# Fenix LD12 and LD22



## kj2 (Jan 31, 2012)

Guys,

Just saw these two on the Fenix website.

LD12; http://www.fenixlight.com/viewnproduct.asp?id=107

• Cree XP-G (R5) LED with a lifespan of 50,000 hours
• Uses one 1.5V AA (Ni-MH, Alkaline ) battery
• 105mm (Length) x 21.5mm (Diameter)
• 54-gram weight (excluding battery and holster)
• Digitally regulated output - maintains constant brightness
• Reverse polarity protection, to protect from improper battery installation
• Anti-roll, slip-resistant body design
• Tactical tail cap switch with momentary-on function
• Side mode switch in the front
• Made of durable aircraft-grade aluminum
• Premium Type III hard-anodized anti-abrasive finish
• Toughened ultra-clear glass lens with anti-reflective coating














LD22; http://www.fenixlight.com/viewnproduct.asp?id=108 

• Cree XP-G (R5) LED with a lifespan of 50,000 hours
• Uses two 1.5V AA (Ni-MH, Alkaline ) batteries
•156mm (Length) x 21.5mm (Diameter)
• 60-gram weight (excluding batteries and body clip)
• Digitally regulated output maintains constant brightness
• Reverse polarity protection guards against improper battery installation
• Anti-roll, slip-resistant body design
• Push-button tail cap switch with momentary-on function
• Side mode switch in the front, fast and convenient 
• Made of durable aircraft-grade aluminum
• Premium Type III hard-anodized anti-abrasive finish
• Toughened ultra-clear glass lens with anti-reflective coating












- Looks like, that the clicky behind the head is gonna be on all LD- lights.


----------



## jamjam (Jan 31, 2012)

According to the official runtime chart, the LD22 brightness increased compare to LD12, instead of remaining the same brightness with almost double the runtime. Only the lowest mode remain at 3lm, but the runtime only increase by 10 hours, which puzzled me.


----------



## kj2 (Jan 31, 2012)

And comparing the LD22 with the LD20. Nothing improved much. Lumens are higher but intensity and throw are less.


----------



## pblanch (Jan 31, 2012)

I noticed they took the LD10 off the site.
LD10
Cree XP-G LED (R5)
87M
100lm 1hr 45min
45lm 4hr 40min
13lm 11hr
3lm 70hr


----------



## sholimar (Jan 31, 2012)

Hmm... just bought an LD10 R5 and didn't believe the guy when he told me that they won't be making them anymore. 

I know there's not much of a difference (except the runtimes, of course), but what do you guys think (_really now, I'm new and I want to know if to return it and wait for a little while_)? Is the LD12 a better flashlight? 
I see a little higher output and better runtimes, but the throw is shorter, as well as the beam intensity.
Also, is the LD12 limited to the side-press button for mode change? That would make a weird interface I think (in a "tactical grip", for example)...

As a side note, I really hoped for XM-L versions, not this side-clicky thing.


----------



## kj2 (Jan 31, 2012)

I think you should keep your LD10  -wait for review(s) of the new lights.


----------



## Ishango (Jan 31, 2012)

sholimar said:


> I know there's not much of a difference (except the runtimes, of course), but what do you guys think (_really now, I'm new and I want to know if to return it and wait for a little while_)? Is the LD12 a better flashlight?



I would keep the LD10. It's a very nice light (I own one myself and use it quite often). The newer specs are interesting, but for me they're not enough to make the switch. As kj2 stated, better wait for reviews on the new lights. However the mode switch on the side is a very interesting feature.


----------



## chewy78 (Jan 31, 2012)

I like the fact these will have a separate mode switch. Its a pain to keep going through the modes to get to medium or high or on my l2d q5. Plus it has a clip, this light would come in handy working on our farm without have to have a holster


----------



## chewy78 (Jan 31, 2012)

The LD22 looks like it could be a good upgrade for my L2D Q5


----------



## sholimar (Jan 31, 2012)

Thank you kj2 and Ishango for the speedy replies. :thumbsup:

After reading a little bit more about the new UI, I'll hold on to my LD10... I just don't like fumbling for two buttons in the dark. If the newer model could switch modes by both clicking the side button and half-pressing the tailcap one, then it would get my attention, but like it is at the moment - no way! 
It would also be interesting if it could at least turn on if the side button is pressed for >1 second (so the "normal" mode of holding a flashlight would be possible), but clicking the tailcap once, then clicking another rubbery thing perpendicular to the first doesn't seem as fluid as the interface on the older models.
Of course, to each his own and I'm sure that many will actually prefer the new way of doing things.

P.S. Yeey! My one-week old purchase isn't outdated yet!


----------



## chewy78 (Jan 31, 2012)

Its funny because I recently ordered 2 E21's from amazon.com. Maybe I will give them away as gifts to local friends and family or use for camping and sell my L2D Q5 .


----------



## kts (Jan 31, 2012)

Is the "side-clicky" rubber replaceable ?


----------



## arjay (Feb 1, 2012)

Yikes! the LD10 series has been my favorite EDC for years and the decision to have a separate button to change modes seems silly to me. I think I need to get some spares now before they are all gone.


----------



## trevordurden (Feb 1, 2012)

I'm glad I bought my LD10 gift set while they still had it. I'm not a big fan of the electronic switches.


----------



## How Goes It (Feb 1, 2012)

I can't see myself liking this configuration of 2 buttons.
Seems more awkward to deal with 2 different button positions.

Either have both buttons on the side, or one button on the tail as with my LD10.

Just make a single rear button forward clicky for momentary, with tap to change modes when the button is fully pressed.

What Fenix really should concentrate on, is making shorter 3 and 4 cell NiMH AA lights, along the lines of the Q50 and the S5310.

-----------
Steve


----------



## regulation (Feb 1, 2012)

I guess I might know why the LD22' intensity and throw is weaker than the LD10.

It might due to the side-mode button.

They need to keep the size compact while adding a side button on the head, so it would reduce the deep of the reflector and resulte in a lower throw and intensity,

I can;t say which one is better since fenix tends to upgrade their products like this.

If a tail standing means much to you, then get the old version, if not, try the new one.


----------



## Swede74 (Feb 1, 2012)

Thanks to this thread, I've fallen in love with the little LD12 a mere day after I learned of its existence. I was only going to buy three lights 2012; a Zebralight T5 if it becomes available, a RCR123-powered one and a backup for my EDC (currently an iTP A3) but now it looks like it's going to be four new lights, for the following reasons: 

1. I don't have a Fenix light. 
2. I don't have a light with separate mode and on/off switches. 
3. I don't have a single AA-light with a crenelated bezel. 
4. I'm impressed by the runtime on the lowest level. 

Why is it so easy to find reasons to buy a light that you don't really need, and why do even the weakest arguments eventually become convincing?


----------



## chewy78 (Feb 2, 2012)

this thread was first lol


----------



## kj2 (Feb 2, 2012)

Think, I gonna get a LD22


----------



## chewy78 (Feb 2, 2012)

me too possibly


----------



## kj2 (Feb 2, 2012)

Preorder @ Fenix OutFitters; LD12- $54.95 (~41.96 euro) ; LD22- $62.95 (~48.07 euro)


----------



## GulfCoastToad (Feb 2, 2012)

One more vote in favor of the LD22 here. Addition of momentary on, lower low mode, and brightness memory are three things I wish my LD20 already had.


----------



## BullsEyeLantern (Feb 2, 2012)

I love my LD10, but will probably pick up the LD12, especially if it can use a 14500 and keep other modes with it.


----------



## Nightman (Feb 2, 2012)

The L2D Q5 was my first "real" flashlight and it got a lot of use in my work. Nowadays I don't use it as much since momentary on is something I must have on my lights.

Therefore I think that Fenix choice to go with 2 buttons is a great one. The benefit of being able to easily changing modes and the added benefit of momentary on makes this a killer light in the 2AA segment. To me...


----------



## A10K (Feb 3, 2012)

Chiming in as an LD20 (Q5) owner, it looks like this may be a slightly better variant for camping/hiking, since none of the LD20 lights had a good "low" (9 lumens for mine). The extra flood is nice too, but that button thing is kinda weird. Most of my experience using mine is attached as a bike light, so throw and brighter modes are both plusses, but the few times I've use it for night hiking (instead of a headlamp) I've been taken aback by the "bright low" mode.
That button thing could go either way. While I like that the blinking modes have been tucked out of the way, I find it convenient to be able to reach the Turbo mode on mine with just a turn of the head.


----------



## luke_DF (Feb 3, 2012)

I'm not keen on the side mode-switch button, either, but I guess it's a step toward making the light as easy to use as possible. I don't care much about the improved clips (holster for my work light and pocket for my EDC work just fine) and find the tight / throwy beam of the LD20 Q5 very useful, so I personally see no reason to upgrade anytime soon... and I might actually pick up an LD10 if this means they will be offered at a discount now - that'd be pretty nice.


----------



## buds224 (Feb 3, 2012)

Side button is awkward. Having owned the PD32 for a month now, I still can't get used to the extra effort in locating the button without having to look down at the light. Would have been nice to have the mode button in the back like the newer Klarus lights.


----------



## Kokopelli (Feb 3, 2012)

When I first ordered my ITP SA1 which also had a side mode button I were thinking that I would get the light of my life. Then I found myself trying to turn it on with the front button, or switch modes on the rear button. Not what I was thinking. Neither did using soft buttons like in TK41 work for me. I think placing the buttons close or just sticking with head turn is better. These mode buttons doesn't look much sturdy either.


----------



## chewy78 (Feb 3, 2012)

i might sell my l2d q5 and get the ld22


----------



## GlocksRock (Feb 3, 2012)

Those look really nice, I like the LD22.


----------



## geckoblink (Feb 3, 2012)

I had my reservations about side switches, but after buying and using the Klarus ST20 I've actually become fairly fond of the concept. Seeing as how the Fenix LD10 is my EDC, I am definitely going to try out the LD12. The temptation of having low modes with 14500 is also too great.


----------



## Nake (Feb 3, 2012)

Where does it say it can use a 14500? Fenix has never made an AA light that could. For that matter never a single CR123 that could use a RCR123.


----------



## Harry999 (Feb 4, 2012)

Nake said:


> Where does it say it can use a 14500? Fenix has never made an AA light that could. For that matter never a single CR123 that could use a RCR123.



I think it mentions it on the Facebook Fenix page.


----------



## chewy78 (Feb 4, 2012)

i sure cant find it.


----------



## geckoblink (Feb 4, 2012)

Nake said:


> Where does it say it can use a 14500? Fenix has never made an AA light that could. For that matter never a single CR123 that could use a RCR123.


I forgot exactly where I read it but I found it again here:

http://www.ramocafe.com/t520400.html


----------



## nanotech17 (Feb 4, 2012)




----------



## candle lamp (Feb 4, 2012)

According to *Fenix homepage*, it's powered by Ni-MH, alkarine (14500 size) battery.
I think turbo mode is only available on RCR123A.


----------



## Nake (Feb 4, 2012)

geckoblink said:


> I forgot exactly where I read it but I found it again here:
> 
> http://www.ramocafe.com/t520400.html



Well, I sure hope so, and maintain the different levels of brightness. It would have to have a buck/boost driver. The older LDs could run with a 14500 but it overdrove the circuit board and all you got was Turbo till the 14500 was almost at the cut off point. 

That's one thing 4sevens single AAs had over Fenix.


----------



## lightnin'hopkins (Feb 4, 2012)

These lights look very interesting.
I like separate mode button, momentary on & memory.
But I wonder how tactile the mode button is.
It doesnt seem to protude in any way.
How will they operate with gloves on?


----------



## lightwait (Feb 5, 2012)

Fenix just updated the comment thread on Facebook to say the LD12 will NOT use a 14500 cell. :sigh:


----------



## andurilgc (Feb 5, 2012)

Nice upgrades Fenix have made

Two things that came to bother me on my LD20 were the reverse (not forward) clicky and clip orientation 

Wonder how that side swich will wear with hard use though ...


----------



## chewy78 (Feb 6, 2012)

select one mode and leave it there, problem solved.


----------



## wudongbo1988 (Mar 19, 2012)

Fenix LD12 is a perfect tourch using one AA battery.:devil:


----------



## subwoofer (Mar 19, 2012)

I've just posted a review of the LD12 if anyone is interested:

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?335180-Fenix-LD12-Review


----------



## brted (Mar 22, 2012)

Has anyone tested theirs with a 14500? I'm wondering if it loses the lower modes like Fenix lights of the past.


----------



## subwoofer (Mar 22, 2012)

brted said:


> Has anyone tested theirs with a 14500? I'm wondering if it loses the lower modes like Fenix lights of the past.



Is anyone willing to risk frying their new light?.....Remember Fenix do not support use of 14500 for the LD12.

Although various Fenix light have survived the abuse of being fed Li-ion when they don't support it, this only goes to show the good quality components used. Personally I wouldn't risk it even if lots of people try and it seems OK. Manufacturers write specifications for a good reason.


----------



## Flashaholic_71 (Mar 23, 2012)

My fenix ld22 got in yesterday in the mail. I pulled it out of the box and i noticed the head of the torch like something would rattle inside. I went and got 2 new AA lithium batt and well long story short, I only get the torch to go into : Low after its in low mode , I need to click side botton twice too get next level witch i think its high cause its preatty high and then turbo , goes into strobe and sos. cant seem to get it too go into medium... I will be contacting fenix for a exchange because i dont think that this is normal.


----------



## GunnarGG (Mar 23, 2012)

Have you tried with alkaline and NiMh?


----------



## Outdoorsman5 (Mar 23, 2012)

Flashaholic_71 said:


> My fenix ld22 got in yesterday in the mail. I pulled it out of the box and i noticed the head of the torch like something would rattle inside. I went and got 2 new AA lithium batt and well long story short, I only get the torch to go into : Low after its in low mode , I need to click side botton twice too get next level witch i think its high cause its preatty high and then turbo , goes into strobe and sos. cant seem to get it too go into medium... I will be contacting fenix for a exchange because i dont think that this is normal.



I'm just guessing here, but I bet I know what's going on. I bet the LD22 has the same circuitry as the LD20 which would mean that the light was really designed for 1.2v NiMH batteries more than the 1.5v alkaline. Each of my LD20's and LD10 lights work just fine on NiMH batteries, but when I use fresh alkaline batteries the low mode no longer works. The voltage on fresh alkalines is too high for the low mode to work, but when the battery is run down enough for the voltage to dip to somewhere around 1.2v or lower then the low mode begins to work. Not that big of a deal since I use eneloops, but is a little annoying since the masses use alkalines.


----------



## Flashaholic_71 (Mar 23, 2012)

I tried a diferent batterie " Powerex 2700 Rechargeable" and all the modes working fine now!!! But there is still something like loose inside the head of the flashlight. "inside" I can hear it rattle inside like a maraca when i shake it. It sounds even louder if i shake it without the batteries inside.

Just wondering if other Ld22's have this same issue when you shake it ???

I got both the Ld22 and the Ld12 and so far im kinda liking the ld12 more in a way... The Ld22 is brighter and has more throw but i find a bigger donut hole on the ld22 ,when bounced off a white wall. The color of the light in my Ld12 is kinda white/ purpleish... Not as white as the Ld22... The Ld12 ran off Energizer Ultimate Lithium just fine unlike the ld22 that some of modes did not funtion... They are both nice lights and i like them alot. I just wish my Ld22 would not rattle like a maraca right now. Ld12 also ran off the powerex cell just fine. 
My Ld20 runs off Lithium cells with no problem just noticed this...

Thank You For Your Time 
God Bless


----------



## hiuintahs (Mar 24, 2012)

I noticed when I put two new L91 lithium batteries in my Olight T25, that my low mode wasn't as low anymore. I believe Outdoorsman5 is correct. The forward voltage drop across the LED is in the vicinity of 3.25 volts. The single AA lights require a boost circuit and so it really doesn't matter if you have a 1.2v cell or a 1.6v cell, the circuit still has to boost the voltage.

But if the circuit has been designed as a boost regulator for 2AA light, and you put in a voltage higher than its trying to regulate to, then the regulator goes into "off" mode and the power just passes from input to output with just a little voltage drop through the schottky diode. If this voltage is higher than it normally would be at the LED for a "low" mode then you see a higher output. I think its barely borderline with 2AA lights and you only notice it with brand new alkaline or especially lithium cells.

Some 2AA lights you don't see it but others you do. I don't think its much of an issue as the voltage on new cells will quickly drop down with some usage and the light's modes will then be spaced normally. Besides for that time when the regulator is in "off" mode is when the most efficient operation of the light will occur.


----------



## Flashaholic_71 (Mar 26, 2012)

Update: Contacted Fenix and told me that was not the case for the ld22 that it should not rattle inside , and too send back the light and that they would send a new one.


----------



## Palaeoboy (Mar 31, 2012)

The anti roll ring on the LD12 doesnt look as prominent as the LD10 or is it just the way the pictures are taken? I wanted a replacement to my L1D but the LD10 looked like it was meant to have a spanner attached to it the anti roll lip was stood out so much so I have been waiting to see is this new one is the same.


----------



## Labrador72 (Mar 31, 2012)

You are right: the anti-roll ring on the LD12 looks a couple of mm thinner than on the LD20. Probably they decided to reduce the size so that the LD12 head, which is visibly longer than the LD10's, wouldn't increas the length of the new model too much! The larger anti-roll ring is handy for twisting the bezel with one hand but with the LD12 you won't have to do that anymore.


----------



## larcal (Apr 1, 2012)

chewy78 said:


> I like the fact these will have a separate mode switch. Its a pain to keep going through the modes to get to medium or high[/QUOTE<BR><BR>
> 
> Don't get this. My reading of both these models is that you have to scroll thru the different levels regardless of where the switch is. Incorrect? Also please tell. On the ld20 if you are in one of the non turbo levels and wish to move to turbo can you just turn the bevel or do you have to turn off first? If the former is true I think I might prefer the ld20 as a bike light since with the ld22 if I am in low mode and want turbo quick I would have to scroll thru medium and high first to get there. Can't believe Fenix does not discuss the UI of these lights at all on their site.


----------



## lightwait (Apr 1, 2012)

You have it correct. The difference though is that the LD12 will remember the last setting used and no head twisting for Max. So every time you turn it on, it remembers the level you left it at. Strobe modes are hidden and won't pop up when cycling through. Lo-med-high-max, so it could be up to 3 clicks to get where you want to be if its not already where you need it at turn on.

The LD20 with head loosened will start from low each time you turn it on and you need to bump it up each time. Also, if you turn it off and on too quickly, you will bump it up. You can just twist the head for max, no need to turn it off first. I don't have an LD20 in hand, but I believe loosening the head again after going to max will revert to low regardless of where you were before going to max.

I've been playing with the LD12 for a few weeks now. It's growing on me. A lot of my use is daytime use, working on cars or whatever and looking for parts/tools in my store room. So its working out good that I don't need to bump it up each time I need to flash some extra light on something and if I happen to turn it off and on too rapidly, I don't bump it up unexpectedly.


----------



## Iroquois Pliskin (Apr 1, 2012)

Love Fenix sadly my TA21 was stolen.


----------



## Labrador72 (Apr 1, 2012)

larcal said:


> chewy78 said:
> 
> 
> > I like the fact these will have a separate mode switch. Its a pain to keep going through the modes to get to medium or high
> ...


What they meant is that the new LD22 has memory so if you switched off to medium and you want it to go on medium again you just have to push a forward clicky and the flashlight will go on on medium.
Personally, I dind this an advantage only if you use always the same output level. The LD20 allows the flashlight to always go on on either turbo or low, depending whether the bezel is tight or loose, so I don't find the lask of memory an issue.
It's really down to what you want and need. 



larcal said:


> Also please tell. On the ld20 if you are in one of the non turbo levels and wish to move to turbo can you just turn the bevel or do you have to turn off first? If the former is true I think I might prefer the ld20 as a bike light since with the ld22 if I am in low mode and want turbo quick I would have to scroll thru medium and high first to get there. Can't believe Fenix does not discuss the UI of these lights at all on their site.


Yes, if you twist the bezel you automatically go to turbo without having to press the tail switch again. Same if you loosen the bezel while the LD20 is on on turbo: it will automatically go to low.
I think that if turbo and low are the modes you'll be using more, you are probably right: twisting the bezel is easier than cycling through; especially if for cycling through if have to locate a separate button switch.
If you look around you might even be able to find the LD20 at a much lower price than the LD22: I got mine for €18 less than LD22!


----------



## Labrador72 (Apr 1, 2012)

Remove content - Double post.


----------



## larcal (Apr 1, 2012)

Cool. Such clear answers, they really help. Yes, with either light wherever you are it's the same # of clicks to get somewhere else, xcept for turbo. The memory is enticing, might be important, dependiing on your use. Is that loose bevel a problem as a handlebar mount on bumpy roads? Once loosened, can it keep loosening? I also wish someone who has an L22 would put on some moderately thick gloves and report as to how well one can feel that side switch. It seems the jury will be out for awhile as to whether the l22 really has such an immense battery life improvement or is just a result of change in the rating system. Seems pretty unlikely to me that there is any diff, as both use the same LED, but I'm sure some of us who have been following these kinds of things for awhile with other lights would have a better idea then me.:wave:


----------



## Labrador72 (Apr 1, 2012)

larcal said:


> Cool. Such clear answers, they really help. Yes, with either light wherever you are it's the same # of clicks to get somewhere else, xcept for turbo.





larcal said:


> Cool. Such clear answers, they really help. Yes, with either light wherever you are it's the same # of clicks to get somewhere else, xcept for turbo. The memory is enticing, might be important, dependiing on your use. Is that loose bevel a problem as a handlebar mount on bumpy roads? Once loosened, can it keep loosening? I also wish someone who has an L22 would put on some moderately thick gloves and report as to how well one can feel that side switch. It seems the jury will be out for awhile as to whether the l22 really has such an immense battery life improvement or is just a result of change in the rating system. Seems pretty unlikely to me that there is any diff, as both use the same LED, but I'm sure some of us who have been following these kinds of things for awhile with other lights would have a better idea then me.:wave:


I've checked my LD20 and LD10 and I seriously doubt bumpy roads or similar vibrations would make bezel loosen accidentally at all: it's quite firm.

The LD22 also has the advantage that strobe and SOS are hidden: If you don't mind having to switch on/off from the tail switch and then having to change grip to cycle through using the button switch the LD22 is probably the better option: newer, rated with slightly better runtimes and lumen outputs. It also allows to reverse the clip and has a forward clicky with momentary on. It does not tailstand though. 

There's a review of the LD12 by Subwoofer, you can try to ask the question about gloves in that thread: the head switch to change mode is exactly the same so if gloves are not a problem on the LD12 won't on the LD22 either.
Good luck.


----------



## lightwait (Apr 1, 2012)

larcal said:


> I also wish someone who has an L22 would put on some moderately thick gloves and report as to how well one can feel that side switch.


I don't have the LD22, but I'm pretty sure the side button is the same as the LD12. I think you will certainly be able to push the button with gloves. However, it raises only slightly from the body and its not likely that you could find it easily just by feel through a glove. Even with cold bare hands, it can be hard to feel for the switch without looking at it. I keep the pocket clip pointing at the switch so its easier for my hand to find the switch without seeing it. Accidental activation might be a problem with a heavy glove depending how you hold the light. The LD22 is longer so its probably easier to avoid the switch on that model. I'm not familiar with bike mounts, but if you could have the switch in a known position, you should ok with gloves. I think it might even be easier than twisting the head with gloves, depending how grippy the gloves are. The oring keeps the head fairly tight on most Fenix that I've handled.


----------



## bon1 (Apr 2, 2012)

lightwait said:


> I think you will certainly be able to push the button with gloves. However, it raises only slightly from the body and its not likely that you could find it easily just by feel through a glove. Even with cold bare hands, it can be hard to feel for the switch without looking at it. I keep the pocket clip pointing at the switch so its easier for my hand to find the switch without seeing it.



I second Lightwait's words, I too use the pocket clip as a reference to locate the side switch found on the LD12. Conversely, I'd buy the LD12 again.


----------



## Mogal (Apr 27, 2012)

Hello all, first post.

After a couple of days searching, I finally desided on the LD22.
This is my first REAL flashlight.
I have an old MAG, and a cheapo LED version of a mag, and a couple dollar store 9 LED lights...

I will be using this light for shipboard work, and general use around the house/yard...

Hope I made a good pick!
(I like the side switch!)

Chris


----------



## Labrador72 (Apr 27, 2012)

Fenix is definitely a good pick and if you like the side switch the LD22 is for you!


----------



## RookieTorchJunkie (Apr 27, 2012)

bon1 said:


> I second Lightwait's words, I too use the pocket clip as a reference to locate the side switch found on the LD12. Conversely, I'd buy the LD12 again.



Just picked up a couple LD12 yesterday; one for me and one for the wife's purse, my very first LED flashlight with an output over 25 lumens. I know there are much more powerful lights on the market, but I feel like Luke Skywalker. Told the wife we're never going to turn on a house light again!  Love this thing. Thanks for the tip, I like the idea of using the clip as a reference point for the side switch.


----------



## RookieTorchJunkie (Apr 27, 2012)

Anyone here use Ballistol? Anyone know if it's safe to put Ballistol on my new Fenix LD12?


----------



## lightwait (Apr 27, 2012)

Mogal said:


> Hello all, first post.
> 
> After a couple of days searching, I finally desided on the LD22.
> This is my first REAL flashlight.
> ...


I think you will be very happy with the LD22. Pretty much all of the lights recommended around here are great. You are starting out new, so you are probably not set in your ways yet about certain features and how the user interface behaves or spacing of the light levels or tint or how bright/dim the low level goes. Speaking of 'low', as some have mentioned around here, the LD22 might not go into low mode with fresh alkaline batteries. Almost everyone would not recommend alkalines in any good flashlight anyway. Their performance at higher current drains is poor and sooner or later they will leak.
I've had the LD12 since it came out and decided to get the LD22 last week for a little extra brightness and throw around the house. (It's not like I don't have 3 or 4 other small lights that would do the same job, lol) Anyway, the LD22 is a nice light. It has the extra brightness and throw I was hoping for. I had a sometimes sticky switch right out of the box, but the dealer mailed me out a new tailcap.


----------



## lightwait (Apr 27, 2012)

RookieTorchJunkie said:


> Anyone here use Ballistol? Anyone know if it's safe to put Ballistol on my new Fenix LD12?


There is a big long thread here under the general flashlight section called 'Comprehensive Grease and Lube Thread'. Its a sticky, so its right at the top. You can read through it all or search the thread for comments on Ballistol.

I would avoid the Ballistol. Most guys use some type of silicone based grease. Orings are made in a wide range of materials. Some are suitable for mineral oil situations and some will eventually disintegrate after experiencing mineral oil or petroleum based greases. Its not worth the chance to see if your orings will survive, so best to stick with a silicone lube. Only a tiny bit is needed, so whatever you get will last for years.


----------



## RookieTorchJunkie (Apr 27, 2012)

lightwait said:


> There is a big long thread here under the general flashlight section called 'Comprehensive Grease and Lube Thread'. Its a sticky, so its right at the top. You can read through it all or search the thread for comments on Ballistol.
> 
> I would avoid the Ballistol. Most guys use some type of silicone based grease. Orings are made in a wide range of materials. Some are suitable for mineral oil situations and some will eventually disintegrate after experiencing mineral oil or petroleum based greases. Its not worth the chance to see if your orings will survive, so best to stick with a silicone lube. Only a tiny bit is needed, so whatever you get will last for years.



Thanks for the tip(s)! :thumbsup:


----------



## Kokopelli (Apr 27, 2012)

I once used Ballistol. I use it everywhere at home. It is a brilliant lubricant. Safe for orings and plastic. A good cleaner, rust opener, and protectant. But and a big BUT it is ph>7. I mean it is slightly alkaline. Aluminum reacts both with acids and alkalis. Although it is very mild it isn't advised to be used on bare aluminum. Again but, LD22 is anodized, so? It is even WORSE. it thinks anodization is oxidation, and starts removing it from bare metal. You end up with discolored and worn anodization. Pity I realized this on my Nitecore EX10.


----------



## Etbr0117 (Apr 30, 2012)

Hi all,

I'm new here, but I've been addicted to flashlights since the start of 2012. I stumbled across the Fenix LD20 a while back and instantly fell in love with its look and modes. A month ago, I discovered the Quark AA^2 and many say that that light is a better than the Fenix. The Quark is definitely a much cleaner and simpler look and the extra lumens is very tempting. However, I have not had a chance to try either of them.

With the new release of the Fenix LD22, would people consider it a worthy competitor for the Quark AA^2 or is the Quark still the crowd favorite? I think I saw a poll somewhere before between the Fenix LD20 and the Quark AA^2 and the Quark had double the votes of the Fenix. Have opinions changed with the LD22? Also, is it possible to use the pinky finger to depress the side switch if people don't want to change grips? If a person is holding the flashlight in a fist with the thumb on the power button, can the pinky then stretch over and use the side switch to cycle through modes.
I'm torn between the LD22 and the Quark AA^2 so any thoughts would be much appreciated. :thumbsup:


----------



## LightWalker (May 1, 2012)

The Quark has Moonlight mode and a lower medium mode, the Fenix LD22 has better runtime on turbo/max and has mode memory. Both are nice lights but I would choose the Quark. The Quark has a better warranty as well, 10 years.


----------



## lightwait (May 1, 2012)

Etbr0117 said:


> I'm torn between the LD22 and the Quark AA^2 so any thoughts would be much appreciated. :thumbsup:


I have several Quarks and I am working my way through the new side switch Fenix's. I have the ld12 and just got the ld22 last week. I always liked Quarks. The moon mode is very nice...sometimes. On the regular interface, it can be a minor nuisance to bump through it every time if you are using it in a brighter situation. On max, my quark on AAx2 is comparable brightness and throw. The quark low (not moon) is similar to the ld22 low. The LD22 might temporarily lose low mode on fresh alkalines from the slightly higher voltage. The quark can also be run on a single AA tube with lesser brightness. Or add a 14500 cell with the single AA tube for some extra brightness. I have gotten several very green tinted quarks, so I'm taking a break. Heavy green tint on dimmer levels just doesn't help my older eyes see. On the shorter fenix's, you can work the side button with your pinky or ring finger. The ld22 is too long for that. Some of us use the pocket clip as a guide to easier find the side switch. I didn't care for the setup at first, but I quickly came to really like it. In my case, I tend to use my lights a lot in daylight for working on stuff. With the fenix having a brighter low, whatever level it turns on at is good to start with. Then I just re-adjust as needed with the side switch. Its easy to get used to, even if you change grips. But if you need to always be sure what the turn on level is, then maybe quark is better. On the fenix, you won't have to bump through strobe modes like on the quark regular interface. There is also the Quark tactical, pick any two modes. I find that limiting in a general purpose light. It can be better though for a mechanic who turns the light on-off many times all day or anyone who absolutely must know what level the light is on.

Tough choice. For me, the fenix edges ahead for the mode memory, but the quark gives you more choices. You won't hate either one and I'm sure you will quickly get used to either interface and love the light. Maybe something in all my babble will clearly point you to one or the other.


----------



## Labrador72 (May 1, 2012)

Etbr0117 said:


> Hi all,
> I'm torn between the LD22 and the Quark AA^2 so any thoughts would be much appreciated. :thumbsup:


I don't have much to add to Lightweight's already thorough analysis.

All I can say is:
Forget what is the crowd favorite: I try to figure out too what most people prefer when buying something but that can be misleading. What suits the crowed does not always suit our need - especially in this case both the Fenix and the 4Sevens are great flashlights so the the disriminating factors would be the distinguishing features rather than the popularity.
Comparing the models you mentioned:
If you prefer more brightness levels and a tad more lumens on the highest mode go for the Quark AAx2.
If you really need a moonlight mode go for the Quark 
If you want to easily cycle through the modes - without going through the flashing modes - choose go for the LD22 or the LD20 (your really only have SOS in the way).
If you want memory and the light to go on at the desired brightness levels go for the LD22.
If you want better runtimes go for the LD22.
If you want the light to always go on on turbo or low choose the LD20 or the Quark AAx2.
If you want a forward clicky go for the LD22.
If you want to save some money and still have a good flashlight go for the LD20.
And so on...

I was looking at all 3 lights when I had to buy a 2xAA flashlight and went for the LD20 and I don't regret it because I wanted better runtimes and didn't really care about the extra lumens nor the 0.2 moonlight mode and I didn't think I'd like the side switch: runtimes and tailstanding for me were more important. I think if you figure out what is most important for you, you'll pick the "best" light for sure. : )


----------



## Etbr0117 (May 1, 2012)

lightwait said:


> I have several Quarks and I am working my way through the new side switch Fenix's. I have the ld12 and just got the ld22 last week. I always liked Quarks. The moon mode is very nice...sometimes. On the regular interface, it can be a minor nuisance to bump through it every time if you are using it in a brighter situation. On max, my quark on AAx2 is comparable brightness and throw. The quark low (not moon) is similar to the ld22 low. The LD22 might temporarily lose low mode on fresh alkalines from the slightly higher voltage. The quark can also be run on a single AA tube with lesser brightness. Or add a 14500 cell with the single AA tube for some extra brightness. I have gotten several very green tinted quarks, so I'm taking a break. Heavy green tint on dimmer levels just doesn't help my older eyes see. On the shorter fenix's, you can work the side button with your pinky or ring finger. The ld22 is too long for that. Some of us use the pocket clip as a guide to easier find the side switch. I didn't care for the setup at first, but I quickly came to really like it. In my case, I tend to use my lights a lot in daylight for working on stuff. With the fenix having a brighter low, whatever level it turns on at is good to start with. Then I just re-adjust as needed with the side switch. Its easy to get used to, even if you change grips. But if you need to always be sure what the turn on level is, then maybe quark is better. On the fenix, you won't have to bump through strobe modes like on the quark regular interface. There is also the Quark tactical, pick any two modes. I find that limiting in a general purpose light. It can be better though for a mechanic who turns the light on-off many times all day or anyone who absolutely must know what level the light is on.
> 
> Tough choice. For me, the fenix edges ahead for the mode memory, but the quark gives you more choices. You won't hate either one and I'm sure you will quickly get used to either interface and love the light. Maybe something in all my babble will clearly point you to one or the other.



So it sounds like changing grips isn't too big a problem for you? Your post was SUPER helpful since you addressed the pinky thing I asked, and you talked about how each flashlight goes through their respective modes. I might go with the LD22 since their strobe is hidden..... still thinking. Thanks a BUNCH though =D


----------



## Etbr0117 (May 1, 2012)

LightWalker said:


> The Quark has Moonlight mode and a lower medium mode, the Fenix LD22 has better runtime on turbo/max and has mode memory. Both are nice lights but I would choose the Quark. The Quark has a better warranty as well, 10 years.



Is the Quark Moonlight mode much lower than the Fenix's low mode? I've heard a lot about Quark's better warranty, but what exactly does it cover? In those 10 years, if the flashlight was dropped or the bulb died, would they cover that?


----------



## Etbr0117 (May 1, 2012)

Labrador72 said:


> I don't have much to add to Lightweight's already thorough analysis.
> 
> All I can say is:
> Forget what is the crowd favorite: I try to figure out too what most people prefer when buying something but that can be misleading. What suits the crowed does not always suit our need - especially in this case both the Fenix and the 4Sevens are great flashlights so the the disriminating factors would be the distinguishing features rather than the popularity.
> ...



Wow, that's a pretty darn good breakdown! The lack of tailstanding kinda pushes me away from the LD22 as well; is that because of the tactical tail switch? You've given me a lot to think about, thank you very much!


----------



## Labrador72 (May 1, 2012)

I'm glad my post helps. 

Yes, by all accounts the LD22 does not tailstand and neither does the QuarkAAx2 Tactical. The LD20 does and well too provided you don't have the lanyard attached. Quark AAx2 Regular should be able to tailstand too.
If you want a light that is able to tailstand, Fenix has a whole series of diffusing accessories that come in handy when tailstanding the light. I'm not sure if the Quark do but I'd assume they would have at least some sort of diffuser.

I was nearly going for Quark 2xAA Regular, then I saw that JetBeam PA20 could tailstand and that it had a tactical tail switch too so I went for that one. It is a bit wobbly though and there are no accessories - one of the Fenix diffusers fits it though but it's a bit brighter than the LD20. Then I found the LD20 on sale and couldn't resist... so I bought that too!

The Quark 2xAA X (with an XML) was tempting because of the output but the runtime on max was too low for me and maybe too floody too while the R5 wouldn't look brighter than the LD20 with just 25 more lumens.
In the end I thought the Quark Regulars would have too many output modes to cycle through for my own personal taste - if I understood it right they have no memory - so I decided to go for the LD20. They must be be great lights with very interesting features though.

Good luck with your choice! : )


----------



## LightWalker (May 1, 2012)

Etbr0117 said:


> Is the Quark Moonlight mode much lower than the Fenix's low mode? I've heard a lot about Quark's better warranty, but what exactly does it cover? In those 10 years, if the flashlight was dropped or the bulb died, would they cover that?



The Quark moonlight mode (0.2 Lumens) is quite a bit lower than the Fenix LD12 low (3 Lumens). The moonlight mode on the Quark gives you about 30 days runtime on 2xAA.

The 4Sevens warranty can be found on his website.


----------



## Etbr0117 (May 3, 2012)

LightWalker said:


> The Quark moonlight mode (0.2 Lumens) is quite a bit lower than the Fenix LD12 low (3 Lumens). The moonlight mode on the Quark gives you about 30 days runtime.
> 
> The 4Sevens warranty can be found on his website.



I see, I see. It looks like the supply of Regular Quark AA^2's are running low? I was on goinggear.com and I saw the "X" version for cheap, but the runtime seems drastically reduced! Moonlight for the "X" version only lasts you 15 day at 0.3 lumens. Is that supposed to happen with an increase of 0.1 lumens?


----------



## Labrador72 (May 3, 2012)

I might as well be dead wrong but I don't think it has much to do with the additional 0.01 lumen. It probably is more related to the emitter and the way the driver has been designed to work on low outputs.

15 days is still 300 hours: plenty of time unless you plan in a survival situation for a long time: are you planning to really use the moonlight mode very often?


----------



## Etbr0117 (May 3, 2012)

Labrador72 said:


> I might as well be dead wrong but I don't think it has much to do with the additional 0.01 lumen. It probably is more related to the emitter and the way the driver has been designed to work on low outputs.
> 
> 15 days is still 300 hours: plenty of time unless you plan in a survival situation for a long time: are you planning to really use the moonlight mode very often?



No, I don't think so. I was just curious about the huge difference in run times haha. So does this mean that the emitter is better or worse in the newer Quark?

Should I start a separate thread now that we're talking about flashlights other than the LD12 and LD22...


----------



## Labrador72 (May 3, 2012)

Etbr0117 said:


> No, I don't think so. I was just curious about the huge difference in run times haha. So does this mean that the emitter is better or worse in the newer Quark?


I think the XM-L T6 led came out after the XP-G R5 and can be driven harder to have a brighter output. The R5 usually can't go that much further than 300 lumens.
The XM-L T6 is floody so throw in comparison won't be as good as a similar XP-G R5 flashlight.
Because the XM-L T6 can and is used to get a brighter output the same or a similar light with an XM-L is likely to have worse runtimes than its XP-G R5 equivalent.
If the XP-G and an XM-L were used to provide the same output on the same flashlight, I don't know if either led would have better runtimes: one might as well perform better. It's simply beyond my flashlights knowledge. 




Etbr0117 said:


> Should I start a separate thread now that we're talking about flashlights other than the LD12 and LD22...


Not sure but, fourm rules aside, If you want to know info on the Quarks and you post on a Quark thread, you are likely to more and better answers than in Fenix thread. So far you are getting a lot replies from someone who never even owned a Quark like myself - LOL! : )


----------



## LightWalker (May 3, 2012)

Etbr0117 said:


> I see, I see. It looks like the supply of Regular Quark AA^2's are running low? I was on goinggear.com and I saw the "X" version for cheap, but the runtime seems drastically reduced! Moonlight for the "X" version only lasts you 15 day at 0.3 lumens. Is that supposed to happen with an increase of 0.1 lumens?



You can get them at 4sevens-store.com as well. The XML just isn't as efficient on the lower levels as the XPG.


----------



## Bram (May 15, 2012)

I just bought a Fenix LD12 very cool small flashlight! I also would like a LD22 but its not in their store yet does anyone knows when it coms out?

Thanks

Please Do Not link directly to sales sites - Norm


----------



## Labrador72 (May 15, 2012)

The message that the LD22 is not out yet might be old and they could have forgotten to remove it.
Both the LD12 and the LD22 were supposed to be released in February 2012. The LD12 was but the LD22 ended up being delayed till mid-March. 

By now they are both available unless the store where you bought the LD12 is out of stock for the LD22.
Which country, region, continent do you live in?


----------



## Mr Floppy (May 15, 2012)

Did anyone find out if you can swap the tubes with LD20/LD10 and LD22/LD12?


----------



## hiuintahs (May 15, 2012)

LightWalker said:


> You can get them at 4sevens-store.com as well. The XML just isn't as efficient on the lower levels as the XPG.



I did a run time test with my data logging light meter on the Quark X 2AA and other 2AA lights with the XP-G and what I found was that at the highest output the XM-L was about 20% more efficient than the XP-G's at their highest level. But down at the low and medium levels (say 100 lumens and less), the XM-L and XP-G were about dead even in efficiency.


----------



## lightwait (May 15, 2012)

Mr Floppy said:


> Did anyone find out if you can swap the tubes with LD20/LD10 and LD22/LD12?


The LD22 head works on the LD12 body. The modes appear similar, but the LD22 has a sharper hotspot. It also has a 'hot' logo on it, so I'm not sure they are exactly the same head. The circuit board appears the same though. I am afraid to try the LD12 head on the LD22 body. 
I tried swapping the LD12 head with my LD10. The LD10 head does not light on the LD12 body, however the LD12 head does light on the LD10 body.


----------



## Mr Floppy (May 16, 2012)

lightwait said:


> The LD22 head works on the LD12 body. The modes appear similar, but the LD22 has a sharper hotspot. It also has a 'hot' logo on it, so I'm not sure they are exactly the same head. The circuit board appears the same though. I am afraid to try the LD12 head on the LD22 body.
> I tried swapping the LD12 head with my LD10. The LD10 head does not light on the LD12 body, however the LD12 head does light on the LD10 body.



Someone posted in subwoofer's review that they tried a 14500 Li-ion in the LD12 so head should be fine on the LD22 body. It looks like it goes into direct drive at 3.7V so 2xAA NiMH should be ok. 

It good to know that the new LD12 head works on the old LDx body though. Not sure how I can lego all the bits together though. I have L1D, L2D; LD10, LD20. So need something to lego a LDx2 with.


----------



## demoteamone (May 16, 2012)

Nice thread. I still not get if the ld22 is superior to the predecessor ld20? 
I wonder, if rear rubber switch will be fine for extended use or with time can degrade quickly?
I have my co-workers ask me all sort of questions after the saw my ld20 r5. Should I recommend my co-workers (3) to buy the old ld20 or the new ld22.
I saw ppl here own both, any INFO IT'S (appreciated).










I have zero understanding about flashlights.


----------



## Labrador72 (May 16, 2012)

demoteamone said:


> Nice thread. I still not get if the ld22 is superior to the predecessor ld20?


It is not superior but it does have some improvements: better runtimes, slightly higher lumens (according to Fenix ratings), forward clicky that allows momentary on, last-mode memory, hidden flashlng modes, improved body that allows reversing the clip, .

These improvements do have their downside: the LD22 does not tailstand and switching modes is does using the side switch requiring to fumble with the light, and last-mode memory can be an nice feature or a pain depending on how you use the light. The twist head with always Turbo on a tightened bezel and always low on a loosened bezel is very practical if you don't mind twisting the bezel when you need to. Also, the LD12 and LD22 should have slightly less throw than the LD12 and LD22. The LD12 might be a tad less bright than the LD10 - see Subwoofer's review.

Despite of the many improvements, the LD22 advantages are not that marked to say the LD22 is better than the LD20: it's pretty much down to your own personal preference and how you use the light.



demoteamone said:


> I wonder, if rear rubber switch will be fine for extended use or with time can degrade quickly?


No reason to think the LD22 rear rubber switch of the forward clicky won't be as durable as the rear rubber switch of the LD20 reverse clicky. 



demoteamone said:


> I have my co-workers ask me all sort of questions after the saw my ld20 r5. Should I recommend my co-workers (3) to buy the old ld20 or the new ld22.


Pretty much depends on what your co-workers like and need.
If they want a forward clicky or they want a flashlight that goes on a specific brightness level or runtimes are critical for them, then they should go for the LD22.

If instead they don't like the idea of using two switches for on/off and cycling through the modes, throw is very important for them or they want a light that goes on always on the highest or lower output, then the LD20 is what they are looking for. 

There is not a better flashlight but a flashlight that better suits your needs.


----------



## Overclocker (May 16, 2012)

this interface sucks for me. with my LD10 if i want max i just tighten the head and i'll surely get max output. 

with LD12 you first turn on the light then try to determine what mode you're in. then you change your grip and fumble with the switch and end up shooting past max so you cycle through again

sucky


----------



## lightwait (May 16, 2012)

I have come to really like the LD12 interface. Most of my use is during the day fixing stuff, so I turn the light on and off many times a day. Its handy that I can set it to come on at a mid level every time and If I need to re-adjust, I don't have to pass through the blinky mode.
That being said, I can certainly appreciate the classic interface and wish they would not discontinue the LD10/20. I think always coming on at low or max works better for night time activity.


----------



## Labrador72 (May 16, 2012)

lightwait said:


> [...]
> That being said, I can certainly appreciate the classic interface and wish they would not discontinue the LD10/20. [...]


Ragardless of initial rumors, it seems the LD10 and LD20 haven't been discontinued for the time being.

My guess is, they'll even be upgraded at the end of this year!


----------



## lightwait (May 16, 2012)

Labrador72 said:


> Ragardless of initial rumors, it seems the LD10 and LD20 haven't been discontinued for the time being.
> 
> My guess is, they'll even be upgraded at the end of this year!


I missed the 'next' button on the Fenix website and so I did not see them listed, so I assumed the rumors were true. But now I see they are listed on the 2nd page. That's good, maybe a lower low and 14500 support would be a nice upgrade. (even though I am trying to give up Li-ion, lol)


----------



## Labrador72 (May 16, 2012)

lightwait said:


> That's good, maybe a lower low and 14500 support would be a nice upgrade. (even though I am trying to give up Li-ion, lol)



Totally! 14500 support and a "lower low" on a revamped LD10 would be great improvements. 
I'd add direct access to strobe and hidden SOS as a plus and maybe memory on the loosened bezel modes. I wouldn't mind a forward clicky and a tailcap that keeps the ability to tailstand - like on the JetBeam PA/PC series.

If they introduce even half of these improvements and a new emitter they'd have one buyer for sure.


----------



## Overclocker (May 16, 2012)

even the "old" quark aa r5 is better: 14500 support. moonlight.


----------



## LightWalker (May 16, 2012)

An OP reflector would be nice as well.


----------



## Labrador72 (May 16, 2012)

Overclocker said:


> even the "old" quark aa r5 is better: 14500 support. moonlight.


The Quark AA 14500 support is defo one up on the LD10.
Runtime and output-wise the LD10 wins though, not to mention that cycling through all the modes in the Quark might get someone yawning!


----------



## Mr Floppy (May 17, 2012)

Labrador72 said:


> The Quark AA 14500 support is defo one up on the LD10.
> Runtime and output-wise the LD10 wins though, not to mention that cycling through all the modes in the Quark might get someone yawning!



I think they would rather sacrifice Li-ion support for the optimal run-time on NiMH. The winner for the LDx2 for me is the run-time on NiMH although I would really like to see how this goes on alkalines.


----------



## larcal (Jun 5, 2012)

The longer run time and greater lumens of the ld22 over the ld20 is frequently mentioned but I wonder if this is really true or if fenix is just calibrating/measuring the data based on a different scale or standard with the newer light. After all, they both use the same led. Would love to own both lights just for the fun of sitting them down side by side in turbo and finding out for sure. Does anyone know? If not, does anyone just know if they are measuring them the same way?


----------



## Labrador72 (Jun 6, 2012)

From the LD20 R5 onwards Fenix have been using the FL1 standard. From what I understand, the standard guidelines for taking measuremenits are somewhat flexible within limits though.
I'd expect the LD22 to have an edge in terms of runtimes compared to the LD20 R5 but there is no independent review of either comparing their runtimes and confirming it.


----------



## Steve Cebu (Jun 6, 2012)

Just wondering how well this light would hold up if mounted to an AR15 rifle?
My wife has an LD10 and I use a Nitecore D10 for edc.
But I will be going to events where a light is required for some stages.
I'd rather stick with AA batteries over pricey rechargeables.
I normally use eneloops but being able to throw in a set of cheap AA's can
make a world of difference.

My concern is the shock from firing. Fenix does list the LD22 as a tactical light.
Any thoughts?


----------



## Labrador72 (Jun 6, 2012)

I personally find Fenix to be a very good flashlight manufacturer, probably my favorite one.
That said, I wouldn't understand "tactical" as having been tested as a weapon light, not by Fenix and not by most of the other flashlight manufacturers.
My take most of them use the term "tactical" for marketing reasons or maybe to indicate that the light has momentary on.

I don't use flashlights on any weapons but out of personal curiosity a few weeks back I read a few interesting threads. I'm kind of in a rush so I don't have time to look for and link them.
If I remember what I read, impact tests to some extent reproduce recoil effects so lights that are tested to withstand impact are indirectly tested to withstand some recoil as well.
I think also read that carabine recoil is not so bad as shotgun recoil. I'd look for those threads as they had lots of interesting information especially for weapon onwers.


----------



## Steve Cebu (Jun 6, 2012)

Thanks, yes mounting on say an AR15 would have significantly less recoil than on a 12GA with an 18" barrel shooting full power slugs.
I'm just wondering if anyone knows how well a Fenix LD22 would hold up under recoil. I really like using AA batteres because in a jam
you might not have eneloops for rechargeable batteries on you.


----------



## Overclocker (Jun 6, 2012)

Steve Cebu said:


> Thanks, yes mounting on say an AR15 would have significantly less recoil than on a 12GA with an 18" barrel shooting full power slugs.
> I'm just wondering if anyone knows how well a Fenix LD22 would hold up under recoil. I really like using AA batteres because in a jam
> you might not have eneloops for rechargeable batteries on you.




during recoil, inertia will ram the two AA cells into the driver board with no spring to soften the blow. i wouldn't trust this setup


----------



## Steve Cebu (Jun 7, 2012)

Ok Thanks, I just wanted to avoid using CR123 batteries ditto for the 18650's.
Guess i have no choice but to look at CR123 lights.


----------

