# P61L



## outersquare (Sep 16, 2008)

is this still coming out or what


----------



## IcantC (Sep 16, 2008)

That's like asking is the world round? No one knows 



It will come out, one day some day. I bet it will be a Q5 and will come out when there are Q10s pumping out 500 lumens .


----------



## dougie (Sep 16, 2008)

I can't say I'm bothered now. Originally I was really looking forward to Surefire releasing this module and I definitely would have bought a few. However, unless the P61L can bring something new to the table that a Malkoff M60 doesn't I'm afraid that they have missed the boat.

However, I'm not surprised that the P61L has not appeared as Surefire does have a lot of other ongoing projects which I think take precedence over the introduction of a new stand alone lamp module. From a business perspective it would seem sensible to avoid spending a lot of time and money on the P61L when they need to get new flashlights onto the market?


----------



## Sgt. LED (Sep 16, 2008)

I think it's dead on the table due to heatsinking concerns.

To have enough heatsinking their drop in would have to look too similar to other's products and they can't stand the thought.


----------



## JNewell (Sep 16, 2008)

Just bought an M60 for exactly the same reason - got tired of waiting for the P61L.


----------



## WadeF (Sep 16, 2008)

I wouldn't be surprised if they are waiting on the new multi-emitter Cree.


----------



## brighterisbetter (Sep 16, 2008)

Here's what you've gotta remember though. The CPF is a relatively close-knit community. For the everyday joe who goes to buy a SF from a brick-n-mortar, and sees a whopping "200 lumen" upgrade next to the lights, he's likely to buy regardless of whatever else is out there. He's probably thinking, "Well I can choose between SF and some guy named Malkoff" which is a shame because I agree with other's posts here and own a few Malkoff's myself. Let's hope this isn't so, and that Gene gets the exposure he deserves before the P61L comes in and destroys the competition.


----------



## ampdude (Sep 16, 2008)

I like the Surefire design better than most of the aftermarket drop ins. I am in for a P61L when they are available. I emailed them on Wednesday morning, but Surefire has not yet responded to my inquiry about the availability of the P61L.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Sep 16, 2008)

I bet you never ever hear from them either.
I have a total of 5 ignored E-mails as of last week. You just HAVE to call them.


----------



## ampdude (Sep 16, 2008)

Usually they reply within 2 or 3 days, this is the first time I haven't gotten an email reply in quite awhile.


----------



## FlashSpyJ (Sep 16, 2008)

I emailed SureFire a while back, I actually got an answer almost seconds after having pressed the send button!

I was really surprised by this! And a bit sad when they told me that they didnt have any time plan at all to when they might be releasing the P61L.

All this new SF products that havent come out yet has only made me stop being a Flashaholic...Im not even EDCing a light anymore!

I might be cured "when" SF releases their new products


----------



## brighterisbetter (Sep 16, 2008)

FlashSpyJ said:


> All this new SF products that havent come out yet has only made me stop being a Flashaholic...Im not even EDCing a light anymore!


WHAT!!!???? - That's Blasphemy!!!!!!!


----------



## Size15's (Sep 16, 2008)

I suggest that if SureFire have a proto-type P61L at their booth for the SHOT Show 2009 then there is a chance they will release it before SS2010.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Sep 16, 2008)

FlashSpyJ said:


> All this new SF products that havent come out yet has only made me stop being a Flashaholic...Im not even EDCing a light anymore!
> 
> I might be cured "when" SF releases their new products



That is so sad, and no cure n sight!!! Looks like it will be a slow, cruel, lingering illness.

Bill


----------



## txgp17 (Sep 16, 2008)

I'm done waiting on P61L's. I already have 7 Malkoff's.

The only benefit I see to having one is that it will fit in the spare carrier.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Sep 16, 2008)

Hoorah for Malkoff!

Surefire would be wise to just buy malkoffs and not burn up anymore R&D money trying to make good drop-ins.

Honestly does anyone here think Surefire could do better than Gene?


----------



## LumenMan (Sep 16, 2008)

Sgt. LED said:


> Hoorah for Malkoff!
> 
> Surefire would be wise to just buy malkoffs and not burn up anymore R&D money trying to make good drop-ins.
> 
> Honestly does anyone here think Surefire could do better than Gene?


 
I honestly don't think that there is a better design than Gene's M60 :thumbsup:


----------



## mdocod (Sep 16, 2008)

Here's my thoughts:

The difference between LOLA and HOLA lamps in the incan line, is not really throw, but total output, spread out into a wider beam.

I would not doubt it if they were planning to replicate this in the P61L, which means they need a small multi-die emitter...

So yea, I'd say expect it to have that new MC-E (or something like it) if they ever do come out. 

I agree though that sticking to their standard lamp design on this one is not going to work well when taking into consideration thermal issues, very curious to see what they will do with that. 

Eric


----------



## ampdude (Sep 17, 2008)

txgp17 said:


> The only benefit I see to having one is that it will fit in the spare carrier.



That's a really big plus in my opinion.



mdocod said:


> I agree though that sticking to their standard lamp design on this one is not going to work well when taking into consideration thermal issues, very curious to see what they will do with that.



I've found some of the current drop-in designs to be somewhat unreliable in operation, especially under hard use or daily operation. I'd rather have the outer spring there to make sure it is making good contact with the body. SF's design seems to be the more reliable design than the typical LED drop-in "pill" for lack of better term.


----------



## mdocod (Sep 17, 2008)

I think they can maintain an outer spring, but just beef up the amount of metal, and make the springs shorter.


----------



## TexLite (Sep 18, 2008)

Sgt. LED said:


> Honestly does anyone here think Surefire could do better than Gene?


 
Yes,I do.

I'm not knocking the Malkoff,its a great product,but Surefire has a track record thats not likely to be matched anytime in the near future.

-Michael


----------



## Sgt. LED (Sep 18, 2008)

Man I'm sorry but I gotta let of a bit of steam on this one, it's not directed at you rather directed at the hole in my wallet due to the P60L

I kinda think their D26 size drop-in has a lousy track record.

Because: they have only made 1 model that due to heat lowered it's output so quick that they were forced to make an inline bezel switch in the G2L lights to try to get closer to specs and the runtime/output charts were vastly different that the usual Surefire claim VS reality.

Up until the P60L the term "Surefire Lumens" was a common way of saying if they claim 100 lumens for 1 hour, what you got was 120 lumens for 1 hour. With the P60L the claim is 80 lumens for 12 hours and what you get is 65 lumens for maybe 4 hours.

I hate to knock them since they do so well with all of their other LED products. Every Surefire LED light besides the P60L has been very good to me and I reccomend them. But sadly for me I would be fine if they just quit the LED drop-in program totally and focused on upgrading all their other LED lights from Lux V's to SSC's and Cree's.

:shrug:


----------



## mdocod (Sep 18, 2008)

Good point Sgt. LED!


----------



## TexLite (Sep 18, 2008)

Sgt. LED said:


> I kinda think their D26 size drop-in has a lousy track record.


 
Yeah,I'll agree the output is kaput,but the track record is anything but lousy.To me,the term "track record" is representative of reliability more than effeciency.The reliability(track record) has been superb, but the efficieny(performance) leaves a lot to be desired.

The P60L has proven itself to be very reliable even when rigidly mounted on many thousands of weapons through many thousands of rounds.Thats the aspect I was referring to that would be near impossible to beat.



Sgt. LED said:


> Up until the P60L the term "Surefire Lumens" was a common way of saying if they claim 100 lumens for 1 hour, what you got was 120 lumens for 1 hour. With the P60L the claim is 80 lumens for 12 hours and what you get is 65 lumens for maybe 4 hours.


 
Yeah,the useful stated runtime is really stretched on the P60L,but the output is around 80lm.

If you've ever pulled one apart the driver seemingly has enough components to make three other boards.The reason for this I assume is redundancy,they've sacrificed efficiency/runtime for reliability.

In my lightbox,most manufacturers come in around their stated output,but Surefire's are always higher than claimed.Im working to get it dialed in better,right now I'm within 10%. 



Sgt. LED said:


> I hate to knock them since they do so well with all of their other LED products. Every Surefire LED light besides the P60L has been very good to me and I reccomend them.


 
I agree its something they need to work on.The P60L is definately the odd one of the bunch,most all of their lights are overachievers,but the P60L is the blacksheep. 



Sgt. LED said:


> But sadly for me I would be fine if they just quit the LED drop-in program totally and focused on upgrading all their other LED lights from Lux V's to SSC's and Cree's.


 
Yeah,other drop-in manufacturers are way ahead with output,runtime,and usability.LF announcing recently they were going to build an LED drop-in really stirs the pot.

But Surefire has actually upgraded at least one light with the recent change of the U2 w/Lux-V to the U2A w/SSC P4.The jurys still out on runtime and output last I checked.

In short,other quality manufacturers indeed have the edge in usability and output,but I think the P60L has a track record of reliability that has to be acknowledged in terms of volume. 

-Michael


----------



## dougie (Sep 18, 2008)

Michael

To play the devils advocate here your suggestion that the P60L has redundancy circuits doesn't make sense. Are you saying that in the event that one component or part of a circuit malfunctions then the LED would continue to work? If that is your proposition then neither Surefire or anyone else has capitalized on it as a function and used it as a sales point?

Whilst there is no denying that the P60L is a fine piece of engineering it uses an electronic sensor for thermal management which is far less efficient than a physical heatsink. This simple fact explains why the output quickly lowers once the P60L begins too hot to dissipate a build up of heat in the module. The reliability of the module is also debatable given that no one knows how many have been sold and if there are many warranty claims?

My feelings, like yours,are that as there are no widespread complaints heard on this or other forums that the module must indeed be reliable. However, this is not verifiable and is just a subjective statement. Al on another thread made a suggestion that the only way to test if a Malkoff or any other well known maker of drop-ins products is reliable on a firearm is to have a number of each module tested. Unfortunately without proper testing the P60L cannot be said to be any more relaible than any other component and the choice of a Surefire P60L is simply a matter of preference. As you will see from a previous post I made I have 3 P60L's which I regard as both useful and until proven otherwise reliable. However, I would much rather use a Malkoff as I 'feel' the reliability is as likely to be as good as or better than the P60L. What is not in dispute is that the output on the M60, M60F and M60L is better than the P60L and given that Surefire themselves suggested that the 'P61L would have an output of at least 200 lumens then the Malkoff units already exceed this statement.


----------



## Monocrom (Sep 18, 2008)

JNewell said:


> Just bought an M60 for exactly the same reason - got tired of waiting for the P61L.


 
Looks like I'm not the only one who got fed up waiting for the P61L.

Snagged a slightly used M60 on B/S/T recently. Gave my SF C2 new life!

Gene's handmade creations are SWEET! :twothumbs


----------



## RWT1405 (Sep 18, 2008)

Sorry Michael, I don’t “bow” at the altar of SF.

If you really believe that that P60L is better than Gene’s “stuff”, so be it, you are welcome to believe what you want. BTW, "the sky is falling". 

For me, no P60L’s reside in any of my “P60” capable SF’s (17 of them), nor will any, at least until SF “decides” to make them right (I’m not holding my breath).

My .02 FWIW YMMV


----------



## PhantomPhoton (Sep 18, 2008)

I've also stopped waiting for the P61L. Its Malkoff all the way for me for now. Hopefully SF is fixing the regulation and making good heatsinking in the meantime.


----------



## kelmo (Sep 18, 2008)

I'll buy a few if they come to market. What I like about the SF drop in, as txgp17 stated, that it will fit in the spares carrier. I'm assuming that the would be P61L will fit in a SC1. This will give my 6P/9P a hi-low option and with a twisty switch will make it an extremely reliable system as I can replace the emitter out in the field if something goes wrong. 

kelmo


----------



## JNewell (Sep 18, 2008)

I have and am running a couple of P60Ls. They were priced well (discount from a B&M dealer with no web advertising to worry about) and I'm happy with them. But...



> Snagged a slightly used M60 on B/S/T recently. Gave my SF C2 new life!


 
Yep, with an emphasis on "*new*." As in, not "new life" (for the same light) but "new light." I know that's kinda playing with words...but the M60 and M60F I got last week totally changed the usefulness and performance of their hosts. I started in a pair of G2s but moved them to a pair of C2s until I can get replacement bezels for the G2s.

The only problem is that the M60F has some completely upstaged my KL4 that it's been hiding in a closet since it saw the beam from the M60F.


----------



## Monocrom (Sep 18, 2008)

PhantomPhoton said:


> I've also stopped waiting for the P61L. Its Malkoff all the way for me for now. Hopefully SF is fixing the regulation and making good heatsinking in the meantime.


 
It might just be more cost-effective for Surefire to throw a buttload of money at Gene, and buy the rights to his Production-version M60 drop-in.... And that's meant with zero sarcasm.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Sep 18, 2008)

^
+1!


----------



## brighterisbetter (Sep 18, 2008)

^
+1 again!! Got my first M30 today, the engraved one, and love the build quality. Next up for me is the M60LL for my BOB.


----------



## BigD64 (Sep 18, 2008)

I have a few "P60L's" that pump out a lot more than 80 Lumens. The P61L does have some heat sink issues. The Extra ooommph P60L's I have get quite warm. They are still not as bright as a Malkoff M60.


----------



## TexLite (Sep 18, 2008)

dougie said:


> Michael
> 
> To play the devils advocate here your suggestion that the P60L has redundancy circuits doesn't make sense. Are you saying that in the event that one component or part of a circuit malfunctions then the LED would continue to work?


 
As I said,if you've ever really opened up a Surefire and compared the driver to others,you'd see that there are much more components than are necessary to make the circuit function.



dougie said:


> If that is your proposition then neither Surefire or anyone else has capitalized on it as a function and used it as a sales point?


 
They have capitalized on it,its called reliability.



dougie said:


> Whilst there is no denying that the P60L is a fine piece of engineering it uses an electronic sensor for thermal management which is far less efficient than a physical heatsink. This simple fact explains why the output quickly lowers once the P60L begins too hot to dissipate a build up of heat in the module.


 
Thats an incorrect statement,in more than way than one.To say it dosent have a "heatsink" when most other drop-ins are built the same way is misleading.

And the output dosent drop dramatically,it drops about 10lm,and then stabilizes.



dougie said:


> The reliability of the module is also debatable given that no one knows how many have been sold and if there are many warranty claims?My feelings, like yours,are that as there are no widespread complaints heard on this or other forums that the module must indeed be reliable. However, this is not verifiable and is just a subjective statement. Al on another thread made a suggestion that the only way to test if a Malkoff or any other well known maker of drop-ins products is reliable on a firearm is to have a number of each module tested.


 
This has been said a hundred times,but Surefire's primary market is the Military and Law Enforcement.Environments where it may be rigidly mounted to a high caliber weapon,getting banged around by entry teams,all while enduring very high ambient tempratures.And yes,if there were even a small amount of failures,I'm sure we would hear about it in one way or the other.Want proof,how about the Surefire tailcap issues of the past?I'd say it would be near impossible to claim they are anything but reliable.



dougie said:


> Unfortunately without proper testing the P60L cannot be said to be any more relaible than any other component and the choice of a Surefire P60L is simply a matter of preference.


 
The P60L and other Surefire's have been tested,in extreme conditions more than any other manufacturer,thats a fact.



RWT1405 said:


> Sorry Michael, I don’t “bow” at the altar of SF.
> 
> If you really believe that that P60L is better than Gene’s “stuff”, so be it, you are welcome to believe what you want. BTW, "the sky is falling".
> 
> ...


 
I dont bow at any alter,I work to be objective in my observations.

If you actually read my post you'd see I never questioned the Malkoff,in fact quite the opposite.I stated the Surefire had been tested in more conditions and in higher numbers than any other manufacturer.Thats a statement of fact.

-Michael


----------



## dougie (Sep 18, 2008)

Michael

I don't want to nit pick with any of your arguments so we will have to agree to disagree on your replies to my post. Anyway I'm glad you like the P60L as much as you seem to. OBTW if it does fail I hope you let us know?


----------



## brighterisbetter (Sep 18, 2008)

Michael, I liked the way you defended your earlier post by not being rude or showing hostility, this to me shows your confidence and professionalism. That being said, I think many of the arguments being made so far, from either side of the fence, are mostly in part due to the frustration of the P61L not being available yet, despite being announced for 2008. Once the product finally comes to fruition, then I'm sure the hostilities will dissipate a great deal, but until that time, thanks all for keeping me entertained.

EDIT - Should mention that I currently own two Malkoff's which I love, but have yet to own a P60L.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Sep 18, 2008)

I have a Malkoff drop-in and a SF P60L, and both are nice. The P60L seems to be sturdy, and I have wrapped mine with aluminum foil for a tight fit and get no drop off in output using a metal SF bezel (bounce with light meter). I particularly like the beam of the P60L with a more or less even transition from the main beam and flood area. The beam of the Malkoff is awesome and setup for max lux, with a nice wide center beam. I wrap up my Malkoff too. The difference, of course, is the higher flux of the Malkoff, and higher mA drain from the batteries. From my point of view the P60L is good for an all purpose light, not too bright for close up work, not too dim for throw outside, and also good runtime. The P61L will most certainly be an interesting drop-in, and we can only guess how it will be setup for heatsinking.

Bill


----------



## TexLite (Sep 18, 2008)

Thanks brighterisbetter,

Funny thing is I'm not really a big fan of the P60L,but I think objectively it has proven itself.

The P61L,regardless of release time,already has some tough competition,and other multi-level drop-ins are way ahead as far as useability goes.

-Michael


----------



## JNewell (Sep 18, 2008)

I have been waiting for the P61, as mentioned...but I have begun to suspect that when it appears it won't have the specs that were announced in the 2008 catalog. I think there's a good chance they've found that they can't fit those specs into their design and production boxes. I'd love to be wrong about that...we'll find out.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Sep 18, 2008)

TexLite said:


> Thanks brighterisbetter,
> 
> Funny thing is I'm not really a big fan of the P60L,but I think objectively it has proven itself.
> 
> ...



Actually, SF will have little competition if and when they come out with the P61L. CPF people and maybe a few others are the only ones who know about alternatives to the SF P60L, and quite possibly the P61L. The mainstream population will think that the P61L is the only LED solution for them, for high output in an LED that they can use with their SF products. Maybe, manufacturers such as Malkoff will have an impact on the general population, LEO's, and the Military, providing some stiff competition. We will see.

Bill


----------



## RWT1405 (Sep 18, 2008)

If you actually read my post you'd see I never questioned the Malkoff,in fact quite the opposite.I stated the Surefire had been tested in more conditions and in higher numbers than any other manufacturer.Thats a statement of fact.

-Michael 

TexLite





Flashaholic
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 303 





*Re: P61L* 
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Sgt. LED* 

 
_Honestly does anyone here think Surefire could do better than Gene?_

Yes,I do.

I'm not knocking the Malkoff,its a great product,but Surefire has a track record thats not likely to be matched anytime in the near future.

-Michael 


Really, you didn't? Please show me how the P60L is better then Gene's "stuff". 

My .02 FWIW YMMV


----------



## TexLite (Sep 18, 2008)

RWT1405 said:


> If you actually read my post you'd see I never questioned the Malkoff,in fact quite the opposite.I stated the Surefire had been tested in more conditions and in higher numbers than any other manufacturer.Thats a statement of fact.
> 
> -Michael
> 
> ...


 
Yes,exactly.Read the post one more time.

I said the Malkoff is a great product,but the area Surefire has them beat is the sheer number of products in service in harsh environments where they have proven themselves.

-Michael


----------



## TMedina (Sep 18, 2008)

As much as I love my new Malkoff drop-in, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that Gene and Cathy do not have the resources to subject their creations to the same degree of testing that Surefire can apply to its product line.

Does this in any way denigrate the quality of a Malkoff? Nope. Am I suddenly less trusting in my Malkoff? Nope. For that matter, I intend to buy one or two more, future paychecks permitting.

If and when the P61L is released, there will inevitably be comparisons with Malkoff drop-ins; to each their own. "Best" is a matter of opinion, taste and relative standard.

-Trevor


----------



## RWT1405 (Sep 19, 2008)

Really now, they have? PLEASE enlighten me as to WHERE the P60L has "proven" itself? I submit, that it has not. Just because you say it has, does not make it so. 

If you have "proof" of the P60L being superior to the Malkoff's and having "proven" itself, please provide it, as I am very interested in seeing it, as I am sure many others here will be also (owning both and having moved all of the P60L's that I have to "cheap knock off's" and for gifts to people who wouldn't normally buy such a light). I can tell you that none of the P60L's (unless they "fix" them) will find their way into my work or CCW lights. 

I find the P60L "wanting" and not up to SF's normal "standards", at least not the "standard" that I found in the first one's I bought in the mid 1990's. 

As I said I do not "bow" at the altar of SF as so MANY here do, when the product they put out is "sub-standard", and yes, I say the P60L is "sub-standard". Not even to talk about the P61L that may never appear, so it seems. 

My .02 FWIW YMMV


----------



## Superdave (Sep 19, 2008)

the P61L was supposed to use a SSC P7, i got tired of waiting and made my own.. and now i see why SF hasn't released them. the beam quality with such a small reflector is crap. It gets pretty warm after a while and even with plenty of thermal compound and decent heatsinking it still tints blue after 10 minutes of use. 


For now i'm using a generic Q5 dropin, it's plenty and runs forever on 1 18650 

the P60L uses a P4 LED.. no wonder the Malkoff is brighter since it's using the better CREE LED. :thumbsup:


----------



## ampdude (Sep 19, 2008)

I've been very interested in a P7 drop-in, but I was never that impressed with the P7 specs. I'll bet Sure-Fire was not either.


----------



## rtt (Sep 19, 2008)

RWT1405 said:


> Really now, they have? PLEASE enlighten me as to WHERE the P60L has "proven" itself? I submit, that it has not. Just because you say it has, does not make it so.
> 
> If you have "proof" of the P60L being superior to the Malkoff's and having "proven" itself, please provide it,


 
+1! I don't know what you mean the "P60L has proven itself" Do you mean the P60L is more reliable, more output, better beam, better runtime, etc, or are you just stating that there are more P60L units being used than Malkoff units? More units being used does not make the unit superior.


----------



## ace0001a (Sep 19, 2008)

As a flashlight enthusiast, I would most likely check out the P61L when and if it comes out. I'm not holding my breath for it though. I honestly don't understand why any flashlight enthusiast here would simply just wait for Surefire to bring them premium performance on their P60 compatible flashlights when there is a plethora of high performance dropins already available...all of which of course ranges in quality, but certainly are worth looking into. I myself own just about every P60LED dropin ranging from the "cheap" DX models to some premium Malkoff Devices M60 R2 modules. I don't purposely rough up my Surefires during my everyday uses of them and so far only the cheap one I put together myself has every actually given me any problems (in which case as a flashlight enthusiast I figured out what the problem was and easily fixed it). Unless you're in law enforcement or actually use your flashlight for "life and death" situations, I personally think the whole idea of "supreme" reliability is a bit overrated. If there's one thing in life I believe is true is that nothing is perfect...and while I am sure Surefire products are of a very high standard, I don't put such high expectations on them. Right now, my vote goes to Malkoff Devices M60 modules. They're built like tanks (for lack of a better description), have extremely reliable performance, have arguably one of best beams for a cree out there (and I know that's subjective) and have Gene's 100% satisfaction guarantee. Plus I know he is devoted to his craft and I really like the idea of something hand made (albeit he is about to have them manufactured).

Like I said, I will probably check out the P61L when and if it becomes available. I briefly owned a P60L and didn't care much for it, so to me there is plenty of room for improvement from them.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Sep 19, 2008)

Regarding SF reliability, we can only assume that their products are thoroughly tested. SF does not tell us their protocol for testing. The tests that we will have access to will be done by fellow CPF'ers, and I am sure if the P60L, or upcoming P61L, has problems, we will hear about it. One issue I can note is that the P60L is not really sealed up tight. All you have to do to see the guts, so to speak, of the P60L is remove the label wrapped around the drop-in. That label is keeping moisture and other matter out, and any accidental loosening of that label can compromise the LA. 

I like my Surefire products, really like them, but I will not get defensive if people have their reasons for not totally embracing the SF concept.

Bill


----------



## TMedina (Sep 19, 2008)

:shrug:

Every subject has hot topics - "Surefire" seems to be one of them.

-Trevor


----------



## Tempest UK (Sep 19, 2008)

Is this "debate" to become the new "Fenix vs. SureFire"? :shakehead

Regards,
Tempest


----------



## TexLite (Sep 19, 2008)

Bullzeyebill said:


> I like my Surefire products, really like them, but I will not get defensive if people have their reasons for not totally embracing the SF concept.


 
Im not getting defensive,I only defended my answer.I answered a question that was asked by Sarge.It was the other guys who seemingly became upset.

I'm not really concerned one way or the other whether or not anyone embraces Surefire.As I stated,I'm not a cool-aid drinker,but I do strive to be objective and honest.



Bullzeyebill said:


> One issue I can note is that the P60L is not really sealed up tight. All you have to do to see the guts, so to speak, of the P60L is remove the label wrapped around the drop-in. That label is keeping moisture and other matter out, and any accidental loosening of that label can compromise the LA.


 
Thats true,but the label isn't the primary defense against the elements,the light itself is.I'm not aware of any drop-ins that are designed to be weather-resistant outside of the body of the light. 

By the way,I didn't find an appropriate place to acknowledge it before,but your post #41 makes a good point.

-Michael


----------



## rtt (Sep 19, 2008)

Tempest UK said:


> Is this "debate" to become the new "Fenix vs. SureFire"? :shakehead
> 
> Regards,
> Tempest


 
I don't think so! The Malkoff is so much superior vs SureFire.


----------



## CM (Sep 19, 2008)

TexLite said:


> As I said,if you've ever really opened up a Surefire and compared the driver to others,you'd see that there are much more components than are necessary to make the circuit function...



That is an interesting assertion, that there is circuitry for redundancy operation. Have you actually reverse engineered any of their circuits to come to this conclusion? Reason I ask is that I have studied their circuits (KL1, KL6, KL4) and see no evidence that the design was done with redundancy in mind. I can tell you that if I pick any one component, say one of the SOT-23 parts or a resistor, and remove it, or short it, that the circuit will fail to function. 

Reliability is also a strong function of the component count. In general, for two properly designed circuits, the one with the higher component count is more likely to have a lower MTBF. Simplicity has an elegance all by itself and one is reliability. I'm not saying that Surefires are unreliable, in fact when people ask what light they should buy for "serious" applications, I would point them to Surefire 99% of the time. But I would challenge the statement that Surefire has redundant circuitry to handle component failures.


----------



## Monocrom (Sep 20, 2008)

Bullzeyebill said:


> One issue I can note is that the P60L is not really sealed up tight. All you have to do to see the guts, so to speak, of the P60L is remove the label wrapped around the drop-in. That label is keeping moisture and other matter out, and any accidental loosening of that label can compromise the LA.
> 
> I like my Surefire products, really like them, but I will not get defensive if people have their reasons for not totally embracing the SF concept.
> 
> Bill


 
Wow.... That is something that wouldn't surprise me if I discovered it on a No-Name LED drop-in sold through DX. But from Surefire??....

Thanks Bill, you saved me some money.


----------



## zx7dave (Sep 20, 2008)

I am a huge SF fan...but I also admit that for SF to put items in their catalog that isn't going to be released in the first quarter of that same year is BS. They been doing this since '69. They need to advertise only what they are going to offer.


----------



## ampdude (Sep 20, 2008)

Bullzeyebill said:


> One issue I can note is that the P60L is not really sealed up tight. All you have to do to see the guts, so to speak, of the P60L is remove the label wrapped around the drop-in. That label is keeping moisture and other matter out, and any accidental loosening of that label can compromise the LA.
> 
> I like my Surefire products, really like them, but I will not get defensive if people have their reasons for not totally embracing the SF concept.





Monocrom said:


> Wow.... That is something that wouldn't surprise me if I discovered it on a No-Name LED drop-in sold through DX. But from Surefire??....
> 
> Thanks Bill, you saved me some money.



This is an issue? I would think that once water has passed the o-rings of a properly lubricated quality light, all bets are off. Who ever heard of a water-proof LED module?

I'm sorry guys, but you've got me scratching my head on this one. :thinking:


----------



## FlashSpyJ (Sep 20, 2008)

I too really like what SureFire produces, but I must say that if another manufacture comes out with a good product before SF does, chanses are very high that I will buy that one! And probably not think of the SF product again. This goes for lamp assembly's not the actual light.

For instance, LF have come out with a couple of LED drop ins, if they're any good chances are very high that I wont buy SFs P61L, at least I wont be waiting for it as hard as I have been until now...

Of course Im not their main customer either so I dont think this will affect them a bit, even if there are others out there that does the same thing.

To be honest, Im a bit tired of discussions like this one. We all know that SF takes their time to release their products, we just have to suck it up and wait for it or buy something else. Discussing it wont make it come out faster...


----------



## Monocrom (Sep 20, 2008)

ampdude said:


> This is an issue? I would think that once water has passed the o-rings of a properly lubricated quality light, all bets are off. Who ever heard of a water-proof LED module?
> 
> I'm sorry guys, but you've got me scratching my head on this one. :thinking:


 
It's not about the practical aspect of being watertight. (At least not for me). It's about quality. I look at Gene's excellent M60 drop-in sitting in my SF C2, and I can see the quality. Short, stout, robust piece of brass beauty. I know it's just a drop-in, but it really is built tough as nails. It looks as though it belongs in any tough as nails P60-based Surefire light. Like a perfect fit. (Literally *and *figuretively). If you slapped a Surefire label on one of Gene's creations, and if folks didn't know any better, it would easily be accepted as a genuine top-quality Surefire product.

Meanwhile, the only thing concealing the guts of the Surefire P60L is the label. Surefire slapped a label on their drop-in. A label.... That's not what you expect when you think of a top of the line Surefire product. Labels are not tough as nails. If someone told me that their LED drop-in had a label covering up the guts of the drop-in, I'd ask them for the sku # on DX and tell them not to be upset since they likely only payed a few dollars for the cheap thing. But to find out that they were talking about a Surefire product?? 

It's sad, but clearly Gene's creations are more appropriate in P60-based Surefire lights than what Surefire makes as LED drop-ins for their lights; in terms of quality.


----------



## sORe-EyEz (Sep 20, 2008)

maybe the people at SF are in talks with Gene on a contract to produce the drop-ins! :laughing:


----------



## ace0001a (Sep 20, 2008)

Monocrom said:


> It's sad, but clearly Gene's creations are more appropriate in P60-based Surefire lights than what Surefire makes as LED drop-ins for their lights; in terms of quality.



Sad that Surefire "takes their sweet time", but great for Gene. Gene is a true flashlight enthusiast who's dedicated to his craft...so I hope the P61L continues to be "in development" just to allow Gene's business to further grow.


----------



## socom1970 (Sep 20, 2008)

ace0001a said:


> Sad that Surefire "takes their sweet time", but great for Gene. Gene is a true flashlight enthusiast who's dedicated to his craft...so I hope the P61L continues to be "in development" just to allow Gene's business to further grow.



I have no experience with Malkoff creations... (This is not a comparison post versus the SF LED drop-ins). In what ways are Gene's drop-ins so awesome and where can I get them? (Serious questions.)


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Sep 20, 2008)

ampdude said:


> This is an issue? I would think that once water has passed the o-rings of a properly lubricated quality light, all bets are off. Who ever heard of a water-proof LED module?
> 
> I'm sorry guys, but you've got me scratching my head on this one. :thinking:



My rational for posting that info was sort of a rebut to the premise posed by others, that SF products are, in effect, above reproach, and have had the highest level of testing to guarantee the utmost reliability. In the real world O ring seals become compromised and moisture can and does enter flashlights. Not a good idea to have the P60L's circuit vulnerable. You would not just have a flashlight with a wet interior that can be dried out, you would have a circuit that would be shorted out, and nonfunctional. I am not knocking SF, but arguing those premises noted in my first sentence. Looking at SF's line up of non-drop in LED lights, SF has really sealed up the circuits in those lights, as CPF'ers can attest to when they try to mod a SF LED lights, and break those seals.

Bill


----------



## StandardBattery (Sep 20, 2008)

socom1970 said:


> I have no experience with Malkoff creations... (This is not a comparison post versus the SF LED drop-ins). In what ways are Gene's drop-ins so awesome and where can I get them? (Serious questions.)


There is a lot of information on the Malkoff drop-ins all over CPF. His Website page for the SF compatible ones is: http://www.malkoffdevices.com/shop2/index-main_page-index-cPath-1_8.html

The basic discussion here is on the solid brass envelope that is used to encase Malkoff drop-ins vs. the SF design. If you look at the pictures on the website it will be clearer.


----------



## Tempest UK (Sep 20, 2008)

ace0001a said:


> Gene is a true flashlight enthusiast who's dedicated to his craft...so I hope the P61L continues to be "in development" just to allow Gene's business to further grow.



PK is as big a flashaholic as any of us.

And a Major Weenie :thumbsup:

Regards,
Tempest


----------



## JNewell (Sep 20, 2008)

<shrugs> Nothing is perfect...you pays your money and you makes your choice. Mechanically and lumen-wise, the M60 series is beautiful. But they cost more than a P60L, and won't allow a nitrolon bezel to thread fully down onto either of my G2 bodies, even when threaded down with significant force. Lots of folks seem to like to pick sides and bash the other side.


----------



## ace0001a (Sep 20, 2008)

Tempest UK said:


> PK is as big a flashaholic as any of us.
> 
> And a Major Weenie :thumbsup:
> 
> ...



Who is PK and what does that have to do with the topic?


----------



## Tempest UK (Sep 21, 2008)

PK (Paul Kim) is the VP of Engineering at SureFire. He's the one responsible for (most of) the ideas that come out of SureFire. And far more that never do...

Simply put, it's quite ignorant to suggest that SureFire doesn't have "flashaholics" working for them and designing their products. It certainly seems to be more than just a career interest for PK; he genuinely enjoys flashlights just as a CPFer would (well, he _is _registered on CPF). 

It's often easier to see the people behind the products of a small business, such as Gene with Malkoff, but that doesn't mean just as dedicated, enthusiastic people who are "dedicated to their craft" aren't behind the larger ones such as SureFire. 

A search for "PK" of "Paul Kim" on CPF will tell you more than I can.

Regards,
Tempest


----------



## ace0001a (Sep 21, 2008)

Tempest UK said:


> PK (Paul Kim) is the VP of Engineering at SureFire. He's the one responsible for (most of) the ideas that come out of SureFire. And far more that never do...
> 
> Simply put, it's quite ignorant to suggest that SureFire doesn't have "flashaholics" working for them and designing their products. It certainly seems to be more than just a career interest for PK; he genuinely enjoys flashlights just as a CPFer would (well, he _is _registered on CPF).
> 
> ...



Ah I see, yeah didn't know who PK was as I tend not to dig too deep into who actually runs a company. I would never suggest that any major flashlight company not have flashaholics working for them. I have said it before here and I'll say it again that more often than not, business-sense usually supersedes flashlight enthusiast wants. There always seems to be alot of innovation that comes from the minds of flashaholics, but obviously it boils down to whether those innovative ideas will transalate into something that makes money and appeals to the masses and/or target audience/clients.

Maybe Surefire is still refining their P61L or maybe they just feel their P60L is good enough for those who buy their products and don't feel any sense of irgency...and are actually "taking their sweet" time with the development and eventual release of the P61L. I for one just think it's pointless for us as consumer flashaholics to wait for Surefire to bring premium performance to our P60 compatible flashlights when there are so many other options legitimately worth getting now.


----------



## Centropolis (Sep 21, 2008)

For Gene, producing drop-ins is pretty much his whole business. He puts all of his R&D into producing drop-ins. Meanwhile, SF does not make that much money by selling the P60L module. I doubt that SF will put that much R&D and time to produce something that it's not their main business focus.

I don't own any of Gene's drop-ins and I am sure it is well respected and great product. However, I think it is unfair to compare Gene's offerings with SF's simply because the P60L was never meant to be the top of the line, latest and greatest LED drop-in.

While we are at it, why don't we discuss the designs and quality of the cotton used in the SF t-shirts and compare them to Fred Perry or La Coste?

Anyway, the P60Ls I am using have been reliable and solid as far as I am concern.


----------



## Monocrom (Sep 22, 2008)

Centropolis said:


> For Gene, producing drop-ins is pretty much his whole business. He puts all of his R&D into producing drop-ins. Meanwhile, SF does not make that much money by selling the P60L module. I doubt that SF will put that much R&D and time to produce something that it's not their main business focus.
> 
> I don't own any of Gene's drop-ins and I am sure it is well respected and great product. However, I think it is unfair to compare Gene's offerings with SF's simply because the P60L was never meant to be the top of the line, latest and greatest LED drop-in.
> 
> ...


 
The flip side of that, is that Gene is one man who concentrates on the R&D of his drop-ins. Meanwhile Surefire has a team (perhaps several teams) of R&D technicians working on various projects for Surefire. 

Perhaps it was a small team charged with coming up with a P60-based LED drop-in. And they created the P60L. Meanwhile, Gene comes up with the built-like-a-tank M60 drop-in all by himself.


----------



## Centropolis (Sep 22, 2008)

Monocrom said:


> The flip side of that, is that Gene is one man who concentrates on the R&D of his drop-ins. Meanwhile Surefire has a team (perhaps several teams) of R&D technicians working on various projects for Surefire.
> 
> Perhaps it was a small team charged with coming up with a P60-based LED drop-in. And they created the P60L. Meanwhile, Gene comes up with the built-like-a-tank M60 drop-in all by himself.



Well, sometimes it is not how many people actually work on a project. I am sure Surefire has more than one person on its R&D team but how many of them actually worked on developing a LED drop-in? And how much time and money spend?

Honestly, I don't have a M60 to compare to a P60L so I cannot comment on the quality of the M60. But I am sure the general consensus is that Surefire makes high quality products....not always leading edge but high quality. They're not Jetbeam...they don't come out with new flashlight models every 4 or 5 months.

Anyway, I am not saying Malkoffs are bad....but I just don't understand why a P60L that costs almost half the price of a M60 could be fairly compared.


----------



## LumenMan (Sep 22, 2008)

Centropolis said:


> Well, sometimes it is not how many people actually work on a project. I am sure Surefire has more than one person on its R&D team but how many of them actually worked on developing a LED drop-in? And how much time and money spend?
> 
> Honestly, I don't have a M60 to compare to a P60L so I cannot comment on the quality of the M60. But I am sure the general consensus is that Surefire makes high quality products....not always leading edge but high quality. They're not Jetbeam...they don't come out with new flashlight models every 4 or 5 months.
> 
> Anyway, I am not saying Malkoffs are bad....but I just don't understand why a P60L that costs almost half the price of a M60 could be fairly compared.


 
The MSRP on the Surefire P60L is $49.00. The MSRP on the Malkoff M60 is $55.00. The prices are very similar.


----------



## Centropolis (Sep 22, 2008)

LumenMan said:


> The MSRP on the Surefire P60L is $49.00. The MSRP on the Malkoff M60 is $55.00. The prices are very similar.



Sorry about that. You are correct. I guess I just got a good deal on a P60L.


----------



## LumenMan (Sep 22, 2008)

Centropolis said:


> Sorry about that. You are correct. I guess I just got a good deal on a P60L.


 
No worries buddy ! I just wanted to relay this info to you. I'm glad that you got a good deal on your P60L :thumbsup:


----------



## outersquare (Nov 5, 2008)

i emailed them and as of yesterday or whatever there is no ETA


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Nov 5, 2008)

I have the P60L and the Malkoff M30. Nice wide hotspot on P60L, and the flood is wider than the KL4. If it was 2X, or 3X brighter it would really be a room sweeper. The M30, like the M60, has a narrower beam profile, about 1/2,or less, and it is about 3X brighter (lumens) than the P60L. The P61L would be the ticket for area coverage, if SF can manage the heat.

Bill


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 5, 2008)

Gene's M60F should take care of flood. And once again, you can have it _now; _instead of waiting for Surefire to release the P61L.


----------



## SnWnMe (Nov 5, 2008)

Surefire like any other big company, has many considerations when developing or releasing product.

If I were the SF CEo these are the questions I will ask R&D and Marketing/Sales


How much will R&D cost?
How much money do we stand to make?
What do we do with existing stocks of P60Ls (SF probably ordered them from vendors in the tens of thousands.)
What do we do with existing contracts from same vendors?
Since this product will render obsolete some of our offerings, how do we position the product in our existing line?
How do we manage the distributors and dealers whose existing stock will suddenly be obsolete? (This ain't like cars. People will always buy cars)
I am sure that there are many more issues. A big outfit like SF cannot just make changes as quick as a smaller one.


----------



## dougie (Nov 5, 2008)

Until a product, any product, is on the shelves they are concepts and concepts can and do get delayed or cancelled. I think Surefire has problems with the way it prematurely releases information about forthcoming products. In the case of the P61L it patently seems to have scored an own goal by allowing its publicity machine to prematurely leak news about it. Unfortunately for me no matter how good it is it will be unable to supplant my Malkoff's. However, I'm sure when or 'if' it is released various military and police contracts will ensure that it is sold in enough numbers to obscure issues over its delay.


----------



## matt0 (Nov 5, 2008)

SnWnMe said:


> Surefire like any other big company, has many considerations when developing or releasing product.
> 
> If I were the SF CEo these are the questions I will ask R&D and Marketing/Sales
> 
> ...



The P61 doesn't make the P60 obsolete. Some people are all about MAX BRIGHTNESS but many others would prefer a better balance of output/runtime. I'm sure there will still be people buying the P60L and I imagine it would still come in their existing line of lights. The P61L would be an option like most of their HO LA's are now.

Also, I can't say for sure but I don't think SF purchases their products from vendors. As far as I know, they make everything themselves.


----------



## Size15's (Nov 5, 2008)

SureFire design and manufacturer their own products - including all the components it is reasonable to manufacture. They subcontract some things to American companies such as anodisation and making Nitrolon components.
They also buy in the LEDs. I understand they build and assemble their own PCB's.
They certainly machine their own metal components including reflectors. They have a world-leading turning centre based on Index machines supported by Zollar


----------



## SnWnMe (Nov 5, 2008)

Whether they make their own stuff or order it is moot. The hard questions are still asked but in a different fashion.

More questions that occur to me:


Have we recouped our investment in making the P60L?
What do we do with the P60L production machines?
Do we have enough space in the factory for mass production? (SF is in a very expensive part of CA)
If not then where do we build the factory space needed?
How tested is the product? SF don't want to go out of business over a mass warranty issue.
All these take time. Then SF has to make sure ample stocks are available for the expected demand, and then delivered all over their distribution network for the rollout. Not trying to defend SF here. Just offering my insight on what it takes to get a new product in this specialty market.


----------



## Size15's (Nov 5, 2008)

I completely agree that SureFire has to consider many factors before deciding to commit to a new product.

It's just as well there are plenty of small operations able to change direction on a dime. Not so easy when you shipping out thousands of lights a day to a hungry dealer base.


----------



## ace0001a (Nov 5, 2008)




----------



## SUREFIRED (Apr 20, 2009)

Wow, old thread... I emailed SF about the p61L and they said they are aiming for the end of 2009 at the latest. I sure hope so.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Apr 20, 2009)




----------



## kramer5150 (Apr 20, 2009)

LOL... whatever 6P compatible module they release in 2009... it won't be over 200 Lumens bright, wont' be affordable, won't be reliably cool running.

Unless there is something omg-orgasmically efficient on the emitter near-horizon.

With current emitter BINs and efficiencies, their only option at releasing a SF product is to partner with Malkoff, since he owns the patent on the thermal design.


----------



## Monocrom (Apr 20, 2009)

SUREFIRED said:


> Wow, old thread... I emailed SF about the p61L and they said they are aiming for the end of 2009 at the latest. I sure hope so.


 
Yeah, at the end of 2009; Surefire _might _have something that can compete with Gene's creations... I'm thinking that by the end of '09, Gene might create something that will outperform his current offerings.

So maybe before 2010, Surefire will finally release their 2008-promised P61L. Nice!


----------



## ampdude (Apr 21, 2009)

I really like the design of the Surefire led head. I like that when you use them the head actually screws down all the way. And if the head gets unscrewed a little with the typical drop-ins, they no longer make contact, and that's really not good enough in my opinion. Not so with the spring based ones.

I'm just hoping when/if they do come out, they use a nice warm Cree 5A tint or better.


----------



## outersquare (Apr 21, 2009)

heh i remember this thread

if they ever actually release, no one will care anymore.


----------



## SUREFIRED (Apr 22, 2009)

outersquare said:


> if they ever actually release, no one will care anymore.



I will.


----------



## Monocrom (Apr 22, 2009)

SUREFIRED said:


> I will.


 
You have the patience of a Saint.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 28, 2009)

Monocrom said:


> You have the patience of a Saint.



Hehe the saint is a bit late too.


----------



## Forgoten214 (May 27, 2009)

Any news yet? Any sort of idea of what its going to be like?


----------



## Sgt. LED (May 27, 2009)

It's going to be like a Malkoff.  Or actually a Malkoff!


----------



## Monocrom (May 28, 2009)

Sgt. LED said:


> It's going to be like a Malkoff.  Or actually a Malkoff!


 
... And you can actually buy a Malkoff M60, _now._

No need to wait for Surefire to eventually release _their_ version of an M60.


----------



## SilentK (May 28, 2009)

Malkoff would still probably blow it out of the water in pretty much all areas. what surefire needs to do is put an mc-e inside it and put a low price tag on it. then they would get some buyers. but then again, malkoff already has an mc-e. so....


----------



## D.S.Brown (Dec 31, 2009)

It is literally the last day of 2009 and no P61L from Surefire. I actually feel like an idiot about this, because up until this morning I had no idea that they had been "promising" this as of 2008. I was on the phone yesterday with Surefire Customer Service, regarding a KX2 conversion for my E2E. I stated at the end that they needed to make an LED drop in assembly for the 9P/G3. My "specs" were modest compared to what Malkoff is producing. I suggested that the lamp assembly have a run time of 11 hours, (as the P60L is advertised having), and it puts out 120 lumens for at least 3 of those hours. Of course I was thanked for my suggestion, and told that if anything were to occur with this it would be sometime between January 1st 2010 and December 31st 2010.

I am not a Flashaholic. A lot to learn.

Best,

Dave


----------



## Inliner (Dec 31, 2009)

D.S.Brown said:


> I stated at the end that they needed to make an LED drop in assembly for the 9P/G3.


 
The P60L is their LED drop in for the 3 cell lights.


----------



## Forgoten214 (Dec 31, 2009)

Im still waiting for it myself. 

Wish somebody had an answer to the P61L questions.


----------



## D.S.Brown (Dec 31, 2009)

Inliner,

That seems to be my understanding from them as well. I also stated to them that yeah I'm getting 6 hours at 80 lumens versus 3 hours in my similarly equipped 6P and Z2, I don't think double runtime for the same amount of lumens is worth the size difference. Just my opinion.

I certainly hope they can solve whatever issues they have in developing the P61L, (if they are even trying), and get it to market.

This probably makes me an oddity around here, but I don't like modding anything too much. I prefer stock. For instance I own several Glock handguns, the only non stock item on any of them will be Heinie Straight 8 Slant Pro night sights. Everything else is factory stock. How this relates, I prefer to use all Surefire parts in my lights, thus my desire for the P61L lamp for my 9P.

Best,

Dave


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Dec 31, 2009)

D.S.Brown said:


> Inliner,
> 
> That seems to be my understanding from them as well. I also stated to them that yeah I'm getting 6 hours at 80 lumens versus 3 hours in my similarly equipped 6P and Z2, I don't think double runtime for the same amount of lumens is worth the size difference. Just my opinion.
> 
> ...



Dave, you are not a oddity, just new to CPF. Please stick around and do some searching. You may find your self interested, after researching, in some of the available drop in lamp assemblies for the 9P. Some of these lamp assemblies will be LED based just like the P60L, and will provide very reliable functioning of the 9P, which is just basically a host for the SF P60L that can be considered an after market product itself. Something like a P61L would have to be designed with very good heat sinking qualities, something the P60L does not have, relying on a temperature cutoff that reduces the output (current) to the LED. Look at Malkoff drop-ins for the SF C series lights, such as the 6P, and 9P. Do a google, cpf only, at the top of every CPF page. These drop-ins are built to withstand the heat that can be generated by the full power LEDs driven at 1 amp+ and produce high output without significant dimming. Your Glocks come pretty much set up for what they are designed for. Your 9P is just a hull that can have parts added to it for flawless functioning, if you choose the right components.

Bill


----------



## txgp17 (Apr 7, 2010)

Anyone heard any updates on this?

By now, they should have at least improved the emitter on the P60L, allowing a 100+ lumen output from the same driver/reflector assembly.


----------



## carrot (Apr 7, 2010)

All news points to the P61L being canned. The newer 6PL et al. use a special integrated lamp assembly for a max output of 120 lumens and the P60L is no longer used on the LED Surefires.


----------



## Size15's (Apr 7, 2010)

SureFire's effective replacement for their P60L was shown at SHOT Show 2010.
By going with a dedicated LED bezel rather than a Lamp Assembly SureFire remove the constraints they have on needing their Lamp Assemblies to fit all their various models (Aftermarket drop-in manufacturers don't need to cater for all of SureFire's historic and legacy models)
Dedicated LED bezels also allow for far better thermal management and sizes of optics and such.


----------



## txgp17 (Apr 7, 2010)

Does anyone have a picture of this new "integrated lamp" 6PL?

Also, I noticed today, that the BP60L warns * "Do not use P60L LED/reflector assembly with incandescent bezel."*

What's the deal on that? I thought all P60L's could be used in P60 hosts.

I read this thread, but I still don't get it.


----------



## JNewell (Apr 7, 2010)

txgp17 said:


> Does anyone have a picture of this new "integrated lamp" 6PL?
> 
> Also, I noticed today, that the BP60L warns *"Do not use P60L LED/reflector assembly with incandescent bezel."*
> 
> ...


 
I think the primary concern is that they don't want people dropping the P60L into the original incan bezel because there is (IIRC) a shock-reducing arranagement at the front of the incan bezel to reduce the chances of blowing the P60 as a result of recoil. If you put the P60L into that bezel, you effectively get "tunnel vision" performance from the light. The P60L doesn't need shock protection, so it can be mounted directly within a regular (aluminum, not Nitrolon) bezel.

Someone jump in if I've mis-remembered.


----------



## Size15's (Apr 7, 2010)

The bezel used by the BP60L is similar to the Z44-BK except it is slightly longer.
Lamp Module Housing Bodies/Adapter Collars have stops that prevent the old-school Z32 bezel from being over-tightened.
Not all other bezels make use of this stop and can be screwed on past the stop.
In addition, the P60L's springs can be over-compressed when being hosted in some Lamp Module / bezel combinations, including with the Z32. The BP60L bezel ensures this doesn't happen.
The P60L will operate a lower output in shock isolated bezels as well so it's a less than desirable combination for a WeaponLight.

As I said SureFire are working on replacing the P60L with a dedicated LED bezel.
Its a shame CPF members at SHOT Show 2010 didn't seem to pick up on this development. SureFire moving away from Lamp Assemblies isn't of interest I suppose... 

Al :candle:


----------



## txgp17 (Apr 7, 2010)

Size15's said:


> As I said SureFire are working on replacing the P60L with a dedicated LED bezel.
> Its a shame CPF members at SHOT Show 2010 didn't seem to pick up on this development. SureFire moving away from Lamp Assemblies isn't of interest I suppose...
> 
> Al :candle:


I made it to SHOT last year, but couldn't swing it this year. The Surefire booth was a nightmare, too many people there to compete with. I had a 6P in my pocket with a M60 in it so I could compare it with every light they boasted about. It still beat everything there except the Turbo-size head modules.

Moving away from lamp assemblies would ruin our ability to purchase kick-*** drop-in's like the M60 series. It would also help their profit margins because you'd have to purchase a whole new head, instead of a higher output drop-in module. But I don't see them halting production on light heads that will host the P60 for a long time.


----------



## SUREFIRED (Apr 7, 2010)

txgp17 said:


> Moving away from lamp assemblies would ruin our ability to purchase kick-*** drop-in's like the M60 series. It would also help their profit margins because you'd have to purchase a whole new head, instead of a higher output drop-in module. But I don't see them halting production on light heads that will host the P60 for a long time.



The current p60 host's 6P, Z2, C2 bezels should still be sold for a loooong time on the Incan version, so either buy the incan Surefire, or find a p60 compatible head to replace the new led head and drop in the aftermarket Led of your choice!


----------

