of these Surefire tailcap ugrades? Would like to get some for my G2s but need to know I can count on 'em when it really matters!

_(Yes, I did a search, but just found sales threads, no comments on how well they work) 
_


----------



## ElectronGuru (May 7, 2010)

I'll ask others to speak to the experience, but I can share a few statistics.

With 6 months of data (Nov 09), 400+ units are in the wild, with 3 reported failures. 1 was dead on on arrive, 1 was blown with a 10 amp load, and the last was somehow crushed during installation. We've not heard of any failures during use.


----------



## signal 13 (May 7, 2010)

Those are impressive numbers, I must say! You will definitely be getting a few orders from me in the very near future for some pre-assembled G2 TCs! 

Thanks for the response!


----------



## gcbryan (May 7, 2010)

What was the problem with the original Surefire tailcaps? Were there many failures with those?


----------



## ace0001a (May 7, 2010)

gcbryan said:


> What was the problem with the original Surefire tailcaps? Were there many failures with those?



Basically the McClicky Surefire tailcap upgrade kit is for those people who want a high quality forward clicky switch for their Surefire 6P, G2, C2, etc. flashlights that come with the Z41 twisty tailcap...which is of course super reliable (though I can't say if there have ever been any failures with them). It's mostly a preference thing. Some people like clicky switches and some people like twisty switches.


----------



## signal 13 (May 7, 2010)

I use the Z41 twisties (for reliability in high risk situations) on my two C2s that I carry on duty, but I just don't like the feel of the G2 twisties. I had a couple of Surefire HA clickies completely fall apart on duty. SF promptly replaced them, but I'll stick to twisties on my C2s for duty carry. 

I carry a G2 w/ an M60 in each of my bags and keep one in my truck. I feel like I'm always just fumbling around trying to go between lockout/momentary/constant on w/ the G2 twisty. I want to be able to just turn it on right away if I really need it.


----------



## TriChrome (May 7, 2010)

I like my three McClicky's, but they're extremely sensitive. The smallest amount of pressure (I'm talking about a fraction of a mm) turns them on; this could be bad if you're in a tactical situation and your light goes on by accident.

I like the stock Surefire twisty tailcaps because you can somewhat choose how much pressure is needed to turn them on (or at least how much travel of the button is needed before they turn on) which prevents accidental light discharges.


----------



## ElectronGuru (May 7, 2010)

gcbryan said:


> What was the problem with the original Surefire tailcaps?


Most metal SF models come standard with a Z41 twisty+momentary. This setup is very reliable but not very convenient. Factory Z58/Z59 tailcaps are available, but at twice the price of the McClicky or NetKidz options when you already have a twisty. So rather than buy two caps, folks find it preferable to upgrade the tailcap they already have.

There are no Nitrolon clicky tailcaps made, its upgrade or get a metal tailcap.




TriChrome said:


> I like my three McClicky's, but they're extremely sensitive.



There are now 2 pressure options, PM sent about upgrading yours:


----------



## JCD (May 7, 2010)

Pssst … grams are not a unit of force.


----------



## bestcounsel (May 8, 2010)

I had one and thought it was great. The only thing to mention is the button sticks out way more than the regular twisty. It did not bother me but it is something that is different to mention. 

I just prefer twisty tailcaps....


----------



## kramer5150 (May 8, 2010)

The McClicky gutts used in these have a very good track record of reliability and durability.


----------



## 737mech (May 8, 2010)

I did not like how sensitive my McClicky switches were either so I came up with a simple fix that works for me. If you take the switch apart you can trim the little "nub" (for lack of a better word) on the underside of the switch boot a bit shorter with a razorblade. Just trim a little bit at a time until satisfied. I trimmed mine nearly all the way off. Works like a champ.


----------



## Reaper (May 8, 2010)

Haven't tried it yet but the switches are supposed to be slightly adjustable for pressure and there's two type of boots - one hard and one soft. I have the hard one on the switch right now and I find it just about perfect in pressure for me so I haven't even tried the soft one yet.


----------



## Chevy-SS (May 8, 2010)

JCD said:


> Pssst … grams are not a unit of force.



_LOL, huh? I guess there's also something wrong with measuring trigger pull in 'pounds'? _



*The chart does a nice job of illustrating the difference in the switches.* Thanks for posting the chart!

-


----------



## Locoboy5150 (May 8, 2010)

Chevy-SS said:


> _LOL, huh? I guess there's also something wrong with measuring trigger pull in 'pounds'?_



No that's correct because pounds are the Imperial ("standard") unit of measuring force. Trigger pull is a force.

Grams are the metric unit of measuring mass, not force.

The standard unit of mass is the slug.


----------



## Chevy-SS (May 8, 2010)

Locoboy5150 said:


> No that's correct because pounds are the Imperial ("standard") unit of measuring force. Trigger pull is a force.
> 
> Grams are the metric unit of measuring mass, not force.
> 
> The standard unit of mass is the slug.




The pound-force has a metric counterpart, less commonly used than the newton: the kilogram-force (kgf) (sometimes kilopond)......

So, I still think he's OK with grams. But no matter, the chart provides a good reference point that we can all understand.

-


----------



## JCD (May 8, 2010)

Chevy-SS said:


> The pound-force has a metric counterpart, less commonly used than the newton: the kilogram-force (kgf) (sometimes kilopond).



From your source:

_"The kilogram-force has never been a part of the International System of Units (SI), which was introduced in 1960. The SI unit of force is the newton."_


----------



## Armed_Forces (May 8, 2010)

*fixed


----------



## Chevy-SS (May 8, 2010)

JCD said:


> From your source:
> 
> _"The kilogram-force has never been a part of the International System of Units (SI), which was introduced in 1960. The SI unit of force is the newton."_




From the same source - *"The newton is the unit of force derived in the SI system; it is equal to the amount of force required to accelerate a mass of one kilogram at a rate of one meter per second per second."*

Then why are they using metric terms here?

Next thing you'll be saying is that "Geeks" is not a proper term for 'force' either, lol! 

-


----------



## JCD (May 8, 2010)

Chevy-SS said:


> From the same source - *"The newton is the unit of force derived in the SI system; it is equal to the amount of force required to accelerate a mass of one kilogram at a rate of one meter per second per second."*
> 
> Then why are they using metric terms here?



???

They're giving the definition of the Newton, and the Newton is the metric (i.e., SI) unit for force. 1 N = 1 kg·m·s⁻². The kilogram-force has never been an SI unit. Even if it was, it is still a unit distinctly different from a kilogram. One measures force; the other measures mass. Force _is not equal to_ Mass. Ever. The units will _always_ be different.

Geez. I was just lightheartedly pointing out that the graph was labeled with incorrect units. If you want to discuss and learn about different units and why it's important to use correct units, start an appropriate thread in The Cafe.


----------



## Wrace (May 8, 2010)

I changed all my G2's over to clicky's using the kits from Oveready as I don't like twisty switches on general use lights. The clicky's are much more user friendly without a bunch of monkey motion twisting just to turn the thing on/off.

I have some of the light touch switches and one of the heavy touch, and I prefer the light touch ones for general use.


----------



## nanomu (May 9, 2010)

Having recently tried out both the soft and hard McClicky, I can say subjectively they seem to work much better than the stock SF clickies, and have an extremely smooth action. They also seem to be much better made than the SF ones.

The soft press takes a _very_ light touch, so beware!

That said, I highly recommend only performing the replacement yourself if you know exactly what you're doing.


----------



## shark_za (May 10, 2010)

Just beware that these clickys use plastic for the body of the switch. 
The Surefire Z59 has a metal band around the switch mechanism for structural integrity. 

I'm not saying this will happen with this switch but it CAN happen. 

I dropped my 6P equipped with another brand aftermarket clicky and it went to constant on. Drop from standing height onto the floor.
Opened up and saw the body of the switch had broken. 

I had two of these and just by chance the same happened to number 2 a week later. Dropped it and when I picked it up I thought "no ways, not again?!" 
I managed to glue it back and have worked out a ring re-inforce method around the plastic bit of body that sticks out past the metal ring. 

My serious torches use the Z-59 and the backup uses the Z41 for maximum reliability. 

I will buy some of these McClickys to see if they are more hardy than the other type. Expect an order soon along with an old style lens kit and a few bezels/tailcaps.


----------



## BIGLOU (May 11, 2010)

Just thought of sharing this photo and I'm sure you have seen them. I tightened my McClicky down pretty good as I did'nt want it to loosen on me. It is pretty sensitive but I love it. If you think your light will accidentally turn on I would throw on the ElectronGuru Delrin Shroud to prevent the button from making contact with anything. Of course doing this will prevent you from using a SF V70 holster tailcap down.


----------



## fyrstormer (May 11, 2010)

I once chucked my Haiku 6 feet into the air and it landed on pavement (by accident of course). The switch was and is perfectly fine.


----------



## shark_za (May 11, 2010)

Ah, but does it have a plastic bodied clicky inside?


----------



## Moddoo (May 11, 2010)

You will never damage a McClicky switch by dropping, or throwing your flashlight.

They have been proven tough for several years, in thousands of lights.


----------



## fyrstormer (May 11, 2010)

shark_za said:


> Ah, but does it have a plastic bodied clicky inside?


Um, yes. All current McGizmo flashlights use McClicky switches, plastic body and all.


----------



## fyrstormer (May 11, 2010)

Chevy-SS said:


> From the same source - *"The newton is the unit of force derived in the SI system; it is equal to the amount of force required to accelerate a mass of one kilogram at a rate of one meter per second per second."*
> 
> Then why are they using metric terms here?
> 
> ...


Oh-kay then.

Pounds are a unit of force. When you say you weigh 220 pounds, you mean Earth's gravity is pulling on your body with sufficient _force_ to compress the scale against the floor until the number "220" shows up on the screen or dial. You could say your equivalent metric "weight" is 100 kilograms, but you'd be wrong, unless you were standing on Earth at sea-level. Your equivalent metric weight is 978.6 newtons. Provided you actually _did _weigh yourself on Earth at sea-level, then you can calculate your metric _mass_ to be 100 kilograms based on your weight of 220 pounds, but the difference there is your mass will be 100 kilograms even if you were floating in space, where you're not applying force to anything.

So the problem with measuring force using grams is: the measurements are only accurate if you're testing at sea-level with actual gram-weights sitting on top of the switch. Otherwise, anywhere else in the universe (even on a mountaintop), the gravitationally-induced force applied by those gram-weights will not be the same as you expect, and your measurements will be wrong.

Moving on...


----------



## sfca (May 21, 2010)

Do these hardpress McClicky's make a loud "click" sound compared to the Z59?


----------



## Moddoo (May 21, 2010)

sfca said:


> Do these hardpress McClicky's make a loud "click" sound compared to the Z59?



The click is nearly the same "loudness" between the Z59, and Mcclicky.
The tone is a bit different.


----------



## ElectronGuru (May 21, 2010)

sfca said:


> ...hardpress McClicky's...



Extra note: hardpress and softpress use the same switch and the same ring (with the same sound), the only difference is the boot. Its also easy to change between them.


----------



## etc (Aug 25, 2010)

nanomu said:


> Having recently tried out both the soft and hard McClicky, I can say subjectively they seem to work much better than the stock SF clickies, and have an extremely smooth action. They also seem to be much better made than the SF ones.
> 
> The soft press takes a _very_ light touch, so beware!
> 
> That said, I highly recommend only performing the replacement yourself if you know exactly what you're doing.



This is really good to know. 

Light soft press is a bonus. If you want to prevent AD, is it possible to just unscrew the Z41 TC a bit?


----------



## ElectronGuru (Aug 25, 2010)

etc said:


> Light soft press is a bonus. If you want to prevent AD, is it possible to just unscrew the Z41 TC a bit?



Depending on the tailcap in which it is installed (bare metal inside won't lock out), the switch is effectively locked out, the moment the brass ring looses contact with the bottom lip of the body. Even a quarter turn off can be enough to keep the light off while the switch is clicked on.


----------



## Darvis (Aug 25, 2010)

Armed_Forces said:


> *fixed


 
Awesomely hilarious... almost had a nose squirter with this one.


----------



## red_hackle (Sep 1, 2010)

ElectronGuru said:


> Even a quarter turn off can be enough to keep the light off while the switch is clicked on.



+1 

I have three softpress McClicky switches installed in Z41 tailcaps and while momentary-on is very sensitive it just takes a short turn to lock out the switch for safe transportation or storage.

Also, I recently intalled the third McClicky myself and was surprised how easy it was. Just make sure you thoroughly boil/bake the tailcap to soften up the adhesive used to secure the plastic disk and you should be able to remove the stock twisty without any damages to threads or anodisation. :thumbsup:


----------



## etc (Sep 1, 2010)

I just tried a McClicky and I like it. It is indeed hyper-sensitive but I see that as a *good* thing, as it takes less pressure to turn get it instant-on and more importantly, less pressure to hold it for a minute. Very nice.

Some of my Z41 tailcaps require so much pressure that gets annoying having to hold them for more than 10 seconds.

I usually EDC in the pocket. I never had issues with Z41, as it cannot click-on. This one, I am worried about accidentally clicking it on. I think I will get a holster for it and carry it bezel down.

Great device for sure. Yes, it can be locked out with as little as about 1/6 of a turn. 

I now have to get used to the one-handed operation as I am so used to having to twist the TC on my 6P clones. But one handed is useful often enough.


----------



## bestcounsel (Sep 2, 2010)

Im thinking about buying a couple of these....

got any data by operators using these like: Soldiers/Cops/Contractors etc..



Moddoo said:


> You will never damage a McClicky switch by dropping, or throwing your flashlight.
> 
> They have been proven tough for several years, in thousands of lights.


----------



## ElectronGuru (Sep 2, 2010)

bestcounsel said:


> got any data by operators using these like: Soldiers/Cops/Contractors etc..



Updating from post 2, it now looks like this:

With 10 months of data (Nov 09), 900+ units are now in the wild, with 4 reported failures. 1 was dead on arrival, 2 were blown with a 10 amp load, and the last was somehow crushed during installation. We've not heard of any failures during use.

I don't know about contractors, but many are in the hands of LEO's in USA, Canada, UK, Spain, Australia, Malaysia, Greece, Israel, Brazil, Russia, and Japan. Kits and preconfigured tailcaps have been shipped directly and indirectly to both Iraq and Afghanistan.


----------



## bestcounsel (Sep 2, 2010)

Thanks for the info...



ElectronGuru said:


> Updating from post 2, it now looks like this:
> 
> With 10 months of data (Nov 09), 900+ units are now in the wild, with 4 reported failures. 1 was dead on arrival, 2 were blown with a 10 amp load, and the last was somehow crushed during installation. We've not heard of any failures during use.
> 
> I don't know about contractors, but many are in the hands of LEO's in USA, Canada, UK, Spain, Australia, Malaysia, Greece, Israel, Brazil, Russia, and Japan. Kits and preconfigured tailcaps have been shipped directly and indirectly to both Iraq and Afghanistan.


----------



## etc (Sep 3, 2010)

Thanks for the update.


----------

