# ExtremeBeam, do they claim way too much?



## RedForest UK (Feb 6, 2012)

Has anyone else noticed the new 'ExtremeBeam' banner add at the top sometimes. Taking a look at their website I find their claims that they are _"Built to Be the World's Brightest and finest Quality Best Performing Flashlights in the history of The Industry"_ very unlikely as they seem to be just OEM chinese ultrafire/akoray and many other cheaper chinese lights rebranded and marked up (significantly) in price.

I would be happy to hear if anyone had actually taken apart or tested one and am open to the idea that they are better made somehow than their much cheaper and identical looking 'originals' of their product line, but from the descriptions they sound like they have exactly the same mode arrangement and drivers etc and so I seriously doubt they do more than just buy in and redistribute rebranded versions of the same models made in the same factories with the same components as the ultrafire etc models.

I wouldn't have a problem with them rebranding and selling on these common OEM lights for a profit at all, that's perfectly legitimate business. Just market them to the general public/police and point out how they use the latest LED technology and how bright they are. It's just when I see claims on their website like 'multiple patents pending wordwide' and others like: _”Built to be the toughest most overbuilt Combat-Ready, Weapon-Mountable, Shock-Proof Recoil-Resistant Super-TAC lights ever used by any soldier in any combat situation anywhere in the world!” ExtremeBeam….The Extreme-Beam-Machine™_ when the lights are almost certainly just the same rebranded relatively cheaply made mass-produced chinese lights we see all the time on DX, KD, Manafont etc, (and all from a company that call the British Army, the 'British Royal Army' for cringeworthy stereotypical reasons) that I get frustrated.

So again, sorry if this seems like a bit of a rant but I would love to hear if anyone has actually put any of their very over-the-top and in my opinion poorly thought out marketing claims to the test.

If they are proved to be 'recoil-proof' etc then while maintaining my opinion that their marketing claims are way over the top, I will strongly edit any criticism of them in this post.


----------



## StarHalo (Feb 6, 2012)

There was an active thread discussing ExtremeBeam's claims that was pulled at roughly the same time the ads appeared.


----------



## Mr. Tone (Feb 6, 2012)

I noticed the ad and went to the website to check it out. I had never heard of them before so I can't say one way or the other. However, the claims seem "extreme". I also tried to find out where they are located and where the lights are manufactured but I couldn't find out that on the website either. I am in law enforcement and also have many military friends/contacts and they typically look to Surefire and Streamlight for lights that have a history of actually meeting the standards that ExtremeBeam is claiming.


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Feb 6, 2012)

StarHalo said:


> There was an active thread discussing ExtremeBeam's claims that was pulled at roughly the same time the ads appeared.


I think a review thread would be more acceptable to CPF than conjecture. If someone buys one and finds it's crap, that's another thing - the light had a chance to stand up for the brand


----------



## Tommygun45 (Feb 6, 2012)

Ya has anyone actually bought one of these lights? They just look like re branded lights to me, from cheaper sources. Its as if the manufacturer essentially tried to take every 'tactically' oriented thing they could find and stick it on their website. Throwing pictures of special forces on there, and making claims to be used by every branch of the US military certainly seems odd, to say the least. I've never heard of them, nor have any of my friends who have been in the service. 

They also claim to have worldwide offices and to provide consulting services to ISIS, or International Security Information Service based out of Brussels. Its where NATO is headquartered. For some reason I can't really feel that a company re branding cheap Chinese flashlights is in any way involved in consulting NATO in "Torpedo Defense." etc.

Either way, a quick whois.com lookup of the site lists this as the owner and registrar.

The reason I feel this is all relevant to us is because, well, if there is someone making claims that are not true than its essentially false advertising and is attempting to lure us into purchasing lights under false pretenses. Of course with foreign companies this kind of stuff isn't exactly regulated and its our jobs as consumers to figure it out. Now maybe we're completely wrong. If so, let us know.

Registrant:
Tong Jun
weshanbei
GuanDong, NA
CN

Domain name: EXTREMEBEAM.COM

Administrative Contact:
Jun, Tong 
weshanbei
GuanDong, NA
CN
+1.011861342638


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 6, 2012)

Well that was my point, maybe I could be mistaken and they for some reason have taken cheap hosts and built them up with the same 5-mode blinky scroll through interface we're so familiar with on cheap chinese products, but done it to a higher standard of build quality, but I doubt it. All of their lights offered look very familiar and I'm sure if I took the time I could find the same host/UI set-up for a much cheaper price direct from somewhere else for almost each of their offerings.

I have no problem with someone selling these cheap products rebranded for a higher price in the US, with some decent marketing. What I do mind is completely false advertising, which from what they claim seems very likely. 

I mean they claim that their lights are used by militaries across the world, but they also claim that one of these is the 'British Royal Army', this does not exist, we have a Royal Navy and Royal Air Force, and even many individual units within the Army with the 'Royal' prefix, but as the army wasn't commissioned in one go by a monarch it certainly isn't the 'Royal Army'. Anyone claiming their lights are used by them or even with a relatively small degree of knowledge/familiarity with the British Army would know that..

I agree this is conjecture, but I would be willing to put money on the idea that many of their claims go beyond exaggeration into more worrying territory.


----------



## my#1hobby (Feb 6, 2012)

Good thing we all know what Ultrafire/DX etc. lights look like so we can steer clear of this company. 

What cracks me up is their SAR5 & SAR7 light they are selling for $100 looks identical to the $12 Akoray K-109


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 6, 2012)

Interestingly it seems they've changed the wording on their banner on their website now at least to 'British forces'. If they are really reading this thread I would also recommend to them that they change their motto on their 'ExtremeBeam Story page': "A Shinning Light in the Face Of Darkness!" to spell shining correctly. The same spelling mistake is interestingly also made in their first 'testimonial'..

They claim also that they 'manufacture' these lights and have a 'german-led engineering team' I would love to see those backed up. Also that they have been 'hosting ShotShows since 2009', I'm guessing meaning a booth at least, and have been around since 2006. Could anyone find out if those are true? They are believable at least.


----------



## TEEJ (Feb 6, 2012)

I just thought if your shins were shadowed, you could point a shinning beam at them to lighten them up, No? :shrug:

The German LEDS that were on the team that engineered the lights are a great example of a product that designed itself. Come on, that's commendable, don't you think? :wave:

And, really just because the British _ROYAL_ Army don't use the lights, at least the British Army DOES! 


And, ANYONE who is anyone in the Navy (Royal or otherwise....) knows that the way you tell if there's a Torpedo coming at your ship is to see it with your Shinning Beam Flashlight. Of COURSE NATO knows this too, sheesh. 


So, lighten up...there's obviously no problems HERE.

:welcome:


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 6, 2012)

Ha ha look, I just don't like to think that a share of the market for supposedly 'quality' LED lights at a decent price goes to people who may rely on false advertising, rather than good honest sellers like Bryan and the genuine 'Shiningbeam' brand. Who genuinely does put a lot of thought and effort into his products and produces his own relatively unique and very well designed and made lights at a very good price point. He doesn't rely on advertising and massive overbearing claims and is a genuine honest guy who lets the quality of his own brand lights talk for themselves. To think that he is missing out on a section of the market just because others make stronger claims without support for them seems very unfair.

I have no particular affiliation with shiningbeam and the same can be said of a few other genuine manufacturers but it's just an example of why I am a little irked by all this.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Feb 6, 2012)

they have an ad here on CPF ? does that mean they are paying money, so you can have a free site, and can bash them without
proper analytical review ? jus wondering. someone is gonna have to do a review, STAT :thumbsdow :thumbsup:

they are taking trade show hosts and rebranding them for sure. lame. much better if they said Hey, good lights
cheap...instead of name drop all these military orgs and charge 10x DX retail



lol European ExtremeBeam - Isis Groug division.


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 6, 2012)

Well yeah that's what I mean. I'm not trying to say they are particularly bad lights, I have nothing against the Ultrafires etc, they are generally decent for the price with a few duds, but if you research right you can get very good deals. If you buy from ExtremeBeam you get better branding, shipping from within the US, domestic CS (although I would guess not domestic repair services) and probably better quality control. I just do not think they should make such broad and strong claims about being the best in the market and used worldwide and a few of the other unrealistic ones brought up by others when they just aren't..


----------



## PapaLumen (Feb 6, 2012)

StarHalo said:


> There was an active thread discussing ExtremeBeam's claims that was pulled at roughly the same time the ads appeared.



Funny that... money talks.

Strange that *"The Genuine M4 Scirrako Military Grade LED Double Sealed, Anti-Recoil Light, Known as the Worlds "Brigtest" Military Grade Under $300, 1090Ft Range, and Tune focusable" *looks so much like an ultrafire c8.. 

Also i guess the "Anti-recoil" is just a gold spring on the mcp? -*"This light was designed for full military service with its 24Kt gold plated internal Anti-Recoil spring-pin system"
*
Also, the British Army do not use these, never have, and i would imagine, never will. Some BIG lies on that site.*
*


----------



## chewy78 (Feb 7, 2012)

I don't see any ads, but then again i use ad-block plus lol


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 7, 2012)

Pretty sure it is another crap chinese brand again...
For the C4, i have something exactly the same as it but not UF
One pic



Bezel: the same
Heatsink fins:the same
Tailcap: the same
Body construction: the same
Highest performing light in its class!"
*Water Proof / Dive Rated* 20 Meters
27700 Lux
It is just another crap selling for $50 USD, where you can get it for $100-150RMB in china
It might be contradict to CPF's ad policy but im against it


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 7, 2012)

Frankly, these lights are crap, even SWM and jetpimp is more worth than them, this crap is overly priced.


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 7, 2012)

And btw, one of the most valuable skills of mainlanders is: copying others design and selling it as their own, sometimes they say something exaggerate to praise their product and try to raise the value. To leech more cash
Most of the "design" of their light, ive seen them before on taobao the chinese fleabay
Words from Hongkonger
Ps: i bet westerners have already heard how the notorius mainlanders do, so im not explaining the deeper truth unless im asked


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Feb 7, 2012)

jh333233 said:


> Frankly, these lights are crap, even SWM and jetpimp is more worth than them, this crap is overly priced.


They support CPF. Let's hold off on our armchair opinions - however qualified - and judge their lights based on...reviews of their lights.


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 7, 2012)

AnAppleSnail said:


> They support CPF. Let's hold off on our armchair opinions - however qualified - and judge their lights based on...reviews of their lights.


Based on what i found im pre-judging them to be ____
Just because of the directly-copied body
The comment would be more objective if someone would pay $100 for this light to review it


----------



## CarpentryHero (Feb 7, 2012)

I finally saw the ad, but couldnt fun the shinning beam anywhere  
My shin needs a light too


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

The 'shinning' is on the website at the bottom of the 'our story' page if they haven't changed it yet.

I didn't start this just as a 'let's all insult company 'x'' thread, just to hopefully point out some glaring problems with their marketing technique and hopefully get them to acknowledge they claim way to much (or alternatively back up these claims with genuine evidence) and tone it down a bit.


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 7, 2012)

Objectively, they didn't even put any effort in designing new bodies, instead they just copied the body from Chinese-Fleabay
Lack of sincereness with that sky-high price, even the double o-ring came with factory trench (UF C8's tail,bezel-to-body have 2 o-ring trench)
And these flashlight bodies are very common in china too
Adding some o-ring and swapping to XP-G and it raised the price by few hundred Yuan and claiming to be tac lights


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 7, 2012)

Banner's hyperlink no longer works:
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/rbs_banner.php?id=56&userid=154151
Btw, i dont think US army would prefer this one but not Surefire, just impossible to be


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

Well yes, you make the same point I would. They probably just contacted one of the OEM suppliers in china and had their name printed on the same lights and sent over. Many companies do this, Lumintop seem to be made by 'Maxtoch' who also manufacture some of the better lower end lights for the ultrafires etc. Even Jetbeam and Fenix/Klarus and 4sevens/Olight have arrangements where they must outsource at least some manufacturing from the same suppliers. Note that the above companies however do design their own unique lights and have good QC and what most consider reasonable pricing.

The thing is that while selling a relatively cheap product for way over market price may seem dodgy, but is not in any way illegal. If the customer buys the product that is their fault for not doing enough research. However, making claims that simply aren't true is illegal, which is why I wanted to bring some of theirs to light.

I've just seen another on their main page now which stands out to me:
*Who Uses ExtremeBeam Tactical Lights?*
*In side-by-side comparison testing 99% of all soldiers chose ExtremeBeam over every other brand.*

Seriously, who have they actually asked if anyone? They clearly also did not show them lights from 'every other brand', that would be absurd. The problem is that not only are their marketing claims clearly well beyond what is believable and likely outright fiction, but they have not made them well. They seem very unprofessional, and it is that which worries me, as if customers do end up having problems a small dodgy company hiding behind an internet storefront with big claims may well have just packed up and left and would provide the customer no come-back.


What worries me further is that while CPF and the admins etc seem to come down very harshly on companies that they judge could be ripping-off their customer base or not providing decent support longer term, e.g. the recent Hexbright brand, (even if they seem legitimate with safeguards in place) they seem to allow these claims to go unanswered. I sincerely hope that they haven't decided just to turn a blind eye to 'ExtremeBeam' simply because they have paid for a banner-add space..


----------



## ExtremeBeamLLC (Feb 7, 2012)

Hi , They pulled the reply because they felt we were advertising... We understood it. And we don't want to cause problems with CPF policy so we are careful not to advertise , but simply answer questions for those who ask. But ExtremeBeam is not an OEM. 
Our factory is located in the area of Streamlights, Fenix, Inova and others and we've been there for years. We've been a manufacturer since some of the flashlight builders were in their proverbial diapers.
And we use to OEM for the largest companies in the world. So our designs have been around and unfortunately have their share of knockoffs. But anyone taking the time to look can see the difference.

The lights aren't fancy. Just designed to work when needed. Military grade is the deal. No OEM can do it, and even the top brands listed on this sight have a very hard time achieving it.
We started as a military manufacturer unlike others who started as toy manufacturers.
Stop judging by the appearance. Get one in your hands and you'll see that they are as described.


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

The problem I have with believing that, (as much as I'd like to) is that the lights you stock are not similar, but in many cases exactly the same aesthetically as the cheaper 'knock-offs'. The headlamp in particular is not a good design and some of the claims for it are almost laughable. 

Also, for models like your SAR5 and SAR7, they are exactly the same bodies as the *copies of* the original Akorays. The original Akorays were subtly different and have been around a while, the ones you sell have the bodies of the later cheaper made copies of the Akoray. 

If you were indeed the original manufacturer then surely your SAR series would at least have the same body as the original higher quality Akoray model (and should in fact be something better still), and not the more recent knock-offs of said model.


Could you please find a time stamped or otherwise datable reference to ExtremeBeam's existence prior 2008? If you can provide a genuine one then that would go someway to improving your credibility in my opinion.


Oh, and furthermore I notice that on many of your lights, the SAR series as a prime example, there is little to no description of the UI of the light. Is the SAR series single mode, or are they the 5 mode with strobe + SOS with the same driver as the chinese 'copies'.

The problem is that cheap chinese knock-offs exist for many higher quality manufacturers' lights, but they are not identical, good quality design and thoughtful UI is what costs top manufacturers time to implement. So copies can look similar but normally can't match the original light in usability. The few descriptions of the lights you sell seem to show that they have the same cheap 'scroll-through' with a half-click, normally 3 or 5 modes interface. 

What's more, this interface is notoriously bad for any tactical user. The fact that lights with this UI are marketed as 'tactical' just undermines the credibility of the brand.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Feb 7, 2012)

ExtremeBeamLLC...you just put the smackdown-challenge up

there are about a dozen electronics professionals who also review lights on CPF in *excruciating* detail.

Those are big words that ExtremeBeamLLC is posting up. 
You bet your lights will get an exhaustive review on CPF, eventually.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can say that this statement on the extremebeam website is misleading because
it has no context. Do you mean military procurement ? Or do you mean you asked someone
at shotshow if they are a US Ranger and will they take the Pepsi Challenge ?


Who Uses ExtremeBeam Tactical Lights?
In side-by-side comparison testing 99% of all soldiers chose ExtremeBeam over every other brand. And from which agencies?
THE ARMY, NAVY, AIR-FORCE, MARINES, NOCS ITALY, II Brigate Carabinieri, S.W.A.T. (USA-EU), US RANGERS, BRITISH ROYAL FORCES


it isn't necessarily the lights people have issue with, it is the_* unusual and quite shocking claims*_
on the website which are simply not believable by reasonable folks currently in the military.

I mean, who is 'The Army' Navy...etc. What country are we specifying, so we can look up these claims ?
What is S.W.A.T. (USA-EU) anyway ?


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

Seeing your other post in reply to someone asking about a 'plunger like system' where you told them that was likely your 'patent pending plunger system', and not as it seems more likely the Nitecore's well established PD design, I would love you to elaborate on this 'patent pending plunger system' and enlighten me as to which of your range of lights it is used in?


----------



## jake25 (Feb 7, 2012)

What I wonder is if they really were at SHOT show "*Thankyou for Joining us at The 2012 Shot Show in Sunny **LasVegas"*


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Feb 7, 2012)

ExtremeBeamLLC said:


> ...But simply answer questions for those who ask.



I look forward to reviews of your lights. I know of some computer manufacturers who went from being manufacturers for "OEM" companies and later made a name selling quality computers of their own. Good luck! And thank you, too, for helping to support CPF.


----------



## ExtremeBeamLLC (Feb 7, 2012)

The products stamped "Akoray" were one of our first knock off problems.
We were "Alpha-TAC" manufacturing before we were ExtremeBeam and Akoray was a line we found of one of our designs which tought us not to allow our guys to wear any of our products outside of the factory.
I know it's hard to concieve of how good the copies are and you will find some good copies,
but as a factory, it only takes 1 day for the machinest to set op the tooling to copy any aluminum bodied light.
Our OEM's for other brands were out there for years before we introduced the ExtremeBeam line publicly at the 2009 Shot show in Orlando.

So we understand the concerns that many many knock-offs are out there. But you ar Right.. they have a hard time coppying the Military grade lights. The SAR5 is easy to copy.
The SAR7 only looks similar on the outside byt the difference is on the designs on the insde which make it weapon-mountable.

We know of no company other than ExtremeBeam that has durability standards as high as ours. We make them to keep people alive.
Are we a small company? Kind of...compare to Surefire or Streamlight, But that's what happens when you focus on specialty sectors of a market and never advertise. ExtremeBeam is nothing fancy. Just a basic tough light that is designed for severe duty.


----------



## Racer (Feb 7, 2012)

I'll just come out and say that I'm surprised and a little disappointed that CPF doesn't do a better job of vetting their advertisers. These are clearly re-branded UF's being sold as top of the line lights. Isn't that fraud?


----------



## ExtremeBeamLLC (Feb 7, 2012)

Our design is different from there and was released in early 2006 before they were a company and the design itself was processed for review well before that.. Their variation does not appear to violate the specifics of our so no reason to pursue any action


----------



## ExtremeBeamLLC (Feb 7, 2012)

No one would ever say that unless they didnt do a side by side... CPF know who we are and they also know that 90% of UF's arent even from UF.


----------



## dc38 (Feb 7, 2012)

ExtremeBeamLLC said:


> No one would ever say that unless they didnt do a side by side... CPF know who we are and they also know that 90% of UF's arent even from UF.



I wonder if you could send one of us one of your cheaper lights so we can do a side by side comparison / review as to validate and acquit your light of any "copy/knockoff" claims? When Fenix first marketed their lights, many people were skeptical as to their quality and durability, and look where they are now. Again, it would be wonderful if you could ship us out some lights strictly for review/testing purposes so we can see first hand just how your lights stand up to other lights.


----------



## dc38 (Feb 7, 2012)

Better yet, it would be even better for you to send us the lights that were discussed earlier in the forum, the S.A.R. 5 AND 7 series, as those two are receiving the most flak. Maybe we could even get the legendary selfbuilt on the case to help your lights prove their mettle?


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

With regards to the Akoray and 'copying' issues I think you missed my points.

What I mean is that your SAR5 is actually the same as the newer lower quality 'copies' of the Akoray, Akoray originally produced a great and better quality than the current versions, whcih was a fully programmable light a couple of years back. If, as you claim, the Akoray was a copy of you then why would you not be using the original better quality design, instead of the later worse quality copies of the Akoray? The logical conclusion is that you are the ones copying..

Again, you also make no mention of the UI on the SAR series, which is a massive oversight. I'm assuming this is as you don't want to give away to obviously that they are just the cheap scroll-through 3/5 mode with flashing modes unhidden, but maybe that is harsh on you, could you clarify the UI? 

Bear in mind the original Akorays had perfect broad voltage current regulation and sophisticated and fully programmable mode options by the end user. If you just use the newer and much cheaper 3/5 mode scroll through interface I simply would not be able to believe that the much more sophisticated and well-thought out Akoray UI was a copy from you.

I didn't say it was hard to copy 'military grade' lights, that is really a fuzzy category useful mainly for marketing. I mean that many more sophisticated and well-known quality brands make lights with well-thought out and hard to implement UI's. Zebralights electronic clicky UI for instance, many with twin buttons for on/off and mode changes, or even a simple 2 mode head twist for high/low which has been around in decent quality manufacturers lights for years would allow momentary tactical use. If you are advertising 5 mode scroll through interfaces as 'tactical' I just cannot take you seriously.


----------



## dc38 (Feb 7, 2012)

I managed to find http://www.officer.com/article/10232669/extreme-beam-tac24 as a review...dunno the credibility but it LOOKS okay


----------



## Racer (Feb 7, 2012)

dc38 said:


> Maybe we could even get the legendary selfbuilt on the case to help your lights prove their mettle?



I was thinking the same thing! And in the case of a $100 light looking 100% identical to a $10 light I'd almost like to see a complete tear-down including the circuitry and switch. But if Selfbuilt said these are high end knock-offs of cheap lights then I'd believe him. 

Still, why would a company do expensive knock-offs of something known for being cheap and of dubious quality? Has that ever even happened in the history of mankind? Normally knock-offs work the other way.

Occam's Razor: "The simplest explanation is most likely the correct one."


----------



## dc38 (Feb 7, 2012)

Racer said:


> I was thinking the same thing! And in the case of a $100 light looking 100% identical to a $10 light I'd almost like to see a complete tear-down including the circuitry and switch. But if Selfbuilt said these are high end knock-offs of cheap lights then I'd believe him.
> 
> Still, why would a company do expensive knock-offs of something known for being cheap and of dubious quality? Has that ever even happened in the history of mankind? Normally knock-offs work the other way.
> 
> Occam's Razor: "The simplest explanation is most likely the correct one."



i also found this on one of their "lower end lights" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckkiNB_nEyk


----------



## ExtremeBeamLLC (Feb 7, 2012)

i see what you are saying... I agree, that the old SAR5 is much the same.. but to be fair, it was the first micro-light released and it will likely be retired.. I saw side by side copies and some were amazingly close. Unfortunately ExtremeBeam pays its people too high to compare to sweatshop labor. They sell that unit for less than what ExtremeBeam can machine it for. 
ExtremeBeam employees are paid according to western living standards.
our investigations show that there are about 9 sweatshop factories for every 1 real one. and their conditions not what we would ever call acceptable.
We're really doing the best we can, but I see your point regarding the old SAR5.


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

_'Still, why would a company do expensive knock-offs of something known for being cheap and of dubious quality? Has that ever even happened in the history of mankind? Normally knock-offs work the other way.'_


No-one is saying they are doing 'expensive knock-offs' just outsourcing these lights at cheap prices having them shipped to the US and sold for a much higher price. Most cheaper chinese brands don't manufacture their lights, just outsource them and get their name etched on the side, that's why you see so many xxxfires selling the same light. The worry here is that ExtremeBeam is just a US company doing the same as the chinese xxxfire brands but advertising them as a lot more than that. 

The problem with Occam's Razor is that what seems 'simplest' to one person is dependent on their prior knowledge and experiences etc. It can change. For example the belief in demonic possession was a perfectly reasonable outcome of the application of 'Occam's Razor' to the medieval mind. They knew nothing of neurological mechanisms etc but knew that demons existed (even if they were wrong). Now the modern persons knowledge base has changed Occam's Razor cuts the other way and we see such behaviours as epileptic fits or other similar physiological and medical issues.


----------



## dc38 (Feb 7, 2012)

Interesting, in the youtube video i posted, the logos seem to be different than even the original sk21. The "TM" marking is higher and the font is bolder, and there's nothing on the upper left of the logo panel.


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

That's a good video, and does seem to show durability. It would be better if an independent reviewer however could take a look at one, dropping blocks on the light isn't that much of a test for it as there is little shock and really it only shows the durability of the body tube which isn't in question. When it is thrown at the rock itself that is a good test, but my Akoray K-106 original is still working great after I threw it out of a window (2nd story) as hard as I could against the house next door's brick wall before falling to the concrete floor around 20 times in a row to test it. 

A good repeated drop from height test would be good, and so would a test to see if it can genuinely take gun recoil. A good question for extremebeam would be, are the electronics potted? As many weapon lights are for shock-proofing and true durability.


I would also bring to attention that 'Lithium' is misspelt on the battery page as 'Litium' and that the 18650 and RCR123s have no capacity claims in the description, although the RCR123s have 1000mah printed on the side, as the max in the industry right now is around 600mah and these look like the Grey wrapped Trustfire cells this is clearly way beyond what is accurate.

Also, they seem to be the only brand anywhere advertising 'Tungsten Carbide' CR123a 'Lithiums'.:thinking:


----------



## Dr. Strangelove (Feb 7, 2012)

I won't comment on ExtremeBeam flashlight quality because I don't own any, or any of the other lights that they have been compared to. I also won't comment on their association with the British or Italian armed forces/police. However, I will comment on their association with the U.S. armed forces since they display it prominently in their banner ad and on their website.

Any direct supplier to the U.S. military will have a NSN (National/NATO Stock Number) for their products. The NSN allows the product to be ordered directly through military supply channels. For flashlights, the 13 digit NSN starts with 6230, indicating a hand held lighting device. NSN are easily searchable on the internet, and many direct military suppliers, such as SureFire, Maglite and Streamlight, list the NSN for their products on their websites. I have two NovaTacs that were part of a military order that have a NSN on the battery tube in place of a serial number: 6230-01-556-0389.

When I couldn’t find a NSN for ExtremeBeam, I called the 877 number listed on their website and asked for one. The gentleman I spoke to was very knowledgeable and courteous, he explained that they do not sell directly to the military but instead sell to the armed forces through their website or prime vendors. He gave an example of a prime vendor that is a well-known audio and video store on 9th​ Ave. in NYC, which is also a large internet seller. I’m familiar with this company because I purchased a TV from them several years ago. I checked their website and they carry a large selection of ExtremeBeam products. They also have a GSA contract, so they supply products to the U.S. government, and by extension, the U.S. military.

In summary, ExtremeBeam is not a direct supplier to the U.S. armed forces and never has been. The only way the armed forces can obtain ExtremeBeam flashlights is for someone in the military supply chain to: A) have knowledge of ExtremeBeam and B) specifically order from ExtremeBeam's website or a prime vendor. It is difficult to determine if ExtremeBeam flashlights are in widespread use with the U.S. military, but they do not seem to be well known on this board. I have drawn my own conclusions as to whether they are exaggerating their association with the U.S. armed forces, I’ll let you draw your own.


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Feb 7, 2012)

RedForest UK said:


> I would also bring to attention that 'Lithium' is misspelt on the battery page as 'Litium' and that the 18650 and RCR123s have no capacity claims in the description, although the RCR123s have 1000mah printed on the side, as the max in the industry right now is around 600mah and these look like the Grey wrapped Trustfire cells this is clearly way beyond what is accurate.


SunWayMan had these problems when they first came out - the manual on the freebie I won had a few such typos. But they've cleaned that up and reworked their logo, and are now generally regarded well here. Give these guys some time.

ExtremeBeam: On the web, your words are the first thing people will judge you by. I see that your posts here are of generally excellent English. But your web site blurbs have some flubs and typos that make it look like you don't care as much as you should about your image. It's hard to do everything right all at once, but I highly support your progress in communication. Typos and written errors hurt and are worth correcting. I look forward to viewing these torture test videos after work!


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

Yes, I am not claiming that the misspellings themselves mean they are a bad company in any way at all, it has no direct reflection on their quality. It just does give the impression, in addition to many of their claims, that they are somewhat unprofessional.


----------



## PapaLumen (Feb 7, 2012)

dc38 said:


> i also found this on one of their "lower end lights" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckkiNB_nEyk



"*ExtremeBeam is now by far the top﻿ Military Grade light in production today and is used by soldiers and officers world-wide including in odd places like Rome, where it is used to protect high ranking officials including The Pope.*"

A little excessive no? Who doesnt use these? Rome is an odd place? By far the top military grade light in production today? Thats just not true.​


----------



## Tommygun45 (Feb 7, 2012)

RedForest UK said:


> Yes, I am not claiming that the misspellings themselves mean they are a bad company in any way at all, it has no direct reflection on their quality. It just does give the impression, in addition to many of their claims, that they are somewhat unprofessional.



With all fairness O-Light is still brutal at this as well. I was so disappointed with my SR-51's manual that I tried contacting the company and inquired as to whether or not they would send me the original files of their manuals so I could fix them and send them back. They were just littered with grammatical mistakes and typos. It was disheartening to have dropped $150 on a light and to have the manual read like a 4th grader wrote it. I get that you have some translation issues, but c'mon... If you're playing the game, play the game. Hell, I'll fix a companies website for a free light. Maybe I should advertise my services in a banner.


----------



## FlashKat (Feb 7, 2012)

Correct me if I am wrong, but the warranty does not seem to cover most of the light.

Except by prior written exception being made by ExtremeBeam on a particular case, this warranty does not include normal maintenance and service items such as but not limited to, bulbs, batteries, switches, or lenses and does not apply to any part which have been subject to modification, gross misuse, negligence, accident, improper maintenance or repair by anyone other than an authorized ExtremeBeam’s repair technician. 

Except by prior written exception being made by ExtremeBeam on a particular case, this warranty does not include normal maintenance and service items such as but not limited to, bulbs, batteries, switches, or lenses and does not apply to any part which have been subject to modification, gross misuse, negligence, accident, improper maintenance or repair by anyone other than an authorized ExtremeBeam’s repair technician. 

Except by prior written exception being made by ExtremeBeam on a particular case, this warranty does not include normal maintenance and service items such as but not limited to, bulbs, batteries, switches, or lenses and does not apply to any part which have been subject to modification, gross misuse, negligence, accident, improper maintenance or repair by anyone other than an authorized ExtremeBeam’s repair technician.


----------



## TEEJ (Feb 7, 2012)

FlashKat said:


> Correct me if I am wrong, but the warranty does not seem to cover most of the light.
> 
> Except by prior written exception being made by ExtremeBeam on a particular case, this warranty does not include normal maintenance and service items such as but not limited to, bulbs, batteries, switches, or lenses and does not apply to any part which have been subject to modification, gross misuse, negligence, accident, improper maintenance or repair by anyone other than an authorized ExtremeBeam’s repair technician.
> 
> ...



So if a soldier who uses the light (As 99% of them do...) has the switch fail, so he can't see the enemy, and he gets killed in combat due to the switch failure, would that mean they won't fix the switch posthumously? 

That's cold.


----------



## F250XLT (Feb 7, 2012)

Did MJ start a new company? :devil:


----------



## Greta (Feb 7, 2012)

Racer said:


> I'll just come out and say that I'm surprised and a little disappointed that CPF doesn't do a better job of vetting their advertisers. These are clearly re-branded UF's being sold as top of the line lights. Isn't that fraud?



Well... seeing as how you asked... I have actually met David (he is the CEO of ExtremeBeam and the one posting under the username) in person... at SHOT Show of all places!! Whaddya know!  ... and I have been in communications with David for almost a year and a half now regarding his products and possible advertising on CPF. I have SEEN his line of lights in person and yes, I actually TOUCHED some of them and saw them in action. They certainly *DO NOT* suck... and are of very good quality... which I cannot say about many others I've had my hands on. 

What really disappoints me is that I told David he had best have a thick skin or a rep in his company with one if he is going to come on CPF/CPFMP. I'm almost ashamed that I was correct with my 'warning'... way to represent CPF, guys... :ironic:


----------



## F250XLT (Feb 7, 2012)

Yeah, who wouldn't love a light that protects the Pope. Although, I suppose that angle could lose you the Atheist market share.


----------



## kts (Feb 7, 2012)

Extremebeam should send some lights to Selfbuilt, Im sure he will do some honest reviews.


----------



## Racer (Feb 7, 2012)

So the owner of a company who makes products that 100% resemble not just one but his whole product line of lights which are known for being cheap and of poor quality was surprised that somebody pointed that out? And you have no problem with someone you're on such good terms with, who nobody has really heard of one day appear out of nowhere and claim to be the industry leader in quality flashlights with pictures of what appear to be a whole line of rebranded DX type lights? The American flag and Bald Eagle on the main page? Listing pretty much every armed service on earth with the inferrence that their very lives depended on these lights?

I admit I'm still a flashlight novice, but I do have extensive personal experience with a) almost all the DX type lights shown on his site and b) companies re-branding cheap merchandise and then making wild claims about it to crank up the prices. Seems like to make the connection I did was a perfectly reasonable observation.

If I'm wrong I will publicly apologize and eat my words, seriously, I will, but in the meantime I'm not ashamed of what I said, and take none of it back.


----------



## Greta (Feb 7, 2012)

Racer said:


> So the owner of a company who makes products that 100% resemble not just one but his whole product line of lights which are known for being cheap and of poor quality was surprised that somebody pointed that out? And you have no problem with someone you're on such good terms with, who nobody has really heard of one day appear out of nowhere and claim to be the industry leader in quality flashlights with pictures of what appear to be a whole line of rebranded DX type lights? The American flag and Bald Eagle on the main page? Listing pretty much every armed service on earth with the inferrence that their very lives depended on these lights?
> 
> I admit I'm still a flashlight novice, but I do have extensive personal experience with a) almost all the DX type lights shown on his site and b) companies re-branding cheap merchandise and then making wild claims about it to crank up the prices. Seems like to make the connection I did was a perfectly reasonable observation.
> 
> If I'm wrong I will publicly apologize and eat my words, seriously, I will, but in the meantime I'm not ashamed of what I said, and take none of it back.



Good for you! I'll be standing by with my titanium spork for you to use... 

Claims? I dunno... I really don't pay attention to hype and all that other stuff. I pay attention to what it does when it is in my hand. FWIW... I have recommended to David that he get one of his lights in one of our respected reviewer's hands. I'm sure it will happen as soon as it is feasible. If you are basing your opinions and comments on LOOKS... well... I imagine you're missing out on a whole hell of a lot of quality things in your life and well.... that's just kinda sad...


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

Greta said:


> I have SEEN his line of lights in person and yes, I actually TOUCHED some of them and saw them in action. They certainly *DO NOT* suck... and are of very good quality... which I cannot say about many others I've had my hands on.
> 
> What really disappoints me is that I told David he had best have a thick skin or a rep in his company with one if he is going to come on CPF/CPFMP. I'm almost ashamed that I was correct with my 'warning'... way to represent CPF, guys... :ironic:



I never said they 'suck' but anyone making such massively overblown advertising claims which cannot be backed up and advertising 5 mode scroll-through interfaces as 'tactical' and 'the best on the market by far' will clearly need a thick skin and a willingness to actively defend their products if they come and try and advertise on a forum full of people who know quite a lot about flashlights/electronics etc. 

I have no issue with reasonable marketing claims and selling to the general public with the emphasis on brightness etc, but there a far to many problems with the advertising and claims made by this company highlighted in this thread. 

Again, I am not directly criticising these lights in themselves, even if they are just OEM ultrafires/akorays etc many of these 'budget' lights are of very good reliable quality themselves, something which is often not acknowledged on CPF at all. I find it frustrating that what _appear_ to be the same or very very similar lights (albeit with probably better Quality Control and a domestic seller to back them up at least partially) are supported by CPF from a US seller who is willing to support CPF back financially, while any mention of the other guys selling them from china at a cheaper price is often hushed up and put down.


When DM51 'uncovered' that a light just like Arcmania's Ostar bike light was available for a very cheap price direct from china and Arcmania was advertising it as a custom set-up for much more money Arcmania was kicked out in disgrace, the problem is that to most concerned it seems we have a similar situation here. To most it certainly seemed Arcmania was selling cheap OEM chinese products at a massive mark-up with over-hyped marketing claims, but then of course it could be that his version was of much higher build-quality internally and the chinese cheap version was a copy of his. He certainly had a better-known history of making genuine custom high quality lights at least! I'm not saying DM51 got that call wrong, but just that it appears that the CPF moderation's response to these two seemingly similar situations is panning out very differently..


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

The other problem is that making the claims they do is a two sided coin. It necessarily means they are claiming to be *better than* other well-known manufacturers on here such as not only Fenix, Jetbeam, Sunwayman, Eagletac etc but also Surefire, HDS, Elektrolumens, Elzetta, Malkoff, Mac's Customs and all.. Can you really allow those blatant claims that they are better than so many other manufacturers with a true pedigree for making quality lights without any real supporting evidence at all?

Even if you can, I don't see how you could expect any real percentage of users here to take them seriously.


----------



## Racer (Feb 7, 2012)

If a company like SF claimed to make the flashlight that guards the Pope, I would totally believe them. They have industrywide respect and credibility. I've never held a SF in my hands but I believe the bazillion people backing them up. 

If a company one day appeared out of nowhere and made that same claim with what appeared to be cheap knock-offs then I would need a statement from the Vatican to believe it 

Still, as a novice flashaholic I practically idolize some of the folks here like Selfbuilt. Someone like him can put this matter to rest. I'm surprised that a company making such bold claims didn't start out their first day of existence with a Selfbuilt review. Sorry, it's not adding up.


----------



## ExtremeBeamLLC (Feb 7, 2012)

Please not that DX got kicked off of CPF for selling knockoff and that is exactly what they have done for years.
First thin you need to know about DX... They are based in Hong Kong. We have credible evidence that they have several accounts on CPF.
We know of several guys from Hong Kong that defend the fake knock-offs or pick on the real models..
Real factories have to pay insurance, credible salaries etc... if the price is too low you can bet there are either kids ,making them or sweatshop labor. Nevertheless non-thinkers out there are somehow surprised that a cheep look-alike will gain more popularity than the low-key hard working companies?

DX has several employees which we have tracked traveling from Hong Kong across the boarder to Shenzhen in mainland China.
They buy the available knockoffs there and our evidence shows that they also find even less quality micro-factories to knock off the knock-offs.

For several years they've been selling copies of the very same models that we make and to make things worse....they have the UF brand and others printed on them!
We have tried numerous time to force them through legal action to stop , but because they are in Hong Kong its tough.
One of our companion military manufacturers named Aimpoint has also had the same problems with DX type sites and eventually someone will go to prison.

The problem is rampant and companies like DX are masters of the heresy.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Feb 7, 2012)

I'll say this...

'The Military and every other special forces buys our lights'....this BS, and using 'shadowy and dubious claims about the Military'...
is toxic waste and everyone and anyone associated with it loses credibility. Should NOT support anyone who hides behind such false
marketing. And it will be labeled false, forever. Even if they have good lights, the false statements on the web site are harmful to
anyone and everyone who ever served in the armed forces. I do not want my efforts and sweat used for false marketing for anyone.

Come up with procurement contract numbers, Extremebeam, or stop the lies.


----------



## ExtremeBeamLLC (Feb 7, 2012)

Claims??
Whats the deal?
First of all, we don't care what bogus claims other manufacturers do or don't make.
No one would take most of these brands you mentioned to combat zones and any side by side would tell you why.
All we do is test our lights, test competing lights and make a product people can trust.

If you want hot rod toy lights there are plenty of them
If our lights fail, people might just loose their lives in combat
so we do our Best... Why in the world are you hard on a company whom you seem to know so little about?


----------



## ExtremeBeamLLC (Feb 7, 2012)

False marketing....thats what you are doing when you type your opinion without knowledge.
We began as a manufacturer building the light engines for major US combat lights..
OK you didn't know that?
Ok well, then just please only comment after you have all of the facts
Because before all of these johnny come lately companies were using LED HO bulbs, we were making the lights.
Almose every brand mentioned in this thread is using one of our designs.
I know you didn't realize that, so please don't comment on things you don't know... That's "FASLE ADVERTISING"


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

But my point still stands. Dealextreme can make 'knock-offs', but not convincing ones of any of the true quality brands. Their manufacturing processes and designs and UI etc are just too costly for them to implement or too complex to manufacture. Your whole line seems exactly the same in evry way other than an intransient metaphysical 'quality' of consturction claim.

You also still haven't addressed my point about your SAR series using the newer 'knock-off' akoray body instead of the original better quality one.

I find it possible (if difficult) to believe you produce these lights to a better standard of reliability and QC than most of the xxxfires sold on DX, but I find it impossible to believe a large number of your marketing claims. These are the main problem and point of this thread.


Please tell me what evidence you have that 'ExtremeBeam' is used to 'guard the Pope' and how if you are the 'preferred choice' of the British Army you referred to them in your banner add as the 'British Royal Army'?

Please give some description of the UI on the SAR series?

Please tell us what actual processes your lights go through that the DX ones don't which makes them more reliable, do they use potted electronics?

Please explain what actual testing you did which allows you to claim that 'in a side-by-side comparison 99% of US soldiers chose ExtremeBeam over any other flashlight brand'?


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Feb 7, 2012)

ExtremeBeamLLC said:


> Claims??
> Whats the deal?
> First of all, we don't care what bogus claims other manufacturers do or don't make.
> No one would take most of these brands you mentioned to combat zones and any side by side would tell you why.
> All we do is test our lights, test competing lights and make a product people can trust.


 and you also say 99% of US Rangers, Navy...etc are on board with your lights. US Rangers rotating banner...did you pay
the US Rangers for that ?


----------



## Racer (Feb 7, 2012)

Greta said:


> Good for you! I'll be standing by with my titanium spork for you to use...



Don't get me wrong, I love the cheap DX type lights and I have turned on quite a few friends and family to them too. But if you tell me they are the best lights in existence *by far* and then multiply the price by a two digit number then I already know from experience that someone isn't being straight with me. That's my problem in all this. My problem is this guy's claims, not his re-branded lights. Claiming the Hyundai is better than a Bentley and charging the price of a Bentley doesn't make the Hyundai a bad car. So re-branding thse lights and selling for 10 times more doesn't make them bad lights, it just makes them ridiculously overpriced. I have one of the lights *pictured* on that guy's site in the emergency kit of my truck. I trust it enough to count on it in an emergency, but I paid $12 for it. 

So that doesn't mean I'm missing out on anything. What I'm really missing out on is being on the receiving end of certain biological acts only legal in 38 states


----------



## Greta (Feb 7, 2012)

RedForest UK said:


> I'm not saying DM51 got that call wrong, but just that it appears that the CPF moderation's response to these two seemingly similar situations is panning out very differently..



That's because they are so incredibly different, it's not even CLOSE! We're not even talking apples and oranges here... we're talking apples and Toyotas. 

Time will tell... and to use another cliche... 'the proof will be in the pudding'. I've tasted the pudding.. and it ain't a cheap knock-off of Jello... 

I'm out of this thread now too - David can handle himself...


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

ExtremeBeamLLC said:


> Almose every brand mentioned in this thread is using one of our designs.



Seriously? Come-on then, you have a very limited line of lights available, of which all appear to use very simple cheap scroll through interface, and all of which physically resemble cheap chinese lights.

Please name me a model of light from any 4 of these companies which is a 'copy' of one of your designs.

Fenix?
Jetbeam?
Eagletac?
Sunwayman?
HDS?
Elektrolumens?
Surefire?
Streamlight?
HDS systems?
Elzetta/Malkoff?

In fact if you can't do that then please pick me any three models from any three 'non-budget' companies of lights whose designs were 'copied' from one of your designs.

This all begs the question of if you are right then why the heck did you push a line of lights with the bodies and UI of cheap chinese xxxfire lights if you really owned the designs/rights to so many high-quality, well-thought out and designed top-end lights?


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

By the way, please can everyone in this thread refrain from bad language and personal insults etc as I really want to keep this thread open and alive until these issues are addressed.


----------



## Racer (Feb 7, 2012)

RedForest UK said:


> I find it possible (if difficult) to believe you produce these lights to a better standard of reliability and QC than most of the xxxfires sold on DX, but I find it impossible to believe a large number of your marketing claims. These are the main problem and point of this thread.



I for one would pay double for a DX light with double the quality. Everyone wins. In fact I think I'm pretty much already doing that with some of the budget lights like Jetbeam's BA10. And I'd love to see some of UF's designs like the K10/S10 in premium quality. But if I can't tell the premium ones apart from the cheap ones then they will have a hard sell with me even if they are legitimate.


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

Greta said:


> Time will tell... and to use another cliche... 'the proof will be in the pudding'. I've tasted the pudding.. and it ain't a cheap knock-off of Jello...
> 
> I'm out of this thread now too - David can handle himself...



Whether you're out of this thread or not now, many of my posts have made it clear that whether these are 'cheap knock-off jello' or not is besides the point. They claim they are 'by far the best in the industry', you've handled them, you've handled Surefires and I'm guessing HDS Systems, Malkoffs etc. I'd like to leave you with the question of whether you can honestly justify that claim?


Another quick question for the manufacturer, do these lights use current regulation? I'm assuming that the headlamp is just one of the plasticky ones running of three AAAs direct drive (with PWM dimming) to lower the cost of electronics by a few cents like many of the knock-offs, but do any of your 'serious' lights use it, and if so could you say which ones?


----------



## Imon (Feb 7, 2012)

When I saw the banner ad for ExtremeBeam about what lights soldiers preferred I thought it would keep going on to list all the various branches of all the armed services around the world. 

I was going to keep silent on this issue but this thread reminded me of that "Monster Flashlight" thread that was closed a few days ago. I think CPFers have good reason to be suspicious although unfortunately it gets a bit testy in these threads. I do hope ExtremeBeam will take time out of his/her day to indulge our questions and please consider loaning a light to one of our well-respected light reviewers.

Edit:


RedForest UK said:


> ...I'm assuming that the headlamp is just one of the plasticky ones running of three AAAs direct drive...



I don't suppose that translucent red plastic ring on the headlamp will change your mind on it? :naughty:


----------



## alpg88 (Feb 7, 2012)

c'mon man, who cares what they claim, we are knowledgeable enough to know, what is true or not. we make our own choices, you think they full of it (so do i) just spend your money someplace else.


----------



## Racer (Feb 7, 2012)

ExtremeBeamLLC said:


> Almose every brand mentioned in this thread is using one of our designs.



So your counter claim to people calling you out for making wild claims, is ... more wild claims?


----------



## dc38 (Feb 7, 2012)

Racer said:


> So your counter claim to people calling you out for making wild claims, is ... more wild claims?



Wait a second...I noticed that Greta reffered to ExtremeBeam's chairman something or other as "David". Is this the very same "David" who had a hand in Fenix distribution and is now President of 4sevens, i.e. 4sevens David?


----------



## dc38 (Feb 7, 2012)

David from 4sevens WOULD have to maintain some kind of corporate anonymity as to prevent any unfair advantage / affiliations between them and ExtremeBeam...so IS it THAT David, the legendary distributor of Chinese lights?


----------



## csshih (Feb 7, 2012)

.......no.

C


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

dc38 said:


> Wait a second...I noticed that Greta reffered to ExtremeBeam's chairman something or other as "David". Is this the very same "David" who had a hand in Fenix distribution and is now President of 4sevens, i.e. 4sevens David?



Ok, now that is as wild as any claims made so far and certainly not the case. There is more than one person known as David in the world and I'm sure the president of 4sevens and chairman of Olight would not be selling these lights. Also if he was at Shot Show then he could not have been in two different places running two booths at once. 

Definitely not.


----------



## Dr. Strangelove (Feb 7, 2012)

I'm beginning to think that this thread has gone on long enough... Here's the scenario, a company comes from seemingly nowhere and makes claims that they have the best quality military grade lights, yet they are virtually unknown to thousands of flashlight enthusiasts. These enthusiasts have only a website to evaluate the lights and decide whether they should step up and make the investment in an unknown product. When they see lights that appear (notice I only said appear) to be almost identical to DX lights and what sound like inflated claims and endorsements, you have to understand that they will raise questions. That is why I didn't speculate, I called your company to get facts. ExtremeBeam purports to be a major supplier to the U.S. armed forces. Yet they don't have a government contract, only ad-hoc sales. This makes it appear that a only few random units have purchased ExtremeBeam flashlights, and that they are not standard issue. You should also understand that ExtremeBeam will be compared against companies that do have U.S. military contracts and are standard issue. If ExtremeBeam makes these claims, they will need to be prepared to back them up. If for whatever reason they don't, their credibility will suffer.

In my eyes the only way to resolve this situation is to explain the relationship between ExtremeBeam and the organizations that they claim use their lights without hyperbole, and to allow the evaluation of some flashlights. Evaluation flashlights are routinely provide to some CPF members, I'm sure terms can be arranged for the return of the flashlights after the evaluation if that is an issue. Other than that, I'm afraid that this debate will go on forever without resolution...

One more thing, I know this has been rough indoctrination to CPF, and if you've been mistreated I apologize. However, you should see how other companies are treated. Greta is right that you have to have thick skin to participate in CPF. If I owned a flashlight company, I'd never venture in here...


----------



## alpg88 (Feb 7, 2012)

127.0.0.1 said:


> I'll say this...
> 
> 'The Military and every other special forces buys our lights'....this BS, and using 'shadowy and dubious claims about the Military'...
> is toxic waste and everyone and anyone associated with it loses credibility. Should NOT support anyone who hides behind such false
> ...



well you have to earn creditability first, you can't loose what you ain't got.


btw us seller adoramacamera http://myworld.ebay.com/adoramacamera/?_trksid=p4340.l2559sells some of them on ebay


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 7, 2012)

I will reiterate please keep it civil and not insulting. I think we are perfectly able to address marketing and UI etc questions which will shed light on the credibility of the company with just a discussion. 

Of course, for a good test to see the quality of the lights themselves a review is needed, not just speculation. But many of the problems brought up can be addressed directly without a need to resort to any physical inspection/evaluation of the lights themselves.


----------



## TEEJ (Feb 7, 2012)

If you read the initial Eagletac introductions, there was a similar amount of incredulity about that new maker, back then, here.

They then went on to prove themselves, and so forth.

I'm not sure if the issue is whether the lights are actually any good or not, as no one has seen one other than Greta, and she didn't do a review, she was at a shot show (2012 Shot Show in Sunny Las Vegas?).

I do think that the CLAIMS in the advertising are the real issue. They are SO over the top, that the credibility of the maker of the claims is called into question, loudly.

If David would simply address some of the sources and basis for the (Seemingly outrageous) claims, we might find that he can back it all up.

I find it hard to believe that 99% of all soldiers choose ANY brand more than ANY OTHER brand, even Surefire, etc, might be shy of 99% market share.

BUT, to be fair, as Babe Ruth said "It ain't braggin if you can do it".

So, was the 99% statistically valid, and, is there data to back this up, or, is it based upon a survey at a shot show where 100 soldiers were shown a dozen lights, and asked which they prefer? Or, to be accurate, was a representative sample of every soldier in active duty since the lights came out asked what their preference was for a duty light, and 99% chose an ExtremeBeam? (What the claim implies. As a soldier COULD have conceivably chosen any brand he wanted to, I could let that part go)

I could also concede that the lights made by Extremebeam might account for a large percentage of the lights out there, again, they would need to show ~ 99% market share for that target demographic.


I was in the Vatican. I saw the Pope. It was daylight though, and none of his guards were displaying any flashlights. If one of the guards brought an orange to squeeze onto his double espresso later, would that fruit vendor he got it from then claim that his fruit is used to guard the Pope?

Maybe not - But, if there was a Papal SOP that mandated what equipment the guards were to use to guard the Pope, or specifications for the light that the guards were to use....and the guards chose ExtremeBeams to guard the Pope with, then I might say, sure, ExtermeBeams were chosen to guard the Pope. 

If someone knew a "Pope Guarder", and gave him an ExtremeBeam as a gift, or the guy just needed a flashlight and that's what he bought, no, that shouldn't count. (Because the IMPLICATION is that the POPE could have whatever flashlight he wanted to, and ExtremeBeam was that choice)

Now, frankly, the Pope's guards are not exactly an elite fighting force, and, they are not exactly known for night fighting expertise, and, in fact, the Vatican is not really a dark place, its pretty well lit. So, I have trouble imagining a scenario where the guard's flashlight choices, or if they even need to HAVE one, is specified by the Vatican. That doesn't mean the Pope's security detail is not concerned with such things, they DID chose a nice bubble for the Pope Mobile, etc....and, that Pope Mobile does have headlights, and I suppose that makes those headlights "The Headlight's Chosen to Light the Pope's Way", etc.

As for the choice of the British Army, again...based upon what?

And so forth.


Sure, ALL manufacturers exaggerate a bit in ads, but, there IS a line that, if crossed, back fires.

Why is it that toothpaste commercials, etc, say "9 out of 10 Dentists Prefer xyz"?

Because if they said ALL of them, you'd go from thinking the statistic showed the product to be good, to thinking the seller of it was lying, not to be trusted, and that the product must be avoided.


If I say my flashlight can shine for 400 yards, and run for 2 hours, people will say, "sweet! I WANT one!"

If I say my flashlight can shine for 100 miles, and has a run time of 365 days, regrows balding hair, cures acne, and makes you irresistible to the opposite sex, people will say "WHAT?!?! - This must be some sort of SCAM!"


Now, if the person with the hair restoration, etc, flashlight comes onto a forum where people are CONVINCED his product is a scam, and the claims are outrageous, and calmly and patiently explains the BASIS for the claims, and shows why the claims are in fact valid, people who WANT that kind of product will BUY that type of product.

If they come on to the forum and just SAY the claims are valid, well, no one sees any new hair, or evidence of the light shining 100 miles, and they wander off to find a flashlight that at least stands up to abuse, has a decent amount of good quality light in their pattern of choice, or whatever trips THEIR trigger...but, they don't BUY the light with unsubstantiated claims.


Substantiated claims are what sells lights here.

Again - The LIGHT ITSELF is now NOT the issue. Its the CLAIMS about the light that are the issue.


As the advertising is HORRIBLY BADLY WRITTEN, it is quite possible that the parties responsible are simply not aware of how to sell via advertising. Perhaps they simply need to be reigned in, told that this sort of overblown presentation backfires, by DILUTING the perceived quality of the product.

Perhaps ExtremeBeam hired a firm that should be fired, because they have caused a lot of damage to ExtremeBeam's reputation. If this is the case, simply firing them, and hiring a real advertising company that knows how to advertise the product, combined with explaining that the old firm never admitted that they just made a bunch of lies up to try to bolster the product position, and they were fired as soon as ExtremeBeam cross checked the REAL FACTS, and discovered they had been lied to.

Now, if this was an inside job, they would have to fire themselves...or at least the parties who came up with the lies, etc.


So - It plays out such that either:

The claims are substantiated, tested and proven to be good lights, and the lights fly off the proverbial shelves in a flashaholic feeding frenzy.

The claims are unsubstantiated, but the parties involved in making the claims are exorcized and the company apologizes, and turns a new leaf in its advertising strategies....and the light sells, if its at least a good light. 

The claims are unsubstantiated, and the advertising is toned down, but there is no admission of a mistake...and the light sells, eventually, after a long cool down period, if its at least a good light.

The claims are unsubstantiated, the ads stay over the top outrageous, no one can believe a word they say, and the light is generally avoided/quickly becomes a paradigm of braggadocio...So if someone says "I'm so strong, I can pick up a Mack Truck!", someone can remark that they are "ExtremeBeaming".




As Greta says its a good light, I'll assume that its at least a good light.

It would be a real shame if a quality light maker is sabotaged by the world's worst advertising campaign, and instead of being welcomed as a great new resource, they come across as an untrustworthy weasel. 




I'd be fine with assuming its fine quality-wise, etc....but, the claims regarding who uses the light, etc, are what need to be addressed at this point, to restore credibility...one way or the other.


The credibility is indicative of the ETHICS of the maker. I might think a particular rug is wonderful, but not buy it if I thought the ethics of the seller was in question.


I might be a wholesale rug buyer, looking to buy a thousand rugs a week...I might worry the sample an unscrupulous rug maker sends me is a ringer, a rug made just to impress me and get my business, but that the rugs he sends out to MY CLIENTS after that might be sub-par.

If I TRUST the ethics of the supplier, I am not as worried about that supplier doing something unethical.

If I DON'T trust that supplier, I might worry that the first few rugs will be OK, but that the second they think I've stopped QA/QC checks..they will start to cut corners, and the quality of the rugs will be spotty.


So, a REPUTATION precedes a relationship. Flashaholics are very detail oriented, I'm MORE impressed if Flashaholics have a high opinion of a light than a soldier. Soldiers are MOSTLY young kids with little real experience or expertise in lights...and if all they knew were 2D maglights who's bulb's broke if you dropped the light, etc, ANY LED light will look like a State of the Art war fighting light machine that turns night into day. Pretty much ANY LED light will be the best they ever saw or used.

Soldiers and cops read our forum to see what WE use. Is it 99% of all soldiers? I doubt it. I can honestly say I have no way of really knowing what the percentage of soldiers that read our forum are, so I don't make a CLAIM about it...beyond that they DO.

A search of the posts from them can be done, and it can be substantiated that soldiers, LEO's, Fireman, etc, DO read the forum, if they posted.


This is what ExtremeBeam needs to do, substantiate THEIR claims, regarding the parties they claimed use their lights, or, withdraw them.


----------



## leon2245 (Feb 7, 2012)

Hi ExtremeBeam, welcome to CPF. Looks like you offer a real no nonsense high quality lineup of LED flashlights, that's actually been BATTLE PROVEN- anything good enough for the Marines, S.W.A.T., & the friggin _Pope _is good enough for me. But any plans to offer something in the way of an AA light (for us civilians)? I'm always on the lookout for a basic single mode tailstanding 1xAA with the level of quality & performance you're talking about, & I think ExtremeBeam just might have the balls to make it happen.

Meanwhile, is there a newsletter or email product updates feature I can sign up for? Couldn't find it on your website.


----------



## PapaLumen (Feb 7, 2012)

Please provide the slightest fragment of truth to your claims to supply the British "Royal" Army. Or as it actually is, The British Army, The Royal Air Force, The Royal Navy.

It's offensive for you to brazenly lie about such matters, what a way to run a business. 

Coming on here was a mistake from you as here lies the worlds largest and best informed community of Flashlight enthusiasts, who have heard and seen it all before.

I too, am disappointed that CPF (greta) allows you to post your lies on here. I hope your payment was worth it.


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 7, 2012)

ExtremeBeamLLC said:


> Our design is different from there and was released in early 2006 before they were a company and the design itself was processed for review well before that.. Their variation does not appear to violate the specifics of our so no reason to pursue any action


Seen my pics on Page 1?
Your "tac light" is completely same as UF C8 and other chinese crap
Dont cheat me, im a Hongkonger and im expert in using crap light
Westerners may not know but i know much about chinese light, you know what is taobao, right?


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 7, 2012)

So call "tac lights"






and






There are even more pics, and i can even say
These thing *had existed for long time*
While your "tac-light business" started just right now

I dont know about the quality but at least, "your design"? False claim


----------



## Astro (Feb 7, 2012)

I wasn't convinced by jh333233's pics, but then I just saw the similaity between the $79 ExtremeBeam XT8 Pro Ranger and the $9.99 UltraFire CREE XM-L T6 502B. The battery barrel is a bit different but the head and tail truely are identical. Not sure if links like that are allowed here so I wont post any, but a quick google for pictures will show you.

The $49 2012 ExtremeBeam M4 Scirrako is remarkably similar to the $9.99 Ultrafire C8 - although I wouldn't like to say identical, but compare yourself. 

In any case, the machining on the XT8 certainly isn't as crisp as premium torches in that price range. This whole thing is very fishy indeed. Why would Ultrafire even be trying to do near perfect copies of a brand and torches no one has heard of?


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 8, 2012)

RedForest UK said:


> Well yes, you make the same point I would. They probably just contacted one of the OEM suppliers in china and had their name printed on the same lights and sent over. Many companies do this, Lumintop seem to be made by 'Maxtoch' who also manufacture some of the better lower end lights for the ultrafires etc. Even Jetbeam and Fenix/Klarus and 4sevens/Olight have arrangements where they must outsource at least some manufacturing from the same suppliers. Note that the above companies however do design their own unique lights and have good QC and what most consider reasonable pricing.
> 
> The thing is that while selling a relatively cheap product for way over market price may seem dodgy, but is not in any way illegal. If the customer buys the product that is their fault for not doing enough research. However, making claims that simply aren't true is illegal, which is why I wanted to bring some of theirs to light.
> 
> ...



Ask any soldiers: Which one do you trust, Surefire, or extremebeam


----------



## leon2245 (Feb 8, 2012)

Greta said:


> Well... seeing as how you asked... I have actually met David (he is the CEO of ExtremeBeam and the one posting under the username) in person... at SHOT Show of all places!! Whaddya know!  ... and I have been in communications with David for almost a year and a half now regarding his products and possible advertising on CPF. I have SEEN his line of lights in person and yes, I actually TOUCHED some of them and saw them in action. They certainly *DO NOT* suck... and are of very good quality... which I cannot say about many others I've had my hands on.
> 
> What really disappoints me is that I told David he had best have a thick skin or a rep in his company with one if he is going to come on CPF/CPFMP. I'm almost ashamed that I was correct with my 'warning'... way to represent CPF, guys... :ironic:





PapaLumen said:


> Please provide the slightest fragment of truth to your claims to supply the British "Royal" Army. Or as it actually is, The British Army, The Royal Air Force, The Royal Navy.
> 
> It's offensive for you to brazenly lie about such matters, what a way to run a business.
> 
> ...



Hey, Greta's no shill- if she says she's known ExtremeBeam for over a year & vouches for the quality of his lights, then you can book it. I have 100% confidence in the integrity of CPF.


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 8, 2012)

Do something similar to TK40 torture and i will believe its quality


----------



## notsofast (Feb 8, 2012)

This ended up being a crazy thread!

Without a review anyone accusing another of talking out their *** is in fact risking the same act, not the type of gambling I am into. I am certain a review is forth coming.

Personally I am pulling for ExtreamBeam, their marketing may be negatively received and missed it mark but if the lights are quality, a better marketing strategy might not have been as effective. The lack of marketing skills of a company is not necessary a reflection of their ability to design and build quality lights.

Sending samples of their lights to selfbuilt for a review will end the controversy.


----------



## mvyrmnd (Feb 8, 2012)

If you subscribe to the idea of "any publicity is good publicity" then this thread is a winner for ExtremeBeam.

I agree the marketing is a bit over the top, and in some countries would even be smacked down by the courts for some of the claims made.

That said, the lights themselves should be given a chance. Let them be reviewed. Let them be torture tested (even though they'll never be repaired thanks to that warranty statement!) only then will the truth be known.


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 8, 2012)

Found this using search function
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?327138-Extreme-Beam-xt8-pro-ranger


----------



## Chicken Drumstick (Feb 8, 2012)

ExtremeBeamLLC said:


> False marketing....thats what you are doing when you type your opinion without knowledge.
> We began as a manufacturer building the light engines for major US combat lights..
> OK you didn't know that?
> Ok well, then just please only comment after you have all of the facts
> ...


As just someone reading this forum, it appears to me an outsider that you are avoiding actually answering any of the questions asked of you.

I think that's the numb of the problem here. Not the actual lights... more the wild claims without any proof and the failure to actually answer reasonable questions.


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 8, 2012)

> Because before all of these johnny come lately companies were using LED HO bulbs, we were making the lights.
> Almose every brand mentioned in this thread is using one of our designs.



Chinese's(Thats a chinese brand, isnt it?) renowned skill is: saying their products to be "original" and "genuine"
If it is *your* design, then why there is *no patent over USA or other western country?*
And these "designs" have been shown on crapfire for long long time
For other company, they will even register the name of light far before they begin to work
You know the word "Zheng Pin"(means real goods) and the word is always seen everywhere



> I know you didn't realize that, so please don't comment on things you don't know... That's "*FASLE ADVERTISING*"


Isnt EB the one doing this?
Where did your 99% solder data comes from

For TAC-24SR
Max Run-Time: 8/12 hours hi/low

Light Performance: 28,000LUX @ Outperforms lights up to 1200 LUMENS IN FOCUSED PERFORMANCE
Single 18650 and 8hr on high? I gotta wow that out

XT8
*Run-Time /set of batteries:* 7 hours High, 12 hours Low

*Light Performance:* 27,000LUX @ 1 Meter

*Light Volume:* 310 Lumens
Wow, 7hrs on high with 310lm and single 18650

Headlamp:
Ahh another "design"
Ive seen it for many times already...

Now whos making false advertising(and bluffing runtime)
Please stop evading all the questions and answer directly instead of accusing CPFers for being suspicious


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 8, 2012)

ExtremeBeamLLC said:


> The products stamped "Akoray" were one of our first knock off problems.
> We were "Alpha-TAC" *manufacturin*g before we *were* ExtremeBeam and Akoray was a line we *found of *one of our designs which *tought *us not to allow our guys to wear any of our products *outside of* the factory.
> I know it's hard to *concieve *of how good the copies are and you will find some good copies,
> but as a factory, it only takes 1 day for the *machinest *to set *op *the *tooling *to copy any aluminum bodied light.
> ...





> David (he is the CEO of ExtremeBeam and the one posting under the username) in person... at SHOT Show of all places!!


Even though it has nothing to do with lights
Do you think western people would type such ridiculous english?
Even if it is not your mother language, you couldnt type such thing, isnt it
This convinced me to believe EB comes from China
(You know why.)


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 8, 2012)

Look, in all honesty many of the mistakes you highlighted are in fact correct or just typos. Everyone makes them if typing in a hurry, it was just the typos on the official website which were under no time pressure or stress which implied a lack of care etc. I have no doubts that ExtremeBeam is a US based company, but I seriously doubt they design and manufacture the lights on their own, it's simply not plausible.

That aside:

*I ask again, if Akoray is a copy of you, then how come your SAR series lights use the lower quality newer akoray 'clone' designs and not the original better quality ones? *

*Also, how come the akoray originals had a fully programmable and very complex UI, while you make no mention of yours at all and have refused to comment on it when asked?* Copies are normally less complex than the originals..

I am assuming it is a cheap and simple 3/5 mode blinky included scroll through one as most cheap OEM models of the new akoray k-109 clones are, and that is why you are refusing to comment. But feel free to prove me wrong.


I love the Sipik SK68 zoomable 1x AA lights, they are awesome quality for the price and will be easily tough enough to withstand some drops and blunt force impact etc, all in a nice clean crisp design with a great clip. The design itself is clearly a copy based on the Nitecore Extreme model which has higher quality and better functionality. But, while it resembles the Nitecore the copy clearly couldn't match it's fully regulated circuit, precision machining, anodizing and thread quality or UI. They wanted to make it on the cheap, so they cut-some corners and made a few changes, this shows in the final product, but for the money it is made extremely well.

The problem is if Sipik, or me for instance, decided to start slapping my own brand on these lights and selling them as 'the best quality worldwide' and 'choice of the military' and 'tactical' etc. Sure the light is still good quality, tough enough for most abuse and most soldiers would find it much better than what they are issued with and used to. However that does not make it better than the original Nitecore or the other copies and I should not market it as such. Furthermore, to those with the right experience/knowledge, the similarities and telling differences will be seen, especially if I start aggressively marketing it to them on a specialist forum.

I could then start claiming that my company originally made and designed the lights and the Sipik's etc are copies, it is just a coincidence that hardly anyone had heard of my brand until recently and well after the Sipik versions were around. This is implausible but possible. However, if I then respond to criticism by claiming the Nitecore itself is a 'copy of my design' people would just laugh at me and think well everything they say is not to be trusted. I'm afraid that seems to be a very similar hypothetical hole to the one you have dug yourself into now.. 


*Oh and also please elaborate on your so called 'patent pending plunger system' which you referred to in your first post here?* I'm suspicious it was just a shameless plug for a non-existent feature of your products to send a new user looking your way. Please prove me wrong.


----------



## shane45_1911 (Feb 8, 2012)

jh333233 said:


> and im expert in using crap light



Of all the funny things in this thread, I LOL'd for real when I read this. Someone PLEASE use this as their signature!


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 8, 2012)

shane45_1911 said:


> Of all the funny things in this thread, I LOL'd for real when I read this. Someone PLEASE use this as their signature!


Facing the strong power of China, we human have to cope with crap in order to survive


----------



## AnAppleSnail (Feb 8, 2012)

jh333233 said:


> This convinced me to believe EB comes from China





jh333233 said:


> Facing the strong power of China, we human have to cope with crap in order to survive
> 
> Signature: When in doubt, yell "I'M A CHINESE"
> No one dares to tempt you:devil:


When did racism become appropriate on this forum? You had a PM and continued.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Feb 8, 2012)

shane45_1911 said:


> Of all the funny things in this thread, I LOL'd for real when I read this. Someone PLEASE use this as their signature!



done. this thread makes me LOL


----------



## alpg88 (Feb 8, 2012)

AnAppleSnail said:


> When did racism become appropriate on this forum? You had a PM and continued.


it is not racism when he says that.


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 8, 2012)

Not to go off-topic, but I think the attitude to mainland China and Chinese business is common in Hong Kong, I have a friend from there and he makes it sound as if it's a common opinion that the mainland Chinese companies push crap products with the sole aim of unscrupulously maximising profit, even if it means cutting corners. Whether or not this is generally the case I see many US posters with similar stereotypes. I think as with most stereotypes there is at least some truth upon which it is based, but it is important not to overgeneralise or take it as a rule too seriously.

I would not see it so much as racism, as HK is so close to those in question it is more of a friendly natured view, like many of the jokes we make about the Welsh in England. Or some of the jokes made in the US about Canadians.

But let's not go far off-topic, there are serious questions which need answering in this thread.


----------



## Racer (Feb 8, 2012)

While a few lights for review would do wonders for showing their supposed quality, I think that ExtremeBeam has just laid it on way too thick to ever have the type of credibility that other manufactuers and vendors have here, at least for me. All marketing usually involves stretching the truth, but you have to have a little bit of truth to start with in the first place. And I never see those wild claims even from companies that are actually in a position to make wild claims!

And yes, I absolutely feel let down by CPF. The credibility issue with Extremebeam in this case at least is a symptom of a credibility issue with CPF in my mind. Sorry, but it is. I guess this is the normal progression of my flashaholic knowledge, but this was like finding out that Santa didn't exist. Obviously the site still has value to me, but I'm not going to assume that any ads I see are 100% legitimate like I did before. Maybe I shouldn't have put CPF on a pedestal to begin with *shrugs*


----------



## Greta (Feb 8, 2012)

Racer said:


> While a few lights for review would do wonders for showing their supposed quality, I think that ExtremeBeam has just laid it on way too thick to ever have the type of credibility that other manufactuers and vendors have here, at least for me. All marketing usually involves stretching the truth, but you have to have a little bit of truth to start with in the first place. And I never see those wild claims even from companies that are actually in a position to make wild claims!
> 
> And yes, I absolutely feel let down by CPF. The credibility issue with Extremebeam in this case at least is a symptom of a credibility issue with CPF in my mind. Sorry, but it is. I guess this is the normal progression of my flashaholic knowledge, but this was like finding out that Santa didn't exist. Obviously the site still has value to me, but I'm not going to assume that any ads I see are 100% legitimate like I did before. Maybe I shouldn't have put CPF on a pedestal to begin with *shrugs*



Believe it or not... I understand your point. But even DX, KD and Dino... and even fonarik!! (  ) were given chances on CPF... before they were perma-kicked-to-the-curb. Have any of you (or me?!?!) given EB a chance yet? Nope. I'm not saying EB is going to end the same way those others did... they all got booted for unethical and, in some instances, illegal business practices. Have I seen that yet with EB? Have any of YOU? Nope - not definatively. As I said previously... time will tell. Not a one of you has or has had an EB product in your hands. Let's wait and see what happens... and you have my word:

**IF** a lynching needs to be done... I'll be leading the pack with the biggest pitch fork and carrying the rope... K?


----------



## Racer (Feb 8, 2012)

Thank you Greta. And thanks for letting me have my say


----------



## shane45_1911 (Feb 8, 2012)

Racer said:


> this was like finding out that Santa didn't exist.



Wait - WHAT???


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 8, 2012)

AnAppleSnail said:


> When did racism become appropriate on this forum? You had a PM and continued.


Go study social science before barking with racism
The comment was objective and commending on *lights only, not human*
Western people may have seen CNN or BBC news

"*Chinese Locusts*, rushing to other country to have babies and become immigrant"; This *is *racism


----------



## CarpentryHero (Feb 8, 2012)

The advertising is pretty grandiose but if Gretta vouches for him than that's good enough for me. I look at advertising like the OldSpice commercials and I try not to take any of it too seriously, using hear say doesn't hurt anything. 
As for facts, they need to stand for themselves and I hope ExtremeBeam does contact someone like Selfbuilt to review there lights


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Feb 8, 2012)

*I will paypal 50 bucks to the expert CPF reviewer* who gets an extremebeam, and also the comparable DX light,
and *does an exhaustive side-by-side with all the numbers* and power meter and lux meter stuff. and also
cuts it open and examines the components and build quality. 

I absolutely promise to do this after the review.

let's do this thing

If I have to I will paypal a mod right now to prove it.
---
and if the extremebeam proves to be quality, fine. that only settles the hardware question.
the marketing hype is still totally unacceptable in my eyes (and being ex-Air Force, it totally angers me)


----------



## jh333233 (Feb 8, 2012)

127.0.0.1 said:


> I will paypal 50 bucks to the expert CPF reviewer who gets an extremebeam, and also the comparable DX light,
> and does an exhaustive side-by-side with all the numbers and power meter and lux meter stuff. and also
> cuts it open and examines the components and build quality.
> 
> ...



Im willing to sacrifice my UF-C8-alike crap, i can torture it and making it rather to die


----------



## FlashlightsNgear.com (Feb 8, 2012)

Racer said:


> I'll just come out and say that I'm surprised and a little disappointed that CPF doesn't do a better job of vetting their advertisers. These are clearly re-branded UF's being sold as top of the line lights. Isn't that fraud?


I agree!!!


----------



## Racer (Feb 8, 2012)

I for one would pay $40 or $50 to have a premium WF-502B body with premium machining, square threads, a high quality forward switch, premium clip and superb anodizing. The styling is great but out of the 4 502B's I've bought:

- one was an outright failure
- one worked OK after I repaired it but only drove XM-L drop-in at 1 amp on high
- one worked OK but it had a few scratches and flaws in the machining
- one worked perfectly because it had a superb drop-in, which I moved to a better 504B body

I've had much better luck with other models but that one is one that I tried very hard to like. If I could get some of the same styling that I like with the cheap ones like the 502B but with premium quality then I'd totally be on board for that. Otherwise, there's plenty of fish in the sea, and I've moved up the flashlight food chain except for some cheap ones I still give as gifts to electronic savvy non-flashaholics.


----------



## F250XLT (Feb 8, 2012)

You guys can always vote with your wallets, and not buy it. Seems to me you are getting all whipped up about nothing. Yeah, the advertising is false IMO. But if you've ever watched any late night infomercials, you'd know that not all products are as described. *IF this company is what it says it is, they will be VERY anxious to send lights to selfbuilt to review*. That is the only way to clear up all the BS that is being slung around this thread. So my advice (whatever that's worth) to you all would be, step back and take a deep breath until the lights can be reviewed.


----------



## Astro (Feb 8, 2012)

Greta said:


> Believe it or not... I understand your point. But even DX, KD and Dino... and even fonarik!! (  ) were given chances on CPF... before they were perma-kicked-to-the-curb. Have any of you (or me?!?!) given EB a chance yet? Nope. I'm not saying EB is going to end the same way those others did... they all got booted for unethical and, in some instances, illegal business practices. Have I seen that yet with EB? Have any of YOU? Nope - not definatively. As I said previously... time will tell. Not a one of you has or has had an EB product in your hands. Let's wait and see what happens... and you have my word:
> 
> **IF** a lynching needs to be done... I'll be leading the pack with the biggest pitch fork and carrying the rope... K?



Sounds like a cool policy. I don't see that it should be CPF's responsibility to pay for investigations into every advertiser, and I am glad yo see that CPF will take action if there is proof of bad business.


----------



## Raze (Feb 8, 2012)

Wow..what a read. I must confess that the banner looks really cool with all the branches of the military and whatnot. Really catchy with the claims - at first I thought it was another SF ad.


----------



## shane45_1911 (Feb 8, 2012)

Astro said:


> I don't see that it should be CPF's responsibility to pay for investigations into every advertiser



No, but I think there is an underlying implication/expectation that sponsors on an enthusiast site such as this, should at least be honest and "above the table". 

I understand that we are all guests here, and this site costs money to run - but I also hope that CPF is not taking money from just any Tom, **** and ExtremeBeam in order to pay the bills.

The assumption is that advertisers on this site are recommended and endorsed - and I am definitely NOT getting a warm fuzzy feeling about this one...


----------



## alpg88 (Feb 8, 2012)

F250XLT said:


> You guys can always vote with your wallets, and not buy it. Seems to me you are getting all whipped up about nothing. Yeah, the advertising is false IMO. But if you've ever watched any late night infomercials, you'd know that not all products are as described. *IF this company is what it says it is, they will be VERY anxious to send lights to selfbuilt to review*. That is the only way to clear up all the BS that is being slung around this thread. So my advice (whatever that's worth) to you all would be, step back and take a deep breath until the lights can be reviewed.



the beef is not about the quality of lights,(which are untested yet, except one user giving it bad grade based on his experience), but about the claims on their site, like 99% soldgers choose their brand, and being it used by british "royal" army (there is no such thing), and us rangers. among other claims.


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 8, 2012)

The problem for me is not that CPF allowed them to advertise here in the first place, of course any company should be given a fair chance. But the actual claims even within the advertising directly in the banner on this forum are quite clearly false. It's *how* people are allowed to advertise on CPF which is the worry, _*who *_is allowed to advertise is only a concern after their credibility is established. The problem is that even from what was directly provided to begin with it should have been clear that this company's credibility was a serious issue.


----------



## flashlight chronic (Feb 8, 2012)




----------



## F250XLT (Feb 8, 2012)

F250XLT said:


> You guys can always vote with your wallets, and not buy it. Seems to me you are getting all whipped up about nothing. *Yeah, the advertising is false IMO. But if you've ever watched any late night infomercials, you'd know that not all products are as described*. IF this company is what it says it is, they will be VERY anxious to send lights to selfbuilt to review. That is the only way to clear up all the BS that is being slung around this thread. So my advice (whatever that's worth) to you all would be, step back and take a deep breath until the lights can be reviewed.





alpg88 said:


> the beef is not about the quality of lights,(which are untested yet, except one user giving it bad grade based on his experience), but about the claims on their site, like 99% soldgers choose their brand, and being it used by british "royal" army (there is no such thing), and us rangers. among other claims.




See my highlighted part of my post above...You really have to take all advertising with a grain of salt, everyone sells a product that is the best thing since sliced bread.


----------



## F250XLT (Feb 8, 2012)

Double Tap


----------



## shane45_1911 (Feb 8, 2012)

F250XLT said:


> everyone sells a product that is the best thing since sliced bread.



There's a big difference in me saying something is the best thing since sliced bread and trying to sell it to you - and me saying that something is the best thing since sliced bread AND THE POPE, THE U.S. RANGERS, THE C.I.A., THE LOCAL P.T.A., THE ARMY, THE NAVY, MICHIGAN STATE'S SYNCHRONIZED SWIM TEAM, ETC. ETC. all use and endorse my product.

See the difference?


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 8, 2012)

F250XLT, yes, I read and understood your point. But you can't say that just because some other people also do it it is ok for them to get away with it and for CPF to directly allow the false advertising claims to appear on the main pages.

CPF actively condemns false claims from many of the 'budget' cheap manufacturers, so why should they tolerate even bigger false claims from a US based seller just as they're also willing to pay for their advertising space?


Also, just so they aren't lost again in the depths of the thread, I will restate a few of the main questions I'd like to have addressed by ExtremeBeamLLC:

*1. If Akoray is a copy of you, then how come your SAR series lights use the lower quality newer akoray 'clone' designs and not the original better quality ones? *

*2. Also, how come the akoray originals had a fully programmable and very complex UI, while you make no mention of yours at all and have refused to comment on it when asked?* Copies are normally less complex than the originals..

*3. Please elaborate on your so called 'patent pending plunger system' which you referred to in your first post here?* I'm suspicious it was just a shameless plug for a non-existent feature of your products to send a new user looking your way. Please prove me wrong. 

*4. Please name 3 models of light from any of the 'non-budget'** brands (including but not limited to Fenix, Jetbeam, Sunwayman, Surefire and the others I mentioned before**) which are, as you claim, 'copies of your designs'?*


There are of course a number of further questions which could do with answering, but the manner in which these four are responded to will I believe paint a good picture of how ExtremeBeamLLC will be able to explain/justify it's claims and actions.


----------



## F250XLT (Feb 8, 2012)

I never said it was right, just said to vote with your wallet and not buy it. And as far as what Greta will tolerate from advertisers, that is none of our business. If it pisses you off so much that she would allow it, start your own board and run it the way you see fit.


----------



## Astro (Feb 8, 2012)

F250XLT said:


> I never said it was right, just said to vote with your wallet and not buy it. And as far as what Greta will tolerate from advertisers, that is none of our business. If it pisses you off so much that she would allow it, start your own board and run it the way you see fit.



I know I'm a new guy here... but I'm not new to forums in general, and it seems that the quality of its forums is directed by those who manage and run the forum, but the quality is _built_ by its members who provide content and community etc. 

Generally it seems to me that this thread and the possible fruits of this thread (eg future product reviews) will help the forum, and help the administrators maintain the standards that they see fit. If ExtremeBeam is legit, it will also help the company see issues with their current marketing strategy and see avenues to better establish a good reputation.


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 8, 2012)

I already have voted with my own wallet, so have lots of us. But we can't help the hundreds of people who may visit and see the advert and purchase what is perhaps a poor choice of light for them based on false claims. That is unless either ExtremeBeam can show their claims are substantiated, or the fact that they are false becomes well-known, either is fine by me.

I am not saying that Greta is in collusion with them to allow false advertising, I'm sure that she has a much higher level of integrity than that. I just think that she may have been misled, and if she can be then don't you think that that's a perfect example of how other people with less flashlight-oriented lives easily could be also?

I'm just trying to uncover the truth. Yes, the truth in their quality claims will need a review to test for sure, but the truth of their marketing claims can be addressed without any need for a physical examination of their lights.


----------



## F250XLT (Feb 8, 2012)

RedForest UK said:


> But we can't help the hundreds of people who may visit and see the advert and purchase what is perhaps a poor choice of light for them based on false claims.




This pretty much sums it all up, you can't. If someone is gonna buy a light based on the fact (or not) that soldiers use it, that is their prerogative. It seems to me that you are pretty much crucifying EB for what you call false advertising, and demand that they prove their claims are true. Perhaps instead of focusing all your energy on this thread, you could spend it on trying to prove his claims wrong without a doubt...


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 8, 2012)

How could I prove him wrong without a doubt? Please let me know. If they are going to buy it on the 'fact' soldiers use them then surely it was important for someone to point out that ExtremeBeam's claims may not count as such a 'fact'. 

I don't think anyone with a reasonable degree of common sense and a decent amount of experience of the flashlight designs and brands out there right now currently believes the majority of their claims, they are too implausible. Simply due to audacity of the claims the onus is on them to support them, not me to prove them wrong. 

I am personally of the opinion that their unwillingness to address the real questions instead of just making further counter-claims, followed by their sudden lack of response at all (but I'll give them time) is going some way to showing the extent to which good answers are available to them..


----------



## alpg88 (Feb 8, 2012)

F250XLT said:


> See my highlighted part of my post above...You really have to take all advertising with a grain of salt, everyone sells a product that is the best thing since sliced bread.


i do, i rearly see advertisment that reflects reality 100%, almost all lie a little, as the saying goes, the best place to hide a lie is between 2 trues (sp?), but in this case, it is all out in the open. 
lol extreame marketing at its best.

btw, i have a friend that served in iraq, he was not sf, or anything like that, he was medic in field hospital, they used simple $12 dorcy 6v lanters , no sf, nor hds.


----------



## F250XLT (Feb 8, 2012)

RedForest UK said:


> How could I prove him wrong without a doubt? Please let me know. If they are going to buy it on the 'fact' soldiers use them then surely it was important for someone to point out that ExtremeBeam's claims may not count as such a 'fact'.
> 
> I don't think anyone with a reasonable degree of common sense and a decent amount of experience of the flashlight designs and brands out there right now currently believes the majority of their claims, they are too implausible. Simply due to audacity of the claims the onus is on them to support them, not me to prove them wrong.
> 
> I am personally of the opinion that their unwillingness to address the real questions instead of just making further counter-claims, followed by their sudden lack of response at all (but I'll give them time) is going some way to showing the extent to which good answers are available to them..




Everyone understands your point, and most (including me) agree with you I am sure. But are you really gonna continue beating the horse...it's been dead for quite a while now. So like I said, focus some of your energy doing some research to prove their claims are incorrect.


----------



## CarpentryHero (Feb 8, 2012)

alpg88 said:


> i do, i rearly see advertisment that reflects reality 100%, almost all lie a little, as the saying goes, the best place to hide a lie is between 2 trues (sp?), but in this case, it is all out in the open.
> lol extreame marketing at its best.
> 
> btw, i have a friend that served in iraq, he was not sf, or anything like that, he was medic in field hospital, they used simple $12 dorcy 6v lanters , no sf, nor hds.



My father was Airforce supply depot for 29 years and 90% of the lights that passed through his department out into the field were the Incan D cell angle lights. my canadian marine friends too, never saw an LED. unless things have changed drastically in the last 5 years, there probably still not getting name brand. I can't speak for other parts of the world


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 8, 2012)

The problem is that I cannot verify or disprove their claims myself. I can not find any genuine survey of which lights soldiers in the US army prefer, I don't think any reasonably professional one has been done. 

The problem is that it would completely implausible for anyone to claim 99% of soldiers prefer any light in a side by side comparison to all other brands, it simply could not be done and if it was there is no way 99% would agree on any one brand. An earlier poster showed they do not officially supply any branch of the US military, but I can't prove or disprove whether soldiers in their thousands are flocking to buy ExtremeBeam lights or not, though I doubt the company would still be so small and unheard of if they were. I also do not have the Pope's contact details and am not willing to call up the vatican and ask what flashlights are used to 'protect' him. You'll have to make your own decisions on that one for now.

Of course testing the actual quality of these lights would need a proper review, I have no problem waiting for one before making a final judgement.

I have asked the questions that need answering clearly and in detail, and have stated my reasons for doing so and the implications if they are ignored. I'm happy to leave it at that until the answers (or a lack of answers) are able to speak for themselves. I will only continue responding to the thread to respond to a new question, answer or piece of evidence introduced, or to reiterate what I think are some key questions if I feel they are in danger of being left behind and lost further back in the thread and forgotten.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Feb 8, 2012)

FACT: if you name drop -anything military- in the US (or elsewhere) to advertise or sell your 'stuff'
and cannot back it up... you instantly come under suspicion as fraudulent....and tick off anyone and
anyone who has busted their hump for their country. 

It is like stealing the pride and hard work that goes into the job to try to sell a 'product' no matter what it is. 

and CPF has a huge global reputation...and shall I say, OBLIGATION to vet out advertisers. 

So many people and families depend on the quality of CPF content to earn a living, do they not ? 
Some of the money and product that get traded across these forums, funds peoples dinner plate.

The legacy of CPF, and incredible standards the mods lay down, dictates that ExtremeBeam be fully vetted, 
(especially since we can all agree now that this is a special case and it drawing way too much negative attention)
or CPF might be letting down all the others who make a living off candlepower and those people drawn to
the forums...

[hey, just 2 cents from someone who gave up a huge chunk of savings to spread the wealth and get me some lights...]


my $50.00 pepsi challenge donation still stands, anyone else want to donate anything ? a dollar ? so we can obtain
product and end the hardware quality questions for good, so we can focus on the shady marketing tactics ?


----------



## alpg88 (Feb 8, 2012)

RedForest UK said:


> I have asked the questions that need answering clearly and in detail, and have stated my reasons for doing so and the *implications* if they are ignored.


lmao, trade embargo?? un sanctions??


----------



## Tommygun45 (Feb 8, 2012)

We shouldn't have to donate any dollars. If extremebeam is a legitimate company with the best flashlights in the known universe they should have no problem submitting their lights for review. If you want to get word of mouth out about your products, it's not a good idea to make up a bunch of insane propaganda and try to convince simple minded people that your products are superior. Especially on a forum of flashlight enthusiasts. Its not like this is anything new though. Almost every company out there makes some wild claims. "Longest running, brightest, toughest, most durable, world leading, etc" are claims you can find on almost any manufacturers site. Leave it at that though. At least its vague. The second you try to actually quantify things and make declarative statements you will be scrutinized, as you should. Welcome to the free market and the first amendment. 

Anyone looking to gain a footing in this market needs to simply submit their products, if they have faith in them, to be reviewed by the people who do it best, on here. If you are going to advertise on a forum of people who are serious flashlight nerds, like myself, you'd better understand that this is all part of the game. If not, go advertise on other sites where the average uninformed American consumer might actually be persuaded enough to believe your claims. I guess eb has just had a crash course in product placement. 

People come to CPF to get expert reviews on flashlights. Not to be bombarded with ludicrous claims. The best way to advertise is with word of mouth, here at least. Submit your products for review-> get good reviews-> get good word of mouth-> people buy your lights. Put a light on youtube and have it get shot by a shot gun, run over by a truck, and dropped off a building 100 times. Have it be proven to be tougher than a Surefire. Hello Elzetta. If there wasn't a huge thread on HDS lights I would never have heard of them. Now I own a bunch of them, and constantly tell people to buy them. I don't buy a light because 99% of every soldier in the world would choose it. That's just silly. 

That being said, I understand the point of this thread and don't really have any qualms about it. However, if people choose to buy these lights based on the claims made by the company, well then that's just Darwinism at work. If you are too lazy to do your own research, or so gullible as to believe these advertisements, then you deserve to be ripped off. And please PM me because I have some male enhancement pills to sell you. And Bill Gates is sharing his fortune. Also, I am a Nigerian Prince...



127.0.0.1 said:


> FACT: if you name drop -anything military- in the US (or elsewhere) to advertise or sell your 'stuff'
> and cannot back it up... you instantly come under suspicion as fraudulent....and tick off anyone and
> anyone who has busted their hump for their country.
> 
> ...


----------



## Racer (Feb 8, 2012)

127.0.0.1 said:


> my $50.00 pepsi challenge donation still stands, anyone else want to donate anything ? a dollar ? so we can obtain
> product and end the hardware quality questions for good, so we can focus on the shady marketing tactics ?



That does sound interesting, but the onus should be on Extremebeam to prove that his lights aren't cheap knock-offs rather than on us proving they are. Which by the way I would think a legitimate company making such bold claims would be more than eager to prove. 

He'd also probably quiet some of us down by saying "Hey guys, we're sending out several samples for review to prominent CPF members by DHL tomorrow. The reviewers will have them within 7 days."


----------



## F250XLT (Feb 8, 2012)

The way some of you are interpreting their advertising, is quite interesting to me.



_Who Uses ExtremeBeam Tactical Lights?__ ExtremeBeam has been providing quality lights to support our troops and soldiers and agents abroad for years._​ 
That sounds completely believable actually, it doesn't say how many...



_We were designed and field-tested by and for soldiers and officers. And our lights are used by members of the following Agencies:_​_THE ARMY, NAVY, AIR-FORCE, MARINES, NOCS ITALY, II Brigate Carabinieri, S.W.A.T. (USA-EU), US RANGERS, BRITISH ROYAL FORCES_

Again believable, doesn't say how many people from each agency. Even if ONE person from each agency uses one, the statement is true.



_99% of all soldiers and officers polled by ExtremeBeam said they prefer ExtremeBeam over every other brand they had previously used.._

They do not state HOW MANY were actually polled...Nor do they say what the criteria was for choosing them.


----------



## Greta (Feb 8, 2012)

RedForest UK said:


> The problem is that I cannot verify or disprove their claims myself. I can not find any genuine survey of which lights soldiers in the US army prefer, I don't think any reasonably professional one has been done.



... and yet you expect **ME** to be able to do this as a form of 'vetting'... :shakehead:



127.0.0.1 said:


> ...
> and CPF has a huge global reputation...and shall I say, OBLIGATION to vet out advertisers.



Really? Where is that implied?


Perhaps you think the following implies some kind of obligation on **MY** part?:


> So many people and families depend on the quality of CPF content to earn a living, do they not ?
> Some of the money and product that get traded across these forums, funds peoples dinner plate.
> ...
> 
> ...



Seriously?!?! All of a sudden the lives and very *DINNERS* of CPF members rests on **MY** shoulders?!?!? REALLY?! C'mon... this is a bulletin board on the internet about flashlights. 

Tell ya what though... you pay me the going investigation rate of $150/hour + expenses and I'll make sure each and every dealer and manufacturer that puts in an application to advertise on CPF is properly vetted to your standards and *THEN* I'll take on the responsibility. Otherwise... please check in with reality... those who depend on CPF for a living do so at their own risk... just like I do.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Feb 8, 2012)

you're correct ^ lol at myself 

but with 127.0.0.1 story...

bought a fenix e11

wanted to know more about it

found CPF

eyes opened

wallet opened

long term dealers and members now a wee bit richer due to CPF and CPF influence on 127.0.0.1

do the math on this, and the throw in the rest of the planet, and you can infer that CPF is a vehicle for people to make a living from lights
and some people might want to rely on CPF to exist. you have created a beast of a website with a lot of influence


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 8, 2012)

F250XLT said:


> The way some of you are interpreting their advertising, is quite interesting to me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Firstly, to Greta. I never said I expected you to put a lot of time and effort into 'vetting' these lights, but within a few seconds of seeing the banner add it was obvious they were making wild claims. Then a couple of minutes of reading their website instantly showed they are likely a very dodgy company with bad false advertising.

F250XLT. I never questioned the first quote you showed, although I certainly had never heard of them before a couple of days ago, still I wouldn't have any issue with that claim.

The second one is believable, but stretching credibility. The lights clearly appear like OEM cheap chinese lights, but the killer point is the cheap 5 mode scroll through UI so hated by most on this forum with any real world experience of using flashlights. It is a cheap and simple to implement interface which would not be chosen by a manufacturer of 'tactical' lights if they had genuinely been field tested. Even ExtremeBeam seems to acknowledge this to some extent as they won't describe the UI in detail and won't even mention what it is on their $100 SAR series.

The third one is where the real problems are. Firstly I would point out that if what you quoted is what is now word for word on their website *they have changed the wording of it* since I first brought it up. When I first quoted it it said: _'In a *side-by-side test* 99% of soldiers chose ExtremeBeam flashlights *over any other brand*'_. How stupid could they get? Clearly they did not do a side by side with every other brand, and clearly if they did 99% would not choose the same light, even if it was the best. I mean come on, even picking 99% is the obvious arbitrary number to seem like they asked a lot of people and almost everyone picked them while still being slightly believable, like a claim from a 12 year old to their still gullible friends. Obviously since I pointed that out they have had at least enough sense to amend the wording to lose the 'side-by-side comparison' part and go for the more sensible option of 'every other brand they had previously used', as most soldiers are issued with poor quality or out of date lights anyway.

If they are editing claims without telling anyone do you not find that suspicious?

In addition to this, you can not say they did not state how many were originally tested. They did inadvertantly claim that they asked *at least 100 people*, if there is a 1% discrepancy from the norm then there must have been at least 100 people asked the question otherwise even 1 person disagreeing would lead to a lower % conformity, basic mathematics. I do not believe they asked 100 soldiers anything of the sort and at least now you've quoted it also this time they can not change the wording again unnoticed.


----------



## F250XLT (Feb 8, 2012)

RedForest UK said:


> Firstly I would point out that if what you quoted is what is now word for word on their website *they have changed the wording of it* since I first brought it up.



There you go, a job well done by you...You are well on your way to saving all of mankind from buying EB flashlights under false pretenses 




RedForest UK said:


> In addition to this, you can not say they did not state how many were originally tested. They did inadvertantly claim that they asked *at least 100 people*, if there is a 1% discrepancy from the norm then there must have been at least 100 people asked the question otherwise even 1 person disagreeing would lead to a lower % conformity, basic mathematics. I do not believe they asked 100 soldiers anything of the sort and at least now you've quoted it also this time they can not change the wording again unnoticed.



Yeah, actually I CAN still say they didn't mention the number of soldiers polled.....because THEY DIDN'T. Do you really think polling 100 soldiers is a large number?


----------



## Greta (Feb 8, 2012)

127.0.0.1 said:


> ... you have created a beast of a website with a lot of influence...



And this is the biggest fallacy you have posted yet. **I** have created nothing... I simply maintain it. The members have created it... 



> ... some people might want to rely on CPF to exist.



At this point, I would definately fall into that category. I can no longer work outside of my home because of the time CPF requires of me. I'm not complaiing at all... work at home in my jammies if I want or from my pool... or from a hotel room in Las Vegas! I've even been able to knock out a couple of online degrees because I work at home! So yeah... I rely on CPF to exist... so don't you think my interest is a bit more vested than anyone else's? 



RedForest UK said:


> ... but within a few seconds of seeing the banner add it was obvious they were making wild claims. Then a couple of minutes of reading their website instantly showed they are likely a very dodgy company with bad false advertising.



Maybe... maybe not. Yeah the banner is a bit... "over-the-top"... but if that is how EB chooses to portray themselves... well... I leave it to them to do their marketing. As I told one dealer one time, "I can't do your marketing for you... that is *YOUR* business". I think EB has gotten the message... loud and clear. Now it's time to put up or shut up. I'll change out the banner if a new one is sent to me... but I'm not going to go asking for one. That's none of my business.


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 8, 2012)

F250LXT. This is getting a little childish now, I don't even want to argue with you. I know it's not that big a deal for most of the worlds population. But I just like the truth to be out and I think other manufacturers/sellers may actually appreciate that as well. 

If all you have to say is that my point is not worth making then you can also just ignore this thread, no need to tell everyone who thinks it is worth making to shut up about it. Just move on and be glad it's not you putting effort into what you consider a pointless excercise.

Ok, you can say that they didn't say how many they polled. My point is that they would have had to poll at least 100, and 99% of them would have had to prefer ExtremeBeam flashlights in a side-by-side comparison with all other brands for their original claims to be truthful. You, me and almost everyone else here can work out how likely it was that that happened and how likely it is that they made it up. 

The fact that they have since changed the wording makes the claim more in line with possible reality, but just highlights their willingness to use unethical and dishonest advertising practices.


Greta. Fair enough, that's a reasonable stance to take. I won't hold it against you. Whether others think having such a banner with such claims appearing on CPF main pages undermines the credibility of the website itself however I cannot guarantee. Of course CPF is long-established and generally well-respected, so I'm sure whatever peoples opinions it won't prove a major issue in the long run.


----------



## nbp (Feb 8, 2012)

What a fun thread! 

For real though; I don't know, or care, if EB lights are all that and a bag of chips. My suspicion is that they are not, but that's just me. 

What we do learn from this thread is that when dealing with a group of highly knowledgeable people on any product, dubious claims and sketchy statistics aren't gonna get you very far. People here already have and use the very best production and custom lights on the planet. If you want in on that action, you're going to have to let the product do the talking, and stifle the grandiose claims. Otherwise you will come off as some fly by night operation hawking subpar products at premium prices, hoping no one calls your bluff. 

If The lights are truly better than SF, HDS, Malkoff, Peak, Elzetta (doubtful), the absurd claims are not needed anyways, as positive reviews will be all that is needed. 

If the lights aren't that great, crazy claims of Papal endorsements won't help anyways....

And even if they are just budget lights with a higher level of QC examination, they could still manifest a presence here. Many people like budget lights and would pay a little more for them if they were sure they would be fully functional on arrival. Even still though, the marketing would have to be brought into harmony with reality. 

It's a good learning experience for all. CPF has been accepting of many new brands in recent years. They just have to know their role in the market, and keep their claims grounded in reality.


----------



## RedForest UK (Feb 8, 2012)

By the way, a couple of very good posts from TommyGun and nbp. I fully agree with what they said and they said it well. I think I've let myself become a little over-involved in this topic now so good sensible input from other posters is appreciated. 

Also, to F250XLT, I forgot to include in my response to your quote rich post about the claim that their lights are used by the 'British Royal Army'. I've said this enough times already, but if they genuinely were then ExtremeBeam should at least not get the name wrong.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Feb 8, 2012)

*127.0.0.1 sez...

now $100 *paypal to the person who posts a complete exhaustive review of any 
ExtremeBeam model vs it's apparent DX clone, and posts up the data, pictures, and charts on CPF

this has to be one of the quality reviews with the real lux real current ...etc charts and photos and analysis.


----------



## Tommygun45 (Feb 8, 2012)

F250XLT said:


> There you go, a job well done by you...You are well on your way to saving all of mankind from buying EB flashlights under false pretenses
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Listen man, RedForest is completely right here. I was one of the first to view this thread and I checked their website. It had all of the exact quotes that he is using. They were *absurd*. The ones that you are now citing have been changed in the past 2 days, clearly, due to the existence of this thread. Therefore for you to cite the new quotes on the website and infer that they are now justified, thus negating the origination of this thread, is completely erroneous. 

He *has* done a wonderful job of preventing people from buying lights under false pretenses. If he hadn't found it, and mentioned it in a thread, do you think they would have changed their website? Of course not. Isn't this one of the reasons we are here? To help educate people on flashlight purchases, brand reliability, customer service, quality, etc.? If he brought to light a blatant case of FALSE ADVERTISING is that bad? I for one, do not think so. 

And did anyone miss my post, one of the first ones in the thread? This is not an American company by any means. They are based in China. Guangdong, China to be exact. Here's their phone number. +1.011861342638 

I suppose the reason people are suspecting their American roots and links is because, well, they have an American flag and bald eagle on their home page. Fair enough. As of now, the entire "About Us" section of the site has been carefully modified in order to not make claims, but state goals. 

"
With a heavy emphasis on Durability and Super High-Output, ExtremeBeam now runs among the most durable and most powerful lines of tactical lights ever produced in the history of military grade Sporting and Tactical lighting.

ExtremeBeam's products are now among the most desireable [sic] lighting product in the tactical world.
ExtremeBeam,
​"A Shining Light in the Face Of Darkness!"
"
Good. Well done. There are plenty of other lines in there talking about "We the people" and making other allusions to tenants of American idealism and patriotism but they don't say that. They also talk about the soldiers and veterans but they don't mention soldiers or veterans of any specific country. Also, their "army, navy, marines" etc claims could be for any country. China has their own army, navy, and Marines as well. The only potentially real dubious claim I can find is in citing that members of the US Rangers and British Royal Forces, along with SWAT teams use their lights. Maybe they do. Maybe they don't. Who knows.

"
ExtremeBeam is committed to support the men and women of both Military and Law Enforcement agencies stationed around the world with its rugged and dependable equipment along with an ever-increasing abundance of information and training direct from the Veterans and active-duty personnel who make the ExtremeBeam family.


Ok, so nicely done. This is a manufacturer responding to criticisms from we, the public. Now if your lights stand up to scrutiny you are on the path to success.


----------



## StarHalo (Feb 8, 2012)

- Sending copies of your lights to users and reviewers is a common form of advertisement; this company has thus far decided against that in favor of only banner advertising. No one has a copy of one of their lights, so there is no information beyond the usual manufacturer back-of-the-box hyperbole and exaggeration. Everything else at this point is conjecture.

- You already know what the general pricing and performance details are; many CPFers wouldn't even bother reading a review just because of the performance-per-dollar index on these lights. 

- The quality of these lights is completely irrelevant; if the Budget Forum has taught us anything, it's that you can market a flashlight that has a significant number of DOAs and early failures and there will still be a loyal fan following and discussion base around it. They don't care if it's a copy or what it's a copy of, only the people who don't buy these lights have such concerns.

- CPF is the stage on which all things flashlight play out; someone pays to have an advertisement displayed and we all see it and make up our own minds. If someone advertised a flashlight that claimed to increase my fertility, I wouldn't buy it because their ad is stupid. That has nothing to do with Greta, the seller is responsible for what the advertising contains, and is responsible for changing it if the market responds poorly. CPF isn't the babysitter, if the users feel something [that isn't illegal] needs to be policed, they can police it.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Feb 8, 2012)

*my 100 dollar offer stands for the entire year of 2012. wake me up when it is done, I will fork it over*


----------



## Greta (Feb 8, 2012)

Tommygun45 said:


> ...This is not an American company by any means. They are based in China. Guangdong, China to be exact. Here's their phone number. +1.011861342638 ...



Um... I don't know where you got that number from or who it goes to... but I can *DEFINATELY* say, your statement is not true. Extremebeam **IS** an American company. This is not to say their actual manufacturing is done here in the states... but then whose is nowadays? :shrug: But the company itself? Oh yeah... it is 100% an American company... and yes, I can vouch for that.


----------



## F250XLT (Feb 8, 2012)

Keep fighting the good fight guys, I know many will definitely sleep better knowing you are on the job.


----------



## Tommygun45 (Feb 8, 2012)

Greta said:


> Um... I don't know where you got that number from or who it goes to... but I can *DEFINATELY* say, your statement is not true. Extremebeam **IS** an American company. This is not to say their actual manufacturing is done here in the states... but then whose is nowadays? :shrug: But the company itself? Oh yeah... it is 100% an American company... and yes, I can vouch for that.



A few reasons...

Upon doing a little research it looks like they have two US addresses listed for offices. 

The first one I found here : http://www.officer.com/company/10040463/extremebeam AND here: http://nssfmarketplace.com/results.php?page=84&search_type=keyword&term=training&num_page=10

It lists the address as : 2275 Huntington Dr., Suite 872 San Marino, CA 91108

A quick google map search of this address reveals that it is an address of a UPS Store, among a few other places. 

The other address I found for them was from here: http://www.manta.com/c/mr4v6ks/extremebeam-llc. It puts them at 
473 S River Road, Saint George, UT 84790-2150

Strangely enough, another quick google map search of this location also shows a UPS Store.


Having a little know how of network administration I can also do a quick search of their domain, www.extremetactical.com and we find that it is registered to:
Registrant:
Tong Jun
weshanbei
GuanDong, NA
CN

Domain name: EXTREMEBEAM.COM

Administrative Contact:
Jun, Tong [email protected]
weshanbei
GuanDong, NA
CN
+1.011861342638


CN stands for China. Now maybe they are "based in the US." I am not saying they aren't, just based on this information I didn't think that they were. Not that that's really a bad thing. I didn't see any 'owned and operated in the US" claims on their site.


----------



## CarpentryHero (Feb 8, 2012)

Tommygun45 said:


> A few reasons...
> 
> Upon doing a little research it looks like they have two US addresses listed for offices.
> 
> ...





That's impressive to the point of Scairy, remind me to never make you mad Tommygun45


----------



## Racer (Feb 8, 2012)

Tommygun45 said:


> Having a little know how of network administration I can also do a quick search of their domain, www.extremetactical.com and we find that it is registered to:




It's actually extremebeamtactical.com not extremetactical.com, but it does appear they have at least two domains, extremebeam.com being the other one. Incoming, a little more research.


----------



## Racer (Feb 8, 2012)

A little research to augment what TommyGun did...

TommyGun45 listed part of the WHOIS record for extremebeam.com. I'll list some more of it to point out some relevant information. And by the way this is all public record:

Technical Contact:
Admin, Domain 


2632 Marine Way
Mountain View, CA 94043
US
+1.8004283170

Registration Service Provider:
Intuit Websites, 


1-800-428-3170
http://www.intuit.com

Registrar of Record: TUCOWS, INC.
Record last updated on 16-Oct-2010.
Record expires on 03-Oct-2020.
Record created on 03-Oct-2002.

Registrar Domain Name Help Center:
http://tucowsdomains.com

--------------------------------------------------------------

So someone in China registered their domain through Intuit and is somehow affiliated with a company called Tucows, inc. My initial guess: They bought it from a domain squatter.

But wait, it gets better. Clicking around the site, one of the links on the batteries they sell bring me to extremebeamtactical.com.

Here's most of the WHOIS record for THAT domain:

Registrant:
Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0118566225
96 Mowat Ave
Toronto, ON M6K 3M1
CA

Domain name: EXTREMEBEAMTACTICAL.COM

Administrative Contact:
Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0118566225, 


96 Mowat Ave
Toronto, ON M6K 3M1
CA
+1.4165385457
Technical Contact:
Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0118566225, 


96 Mowat Ave
Toronto, ON M6K 3M1
CA
+1.4165385457

Registration Service Provider:
Intuit Websites, 


1-800-428-3170
http://www.intuit.com

Registrar of Record: TUCOWS, INC.
Record last updated on 20-Oct-2011.
Record expires on 18-Nov-2012.
Record created on 18-Nov-2008.

Registrar Domain Name Help Center:
http://tucowsdomains.com


Ok, now we have another domain with that only has Tucows, INC. in common with the first ... to be continued ...


----------



## Greta (Feb 8, 2012)

:shakehead ... and all of that means absolutely nothing... :sigh: Up until a year ago, you'd have found CPF located in a P.O. Box. Anyone who wants to make their information private can do it for a nominal annual fee. I myself choose not to... as Tommygun proved in a PM to me. He really didn't have to go through all that trouble though... he could have done what others on other forums do and simply go to my FaceBook page... (which is also not private) and he could have taken pictures of me from my page and posted them here... like others on other forums do. Hell - there's even an arial picture of my house with me on the roof on my FaceBook page! ... but I digress...

What does any of that prove? Nothing. There are reasons (and very logical and good ones!) for all of the "dirt" you all seem to have gone on a witch hunt for. I know those reasons. I am satisfied with what I know. And I stand by my statement that Extremebeam is indeed an American company.

Now enough of this nonsense and yes... witch hunt. This thread is now closed. If you have questions for Extremebeam LLC, please take it to the Manufacturer's Corner at the MarketPlace.


----------

