# ITP SA1, SA2, SC1, SC2 Round-Up Review (XP-E R2): RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS and more!



## selfbuilt (Mar 17, 2010)

_*Reviewer's Note: *The ITP SA1/SA2/SC1/SC2 were provided for review jointly by Battery Junction and Going Gear._

*Warning: Even more pic heavy than usual! This is will be a round-up review of all four lights. oo:*

*Specifications for SA/SC family, according to BatteryJunction.com and GoingGear.com:*

LED Type: Cree XP-E R2
Function: Low-Med-High-Strobe and Digital Infinite Beam Adjustment Output Levels
Finish: HA Type III
Reflector: Smooth Reflector
Lens: Anti-shattering ultra clear lens, anti-scratching and anti-slip
Water and Dust Resistant to IP68
Switch: Tail switch for turning light on/off and Side switch for changing modes
Mil-spec: MIL-STD-810F
SA1: 1 x Alkaline, 1 x NI-MH, 1 x 14500 Battery, Size and Weight: L 107mm (4.21’’) x D 26.5mm (1.04’’), 67g (Excluding Battery)
SA2: 2 x Alkaline, 2 x NI-MH Batteries, Size and Weight: L 156.5mm (6.16’’) x D 26.5mm (1.04’’), 86g (Excluding Batteries)
SC1: 1 x CR123A, 1 x RCR123A, 1 x 16340 Battery, Size and Weight: L 90.5mm (3.56’’) x D 26.5mm (1.04’’), 54g (Excluding Battery)
 SC2: 2 x CR123A, 2 x RCR123A, 2 x 16340, 1 x 17670 Battery, Size and Weight:
L 124.5mm (4.90’’) x D 26.5mm (1.04’’), 69g (Excluding Batteries)
MSRP: ~$40 (all models)







The SA/SC series are replacements for ITP’s original entries into the LED flashlight world, the C7/C8/C9/C10 lights. Please see my earlier reviews for details of those lights. 

This will be a round-up review of all four new SA/SC lights. In the first part of the review, I will provide a general overview of the common build features and design. In the second part, I will provide detailed output/runtimes and size comparisons for each light, with some general comments at the end.

_*Note:* The SC2 will be shown as a representative sample in the pics below._






In keeping with their budget status, the ITP SA/SC lights come in fairly basic packaging – but include a reasonable number of extras. These include a decent quality carrying pouch with closing flap, simple wrist lanyard, replacement o-rings and low profile tailcap button, and a reverse clicky tail switch. Also included is a warranty card and manual. Note the pocket clip is built-in to the light.

_*UPDATE:* As several members have pointed out, the replacement switch and boot cap are a reverse-clicky with lower profile, allowing tailstanding._










Fit and finish were good on all my samples, with no flaws in the black type-III hard anodizing. Identification labels are sharp and clear on all samples (something that wasn’t always the case on my early sample C7/C8/C9 lights). 






The attached stainless steel clip and checkered body pattern help with grip. I found all samples reasonably comfortable to hold in the hand. Note the presence of the front switch, on the head above the clip. This switch is a reverse clicky, and is used to control output modes. The rear tailcap (forward-clicky) controls on-off - see UI discussion below. 










Tail screw threads are anodized for tailcap lock-out. :thumbsup: Note the lights cannot tailstand in its default form with the forward clicky. However, you can swap in the reverse clicky switch and low profile boot cover (included in the package) to restore tailstanding at the expense of momentary-on.

Unlike the earlier C-series, the head is not user-removable. Here’s a shot down the battery/body tube:






Similar to the budget MC-E-based ITP A6 Polestar, the positive contact surface is simply a piece of metal that has been folded-over. This is not particularly impressive. :sigh: There is certainly no physical reverse-polarity protection with this setup.










Unlike the earlier 2-stage reflector of ITP C-series and Olight T- and I-series lights, these new SA/SC lights have a smooth reflector that is not as deep. Actually, there seems to be very fine concentric rings all along the reflector, although these are subtle. They are likely there to help smooth out the beam somewhat. 

These lights all use the new standard Cree XP-E emitter, with a R2 output bin (no tint bin reported). For those of you not familiar with tint bins, please see my Colour tint comparison and the summary LED tint charts found here. 

For beamshot comparisons, I’ve chosen just the SA1 and SC2 below. All lights are on Max on either 1xSanyo Eneloop or 1xAW protected 14670/17670/18650 as appropriate, about 0.5 meters from a white wall. 



























Note that I do not have an ITP C10 to directly compare, so I’ve used the Olight Infinitum I20 for the second set of beamshots above. The I20 uses the same reflector and similar circuit as the C10, so is directly comparable.

First thing you will notice is that the beam pattern is completely different from the earlier ITP/Olight series lights. In fact, this new emitter/reflector setup produces a pattern that is very similar to the 4Sevens Quark series – a medium intensity hotspot with a very wide and relatively dim spillbeam.

The reflector seems to do a good job of producing a smooth transition from hotspot to spill without rings. 

*User Interface*

The SA/SC series have an updated interface. Similar to other lights that use dual switches, the rear tailcap switch controls on-off and the front head-mounted switch controls output modes.

Default rear switch is a forward clicky, so you can press for momentary-on, click for lock-on. :thumbsup: You can substitute the reverse clicky replacement switch and low-rise boot cover if you prefer to have a tailstanding option (note that this would prevent momentary signaling, though).

Front switch is a reverse clicky, and works in two ways. To change between preset output modes, press and release the switch repeatedly until you get the mode you want. Sequence is Lo-Med-Hi-Strobe, in repeating order. The light has a memory mode, and will remember the last setting upon re-activation.

To run through a continuously variable ramp, press and hold the front switch. Initially, the light will ramp from Lo to Hi, and back down from Hi to Lo, in a repeating fashion. Release the switch to select the desired output level. The variable output feature has a separate memory mode, and will retain the relative brightness setting the next time you initiate a ramp. Note the ramp speed is fairly quick (i.e. ~3 secs, see ramp graphs for each model below).

Note that the preset Lo and Hi modes correspond roughly to Min and Max on the continuously variable ramp.






Strobe frequency was measured at just under 10Hz.

Consistent with earlier ITP/Olight continuously-variable lights, I was unable to detect the PWM frequency.  The lights definitely use PWM, but the freq must be above >30kHz or so, as that is the upper detection limit in my setup. You won’t be able to detect it by eye.

*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, except for the extended run Lo/Min modes (i.e. >12 hours) which are done without cooling.

Throw values are the square-root of lux measurements taken at 1 meter from the lens, using a light meter.

*Note:* _Effective January 2010, all CR123A runtimes are now performed solely on Titanium Innovations batteries sponsored by a BatteryJunction.com. You can compare the generally excellent performance of these CR123A cells relative to the Duracell/Surefire cells used in all my erlier reviews here. I have marked all the new runtimes of lights with Titanium Innovations CR123As on the graphs with an "*". _

*Size Comparison Pics, Throw/Output Summary Charts, Runtime Graphs, and Ramping Graphs will be provided for each respective light below.*

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

*SA1 (1xAA) Comparison*





















































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

*SA2 (2xAA) Comparison*









































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

*SC1 (1xR/CR123A) Comparison*

















































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

*SC2 (2xR/CR123A) Comparison*
























































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

*Potential Issues*

Build quality is consistent with price, and is lower than more expensive offerings. Overall, the SA/SC family build is similar to the ITP A6 Polestar, but without the battery carrier (i.e. also have a front-mounted switch, relatively thin bodies, and a simple contact surface for the positive battery terminal).

The memory modes for the preset levels and the continuous ramp are independent of one another. While some may like this, it means you may be in for a visual shock if you have them set to widely different extremes. For example, if you leave the continuous ramp set at Max and the preset to Lo, when next you engage the ramp from the preset Lo it will jump immediately to Max and start to work down (i.e. it will not start ramping from the Lo preset you were on). As such, I found myself making sure that I kept the continuously variable mode saved to a relatively low level before switching to preset modes, to avoid switching back to something potentially too bright at a later time.

Min/Lo output mode is not as low as other continuously-variable lights (i.e. lacks a true Lo/Moonlight mode)

*General Observations*

I would consider these SA/SC series lights to be modern build replacements for the “budget-level” original ITP C7/C8/C9/C10 series. 

In the context of general-purpose use, there are certainly a number of significant upgrades here: Higher output bin emitter (R2), more useful general-purpose beam (i.e. wider spillbeam, no rings), better checkering and clip for enhanced grip for carry, traditional head-mounted switch for output mode control, and the dual-control option of preset output modes or continuously-variable ramp. This last point is particularly impressive in a “budget” offering. oo:

Some of this comes down to simple preference – while I liked the original ITP/Olight head-twist mechanism for the ramp, I know most users prefer a button control. So kudos to them on the head-mounted switch (FYI, Mrs. Selfbuilt definitely prefers this new front button over the older twist interface ). And although it requires you to switch hand positions, at least it doesn’t clutter the tailcap switch control (i.e. momentary is available). :thumbsup: And they thoughtfully included a reverse-clicky switch and low-rise boot cover, if you want to restore tailstanding ability (at the expense of momentary signaling, of course).

What hasn’t changed is the tailcap lock-out or the excellent overall circuit efficiency. Performance is quite good at all levels tested. The dynamic range of the light is slightly reduced (i.e. it doesn't go as Lo as the previous series did). Note that the ramping speed has also increased considerably. Many users here seem to like this sort of fast ramp, but I personally prefer a more gradual one like the original C-series. :shrug:

Personally, I would like to see a removable clip option and a better contact surface for the positive battery terminal. Ideally, the option to swap heads on different bodies (where appropriate) would have been nice, but I guess something had to go to keep costs down. :shrug:

Also, while most will likely applaud the separate memory controls for preset levels and the continuous ramp, I would prefer to see the ramp start from whatever output level I am currently on when coming from the presets (i.e. instead of defaulting to what is in the continuous ramp memory mode and going from there). Oh, and have I mentioned that a lower Lo mode would really be nice? 

But these issues aside, there is certainly no arguing with what you get here for the price. I see these lights doing very well for the general user, as a front head-mounted button is very intuitive for most people. And if you don’t like seeing strobe in the preset sequence, there’s always the continuously-variable mode for you to use. 

All in all, a nice package falling into a fairly unique price/performance niche (i.e. higher-end budget category/lower-end flashaholic category).


----------



## vali (Mar 17, 2010)

Great review, as always.:twothumbs


----------



## TooManyGizmos (Mar 17, 2010)

Very nice and detailed review ..... for all 4 lights.

Selfbuilt , as Thanks for your reviews .... I'm sending $10.oo to your Battery Fund.

I agree about the clips , odd and almost useless on the SC1 .(light so short)
It's only usefull for the brim of a ball cap.
Would have made for better clip carry on SC1 & SA1 if they had made a full circular ring (like a washer) go between the body and tailcap. (removable of course) Clips need to be near the end of a light - not in the middle.

Your "Throw Max" figure of 76 , on single cell Li Ion , was right up there among the highest figures. That proves why I've been telling other members that it's a good medium range thrower, for such a tiny light.

And it comes with a second (low profile) switch and boot , which allows it to tailstand.

IMO , they have great runtimes , especially using L91 in the SA1 (2&1/2 hr on Hi w/1 cell). And medium mode really stretches out the times.(Eneloop's are good too) ( Alkies are not so good)

If they could make the infinate brightness go as low as a moon mode ... yet keep the low/med/Hi presets as they are , that would be ideal !

I'm very happy with my SA1 & SC1 . They are a little too fat with 1" head for EDC , but easily pocketable for dog walks/short hikes and put out a lotta light with med. throw. They do have a hole in the endcap for lanyard attachment . I prefer the momentary end switch on mine . I got em as soon as they were available (12-4-09) and I've been recommending em since.

Thanks for the review which backs up with tech. data what I've been saying all along.

They're worth the 40 bucks ! .......... Good tool box ~ Glove box lights !


----------



## csa (Mar 17, 2010)

Nice review! Good to see quality reviews of budget lights.


----------



## alfreddajero (Mar 17, 2010)

The light will tailstand if you install the reverse clicky with included rubber boot. Once again your reviews are a pleasure to read.


----------



## Burgess (Mar 17, 2010)

Excellent Review, SelfBuilt ! 

:goodjob::kewlpics::thanks:
_


----------



## Surnia (Mar 18, 2010)

I'm very surprised by its efficiency and output numbers, very close to the eagletacs, and exceeding the quarks in the AA category! 

excellent review as always selfbuilt, I'm very thankful for your work!

*edit* If you don't mind a further question, when you activate the ramping mode, does it hold the light level you set it at for a short time before ramping, or does it immediately start ramping?


----------



## strinq (Mar 18, 2010)

Awesome, been waiting for a review on this light.
Good job!


----------



## alfreddajero (Mar 19, 2010)

I got the light 2 weeks after it hit the online shops and i was impressed with what it came with. Wish they made one with on OP reflector or have an option to get one.


----------



## jhc37013 (Mar 20, 2010)

I have been waiting on a review for these lights I probably won't get one from the lack of removable clip but from every thing I gather in your great review I feel comfortable enough to recommend them as budget lights in alternative to Quark and Eagletac. Thanks


----------



## alfreddajero (Mar 21, 2010)

For the price you just cant beat what you get. I was surprised when i got mine. I put a split ring and swivel for the lanyard since most of the time the lanyard gets cut by the sharp edges of the holes. I also used a cutting wheel for the slot so it would be able to tailstand.

http://www.mediafire.com/?gnzm2wjjyzy
<a href='http://www.mediafire.com/?nozkdiocygx'>http://www.mediafire.com/?nozkdiocygx</a>


----------



## alfreddajero (Mar 21, 2010)

For the price you just cant beat what you get. The only think that i didnt like is the holes for the lanyard, i put in a split ring and swivel then attached the lanyard, i also used a cutting wheel to put in a slot for the split ring to get into so the light would still be able to tailstand. I will have to post pics up in a bit since Imageshack is being a pita right now.


----------



## alfreddajero (Mar 21, 2010)

Here are the pics......


----------



## Dioni (Mar 23, 2010)

Wow.. there is a huge amount of work here! 

Thanks for the reviews! :thumbsup:


----------



## Surnia (Apr 16, 2010)

Alright I just picked the SA2 up from Battery Junction (thanks MattK!), and its absolutely great as a bike light. I run it slightly above medium, and it completely swamps out the Cateye Uno (which from what I can tell, runs on a 5mm behind their opticube). Was riding on the sidewalk (the road was a touch too busy, and this was a local park area anyway), and it made a guy jump (I think he thought i was a car or something, its just crazy bright).

Beam pattern is excellent for riding IMO, the hotspot throws nicely forwards (I could have it point further up, but at its current setting it matches car headlights in angle, as to not disturb drivers too much), while the dim spill works out great right in front of the bike. 

minor battery rattle with mine, but solved with a paper shim.. also the clip's a little loose, lack of ability to remove it is also preventing me from tightening it up again.
Thanks Selfbuilt for the review + lux measurements, this is turning out to be a great budget light! I eagerly await your P20 Mk II reviews, as one will likely be a sister light to this one...


----------



## selfbuilt (Apr 17, 2010)

Surnia said:


> Beam pattern is excellent for riding IMO, the hotspot throws nicely forwards (I could have it point further up, but at its current setting it matches car headlights in angle, as to not disturb drivers too much), while the dim spill works out great right in front of the bike.
> 
> minor battery rattle with mine, but solved with a paper shim.. also the clip's a little loose, lack of ability to remove it is also preventing me from tightening it up again.
> Thanks Selfbuilt for the review + lux measurements, this is turning out to be a great budget light! I eagerly await your P20 Mk II reviews, as one will likely be a sister light to this one...


Thanks for the "field" report. 

These are definitely excellent "budget lights", given their feature set. I still have a fondness for the original ITP C-series/Olight I-series interface, but I can see these SA/SC-series lights as being more popular with most users. And being driven a bit harder than those earlier lights probably doesn't hurt with most either.


----------



## Monocrom (Apr 18, 2010)

An excellent review as always. Thank you. :twothumbs


----------



## Surnia (May 4, 2010)

More SA2 observational fun!

Decided to do a runtime to actually find out how long this thing will run at medium... 
- did a 45 min bike ride at night
- a week later, I set it to high for about 5 mins, then it got warm and decided to try a runtime test at medium
- did a 4.5hr or so continuous run (as I slept)
- continued a few hours later, ran for another 2hr 45min before dropping into low
Total runtime in medium was about 8 hrs, give or take a bit of error... Quite excellent performance in my book.

Now the interesting part is.... The light seems to set a brightness limit when it detects the batteries are low on remaining power. I pulled the cells and let them cool before charging, but forgot to charge them. This allowed me to check ramp capabilities and a strange observation... Plugging in some ancient Alkalines (going on 7 years, still have power in them and have not leaked! exceptionally old radio shack heavy duties that are surprisingly light...), the light would fire up in low and medium, but not access high. The strobe also ran quite contently in medium brightness. Similar occurred with the Eneloops, with the cutoff occurring on low (as they were quite sufficiently depleted). There were 3 modes and 1 strobe mode with the button presses, but they all were firing at the low mode brightness (including the strobe).

I then took the rested (but still depleted) Eneloops to check out the ramping capabilities. Turned it on and found high worked again. However, it lasted about half a minute then dropped into medium. I found this interesting, as it chose to drop into a regulated medium mode, where the strobe also dropped into medium mode. I tried ramping and this was even MORE amusing.

I already established that the light only went up to medium in the previous test, but what would happen with ramping? Apparently the exact same thing would occur. Activating the ramp, it began at last memory point (which I set slightly brighter than medium) and began ramping up for a fraction of a second then dropped back into medium. I kept holding the button (so the ramp programming was still running) to see what would happen, and sure enough once it passed the medium level on its decreasing ramp, it started ramping down. Essentially, the ramping coding is still working (still takes the full 7 seconds to ramp up and down), but the driver will not let the output exceed the maximum mode brightness the cells can sustain. I forgot to check this, but I do believe if you change the cells the ramp memory will only retain the brightness it was at.

Repeated a few times to make sure it was not an anomaly, and it seems to prove that the SA2 uses the preset light levels as regulation points. Ramps will still take 7 seconds, but it will never exceed the level brightness. 
- If the light can sustain high, all functions are enabled. (L-M-H-Strobe[H] + ramp [L --> H] )
- If cells can no longer sustain high, High mode is disabled. (L-M-M-Strobe[M] + ramp [L --> M] )
- If cells can no longer sustain medium, medium is disabled. (L-L-L-Strobe[L])

I find this very neat regulation, very useful early warning for the cells 
remaining power!


Also the reverse clicky tailcap, If you screw in the retaining ring all the way, the light cannot tailstand, it still protrudes out too much. You can actually screw it in less, which will allow tailstanding. The difference for me was about 1/4 of a turn, and it can now tailstand with negligible wobble.


----------



## selfbuilt (May 4, 2010)

Surnia said:


> I find this very neat regulation, very useful early warning for the cells remaining power!


Thanks for the detailed analysis Surnia.

I don't generally examine the performance of lights on nearly depleted cells, but what you describe doesn't surprise me - I have seen similar examples on other lights (i.e. Med or Hi mode disabled upon activation on alkaline/NiMH if insufficient charge remaining). The effect on the ramping is particularly interesting. As you note, this is actually a useful adaptation of the circuit. Thanks for sharing. :thumbsup:


----------



## Perfectful (May 7, 2010)

It's very detail,thank you for share!:welcome:


----------



## Trancersteve (Jul 2, 2010)

Many thanks for the hard work here selfbuilt.

It is quite incredible that the SA2 compares in brightness and has a longer running time than the Quark 2AA. I wonder how those graphs would look now the Quark 2AA uses an R5 emitter. What would your thoughts be?


----------



## selfbuilt (Jul 5, 2010)

Trancersteve said:


> It is quite incredible that the SA2 compares in brightness and has a longer running time than the Quark 2AA. I wonder how those graphs would look now the Quark 2AA uses an R5 emitter. What would your thoughts be?


Hard to say without directly testing the new Quark lights. If drive currents remain un-altered, then I expect output levels will have gone up slightly with the R5s (otherwise, runtime could have increased further). But since Vf typically has the greatest effect on runtime (which is not reported), hard to know how they would compare exactly. I'm sure new Quarks perform quite well ...


----------



## kdaq (Sep 18, 2010)

How would you compare the overall build quality to the C-series, say SA1 vs. C7? I feel like the C7 is a little tank of a light, and was surprised for the price.


----------



## selfbuilt (Sep 19, 2010)

kdaq said:


> How would you compare the overall build quality to the C-series, say SA1 vs. C7? I feel like the C7 is a little tank of a light, and was surprised for the price.


The new SA/SC lights are still very solid ("tank-like" ). Not sure about longevity - they are a little more complicated with the double switch design. Hard to say more - they are quite different lights.


----------



## kdaq (Sep 20, 2010)

Hey, Fenix was on to something with the TK-series naming . Incidentally, my first serious torch was a TK11, and I tend to use it as my build quality reference point.

Thanks for the impressions! I think I see an SA1 in my future.


----------



## pounder (Sep 25, 2010)

awesome review! I ordered an sa1 a couple of days ago with 6 14500 batteries..was going to get the sa2 but your tests showed that the sa1 is just as bright with a 14500 battery in a smaller package..I love aa/14500 lights because of the option to run aa's in power outage situations..aa's are everywhere and very cheap..thanks for the good work selfbuilt!


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 13, 2011)

Post reserved in case old cache data found.


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 13, 2011)

> *Re: ITP SA1 , SA2 , SC1 , SC2 Round-Up Review ( XP-E R2 ): RUNTIMES , BEAMSHOTS and more !*
> Written by *DEERSLAYER* on 01-10-2011 02:48 PM GMT
> 
> Apparently my problem is a misinterpretation of the ^ symbol. What action does it represent? This noob is still not coming out with the right answer.



*Re: ITP SA1 , SA2 , SC1 , SC2 Round-Up Review ( XP-E R2 ): RUNTIMES , BEAMSHOTS and more !*
Written by *selfbuilt* on 01-10-2011 04:32 PM GMT



DEERSLAYER said:


> Apparently my problem is a misinterpretation of the ^ symbol. What action does it represent? This noob is still not coming out with the right answer.


It's the power symbol. So, 86^1.48 means 86 raised to the power of 1.48. It's the power symbol. So, 86^1.48 means 86 raised to the power of 1.48. 

If you don't have a scientific calculator with exponents, you can just pop the whole equation into your google search bar - it will return the right result.




> *Re: ITP SA1 , SA2 , SC1 , SC2 Round-Up Review ( XP-E R2 ): RUNTIMES , BEAMSHOTS and more !*
> Written by *DEERSLAYER* on 01-10-2011 07:44 PM GMT
> 
> 
> ...





> *Re: ITP SA1 , SA2 , SC1 , SC2 Round-Up Review ( XP-E R2 ): RUNTIMES , BEAMSHOTS and more !*
> Written by *popedandy* on 01-20-2011 09:05 PM GMT
> 
> Thanks for the thoroughreview. I'm very new to flashlights and had been looking for reasonably simple flashlights for general use by my family when the power goes out or on the rare occasions when we go camping. Based on this review and some other posts I settled on the SA2. It will be a significant step up from what they have been using, but was inexpensive enough that I could buy one for each family member. The lights should be here in a couple of days and I'm looking forward to seeing their reactions.



*Re: ITP SA1 , SA2 , SC1 , SC2 Round-Up Review ( XP-E R2 ): RUNTIMES , BEAMSHOTS and more !*
Written by *selfbuilt* on 01-21-2011 07:22 AM GMT



popedandy said:


> Thanks for the thorough review. I'm very new to flashlights and had been looking for reasonably simple flashlights for general use by my family when the power goes out or on the rare occasions when we go camping. Based on this review and some other posts I settled on the SA2. It will be a significant step up from what they have been using, but was inexpensive enough that I could buy one for each family member. The lights should be here in a couple of days and I'm looking forward to seeing their reactions.


 :welcome: Although not the latest and greatest release in the flashlight world, the SA/SC family represents good value for the money. The SA2 fits into the "sweet-spot" for general use in my opinion (i.e. the form factor is very familiar to the general user, with a good trade-off in size, output, runtime and battery availability). It's a good light to introduce non-flashaholics to world of LED lights. I am sure they will be amazed at the brightness and range of features.

For those looking for something a bit higher quality with a similar interface, there is also the Klarus series of lights to consider. But the low price and decent quality of the SA/SC series is compelling.





> *Re: ITP SA1 , SA2 , SC1 , SC2 Round-Up Review ( XP-E R2 ): RUNTIMES , BEAMSHOTS and more !*
> Written by *DrJekyll* on 02-14-2011 05:06 PM GMT
> 
> Just got myiTP SC2 R5 in today. I know this is a budget light, but this is my first step above incandescent mag lites and multi led stocking stuffer flashlights, so needless to say I am impressed. I really appreciate the information given in this review and throughout the forum in helping me make my decision on this purchase.
> ...




*Re: ITP SA1 , SA2 , SC1 , SC2 Round-Up Review ( XP-E R2 ): RUNTIMES , BEAMSHOTS and more !*
Written by *selfbuilt* on 02-18-2011 11:51 AM GMT



DrJekyll said:


> This is probably a stupid question, but how do you remove the supplied tail cap boot for replacement with the one that allows tail standing?


 :welcome:

You need to unscrew the switch retaining ring, located on the inside part of the tailcap. You will see two indentations in this ring. You need to use snap-ring pliers (or really fine needle-nose pliers, or very sturdy tweezers) to loosen and remove this ring. The switch and boot cover will then fall out of the light - replace the boot cover, and re-assemble and tighten the retaining ring again.


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 13, 2011)

The thread discussions for the last few months have been *partially restored* from the search engine cache data (thank you tandem!). I was able to capture original p.2 cache data, but couldn't find the missing posts from the end of p.1. If anyone has a copy, let me know.

Please carry on! 



Unfortunately, I could only track down search engine cache data up to the bottom of p.7 (i.e. Dec 16, 2010). Anything posted after that has been lost. If you happen to have cache data after that, please let me know and I will re-post.


----------



## AIC (May 20, 2011)

Why do companies ruin a good design with a memory function!!!!


----------



## MacNCheese (Mar 24, 2013)

Can the ITP S-series withstand drops from 1m like most other lights?


----------



## selfbuilt (Mar 24, 2013)

It should. But at the time these lights came out, the ANSI FL-1 standard had only recently been developed, and was not in common use. As such, there was no reported impact resistance for these lights. But I would expect them to do as well as any other light (i.e. 1m drop isn't that stringent).

And :welcome:


----------



## MacNCheese (Mar 24, 2013)

Thanks so much! Didn't really expect a reply after 2 years since the last post. I'm planning to buy the SA2 as my first light and your very comprehensive review has enlightened me very much. I plan to buy this because it's cheaper yet has as good as something more expensive (such as the Fenix LD22), and I hope it'll be sufficient for general use.


----------

