# The A2 stinks.



## Josey (Jul 29, 2006)

OK, I just got the A2. I resisted forever and ever. It just never looked like a light that had a purpose. Feeble incan. Feeble LEDs. Then I saw JS's review on the A2. The best review I've ever seen and written by the hot wire guru himself. JS is waaaaay smarter than me. Taller and better looking, too. Then I saw wise carrot-like people rave and put the A2 in their signature lines. How could I not try this light?

So now, after trying it, I don't get it. This is a crummy light. Feeble incan beam. Hot wire my foot. This is a warm wire. My U2 out throws it while providing a LOT more flood. My VIP750 TXOH LuxIII in a Mag2C just flat out blows it away for throw. Not even close. Mike Tyson v. Captain Kangaroo on a bad day.

The "white" LEDs have this weird blue-tint hot spot. What's with that? Makes everything look like grandma's hair.

And, to top it off, this sucker is another %#@*! twistie. I hate twisties! This is 2006, people. We landed on the moon in, what, 1969? The twistie was the second invention after the wheel. We had twisties before we had fire. This is dumb.

My U2 is way brighter on high, better in both flood and throw. It's slightly brighter on low. It can run rechargeables, including an 18650, which I have in it. It has an adjustable beam. It has a clicky. It's a giant among lights.

I don't get the A2. The only thing it excels at is lighting up brown things, like stumps and moose muffins. Not enough of an advantage for me.

Mine's going up for sale. 

You A2 guys must be smoking something besides batteries.

Josey


----------



## InfidelCastro (Jul 29, 2006)

I think it's an interesting light, but I would not pay as much as they're asking for one.

And I think Surefire really needs to upgrade the 5mm LED's in it.


----------



## Mad1 (Jul 29, 2006)

Nice rant. :lolsign:

Not having an A2 or a U2 myself i cant agree with you.

But what i can agree with you on is the twisties. I also detest them what is the point? Surefire are meant to be tactical lights? 

I find it quite hard to turn my L1 onto bright via twisting. Surely it would be faster to click for low then click for high.

</rant>


----------



## 270winchester (Jul 29, 2006)

Josey said:


> So now, after trying it, I don't get it. This is a crummy light. Feeble incan beam. Hot wire my foot. This is a warm wire. My U2 out throws it while providing a LOT more flood. My VIP750 TXOH LuxIII in a Mag2C just flat out blows it away for throw. Not even close. Mike Tyson v. Captain Kangaroo on a bad day.



well, looks like you didn't like the light.

If the light wasn't white, call Surefire and have them take a look at it. crap happens.

2nd, when was last time you put a mag 2C in your pocket? you have to realize the limitation of physical dimensions of refletors and not comapre orange to apples in pure throw department.


----------



## Alin10123 (Jul 29, 2006)

You'd better run for the hills when "carrot" sees this thread. 

On the other hand, have you checked to make sure that the contacts are clean? Maybe the light fell out of regulation. Or...are you using fresh batteries?


----------



## chesterqw (Jul 29, 2006)

hmm... you don't really understand the A2 huh?

it was design FOR aviation purposes NOT for brightness.
incan for checking the plane's exterior and the leds to use inside so that night vision won't be affected.
brightness is NOT really a thing for both of this.

the incan is regulated!!

it has a rating of 50 lumens while the U2 has at least 80(on lvl 6) so of course it wins..
the VIP with the T bin also has a higher lumen rating.

what the hell is wrong with twisty? do you have the l2? the L1? the fenix p1? the fenix E1? so other surefire lights which uses the twisty?

but hey, those are tactical tailswitch!!! it can be for momentary action and twist all the way of constant on and lock-out. The A2 having 2 different modes of course needs the tailcap designed like that.

the U2 is a totally different design anyway...

you want a U2 switch for the A2? you should see how much it is going to cost to scrape a design for a new one...


----------



## nzgunnie (Jul 29, 2006)

Good for you, telling it like it is.

I got mine for a pretty good price, but have never been really happy with it. Now it is playing up, the incan only coming on at half power sometimes, even with fresh SF batteries.

I find the incan is bright enough (when it's working), but those horrible blue LEDs are a real dissapointment in such a pricy light. No matter how well made it is, those LEDs just let the whole thing down.

It's a handy light, but not for the price SF want for it.


----------



## Scottiver (Jul 29, 2006)

When I first got my A2 it was my first incandescent and I thought pretty much the same things that you do, but after a while I really fell in love with it.
Going from using an LED flashlight all the time to using an incandescent and seeing the "yellow" beam can be a little disconcerting at first because they are so different. But once you get used to the idea, it's a beautiful thing.
The LED's in the A2 are designed to be dim so that you don't ruin your night vision in the cockpit. But I find it a very good level of brightness for anything 10 ft and closer.
And as far as the twistie goes, I wasn't too thrilled with it either, but I use the momentary on button 90% of the time anyway so it doesn't really matter.All Surefires with a two stage brightness use a twistie. 
So I say give the ole A2 a chance and use it for a couple of weeks and see if it doesn't grow on you. It grew on me and now I never leave the house at night without it.


----------



## Blindasabat (Jul 29, 2006)

Mad1 said:


> Surely it would be faster to click for low then click for high.


Ew! Clicking through modes makes me want to pull my eyes out. But to each his own. Just don't ask that it be reverse clicky.:lolsign: 
I think the operation of the A2, L1, and L2 switch is divine inspiration. Using those lights is such a pleasure because whatever level you want is instantly available and intuitive one handed, one press. 
Eating dinner in camp by the LEDs when a bear breaks out of the trees? Instant hi power light without a thought, just a squeeze - what you want and would do under stress anyway.
If I need it on for a while longer, a twist is slightly more effort, but not much. Simple, elegant, and makes lockout simple and intuitive as well.
The incan certainly is not perfect.. mostly, I believe because of the holes in the reflector, but it is regulated and will be brighter than many "brighter" incans when the batteries are even 1/3 depleted. The A2 maintains brightness. 
And I have found that if I rotate the LA in the bezel, the beam can often be improved. I had to try several different times, but I now have an 'almost' round hot spot with more throw than the long oval I started with.
That said, I would not have bought one had it been more than ~$100 - I got mine used, but it was well worth the money.


----------



## marxs (Jul 29, 2006)

Blindasabat said:


> - what you want and would do under stress anyway.


I would've asked the bear for a beer but thats just me :naughty:



Blindasabat said:


> And I have found that if I rotate the LA in the bezel, the beam can often be improved. I had to try several different times, but I now have an 'almost' round hot spot with more throw than the long oval I started with.


you wouldnt happen to have beamshots would you? i was under the impression that in order to have the farthest throw the hotspot would need to be oval like?


----------



## leukos (Jul 29, 2006)

Josey,

I have to agree with you somewhat that the hype the A2 has received in recent months makes it very hard for it to live up to. But, it makes a big difference what light you are comparing it with and what conditions you are using it. I think most of the praise given for the A2 is within context, and maybe that should be factored into this discussion. Comparing the A2 to a G2, E2e, L2 or Streamlight TT 2L will quickly help one to appreciate its qualities. And the praise is usually for how it performs outdoors, being a quality incandescent, as compared to LED. Many others have posted how they like the A2 over their 5W lights outdoors, though not everyone. Likewise there is the form factor, the A2 is very pocketable, whereas most other lights about the size of the minimag just don't compare with the A2's features. 

In conclusion, I feel bad that your expectations are perhaps a victim of hype, but your experience may be a good balance to the A2 chorus. It is a good light and definately one that tends to grow on you the more you use it. If you do decide to sell it, I'm sure you'll have no problem finding a buyer!


----------



## Blindasabat (Jul 29, 2006)

marxs said:


> I would've asked the bear for a beer but thats just me :naughty:


Why didn't I think of that?



marxs said:


> you wouldnt happen to have beamshots would you? i was under the impression that in order to have the farthest throw the hotspot would need to be oval like?


I don't have any comparative beamshots, nor any way to measure the light intensity, it just follows that if the beam is more concentrated, it must throw better. It appears to. 
My beam is still oval, just less oval. But my old beam was maybe 3-4 times as long as it was wide, now it is only about twice as long as it is wide. And the width has not changed much, so it is more concentrated.
I know it has to be oval to some extent because it is a straight hot wire in the lamp.


----------



## JimmyB (Jul 29, 2006)

I really appreciate the twisty style switch on the A2, L2, ect. I can lockout the high portion of the beam so that only the low is available. This comes in handy when I've got night adapted vision and an inadvertent blast on high can destroy that quickly.

I can understand where you're coming from with your comments, although calling it a crummy light sounds a bit extreme. Like all lights, some fit your needs better than others. Sounds like the A2 doesn't meet yours at all while the U2 works well for you. 


Like others said, you shouldn't have too much trouble selling it.


----------



## cy (Jul 29, 2006)

thanks for the tip... just rotated lamp in my A2. performance hugely improved, not just beam shape. 

maybe it's my imagination, but A2 now seems to put out more lumens after rotating lamp. possibly hotwire is lined up better against leds in reflector?

FYI... I really like my A2 and I've been using 2x R123 li-ion for sometime with no problems. 

LOTC tailcap are safer than clickies. much harder to leave on accidently. expecially when seeing more reports of multi-cell primary lithium batteries failures. 



Blindasabat said:


> I have found that if I rotate the LA in the bezel, the beam can often be improved. I had to try several different times, but I now have an 'almost' round hot spot with more throw than the long oval I started with.


----------



## marxs (Jul 29, 2006)

you just moved the ma02 around right? hmm...let me play with it and see if i can get a better hotspot...


----------



## dragoman (Jul 29, 2006)

To each his own........if you are selling yours for a good price I'll buy it. PM me.

dragoman


----------



## Mark2 (Jul 29, 2006)

Twisties have one MAJOR advantage: they're very reliable and robust. Thus, in a light like the SF M2, a twisty still makes sense IMHO.


----------



## Maximum (Jul 29, 2006)

cy said:


> thanks for the tip... just rotated lamp in my A2. performance hugely improved, not just beam shape.
> 
> maybe it's my imagination, but A2 now seems to put out more lumens after rotating lamp. possibly hotwire is lined up better against leds in reflector?
> 
> ...



Can you tell me where can I buy these R123 Li-Ion?
Thanks


----------



## Pydpiper (Jul 29, 2006)

That review was worthy of a Saturday morning smile, thanks..


----------



## bennytheblade (Jul 29, 2006)

I dont know anything about the A2, but that was a most excellent rant. :laughing:


----------



## carrot (Jul 29, 2006)

To paraphrase KevinL: "either you 'get it' [the A2] or you don't."

The A2 is my favorite light not because it is the brightest or has the best throw, but for its versatility.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jul 29, 2006)

Nice to see somone call it like they see it. Takes some guts to say something bad about favored lights. Good for you. Can you return the smelly little thing?
If not just sell it. Plenty of buyers around here. I`d buy it but I want a nice light.

Ken


----------



## StanTeate (Jul 29, 2006)

Josey,
So what did you buy the A2 for? What did you buy the U2 for? If you check out the Surefire products pdf's, on their web site, previous years and up to now, you will read a detailed explanation of each lights purpose and specifications. The lights do what they are designed to do, not cater to your personal wims. 
1. The specifications clearly state that the U2 SHOULD be brighter and throw longer, it is what it is designed to do. 
2. Checking out the exterior of a plane, throw not all that necessary, and reading a map in the cabin at night, preserving night vision, would necessitate, less intense leds. 
So perhaps you should invest some more research time before buying expensive lights. Reading some of the reviews here does constitute research time, though in this case, clearly not enough! Your expectations were very different that the actual thing. The A2 stinks, for your expectations.


----------



## lightplay22 (Jul 29, 2006)

I tried turning the lamp a while back and it makes a noticeable improvement to the beam. I just compared my A2 to an L2 shining up into a suspended cieling in which the tiles were removed but the flourescent lights were still in place and on. You talk about "blown away" The L2 looked like a nightlight while the incan totally illuminated the ducts, wires, etc. That doesn't mean the L2 is crummy, but it shows that there are places the where the incan is way better. I like my A2 and would love a U2 but its too big for pocket carry and there is no way I could tolerate a donut hole beam, which many of them seem to have.


----------



## cy (Jul 29, 2006)

AW has a li-ion page for all sorts of sizes. 

IMHO A2 is one of the most elegantly crafted lights available at any price. batt tube ID tolarances are tight at 16.77mm. you will only be able to use bare R123 li-ion cells. 

read all the li-ion pre-cautions before using of course!



Maximum said:


> Can you tell me where can I buy these R123 Li-Ion?
> Thanks


----------



## cheapo (Jul 29, 2006)

;;;
-David


----------



## Josey (Jul 29, 2006)

I did sell the light and enjoyed passing a good deal on to a fellow CPFer. I'm only out about $30, which was worth it to me to be able to test the light out for my self in my setting against the lights I already have. I live in a remote area, so I can't just go down to the store and see what this A2 is all about.

I didn't intend this as a review for the review forum, only a light counterpoint to the massive outpouring of superlatives flooding every corner of the general flashlight forum, so I was sad to see it moved. 

I think comparing the A2 to my U2 is fair. They are both about the same size. I don't think either is a pocket light, at lease not for jeans or slacks. Since I was interested only in white light, it was a good comparison. My U2 is unusually bright. It has no donut. It's dim level is about as low as the A2 dim level, but the tint is way better. The bright is way better. And it has a clicky.

I don't examine the exterior of jets very often, nor do I use a light much to check a massive flight display panel before lifting off in my 747. 

But here's my tip to Surefire: A better A2 would be a modified U2. I'd keep the highest level the same, but make the second lowest setting about where the A2's lowest setting is now. And I'd make the very lowest setting for three red LEDs for cases where night vision is important. That light I'd buy, but maybe we're talking something like the Kroma.

Josey


----------



## dragoman (Jul 29, 2006)

Sounds like indeed a Kroma might be right for you. Same form factor as U2, but with an optic for greater throw with main LED. Also has blue/red leds in a selectable low/high mode......also has high/low mode for main LED.

I'm probably going to get one someday.....

dragoman


----------



## cheapo (Jul 29, 2006)

yeah, the a2 is a good light, but doesnt isnt really great at any one thing. 

-David


----------



## Somy Nex (Jul 29, 2006)

i like my A2, i don't love it, but i do like it...

...but i think this post/thread is excellent. there's too much hype surrounding the A2 right now, and it's been recommended as the perfect light for everything from lighting up your room or garage or spotting some jumping gazelle in farawayland, or slicing bread and cutting cheese.

only with this thread do the qualifications come out. it's not the best in this or that but it does many things well. i don't need this or that function. what are your needs. blah blah blah.

the only thing i disagree with is the switching mechanism. it's perfect for me, and i have to see a better design for good management & quick accessiblity of all stages of the light.

sorry if i come off a bit sarcastic in this post. as i said, i like my A2. but it's easy to see how Josey feels that way.


----------



## wquiles (Jul 29, 2006)

Josey said:


> I did sell the light and enjoyed passing a good deal on to a fellow CPFer. I'm only out about $30, which was worth it to me to be able to test the light out for my self in my setting against the lights I already have. I live in a remote area, so I can't just go down to the store and see what this A2 is all about.


I think that your reivew is fair since you either like it or not - nothing wrong with that. I actually enjoy when folks have the guts to state their own opinnion in a respectfull and rational maner as you have done :goodjob:

Like many others here, I do love my A2, and I am always ready to buy a second one for my little girl, so I will gladly pay your $30 plus insured shipping. PM me when you are ready to sell it 

Will


----------



## TorchEnvy (Jul 29, 2006)

I, too, wanted to be all smitten with this light when I received it a few days ago. There are so many fans of it here I figured I couldn't go wrong.

I haven't played with the incan in a suitable environment yet, so my opinion of that remains unresolved. But what I've seen looks great.

The LEDs are dimmer than I envisioned, and using it to read in bed was really annoying because I got tired of those purple bowling ball holes staring back at me. I understand it's supposed to be low level, but I just don't care for the color temperature of its so-called white LEDs. 

I would guess the intensity to be about right for dark cockpit, though with red LEDs, obviously. I wish I could have had a red A2 twelve years ago when I obtained my private pilot's license. I don't fly anymore, otherwise red would have been my likely choice.

So, I need to use it more in various circumstances to really decide. Those LEDs are too obnoxious for reading from white paper, and they seem kind of dim for going downstairs for a baby bottle, etc. Outdoor use will be the key, I believe, in its overall usability for me. I just don't think the LEDs will add much if there is a little bit of ambient light.

What am I missing here?


----------



## Chehalis (Jul 29, 2006)

Well, this read more like a rant than a review. Just because a light doesn't meet your needs doesn't make it a bad light. The A2 was designed for pilots. While I agree that Surefire really should provide white LEDs with a better tint I certainly don't think it's an awful light by any means. It is well known for having an "angry blue" tint to the white LEDs so I think red or yellow-green would be a better choice. The incandescent is about as bright as the G2 yet it also happens to be regulated. I would much rather use an incandescent for checking a plane out due to its better color rendition. A U2 would be brighter but would have that typical "moonlight" color rendition of white LEDs. I think the U2 is one of their best lights but I wouldn't be comfortable using one for this. The Kroma is not as bright as the U2 by the way, especially the MILSPEC version of it.


----------



## leukos (Jul 29, 2006)

Josey said:


> And, to top it off, this sucker is another %#@*! twistie. I hate twisties! This is 2006, people. We landed on the moon in, what, 1969? The twistie was the second invention after the wheel. We had twisties before we had fire. This is dumb.


 
The reliability of SF's two-stage switches aren't perfect, but I imagine they have a better track record than the U2 switch.....


----------



## Longbow (Jul 29, 2006)

Pila or Wolf-Eyes makes more sense.


----------



## cheapo (Jul 29, 2006)

leukos said:


> The reliability of SF's two-stage switches aren't perfect, but I imagine they have a better track record than the U2 switch.....



actually, the u2's switch is great. Its just that people dont bend the tabs in the tailcap- once that is done, the tailcap is very reliable. The Surefire 2 stage tailcaps are also quite reliable too.

-David


----------



## greenLED (Jul 29, 2006)

carrot said:


> The A2 is my favorite light not because it is the brightest or has the best throw, but for its versatility.


What he said (plus the regulated incan part).

I love every little bit of my A2, even over the U2 (and I've had 4 of those in the last year), which is another of my favorite SF lights. Like I keep saying, the A2 is the only SF light I'd buy more of (maybe the L1 as well).


Cheapo, I didn't know you had an A2.



TorchEnvy said:


> What am I missing here?


 You gotta stop paying attention to the Wall Hunters. Even snowLED's have blotchy beams.


----------



## cheapo (Jul 29, 2006)

greenled, i think that the a2 uses essentially the same switch as the l2 (right?)- which cornkid owns, and i must say, it is VERY RELIABLE.

-David


----------



## cy (Jul 29, 2006)

A2 was the model PK filed at US patent office for two stage switch.


----------



## Scottiver (Jul 30, 2006)

I just turned off all the lights, grabbed my A2, put on my glasses and grabbed a newspaper and started to read it. There was no blue ball to follow around. It just lit up the entire newspaper and it was very comfortable to use. And I think it's a perfect brightness to go on an errand in the house in the middle of the night.


----------



## cy (Jul 30, 2006)

just got back from playing with A2 outside. beam improvement after rotating lamp is amazing! 

sure seems like output has increased too. 
my led's is pretty blue too.


----------



## Manzerick (Jul 30, 2006)

This may be the funniest rant I have read yet!!!! :lolsign:




Josey said:


> OK, I just got the A2. I resisted forever and ever. It just never looked like a light that had a purpose. Feeble incan. Feeble LEDs. Then I saw JS's review on the A2. The best review I've ever seen and written by the hot wire guru himself. JS is waaaaay smarter than me. Taller and better looking, too. Then I saw wise carrot-like people rave and put the A2 in their signature lines. How could I not try this light?
> 
> So now, after trying it, I don't get it. This is a crummy light. Feeble incan beam. Hot wire my foot. This is a warm wire. My U2 out throws it while providing a LOT more flood. My VIP750 TXOH LuxIII in a Mag2C just flat out blows it away for throw. Not even close. Mike Tyson v. Captain Kangaroo on a bad day.
> 
> ...


----------



## cheapo (Jul 30, 2006)

;;;


----------



## Delvance (Jul 30, 2006)

cheapo said:


> Also, it doesnt seem very efficient- as the U2 has twice the output, and has about the same runtime. LED, is the way to go if you are only going to have 50 lumens IMHO.
> -David


i've always thought the A2 was actually very efficient. The light, with LEDs only, run for around 40 hours iirc. And with the incan, you get 50 minutes, of REGULATED flat output. The A2 has also been known to put out alot more lumens than it is rated for on the box. I seem to recall a figure of 79 output lumens. Measuring mine in my lightbox (mine has modded LEDs though), it calculates to 80 output lumens for 50 minutes. The fact that it beats the P60 lamp easily while still operating the 3 LEDs and having the regulating circuitry take their share of energy as well, should show how efficient the light, circuitry and lamp is. The lamp is also known for being long lasting and quite tough ( i believe the circuitry also provids softstart for the lamp too).

The U2 depending on the LED, seems to put out 80-100 lumens for 1 hour, but if we have a look at the chart on FLR, the max level output is not very flat. From the 1st minute, the U2 has already dropped several percent and continues to drop. However the rest of the levels are flatly regulated. So once the output slides down a bit (on max level), a 80-90ish lumen binned U2 is probably putting out the same amount of light as the A2. And it will continue to drop too.

I don't own a U2 though... (but i want to)...


----------



## SilverFox (Jul 30, 2006)

Hello Delvance,

While your recollection is good, you need to understand that the 79 lumen figure came from Don's integration sphere before it was properly calibrated. We discovered that number was optimistic when we had the A2 tested in the laboratory. The purpose of our Light Meter Benchmark Testing is to see where our light measurement equipment results are in relation to what others are observing, and to be able to "adjust" our readings according to the real numbers from the laboratory.

I should also point out that the A2 that we had certified and are using in our testing has been modified. We took the LED ring out of it. This means that the lumen values will be higher for this light than a stock A2.

Tom


----------



## cue003 (Jul 30, 2006)

How does removing the LED ring make the lumens higher?

Curtis


----------



## dragoman (Jul 30, 2006)

When the A2 incandescent bulb is on, the 3 LEDs stay on too. You can't tell this by looking at the beam, but if you have a colored version you can easily tell by looking at the bezel.

The LEDs are direct driven and consume a small amount of current. With the LED ring removed ALL of the current is going to the incan bulb, resulting in slightly higher output. The runtime should be a little better on the incan too.....

dragoman


----------



## Max Brightness (Jul 30, 2006)

cheapo said:


> ..... lets just make this a rule, if you have a u2, dont buy the a2, because it wont do anything that the u2 cant- other than have a warm tint.


 
David may be onto something here.

I don't own a U2 (yet...) but if I needed to grab just one light, I would grab my HDS U60 with multiple levels, decent brightness, decent throw and very pocketable. My second choice would be my A2 because I find there are times when it is easier for me to see with an incandescent (and I know there is lots of discussion on this). It also has low level/backup LEDs.


----------



## lightplay22 (Jul 30, 2006)

Maybe I won the A2led lottery because my led's output is a nice smooth white flood. Blueish? Definately, but not enough to resemble most cheap nichia led lights i've seen. More than enough output to walk out doors in the dark. If the led's looked blue or purple like some i've seen, I would be highly disapointed and be looking to mod.


----------



## wquiles (Jul 30, 2006)

dragoman said:


> With the LED ring removed ALL of the current is going to the incan bulb, resulting in slightly higher output. The runtime should be a little better on the incan too.....


The part about the incan having higher output with no LED's is "not" correct. The A2's incandecent bulb is PWM regulated, and the output is fairly flat as long as there is energy left on the cells for the regulator to maintain a constant output voltage (DC equivalent). Not having LED's means there is more power (see second point), but it means nothing to the output of the regulator.

The part of having a longer runtime for the incan without LED's is true, since the batteries only feed the regulator and not the regulator and the LED's. However, the LED's don't draw "that" much power to make a huge difference  . I recall somebody in the forum did the experiement (removing the LED ring), but I don't recall how many extra minutes of runtime the incan lasted without the LED's in place.

Will


----------



## SilverFox (Jul 30, 2006)

Hello Will,

The reason the A2 without the LED's has a higher output in lumens and lux is because the LED's absorb some of the output. It has nothing to do with the power use. I had LSI try the A2 both ways and without the LED's it was around 5 lumens higher.

Tom


----------



## wquiles (Jul 30, 2006)

SilverFox said:


> Hello Will,
> 
> The reason the A2 without the LED's has a higher output in lumens and lux is because the LED's absorb some of the output. It has nothing to do with the power use. I had LSI try the A2 both ways and without the LED's it was around 5 lumens higher.
> 
> Tom


Cool. I have played so much lately with Willie Hunt's LVR's so I am fairly certain about the power/voltage side, but I did not looked at anything else.

I stand corrected then. Thanks Tom. 

My apologies dragoman 

Will


----------



## Delvance (Jul 30, 2006)

Hello Silverfox,

Thankyou for the clarification. Quite interesting that the A2 model tested scored a higher output with the LED ring removed. Do you remember what that same A2 was tested for at the certified laboratory ?

I just went through FLR's numbers again and compared the initial output (before sag for either lights) and the U2 scores 55 QUPS (trying not to use any conversion numbers now, just the straight out measurement to eliminate another variable), whilst the A2 scores 57.5 QUPS. Of course, the lightbox itself is not exactly the most scientific or accurate way of measuring lumen output of the light...but it seems to measure relative output of one light to another quite well. Going by the figures obtained from the lightbox, it seems with fresh cells, the A2 Quickbeam reviewed, had higher output than the U2 even before initial sag. Once sag kicks in, the A2 still manages a very flat output, while the U2 is sagging away to 80% of it's initial output before regulation itself fails.

I also just removed the LED ring for my A2 and obtained a measurement of 45 QUPS in my lightbox (obtained the number after 15 seconds on time to allow for regulation and current to settle). I then installed the LED ring and got a number of 49 (also allowed for a 15 second on time). My little experiment differs from your statement most probably because my A2 doesn't use the stock LEDs though. I bought it modded with 40k mcd LEDs (sanded for a smooth beam) instead of the original Nichias SF supplies. The 40k LEDs are also a fair bit overdriven. Initially, my train of thought was similar to what wquiles said, about the PWM regulator maintaining a constant current output, regardless of whether the batteries are feeding the LEDs a bit of current or not. Now i'm not so sure lol, sure am looking forward to seeing a definite conclusion though, very interesting.

Not trying to argue Silverfox, just reporting and attempting to discuss my personal findings and my thoughts regarding the output of both lights in regards to the lightbox, LED rings etc, thanks 

Oh forgot to mention, the batteries in my A2 during my little test, were at roughly 85%, so output sag had already kicked in. With fresh cells, my A2 outputs an almost identical number to what FLR obtained.




SilverFox said:


> Hello Delvance,
> 
> While your recollection is good, you need to understand that the 79 lumen figure came from Don's integration sphere before it was properly calibrated. We discovered that number was optimistic when we had the A2 tested in the laboratory. The purpose of our Light Meter Benchmark Testing is to see where our light measurement equipment results are in relation to what others are observing, and to be able to "adjust" our readings according to the real numbers from the laboratory.
> 
> ...


----------



## SilverFox (Jul 30, 2006)

Hello Delvance,

I believe this thread may outline some of the difficulties that we have measuring light.

I don't know why you are seeing what you are, but can speculate that it has something to do with the spectral response of the light meter you are using. Keep in mind that obtaining a lumen figure from a lux measurement will result in "very rough guess" that is dependent on the spectral output from the light and the spectral response of the meter you are using for the measurement (as well as a number of other factors).

Tom


----------



## Delvance (Jul 30, 2006)

Thanks Tom! :goodjob:


----------



## Ray_of_Light (Aug 1, 2006)

Josey said:


> It just never looked like a light that had a purpose. Feeble incan. Feeble LEDs.
> ...This is a crummy light. Feeble incan beam. Hot wire my foot. This is a warm wire....
> ...We had twisties before we had fire. This is dumb.
> ...You A2 guys must be smoking something besides batteries.
> ...



I never had so much fun with a review! 

I have two white A2s that I bought in 2004. I EDCed one for about a year, until i decided that I was done with incandescent on my person.
Rave reviews of teh A2, and more critical ones, exist in the archives of CPF. 

Today, the A2 is still my reference for "whiteness", due to its unique peculiarity of regulation. Yoy need to keep the A2 on, to realize its superiority...

Anthony


----------



## clipse (Aug 1, 2006)

Of all the reviews on CPF, after reading this one, I went and ordered an A2. 

clipse


----------



## Max Brightness (Aug 1, 2006)

clipse said:


> Of all the reviews on CPF, after reading this one, I went and ordered an A2.
> 
> clipse


 
Good for you. That's awesome.:rock:


----------



## leukos (Aug 1, 2006)

Ray_of_Light said:


> Rave reviews of the A2, and more critical ones, exist in the archives of CPF.


 
Good point, without a knowledge of history, history repeats itself. Maybe we would get less of these reviews that really _stink_ as reviews!


----------



## bwaites (Aug 1, 2006)

Josey makes some good points.

BUT...the A2 is still my reference light. 

Does my U2 put out more light overall on high? Perhaps, but I can't carry it in my front (or back) pocket, like I can the A2.

Do I have other lights that put out WAY more light? Of course, but they are all A LOT bigger. 

When it comes right down to it, the A2 remains the perfect combination of size and brightness for an EDC incandescent light, at least for me. If there is an unregulated light out there that is it's size (or smaller) and puts out a whiter light for as long as the A2 does, I'd love to see it!!

Bill


----------



## Barbarin (Aug 1, 2006)

Josey said:


> And, to top it off, this sucker is another %#@*! twistie. I hate twisties! This is 2006, people. We landed on the moon in, what, 1969? The twistie was the second invention after the wheel. We had twisties before we had fire. This is dumb.




I use twisties on all of my designs. The reasons are that they are more reliable, and a momentary tactical button that is impossible to lock accidentaly is a must on a tactical flashlight. 

Of course they are not as confortable as clickies, but safer and more reliable. If safety and reliability are the top goals on a design (as I think they are on Surefire, because people trust their lives on their products), the classical twistie with momentary is the way to go.

Regards, 

Javier


----------



## cy (Aug 1, 2006)

totally agree!!!

with primary lithium cell failure becoming common place. clickies is one of possible culprits in chain of failure. along with mis-matched cells and defective PTC devices. 



Barbarin said:


> I use twisties on all of my designs. The reasons are that they are more reliable, and a momentary tactical button that is impossible to lock accidentaly is a must on a tactical flashlight.
> 
> Of course they are not as confortable as clickies, but safer and more reliable. If safety and reliability are the top goals on a design (as I think they are on Surefire, because people trust their lives on their products), the classical twistie with momentary is the way to go.
> 
> ...


----------



## batman (Aug 1, 2006)

i have read that one of the effets of removing the LED ring from the A2 is that the light throws farther since there are no LEDs in the way of the reflector. 

according to the flashlightreviews graph the A2 throws further and produces more light than the U2. I've never seen an LED "white" that didn't look bluish..on the contrary my A2 incan isn't yellow by any standard. It''s basically white.


----------



## cheapo (Aug 2, 2006)

i dont like twisties, because you cannot turn them on underwater..... for example, my amilite- it is waterproof, but i cant turn it on or off underwater, because twisting it disturbs the o-rings... thats why i like clickies more... and they are better for quick activation.

-David


----------



## greenLED (Aug 2, 2006)

You need to lubricate the o-rings. Clickies will actually activate by themselves given enough depth (because of the pressure). Not good if you're a tactical diver...


----------



## cy (Aug 2, 2006)

not a diver, but it seems water pressure would activate a clickie....


----------



## cheapo (Aug 2, 2006)

even if i lubricate the o-rings, it would still let water in.

-David


----------



## cy (Aug 2, 2006)

use a double or triple Oring design


----------



## greenLED (Aug 2, 2006)

cy said:


> use a double or triple Oring design


 plus thicker o-rings and lots'a lube


----------



## cheapo (Aug 3, 2006)

cy said:


> use a double or triple Oring design



then you cant turn it on with one hand.

-David


----------



## carrot (Aug 3, 2006)

cheapo said:


> then you cant turn it on with one hand.
> 
> -David


Then... don't dive with it.


----------



## clipse (Aug 3, 2006)

I just got my A2 with red LED's. I like it. Initial impression are I LIKE IT ALOT!!!! but I've had my heart broken before so I'm gonna wait a bit. 

clipse


----------



## Blindasabat (Aug 3, 2006)

Many dive lights (PT, UK) use this design and it often works down to 100's of feet deep. A twist cap on an o-ring is sliding contact and should not let any water in until you reach some depth. Of course that depth depends on the design, fit of the o-rings, and how well it is lubed and what lube is used.


cheapo said:


> even if i lubricate the o-rings, it would still let water in.
> 
> -David


----------



## Haz (Aug 3, 2006)

I would think a snug o-ring, will provide more water proof capability than a switch with a rubber sleeve. There is more pressure on the o-ring to prevent the entry of water, than a rubber sleeve.


----------



## thesurefire (Aug 3, 2006)

cheapo said:


> actually, the u2's switch is great. Its just that people dont bend the tabs in the tailcap- once that is done, the tailcap is very reliable. The Surefire 2 stage tailcaps are also quite reliable too.
> 
> -David



Right.... I can't imagine why people don’t think its 'great' that they have to take apart and bend parts of their 270 dollar light to get it to work properly... 

As for the diving argument, unless your diving deep, like maybe 250+ feet, twisties are they way to go. Just do like cy said and use 2/3 o rings.

I like the A2. I dont like it enough to buy one, but I do like it. IMHO its LED territory under 100 lumens, not Incan.


----------



## cheapo (Aug 3, 2006)

thesurefire said:


> Right.... I can't imagine why people don’t think its 'great' that they have to take apart and bend parts of their 270 dollar light to get it to work properly...
> 
> As for the diving argument, unless your diving deep, like maybe 250+ feet, twisties are they way to go. Just do like cy said and use 2/3 o rings.
> 
> I like the A2. I dont like it enough to buy one, but I do like it. IMHO its LED territory under 100 lumens, not Incan.




you dont have to take it apart- you just take off the tailcap and bend the tabs.... it would be perfectly fine with me to have to do that with a $1000 light. This bending tabs thing is not even an issue, and it doesnt matter, and it bothers noone.

as for the twisty thing... if you plan on being able to twist the light on with one hand (easily), dont plan on being able to turn it on underwater- simple as that.

-David

-david


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Aug 4, 2006)

What SilverFox said earlier: 

Hello Delvance,

While your recollection is good, you need to understand that the 79 lumen figure came from Don's integration sphere before it was properly calibrated. We discovered that number was optimistic when we had the A2 tested in the laboratory. The purpose of our Light Meter Benchmark Testing is to see where our light measurement equipment results are in relation to what others are observing, and to be able to "adjust" our readings according to the real numbers from the laboratory.

I should also point out that the A2 that we had certified and are using in our testing has been modified. We took the LED ring out of it. This means that the lumen values will be higher for this light than a stock A2.

Tom
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Benchmark A2 tested by LSI had been passed around quite a bit and had some hours on it when it was tested by LSI. My thought is that the output had degraded somewhat, and may actually be the 1/2 life of the A2 LA. I say this because my A2 deminished in output by about 20% since I have had it (bounce with lightmeter). Quickbeams figures may be pretty accurate, and the output is probably closer to 80 lumens with a fresh MA02 LA. 

Bill


----------



## thesurefire (Aug 4, 2006)

cheapo said:


> as for the twisty thing... if you plan on being able to twist the light on with one hand (easily), dont plan on being able to turn it on underwater- simple as that.
> 
> -David



I won’t argue about the U2 tailcap. It does bother me. To me it’s unacceptable to have to do anything to a light of that cost. It should work perfectly out of the box.

Will you please explain to my why 2 weeks ago when I was under 15 feet of water, why I had absolutely NO problem turning on (easily, with 1 hand) a Surefire 6P with 2 O rings on the tailcap, and why when I came back to the surface and checked the light it had NO water in it? I use a 6P as my primary dive light, as the max depth of the lake I dive in is only about 50 feet. The only reasonable reason I can see not being able to do this is that you have used no lube on the threads.

I apologize for being so off topic, the clicky vs twisty in dive lights probably deserves its own thread.

Back on topic... Would there be anyway to remove the LED ring from an A2 and put in a normal reflector (one without holes in it), to increase throw/beam quality? The Idea of a regulated E1e with a R123 cell strikes me as a good one.


----------



## rgp4544 (Aug 4, 2006)

If you don't like twist and press type tailcaps, you have to remember that it is common knowledge that the A2, L1, L2, and K2 all have that tailcap. No need to buy one and then complain about something known in advance. If you want something else, buy something else.

Richard


----------



## rgp4544 (Aug 4, 2006)

thesurefire said:


> I won’t argue about the U2 tailcap. It does bother me. To me it’s unacceptable to have to do anything to a light of that cost. It should work perfectly out of the box.
> 
> Will you please explain to my why 2 weeks ago when I was under 15 feet of water, why I had absolutely NO problem turning on (easily, with 1 hand) a Surefire 6P with 2 O rings on the tailcap, and why when I came back to the surface and checked the light it had NO water in it? I use a 6P as my primary dive light, as the max depth of the lake I dive in is only about 50 feet. The only reasonable reason I can see not being able to do this is that you have used no lube on the threads.
> 
> ...



I just pulled the head off one of my A2's and it sure looks like the reflector is a machined portion of the head itself...there does not appear to be a removable reflector.

Richard


----------



## cheapo (Aug 4, 2006)

thesurefire said:


> Will you please explain to my why 2 weeks ago when I was under 15 feet of water, why I had absolutely NO problem turning on (easily, with 1 hand) a Surefire 6P with 2 O rings on the tailcap, and why when I came back to the surface and checked the light it had NO water in it? I use a 6P as my primary dive light, as the max depth of the lake I dive in is only about 50 feet. The only reasonable reason I can see not being able to do this is that you have used no lube on the threads.



ok... time to lube my 0-rings.

-David


----------



## Protaeus (Aug 5, 2006)

Ive used both the U2 and the A2.

As far as Im concerned, outdoors, the A2 beats the U2 hands down. It simply doesnt matter if the U2 produces more light than the A2. The poor colour rendition of the LED just washes everything into a grey blur. Furthermore, have you tried using an LED in the fog? 

I found the U2 to be a little large for its output. 

I didnt really appreciate the A2 when I had it. Once I swapped it for the U2 however, I really wanted to go back.

As far as Im concerned, LEDS should be kept for indoor/close range work and long runtime lights. 

just my 2 cents. feel free to criticise constructively


----------



## rgp4544 (Aug 5, 2006)

I've had that situation myself with high output LED lights and now I stick with a Surefire A2 and an M3T. The A2 wasn't that impressive at first glance and required practical use to actually appreciate it.

Protaeus, I have to be back in Australia toward the end of this year before going to the top end and would like to ask if you know of a discount source for CR123A's in Sydney?

Thank you

Richard


----------



## Protaeus (Aug 5, 2006)

hahaha

discount and CR123as are an oxymoron down here in Sydney and for the rest of Australia for that matter. As far as I can tell, the cheapest that I can see is $50AUD (around $38USD) for 12 Surefire cells and they were out of stock. 

I have resorted almost entirely to rechargeable cells and if I do need primaries, I will get them from the US. 

If you go to supermarkets its about $7USD per cell.

So, my advice would probably be to get some rechargeables and a charger or to bring some over, because you arent going to easily get cheap CR123as down heree.


----------



## cheapo (Aug 5, 2006)

With an incand, you lose the ability to have multiple stages, you also lose the ability to use higher voltage rechargeables, the bulb will eventually blow- and some would want all that just to have a yellow beam.... ;;;

-David


----------



## 270winchester (Aug 5, 2006)

cheapo said:


> With an incand, you lose the ability to have multiple stages, you also lose the ability to use higher voltage rechargeables, the bulb will eventually blow- and some would want all that just to have a yellow beam.... this "beam color" thing is overrated imho, just buy a color filter for the led light if it is that important.
> 
> -David



David:

the A2 can infact use 2 3.7v R123s. it has been shown over and over again that the regulator is a buck-boost type for incandescents.

The reliability of the MA02 is also legendary with its soft start assist.


----------



## Delvance (Aug 5, 2006)

I would never put a colour filter on a LED light and expect it too match an incans beam. The filters only give one very specific colour and they cut down on overall output too much.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Aug 5, 2006)

Actually the A2 has a regulator that delivers about 3.7 volts to the incan bulb, and voltage must be above 3.7 volts for it to work in regulation. Circuit is different than a typhical led buck regulator.

Bill


----------



## wquiles (Aug 5, 2006)

270winchester said:


> David:
> 
> the A2 can infact use 2 3.7v R123s. it has been shown over and over again that the regulator is a buck-boost type for incandescents.
> 
> The reliability of the MA02 is also legendary with its soft start assist.



It is not a buck-bost regulator. The A2 has a Willie Hunt designed PWM regulator, which only regulates to a lower voltage than the battery/cells - a buck reguator, although as noted by Bill, much different than say something like the downboy current regulator we can get from the Shoppe. Willie's regulator outputs either zero volts or a full battery/cell voltage, and this square wave output has a varying period (% of time that is ON), to provide equivalent DC or "RMS" voltage to the lamp. As the batteries drain, the period increases until the voltage is always ON (period = 100%), once you go past this point, the regulator goes out of regulation. More can be read here in Willie's site , and in my own test, evaluation, and modification of one of his regulators in here .

I know for a fact that the A2 can and does work with two rechargeable 3.7V LiIon cells - I lost count past 30 full cycles of how many times I have used them in my own personal A2. In the A2, once the cells are depleted, the beam turns yellow and drops in output condirerably - this happens right before the LiIon cells get over-discharged, so you basically turn the A2 off and re-charge the cels as soon as possible.

Also, as Bill noted, the soft-start is totally awesome. I actually have some scope shots here showing the soft-start in actiion 

Will


----------



## 270winchester (Aug 6, 2006)

I stand corrected, I couldn;t think of the name for the regulator. Dang, spending way too much time with LEDs...


----------



## carl (Aug 13, 2006)

This is by far the most hilarious thread to date on the CPF! Great original post. Great responses. carry on.


----------



## europium (Nov 14, 2006)

I heartily look forward to the inevitable follow-up: "The Kroma stinks."   


From FLR: http://flashlightreviews.com/reviews/surefire_kroma.htm

Kroma Level: _White High_*
Throw: *_*1600 (40.00) *_
*Overall Output: * _*3220 (32.20)* _
*Runtime hrs. (estimated): 1*


----------



## jch79 (Nov 14, 2006)

Not this thread again! :duck:

As for the Kroma, it did get 5 "dots" from Flashlight Reviews, so it might be harder to say that it stinks. If someone is buying it just for the white light, they're buying the wrong light :shrug:, and should consider the U2 instead. 

The purpose of the Kroma is the red & blue LED's as well as the white.

john


----------



## revolvergeek (Nov 14, 2006)

I won't say that it stinks, but I personally am not that awed by it. I have had two, an early one with white leds and a newer one with red, and they are nice lights but I don't find that I particuarly have a use for one. Yes, they are regulated, and I know that is very important to some folks, but I just don't see that much of a difference personally. I found that in real world use I liked my modded L1 and modded KL1 with two-stage tailcap much better. It may be awesome as an aviation light, but I don't fly or crew airplanes.


----------



## leukos (Nov 14, 2006)

My A2 smells just like all my other lights.....flashohol!


----------



## DM51 (Nov 16, 2006)

Could someone please send Josey another controversial light to review?


----------

