# EagleTac M2XC4 Review: RUNTIMES, PHOTOS, BEAMSHOTS and more!



## selfbuilt (May 28, 2009)

_*Reviewer's Note: *The M2XC4 3xCree R2 (Cool) was provided for review by EagleTac. The P7-based M2C4 will also be reviewed at a later date, as EagleTac will be sending me one from the next batch. 
_
*Warning: very pic heavy, as always*

_*UPDATE AUGUST 12, 2009:* My review of the second batch M2C4 (P7) is now up. Please see that review for an updated discussion of the build features of the M2-series lights._

The M2X family of lights from EagleTac have been highly anticipated, due to (among other things) a novel parallel battery tube design and magnetically-controlled switching ring. Here you will see how they compare to some of the multi-emitter competition, starting with the M2XC4 3xCree (cool white).







M2XC4 Cool specs (from the manufacturer):
 
Triple CREE R2 XR-E Cool White LED 
Type-III Hard-Anodized Aluminum Construction 
Constant Current Regulation Output
All-in-one Digital Rotary Switch with Off Position and Tactical Strobe, made of Re-enforced Polycarbonate with Smooth Rubber Coating 
Dual-Slot Loaded Battery Tray System, Re-enforced by Anodized Aluminum Construction and Stainless Steel Mounting Screws, fits CR123A and 18650
Custom Fitting Silicon O-rings and Rubber O-rings for Water Resistance (IPX8 Standard) 
Gold Plated Copper Contacts for Superior Conductivity and Durability 
Type-III Hard-Anodized Aluminum Tail-Cap with Tail-Standing and Lanyard Attachment Ability 
Thermal Management Treatment for Continuous High Output 
Syntax I Anti-Reflector Coated and Hardened Shock-Mounted Window 
Removable Smooth Crenelated Stainless Steel Bezel 
Output Modes: Strobe > 100% (800 lumens) <> 40% (360 lumens) <> 3.5 % (40 lumens) <> Off
Runtimes (4x123A): Strobe <> 1.2hr <> 3.5hr <> 9.5 hr <> 45hr <> Off
Runtimes (2x18650): Strobe <> 1.5hr <> 4.5hr <> 12.5 hr <> 55hr <> Off
Included accessories: Paracord Lanyard with Position Lock, Rigid Nylon Holster with Adjustable Mounting for Different Belt Sizes, Spare O-ring
Optional accessories: Filter Kit (Red/Blue/Green/IR) , Diffuser Kit, Window Protector Cap, 123A Battery Magazine Holder, M2 Additional Battery Tray










The EagleTac comes with the standard set of extras, like extra o-rings, wrist lanyard, warranty card and manual, and a few extras like primary battery holders, and a good quality nylon case that fits the light well. Also included with this initial run is the optional clicky switch kit (more on that in a moment).

EagleTac is preparing to offer a number of additional accessories that can be purchased separately, such as a diffuser and colored filters. With this review sample, they also included two of their own branded protected 18650 batteries (2400mAh rated capacity).






One of the most obviously distinctive features of the M2X series of lights is their parallel battery configuration. This is achieved through the use of a battery carrier inside the “handle” of the light. Note the all-black type III (HA) anodizing. My sample came very well lubed.














18650 batteries fit fairly snugly inside the carrier, but I recommend you use the included primary cell holder tubes for CR123A (prevents rattle, and holds everything together well). 

The battery/body tube is attached to the tail-plate and head region base by two series of four small screws. Here is the the head region:










Note the presence of o-rings on each of four screws (these are needed for waterproofness, given the design). Here is the tail region, in stock form:










The standard tailcap is a different design than the head region, and the main o-ring appears to be sufficient to provide sufficient waterproofness (thus no o-rings on these screws). The light can tailstand in this default configuration, and there is an attachment point for the lanyard.

The light also comes with an optional clicky-switch kit:














To swap in the clicky, you will need to disassemble both the back plate and the rear of the battery carrier. This requires the proper tool – a small Phillips-head jeweler’s screwdriver. Care has to be used when assembling/disassembling so that you don’t actually strip the screws – this is a fairly delicate procedure. The screws on my battery carrier required a lot of force to undo.

 I also found it a bit tricky to properly seat the o-ring on the clicky switch module. If you are not careful, the o-ring will bulge inward and reduced waterproofness. The design of the flat metal tail piece seems to hold the o-ring in place better. In fact, I had better success by using the original o-ring instead of the replacement that came with the clicky switch kit.










The 3xCree M2X lights use a common reflector with 3 partially overlapping wells for the emitters. This will give something of a “daisy” beam pattern up-close, but won’t be an issue at a distance. My sample is the one with “cool” ~6000K color temperature Cree R2 emitters. Note the removable stainless steel bezel ring with slight crenelations.






Key to using the light is the rotary grip ring at the base of the head. This is made of polycarbonate (i.e. plastic) with a fairly “grippy” feel. It slides smoothly over ~110 degree arc, which runs in sequence as you turn clockwise from Off, through Lo, Med, Hi, Turbo, and Strobe (measured at 8 Hz on my sample). I’ve tried to illustrate this graphically below, starting at the 12 o’clock position and turning to the right (clockwise if holding the light and pointing away from you).






This rotary dial controls mode switching by the presence of a small embedded magnet. As it passes over various control points on the circuit, it triggers the different modes. Note that the modes are not evenly spaced along the ring. As many users have noticed, it is hard to get into Turbo mode without accidentally over-shooting into strobe instead. There are various ways to improve this – from simple mods to prevent the grip ring from making its full arc, to resoldering components on the inside of the circuit (search the main board for some discussion threads if you are interested in learning more). 

With the standard flat tailcap installed, I find this ring works well only in traditional flashlight carry mode (i.e. underhand). In overhand “tactical” stance, it is hard to control the ring. But with the forward clicky kit installed, you can set the ring to your desired output mode and simply control on/off by a thumb-press in tactical overhand stance. Note that it is not as comfortable to hold the light underhand with the clicky switch installed, since the polycarbonate tailcap piece projects out wider than the width of the battery tube “handle”. 

Speaking of holding it, here’s how it looks in my hands:










*Dimensions (no batteries installed):*
Height: 160mm
Width: 49mm (solid tailcap max width), 25mm (body tube minimum width), 61mm (bezel)
Weight: 395.8g

The M2XC4 is very substantial feeling, and heavier than I had expected. The light is in fact top-heavy, suggesting a good heatsinking base in the head (I understand the P7 version is not as top-heavy – I will update when that review sample arrives). IMO, it is more comfortable to carry underhand without the clicky. Given the ergonomics, there has been some concern that the light may be awkward to carry in use for long periods of time. :shrug: While I understand these concerns, the light doesn’t seem too unbalanced to me, just rather beefy.

Here's how it compares to the competition (without battery extenders in place):





(from left to right, AW 18650 protected battery, EagleTac M2XC4, Tiablo ACE-G, Olight M30 Triton, JetBeam M1X, , Lumapower MVP 3xCree).






*Comparison Beamshots*

Both lights are on Max on 2x18650 AW protected Li-ion. Distance is about 0.5 meters from a white wall. 


















Up close, the M2XC4 has the typical “daisy” flower appearance customary to shared 3x reflector designs. The MVP 3xCree is a bit different, since each emitter has its own separate reflector cone.

To better compare the M2XC4 to other lights, here are some outdoor shots focused on a point ~30 feet from the lights. 


























And here are some lower exposures to better show you the hotspots:


























Overall output of the M2XC4 on max is among the highest of my multi-emitter lights. :thumbsup: Throw is similarly among the highest of these lights – Eagletac has done an excellent job getting the 3 emitters to focus on a common spot in my sample. 

*Testing Method:* All my output numbers are relative for my home-made light box setup, a la Quickbeam's flashlightreviews.com method. You can directly compare all my relative output values from different reviews - i.e. an output value of "10" in one graph is the same as "10" in another. All runtimes are done under a cooling fan.

Throw values are the square-root of lux measurements taken at 5 meters from the lens, using a light meter, and then extrapolated back to estimate values for 1 meter. This will be my standard way to present throw on these types of lights from now on. The beams don't really have a chance to fully converge until typically several meters out

Some of the MC-E-based lights take a couple of minutes to settle into their regulated output state (i.e. their initial output is higher, but not for long). As such, all my output and throw numbers are taken after 2 mins of continuous runtime (on 2x18650 AW Protected cells).

*Throw/Output Summary Chart:*






The ceiling bounce and lightbox tests confirm what the beamshots showed – that the M2XC4 has excellent throw and overall output.  In fact, it is the brightest and furthest throwing of the multi-emitter lights I've tested so far. This isn't entirely surprising, since 3x emitter lights are capable of higher outputs than the quad-die MC-E or P7 lights (as the individual emitters can be driven harder if properly heatsinked).

*Output/Runtime Comparison*

All 18650 runtimes were done on AW protected cells (2200mAh), except for the one run below labelled EAGLETAC which used the provided cells (2400mAh rated)






A couple of points here:

The M2XC4 regulation pattern is excellent on all batteries, perfectly flat at all levels initially
Output levels seem very evenly spaced - remarkably so, in fact.
Runtime is also excellent, but you’ll see that more clearly in the detailed comparisons below.
Note also the performance of the included EagleTac protected 18650 batteries. The 2400mAh rating appears to be believable relative to the 2200mAh-rated AW protected cells.

_*UPDATE 06/08/09:* I've just updated the graphs with 4xCR123A runtimes for all lights that support this configuration._














It’s nice to see the performance of a well-designed constant-current circuit - note the excellent runtimes at all levels with the M2XC4. :twothumbs

The M2XC4 particularly distinguishes itself on its Med and Lo modes – see how long it runs compared to the PWM-based JetBeam M1X and Olight M30 at these levels. oo: The M30 performance seems to be an anomaly among PWM-based lights, but there is no arguing the benefits of constant-current here.

Interestingly, when the batteries were nearing exhaustion on the Lo mode run, the light dropped to ~1/10 its lowest output, but maintained regulation at this level (except for the brief spike back to initial Lo output right before the protection circuits kicked in)






I haven’t done a lot 4xCR123A runtimes, but I think you can see there are no surprises here – the light performs as expected on max on CR123A. Sorry, I don’t plan to do any more of these 4x Duracell runs.  

As always, there is lot more than just output/runtime efficiency to consider when choosing a light. But efficiency-fiends will find much to like here. :devil:

*Potential Issues*

Waterproofing of the battery tube is a potential issue given the large number of screws holding the top and bottom of the battery tube handle in place. Note that the screws may not have been fully tightened at the factory, and can potentially loosen with time, so you should periodically check their tightness. The o-ring in the tailcap can be difficult to seat properly on the clicky switch tailcap.

Light design requires use of a battery carrier.

The lack of detents or marks on the rotary dial (and the variation in the precise spacing of each mode) can make it difficult to rapidly select the level you want without “overshooting” (i.e. you will commonly find yourself getting strobed when trying to access Turbo). It may also be difficult for people with small hands to rotate the ring smoothly one-handed (there seems to be some variability in its stiffness – although mine moves freely and easily).

Due to the way the rotary dial functions, the circuit needs to be drawing a small amount of power from the batteries at all times (i.e. to detect the movement of the magnet in real time). I haven’t measured the current draw on my sample, but there are other reports on the issue here on CPF. However, you can lock-out the light by unscrewing the head until the light shuts off (still has a few screw threads to hold the head in place, at least in my sample). Alternatively, with the clicky switch kit installed, you just need to keep the switch in the clicked off position.

Light is top-heavy in the M2XC4 format, likely due to a heavy-duty heatsink. I haven’t received the M2C4 for testing yet, but it has been reported that weight is reduced on this model.

*Preliminary Observations*

EagleTac has impressed since their arrival on the flashlight scene with a series of sturdy lights with straight-forward interfaces, good reflector designs and excellent output/runtime efficiency (and at competitive prices to boot ). Although there have been a few build issues on the initial production runs of several of their other lights, these were typically resolved in short order. I have no doubt EagleTac will similarly work quickly to smooth out some of the M2XC4’s rough edges (in fact, they have already demonstrated this through their participation here on CPF).

In principle, I find the rotary control dial an excellent and intuitive interface. It still needs a bit of tweaking in this case, but I see it as having a lot of potential. I am not so sure about the combination with the clicky switch (except maybe as a means to break the stand-by circuit, but you can also do that in the standard configuration by simply loosening head until the light can no longer be activated). I think the interface works best in its default non-clicky arrangement. But at least the option is there for users who want it.

What I am definitely impressed with is the beam pattern and output/runtime efficiency of the M2XC4. :thumbsup: The beam pattern is very smooth, with excellent throw and very high max output. It’s true the head is somewhat heavy, but I take this as a sign of the good heatsinking necessary to safely drive three emitters to such high output levels. Everything involves a trade-off, and I’m glad EagleTac has not skimped here. 

The selection of output levels is very good, and their runtime performance is excellent at all levels. This is the kind of circuit performance I’ve been waiting to see in the multi-emitter space. :twothumbs

The package included with the light is also above average, with a good quality holster designed to fit the light. Performance of their own branded protected 18650s (2400mAh rated capacity) was as expected. I am looking forward to seeing their diffuser/filter kit, as that should provide enhanced functionality, especially for close-range tasks.

Expectations for these M2 series lights were running very high here – understandably given EagleTac’s track record and their announced design choices for these lights. My impression is that EagleTac may have been trying to do too much all at once, by providing a novel UI, side-by-side battery tube design, and optional clicky switch (requiring modification to both the tailcap and the battery carrier), all in one initial release (and with 3 emitter/reflector options to boot!). 

But I think it’s important to keep in mind that the initial production of run of most new lights in this multi-emitter space exhibited issues that were fixed in subsequent releases (e.g. JetBeam M1X, Tiablo ACE). On the whole, I think EagleTac has delivered on its promise with the M2XC4. There are definitely some build kinks to work out (e.g. I would recommend at least making the base of the head and the handle out of a continuous piece of aluminum, to avoid one potential gap due to joining). But for now, I suggest that end users simply pay attention to o-ring placement and screw tightness to insure waterproofness. 

In the end, it is an impressive light to hold and use, with an excellent beam and outstanding circuit performance. But as always, I recommend everyone carefully consider what build features and design elements most matter to you, and a select a light accordingly. After all, you will have to carry around whatever you choose, so it should fit your intended uses.

_*UPDATE AUGUST 12, 2009:* My review of the second batch M2C4 (P7) is now up. Please see that review for an updated discussion of the build features of the M2-series lights._


----------



## MrGman (May 28, 2009)

*Re: EalgeTac M2XC4 Review: RUNTIMES, PHOTOS, BEAMSHOTS and more!*

Great review, very detailed. What is the make and model of your light meter? 

You may want to fix the title of your thread to say EagleTAC instead of "EalgeTac". 

Did you say you are going to get the other 2 models from EagleTac to also compare, the warm and the P7 versions?


----------



## Outdoors Fanatic (May 28, 2009)

*Re: EalgeTac M2XC4 Review: RUNTIMES, PHOTOS, BEAMSHOTS and more!*

Excellent review!

Thanks man.


----------



## DM51 (May 28, 2009)

Great review - eagerly awaited by many! The unusual side-by-side shape makes this a fairly compact light for its capability, but may take some getting used to. Very impressive regulation is evident from the graphs. 

IMO the Hall effect magnetic switch would have been better if it described a larger arc overall - I would have said 360 degrees continuous, except that might make it impossible to mod it to lock out the strobe setting as some might wish.

Moving to the Reviews section.


----------



## MichaelW (May 28, 2009)

You'd figure that a 180 degree sweep would allow for ambidextrous grip {which way is up}


----------



## selfbuilt (May 28, 2009)

MrGman said:


> Great review, very detailed. What is the make and model of your light meter?


For Lux throw measures and ceiling bounce, I use the cheapo Certo CT1330B that DX sells. I have verified linearity over most if its range, but of course its actual lux calibration is a huge unknown. :shrug: I have compared my lux readings to others posted online for the same model lights, and I would say mine are actually pretty close to the mean values I'm seeing posted here and elsewhere with higher quality meters. This is actually much better than most of the other DX meters I've seen quoted here - they seem to have a problem with considerable underreporting in many cases.

For the lightbox, I have a home-made setup using a photoresistive cell that I manually calibrated against a friend's light meter (sorry, don't know the model). But again, I have verified its linearity over a wide range, and only report relative output values (since every milk carton will be different anyway).



> You may want to fix the title of your thread to say EagleTAC instead of "EalgeTac".


Looks like someone already fixed that for me.  



> Did you say you are going to get the other 2 models from EagleTac to also compare, the warm and the P7 versions?


EagleTac originally asked me do all three, but I only know for sure that the P7 M2C4 is on its way to me soon. Hopefully they will send along the warm version M2XC4 so that I can compare outputs.



DM51 said:


> IMO the Hall effect magnetic switch would have been better if it described a larger arc overall - I would have said 360 degrees continuous, except that might make it impossible to mod it to lock out the strobe setting as some might wish.


A good point. I feel that ~110 degrees is a bit limited as well, but I think that 360 degrees would be too much given the size of the light and the limited number of modes (i.e. only 4 output modes and strobe). 

Something closer to ~180 I think would feel subjectively about right to my finger-tips, but I'm sure that experience would be different for others. My wife in fact found it hard to do the 110 degree arc given the size/weight of the light and her smaller hands - she had to do it two-handed!


----------



## Ryanrpm (May 28, 2009)

Very nice review selfbuilt! I agree with you, in that this light has amazing output and throw. It's a breath of fresh air to see new optics/emitters/battery configs.


----------



## richardcpf (May 28, 2009)

Excellent review!!

Thanks for the reading and runtime graphs... amazingly the flood of the tri emitter is larger brighther than the P7 competitors, which are supossed to be less throwy and floodier.

If I ever had to take only two of my lights to the nowhere, this will be the first one. The other one... I haven't found it yet. Guess I'll keep looking (buying).:twothumbs

Waiting for the P7/MCE/Multi-emitter shotout, should be the most amazing review ever done.


----------



## Mjolnir (May 28, 2009)

Those Eagletac batteries seem pretty impressive. 
It would have been nice if they had a ring that gave some tactile feedback when it switched modes, but this probably would have added to the cost. Failing that, they should at least have some sort of marking (like a laser etched line) on the head just above the ring, as well as some markings on the ring itself. Otherwise, it doesn't seem like you can select a mode before turning the light on (using the clicky) without blindly guessing. I believe eagletac is going to make some sort of laser etched ring available as an accessory, but I'm not sure how well that would work without something as reference on the head. 
I think they could have done without the strobe mode, or at least separate it somehow. If they weren't going to have tactile feedback for every mode change (some sort of "click"), they should have done something just for the strobe mode, so one would encounter some resistance before actually entering it.


----------



## selfbuilt (May 29, 2009)

Ryanrpm said:


> It's a breath of fresh air to see new optics/emitters/battery configs.


One problem with reviewing so many lights is that it's easy to get excited when something different or new crosses my desk.  But in this case, I think the M2 line does have a lot of potential - especially for its UI (which is relatively new and still requires some tweaking) and optics/circuit (which are already well optimized). I like the battery configuration in principle, but I think this is also an area where we will need to see some refinement (i.e. less or better quality screws, additional battery carrier for clicky, adjusted weight balance, etc.).



Mjolnir said:


> Failing that, they should at least have some sort of marking (like a laser etched line) on the head just above the ring, as well as some markings on the ring itself.


I agree, that's probably the easiest and cheapest fix. EagleTac has been responsive to dealing with CPF feedback on their other lights, so I wouldn't be surprised to see something like that cropping up soon.

The nice thing about reviewing models from different batches is that I will be able to quickly compare any incremental upgrades or fixes they introduce on the line. Patiently waiting for the next batch of M2C4s ...


----------



## DM51 (May 29, 2009)

Interesting extract from a post in another thread:


2sparky said:


> ... the next batch is being upgraded and should be in next week for shipment, then goes on to explain the "upgrades".
> 
> Better weight balance between the head and tail
> 
> ...


----------



## Daniel_sk (May 29, 2009)

I should have waited for the second batch.


----------



## selfbuilt (May 29, 2009)

DM51 said:


> Interesting extract from a post in another thread:


Thanks David. FYI, EagleTac has confirmed that my P7 M2C4 sample will be from the second batch, so I will be able to directly confirm any and all upgrades when it gets here.

They typically send me lights by EMS, so I should receive it fairly quickly once the release begins. In the interest of rapid public dissemination, I will post here all the build updates immediately, before I begin my runtime testing.


----------



## applevision (May 29, 2009)

Brilliant review, as always.

I want you to review ALL lights before I pick them up, please, *selfbuilt*!


----------



## DavesKam (May 30, 2009)

Hi Selfbuild,
It's excellent review. :thumbsup:
Do you test the body temperature at normal use? I've a little bit worry when used with li-ion rechargable battery in hot enviroment.


----------



## I came to the light... (May 30, 2009)

Thanks for the review :thumbsup:

You may want to test the M2 with AW 2200mah cells as well, as the EagleTac 18650s are quite a bit more than 11% (implied by rated capacities) better: http://light-reviews.com/forum/download/file.php?id=356 shows over 30% greater capacity.


----------



## selfbuilt (May 31, 2009)

DavesKam said:


> Do you test the body temperature at normal use? I've a little bit worry when used with li-ion rechargable battery in hot enviroment.


No, I don't standardly test for heat. Hard to interpret with a simple thermal probe. Runtimes on max are not appreciably different from other lights of this class, so it doesn't seem like it's placing the cells under any greater load. I wouldn't think the M2XC4 is any worse than any other.



I came to the light... said:


> You may want to test the M2 with AW 2200mah cells as well, as the EagleTac 18650s are quite a bit more than 11% (implied by rated capacities) better: http://light-reviews.com/forum/download/file.php?id=356 shows over 30% greater capacity.


I suspect in Mev's case his AWs have lost a lot of capacity. All my runtimes above are based 2200mAh AW, except for the one run with the 2400mAh Eagletac batteries. As you will see above, the Eagletacs showed about ~14% greater capacity in my testing (Eagletac 1hr 31min on max, vs 1hr 20min for the AW 2200mAh cells). Note as well that my AW 2200mAh 18650s are not new, and I know they have lost some capacity (although fairly minor so far). Mev's runtimes show a lot less on his AW cells (his 53 mins vs my 80mins), despite comparable 4xCR123A runtimes (his 78mins vs my 80mins). So it seems likely that its his specific 18650 cells that have lost a lot of their original capacity.

All batteries wear down with time and use. I frequently retest by Li-ion batteries in a standard testing regimen - once they drop below ~85% of original capacity, I toss them and buy new. I have to tell you I've gone through a *lot* of RCR cells - those high drain runs (>2C) are murder on the batteries long-term storage capacity.


----------



## toneloe (May 31, 2009)

Do you know any specs. on their electronics on reverse battery protection, their site only list 
" C2800 LED Driver : Physical battery reverse polarity protection is also implemented on the aluminum re-enforced battery tray to prevent reverse battery installation. "
I don't see hows that possible with their battery tray design.


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 1, 2009)

toneloe said:


> Do you know any specs. on their electronics on reverse battery protection, their site only list
> " C2800 LED Driver : Physical battery reverse polarity protection is also implemented on the aluminum re-enforced battery tray to prevent reverse battery installation. "
> I don't see hows that possible with their battery tray design.


I don't know the details, but use of the driver model number and the word "also" implies there is circuit reverse polarity protection.

As for the last part, I think all they mean is that the battery tray doesn't activate the light when placed in the wrong orientation. I don't see any sort of physical battery reverse polarity protection within the tray itself. For that, the circuit reverse polarity protection is what would matter.


----------



## 1996alnl (Jun 6, 2009)

Excellent review Selfbuilt!

I've come to the conclusion that when it comes time for me to purchase a new light i'll wait until i read up a review on it from you.

Thanks for contributing,we all appreciate it.


----------



## andylondon (Jun 6, 2009)

Thanks for the review!

I am looking forward to buying the M2XC4 cool white from the second run, and testing it with my new AW 18650 2600mAH cells.


----------



## faucon (Jun 6, 2009)

Super review---very comprehensive. Thanks! I have the M2C4 and don't have a problem with the balance. The balance point with batteries loaded is right where the grip joins the head---just slightly "top heavy" when using a tactical grip but no problem at all in real use. I use the momentary feature frequently so I've installed the clicky, and like it a lot. I've also marked the levels and the selector ring, so I can choose the level I want, or switch quickly, with the light off or on.


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 6, 2009)

1996alnl said:


> Excellent review Selfbuilt! I've come to the conclusion that when it comes time for me to purchase a new light i'll wait until i read up a review on it from you.


:laughing: That might be a bit extreme - but glad you enjoyed the review. 


faucon said:


> Super review---very comprehensive. Thanks! I have the M2C4 and don't have a problem with the balance. The balance point with batteries loaded is right where the grip joins the head---just slightly "top heavy" when using a tactical grip but no problem at all in real use.


A fair assessment. I think if they manage to reduce the weight of the head slightly, it will help with the overall feel and remove any niggling perception of top-heavyness.

Looking forward to my second generation M2C4 ...


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 8, 2009)

FYI, I've just updated the graphs with 4xCR123A runtimes for all lights that support this configuration. 







Hit your brower re-load if you don't see the new traces. :wave:

The runtimes graphs have also been updated across my recent reviews in this class (i.e. Tiablo ACE-G, JetBeam M1X and Olight M30).


----------



## Justin Case (Jun 10, 2009)

Are the R2s wired in parallel? Did you measure or notice any differences in output or Vf for the emitters?


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 10, 2009)

Justin Case said:


> Are the R2s wired in parallel? Did you measure or notice any differences in output or Vf for the emitters?


Don't know how the emitters are wired, and I can't directly measure Vf. However, I have looked directly at their output (i.e. on low, reflected off glass) and I can't see any difference visually.

For kicks, I just tested it out on my light meter by holding the light close enough to form 3 distinct circles exactly the same size as the light sensor's diffuser cup. I then I rotated the light to measure each emitter's output roughly independently from the others. The max difference I measured was less than 10% among the 3 emitters


----------



## Helmut.G (Jun 10, 2009)

there was a pic of the head disassembled some time ago and I'm sure that the LEDs were in parallel.


----------



## Tohuwabohu (Jun 10, 2009)

Helmut.G said:


> there was a pic of the head disassembled some time ago and I'm sure that the LEDs were in parallel.


Here is a link to the post with the disassembled head: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2956552&postcount=19.


----------



## learnyee (Jun 11, 2009)

selfbuilt said:


>



Hi selfbuilt, thanks for the superb and very informative review. I was a little confused with your graph above on the relative output between M2XZ4-C, Lumapower MVP P7 and MVP Creex3, compared to the manufacturer stated lumen output, MVP P7 would have higher output compare to its Creex3 counterpart in medium and low mode. Will you be able to clarify on that?
And I was wondering will you be able to rank the M2CX4-C, Lumapower MVP P7 and MVP Creex3, which is the best throw and flood since you had review all these 3?

Lee


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 11, 2009)

learnyee said:


> Hi selfbuilt, thanks for the superb and very informative review. I was a little confused with your graph above on the relative output between M2XZ4-C, Lumapower MVP P7 and MVP Creex3, compared to the manufacturer stated lumen output, MVP P7 would have higher output compare to its Creex3 counterpart in medium and low mode. Will you be able to clarify on that?


Manufacturer specs need to be taken with a grain of salt.  In my testing, the MVP P7 Med/Lo is just slightly less than the 3xCree. Both are fairly similar to the Med/Lo of the M2XC4.



> And I was wondering will you be able to rank the M2CX4-C, Lumapower MVP P7 and MVP Creex3, which is the best throw and flood since you had review all these 3?


Throw is easiest to say - the M2XC4 throws further than the Lumapower lights (which are roughly similar to each other0.

As for flood, that depends what you mean by it. The MVP P7 has the widest spillbeam of all the lights, the MVP 3xCree has the narrowest. But for me, flood is also about brightness of the spill relative to the hotspot. In that sense, the MVP 3XCree has the most even overall beam pattern, thanks to its narrow spill and lower throw. I suppose the M2XC4 might be an overall good balance if you were to only get one light. :shrug:

To be honest, the only real flood light is the Olight M30 with included diffuser. Now that is true flood. :thumbsup:


----------



## picard (Jun 12, 2009)

I am concerned about the plastic case. Would this plastic crack in cold weather? 

would the case survive a drop on the floor without cracking ?


----------



## selfbuilt (Jun 12, 2009)

picard said:


> I am concerned about the plastic case. Would this plastic crack in cold weather? would the case survive a drop on the floor without cracking ?


The body and head are made of aluminum. The only plastic (polycarbonate) is the grip ring and optional clicky tailcap, both of which are somewhat soft feeling and should survive deformation and impact well.


----------



## picard (Jun 13, 2009)

selfbuilt said:


> The body and head are made of aluminum. The only plastic (polycarbonate) is the grip ring and optional clicky tailcap, both of which are somewhat soft feeling and should survive deformation and impact well.




oh ok. thanks for the info.


----------



## Kiessling (Jun 14, 2009)

I have doubts on the selector ring as well. I don't think it is made to be dropped, unfortunately.
bernie


----------



## brightnorm (Jun 15, 2009)

A couple of weeks ago I was walking on the sidewalk at night holding my M2XC4, tripped and fell flat on my face. I broke the fall with my hands and the light hit hard with a loud SMACK! I feared the worst but the light worked perfectly, the notoriously tiny screws held, the ring turned smoothly and the only visible damage was a few very small dings on one end of the protruding bottom handle edge and on the head directly above the ring.

I am impressed and reassured. (unless I was just lucky)

Brightnorm


----------



## strinq (Jun 15, 2009)

brightnorm said:


> A couple of weeks ago I was walking on the sidewalk at night holding my M2XC4, tripped and fell flat on my face. I broke the fall with my hands and the light hit hard with a loud SMACK! I feared the worst but the light worked perfectly, the notoriously tiny screws held, the ring turned smoothly and the only visible damage was a few very small dings on one end of the protruding bottom handle edge and on the head directly above the ring.
> 
> I am impressed and reassured. (unless I was just lucky)
> 
> Brightnorm


 
Makes me feel better knowing that. Overall it does seem that it's a little more fragile compared to the more conventionally shaped lights. Will be receiving mine at the end of the month, gonna scare the dogs in my area.


----------



## GarageBoy (Jul 12, 2009)

Any reviews on the P7 version yet?


----------



## jirik_cz (Jul 12, 2009)

I have some long range beamshots of all M2 versions, TK40, M1X, ACE, M30, L950M and some other flashlights on my led flashlights preview  
(czech language only )


----------



## selfbuilt (Jul 12, 2009)

GarageBoy said:


> Any reviews on the P7 version yet?


EagleTac is supposed to be sending me one to review.


----------



## brightnorm (Jul 13, 2009)

jirik_cz said:


> I have some long range beamshots of all M2 versions, TK40, M1X, ACE, M30, L950M and some other flashlights on my led flashlights preview
> *(czech language only* )


Some of the translation sites (Babelfish, etc) don't do Czech, but this one does:

http://www.freetranslation.com/

Brightnorm


----------



## SunFire900 (Jul 15, 2009)

O.K.......I have held off as long as I can stand. I pre-ordered the M2XC4 (cool) and received it just over two months ago. I still think it is one of the most overall unique lights out there...especially for the price, so I am not here to bash it, but to tell everyone about a peculiarity I have experienced several times since it arrived.

On occasion, after running the light for a few seconds or minutes on turbo and then returning to low, the light will enter a strange "moon mode" where the brightness (on low) is about the same as, or a little bit dimmer than the Olight M20 on low. It is so low that you can look directly into the LED's. This can happen while the light is cold or warm. It makes no difference.

Now, this is good, when I move the ring to the MID level or HI position.....nothing happens. The light remains in this very low glow mode. But, and this happens every time, when I go to Turbo everything is fine again...until I return to the Lo position. It goes from Turbo to Hi to Mid and then back to "moon" mode!! It's nuts. I know.

I am wondering if any one else has seen this phenomenon in their lights.

Most of the time the light works perfectly and I can always go from off to turbo and back down from turbo to the Hi or Mid level even when it gets "stuck" in this super low mode from time to time. 

If I find out that I am the only one to experience this, then I will start buying lottery tickets again!


----------



## strinq (Jul 15, 2009)

Never experienced this. Has always functioned perfectly so far.


----------



## Xe54 (Aug 10, 2009)

Tohuwabohu said:


> Here is a link to the post with the disassembled head: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2956552&postcount=19.



That picture makes me a bit concerned about what technique is being used to ensure full thermal contact between the center pad under the emitter substrate and the heatsink. It appears some white adhesive is used to tie the emitters down. There are two possibilities: 

1. The clearance needed to solder the wires under the emitter spaces the emitter off the heatsink somewhat. This would be unacceptable, as no adhesive would provide low enough thermal impedance with a gap equivalent to any realistic wire diameter. If this is what's going on (highly unlikely) the emitters wouldn't last very long.

2. The little recesses milled into the metal mass have "pads" protruding (but which unfortunately we can't directly see without removing an emitter), onto which the emitters are adhered. The milled recesses provide clearance for the wires so that the wires don't interfere with seating the emitters on the pads.

I suspect the 2nd case is the actuality, and closer study of the photo leans me strongly in that direction. Still, having read the data (specifically the thermal management/solder instructions) of these LEDs several times, my sense is that flashlight builders rarely achieve optimum thermal contact.

Since we probably only ever put a handful of continuous hours on them, we get away with it. Or rather, they just don't get used long enough to notice the accelerated lumen decline that results from overdrive and/or pushing the junction temp. to the limit or above.

I think the ideal design would involve metallic bonding of the thermal pad to a large copper PCB area, with extensive thermal vias to conduct the heat to a lower layer for contact with a solid mass.


----------



## berry580 (Oct 14, 2009)

My M2XC4's rubber on the selector ring is already starting to wear out after less than 2 hrs of handling.
I just got the light yesterday, and no, I didn't mistreat it, all in normal testing/usage.

Anyone else noticing the same issue as my light?


----------



## Steve Curtis (Oct 15, 2009)

Yes , mine is doing the same after less time than yours.
very poor :thumbsdow


----------



## berry580 (Oct 15, 2009)

Steve Curtis said:


> Yes , mine is doing the same after less time than yours.
> very poor :thumbsdow


Well i haven't been actually using it continuously for 2 hrs straight, more like its been in my eyesight for 2hrs. I probably had actual physical contact (with my hand ) with it for less than an hr. lol

hmm... Eagletac never gave me any good impressions due to its "Chinese TRYING to be American" marketing, until I first had the M2XC4 in my hand. i.e. it gave me a good initial impression, which is short lived. Now its image is back down, except lower than it originally was.

Built quality wise they're DEFINITELY inferior to other premium Chinese flashlight brands.

Just on the side note, the threads are extremely rough/tight in certain sections (bad machining) between the SS bezel and the head.:thumbsdow
I expected a little more from a $150 light (although i paid it at a discount).

Has anyone raised these issues up? I have yet to see anything about it.


----------



## blacktop711 (Oct 27, 2009)

*Hotspot size vs Raptor 2*

Can awayone estimate for me what the size of the EagleTac M2XC4 would be relative to a Jetbeam Raptor 2?

Thx..


----------



## HKJ (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: Hotspot size vs Raptor 2*



blacktop711 said:


> Can awayone estimate for me what the size of the EagleTac M2XC4 would be relative to a Jetbeam Raptor 2?
> 
> Thx..



Will this do:


----------



## maxilux (Oct 27, 2009)

Here you can see some more Beamshots:
http://schiermeier.biz/html/eagletac__m2c4-m2xc4.html


----------



## blacktop711 (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: Hotspot size vs Raptor 2*



HKJ said:


> Will this do:



I'm sorry, I omitted the word "hot spot."


----------



## blacktop711 (Oct 27, 2009)

maxilux said:


> Here you can see some more Beamshots:
> http://schiermeier.biz/html/eagletac__m2c4-m2xc4.html



Thanks for the link. Do you have any beamshots of the Jetbeam or the Olight?

Thx...


----------



## berry580 (Mar 11, 2010)

Not sure whether its a coincident or good quality control, but with a pair of pink Ultrafire 18650, i managed to get 1hr 22mins of runtime on turbo before the thing shuts down, quite close to Selfbuilt's 1hr 20 mins to 50%

What's worth noting is that after the light shut down, about half an hour later i took the batteries out and it turns out one still have 3.5V and the other still has 3.7V left, and i put them back in and the light still has the ability to fire back way up to the Turbo mode.

Amazing!


----------



## skyfire (Mar 13, 2010)

another great review!

may i ask if you would recommend this light in warm tint, or the catapult?

ive never been a fan of eagletac for some reason. but i do like this light, eagletac went in a different direction than most, and i feel they created something special.

anyhow, for a bright outdoors light, i want neutral or warm tint LED. and it seems my only 2 options are this, and catapult, also i dont really like the warm M1X because of its donut and availability. i really like the catapult, but because of its leaky grease problem, and it might not be warm enough, im seriously considering this light. (4sevens is making it hard to keep waiting for their maelstroms. and i havent heard anything about warm tint option maelstroms yet).

also, will this light work with AW flat-top 2600 18650?

anyone with some insight on these subjects would be greatly appreciated!


----------



## forexer (May 2, 2010)

*Comparing build quality, price, OTF lumens, throw (lux at good distance), regulation, tint and feel*;

How does M2xc4 match up against the thrunight catapult SST-50? Please lets me know, i'm going to get either one. The bad comments on this thread about the m2xc4 are making me lean more to the catapult. 

Forexer


----------



## cy (Oct 26, 2010)

got a M2C4 ... can hardly use it due the piece of sh*t strobe design. 
everytime you turn it on, almost impossible to turn on without strobing. 

which can give a king size headache... making this light all but un-usable. 

what's the fix for this light?


----------



## Steve'O (Oct 26, 2010)

CY, it sound's to me like you have an older design of that light. 

They changed the UI a long time ago.

On the new version the strobe is hidden, you can only access strobe by turning the power ring quickly from HIGH to STAND-BY then back to HIGH again.


----------



## selfbuilt (Oct 26, 2010)

cy said:


> got a M2C4 ... can hardly use it due the piece of sh*t strobe design.
> everytime you turn it on, almost impossible to turn on without strobing.
> which can give a king size headache... making this light all but un-usable.
> what's the fix for this light?


Yes, the original interface had strobe at the end of the dial, after Turbo. This made it difficult to reliably access Turbo without accidentally "overshooting" into strobe.

Newer lights have a revised interface where Strobe is hidden. FYI, the M2-series lights have all been replaced with the improved M3-series build reviewed here.

For those with the original M2, I seem to recall a thread where people disassembled the head and put a jury-rigged stopper on the control ring, preventing it from turning all the way. Sorry, can't remember the details, but a search should pull it up. Good luck!


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Oct 26, 2010)

Yep, that's what I did. Just used a piece of an old credit card and glued it in place as a shim to stop it before it gets to strobe.


----------



## brightnorm (Oct 27, 2010)

AardvarkSagus said:


> Yep, that's what I did. Just used a piece of an old credit card and glued it in place as a shim to stop it before it gets to strobe.


 
I didn't even have to glue mine in. Just add a little more lube so the ring slips over it easily and it will not slip out of place. Even though I have the new M3's including the XR-E R2 version I still enjoy using the M2xC4. It remains a great light, one of the best of its kind in my opinion.

Brightnorm


----------



## Helmut.G (Oct 27, 2010)

there was also another hack that I did, my light worked very well ever since.
you had to open the head of the light and de-solder one of the reed-switches that recognize the dial position and solder it back shifted by a few millimetres
there was a tutorial thread, I'm gonna search for it.

edit: found it, look here:
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/231907


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Oct 27, 2010)

I looked at doing that, but my sensors were in pretty much the correct place.


----------

