# FWIW: Poll results about 416 SFclickies - 24.5% initial problem rate



## nerdgineer (May 8, 2007)

So I tried collecting _*statistics *_about Jetbeam CLE quality once, and learned something about polling. Now, with everyone's indulgence, I thought I'd try collecting _*statistics *_on another energetic topic around here: the quality of Surefire clickie switches. 

_*Disclaimer: The poll results do not reflect true Surefire failure rates, which only Surefire knows for sure. *_It reflects only the experiences CPFers here report, which is the best we can do within our little forum. Still, I hope it will be an interesting piece of information.

_*Concept:*_ you bought some clicky type Surefire(s) from a dealer and had some experience regarding the switch: 1) it worked fine, 2) it had a problem which you will or are currently working with Surefire to resolve, 3) it had a problem which Surefire did resolve happily for you, or 4) it had a problem which Surefire did not satisfactorily resolve for you in (need a rule here) 3 months of trying or worse. 

The statistics part is that I'm providing poll choices for the *number *of each experience you got: if you had 1 good light, click "add 1 to the OK pile", if you had 2 good lights, click "add 2 to the OK pile", if you got 1 problem switch which Surefire or your own heroic efforts fixed for you within 3 months of asking, click "add 1 to the "problem fixed OK pile", and so on. This poll will let you make *multiple *choices so you can express a wide range of experiences: combinations of choices can show: 6 good switches, 3 bad switches in work, 3 bad switches fixed, and/or so on.

Everyone seemed to understand the concept part OK in the CLE poll, so I hope it's still clear.

_*Rules:*_ I learned from the CLE poll that rules are important. The purpose for rules is so we can *interpret *our results. My mistake with the CLE poll was that I got statistics more about what people thought about the CLE than what the light itself did. So a better poll will need more rules. So please bear with me.

*Rule 1*: Votes are private (anonymous). This poll is based on the honor system. You are what you do. Period. 

*Rule 2*: _*This poll is only for people who received new Surefires with a factory clicky switch or new SF clicky switches from a dealer. *_Private party B/S/T do *NOT *count. This is because a good or bad light can pass through many hands and therefire bias the results. I only want one data input from each light or separate SF switch. Non-clicky switches also don't count as I don't think there are any issues reported for those.

*Rule 3*: Define good. I'd like good to be an objective event rather than an opinion, so: a switch is GOOD if, with at most *minor *initial tweaking (tightening retaining rings, cleaning contacts, oiling if you did that as prevention), it worked OK and has worked reliably to your satisfaction ever since. 

*Rule 4*: Define problem. The clickie switch didn't work right so you had to do something heroic (i.e. take the switch apart and fix it, bend contacts, whatever) or send it back or get the factory to send you another switch. Whatever your opinion, I'd like you to consider that a bad switch. 

*Rule 5*: Cutoff time for Surefire to fix the problem and be OK is 3 months from time they were informed or you sent light. If fixed less than 3 months, they did OK. If more, they did not do OK. This is because some are more patient than others.

And that's it. I'll check back and calculate statistics if we get enough response. Thanks for your efforts, all.

*EDIT #1: If you bought a new clicky switch only from SF, then you can count that just like a whole light as we're focusing only on clicky switch performance here*.

If the options here (remember you can check multiple buttons to enter as many as 6 good switches or 3 bad ones of any category or any combination thereof) don't cover your situation, it's OK to have someone else enter the additional inputs required to cover your complete situation. "Honor system" means truth about what actually happened. Proxy voting to represent a true situation is OK with me.

_*Edit #2:*_

*Final Results at 178 respondants*, reporting on *416* new lights or new clicky switches:

74.5% reported good switches out of the box. 

3.4% reported problems which are in the process of being fixed, 3.8% reported problems which couldn't be fixed within 3 months, and 17.3% reported problems which were fixed OK within 3 months. 

Total proportion of lights/switches reported with initial problems was 24.5%.


----------



## cslinger (May 8, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*

I have actually had exp. with four Surefire clickies and all were fine. All were Surefire E1Ls.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 8, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*

New lesson learned: I need to provide a button which says "no input, I just wanted to push one of the buttons"....

Whenever I look at this, I want to push a button, and I wrote the darn post. It's very annoying...


----------



## GeorgePaul (May 8, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*

I had one clicky that was flaky. Relaced immediately by dealer when I took the light back.

[EDIT]I have had 3 other good clickies though.


----------



## mdocod (May 8, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*



> "no input, I just wanted to push one of the buttons"....



LOL, I wanna push a button!!!!


----------



## KeyGrip (May 8, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*

Got an L4 with a sticky tailcap. SF replaced it and, this is my favorite part, it started working again and has been going strong for months.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 8, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*

Poll analysis at 38 respondants, reporting on 96 new lights:

75% had good switches. 

2% had problems which are in the process of being fixed, 1% had problems which couldn't be fixed within 3 months, and 23% had problems which were fixed OK. 

Total proportion of lights received with problems was 25%.


----------



## schrenz (May 9, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*

Mhhh, sometimes these polls seem to be a little bit ominous, I can't explain myself, why I never had a problem with my *8* SF Clickies.

Best 
Jens


----------



## MikeSalt (May 9, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*

There's a good spread of results. I would definately expect it weighted more towards the top end for something so expensive.


----------



## Art Vandelay (May 9, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*

What does "problem now or soon in work" mean? Can you pick that and pick "problem NOT fixed by Surefire", or do you have to pick one or the other for the same light?


----------



## yellow (May 9, 2007)

why is it reserved to complete lights only?

f.e. I just bought a Z59 for my old 6P. 
When I consider that ridiculus price, the _feel_ of the switch is bad. 
But would that be a "problem"? 
Which one, as it works and will not get changed by anyone
.
.
.

PS: wow! at time to type this the results are that 1/3 of about 90 switches were defective. 
Wonder what the "SF and nothing else and no critics allowed"-ppl say to this


----------



## nerdgineer (May 9, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*



Art Vandelay said:


> What does "problem now or soon in work" mean? Can you pick that and pick "problem NOT fixed by Surefire", or do you have to pick one or the other for the same light?


No. I'd prefer that you pick one or the other input for any single light. Problem now or soon in work means you have a problem and it is not resolved yet so you can't yet say whether it was resolved successfully yet or not. If it is resolved successfully, then you pick the "fixed OK" button. If not resolved in (my arbitrary rule) 3 months, then you picked the "not fixed" button. If you haven't sent it in yet or haven't gotten a final response yet and 3 months hasn't gone by yet, then it's the "still in work" button.

Each light should only generate one case. Multiple lights can activate multiple buttons. If you have 8 clicky SFs, 5 are good, 2 were bad but fixed, and 1 is in work, then you hit the multiple buttons of: +3 good, +2 good, +2 bad but fixed, +1 bad and in work.

Sorry it's so complicated but I don't know a simpler way to get clear results - and even this set of choices requires some compromises.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 9, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*



yellow said:


> why is it reserved to complete lights only?...


Good question. Answer: because I wasn't thinking (another lesson learned...)

Since we're looking at SF clicky performance, I would count a switch purchased new from Surefire to be the same as a clicky light for purposes of this poll. If you bought a switch and it was good or bad, you can enter it in the poll just like it was a whole light.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 9, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*

Poll analysis at 70 respondants, reporting on 175 new lights or new clicky switches:

77% reported good switches. 

1.7% reported problems which are in the process of being fixed, 6.3% reported problems which couldn't be fixed within 3 months, and 15% reported problems which were fixed OK within 3 months. 

Total proportion of lights/switches reported with problems was 23%.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 9, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*



schrenz said:


> ..I never had a problem with my *8* SF Clickies...


I'm sorry I couldn't make poll options to cover all the high SF achievers. As post #13 above notes, it's OK to count a switch purchased new from a SF dealer just like a whole light.

You can enter your results into the poll for 6 of the good switches by clicking +1 good, +2 good, and +3 good, and submitting. As for the other 2, maybe you can PM someone or a friend to fill in the extra +2 good for you. Since I haven't made a vote yet, I'll offer to add the 2 extra ones for you, or anyone else (I can only do this once, of course).

As I said, this poll is on the honor system, relative to ground truth. I have no problems with arrangements for proxy votes being cast to cover cases which are outside the poll options I allowed for.

Hope this helps.


----------



## luigi (May 9, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*

I don't want to be a statistical PITA but if you ask about problems you get answers from people with problems (mostly). The ones with bad switches will want to be here to show their problems, but a good percentage of the users with good switches will not even read the thread, vote or do anything.

Anyway I hope the poll serves your purposes, I just hope you don't claim "X% of Surefire switches are deffective" 

Luigi


----------



## nerdgineer (May 9, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*



luigi said:


> I don't want to be a statistical PITA but if you ask about problems you get answers from people with problems (mostly). The ones with bad switches will want to be here to show their problems, but a good percentage of the users with good switches will not even read the thread, vote or do anything.
> 
> Anyway I hope the poll serves your purposes, I just hope you don't claim "X% of Surefire switches are deffective"
> 
> Luigi


Probably all true. It's just that before (in the CLE poll case), we only had anecdotal information which was even more biased toward problems (few would post to say their CLE was fine). A poll at least gives owners of good items an easy way to be heard.

In the CLE case, I got responses on something like 180 lights at a time when there were only 200 pre-sale lights plus prototypes (and many Asian owners who perhaps were not reading CPF) out there so I thought the insight provided was useful.

I don't know how many clickie SF lights and switches are out in CPF land, but having numbers on a few hundred (thousand?) would provide an interesting context for the occasional SF clicky discussions I see...

And of course, the analysis is only for how the poll responses break down, and I've changed the title accordingly. Only Surefire knows how many warranty repairs they get vs. their total sales.


----------



## MikeSalt (May 9, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*

Of course, SureFire fans tend to be particularly devout, therefore almost all of them will post, giving fair results.


----------



## chevrofreak (May 9, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*

The Z57 on my E2e has been flawless.


----------



## Size15's (May 9, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*



MikeSalt said:


> Of course, SureFire fans tend to be particularly devout, therefore almost all of them will post, giving fair results.


Less than 100 members responding out of a possible 25,000 supports that point of view?


----------



## nerdgineer (May 9, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



yellow said:


> ...I just bought a Z59 for my old 6P.
> When I consider that ridiculus price, the _feel_ of the switch is bad.
> But would that be a "problem"? ..


To keep things simple, if the switch works reliably (turns on/off, no flicker), I'd call that "good"...


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*



Size15's said:


> Less than 100 members responding out of a possible 25,000 supports that point of view?


That's 25,000 members who have ever registered. The number of active members is probably a small fraction of that. If there are 2,500 posts every day (as has been mentioned recently) and the average number of posts per day for each user is just 5, that puts the number of unique users each day at somewhere near 500. If we say that each member logs in only once a week, we get 3,500. That number is likely sort of close, since not everyone owns a SF clickie and some people have more than one. No matter how you slice it, that's nowhere near 25,000.

And it's been, what, three days?

P.S.: If this post is somehow out of line, just say the word and it's gone.


----------



## Size15's (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

Not out of line, but I do have some actual data for you:

08-May-07 2878 Users Active, 1836 new posts
09-May-07 2829 Users Active, 1654 new posts

Your argument is not based on accurate data. I'll see what I can do to help with that.

Al


----------



## MikeSalt (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

We'll see, I reckon a 20% cross section of active users (about 560) should pretty much cover the SureFire population. Then we'll know for sure. Get posting


----------



## TORCH_BOY (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

Just the one


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



Size15's said:


> Not out of line, but I do have some actual data for you:
> 
> 08-May-07 2878 Users Active, 1836 new posts
> 09-May-07 2829 Users Active, 1654 new posts
> ...


Whoa, looks like I was way off with the average posts per day per person. I'm quite surprised that so many members log in but don't post anything.

Thanks for the heads-up! :thumbsup:

As far as 20% of active users owning a SF clickie, that seems like a pretty good approximation...


----------



## Brozneo (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switches (READ instructions first!)*



KeyGrip said:


> Got an L4 with a sticky tailcap. SF replaced it and, this is my favorite part, it started working again and has been going strong for months.


 
Ditto


----------



## Size15's (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

Some more data...
Flashlight manufacturers members list as their favourite
SureFire - 566
Fenix - 95
Arc - 88
HDS - 77
Streamlight - 64
McGizmo - 54
Inova - 52
Maglite - 26
Pelican - 14
Pila/Wolfeyes - 13
Night-Ops/Gladius - 8

I realise I have not searched data for every possible manufacturer
(If you'd like me to add one to the list, please pm me)

This is a search of all 25,000 members.

Of the 1057 members above, 54% of them state that SureFire is their favourite manufacturer.
Based on this data I don't feel that your reckoning of 20% is sufficient.
What I could do is use the members who have responded to the poll as the data set to see which manufacturers (if any) they say is their favourite?

I can certainly see that trying to put this poll in context is very difficult. There is certainly a lot of information missing before a poll on CPF can be qualified, let alone any conclusions drawn for the CPF community. How the poll relates to the real world will be even more difficult to determine (I don't think it will be possible).

Al


----------



## KevinL (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

Three clickies here, one is on my 'early adopter' U2, one on a complete L4 in sealed box from Lighthound and another Z57 new in bag from Lighthound. Never experienced a problem. The U2 is one of the Nov '04 ones and has been through hell, never let me down. Wish I could say everything in life was this good!

The A2 twisty on the other hand is giving a small issue, the main beam is out of regulation even on fresh cells - might hafta talk to SF about that. 


Devout? Maybe. But I've also had a couple of Fenixes with clickies and a HDS B60 that have never let me down either, so that's cool '

As for how relevant the data is, I'll just quote a commonly used line from those hawking investment products.. past performance is no indicator of future returns


----------



## DM51 (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

I think you should reconsider your Rule 2:


> _Rule 2: This poll is only for people who received new Surefires with a factory clicky switch or new SF clicky switches from a dealer. Private party B/S/T do NOT count. This is because a good or bad light can pass through many hands and therefire bias the results. I only want one data input from each light or separate SF switch. Non-clicky switches also don't count as I don't think there are any issues reported for those_.


My reasons for suggesting an amendment to this rule are as follows:

1. Lights acquired 2nd-hand via B/S/T etc are unlikely to have defective switches on arrival, unless they were bought in the knowledge that that was the case.

2. They could however go wrong later and surely the statistics should reflect ALL problems.

3. Equally, if the light is a good one when it is acquired, the fact that it continues to be good should be reflected in the statistics.

4. Lights that change hands are more likely to be given rough (ie more realistic) treatment. 

5. The entire lifetime of a light is more likely to be represented, not just the period when it is relatively new.

6. (Real reason) All my Surefires are 2nd-hand and *I WANNA VOTE !!!!!!*


----------



## nerdgineer (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

_*Poll analysis at 101 respondants*_, reporting on 251 new lights or new clicky switches:

75.3% reported good switches. 

2.8% reported problems which are in the process of being fixed, 5.2% reported problems which couldn't be fixed within 3 months, and 16.7% reported problems which were fixed OK within 3 months. 

Total proportion of lights/switches reported with problems was 24.7%.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



DM51 said:


> ...
> My reasons for suggesting an amendment to this rule are as follows:
> 
> 1. Lights acquired 2nd-hand via B/S/T etc are unlikely to have defective switches on arrival, unless they were bought in the knowledge that that was the case.
> ....


That pretty much says it: you're addressing subtleties of statistical inference, here... 

All clickies will fail eventually, and clickies will also have an "infant death" rate which is what indicates product issues. The rules do not target infant death precisely (that would have taken even MORE rules...), but I've tried to point them more toward looking at early switch failure rates than at switch life cycle durability numbers.

I'm guessing that most here are honest and that B/S/T lights - as you say - are filtered for good ones more than bad ones; and those lights may have already been entered into the pollling data from the initial buyer. So I'd like to keep rule #2 as it is. 

The counter example to this would be looking at problems with car makes. If I allowed statistics on cars bought used to be included in assessing problems between, say, Fords and Buicks, then the likelihood of problems in the used cars would be much higher than in new cars (because that's why people usually sell their cars.... ) and my results would be skewed. The final answers would be a less accurate assessment of new Fords and Buicks than if I only looked at what the new car buyers found.

So, sorry. However, feel free to post here anecdotally if that will make you feel any better.


----------



## DM51 (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

Your logic is good, and I accept it. I think my points #2 & #4 above had some value but they certainly don't outweigh yours or the usefulness of the data you are collecting (which is already quite surprising.)

I freely admit (as I admitted above) that all I really wanted to do was vote! 

BTW, no problems with any of my SF lights.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



DM51 said:


> ...BTW, no problems with any of my SF lights.


How many ya got? [Don't worry, we won't tell your significant other..........:laughing:....]


----------



## DM51 (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

8


----------



## RGB_LED (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

nerdgineer, I like your poll and the rules make good sense. :goodjob: In particular, the rule about the B/S/T which would bias the results.

As for the clicky poll, I've added 2 to the "OK pile"; I have an E1L and an E2e, both of which were purchased from a retailer. Granted, I use the E1L a lot more than the E2e (which is pretty much a shelf queen) but both functioned beautifully right out of the box!

I am rather shocked that almost a quarter of SF lights have had difficulties with the clicky switches as I am a fan of them...


----------



## NoFair (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

The second replacement switch for my U2 broke a few days ago. The plastic cap that holds the plunger/spring in place was in pieces inside the flashlight

I now have a twisty while waiting for a response from Surefire.

My first tailcap failed in a different fashion. It would stick in the on position and got worse with wear.. 
This was replaced by Surefire after a few weeks.

Sverre


----------



## nerdgineer (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

Deleted. Too confusing, even for me...


----------



## NoFair (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

Sorry about the inaccurate reporting. The first switch was fixed by Surefire and the replacement has now failed and I am waiting for a new one/reply from Surefire CS.

Sverre


----------



## nerdgineer (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

You did just fine, NoFair. I was just pontificating. 

Edit: In fact, I think what I said pontificating was wronger than what you did so I beieve you were _*correct*_, and I much appreciate your input. 

Not everyone can be (or should be) as anal about statistics as engineers are...


----------



## Alteran (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



nerdgineer said:


> Not everyone can be (or should be) as anal about statistics as engineers are...



But without our anal engineers, where would we be now? I'm guessing a much calmer, but less enlightened society. :goodjob:


----------



## nerdgineer (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



Alteran said:


> But without our anal engineers, where would we be now? I'm guessing a much calmer, but less enlightened society. :goodjob:


You are too kind.

I once had a talk with one of my neices who is a FAR more accomplished engineer than I am (..really..). We agreed on 4 truths of engineering:

1. Anal is good. [for non-English slang speakers out there. This is anal as in obsessively detail oriented, not the pornography anal...]

2. Food IS love.

3. OJ did it.

4. Elvis IS dead. Get over it....:laughing:


----------



## 276 (May 10, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

i have 2 surefire's that have click switches and have had no problems. (knock on wood)


----------



## NoFair (May 11, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



nerdgineer said:


> You did just fine, NoFair. I was just pontificating.
> 
> Edit: In fact, I think what I said pontificating was wronger than what you did so I beieve you were _*correct*_, and I much appreciate your input.
> 
> Not everyone can be (or should be) as anal about statistics as engineers are...



No hard feelings I have a masters course in statistics and I know that being anal is the way

Sverre


----------



## Art Vandelay (May 11, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

Is it possible Surefire could offer a tactical twisty instead? I don't think Surefire would have to replace them, win\win.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 11, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

*Poll analysis at 120 respondants*, reporting on 294 new lights or new clicky switches:

74.8% reported good switches. 

2.4% reported problems which are in the process of being fixed, 4.2% reported problems which couldn't be fixed within 3 months, and 18.4% reported problems which were fixed OK within 3 months. 

Total proportion of lights/switches reported with problems was 25.2%.


----------



## AnimalHousePA (May 11, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

I purchased a Surefire 6P Defender last weekend and after a couple of days, the clickie switch broke on it. I could sort of tell that the switch was inferior to switches on other Surefire lights and I thought it would fail...sure enough it did. I called Surefire customer service today and they were very nice and are sending me out a replacement switch today. I wonder if all of the switches on these lights are as good as switches on other Surefire lights or did I just get a bad one?


----------



## nerdgineer (May 11, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



AnimalHousePA said:


> ...I wonder if all of the switches on these lights are as good as switches on other Surefire lights or did I just get a bad one?..


I didn't get data on SF switches by model, but according to the poll so far, about 25% of the new SF switches overall came in with problems.


----------



## AnimalHousePA (May 11, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



nerdgineer said:


> I didn't get data on SF switches by model, but according to the poll so far, about 25% of the new SF switches overall came in with problems.


hmmm...I'm hoping that the new switch feels solid as opposed to the cheap feel of the defective one...In the meantine, I took the tailcap from my original 6P and put it on my 6P Defender


----------



## MikeSalt (May 11, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



nerdgineer said:


> I didn't get data on SF switches by model, but according to the poll so far, about 25% of the new SF switches overall came in with problems.


 
That's bad, 25%+ failure, and with 120+ responses, even the statitically retentive cannot deny that indicates a problem. Why deny it, and let SureFire die, ignorant of their problems? It seems that the clickie is the weak spot, and may need fully revising.


----------



## monkeyboy (May 11, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

1 in 4 bad clickies seems a bit high. I reckon people who have had bad experiences with SF clickies are a lot more likely to vote in such a poll than those who have not. It's the same when you read consumer reviews about cars, you always get a disproportionate number of people writing to complain about the bad experiences they have had.

A 1 in 4 failure rate is very poor for a company like SF that prides itself on the quality of its products but I expect the reality is not so bad.


----------



## MikeSalt (May 11, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

Still, 1 in 4 is more than enough to put me off. In fact, I have never had a £2+ flashlight fail on me (apart from blown bulbs), so I'll be blowed to spend £100+ on anything less than perfection. Besides, they didn't survive the 'John Deere mower blade test' very well.


----------



## Lobo (May 11, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



monkeyboy said:


> 1 in 4 bad clickies seems a bit high. I reckon people who have had bad experiences with SF clickies are a lot more likely to vote in such a poll than those who have not. It's the same when you read consumer reviews about cars, you always get a disproportionate number of people writing to complain about the bad experiences they have had.
> 
> A 1 in 4 failure rate is very poor for a company like SF that prides itself on the quality of its products but I expect the reality is not so bad.


 
I thought the same, I think the numbers are a bit too high so far. But IMHO, even 10% would be a way to high number of faulty clickies on a light in this price range, especially considering the reputation Surefire has, which seems to be based a lot on good marketing.


----------



## Art Vandelay (May 11, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

I don't think we have enough information to say that one quarter of SF clickies are defective. 

The people at SF have a more compete picture. They know how many they sell and how many are returned. Maybe Surefire will consider offering a tactical twisty option. 

Consumers have more choices now. If they want a SF quality light without a clicky they have more than one choice. Maybe Surefire will also give consumers more choices in the future.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 11, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



Art Vandelay said:


> I don't think we have enough information to say that one quarter of SF clickies are defective...


Agreed (and we'll never be able to get that kind of information)...

The only facts we have are that: 1200 people have read the post, 120 of them have responded, reporting (I'd like to think honestly) on 300 new-from-the-factory clicky switches, 25% of which were faulty, and the 25% number has been remarkably stable over the entire history of the poll (suggests that people _are _being honest and - whether our sample filtering process is biased or not - it's at least stable) .

Still, it's food for thought. 

What I think is a less biased number (and perhaps an unbiased number) is that almost 17% of those who had problems (i.e. 4.2%/25% x 100 = 16.8%) couldn't get them fixed in 3 months of trying. 

I don't think more customers with bad service would have responded to the poll than those with good service, and that 16.8% number says SF customer service could stand some improvement.

I personally would have gotten unhappy a lot faster than 3 months if I was waiting for service on a premium product.


----------



## DM51 (May 11, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

It sounds strange. You’d have thought they would not risk bad customer relations by taking so long trying to repair defective units. What they should do on receipt of a defective part is:

1. Log it in, enter on customer statistics database etc
2. Throw it at R&D dept
3. R&D do a very quick check to confirm whether it is working or not 
4. If it is not working, they tell Customer Relations
5. CR immediately send customer a brand-new replacement
6. R&D then examine it closely to establish why it went wrong
7. Fault correlated with similar faults/weaknesses found in that model
8. R&D redesign part where necessary and incorporate change in manufacturing process.

Why do they waste time trying to fix these parts? It probably costs them more money to repair them than it would cost to replace them, and it just annoys their customers.


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (May 12, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

I think the reason usually given for the long waits isn't that SF is trying to fix the part, but rather that they're really busy with government orders and don't have many parts in stock.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 12, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

*Poll analysis at 133 respondants*, reporting on *317* new lights or new clicky switches:

73.2% reported good switches. 

3.8% reported problems which are in the process of being fixed, 4.4% reported problems which couldn't be fixed within 3 months, and 18.6% reported problems which were fixed OK within 3 months. 

Total proportion of lights/switches reported with problems was 26.8%.


----------



## MikeSalt (May 12, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

The statistics are remaining constant, well, perhaps even increasing for faulty switches. The extrapolation would indicate that the bias may not be as weighted as originally thought. This may actually be a real indicator :S


----------



## nerdgineer (May 13, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

*Poll analysis at 143 respondants*, reporting on *330* new lights or new clicky switches:

76.4% reported good switches. 

3.6% reported problems which are in the process of being fixed, 4.5% reported problems which couldn't be fixed within 3 months, and 15.4% reported problems which were fixed OK within 3 months. 

Total proportion of lights/switches reported with problems was 23.6%.


----------



## MikeSalt (May 13, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

Still hovering around that 25% mark, ouch!


----------



## Size15's (May 13, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

Perhaps CPF should be considering the "25%" to be a poor performance for a discussion board? One might well expect the proportion of dissatisfaction to be higher than '1 in 4'.

Perhaps CPF should be pleased that our forum is not just about whining/complaining about product defects.

I subscribe to the latter point of view. I like to think that CPF community is more than just complaining / highlighting problems and that this is keeping the 25% proportion at the level it is.

Al


----------



## Art Vandelay (May 13, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

Surefire does have an option for people who do not like the E series clicky. It is the Wine light. It is like an E-series but it does not have a clicky. Smart alecks could call them Whine lights.


----------



## NoFair (May 14, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

My replacement U2 tailcap arrived today. 3 weeks from it broke until a new one arrived isn't bad at all

So it seems my entry was correct after all

They do for some reason not reply to e-mails... I would have felt a lot better if they had sent an e-mail saying it was on it's way.

Almost bought myself another light to tide me over


----------



## 270winchester (May 14, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

I have had 7 or 8 clickies so far and no problems whatsoever.


----------



## SoonerOne (May 14, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

There have been 16 tailcaps not fixed by Surefire while 335 of the 361 are fixed, working or never had a problem. Not too bad 4.5%


----------



## Hans (May 14, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



SoonerOne said:


> There have been 16 tailcaps not fixed by Surefire while 335 of the 361 are fixed, working or never had a problem. Not too bad 4.5%



While Surefire seems to be pretty good at fixing problems, there are far too many failures it seems. When you're somewhere in the field and your tailcap fails, it's hardly a consolation to know that Surefire is pretty good at fixing it if and when you get home and send it to Surefire.

Hans


----------



## Hans (May 14, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



Size15's said:


> Perhaps CPF should be considering the "25%" to be a poor performance for a discussion board? One might well expect the proportion of dissatisfaction to be higher than '1 in 4'.



I wouldn't. Not with a company like Surefire. After all, this thread isn't about beam quality or some such, it's about the reliability of a pretty straightforward mechanical component. 

And figures like the ones in this thread seem to indicate that anyone who is thinking about taking a Surefire on a long trip might as well pack a spare tailcap, just to be on the safe side. They also seem to indicate that it might be a good idea for Surefire to offer a simple twisty for all those who don't really need a tactical clicky, but only a *very* reliable way of turning their light on and off. After all, Surefire lights are among the very best in the world, and many people (myself included) would rather carry a Surefire than almost any other light in difficult situations.

Hans


----------



## Art Vandelay (May 14, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

I don't think Surefire twisty tailcaps would show a 25% failure rate in the same kind of poll of CPF users. In fact, I don't recall ever reading a complaint about Surefire twistys on CPF. I'm sure at some point someone must have had a problem with a SF twisty tailcap, but I don't recall seeing a complaint here. 

What could explain the difference in the number of complaints about SF clicky tailcaps and SF twisty tailcaps. Could it be a difference in the reliability of the two? 

Like most people, I've never had trouble with Surefire clicky tailcaps. That should not be surprising. According to this poll, 75% of SF clicky tailcaps are fine. I think this poll probably does show a higher level of dissatisfaction than you would find in the general public.

For Surefire, it may be cheaper to continue replacing the tailcaps, than to fix the underlying problem. To me, it seems that this tailcap issue may eventually harm Surefire's reputation for quality and dependability. 

Of course, if there is no problem with the clicky tailcaps, then there is nothing for Surefire to fix. Maybe Surefire could do or say something for the many people (like me) who have never had a problem, but are now concerned that their Surefire might fail at a critical moment. 

"Observe your enemies, for they first find out your faults."
Antisthenes


----------



## nerdgineer (May 14, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

*Results at 154 respondants*, reporting on *358* new lights or new clicky switches:

74.3% reported good switches. 

3.6% reported problems which are in the process of being fixed, 4.5% reported problems which couldn't be fixed within 3 months, and 17.6% reported problems which were fixed OK within 3 months. 

Total proportion of lights/switches reported with problems was 25.7%.


----------



## mdocod (May 14, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

36.36%
16.88%
29.87%
1.95%
4.55%
11.04%
18.83%
3.25%
3.90%


126.63% worth of results. lol.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 14, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



mdocod said:


> ...
> 126.63% worth of results. lol.


Yeah....

Multiple choice poll. If everyone had hit every button, percentages would have totaled to 800%...:laughing:


----------



## firefly99 (May 15, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

I had about 18 clicky tailcaps and have never experience a single failure. 

After nearly 2 dozen of Surefires flashlights, I only encounter 1 case of DOA and that happen in the dealer shop when the dealer take out the SF L1 to show me it is working before wrapping it up. I had a on the spot replacement.

Feel the best way to buy expensive lights such as Surefire, is to have a hands-on before parting with your hard earned cash, after you are completely satisfied with the beam.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 15, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



firefly99 said:


> I had about 18 clicky tailcaps and have never experience a single failure....


If your 18 clickies meet the criteria (all are from Surefire dealer and not 2nd hand) and you haven't entered the poll, you can enter 6 of them by picking +1 to the good pile button, +2 to the good pile button, AND + 3 to the good pile button. I can enter 6 more for you as I haven't entered any yet, and we can probably get a volunteer to enter the remaining 6.

Up to you how you enter the DOA one. Either ignore it (never got to you) or consider it as one received bad and fixed within 3 months (+1 to that pile), in which case it would be 17 good ones and 1 fixed within 3 months. Close enough either way at this point.


----------



## Size15's (May 15, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

Well if I'd known that I'd have selected the +2 and +1, and needed somebody else to enter another five good ones. So that's eight good ones unaccounted for. Only one problem one which I've already included


----------



## nerdgineer (May 15, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



Size15's said:


> Well if I'd known that I'd have selected the +2 and +1, and needed somebody else to enter another five good ones. So that's eight good ones unaccounted for. Only one problem one which I've already included


If firefly doesn't take me up on my offer within a few days, then I can enter 6 of them for you. Anyone else who hasn't already entered data can also volunteer.

_*IMPORTANT*_: For anyone doing proxy voting, have a POSITIVE agreement with the original owner that you're doing it (communicate through thread or via PM that you're offering to do it, owner should explicitly ACCEPT _*your *_offer, and you should let him/her know when you've done it so he won't accept anyone else's redundant offer). Otherwise, we'll have redundant entries.


----------



## carrot (May 15, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

I have had one second hand C2 with a clickie and it has yet to fail, despite being used pretty frequently.

The clickie on my E1L failed in a state where it would not click on but you could press it momentarily. Also, it appeared harder to press than usual. Per Beamhead's instructions I was able to fix it, before Surefire sent me a new one (which they did promptly).


----------



## mdocod (May 15, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

I don't own any SF clickers, so my vote is available for anyone who'd like me to vote on behalf of their clickies.. just first to say "I'll take mdocod's vote" get's it, then just PM me with what you want me to vote for.


----------



## Lobo (May 15, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



mdocod said:


> I don't own any SF clickers, so my vote is available for anyone who'd like me to vote on behalf of their clickies.. just first to say "I'll take mdocod's vote" get's it, then just PM me with what you want me to vote for.


 
Same thing here, if anyone needs more votes.


----------



## firefly99 (May 16, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



nerdgineer said:


> If your 18 clickies meet the criteria (all are from Surefire dealer and not 2nd hand) and you haven't entered the poll, you can enter 6 of them by picking +1 to the good pile button, +2 to the good pile button, AND + 3 to the good pile button. I can enter 6 more for you as I haven't entered any yet, and we can probably get a volunteer to enter the remaining 6..


Yes, thats what I did. Will be glad if you could help to enter another 12 for me. Many thanks.


nerdgineer said:


> Up to you how you enter the DOA one. Either ignore it (never got to you) or consider it as one received bad and fixed within 3 months (+1 to that pile), in which case it would be 17 good ones and 1 fixed within 3 months. Close enough either way at this point.


The DOA should be ignore, since it is a SF L1 which has a twisty tailcap and problem is not with the tailcap.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 16, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

I have entered 6 good ones for firefly99. That means there are 6 more up for grabs - i.e. for someone else to volunteer to enter.


----------



## DM51 (May 16, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

I've put in the remaining 6 good votes for Firefly. Firefly, that's 6 votes @ $12 each, so you owe me $72.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 16, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

OK firefly99, I think you're set. So far Size15's the only other SF high achiever to be covered. Size15, can you post just to confirm again that there are 8 good ones of yours not entered yet? Maybe take up lobo and mdocod (see posts a couple of spots above) on their offers?

Thanks.


----------



## Lightedge (May 16, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

Well I would probably say SF is my favorite light. Additionally, I have had 2 clickies and both were fine.

On the surface, this poll doesn't look good for SF. If this is representative of the entire population then SF really has no business charging $150-$300 for most of their lights.

All that said, Size15's comments are extremely valid. It is very possible that this type of poll heavily attracts people who have had problems and thus severely understates all of the clickies that would fall in to the 'OK' pile.

I would take the 25% with a large grain of salt.


----------



## firefly99 (May 17, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



DM51 said:


> I've put in the remaining 6 good votes for Firefly. Firefly, that's 6 votes @ $12 each, so you owe me $72.


Ok, the dollar below is all yours.
$$$$$$$$$$$$,$$$$$$$$$$$$,$$$$$$$$$$$$,
$$$$$$$$$$$$,$$$$$$$$$$$$,$$$$$$$$$$$$,

Thank You, Nerdgineer and QM51 for the votes.


----------



## nerdgineer (May 17, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

*Results at 168 respondants*, reporting on *406* new lights or new clicky switches:

76.1% reported good switches. 

3.4% reported problems which are in the process of being fixed, 3.9% reported problems which couldn't be fixed within 3 months, and 16.5% reported problems which were fixed OK within 3 months. 

Total proportion of lights/switches reported with problems was 23.9%.


----------



## nerdgineer (Jun 14, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*

*Final Results at 178 respondants*, reporting on *416* new lights or new clicky switches:

74.5% reported good switches out of the box. 

3.4% reported problems which are in the process of being fixed, 3.8% reported problems which couldn't be fixed within 3 months, and 17.3% reported problems which were fixed OK within 3 months. 

Total proportion of lights/switches reported with problems was 24.5%.

For what it's worth...


----------



## LightHearted (Aug 26, 2007)

*Re: STATISTICS about Surefire clickie switch experiences (READ instructions first!)*



Lightedge said:


> I would take the 25% with a large grain of salt.


 

Their failure rate with me has been 100%. I have owned two Surefire Z59 clickies and both of them have problems. One I purchased directly from an authorized dealer. The other came from Surefire as a replacement to the dead Z59, and it is having issues. I don't think I'll be purchasing any more Z59 switches until I know they get this worked out. 

The clicky switches on all 4 of my $15 Maxfire lights are still going strong after hundreds if not thousands of actuations. It's obvious that Surefire has a problem.


----------



## warpdrive (Aug 28, 2007)

I bought a L4 (sealed box) from a private reseller (Oldgrandpa) and it started acting up within two weeks of very light use. Surefire sent me a new one NC


----------

