# Titanium Quarks



## Nitroz (Aug 15, 2009)

Guess what just showed up at the marketplace!


----------



## Oddjob (Aug 15, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Thanks for the heads up!


----------



## Woods Walker (Aug 15, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

I have been hearing about the XP-G emitter but don't know much about it. I think that is the bigger news than the Ti.


----------



## csshih (Aug 15, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

[email protected]#$ [email protected]#[email protected][email protected][email protected]!#!#@!!

(and other censored obscenities)


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Aug 15, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Ouch, my aching wallet!


----------



## Valpo Hawkeye (Aug 15, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Yep, already placed my order. Thank goodness for side jobs!


----------



## KuKu427 (Aug 15, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Man... I just bought two in Al... XP-G!!!


----------



## Morelite (Aug 15, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Thanks Nitroz, I just placed my order.


----------



## recDNA (Aug 15, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Darn..I wanted to wait for the MC-E. Titanium Quarks under $100? I'm doomed.

Can anybody *estimate* for me what I might expect from the XP-G in each battery configuration? I lean toward the 1 X CR123 but I have no idea what to expect from the new bin.

I understand fully i is only a guess.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 15, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Is the XP-G more efficient in the way of longer runtimes? R4 is a warm white bin correct? Was hoping for a cool white. How would this compare to the regular Quark AA?


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 15, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Beacon of Light said:


> Is the XP-G more efficient in the way of longer runtimes? R4 is a warm white bin correct? Was hoping for a cool white. How would this compare to the regular Quark AA?



R4 is the flux bin, q5, r2 etc. Since they are using the same driver I would think the gains come in brightness.


----------



## Nitroz (Aug 15, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Beacon of Light said:


> Is the XP-G more efficient in the way of longer runtimes? R4 is a warm white bin correct? Was hoping for a cool white. How would this compare to the regular Quark AA?



R4 is the brightness, these should be cool white.


----------



## Burgess (Aug 15, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

to Nitroz --


Thank you ! :thumbsup:




_


----------



## bmstrong (Aug 15, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Interested. I posted a buch of questions in the other thread.


----------



## jgraham15 (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Thanks for the heads up! Just ordered one and now I need to decide if I want one more. lovecpf


----------



## Nitroz (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

I can't wait for some pics.


----------



## bansuri (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

:mecry: This messes up _everything!_


----------



## jahxman (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

 

:devil:


----------



## Zeruel (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Phew, good thing I held back on the Quarks...:sweat:

Anyone knows if the clip for Quark 123 can be removed? Or do I have to buy the version without clip?


----------



## Henk_Lu (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Zeruel said:


> Phew, good thing I held back on the Quarks...:sweat:
> 
> Anyone knows if the clip for Quark 123 can be removed? Or do I have to buy the version without clip?



The clip can't be removed, that's why there are two versions and you have to decide wheter you want a permanent clip or none at all. I chose the No clip.

Now, guess, who has just preordered a set without knowing where to grab the money off... 

It is quite expensive, but for limited titanium versions with such an emitter it isn't. I still get 4 bright lights for 2/3 of the price of a single Clicky Ti.

I'll officially change my birth date to 10/10, so they will arrive on time for my birthday!!! 

I took the most expensive and most secure shipping, I wouldn't want these babies to get lost between USA and me. I don't know if the redeem was meant to be used here, but it worked, so I get at least the shipping for free.

... and I didn't want to turn on my computer until this evening! 

I wonder how long it will take for the 20 collector sets to be gone. Anyone ordered one yet? I took the regular UI, while I like the tactical on my neutral white 123/123-2, I think for the set the regular will be better.

Now, I will try to sell one of my kidneys, anybody needs one?


----------



## Zeruel (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Henk_Lu said:


> The clip can't be removed, that's why there are two versions and you have to decide wheter you want a permanent clip or none at all. I chose the No clip.



Thanks. But for Quark AA, the clip can be removed right?

I wish they would top it off with a titanium switch cap. oo:


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

How ironic. The only reason I'm not buying one is because I can't choose.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Haha I've been stuggling to choose which normal model I want!

Now these! :shakehead


----------



## wapkil (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



recDNA said:


> Darn..I wanted to wait for the MC-E. Titanium Quarks under $100? I'm doomed.
> 
> Can anybody *estimate* for me what I might expect from the XP-G in each battery configuration? I lean toward the 1 X CR123 but I have no idea what to expect from the new bin.
> 
> I understand fully i is only a guess.



You can make a guess by simply multiplying the output by ~1.37, that's how brighter @1A XP-Gs should be, according to Cree announcement. Remember that for the human eye the 37% brightness difference is hardly noticeable.

EDIT: I meant multiplying the output of XP-E R2 Quarks.


----------



## oldpal (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

I just ordered a Quark AA Ti and a Quark 123 Ti with no clip, standard not tactical. Now if I win the Ti Ra Clicky in the raffle I'll be set. 

Hugh


----------



## hatman (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

For those of us who've never used titanium lights, how well do they hold up under everyday pocket carry?

Considering that my regular Quarks are holding up beautifully, and don't have so much as a scratch on them after several nasty mishaps, what advantage would titanium bring? 

Another poster says the change in emitters is the big news here. This inquiry is addressed only to the titanium question. Many thanks.


----------



## Zeruel (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



hatman said:


> For those of us who've never used titanium lights, how well do they hold up under everyday pocket carry?
> 
> Considering that my regular Quarks are holding up beautifully, and don't have so much as a scratch on them after several nasty mishaps, what advantage would titanium bring?
> 
> Another poster says the change in emitters is the big news here. This inquiry is addressed only to the titanium question. Many thanks.



Why titanium?

Advantages of titanium?

Titanium vs Aluminum

If you're afraid of scratches, it's best you leave titanium alone, they're scratch magnets. But easily buffed back to original shine. Unless of course, the lights are meant to be shelf queens.


----------



## NonSenCe (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

ughh.. 30 more for Ti version. 

where do i steal the money for this..?

should i sell a flashlight to support buying this one? 

selling one.. ouch.. thats against everything i believe in! 
and the ones im truly willing to give up are worth too little. 

i would of not ordered the itp eos if i knew this was coming.. nor the romisen n3.. thats about 50$ i spent in a whim.. without them this would of been easy to buy..

oh well i have few weeks to think what to do..

**is it just me or does this year seem to be the best/worst time to be a flashaholic? has there been such an outburst of cool stuff before in this short timespan? i am new to this hobby, so i dont know.. it just seems that there is something awesome coming out every 2 months. or is that just my flashlight addicted mind that makes me think like that?


----------



## hatman (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Thanks, and I'll read those threads....but scratch magnets? I have a hard time seeing the advantage to that.


----------



## Coaster (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

I had been considering a Quark, this was just too tempting. Now comes the hard part, the waiting...

:twothumbs


----------



## Zeruel (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



hatman said:


> Thanks, and I'll read those threads....but scratch magnets? I have a hard time seeing the advantage to that.



There's no advantage being a scratch magnet. I suggest you read through the threads, there're advantages that far outweigh the downside of using titanium.


----------



## Oddjob (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



hatman said:


> Thanks, and I'll read those threads....but scratch magnets? I have a hard time seeing the advantage to that.


 
The scratches aren't visible at arms length the way scratches on an anodized light are and as been mentioned they could be buffed up to their original condition. Check out the before and after pics in the first post: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/219071


----------



## hatman (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Oddjob,
Thanks, I remember reading that uber-length Lunasol review -- and wanting the damn thing while still being repelled by the price (no offense intended to those willing to spend the cash.....)

Maybe I missed it, but how do you buff out the scratches? I'm not what you would call handy.

And how often do you end up having to do that?


----------



## John_Galt (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Wow, this is actually a great deal! A titanium light for under $100... Dangit... Now I just have to be paid broke, and join the Marketplace...


----------



## xenonk (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



hatman said:


> Thanks, and I'll read those threads....but scratch magnets? I have a hard time seeing the advantage to that.


The scratches need to be pretty bad or numerous before they stand out. The main thing about titanium is that you get strength close to stainless steel at a fraction of the weight. Then there's the corrosion resistance. Just make sure you have good thread lube, because dry threads are highly prone to galling (cold welding).



hatman said:


> Maybe I missed it, but how do you buff out the scratches? I'm not hat you would call handy.


You can buff it with a mild abrasive compound just like you can steel. It's no harder, just lighter.


----------



## Oddjob (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



hatman said:


> Oddjob,
> Thanks, I remember reading that uber-length Lunasol review -- and wanting the damn thing while still being repelled by the price (no offense intended to those willing to spend the cash.....)
> 
> Maybe I missed it, but how do you buff out the scratches? I'm not what you would call handy.
> ...



I have not polished my light (the price was not a strong enough repellent) but I have read silver polish or some such compound is good for touching up. For severe scratches I think a process of using increasingly finer grit sandpaper to bring it back to life is used. I have also read that some people use the polishing attachment for their Dremel tool. Hopefully someone with more experience can tell you.


----------



## :)> (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Metal polishes like Fitz polish or Mothers Billet polish do a great job when used with a dremel, they will bring the surface to a high shine. Others use very fine grit sandpaper and it also does a great job.

Ti lights simply rock!


----------



## icaruz (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



xenonk said:


> The scratches need to be pretty bad or numerous before they stand out. The main thing about titanium is that you get strength close to stainless steel at a fraction of the weight. Then there's the corrosion resistance. Just make sure you have good thread lube, because dry threads are highly prone to galling (cold welding).



Is Nyogel good for Ti thread . If not pls recommend other alternatives.


----------



## Woods Walker (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

I use Ti cook ware and enjoy some of the properties of SS at lower weight. Heat transfer at room temps are not all that good. Have some Ti stoves and at higher temps the transfer rates seem to be improve but this is based some on the alloy. Guessing Ti would make for a fine light too for harsh use but no expert on any of this. Now for scratches I can't imagine a reason why anyone would buff out scratches on a tool.


----------



## callmaster (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Ordered the 123^2. I don't need a whole set. Don't like the AA versions.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



wapkil said:


> You can make a guess by simply multiplying the output by ~1.37, that's how brighter @1A XP-Gs should be, according to Cree announcement. Remember that for the human eye the 37% brightness difference is hardly noticeable.
> 
> EDIT: I meant multiplying the output of XP-E R2 Quarks.



Well if we use this as a guide...no calculator handy...so a little less accurate...but lets make the 37%...40% (keep it simple) and the R-2 Quark puts out 170 (AA, 123 head). So every 10% = 17 lumen...x 4 = 68. So lets subtract a bit and call it 65. So we have 170 + 65 = 235 OTF lumen.

That`s not bad. You could have a small 123 light putting out 235 lumen. That makes it one of the brightest, perhaps THE brightest single 123 batt powered light made .

The Ti stuff is just a bonus .


----------



## John_Galt (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Badbeams3 said:


> Well if we use this as a guide...no calculator handy...so a little less accurate...but lets make the 37%...40% (keep it simple) and the R-2 Quark puts out 170 (AA, 123 head). So every 10% = 17 lumen...x 4 = 68. So lets subtract a bit and call it 65. So we have 170 + 65 = 235 OTF lumen.
> 
> That`s not bad. You could have a small 123 light putting out 235 lumen. That makes it one of the brightest, perhaps THE brightest single 123 batt powered light made .
> 
> The Ti stuff is just a bonus .



That's quite a good point. but the biggest reason (ahem, for me to purchase) I see with these newer, more efficient LED's is longer runtimes, and less heat. Especially less heat.

But, wow, 235 lumens from a single CR123 is great! I can't wait to see what other companies will produce with the XP-G. I wonder who will choose to go with longer runtimes, at the same output, and who will go with higher output at the same runtimes. Interesting stuff.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



John_Galt said:


> That's quite a good point. but the biggest reason (ahem, for me to purchase) I see with these newer, more efficient LED's is longer runtimes, and less heat. Especially less heat.
> 
> But, wow, 235 lumens from a single CR123 is great! I can't wait to see what other companies will produce with the XP-G. I wonder who will choose to go with longer runtimes, at the same output, and who will go with higher output at the same runtimes. Interesting stuff.



Well, the next level down would be (if we use the same guide) 70 + 28 = 98.

So around 100...way to dim for my tactical missions :candle: ...:toilet:
,


----------



## wapkil (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Badbeams3 said:


> Well if we use this as a guide...no calculator handy...so a little less accurate...but lets make the 37%...40% (keep it simple) and the R-2 Quark puts out 170 (AA, 123 head). So every 10% = 17 lumen...x 4 = 68. So lets subtract a bit and call it 65. So we have 170 + 65 = 235 OTF lumen.



I'd guess closer to 220lm but it's only an estimation anyway. BTW, the calculator is usually in the device you to access the Internet or you can use something in the Internet, like Google :nana:



John_Galt said:


> That's quite a good point. but the biggest reason (ahem, for me to purchase) I see with these newer, more efficient LED's is longer runtimes, and less heat. Especially less heat.



I agree but the Quarks won't do it. They would need to modify the driver for it. And many customers are addicted to output numbers, even if these numbers really don't mean any visible improvement. IMO if the output cannot be ~2x higher, it would be much better to keep the output the same and the runtime ~50% longer but it won't happen.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



wapkil said:


> I'd guess closer to 220lm but it's only an estimation anyway. BTW, the calculator is usually in the device you to access the Internet or you can use something in the Internet, like Google :nana: /QUOTE]
> 
> Well let`s split the diff and call it 226 OTF lumen
> 
> Wise guy


----------



## lolzertank (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



John_Galt said:


> That's quite a good point. but the biggest reason (ahem, for me to purchase) I see with these newer, more efficient LED's is longer runtimes, and less heat. Especially less heat.
> 
> But, wow, 235 lumens from a single CR123 is great! I can't wait to see what other companies will produce with the XP-G. I wonder who will choose to go with longer runtimes, at the same output, and who will go with higher output at the same runtimes. Interesting stuff.



There are low modes for longer runtimes and less heat. :tinfoil: Either way, Ti is not the way to go for less heat since it has terrible thermal conductivity compared to Al. Copper would be the only material that would be better than Al, but it's only a little better than Al (probably worse if you can't coat it black), doesn't have much strength and is ridiculously expensive compared to Al.


----------



## wapkil (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



lolzertank said:


> There are low modes for longer runtimes and less heat. :tinfoil: Either way, Ti is not the way to go for less heat since it has terrible thermal conductivity compared to Al. Copper would be the only material that would be better than Al, but it's only a little better than Al (probably worse if you can't coat it black), doesn't have much strength and is ridiculously expensive compared to Al.



For higher thermal conductivity you can always strategically place diamonds in there. As a bonus you'd get an even better bling factor than for titanium.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



wapkil said:


> For higher thermal conductivity you can always strategically place diamonds in there. As a bonus you'd get an even better bling factor than for titanium.



I think gold has good thermal conductivity properties...add a few diamonds...


----------



## hatman (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

I'm reading the threads on titanium and here's the bottom line question(s):

-- Does anybody actually need a flashlight that's stronger than well-anodized aluminum? (If I get in an accident strong enough to destroy my Quark, I suspect that repairing my flashlight will be my last concern!)

In other words, is titanium mainly for collectors and those who like the looks? Does it have some practical use for those who just need a good light?

Thanks,


----------



## John_Galt (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



hatman said:


> I'm reading the threads on titanium and here's the bottom line question(s):
> 
> -- Does anybody actually need a flashlight that's stronger than well-anodized aluminum? (If I get in an accident strong enough to destroy my Quark, I suspect that repairing my flashlight will be my last concern!)
> 
> ...



Well, it does have the new XP-G LED in it. That is a definite plus.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



hatman said:


> I'm reading the threads on titanium and here's the bottom line question(s):
> 
> -- Does anybody actually need a flashlight that's stronger than well-anodized aluminum? (If I get in an accident strong enough to destroy my Quark, I suspect that repairing my flashlight will be my last concern!)
> 
> ...



That`s open to opinion. Let me think :thinking: :sick2: :green: ...ok , got it...let`s say your on a tactical mission in middle east...you turn your Ti Quark on turbo to blind the enemy...and a tank drives over you...the tank commander say`s "Hey nice light" and grabs it out of your crushed/flat hand. Later the enemy commander hears a plane and uses it as a search light...and his tank is promply blown up. Friendly troops find the light later and send it back to your kids who have inherited it. They sell it on E-bay and buy a cool toaster oven.

So the answer must be "yes"...you should buy one


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Nitroz said:


> R4 is the brightness, these should be cool white.



So are these brighter at the expense of runtime or is it like the Nitecore D10 regular and R2 version where the R2 is brighter but offering the same runtime as the regular Q5?


----------



## jabe1 (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Beacon of Light said:


> So are these brighter at the expense of runtime or is it like the Nitecore D10 regular and R2 version where the R2 is brighter but offering the same runtime as the regular Q5?



Brighter, same runtime. The driver will be the same, therefore using the same amount of current on any given level. Unless, of course, 4-sevens has adjusted the lower level resistors to attain the same low. Then you will get increased runtime!


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



wapkil said:


> I agree but the Quarks won't do it. They would need to modify the driver for it. And many customers are addicted to output numbers, even if these numbers really don't mean any visible improvement. IMO if the output cannot be ~2x higher, it would be much better to keep the output the same and the runtime ~50% longer but it won't happen.



Eh, why are people so addicted to high freaking output? Honestly I rarely ever have a need to get out of a low or medium mode on any flashlight. I think 100 lumens is more than enough for anyone. Who is God's name would have a need for a 500 lumen light? I mean come on are these the same people that stare straight at the sun just for kicks? 

I agree wapkil, let's get the benefits of more runtime over the extra brightness our eyes can't really perceive anyways.


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



jabe1 said:


> Brighter, same runtime. The driver will be the same, therefore using the same amount of current on any given level. Unless, of course, 4-sevens has adjusted the lower level resistors to attain the same low. Then you will get increased runtime!



Since my favorite mode is *Moon Mode*, I don't think I would want it brighter at all as it is perfect as it is. I may have to hold off and hope the next best efficient emitter and new circuit will just make the current Quark AA more efficiant with the same brightness.


----------



## John_Galt (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

^^^ Your speech here is ironic, as your avatar is of a light house, but I digress...

You have an opinion, one that happens to differ form mine. I like the ability to have a choice of high output, low output, and in between output. I bet that if you worked as a SAR personnel, you would want the ability to flood an area with as much light as possible. But yeah, I'm kind of split right now, between whether I'd prefer a longer runtime, or more output. 

I just signed up for the marketplace. Hopefully, I'll be able to purchase a Quark 123. For a Ti light, I'll purchase Cr123's...


----------



## wapkil (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



John_Galt said:


> ^^^ Your speech here is ironic, as your avatar is of a light house, but I digress...



Maybe it is a lighthouse running in the moon mode :nana:



Beacon of Light said:


> Eh, why are people so addicted to high freaking output? Honestly I rarely ever have a need to get out of a low or medium mode on any flashlight. I think 100 lumens is more than enough for anyone. Who is God's name would have a need for a 500 lumen light? I mean come on are these the same people that stare straight at the sun just for kicks?
> 
> I agree wapkil, let's get the benefits of more runtime over the extra brightness our eyes can't really perceive anyways.



I wasn't denying that there is a need for higher outputs. 500lm is not that much, I think a single 100W incandescent bulb puts out around 1500lm... I was writing about the problem with "if it has more lumens, it is a better flashlight" attitude. In reality, if one has a light that puts out around 150lm-200lm it usually makes sense to upgrade to something around 400lm-500lm but not much less. If the difference in brightness between two lights is less than 40%-50%, other factors, like the runtime, are much more important.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Beacon of Light said:


> Since my favorite mode is *Moon Mode*, I don't think I would want it brighter at all as it is perfect as it is. I may have to hold off and hope the next best efficient emitter and new circuit will just make the current Quark AA more efficiant with the same brightness.



Unless the driver is changed, moon mode (and all modes) will be brighter as well...some folks are not going to like that. Maybe adding a defuser will cut down the moon mode lumen?


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



wapkil said:


> I wasn't denying that there is a need for higher outputs. 500lm is not that much, I think a single 100W incandescent bulb puts out around 1500lm... I was writing about the problem with "if it has more lumens, it is a better flashlight" attitude. In reality, if one has a light that puts out around 150lm-200lm it usually makes sense to upgrade to something around 400lm-500lm but not much less. If the difference in brightness between two lights is less than 40%-50%, other factors, like the runtime, are much more important.



 I agree 100%. In fact I`m not sure if I will be getting one of these. I had my sites set on the 500 lumen light 47`s is working on...not sure what to do. I just can`t afford every light I see...47`s made a brilliant move making these a limited run in Ti...makes it tough to just sit and wait.


----------



## Nitroz (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Badbeams3 said:


> I agree 100%. In fact I`m not sure if I will be getting one of these. I had my sites set on the 500 lumen light 47`s is working on...not sure what to do. I just can`t afford every light I see...47`s made a brilliant move making these a limited run in Ti...makes it tough to just sit and wait.



Some people were waiting for the XP-G in a light before buying something new. Now they can have both an XP-G and titanium at a great price.

This has to be the best titanium bang for the buck light. Now if my poor self could just afford one.


----------



## hatman (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Badbeams3 said:


> That`s open to opinion. Let me think :thinking: :sick2: :green: ...ok , got it...let`s say your on a tactical mission in middle east...you turn your Ti Quark on turbo to blind the enemy...and a tank drives over you...the tank commander say`s "Hey nice light" and grabs it out of your crushed/flat hand. Later the enemy commander hears a plane and uses it as a search light...and his tank is promply blown up. Friendly troops find the light later and send it back to your kids who have inherited it. They sell it on E-bay and buy a cool toaster oven.
> 
> So the answer must be "yes"...you should buy one



What can I say -- your logic is flawless, and I'm convinced!
(And I just noticed that I've gone over 100 posts.....)


----------



## SFG2Lman (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

gaaa! the marketplace won't let me on...i have been a member for awhile, and now when i log on it says "thank you for loggin on, sfg2lman" and then returns me to the log-on page! grrrr i really wanted to read about these quarks too!


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



John_Galt said:


> ^^^ Your speech here is ironic, as your avatar is of a light house, but I digress...
> 
> You have an opinion, one that happens to differ form mine. I like the ability to have a choice of high output, low output, and in between output. I bet that if you worked as a SAR personnel, you would want the ability to flood an area with as much light as possible. But yeah, I'm kind of split right now, between whether I'd prefer a longer runtime, or more output.
> 
> I just signed up for the marketplace. Hopefully, I'll be able to purchase a Quark 123. For a Ti light, I'll purchase Cr123's...



Wapgil's got it right, a lighthouse running in MOON MODE. 

I like a choice in output as well. Why do you think I love the Quark AA. I will probably never use a lithium in is as I do not need or want 170 lumens out of this thing. 

I've only turned on turbo once and it was stupid bright and that was on Eneloops. Only modes I use are Moon/Low and RARELY medium. 

Isn't the generally consensus here that they would prefer moderate gains in runtime over marginally brighter lumens once we are talking about lights that already meet or exceed 170-200 lumens? Might be time for me to make another poll to show what we the people want.


----------



## recDNA (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Unless specs are below expectation I'm in for the 1 X CR123 and I don't care about run time at all. Give me the output. I'll run it on medium if I want runtime


----------



## Beacon of Light (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Badbeams3 said:


> Unless the driver is changed, moon mode (and all modes) will be brighter as well...some folks are not going to like that. Maybe adding a defuser will cut down the moon mode lumen?



That's what I was concerned about. I may sit this one out then as my wallet could use a break anyways.


----------



## jchoo (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Guys... really... a 37% increase over .2 lumens is STILL really, really low...


but not as low as the .08 lumens I can get from my Twisty.


----------



## jgraham15 (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



hatman said:


> I'm reading the threads on titanium and here's the bottom line question(s):
> 
> -- Does anybody actually need a flashlight that's stronger than well-anodized aluminum? (If I get in an accident strong enough to destroy my Quark, I suspect that repairing my flashlight will be my last concern!)
> 
> ...





Badbeams3 said:


> That`s open to opinion. Let me think :thinking: :sick2: :green: ...ok , got it...let`s say your on a tactical mission in middle east...you turn your Ti Quark on turbo to blind the enemy...and a tank drives over you...the tank commander say`s "Hey nice light" and grabs it out of your crushed/flat hand. Later the enemy commander hears a plane and uses it as a search light...and his tank is promply blown up. Friendly troops find the light later and send it back to your kids who have inherited it. They sell it on E-bay and buy a cool toaster oven.
> 
> So the answer must be "yes"...you should buy one






:laughing: You made me spit soda out of my nose you *******!!!!!!!!!


----------



## PeaceOfMind (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Well I definitely don't need one of these, but I ordered one anyway.

Now I need to try and forget that it even exists so that the waiting goes by quickly!


----------



## moses (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Brightness - depends on your application. we live in the mountains where there are zero street lights at night and most homes do not have outside porch lights. So I carry a light 100% of the time. For me, the capacity for brighter, the better because at times, I want to reach out there. And yes, most the time a lower amount of light is enough but i find that visual acuity goes up with brightness when going far so I want as much as I can get. It doesn't mean I'll always use it at that level - just that it is available. 

That's why the Nitecore PD is so great with its 100 levels which is really just like infiinitely adjustable. 

As to titanium, it is tougher but yes, aluminum is tough enough for all of my applications.

Mo


----------



## Patriot (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

XP-G is fantastic. Ti is the icing on the cake!


----------



## Haz (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

the light is at a fantastic price, it's the price of only the body or tail cap on some other lights. Still cant' believe this is the whole light, with the latest emitter, square thread, moon-mode, regulated, clip, what more could we want?... twisty tail cap perhaps?


----------



## sabre7 (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Haz said:


> the light is at a fantastic price, it's the price of only the body or tail cap on some other lights. Still cant' believe this is the whole light, with the latest emitter, square thread, moon-mode, regulated, clip, what more could we want?... twisty tail cap perhaps?



Ok, Ok, enough already...


----------



## Haz (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



sabre7 said:


> Ok, Ok, enough already...


 




Hi 4Sevens, any jobs available... i think i just made a sale  
i can do other tasks too...

lube flashlight threads
install o-rings
turn lights on and off
change batteries
polish and buff titanium lights


----------



## Krotchitty (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

I'm more excited about the advantages of the new efficiency versus the increased brightness. 

Practically, a smooth floody beam with a low and medium is really all that I find necessary.

On the other hand, having access to a much brighter level of both max/turbo and a disorienting strobe is comforting, and serves a purpose as well.

For me the Ti part only increases cost, weight is likely negligible.


----------



## sabre7 (Aug 16, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Haz said:


> Hi 4Sevens, any jobs available... i think i just made a sale
> i can do other tasks too...
> 
> lube flashlight threads
> ...


----------



## GarageBoy (Aug 17, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Beacon of Light said:


> Eh, why are people so addicted to high freaking output? Honestly I rarely ever have a need to get out of a low or medium mode on any flashlight. I think 100 lumens is more than enough for anyone. Who is God's name would have a need for a 500 lumen light? I mean come on are these the same people that stare straight at the sun just for kicks?
> 
> I agree wapkil, let's get the benefits of more runtime over the extra brightness our eyes can't really perceive anyways.



If you have to ask...
High output rocks in urban environments. Nothing like blastin through an alleywall and still getting light on the other side


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 17, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Haz said:


> Hi 4Sevens, any jobs available... i think i just made a sale
> i can do other tasks too...
> 
> lube flashlight threads
> ...



 Most of those positions require years of training. I did hear there is an opening for light brightness tester...had to let the last guy go...gave him a monkey and accordion....pair of sunglasses.


----------



## Glenn7 (Aug 17, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*

Everything about this light sounds so nice and I would like to get one - but one thing bothers me and I just have to ask - if this XP-G is driven hard and pumping out tones of lux then isn't it pumping out tones of heat in such a small package of Ti? - will this small amount of Ti dissipate that much heat I would have to ask - because I have a EX-10 with a GD+ and that gets really hot on high and thats Alu being held in my hand.
Oh yer and BTW I have had 8 or 9 Ti lights - and they got a bit too hot for my liking - and they were twice the size of these - just a thought - not a flame.


I quote a little from McGizmo - " Anyone intending to use a light for long on durations and at high current drive levels should not consider Ti as an optimal material unless they plan to be using the light in very wet environments where the ambient conditions will bring the steady state temps down. For intermittant use or long on times at low current levels, the thermal aspects are not significant to be of real concern."


----------



## oldpal (Aug 17, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> Unless the driver is changed, moon mode (and all modes) will be brighter as well...some folks are not going to like that. Maybe adding a defuser will cut down the moon mode lumen?



Well I like the moonmode setting also, but a ~37% increase of 0.2 lumens to about 0.3 lumens isn't going to bother me. 

Hugh


----------



## copperfox (Aug 17, 2009)

...that makes me wonder if using max output on two RCR123s would be too much heat, since the regular Quark already heats up a lot (so I've heard).


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Aug 17, 2009)

I really don't see how these would heat up more than the original quarks. The drive current is the same and I would imagine that the thermal disadvantages of using Ti are somewhat offset by the fact that the LEDs are converting more of that energy into light and less into heat. 

If anyone really gets to the point where they fear that these will not work with the current setup, there are two things to remember. A.) the 10 year warranty, and B.) the fact that no one is _required_ to purchase one.

I personally think it's awesome that they are being offered and for such an amazingly reasonable price too!


----------



## slate (Aug 17, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Beacon of Light said:


> Eh, why are people so addicted to high freaking output? Honestly I rarely ever have a need to get out of a low or medium mode on any flashlight. I think 100 lumens is more than enough for anyone. Who is God's name would have a need for a 500 lumen light? I mean come on are these the same people that stare straight at the sun just for kicks?



Just turning on my 500 lumen Malkoff MC-E brings a smile to my face. Perhaps reading a book or map in darkness, one only needs a few lumens but most of the time for tactical usage (i.e. lighting up a room), Lumens > Runtime especially if we are talking about using rechargables

I am still waiting on numbers for the XP-G before I commit. I am going to go broke buying flashlights. Just bought a Muyshondt Aeon.


----------



## Centropolis (Aug 17, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



slate said:


> Just turning on my 500 lumen Malkoff MC-E brings a smile to my face. Perhaps reading a book or map in darkness,


 
This reminds me of that picture of Nicholas Cage using the SF M4 in the movie "Knowing" to read a 4" x 5" piece of paper by shining on it from 3 inches away.


----------



## BigBluefish (Aug 17, 2009)

Aaaaaw, crap! :shakehead

Just when I thought I had enough flashlights for my needs and even wants, and had wandered off to the world of watch forums, to find some companions for my overworked and much beloved Tag Heuer, now you tell me there's a freakin' TITANIUM Quark with an XP-G???????

At least you didn't tell me SureFire finally got with it an put a warm white emitter in the E1L or E2L, then my wallet would really be screaming.

If 4-7s puts a warm-white XP-G (is there such a thing?) in one of these titanium's....I DON'T want to know about it....


----------



## Illumenaughty (Aug 17, 2009)

*Oh Yeah!!!:thumbsup::thumbsup:*


----------



## Henk_Lu (Aug 17, 2009)

BigBluefish said:


> Aaaaaw, crap! :shakehead
> 
> If 4-7s puts a warm-white XP-G (is there such a thing?) in one of these titanium's....I DON'T want to know about it....



I would buy another collector set if they came with neutral or even warm whites, but they surely won't.

The XP-G emitter is still unreleased, so you'll get a light with the most modern LED from Cree here. The cool whites are always the first ones to be developped as they are logically the brightest ones.

Warmer tints will come in a few months and as the limited run on neutral whites sold well, I hope there will be another run with the XP-G.

What about starting a poll thread to see how many of us freaks would be interested in a WARM white Quark?


----------



## sol-leks (Aug 17, 2009)

I'm a little confused are the xpg quarks already sold out? The pages for them on 47's say R2's now.


----------



## Henk_Lu (Aug 17, 2009)

sol-leks said:


> I'm a little confused are the xpg quarks already sold out? The pages for them on 47's say R2's now.



They didn't update the page and it always said R2.

Please have a look at the thread in the marketplace, all your questions will be answred, if not, post it there.

As for the emitter, David reassured us that it will be an XP-G R4 minimum for all Titaniums.


----------



## burntoshine (Aug 17, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Beacon of Light said:


> That's what I was concerned about. I may sit this one out then as my wallet could use a break anyways.



i'm definitely on the same page. i wish they could have lowered the moonmode significantly so that it's even lower than the regular quark with better run times. lower low, higher high; what's wrong with that? i don't think they should just up all the levels. i think they should spread them out more. i guess it's easy to just slap in a new emitter and not tinker with the levels/driver/processor/whatever.

it's tempting, but i also think i'll be sitting this one out. my regular quark AA is doing me just fine.


----------



## lolzertank (Aug 17, 2009)

oldpal said:


> Well I like the moonmode setting also, but a ~37% increase of 0.2 lumens to about 0.3 lumens isn't going to bother me.
> 
> Hugh



The moon mode might actually be lower. LED efficiency drops off significantly below 20ma for XP-Es, and since the XP-G has a die about 2x the size, the efficiency might actually be worse at 1ma. I'm just speculating though, the efficiency at low currents might be increased too especially since it looks like there's more improvements to the XP-G than just the larger die.



BigBluefish said:


> If 4-7s puts a warm-white XP-G (is there such a thing?) in one of these titanium's....I DON'T want to know about it....



Well, *I* WANT to know about it. :nana: If it's in Ti, I want to buy it.


----------



## Xak (Aug 17, 2009)

Well, I really love the tint of the neutral Quarks, and they are PLENTY bright enough. If I want something brighter I'll wait for a Q123-2 with an SST-50!


----------



## Yucca Patrol (Aug 17, 2009)

I just received my titanium EX-10 and the boss has put her foot down on any more flashlight purchases, so I'm afraid I won't be getting one of these.

But for those of you having trouble deciding, I'd get the AA version for maximum versatility since titanium is meant to be CARRIED not shelved. . . .


----------



## Valpo Hawkeye (Aug 17, 2009)

Yucca Patrol said:


> I just received my titanium EX-10 and the boss has put her foot down on any more flashlight purchases, so I'm afraid I won't be getting one of these.



You gotta keep your pimp hand strong.


----------



## nismotor (Aug 17, 2009)

Valpo Hawkeye said:


> You gotta keep your pimp hand strong.


 
keep it strong, and fear the consequences... 

lol, skip this one to please the "boss", or keep it strong, and will never get another




!


----------



## Beamhead (Aug 17, 2009)

Valpo Hawkeye said:


> You gotta keep your pimp hand strong.


I have heard it said that single guys have a strong dominant hand.......


----------



## Sgt. LED (Aug 17, 2009)

OH! :laughing:

See I tell you how to do this the easy way, pay all the bills. All of them, on your own.
After that she has no say so in what you do with the rest of the money.
:tinfoil:


----------



## CaNo (Aug 17, 2009)

AWWW what the hell! I was picking between the LF2XT and the Maratac, then i come across this post! HOLY HELL! pardon my french... I can see it already........ If I already have a Quark AA, which one of these lights should I purchase? Only 1....?


----------



## xenonk (Aug 17, 2009)

Okay, I can resist this... he doesn't have any warm-tinted XP-Gs. I just need to hold out until the run is over...


----------



## CaNo (Aug 17, 2009)

xenonk said:


> Okay, I can resist this... he doesn't have any warm-tinted XP-Gs. I just need to hold out until the run is over...



Stay strong my friend... stay strong!


----------



## crystalfox (Aug 17, 2009)

"...This limited run will have their titanium polished to a mirror shine.."

and it had me ordered ...argghhh can't resist the temptation...lol


----------



## wapkil (Aug 18, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



wapkil said:


> You can make a guess by simply multiplying the output by ~1.37, that's how brighter @1A XP-Gs should be, according to Cree announcement. Remember that for the human eye the 37% brightness difference is hardly noticeable.
> 
> EDIT: I meant multiplying the output of XP-E R2 Quarks.



I saw that a few people in the thread tried to extrapolate this 37% brightness rise to other modes (i.e. assume other modes will also be 37% brighter). It is still a guess based on a limited knowledge but I don't think one can do it. 

In the marketplace thread someone posted an interesting link to XP-Gs characteristics. As you can see, the XP-G is expected to be 37% brighter @1A but much less at lower currents. I'd guess something around 10% at High and negligible differences in lower modes.

XP-Gs are also expected to have lower forward voltage so the lights at the same currents may run longer. I think in practice it would depend mainly on the driver behavior so we could see anything from no improvement to 25% longer runtimes...


----------



## recDNA (Aug 18, 2009)

crystalfox said:


> "...This limited run will have their titanium polished to a mirror shine.."
> 
> and it had me ordered ...argghhh can't resist the temptation...lol


 
I'm definitely buying a 123 but I'm trying to think of a use for the 2 X AA version too. The 2 X AA seems like it would be really cool but I'm not sure I have a real need for it...but I want one anyway. I wish I could afford the set. It costs less than one ti Ra Clicky!


----------



## AlexD (Aug 18, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



wapkil said:


> I saw that a few people in the thread tried to extrapolate this 37% brightness rise to other modes (i.e. assume other modes will also be 37% brighter). It is still a guess based on a limited knowledge but I don't think one can do it.
> 
> In the marketplace thread someone posted an interesting link to XP-Gs characteristics. As you can see, the XP-G is expected to be 37% brighter @1A but much less at lower currents. I'd guess something around 10% at High and negligible differences in lower modes.
> 
> XP-Gs are also expected to have lower forward voltage so the lights at the same currents may run longer. I think in practice it would depend mainly on the driver behavior so we could see anything from no improvement to 25% longer runtimes...


Why do "10% at High and negligible differences in lower modes" ? R2 bin 114 lm at 350ma and R4 bin 130 lm at 350ma, 14% brighter and maybe more brighter at higher amperage considering Relative LF vs. current graph


----------



## lolzertank (Aug 18, 2009)

xenonk said:


> Okay, I can resist this... he doesn't have any warm-tinted XP-Gs. I just need to hold out until the run is over...



+1:candle:


----------



## ThesaurZA (Aug 18, 2009)

Hi all. This is a first post for me, but I have been reading CPF for a while.

I just ordered a couple of Quarks, including a Ti, and was wondering whether anyone might know if the Ti parts would be compatible with the standard aluminium parts...?


----------



## Henk_Lu (Aug 18, 2009)

ThesaurZA said:


> Hi all. This is a first post for me, but I have been reading CPF for a while.
> 
> I just ordered a couple of Quarks, including a Ti, and was wondering whether anyone might know if the Ti parts would be compatible with the standard aluminium parts...?



Although I wonder why people would want to do such a disgusting parts exchange, it has already been discussed in the thread on the Marketplace :

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=198575

I hope you also ordered one or more neutral whites, they are really great! :thumbsup:


----------



## ThesaurZA (Aug 18, 2009)

Thanks


Henk_Lu said:


> Although I wonder why people would want to do such a disgusting parts exchange...


It's mainly for testing out the new XPG with different battery configurations. I only ordered one Ti. Can't wait to start playing though...


----------



## flatline (Aug 18, 2009)

Perhaps I'm not a proper flashaholic, but don't find the new quarks appealing at all since it offers me nothing that I don't already get from my QAAw (which I love, btw). For a flashlight to be appealing to me, it needs to be a difference in kind from what I already have, not a difference in degree.

Brighter but otherwise identical beam? No thanks.

Exact same form but of a different material? Only if the material offers a non-cosmetic advantage that I desire over the current material (titanium is a step backwards, heat-wise).

I'll be interested if 4sevens releases something that improves the MG L-mini II (which is my current lust). If they can release a better 18650 host before I break down and buy the L-mini, then they have a shot at my money.


----------



## wapkil (Aug 18, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



AlexD said:


> Why do "10% at High and negligible differences in lower modes" ? R2 bin 114 lm at 350ma and R4 bin 130 lm at 350ma, 14% brighter and maybe more brighter at higher amperage considering Relative LF vs. current graph



Good question. 

I suspect that at higher currents the better efficacy of these LEDs is caused mainly by larger emitting area. When smaller XP-Es are losing much of the efficacy XP-Gs they are still able to keep up. This is why the brightness difference can be 37% at 1A but only ~14% at 350mA. 

This part of my reasoning is probably correct but I may have been too fast in extrapolating this drop in the difference to lower currents (hence "negligible difference"). At lower currents the usual difference between performance bins starts to be more important so it may also be the case that at currents below 350mA the difference stays at ~14% or even becomes a bit higher. Either way, it is unnoticeable to the human eye.


----------



## cheetokhan (Aug 18, 2009)

flatline said:


> Perhaps I'm not a proper flashaholic, but don't find the new quarks appealing at all since it offers me nothing that I don't already get from my QAAw (which I love, btw). For a flashlight to be appealing to me, it needs to be a difference in kind from what I already have, not a difference in degree.
> 
> Brighter but otherwise identical beam? No thanks.
> 
> Exact same form but of a different material? Only if the material offers a non-cosmetic advantage that I desire over the current material (titanium is a step backwards, heat-wise).



I'm feeling the same way. I would have gotten a Ti version had I known they were coming before I bought a warm 2x123 and a regular AA version.
If the Ti body was restyled to have a little more pizazz than the bland, plain Jain looking regular Quarks, I might be more interested, but it sounds like it will just be a shinier version of the same light. 
I love the UI and the beam that my Quarks have, but this is one boring looking light.


----------



## recDNA (Aug 18, 2009)

cheetokhan said:


> I'm feeling the same way. I would have gotten a Ti version had I known they were coming before I bought a warm 2x123 and a regular AA version.
> If the Ti body was restyled to have a little more pizazz than the bland, plain Jain looking regular Quarks, I might be more interested, but it sounds like it will just be a shinier version of the same light.
> I love the UI and the beam that my Quarks have, but this is one boring looking light.


 
But with XP-G should be even nicer beam.

I don't really like the Olight T-25 I keep in my wife's car. Maybe I'll take it to work and put my Eagletac T20 in her car and get the 2 X AA Titanium Quark for my car....or if the Eagletac is WAY brighter I'll give her the Quark. She'll like the Titanium bling factor.


----------



## CaNo (Aug 18, 2009)

cheetokhan said:


> I'm feeling the same way. I would have gotten a Ti version had I known they were coming before I bought a warm 2x123 and a regular AA version.
> If the Ti body was restyled to have a little more pizazz than the bland, plain Jain looking regular Quarks, I might be more interested, but it sounds like it will just be a shinier version of the same light.
> I love the UI and the beam that my Quarks have, but this is one boring looking light.



+1

But even with the XP-G... it is still going to be a first run... I am sure there will be some problems/glitches with the first release... I'll wait. :tired:


----------



## John_Galt (Aug 18, 2009)

CaNo said:


> +1
> 
> But even with the XP-G... it is still going to be a first run... I am sure there will be some problems/glitches with the first release... I'll wait. :tired:



And with that... All of my carefully laid plans come smashing into a brick wall of realistic problems...

Truthfully, I was going to wait until the runtimes and outputs had been finalized to see which model I would order. More output= Q AA, longer runtimes, same output= Q 123


----------



## rockz4532 (Aug 18, 2009)

:twothumbs


----------



## Valpo Hawkeye (Aug 18, 2009)

CaNo said:


> But even with the XP-G... it is still going to be a first run... I am sure there will be some problems/glitches with the first release... I'll wait. :tired:



I'm the first to agree that first-runs are about as reliable as an Xbox 360 (on my fifth one). However, since these electronics have already been produced, released and tested in the hands of paying customers, I fail to see how this is a first run. The only thing "new" is the emitter. Those usually work or they don't.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Aug 18, 2009)

Even if these are buggier than poop, and they really really shouldn't be, 7777's will take care of us 100%.

No worries here!  Get them now or not at all, they are limited items.


----------



## CaNo (Aug 19, 2009)

Valpo Hawkeye said:


> I'm the first to agree that first-runs are about as reliable as an Xbox 360 (on my fifth one). However, since these electronics have already been produced, released and tested in the hands of paying customers, I fail to see how this is a first run. The only thing "new" is the emitter. Those usually work or they don't.


 
Oh don't get me wrong... I love my QAA on 14500. It's just the new emitter I am referring to. Noone has them out yet... Leading me to the last sentence that you had typed. But then again... Ti light for under $100... god thats EVIL! :devil:



Sgt. LED said:


> Even if these are buggier than poop, and they really really shouldn't be, 7777's will take care of us 100%.
> 
> No worries here!  Get them now or not at all, they are limited items.


 
Yes, I know 4 7's has not let me down either. This is just my personal way of trying to resist the temptation of purchasing the light... . I had to have it in writing . Oh well so much for that idea


----------



## dooz (Aug 19, 2009)

So any update on what TI grade theyre made of? :thinking:


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 19, 2009)

This whole thing sort of irritates me. I almost wish they simple were not coming. I had my cross hairs lined up on the 47`s MC-E light and my wallet will not support both. If only they were not Ti...if only they didn`t have the new xp-g...and if only they were not polished...if only they sold for way more...if only they were not a limited run :shakehead

But the MC-E will be 500 lumen...run on a single 18650...have thermal management.

Both selling for around $100...which one :hairpull: :mecry:


----------



## WadeF (Aug 19, 2009)

I'm hoping the XP-G will produce less heat than the XP-E, since it will be in a Titanium body.


----------



## bmstrong (Aug 19, 2009)

dooz said:


> So any update on what TI grade theyre made of? :thinking:



That's what I'm waiting on as well.


----------



## burntoshine (Aug 19, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> This whole thing sort of irritates me. I almost wish they simple were not coming. I had my cross hairs lined up on the 47`s MC-E light and my wallet will not support both. If only they were not Ti...if only they didn`t have the new xp-g...and if only they were not polished...if only they sold for way more...if only they were not a limited run :shakehead
> 
> But the MC-E will be 500 lumen...run on a single 18650...have thermal management.
> 
> Both selling for around $100...which one :hairpull: :mecry:



i've also been waiting for the quark mc-e light. these seem to have come out of left field.

i can see a lot of people getting annoyed; i know a lot of people would have waited on the regular quarks if they knew these were coming out. i'm sure it wouldn't have made much business sense to announce it though; would've killed initial sales, i imagine.

seems as though everything is limited edition. at least from my experience with 7777; even things that aren't announced as limited editions. all the natural finishes are gone. the T1 came and went in what felt like a couple months. it is indeed a cool feeling owning something that isn't available anymore.

i think i'd be more interested in these if they didn't have the rubber switch boot. as time wears on, i'm liking the all-too-common rubber switch boot less and less.

random thoughts from a random guy.


----------



## flatline (Aug 19, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> But the MC-E will be 500 lumen...run on a single 18650...have thermal management.


 
Is this pure speculation or is there official info about a 47s 18650 host coming soon?

If true, this would further delay my decision on purchasing a L-mini...


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 19, 2009)

flatline said:


> Is this pure speculation or is there official info about a 47s 18650 host coming soon?
> 
> If true, this would further delay my decision on purchasing a L-mini...



http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=195688


----------



## CaNo (Aug 20, 2009)

burntoshine said:


> i think i'd be more interested in these if they didn't have the rubber switch boot. as time wears on, i'm liking the all-too-common rubber switch boot less and less.
> 
> random thoughts from a random guy.



I agree with you. The clicky on Nitecore D10 for example feels more durable and sophisticated (even though it is not a clicky per say, but a piston drive), and also the clicky on a Ra Clicky is not bad for a rubber clicky. But all in all, yes the rubber clickies are making the light feel cheap, even though it is an excellent light. If the Ti's came with a Ti clicky... then hey I'm all for it. But if its a Ti body, and a rubber clicky... it will make the light feel half-assed and not worth my money when I have a perfectly functional regular Quark already in my arsenol.


----------



## CaNo (Aug 20, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=195688



That is :devil:... playing with our emotions like that! So September it is... I will wait.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 20, 2009)

CaNo said:


> That is :devil:... playing with our emotions like that! So September it is... I will wait.



Those are not limited runs, while the Ti`s are. Here today, gone tomorrow.


----------



## FrogmanM (Aug 20, 2009)

I have enough PDs, I'd like my AA Tactical Ti Quark to sport a Blue boot.

-Mayo


----------



## uplite (Aug 20, 2009)

dooz said:


> So any update on what TI grade theyre made of? :thinking:


Probably Grade 2. Pure Ti is roughly the same strength/workability as 6061-T6 Al, so they would not have to make any big changes to their manufacturing. Grade 5 (6Al4V) is stronger but harder to machine.

But does it really matter? Titanium flashlights are mostly about appearance, not function. These are _collectors' items_. Grade 2 or Grade 5, should look the same on your shelf.  :thumbsup:

-Jeff


----------



## Zendude (Aug 20, 2009)

uplite said:


> Probably Grade 2. Pure Ti is roughly the same strength/workability as 6061-T6 Al, so they would not have to make any big changes to their manufacturing. Grade 5 (6Al4V) is stronger but harder to machine.
> 
> But does it really matter? Titanium flashlights are mostly about appearance, not function. These are _collectors' items_. Grade 2 or Grade 5, should look the same on your shelf.  :thumbsup:
> 
> -Jeff




Bite your tounge...er fingers!:whoopin: Strength of steel(assuming its not grade 2), wieght of aluminum, no wear marks that stick out like a hippe at a gun show! Ti was *meant* to be carried and used!


----------



## CaNo (Aug 20, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> Those are not limited runs, while the Ti`s are. Here today, gone tomorrow.



I'm well aware. But I am just thinking in my head that I already have a Quark AA (not to mention aluminum handles heat better than Titanium...). I would just rather invest it in a totally different light with a noticeable difference, not just a cosmetic upgrade, and little clearer and a tad bit stronger beam.

But in all fairness, my opinion may change once I see some pictures or beamshots of this light. If the difference in beam quality is _*that*_ much greater than the XP-E... it might be worth the purchase. As it stands, we are only going off of hearsay without any actual proof, it just seems like the light is for bragging rights (which does not do anything for my situation because I have yet to encounter a flashaholic in person where I live)


----------



## recDNA (Aug 20, 2009)

Zendude said:


> Bite your tounge...er fingers!:whoopin: Strength of steel(assuming its not grade 2), wieght of aluminum, no wear marks that stick out like a hippe at a gun show! Ti was *meant* to be carried and used!


 
I know I'm going to carry mine (CR123). I just have to decide with or w/o clip. I think I prefer clipless on my keychain but I don't know if it will be too big or heavy. I'm used to my P1D on my keychain now.


----------



## Haz (Aug 20, 2009)

uplite said:


> These are _collectors' items_. Grade 2 or Grade 5, should look the same on your shelf.  :thumbsup:
> 
> -Jeff


 
This one is definately going to be a user!, rather than sitting on the shelf. It needs a bit of action, If I wanted a shelf queen, i wouldn't care less what material they were going to be made from, whether it be stainless steel, bare aluminium, or even a lump of clay!.


----------



## FrogmanM (Aug 20, 2009)

Haha funny you mention shelf queen, my Quark is gonna be my beater loaner torch.

-Mayo


----------



## CaNo (Aug 20, 2009)

FrogmanM said:


> Haha funny you mention shelf queen, my Quark is gonna be my beater loaner torch.
> 
> -Mayo



Between the Aluminum and the Titanium... I would sure hope so...


----------



## recDNA (Aug 20, 2009)

Haz said:


> This one is definately going to be a user!, rather than sitting on the shelf. It needs a bit of action, If I wanted a shelf queen, i wouldn't care less what material they were going to be made from, whether it be stainless steel, bare aluminium, or even a lump of clay!.


 
If I could afford the case with the entire collection I WOULD display it...and then I'd buy individual lights to use.


----------



## recDNA (Aug 20, 2009)

FrogmanM said:


> Haha funny you mention shelf queen, my Quark is gonna be my beater loaner torch.
> 
> -Mayo


 

I don't understand what that means?


----------



## Haz (Aug 20, 2009)

recDNA said:


> If I could afford the case with the entire collection I WOULD display it...and then I'd buy individual lights to use.


 
I would like the case too, it's so tempting. It feels as though I need the set to complete me!!


----------



## FrogmanM (Aug 20, 2009)

recDNA said:


> I don't understand what that means?



My family always feels funny using my flashlights, so I plan on specifically having my Ti Tactical AA Quark set aside for my family to borrow/use.

-Mayo


----------



## Th232 (Aug 20, 2009)

Definitely going to be a user for me.


----------



## Sgt. LED (Aug 20, 2009)

I want them to come with the blue buttons!


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 21, 2009)

CaNo said:


> I'm well aware. But I am just thinking in my head that I already have a Quark AA (not to mention aluminum handles heat better than Titanium...). I would just rather invest it in a totally different light with a noticeable difference, not just a cosmetic upgrade, and little clearer and a tad bit stronger beam.
> 
> But in all fairness, my opinion may change once I see some pictures or beamshots of this light. If the difference in beam quality is _*that*_ much greater than the XP-E... it might be worth the purchase. As it stands, we are only going off of hearsay without any actual proof, it just seems like the light is for bragging rights (which does not do anything for my situation because I have yet to encounter a flashaholic in person where I live)



LoL...me too. No one I know around here could care less. And to me it`s about performance and features. And value.


----------



## Glenn7 (Aug 21, 2009)

CaNo said:


> (which does not do anything for my situation because I have yet to encounter a flashaholic in person where I live)



Yes its funny/sad/frustrating/ironic when someone says hey thats a bright light - then on closer inspection and a few questions later - you answer them and watch their eyes glaze over - or they go.... you paid how much!!!! - then I say well hey if you could afford it wouldn't you buy the best? - or I say I can ride it off in tax for my work :naughty:


----------



## Burgess (Aug 21, 2009)

Yes its funny/sad/frustrating/ironic when someone says hey thats a bright light - 


- and you realize they're talking about your *Fauxton keylight* !



:shakehead
_


----------



## Glenn7 (Aug 21, 2009)

Burgess said:


> Yes its funny/sad/frustrating/ironic when someone says hey thats a bright light -
> 
> 
> - and you realize they're talking about your *Fauxton keylight* !
> ...


----------



## get-lit (Aug 21, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> LoL...me too. No one I know around here could care less. And to me it`s about performance and features. And value.


 
I called 4sevens and asked them directly what kind of difference we could expect. I specifically asked if the difference would be much noticable. They're answer was quick and clear...*MORE* THAN NOTICABLE. I'm on pre-order!!!


----------



## CaNo (Aug 21, 2009)

Glenn7 said:


> Yes its funny/sad/frustrating/ironic when someone says hey thats a bright light - then on closer inspection and a few questions later - you answer them and watch their eyes glaze over - or they go.... you paid how much!!!! - then I say well hey if you could afford it wouldn't you buy the best? - or I say I can ride it off in tax for my work :naughty:



Yes and when you do answer their questions, they give you a weird look  like they don't know what the heck you're talking about and shouldn't go anymore in depth because they do not share the same interest... :shrug:

I have still yet to hold a conversation with someone that knows what I am talking about when it comes to flashlights. 



Burgess said:


> Yes its funny/sad/frustrating/ironic when someone says hey thats a bright light -
> 
> 
> - and you realize they're talking about your *Fauxton keylight* !
> ...



Sadly, I can relate to this as well... 



get-lit said:


> I called 4sevens and asked them directly what kind of difference we could expect. I specifically asked if the difference would be much noticable. They're answer was quick and clear...*MORE* THAN NOTICABLE. I'm on pre-order!!!



Hmmmm....

Just curious... what did everyone pre-order so far?


----------



## uplite (Aug 21, 2009)

Zendude said:


> Strength of steel(assuming its not grade 2)


I think you'll want grade 2, actually. Grade 5 is about *40 times* less thermally conductive than aluminum. Grade 2 is only about 10 times less conductive than Al.

Either way, the emitter will get hot on High or Max, but with grade 2 it is less likely to go   

-Jeff


----------



## CaNo (Aug 21, 2009)

If you pre-ordered a Titanium Quark please enter it in the poll:
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/239926


----------



## mr.snakeman (Aug 21, 2009)

Sgt. LED said:


> I want them to come with the blue buttons!


+ 1 on that:wave:


----------



## oldpal (Aug 21, 2009)

CaNo said:


> I'm well aware. But I am just thinking in my head that I already have a Quark AA (not to mention aluminum handles heat better than Titanium...). I would just rather invest it in a totally different light with a noticeable difference, not just a cosmetic upgrade, and little clearer and a tad bit stronger beam.
> 
> But in all fairness, my opinion may change once I see some pictures or beamshots of this light. If the difference in beam quality is _*that*_ much greater than the XP-E... it might be worth the purchase. As it stands, we are only going off of hearsay without any actual proof, it just seems like the light is for bragging rights (which does not do anything for my situation because I have yet to encounter a flashaholic in person where I live)



Keep talking. But you are going to buy one. :devil:

Hugh


----------



## CaNo (Aug 21, 2009)

Shhh!!! I had something good going... :nana:


----------



## CaNo (Aug 21, 2009)

This forum is anti-self control... :shakehead


----------



## oldpal (Aug 21, 2009)

CaNo said:


> Shhh!!! I had something good going... :nana:



You weren't fooling anybody. What did you really order?

Hugh


----------



## NonSenCe (Aug 21, 2009)

never thought i would end up in this state of mind.. and actual ti light that i kinda want.. and almost have afford to buy too.. (and at the same time my maximum price limit for edc item is raised 20 or so bucks. "bcuz its titan!")

sheesh.. i just cant decide. regular or tactical. tac or reg.

i already have QwAAt as my edc flashlight. and i tend to program it alot. moonmode +medium or high for home use and low-high when out. so i kinda would like to have a 3-mode light instead. 

so now im torn.. should i go for QTiAAt/TiQAAt or QTiAAr/TiQAAr
i like AA/14500 set up and size.. 

or if i should keep one as home light, and other as pocket/belt carry edc.. but which.. the tactical works at work and stuff.. and it does work at home with different setup.. 

but the regular might work everywhere.

but i like the momentary mode alot and i hate the strobe and sos modes. (wish they would of made the light with maximum and blinker modes set to one side of ´the bezel twist..not like they are now.) would tactical tailcap on regular light be the key for happiness.. anyone tried that? -guess it becomes a hassle.

hope they will fix the moonmode preflash out of these! it diminshes the feel of quality of the quark.. and in my mind it will make the more expensive ti version feel.. hmm cheap.

ughh.. i cant decide yet. i want to lean towards the momentary mode of the tactical but then again.. i dont need the max output at all, so i might be okay with the regular version just tapping thru till high. (but thm damn sos modes and no momentary)

arghh.. HeLp fellow flashaholics! only few days to make decision left! 

and..no.. cant afford both. not until end of september earliest. seriously just one. 

if i cant decide which to get.. i will not buy one. im sorta happy with my current edc rotation of lights as is. 

(lummiraw,itpeos,d10,jetpro1,lmini2,c2h,tk11,zeb501h,itpc8t and qwaat.. im sucker for warm tints.. if they are close, warm wins.. so the titanium version white might negate it out of use on arrival.. i just as might like the warm quark more.)


----------



## CaNo (Aug 21, 2009)

oldpal said:


> You weren't fooling anybody. What did you really order?
> 
> Hugh



You caught my bluff! I was actually thinking on the grand daddy of the bunch (QTi123*2) but do not know if the size will be comfortable enough to carry front pocket, or if it is too big for comfort...


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 21, 2009)

CaNo said:


> This forum is anti-self control... :shakehead



You don`t need 200~250 wimpy lumen...you already have lights that glow that bright. 

YOU DO NEED 500+ LUMEN. 

YOU DO NEED A LIGHT THAT RUNS BRIGHT FOR A LONG TIME ON 18650 POWER.

By not buying the TI you can have ALL that...anyway...you do know if you buy the Ti you will still have to buy the 500 MC-E. So you will spend $200.

Now if you buy only the 500...then you will have $100 left over for the 47`s 1000 lumen SST-50 that will follow the MC-E. Well, unless you want to wait on that too...go for the 47`s 1500 lumen SST-100...figure Christmas time.

And most important...I will have someone to share in the misery of waiting :mecry:


----------



## CaNo (Aug 21, 2009)

NonSenCe said:


> never thought i would end up in this state of mind.. and actual ti light that i kinda want.. and almost have afford to buy too.. (and at the same time my maximum price limit for edc item is raised 20 or so bucks. "bcuz its titan!")
> 
> sheesh.. i just cant decide. regular or tactical. tac or reg.
> 
> ...



Since you already have the Regular Tactical QAA, I would say get the non tactical one with the titanium series. You wont have the annoying flash you were experiencing, and it is a slight twist away switching between modes... I would rather have something and not need it, than need it and not have it...


----------



## CaNo (Aug 21, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> You don`t need 200~250 wimpy lumen...you already have lights that glow that bright.
> 
> YOU DO NEED 500+ LUMEN.
> 
> ...



Are you trying to not make me buy a Ti Quark so you can guarantee yourself one? haha jk

I do see your point though... maybe I am just power hungry, and should stop playing around with these little flashlights and head towards the HID's... Do pocket HID's exist?


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 21, 2009)

Nonsence, If I were you...and if you decide to buy a Ti light...why not go for the 2x123 and power it with a 17670. Maybe...just maybe...47`s will offer diff bodies later. This way you have the brightest...and longest running. You already have the AA for EDC...and the Ti you might want to keep in good shape...:tinfoil:


----------



## icaruz (Aug 21, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> Nonsence, If I were you...and if you decide to buy a Ti light...why not go for the 2x123 and power it with a 17670. Maybe...just maybe...47`s will offer diff bodies later. This way you have the brightest...and longest running. You already have the AA for EDC...and the Ti you might want to keep in good shape...:tinfoil:



Just a question..what is the runtime for the 17670 on the Q123*2?
Need to know before hitting the checkout button again...


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 21, 2009)

icaruz said:


> Just a question..what is the runtime for the 17670 on the Q123*2?
> Need to know before hitting the checkout button again...



The R-2 ran 1:42 to 50% https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/234960

Think it ran more than 6 hours on the next level down...70 lumen


----------



## Xe54 (Aug 21, 2009)

Hi folks,

I ordered a 123 Ti Quark a few days ago. Now I'm considering to see if 47 will let me change to a AA tactical. The reason is that after reading about the thermal conductivity of Ti, I'm not sure I like the idea of a hard-driven LED in a Ti body. The AA doesn't attempt to reach the highest outputs, so may be safer for the LED.

I'm thinking to use this light to replace a SF U2 as my carry around the house once evening comes light. The fwd. clicky is desirable here. I'll probably program it to low and med, then it will be about as useful as the U2.


----------



## get-lit (Aug 21, 2009)

I'm definitely ordering one, just cant' decide which one! :thinking:

I really want the 123 so that I can carry it as my primary EDC. It's just small enough for me to carry around all the time, but then what if I have to try and catch my dog real quick and I wander out into the back woods just a little too far and get lost and my 123 runs out of juice and there's all these glowing eyes out there with only enough moonlight to see my own imagination:candle:

I could get eaten alive by big foot and I'd never even get back to tell everyone that there really is a big foot :duck:, and the legend would continue on without any real proof but some of my old bones left behind!  Even the best forensics with Quarks couldn't determine whether it was big foot or just a pack of wolves 

So here's the deal, if I got the 123-2 instead, I would have had enough run time to see where I was going so that I could run away from big foot (I'm a fast runner) and I could have told you all about it! :grouphug:

But then again, if I had the 123-2 instead of just the 123, how likely is it that I would happen to even have it on me then? Seriously! I'm much less likely to happen to be carrying my Quark if it is larger than the 123. :sweat:In that case, I wouldn't have had a light at all and I wouldn't have ventured far enough into the woods to even get lost and find big foot to begin with. So 123 it is :thumbsup:

Damn! So now that I'm stuck with the 123, I gotta deal with the whole clip thingy!If I had the clip version, I just might get it snagged on that little bit of sewing string at the bottom of my pocket just when I needed it most and a log could have jumped out and tripped me and knocked me unconscious and big foot would have come eaten me without me ever seeing it. Ok, so definitely **NO** clip! :shakehead

Um, then there's regular or tactical!  It's quite feasible that no matter how fast I run, big foot could corner me somewhere. I've heard of that happening. If I had the regular version, then by the time I actually find the defensive strobe mode, my leg is gone and I wouldn't care too much about the light at that point anyway. :hairpull:With the tactical version, I could pull a cool Skywalker move and switch to pre-programmed defensive attack strobe mode and - BOOM!! Big Foot runs like hell!!!  Tactical it is!!! 

Thanks guys!
:sleepy:


----------



## Marduke (Aug 21, 2009)

Xe54 said:


> Hi folks,
> 
> I ordered a 123 Ti Quark a few days ago. Now I'm considering to see if 47 will let me change to a AA tactical. The reason is that after reading about the thermal conductivity of Ti, I'm not sure I like the idea of a hard-driven LED in a Ti body. The AA doesn't attempt to reach the highest outputs, so may be safer for the LED.
> 
> I'm thinking to use this light to replace a SF U2 as my carry around the house once evening comes light. The fwd. clicky is desirable here. I'll probably program it to low and med, then it will be about as useful as the U2.



Just because it goes higher doesn't mean you have to use it higher. Be smarter than the flashlight...


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 21, 2009)

Xe54 said:


> Hi folks,
> 
> I ordered a 123 Ti Quark a few days ago. Now I'm considering to see if 47 will let me change to a AA tactical. The reason is that after reading about the thermal conductivity of Ti, I'm not sure I like the idea of a hard-driven LED in a Ti body. The AA doesn't attempt to reach the highest outputs, so may be safer for the LED.
> 
> I'm thinking to use this light to replace a SF U2 as my carry around the house once evening comes light. The fwd. clicky is desirable here. I'll probably program it to low and med, then it will be about as useful as the U2.



Well these light are 5 level lights...turbo being 5. I doubt any of the models will have much trouble on level 4 (probably around 100 lumen) and lower.


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Aug 21, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



wapkil said:


> You can make a guess by simply multiplying the output by ~1.37, that's how brighter @1A XP-Gs should be, according to Cree announcement. Remember that for the human eye the 37% brightness difference is hardly noticeable.
> 
> EDIT: I meant multiplying the output of XP-E R2 Quarks.



Depends on beam distribution if you will notice the % difference. 37% difference between two lights using same type emitter, optic, or reflector will be noticeable. You would notice more lux, throw with the high flux light. I do not subscribe to thinking that it takes 50% more flux to notice the difference, just my own subjective conclusion, never mind the obvious difference testing lux, or output.bounce with a lightmeter.

Bill


----------



## jabe1 (Aug 21, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> You don`t need 200~250 wimpy lumen...you already have lights that glow that bright.
> 
> YOU DO NEED 500+ LUMEN.
> 
> ...



You forgot to mention the AAA. :nana:


----------



## CaNo (Aug 21, 2009)

I wonder if a QAAA will be able to top a LF2XT...


----------



## wapkil (Aug 21, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Bullzeyebill said:


> Depends on beam distribution if you will notice the % difference. 37% difference between two lights using same type emitter, optic, or reflector will be noticeable. You would notice more lux, throw with the high flux light. I do not subscribe to thinking that it takes 50% more flux to notice the difference, just my own subjective conclusion, never mind the obvious difference testing lux, or output.bounce with a lightmeter.



The emitter is definitely not the same. The package dimensions are the same but AFAIK XP-G's surface area is 2mm^2 while XP-E is 1mm^2. I think that with twice the surface even if the reflector is changed (haven't heard anything about it) it will have lower throw. There will be differences of course - like lower throw and larger hotspot. 

You are right though that thinking only about the brightness, without considering the beam pattern, doesn't make much sense - I wanted only to say, that 37% difference (and much lower in lower modes) in my opinion isn't something important. And obviously, I was writing about the human eye - with an appropriately sensitive equipment every (non quantum physics level) difference can be measured.


----------



## CaNo (Aug 21, 2009)

Less throw? BOOOOO!!!!!! :eeew:


----------



## wapkil (Aug 21, 2009)

CaNo said:


> Less throw? BOOOOO!!!!!! :eeew:



Well, Quarks are not dedicated throwers anyway. I think larger hotspot may be a nice thing for some users.


----------



## CaNo (Aug 21, 2009)

wapkil said:


> Well, Quarks are not dedicated throwers anyway. I think larger hotspot may be a nice thing for some users.



Wider beam is always useful I guess for searching in the woods, or ceiling bounce, but I do not want less throw than my Regular Quark... :thinking:


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 21, 2009)

My guess is the throw will be about the same...larger hotspot...but similar brightness/throw...little more brightness in the spill...all good.


----------



## Nitroz (Aug 21, 2009)

You guys are so funny worrying about less throw with the XP-G.:shakehead Who knows maybe someone has developed a new reflector in a larger head that will make the XP-G a thrower.


----------



## recDNA (Aug 21, 2009)

Nitroz said:


> You guys are so funny worrying about less throw with the XP-G.:shakehead Who knows maybe someone has developed a new reflector in a larger head that will make the XP-G a thrower.


 
I'm pretty sure the shape of the Ti Quarks is identical to the original Quarks....but that's fine with me because I prefer flood to throw.


----------



## lolzertank (Aug 21, 2009)

Nitroz said:


> You guys are so funny worrying about less throw with the XP-G.:shakehead Who knows maybe someone has developed a new reflector in a larger head that will make the XP-G a thrower.



Then again, you could have put an XP-E into that new head and it would still throw better. 

The surface brightness of the XP-G is sadly lower than the XP-E at the same current.


----------



## Nitroz (Aug 21, 2009)

recDNA said:


> I'm pretty sure the shape of the Ti Quarks is identical to the original Quarks....but that's fine with me because I prefer flood to throw.



I'm not to concerned either, I just want my Ti now!:hairpull:


----------



## Nitroz (Aug 21, 2009)

lolzertank said:


> Then again, you could have put an XP-E into that new head and it would still throw better.



This is all speculation that the XP-G will not outperform the XP-E as not many have seen the XP-G in a working light. 



lolzertank said:


> The surface brightness of the XP-G is sadly lower than the XP-E at the same current.



True however, the XP-G can run at higher currents.


----------



## wapkil (Aug 21, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> My guess is the throw will be about the same...larger hotspot...but similar brightness/throw...little more brightness in the spill...all good.



We are all guessing here but could you explain why you think so? 

The XP-G driven at 1A will have ~70% surface brightness of XP-E and twice as large emitting surface. Even if the optical properties of the dome are changed, I don't see how it can have the same throw (for any rational definition of throw).


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 21, 2009)

wapkil said:


> We are all guessing here but could you explain why you think so?
> 
> The XP-G driven at 1A will have ~70% surface brightness of XP-E and twice as large emitting surface. Even if the optical properties of the dome are changed, I don't see how it can have the same throw (for any rational definition of throw).



Alright, so your thinking is the hotspot will be twice as large but only 70% as bright...could be...that would still give an overall increase in total lumen of around 40%. I wonder how the spill brightness will be affected?


----------



## Nitroz (Aug 21, 2009)

wapkil said:


> We are all guessing here but could you explain why you think so?
> 
> The XP-G driven at 1A will have ~70% surface brightness of XP-E and twice as large emitting surface. Even if the optical properties of the dome are changed, I don't see how it can have the same throw (for any rational definition of throw).



Cree does say that the XP-G will have the highest lumen density in any available lighting-class LED. Hmmmm, time will tell.


----------



## Zendude (Aug 21, 2009)

uplite said:


> I think you'll want grade 2, actually. Grade 5 is about *40 times* less thermally conductive than aluminum. Grade 2 is only about 10 times less conductive than Al.
> 
> Either way, the emitter will get hot on High or Max, but with grade 2 it is less likely to go
> 
> -Jeff



I guess I'll have to hold it with two hands!:nana:

But seriously, how does it compare to SS? My ld01 seems to do alright. 


Since I'm posting I might as well spill my guts. I try really hard not to get too caught up in the latest lights as the ones I have do the job just fine. I'm the type of guy that sticks with common batteries. I have a d10, l1d with l2d body, ld01ss and an e01. I passed on the Al Quarks and the EZAA because of this. I figured since I justified getting a Zebralight to fill the hands free niche that I would be content...until now. I've really taken a liking to Ti and this release has just about broken me. 

I can't justify this...but I sure am trying!:shakehead


----------



## Nitroz (Aug 21, 2009)

Zendude said:


> I guess I'll have to hold it with two hands!:nana:
> 
> But seriously, how does it compare to SS? My ld01 seems to do alright.
> 
> I can't justify this...but I sure am trying!:shakehead



Here let me help. 

1. You don't have any Ti lights 
2. You don't have any XP-G Cree lights(For sure)
3. This is a great deal for Ti

Is that enough or should I go on...:naughty:


----------



## nismotor (Aug 21, 2009)

For those wanting a pic of the production QaaTi, maybe you ought to look at the Ese LZ2 stainless steel finish. It looks almost like a Quark aa, sans the clip and knurling. ..just a thought


----------



## nismotor (Aug 21, 2009)

Here is a link to selfbuilt's review of the Ese Lz2 SS:
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/207772




.. sorry if this was mentioned already


----------



## CaNo (Aug 22, 2009)

nismotor said:


> Here is a link to selfbuilt's review of the Ese Lz2 SS:
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/207772
> 
> 
> ...



If this was mentioned before, I did not catch it, so let me be the first to thank you for the link. That is one sweet looking light! So I am guessing the only other difference between this and the Quark, aside from the obvious, (logo, emitter, diff clicky, etc) is supposedly knurling galore... 

Atleast now I have something to work with.


----------



## wapkil (Aug 22, 2009)

Nitroz said:


> Cree does say that the XP-G will have the highest lumen density in any available lighting-class LED. Hmmmm, time will tell.



Heh, looks like their marketing department managed to calculate the lumen density in relation to the full package size. After all why not - it looks better in the announcements this way...


----------



## uplite (Aug 22, 2009)

Zendude said:


> I guess I'll have to hold it with two hands!:nana:
> 
> But seriously, how does it compare to SS? My ld01 seems to do alright.


It depends on the grade, but roughly speaking stainless steel is also a poor thermal conductor. About the same as unalloyed Ti, 10x slower than Al. Keep in mind that your LD01 in max mode drives just 1/3 the current of a Quark.

No worries, though.  My earlier post was that Ti ~alloy~ is much worse, and therefore unlikely to be used in these lights. Anyway, they come with a 10-year warranty. If you want to set your mind at ease, just run through a few cells on Max to test it out.  :thumbsup:

-Jeff


----------



## Nitroz (Aug 22, 2009)

wapkil said:


> Heh, looks like their marketing department managed to calculate the lumen density in relation to the full package size. After all why not - it looks better in the announcements this way...



Yup, I still think it will be a winner.


----------



## 96bravo (Aug 22, 2009)

I think I will hold off for the next evolution from 47777. A Tactical Tungsten Carbide (TTC). I've had a lot of experience with titanium tools, devices, and weapons, and found one common shortcoming. They mar and scratch easily. Not any such problem with tungsten carbide. With a new brighter, more effiecient emitter and 18650 power, it will be a thrower and durable to boot. Just perfect to toss in the back of the recon hummer. Now if only the follow on unit to the TTC will have built in solar recharge capability. Or perhaps a slow decay nuclear power plant( If we can get past the tree huggers). Then for a catchy name....

Yurgis


----------



## lolzertank (Aug 22, 2009)

wapkil said:


> Heh, looks like their marketing department managed to calculate the lumen density in relation to the full package size. After all why not - it looks better in the announcements this way...



And for most lighting applications, that's all that matters. General lighting does NOT require a Maxabeam. Even so-called "spotlights" are flooders to us flashaholics.


----------



## lolzertank (Aug 22, 2009)

96bravo said:


> I think I will hold off for the next evolution from 47777. A Tactical Tungsten Carbide (TTC). I've had a lot of experience with titanium tools, devices, and weapons, and found one common shortcoming. They mar and scratch easily. Not any such problem with tungsten carbide. With a new brighter, more effiecient emitter and 18650 power, it will be a thrower and durable to boot. Just perfect to toss in the back of the recon hummer. Now if only the follow on unit to the TTC will have built in solar recharge capability. Or perhaps a slow decay nuclear power plant( If we can get past the tree huggers). Then for a catchy name....
> 
> Yurgis



That's going to one heavy flashlight. Tungsten Carbide is *6* times denser than aluminum. Not to mention that it's going to be a PITA to machine...  Titanium is bad enough.


----------



## NonSenCe (Aug 22, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> Nonsence, If I were you...and if you decide to buy a Ti light...why not go for the 2x123 and power it with a 17670. Maybe...just maybe...47`s will offer diff bodies later. This way you have the brightest...and longest running. You already have the AA for EDC...and the Ti you might want to keep in good shape...:tinfoil:


 

nope.. 

if i get one, for that price, it must be a user light! i cant justify paying that much for shelf queen and rarely use it. all my lights are bought with a thought "i beat the living sht out of it and use it like tool it is". and because of that i have set an aesthetical "Limit" how much it can cost.. motto: only have things that you are ready to use/lose/break and replace.

the 2*cr123 light is on high end of my size limit for edc. (i use the lmini2 only when i know i need long runtime) and the TI vould be even heavyer than it. and also the extra worry of mismatching cells (or buying 17670s no no not again different battery to use and buy..). so no go for 2 cell ti lights as my edc. 

and shorter cr123 light is a bit too short for me to use with comfort. they disappear inside my hand.

so the AA is the right one.. (works with alkalines, lithiums, nimhs and li-ions.. yeah. versatility is good) 

but: if 47s puts out the extra bodies. i might consider buying the 2cr body and use the 17670 and aa head and clicky.. and have a long runtime light!

but the regular vs tactical is still a dilemma. big one. (simple to use, momentary vs multimode and no momentary)


----------



## recDNA (Aug 22, 2009)

I just wish 4-7's would put out some specs with numbers and beamshots.


----------



## 96bravo (Aug 22, 2009)

lolzertank said:


> That's going to one heavy flashlight. Tungsten Carbide is *6* times denser than aluminum. Not to mention that it's going to be a PITA to machine...  Titanium is bad enough.


. T

Tungsten is 4 times harder than titanium. There's no secret to machining tungsten. Patience, mostly, don't rush the job, and use plenty of lubricant.

I won't be concerned about the weight of the body. Overall, that will be a small portion of the light's whole weight. I believe most of the weight will be for the nuclear cell shielding.

I would be concerned about the Peoples' Republic of Kalifornia imposing some wacko up front recycle fee (like they do with computer monitors).
Just another intrusion on rights. what part of "The right of the People to be fully illuminated...shall not be infringed..." don't they get?

I personally don't worry about the cost..I'm married to an independently wealthy woman who understands that a man must have his hobbies.

Yurgis


----------



## CaNo (Aug 22, 2009)

recDNA said:


> I just wish 4-7's would put out some specs with numbers and beamshots.


+100


----------



## jabe1 (Aug 22, 2009)

NonSenCe said:


> nope..
> 
> if i get one, for that price, it must be a user light! i cant justify paying that much for shelf queen and rarely use it. all my lights are bought with a thought "i beat the living sht out of it and use it like tool it is". and because of that i have set an aesthetical "Limit" how much it can cost.. motto: only have things that you are ready to use/lose/break and replace.
> 
> ...



I decided to get the AA reg, and a spare tactical tailcap assy. which will promptly be disembowled to donate it's guts to the Ti tailcap. 

I have a AAW setup that way and it works great for me!


----------



## JermsMalibu (Aug 22, 2009)

So I was thinking earlier today about how the XP-G will look in the light. I know that the die is bigger than the XR-E and XP-E dies, but since the XP-E and XP-G use the same package....would the apparent die size of the XP-G be about the same as the XR-E (since it is partially magnified)? If so, I wouldn't think it'd be too hard to get a reflector to work well with it. Anywho, that's just my thought.


----------



## get-lit (Aug 23, 2009)

96bravo said:


> Patience, mostly, don't rush the job, and use plenty of lubricant.


 
Is that how you keep your independently wealthy woman??


----------



## Sgt. LED (Aug 23, 2009)

_Blue buttons........._


----------



## Splunk_Au (Aug 23, 2009)

What kind of Ti alloy will these be made of?


----------



## ThesaurZA (Aug 23, 2009)

@#$%, I just ordered another Quark Ti. I couldn't help myself. These are going to look awesome with the blue boot - so I picked up a boot kit too!


----------



## jabe1 (Aug 23, 2009)

Sgt. LED said:


> _Blue buttons........._



LOL Exactly what I keep thinking...


----------



## wapkil (Aug 23, 2009)

lolzertank said:


> And for most lighting applications, that's all that matters. General lighting does NOT require a Maxabeam. Even so-called "spotlights" are flooders to us flashaholics.



Well, maybe but I'm a bit tired of all these advertisements that present new LEDs as if they were important improvement while all they really are is a bigger die. 

Measuring the lumen density in relation to the package size is rather strange - by cutting out the PCB corners I would get a better value. I'm not even sure what this "lumen density" really mean. At what current is it measured? If the current is different for different LEDs, there is really no comparison. If it is the same, bigger dies by definition show better values (because of lower current density and better efficacy). Of course it is not only Cree's fault, the competition does the same.

Anyway, continuing this discussion would probably be off topic in this thread.


----------



## recDNA (Aug 23, 2009)

Will the Ti Quarks have the flash defect?


----------



## uplite (Aug 23, 2009)

96bravo said:


> Tungsten is 4 times harder than titanium.


Tungsten is lame.  If money is no object, how about the *Diamond* Quark. Harder than _any_ other material...better thermal conductivity than _any_ other material...about the same weight as aluminum...and you can inspect your o-rings without even opening the light. :thumbsup: 

-Jeff


----------



## Morelite (Aug 23, 2009)

recDNA said:


> Will the Ti Quarks have the flash defect?


----------



## uplite (Aug 23, 2009)

wapkil said:


> Well, maybe but I'm a bit tired of all these advertisements that present new LEDs as if they were important improvement while all they really are is a bigger die.


Haha, welcome to the world of popular electronic components. Ever follow CPU releases? New CPU families almost always perform _worse_ at release than the previous family...but Intel & co market the heck out of 'em, and people buy 'em. 

Seriously though...we can't judge these new LEDs until we have more data. It's possible that the XP-G has other benefits. Lower cost? Higher thermal tolerance? I dunno. When they're generally released with pricing and public datasheets, we can assess. 

-Jeff


----------



## uplite (Aug 23, 2009)

Morelite said:


>


I think he means the very quick flash at high brightness, aka *pre-flash*, when you turn the light on in a low mode.

I'd bet this is _not_ fixed. I dunno for sure, but I get the impression that 47s does not make their own electronics, so they don't have much control to debug this. Which is a shame, because there's a bunch of other features that they could implement if they had control. Like:

1) Let us program _sequences_ of modes, instead of just single modes, on the tactical head.

2) Provide several preset "profiles" (e.g. Medium-High-Max, High-Medium-Moonlight, etc) for different use cases, that you can select with some twisty/clicky programming sequence.

3) Let us change the behavior of a Regular head to Tactical, or vice versa, with some twisty/clicky programming sequence (actually, I'm very surprised that they don't already do this, so they could manufacture & stock just one Quark head ).

Wishful thinking. Maybe I'm wrong and they do make their own controllers, and they will do stuff like this. We'll see... 

-Jeff


----------



## Marduke (Aug 23, 2009)

recDNA said:


> Will the Ti Quarks have the flash defect?



Well, considering it's not a defect in the first place...


----------



## flæshaholic (Aug 23, 2009)

Sigh. Got the reg 123 no clip, nano charger and aw r123.


----------



## chrisWELD (Aug 23, 2009)

jabe1 said:


> I decided to get the AA reg, and a spare tactical tailcap assy. which will promptly be disembowled to donate it's guts to the Ti tailcap.
> 
> I have a AAW setup that way and it works great for me!



So you effectively get a forward clicky with momentary which tailstands - am I understanding you right? 

Sounds like a nice idea. How easy was it to swap out the guts?


----------



## Morelite (Aug 23, 2009)

chrisWELD said:


> So you effectively get a forward clicky with momentary which tailstands - am I understanding you right?
> 
> Sounds like a nice idea. How easy was it to swap out the guts?


I don't think he has done it yet unless it was done on the aluminum Quarks since the Ti's are in the pre-order stage.

It does sound like a great plan though.


----------



## xenonk (Aug 24, 2009)

The aluminum tactical and regular tailcaps are identical with the internals removed. The tactical guts themselves cause the switch to protrude.


----------



## jabe1 (Aug 24, 2009)

chrisWELD said:


> So you effectively get a forward clicky with momentary which tailstands - am I understanding you right?
> 
> Sounds like a nice idea. How easy was it to swap out the guts?



I have removed the switch from a regular tailcap, just to check whether it was glued or not. It is a simple procedure, done with snap-ring pliers, or small needlenose.

xenonk is right, it won't tailstand. I just want the tac switch on a regular head... keeping the Ti look. Also, the retaining ring should be Ti to avoid corrosion probs with dissimilar metals as described earlier in this thread.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 24, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



Haz said:


> Hi 4Sevens, any jobs available... i think i just made a sale
> i can do other tasks too...
> 
> lube flashlight threads
> ...



We can start 4sevens.au :nana:


----------



## Glenn7 (Aug 24, 2009)

*Re: Titanium Quarks at the Marketplace!*



[email protected] said:


> We can start 4sevens.au :nana:



good idea :thumbsup: or we could call it 7fours.au:ironic:


----------



## uplite (Aug 24, 2009)

Marduke said:


> recDNA said:
> 
> 
> > Will the Ti Quarks have the flash defect?
> ...


aha...I see...it's actually a subliminal message coded in very very fast morse code:

-... ..- -.-- / -- --- .-. . / --.- ..- .- .-. -.- ...

 :laughing:

-Jeff


----------



## wapkil (Aug 24, 2009)

uplite said:


> aha...I see...it's actually a subliminal message coded in very very fast morse code:
> 
> -... ..- -.-- / -- --- .-. . / --.- ..- .- .-. -.- ...
> 
> :laughing:



There was also an idea that the pre-flash is a deliberately introduced, extremely useful feature. The message seems to work quite well so it seems that your theory is correct. It's possible that both interpretations are true. Either way, the pre-flash is obviously not a defect because these lights are, by definition, flawless


----------



## Zendude (Aug 24, 2009)

Nitroz said:


> Here let me help.
> 
> 1. You don't have any Ti lights
> 2. You don't have any XP-G Cree lights(For sure)
> ...




NO MORE!....NO MORE! I CAN'T STAND IT! :hairpull:

OK it's justified.for a tactical AA!


----------



## recDNA (Aug 24, 2009)

uplite said:


> I think he means the very quick flash at high brightness, aka *pre-flash*, when you turn the light on in a low mode.
> 
> I'd bet this is _not_ fixed. I dunno for sure, but I get the impression that 47s does not make their own electronics, so they don't have much control to debug this. Which is a shame, because there's a bunch of other features that they could implement if they had control. Like:
> 
> ...


 

Yes thank-you. A communication problem I guess. I consider the "pre-flash" (not to be confused with any of the flash modes) to be a defect. I wonder if it will be corrected? 

I think the bright momentary flash when using moonlight mode in pitch darkness is a bad thing. If there is ambient light present you probably wouldn't use moonlight mode so there is no need for a pre-flash to let you know the light is on. I've read many complaints about it. I see no description of it as a "good feature" of the light on the website. 

I agree with your 3 points also (especially the first one)...just didn't think of them.


----------



## Marduke (Aug 24, 2009)

A "defect" implies a mistake or deviation from the intended design, of which there is none. It is the nature of the circuit. If you want it gone, you sacrifice goobs of efficiency. 

Furthermore, why does it matter? It is sufficiently low and of such a short duration that it has absolutely no effect on dark adapted vision (it is below the required biochemical threshold).


----------



## Moonshadow (Aug 24, 2009)

Sorry, but I couldn't disagree more. 

Are you trying to suggest that the preflash is a design _feature_ ? An intentional addition to the workings of the light ? Or is it really something unwanted but difficult to eliminate ?.

Saying that it doesn't matter isn't good enough. A scratch or blemish in the anodisation doesn't actually matter to the function of a light, but would be cause for rejection. Apparently minor things like this contribute greatly to the feeling of quality in a product.

If you are working in a scotopic environment, the preflash could be very annoying. Biochemical threshold or not isn't the point - if you are dark adapted, it will be very noticeable.


----------



## Marduke (Aug 24, 2009)

If you really want to discuss the preflash, there are already numerous threads on it specifically in the MP. Lots of info there on what causes it and why it exists. 

However, in actual use, it is VERY small, and nowhere near as bad as the Fenix preflash, which I am sure is what most people are imagining when they read about it but have never actually seen it.


----------



## wapkil (Aug 24, 2009)

Marduke said:


> A "defect" implies a mistake or deviation from the intended design, of which there is none.



It depends on the vocabulary but AFAIR in the language used for example in ISO standards the pre-flash can be accurately described as a "design defects" (hence also also a "defect") - an incorrect behavior occurring by design. A defect is any flaw that prevents something from working correctly. If we agree that the existence of pre-flash is an incorrect behavior, preventing the light from working as requested by the user, then it is a defect.

This mistake or deviation you write about is usually an anomaly, non-conformity or maybe a manufacturing defect.


----------



## uplite (Aug 24, 2009)

Marduke said:


> If you really want to discuss the preflash, there are already numerous threads on it specifically in the MP. Lots of info there on what causes it and why it exists.


I just searched the MP for "(preflash or 'pre-flash') quark", and the only thread that came up was *this one*, which mentions another thread that was closed and can't be found. I smell fish...or cow patties...or astroturf?  

Marduke, you seem to understand the issue. Can you either explain it, or link to any thread that explains it?

fwiw, the "preflash" does not affect me. I only use my Quarks in High or Max mode. Frankly I don't understand why so many folks use these lights on Moonlight or Low mode...I have a tiny led in the victorinox penlight on my keychain for that. But I've seen the flash, and I am curious about what causes it. Is it really a subliminal message?  :laughing:

-Jeff


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Aug 24, 2009)

Well there is the one bonus that the preflash doesn't seem to occur on any of the 1.5-4.2V Quarks if it hasn't been turned on in greater than ~30 seconds. My 123-2 has it every time, but it is still low intensity and extremely brief.


----------



## DM51 (Aug 24, 2009)

There was a thread in the MP on the subject of the "pre-flash". It was a troll thread, so it was closed. 

Further posts in this thread about this will be deleted as off-topic and/or trolling, with action taken against offenders where appropriate.


----------



## tennisplyr3 (Aug 24, 2009)

uplite said:


> aha...I see...it's actually a subliminal message coded in very very fast morse code:
> 
> -... ..- -.-- / -- --- .-. . / --.- ..- .- .-. -.- ...
> 
> ...



"buy more quarks" 

lol...


----------



## Norm (Aug 24, 2009)

DM51 said:


> There was a thread in the MP on the subject of the "pre-flash". It was a troll thread, so it was closed.
> 
> Further posts in this thread about this will be deleted as off-topic and/or trolling, with action taken against offenders where appropriate.


Thanks Dave.
Norm


----------



## uplite (Aug 24, 2009)

Dang. I was just about to post that I finally found the closed thread about that-which-we-may-not-mention, and that I don't think that-which-we-may-not-mention is a significant issue. 

But the censorship here _is_ a big issue for me. I don't play on threads that are so obviously managed by their commercial sponsors. I'm outta this thread for good!! Enjoy. 

-Jeff


----------



## Haz (Aug 24, 2009)

It seems most people prefer brush stainless clips over the chrome ones, i agree.

hopefully they have will also make the clips with deep carry, so the whole light can go into the pocket


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 24, 2009)

uplite said:


> Dang. I was just about to post that I finally found the closed thread about that-which-we-may-not-mention, and that I don't think that-which-we-may-not-mention is a significant issue.
> 
> But the censorship here _is_ a big issue for me. I don't play on threads that are so obviously managed by their commercial sponsors. I'm outta this thread for good!! Enjoy.
> 
> -Jeff



Whoa uplite...go ahead and place the link to the thread so those who didn`t catch it before can read up. The only reason our moderator posted a warning is that this subject has been beaten into the ground before. Just be going round and round like a cat chasing it`s tail. Has nothing at all to do with commercial sponsors...I can assure you that. The pre-flash is there...it is what it is. If folks think it would bother them that much then perhaps these are not the lights for them. Just the way these are


----------



## tslrc (Aug 24, 2009)

This is insane :shakehead I spent the last week trying to decide which Quark TI to get. I narrowed it down to AA or 2AA, then down to a regular instead of tactical after much thought and  

I on Sunday for a regular AA Ti...........and now I decided to get another one . I'm almost back where I started from last week.


----------



## Haz (Aug 24, 2009)

tslrc said:


> This is insane :shakehead I spent the last week trying to decide which Quark TI to get. I narrowed it down to AA or 2AA, then down to a regular instead of tactical after much thought and
> 
> I on Sunday for a regular AA Ti...........and now I decided to get another one . I'm almost back where I started from last week.


 
I had the same dilemma, so I went for the regular AA Ti, plus the tactical AA^2 Ti, because I didn't want to use other batteries, so i have 6 additional combinations possible.






Default

AA Regular
AA^2 Tactical
When changing only the bodies

AA^2 Regular
AA Tactical
When changing the heads only, 8 modes (Regular) or 2 user defined (Tactical)


AA 2 user defined mode with Regular switch
AA^2 8 modes with Tactical switch
When changing the tails only

AA 8 modes with Tactical switch
AA^2 2 user defined mode with Regular switch


----------



## Norm (Aug 24, 2009)

I did something similar but bought 123 regular sans clip and AA Tactical. Similar combinations to Haz.
Norm


----------



## nismotor (Aug 24, 2009)

tslrc said:


> This is insane :shakehead I spent the last week trying to decide which Quark TI to get. I narrowed it down to AA or 2AA, then down to a regular instead of tactical after much thought and
> 
> I on Sunday for a regular AA Ti...........and now I decided to get another one . I'm almost back where I started from last week.


 

Haha you are not alone as you can see. 

Ever since I heard the news on the 15th, I've been trying to narrow it down to which one I should get. Went through pretty much the same thing, and bought the Ti AA Reg recently...just like you.-- :shakeheadplease don't tempt me to get another !!!


----------



## richardcpf (Aug 24, 2009)

You should get a AA so you could use 14500 with it. Then you'll have the brightest AA flashlight*


----------



## tslrc (Aug 24, 2009)

Haz said:


> I had the same dilemma, so I went for the regular AA Ti, plus the tactical AA^2 Ti, because I didn't want to use other batteries, so i have 6 additional combinations possible.



Actually I was thinking of the tactical AA^2 TI, so I guess I'll add that to my regular AA Ti :thumbsup: That gives a lot of flexibility playing Lego.


----------



## tslrc (Aug 24, 2009)

nismotor said:


> Haha you are not alone as you can see.
> 
> Ever since I heard the news on the 15th, I've been trying to narrow it down to which one I should get. Went through pretty much the same thing, and bought the Ti AA Reg recently...just like you.-- :shakeheadplease don't tempt me to get another !!!



Hey nismotor look at all those options that Haz mentions that I will have also......by getting the tactical AA^2


----------



## nismotor (Aug 24, 2009)

tslrc said:


> Hey nismotor look at all those options that Haz mentions that I will have also......by getting the tactical AA^2


 
Why do I even bother :tired:?? 

Asking that is like asking the devil for mercy


----------



## CaNo (Aug 25, 2009)

nismotor said:


> Why do I even bother :tired:??
> 
> Asking that is like asking the devil for mercy



Nismotor, you have made an EXCELLENT choice. I would definitely have gotten the QAA Ti any day, if it weren't for the fact that I already have the QAA in Alum. I only ordered the Q123 Ti Reg w/o clip because it was the 2nd best light for my needs, and it's really throwing money away getting the same light pretty much w/ some minor upgrades just so I can say I have it both in XP-E and XP-G and from Aluminum-Titanium...? No thanks. Stand behind your decision. You will LOVE that light... esp with 14500 cells. :thumbsup:


----------



## recDNA (Aug 25, 2009)

I'm having a hard time deciding between clip-less Cr123 and the one with the clip. I prefer to carry clip-less on my belt carabiner clip w keyring but I don't know if the Ti will be too heavy for keyring carry.


----------



## eddyg (Aug 25, 2009)

Haz said:


> I had the same dilemma, so I went for the regular AA Ti, plus the tactical AA^2 Ti, because I didn't want to use other batteries, so i have 6 additional combinations possible.


Aaaarrgh! I just ordered a Ti AA² Regular after reading this... I had ordered a Ti AA Tactical yesterday, and the legoability was just too good to pass up! _*sigh*_ :laughing:


----------



## SFG2Lman (Aug 25, 2009)

i have the quark123 with a clip and i LOVE it, I clip it in my pocket right next to my knife and it has seen some serious use there, its just so convenient, I would recommend the clip to anyone that plans on using the light, that light surpassed all my other lights for usage time in a matter of a week just because of the convenience


----------



## recDNA (Aug 25, 2009)

SFG2Lman said:


> i have the quark123 with a clip and i LOVE it, I clip it in my pocket right next to my knife and it has seen some serious use there, its just so convenient, I would recommend the clip to anyone that plans on using the light, that light surpassed all my other lights for usage time in a matter of a week just because of the convenience


 
You've changed my mind. I'm going to order the one with the clip.


----------



## qip (Aug 25, 2009)

no one worries about heat and if it effects efficiency of lights


----------



## Sgt. LED (Aug 25, 2009)

Just want a blue button................... :naughty:


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Aug 25, 2009)

recDNA said:


> You've changed my mind. I'm going to order the one with the clip.


Personally I don't like the clip on the 123. It was the one thing that made me not like the 123 since it seemed to completely get in the way of the twist operation, being connected to the head rather than the body.


----------



## flasherByNight (Aug 25, 2009)

I got clipless and I'm sure I made the right decision :twothumbs
Did I help at all? :shrug::naughty:


----------



## FlashlightsNgear.com (Aug 25, 2009)

Sgt. LED said:


> Just want a blue button................... :naughty:


 Im with Sarg, 8 more blue buttons for my order


----------



## Xak (Aug 25, 2009)

I'd like to see some beam comparisons between the R2 and the new LEDs. I gotta say I am really loving the Neutral Quarks tint, though.


----------



## Marduke (Aug 25, 2009)

Xak said:


> I'd like to see some beam comparisons between the R2 and the new LEDs. I gotta say I am really loving the Neutral Quarks tint, though.



You'll have to wait until they are made. No other light in existence has them yet.


----------



## nismotor (Aug 25, 2009)

CaNo said:


> Nismotor, you have made an EXCELLENT choice. I would definitely have gotten the QAA Ti any day, if it weren't for the fact that I already have the QAA in Alum. I only ordered the Q123 Ti Reg w/o clip because it was the 2nd best light for my needs, and it's really throwing money away getting the same light pretty much w/ some minor upgrades just so I can say I have it both in XP-E and XP-G and from Aluminum-Titanium...? No thanks. Stand behind your decision. You will LOVE that light... esp with 14500 cells. :thumbsup:


 
First Quark and first titanium light... so I hope so haha

I just gotta stay away from this thread and the Ti Vote thread you started for awhile as to prevent myself from buying another...tslrc isn't helping much  staying away from his posts too


----------



## tslrc (Aug 25, 2009)

nismotor said:


> I just gotta stay away from this thread and the Ti Vote thread you started for awhile as to prevent myself from buying another...tslrc isn't helping much  staying away from his posts too



:shrug: Who me? :lolsign: Now that I think about it, you shouldn't buy it nor do you need another. Those of us who have a AA Ti and AA^2 TI will be sure to fill you in on our lights. It'll be just like you have one yourself, without the cost.... won't it? :shakehead :shakehead :shakehead


----------



## recDNA (Aug 25, 2009)

flasherByNight said:


> I got clipless and I'm sure I made the right decision :twothumbs
> Did I help at all? :shrug::naughty:


 
I'm going crazy with this. If I buy a clipless and it is too heavy for keyring is there some other manufacturer's clip that works well with the q123?


----------



## flæshaholic (Aug 25, 2009)

^ not sure about 3rd party clips, but... given that its a 123 light and it's titanium, I'd think it'd be quite heavy/bulky for keychain carry.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Aug 25, 2009)

I'm becoming impatient


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 25, 2009)

Whats the story on this "blue boot kit" I keep hearing about. Are these coming with a blue rubber switch? That would sure look great.


----------



## oregon (Aug 25, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> Whats the story on this "blue boot kit" I keep hearing about. Are these coming with a blue rubber switch? That would sure look great.


 
I ordered one from here: http://www.4sevens.com/product_info.php?cPath=297_304&products_id=1803

If my Ti Quark comes with one then I will have a spare!

oregon


----------



## Badbeams3 (Aug 25, 2009)

oregon said:


> I ordered one from here: http://www.4sevens.com/product_info.php?cPath=297_304&products_id=1803
> 
> If my Ti Quark comes with one then I will have a spare!
> 
> oregon



Oh wow, yea that should look sweet on a polished Ti Quark. Really classy.

Damm I wish I hadn`t spent my buget on the regular Quarks...this is eating me alive :shakehead


----------



## Xak (Aug 26, 2009)

recDNA said:


> I'm going crazy with this. If I buy a clipless and it is too heavy for keyring is there some other manufacturer's clip that works well with the q123?


 
If it's going on a keyring I say forget the clip. If your going to use it for EDC get the clip.


----------



## Zendude (Aug 26, 2009)

Is the tactical Quark going to have a Ti switch cover? If not then I too would like blue.

EDIT:Actually, having read the MP thread again I think David misintepreted the question and some of us misinterpreted his answer. So no Ti boot and if you want blue ya gotta get the kit.


----------



## recDNA (Aug 26, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> Oh wow, yea that should look sweet on a polished Ti Quark. Really classy.
> 
> Damm I wish I hadn`t spent my buget on the regular Quarks...this is eating me alive :shakehead


 
If it were ONLY the XP-G or ONLY the Titanium I might be able to resist. With BOTH for under $100? I'm lucky if I can resist buying all 5.


----------



## Federal LG (Aug 26, 2009)

Sgt. LED said:


> Just want a blue button................... :naughty:



I LOVE orange rubber buttons. It´s easy to see them... 
I love my Fenix TK20 orange button, and sometimes I think every light should have the "orange option".


----------



## Xak (Aug 27, 2009)

Henk_Lu said:


> I would buy another collector set if they came with neutral or even warm whites, but they surely won't.
> 
> The XP-G emitter is still unreleased, so you'll get a light with the most modern LED from Cree here. The cool whites are always the first ones to be developped as they are logically the brightest ones.
> 
> ...



I'd be interested in an XP-G with the same tint as the Neutral Quarks tint.


----------



## WadeF (Aug 27, 2009)

I decided to go back and look up some info about the XP-G to further torture myself while I wait for my Ti Quark. I figured I'd torture the rest of you with some blurbs from Cree:

"
The cool white XLamp XP-G provides 139 lumens and 132 lumens per Watt at 350 mA. Driven at 1 A, the XP-G produces 345 lumens, which is 37 percent brighter and 53 percent more efficient than the brightest XR-E LED. The XP-G LED has the highest lumen density of any available lighting-class LED, and it is based on the XLamp XP family package."

Has anyone found a Cree Data sheet for the XP-G yet? I was also trying to find what the CRI is rated at for the XP-G and if the CRI is better than XR-E's and XP-E's.


----------



## AlexD (Aug 27, 2009)

WadeF said:


> Has anyone found a Cree Data sheet for the XP-G yet?


Preliminary Characteristics from May 2009 http://www.powerled.ru/user_img/xlampxpeansiwww_powerled_ru.pdf​


----------



## CaNo (Aug 27, 2009)

nismotor said:


> First Quark and first titanium light... so I hope so haha
> 
> I just gotta stay away from this thread and the Ti Vote thread you started for awhile as to prevent myself from buying another...tslrc isn't helping much  staying away from his posts too



Let us know how long that lasts! :nana:


----------



## djj (Aug 27, 2009)

Thought I was done buying lights for a while... but couldn't resist... new emitter... Ti... super-low mode... super-bright high... great dealer/manufacturer...


----------



## Henk_Lu (Aug 28, 2009)

Xak said:


> I'd be interested in an XP-G with the same tint as the Neutral Quarks tint.



Me too!

Good news : They surely will come!
Bad news : It could take a couple of months before we see them in new lights...


----------



## Tremendo (Aug 28, 2009)

Do we know that the Titanium Quark AAs will not be regulated to have a Max output below the CR123s max? I have been trying to assure myself that my 2 Quark TI AAs on order using the 14500's I just bought will be as bright as the CR123 Ti Quarks.


----------



## Marduke (Aug 28, 2009)

Tremendo said:


> Do we know that the Titanium Quark AAs will not be regulated to have a Max output below the CR123s max? I have been trying to assure myself that my 2 Quark TI AAs on order using the 14500's I just bought will be as bright as the CR123 Ti Quarks.



It's the same head, so...


----------



## Tremendo (Aug 28, 2009)

Marduke said:


> It's the same head, so...


Sweet! I must have missed that.


----------



## JeffInChi (Aug 31, 2009)

djj said:


> Thought I was done buying lights for a while... but couldn't resist... new emitter... Ti... super-low mode... super-bright high... great dealer/manufacturer...


How could you resist? 

My AA is on the way!:twothumbs


----------



## pobox1475 (Aug 31, 2009)

> I'd be interested in an XP-G with the same tint as the Neutral Quarks tint.


 *+1.*


----------



## Glenn7 (Aug 31, 2009)

Marduke said:


> It's the same head, so...



A quote from Selfbuilt about the Quarks.

"Note that the heads, tailcaps and body tubes are physically interchangeable among the four models. The Q123-2 uses a different circuit from the rest, but the Q123/QAA/QAA-2 versions use the same circuit (i.e. you could switch tubes between those models for different battery performance)."


https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/234960


----------



## John_Galt (Aug 31, 2009)

Man, i can't wait until mine gets here! I'm going to have to show it off to all my friends! "Well, Friends, if you didn't think I was nuts before, for spending $60 on a flashlight, just wait till you see my $90 _*Titanium*_ flashlight!" Hopefully, I'll still have friends at the end of that conversation...:mecry:


----------



## Konad (Aug 31, 2009)

I must have missed the Ti Quarks on Friday night, but I did order a EX10 R2. Saturday night I found the Ti thread and had to order the 123 regular! I have only been into the LED's for about two months and already have a fleet of about 10 lights.  Don't let my wife see this!


----------



## nismotor (Aug 31, 2009)

CaNo said:


> Let us know how long that lasts! :nana:


 

haha i caved after 4 days... and i see that all but the collector's set is out of stock! way to curb my enthusiasm and will to buy another since i can't afford $400+ right now!

so now we just sit around and wait huh... great...

i hope 4sevens got something up their sleeves with these Ti quarks to differenciate them from the Al models... besides the obvious emitter, engraving, and Ti of course. --> +1 on the shallow crenelation and dif (color/material?) tail boot


----------



## recDNA (Aug 31, 2009)

John_Galt said:


> Man, i can't wait until mine gets here! I'm going to have to show it off to all my friends! "Well, Friends, if you didn't think I was nuts before, for spending $60 on a flashlight, just wait till you see my $90 _*Titanium*_ flashlight!" Hopefully, I'll still have friends at the end of that conversation...:mecry:


 
I was just thinking the same thing. When I told my friends I that I am a flashlight "buff" they laughed. If I were to tell them my flashlight is made of titanium they might ask what a Maglite is made of. The flashlight would have to be made of 18 ct. gold to impress them...and then only that I was a show off. I just have to appreciate my Quark Ti myself. Those of you with friends you actually SEE personally who are flashaholics are more lucky than you know.

I really wish these Titanium flashlights were not limited production items. I think they would continue to sell and may even outsell the aluminum version. They would certainly sell in tremendous numbers now because nobody else is selling XPG's.


----------



## Marduke (Aug 31, 2009)

Glenn7 said:


> A quote from Selfbuilt about the Quarks.
> 
> "Note that the heads, tailcaps and body tubes are physically interchangeable among the four models. The Q123-2 uses a different circuit from the rest, but the Q123/QAA/QAA-2 versions use the same circuit (i.e. you could switch tubes between those models for different battery performance)."
> 
> ...



He was talking about the AA and 1x123 model, NOT the 123^2 model (the only one with a different head).


----------



## Glenn7 (Aug 31, 2009)

Marduke said:


> He was talking about the AA and 1x123 model, NOT the 123^2 model (the only one with a different head).



oh ok sorry bud!


----------



## Haz (Aug 31, 2009)

recDNA said:


> I really wish these Titanium flashlights were not limited production items. I think they would continue to sell and may even outsell the aluminum version. They would certainly sell in tremendous numbers now because nobody else is selling XPG's.


 
4Sevens did mention they will continue to built Ti Quarks, but those will have no serial numbers. The emitter however may not necessary be the same as the one on the limited edition.


----------



## berry580 (Sep 1, 2009)

Haz said:


> 4Sevens did mention they will continue to built Ti Quarks, but those will have no serial numbers. The emitter however may not necessary be the same as the one on the limited edition.


He said he might.
If he could source the XPGs, why not keep selling the Quarks with them on? There's no losses for him. (unless he's selling it at a loss.. lol)


----------



## Henk_Lu (Sep 1, 2009)

recDNA said:


> I was just thinking the same thing. When I told my friends I that I am a flashlight "buff" they laughed. If I were to tell them my flashlight is made of titanium they might ask what a Maglite is made of. The flashlight would have to be made of 18 ct. gold to impress them...and then only that I was a show off. I just have to appreciate my Quark Ti myself. Those of you with friends you actually SEE personally who are flashaholics are more lucky than you know.
> 
> I really wish these Titanium flashlights were not limited production items. I think they would continue to sell and may even outsell the aluminum version. They would certainly sell in tremendous numbers now because nobody else is selling XPG's.



Last friday I spent 440$ on a titanium flashlight with an output of 70 Lumen. I'll surely never tell anybody the price, if I show it to someone who uses an L2D-Q5 for example (widely adopted by geocachers), he'll say "My Fenix is brighter and its light is whiter than your old torch there!" If I would tell him that it's in fact brand new and that it costs 8 times his Fenix, he will try to sell me his 10 year old car for half a million... :duh2:

We often had the same discussion, there are also people who spend big amounts for stamps, mine cost exactly the price the postal service asks for transportation and I glue them to my letters and parcels to get rid of them. So it is!

As for the titanium Quarks, I don't think they could sell them as normal versions. The XP-G are still rare, so they would have the normal XP-E of the aluminium Quarks. I don't think people would preffer a titanium versioun that costs 50% more than the normal version with the same specs. The limited run with the XP-G is clearly a collector item for a price we all wonder how low it is, compared to other lights of that kind (Olight Titanium Infinitum e.g.)...


----------



## Th232 (Sep 2, 2009)

In case anyone hasn't seen it, pics are up on the marketplace!

Here's one of them:







Note the *something* behind the torch on the far right...


----------



## Darkspark (Sep 3, 2009)

I :wow: likey!  Thanks Th32!


----------



## FrogmanM (Sep 3, 2009)

Very cool! (Blue boots!)

-Mayo


----------



## CaNo (Sep 3, 2009)

Th232 said:


> In case anyone hasn't seen it, pics are up on the marketplace!
> 
> Here's one of them:
> 
> ...



Looks like a AAA Quark Ti to me...


----------



## OfficerCamp (Sep 3, 2009)

It just got really, really, *REALLY* hard to wait for these beauties!!!!!! Guess I shouldn't have bought 2 sets of blue boots for my Ti's  What's that little guy peaking around the 123^2?


----------



## CaNo (Sep 3, 2009)

OfficerCamp said:


> It just got really, really, *REALLY* hard to wait for these beauties!!!!!! Guess I shouldn't have bought 2 sets of blue boots for my Ti's  What's that little guy peaking around the 123^2?



I should have held off on the boots as well...


----------



## josean (Sep 3, 2009)

Th232 said:


> In case anyone hasn't seen it, pics are up on the marketplace!
> 
> Here's one of them:
> 
> ...



I remember having read in a post that the collector set increased from $399 to $499 and will include something *extra*.

Maybe the extra is an _XP-G R4 Ti Quark AAA_?


----------



## Xak (Sep 3, 2009)

I'm waiting for a non-titanium Q123-2 with a neutral XP-G and GITD boot.


----------



## Th232 (Sep 3, 2009)

josean said:


> I remember having read in a post that the collector set increased from $399 to $499 and will include something *extra*.
> 
> Maybe the extra is an _XP-G R4 Ti Quark AAA_?



From here:

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showpost.php?p=2350389&postcount=456



4sevens said:


> No. As far as flashlights, only those four pieces are in set.



http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showpost.php?p=2350396&postcount=459



4sevens said:


> No. Let's just say it's not going to be in the kit.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Sep 3, 2009)

They look so awesome... I cant wait!!!


----------



## Larbo (Sep 3, 2009)

Henk_Lu said:


> Me too!
> 
> Bad news : It could take a couple of months before we see them in new lights...



The several week wait for my TK40 was bad enough so I ordered a regular 123 Quark, I may order one when I can get it in a few days though.


----------



## recDNA (Sep 3, 2009)

Haz said:


> 4Sevens did mention they will continue to built Ti Quarks, but those will have no serial numbers. The emitter however may not necessary be the same as the one on the limited edition.


 
The lights are GORGEOUS! I wish I bought 2 or 3 of them! Any output numbers yet?


----------



## John_Galt (Sep 3, 2009)

Those lights are beautiful! I was hoping for more of a matte finish, as most around here would just laugh and say I chromed it, but this is nicer than I thought they would look!


----------



## LumensMaximus (Sep 3, 2009)

Sgt. LED said:


> I want them to come with the blue buttons!


 
Me too! :thumbsup:


----------



## recDNA (Sep 3, 2009)

Henk_Lu said:


> Last friday I spent 440$ on a titanium flashlight with an output of 70 Lumen. I'll surely never tell anybody the price, if I show it to someone who uses an L2D-Q5 for example (widely adopted by geocachers), he'll say "My Fenix is brighter and its light is whiter than your old torch there!" If I would tell him that it's in fact brand new and that it costs 8 times his Fenix, he will try to sell me his 10 year old car for half a million... :duh2:
> 
> We often had the same discussion, there are also people who spend big amounts for stamps, mine cost exactly the price the postal service asks for transportation and I glue them to my letters and parcels to get rid of them. So it is!
> 
> As for the titanium Quarks, I don't think they could sell them as normal versions. The XP-G are still rare, so they would have the normal XP-E of the aluminium Quarks. I don't think people would preffer a titanium versioun that costs 50% more than the normal version with the same specs. The limited run with the XP-G is clearly a collector item for a price we all wonder how low it is, compared to other lights of that kind (Olight Titanium Infinitum e.g.)...


 
I hope I'm "allowed" to carry a collector's item on a keychain cause that's where it's goin! LOL

I haven't been this excited (about a flashlight anyway) since I ordered my TK40. The only premium flashlight I've been disappointed with is the Olight T20M but my wife loves it. It quicky moved from her car to her briefcase and she uses it more than I use any of my flashlights. I think she has a little flashaholic in her! A Quark AAA TI-XP-G could be just what she needs to set the demon free.


----------



## CaNo (Sep 4, 2009)

recDNA said:


> I think she has a little flashaholic in her! A Quark AAA TI-XP-G could be just what she needs to set the demon free.



Sounds like you are saying she is expecting your child... haha!:nana:
But I wouldn't refer to him/her as a demon... :devil:


----------



## Morelite (Oct 21, 2009)

I just got a email notice stating mine has shipped. :twothumbs


----------



## duboost (Oct 21, 2009)

Morelite said:


> I just got a email notice stating mine has shipped. :twothumbs


 me too!


----------



## mr.snakeman (Oct 21, 2009)

And I as well :thumbsup: :twothumbs


----------



## CaNo (Oct 21, 2009)

I'm the only one without a damn confirmation! BAH! :scowl:


----------



## DimeRazorback (Oct 21, 2009)

I don't have one :thumbsup:


----------



## Closet_Flashaholic (Oct 21, 2009)

CaNo said:


> I'm the only one without a damn confirmation! BAH! :scowl:



You're not the only one. I ordered in pre-stage 1, but I was pretty late to the the table. So given that there are 3 shipments over 3 days of the Ti lights, mine will probably be covered by the last shipment which means they might ship as late as this Friday or even (gasp!) next Monday which means not until next week until they arrive. I just hope they get here before Halloween. They will be great fun for that night.


----------



## CaNo (Oct 21, 2009)

DimeRazorback said:


> I don't have one :thumbsup:





Closet_Flashaholic said:


> You're not the only one. I ordered in pre-stage 1, but I was pretty late to the the table. So given that there are 3 shipments over 3 days of the Ti lights, mine will probably be covered by the last shipment which means they might ship as late as this Friday or even (gasp!) next Monday which means not until next week until they arrive. I just hope they get here before Halloween. They will be great fun for that night.




Whew! :twothumbs

I thought I was the only one forgotten here guys! I see all these posts about shipping confirmations... I kinda got sick to my stomach! 
I even checked my spam mail! Just in case!


----------



## Tremendo (Oct 21, 2009)

I just checked my Spam mail as well, no ship confirm here either. I got in Aug 20th I believe, with 2 Ti Tactical AA's. It may be those haven't been sent yet. I think these lights are going to be killer, whenever they do arrive.


----------



## Oddjob (Oct 21, 2009)

Mine shipped today too! Woohoo! Sorry to those who have not yet received shipping notices.


----------



## branespload (Oct 21, 2009)

Tremendo said:


> I just checked my Spam mail as well, no ship confirm here either. I got in Aug 20th I believe, with 2 Ti Tactical AA's. It may be those haven't been sent yet. I think these lights are going to be killer, whenever they do arrive.



7777s has announced earlier today that the QAA^2Tis have not completely arrived yet, so yours will probably be one of the later shipments. Sorry :\

I, on the other hand, ordered a regular Q123Ti and haven't received shipment confirmation yet either 

And tonight, SoCal Edison is having a blackout from 9pm to 6am and all I have with me here at school is my Nitecore EZCR2w.. a night of darksies without the quarksies :\


----------



## Bronco (Oct 21, 2009)

Don't fret if you haven't received your ship notice just yet. A couple of the configurations weren't included in the first shipment, but are following closely behind. I think the 1x123 w/ clip and one other was in that group.


----------



## Tremendo (Oct 21, 2009)

branespload said:


> 7777s has announced earlier today that the QAA^2Tis have not completely arrived yet, so yours will probably be one of the later shipments. Sorry


Even though I'm going camping Saturday and was hoping to see it, I'll be patient and wait. I hope there was no confusion though, I ordered (2) of the 1xAA Tactical Ti's, not a 2xAA.


----------



## fiorano (Oct 21, 2009)

Looking good!


----------



## CaNo (Oct 22, 2009)

I saw that post from 47's as well. But I had ordered a Q123 w/o a clip... that's why I grew a little impatient. It was the Q123's with a clip that was delayed...



branespload said:


> 7777s has announced earlier today that the QAA^2Tis have not completely arrived yet, so yours will probably be one of the later shipments. Sorry :\
> 
> I, on the other hand, ordered a regular Q123Ti and haven't received shipment confirmation yet either
> 
> And tonight, SoCal Edison is having a blackout from 9pm to 6am and all I have with me here at school is my Nitecore EZCR2w.. a night of darksies without the quarksies :\


----------



## Sgt. LED (Oct 22, 2009)

That's what I ordered and I haven't got a notice either. 

I ordered within the first 20 minutes of the link being put up back when we had hardly any clue what it was. Thankfully I have a light or 40 to keep me company till it eventually makes it here.


----------



## TCW 60 (Oct 22, 2009)

Ordered a Q123 T wo a clip and no confirmation either. As checking out out the luggage mine is coming at last.


----------



## recDNA (Oct 22, 2009)

TCW 60 said:


> Ordered a Q123 T wo a clip and no confirmation either. As checking out out the luggage mine is coming at last.


 
Same order - no notice


----------



## Tremendo (Oct 22, 2009)

Got my ship confirm this morning for (2) Ti Tactical 1xAA's. They are on their way!


----------



## CaNo (Oct 22, 2009)

Woo Hoo! Got my confirmation today! Yeah baby! :twothumbs


----------



## recDNA (Oct 22, 2009)

I'm getting aggravated. First I hear the clip scratches the flashlight and I don't even have the OPTION to get one without the clip. (Yes I know I can get my money back and you know as well as I that is NOT what I or any Quark Ti purchaser wants!)

NOW another day passes and STILL no confirmation. It's bad enough that I have to settle for a defective flashlight clip without waiting even LONGER for it!


----------



## DimeRazorback (Oct 22, 2009)

Mate, I am in the *exact* same boat... calm down a bit. 
It's no race, you will get it when you do.

I also have to wait 10-14 days for shipping, so quit complaining.


----------



## TCW 60 (Oct 22, 2009)

recDNA said:


> NOW another day passes and STILL no confirmation. It's bad enough that I have to settle for a defective flashlight clip without waiting even LONGER for it!



Got mine and now the next announcement fom 4/7 thats just killing me!
I think your light is coming soon to the post office.


----------



## LumensMaximus (Oct 22, 2009)

Q123 no clip, en route, i'm excited


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Oct 23, 2009)

Just got my QAA Tactical Ti and Q123-2 Tac Ti. I'll leave the Q123-2 in the box for a while and bond with the QAA.

Fit and finish are as advertised, the polish is very nice. The head and tail caps seemed a little dry so I put a dab of Nyogel 779 on each. As David recommended, I bent the clip slightly away from the body to avoid scratching during battery changes. Twist action on the caps is still slightly gritty compared to my beloved QAAW. It may improve in time, I'm used to this with stainless lights as well.

The new emitter die is slightly larger on visual inspection and the hotspot from the light is maybe 50% wider across at long distances. I'm running an AW 14500 in both QAA's. The XP-G emitter is of course noticeably brighter than the warm XP-E, I'm back in the U.S. at the moment on east coast time. When it gets dark I'll go for a walk in the country with the mutt and really see how far this pocket rocket goes.

Thanks again David for this special Ti Quark run!


----------



## seattlite (Oct 23, 2009)

Got my 273 of 750. I immediately stuck in 2 x RCR123's(MP) and tried it out. Output is just as bright or a smidgen brighter than my LX2(2 x RCR123's).

Packaging is DANG nice! Nice touch on the magnetic clasp. Exterior box texture is also very unique.


----------



## WadeF (Oct 23, 2009)

Here's the topic I was looking for earlier!  Got my Ti Quark 2x123 today. Love it! Some initial impressions as far as the beam, etc. Tint is cooler than my Quark 1x123 XP-E R2 (I got lucky with the tint on my XP-E R2, it's very warm for a cool white tint bin). The hot spot with the XP-G is larger as expected, which makes it better suited for close range applications. 

I did a quick check on the LUX meter from approx 1 meter. The Quark 1x123 XP-E on MAX out throws the Quark 2x123 XP-G on MAX. I was expecting this, but was wondering if the additional output from the XP-G would keep things close. I got around 4,600LUX with the XP-E, and around 3,400LUX with the XP-G. Results will vary from meter to meter, but the results clearly show the XP-E, even with less lumens, has more throw. This is because both lights use the same size reflector, but the XP-E has a smaller die and a higher surface brightness. 

The Quark 2x123 carries surprisingly well in my left front jeans pocket, using the clip. I replaced the Maratac AAA I had clipped there. I use this pocket for my iPhone so I don't want something that will bang into the phone, or get in the way when I take the phone out of my pocket and put it back in. The Quark doesn't get in the way and carries comfortably. 

I took some quick and dirty beam shots just to give a general idea of the characteristics of the beams.

Quark Ti XP-G:



Quark XP-E:




Overall I'm very happy with the light. The only thing that could have been better would be a slightly warmer tint, but I have a feeling most of the R5 bins will be on the cool side in order to reach that level of efficiency. Once your eyes adjust though it looks perfectly white if you aren't comparing it with other light sources.

Also I'm 271 or 750.


----------



## MerkurMan (Oct 23, 2009)

Received my QAAT Ti today, and I have to say that it is quite a beautiful piece of machinery. My first titanium light, and I hope not my last. 

First impressions are that it's definitely brighter than my neutral QAAT (both on li-ion) and has a larger spot, which is much welcomed. Tint is a very nice white with a slight tinge of green on high, shifting slightly to the greener side on lower output modes.

Of course, my enthusiasm overpowered any rational thought when I first pulled it out of the box (in my car before I even got home. ), whence I loaded 'er up and changed modes without even thinking about the clip.  Suffice it to say, my Quark now has a _character line_ running halfway around the head.  And since I put the first scratch on it not more than 30 seconds after taking possession, I think this light will be FORCED in to user duty. :devil: Who knows, I might even EDC the sucker. I've always wondered what titanium looks like with a patina anyway.

Other than that, I'm happy with the light. The threads are quite gritty on mine, with a little bit of chaff on the head, but after a thorough cleaning and lubing with white lithium grease it's improved. Tailcap threads are much smoother than the head on my example. When I lego'ed the Ti Q with my Al Q, the threading was MUCH smoother. Who knows, I might have to run the light with an aluminum body!  She definitely won't be a shelf queen at this point!

My serial # is 466, which doesn't hold any personal meaning... other than being the clock speed of my first computer.  

Well, I think I'll let it all sink in, and if I'm up to it, maybe post some beamshots later tonight. She is a bright little sucker.


----------



## xenonk (Oct 23, 2009)

WadeF said:


> I did a quick check on the LUX meter from approx 1 meter. The Quark 1x123 XP-E on MAX out throws the Quark 2x123 XP-G on MAX. I was expecting this, but was wondering if the additional output from the XP-G would keep things close.


Approx 2/3 the throw from the less intense (but fatter) hotspot, and also brighter spill. Awesome, those pictures along with your meter readings correlate pretty well with what we were expecting from the increased die size. :thumbsup:


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Oct 24, 2009)

Spent the evening with two Ti Quarks. I started with the Ti QAA but quickly put it aside to check out the Ti Q123-2.

The Ti Q123-2 feels so nice in the hand with the mirror finish and not too agressive knurling. The Ti gives the light a little more heft than the original Al version. Also, the head seems to heat up a little more on high but not uncomfortably so. The XP-G emitter appears to be slightly green in comparison to a conventional XP-E Q123-2 with the customary further green shift on lower levels. It is well in the tint ballpark and not noticeable except by side by side comparison. Of course, after EDC'ing a QAAW for the past few weeks, everything looks a little green or blue.

The Ti Q123-2 had dry threads with a gritty feel like the Ti QAA, a little Nyogel seems to fix that. The threading is tight with little play and the friction for changing modes on the head seems just right after lubrication.

A minor labeling issue on one of the flat surfaces, the Quark 123-2 Tactical logo seems to be bottom justified rather than vertically centered like the 4Sevens logo on the other face. The flat surfaces are larger than on the aluminum version of the light.

I tried a couple of RCR123's in the light but it seems just as bright on a freshly charged 17670, same result I got with the non-Ti Q123-2. The Ti Q123-2 has a slightly dimmer hotspot than my SF LX2 but a lot more spill and a better looking beam. The spill was handy on a walk with the dog on a dark country road, I used the level just above moonlight to preserve night vision with occasional bursts of max to check out wildlife in the woods.

As always, I'm torn between the tactical tailcap with easy access momentary and the non-tac tail that will tailstand, a feature a lot more handy in the real world than I had imagined. And yes, as a CPF'er, I have several of both...


----------



## recDNA (Oct 24, 2009)

I thought the spill would look much brighter on the wall from the XP-G. I'm a little disappointed.


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Oct 24, 2009)

Looks like the Ti Q123-2 has a little PWM flicker on max with a 17670. It doesn't flicker with two RCR123's. Also, the Al Q-123-2 on a 17670 doesn't have the flicker.

I checked to make sure that the Ti Q123-2 was really on max and not one level down.

Perhaps the two cell head on one cell regulates differently on the XP-G than on the XP-E. Or, it might just be a quirk of my Ti Quark.


----------



## Dan FO (Oct 24, 2009)

On the Ti Quark AA, can the clip be removed and still function properly?

Mine has not arrived yet.


----------



## fiorano (Oct 24, 2009)

Dan FO said:


> On the Ti Quark AA, can the clip be removed and still function properly?
> 
> Mine has not arrived yet.


Yes, it functions fine. Perhaps better.

You are much less likely to scratch the head with the clip removed. With the clip on it touches the head as you twist it.


----------



## Morelite (Oct 24, 2009)

fiorano said:


> Yes, it functions fine. Perhaps better.
> 
> You are much less likely to scratch the head with the clip removed. With the clip on it touches the head as you twist it.


 Yep, I have a nice scratch from twisting the head, the clip is now gone.


----------



## FrogmanM (Oct 25, 2009)

Morelite said:


> Yep, I have a nice scratch from twisting the head, the clip is now gone.



Same hereoo:

-Mayo


----------



## Morelite (Oct 25, 2009)

The empty space left behind from the clip makes a great spot to place a tritium vial.


----------



## ubetit (Oct 25, 2009)

FrogmanM said:


> Same hereoo:
> 
> -Mayo


 
Me too.


----------



## jabe1 (Oct 25, 2009)

Those scratches can be buffed out. When I unpacked mine, I slid a piece of cloth under the clip and removed the head. Then I put a small (1/2" ?) piece of shrink tubing over the clip contact point, where it touches the head. Reassemble, insert AW14500...:devil:.


----------



## branespload (Oct 25, 2009)

my n00bish quick first impressions/review of the 123 regular:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaN87NhOwJA

and a ceiling bounce demo w/ moon and low mode beamshots indoors sort of.. made this vid real quick to prove to a friend that my flashlight can light up a room -_-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3YDuyQSdhs


----------



## yuk (Oct 25, 2009)

Thanks for the videos! :thumbsup: I am still waiting for mine to be shipped... :candle:


----------



## flasherByNight (Oct 25, 2009)

branespload said:


> my n00bish quick first impressions/review of the 123 regular:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaN87NhOwJA
> 
> ...



Just watched your vid....
wait for modes? huh???


----------



## branespload (Oct 25, 2009)

^ the wait time between resetting back to moonmode or bumping up to the next mode is too long for me i guess

it feels like almost 5 seconds i have to wait after turning the light off before i can turn it on back in moon mode. the video kinda shows that. it's really annoying when i turn off the light in turbo, then turn it back on for it to come on in strobe.

i know the best solution would be to get a tactical w/ momentary and program only the modes i want, but alas.. i didn't buy one. the light will suffice for now. i think i've bought enough lights now to know that i prefer 1 cell size, titanium, turbo and low low modes, and neutral tint. hopefully 4sevens pulls through with that :]]]


----------



## flasherByNight (Oct 25, 2009)

Oh, I see you're referring to how long it takes for it to reset itself


----------



## branespload (Oct 25, 2009)

^ right, my bad. added annotations to the vid to clarify. thanks! :thumbsup:


----------



## qip (Oct 25, 2009)

nice video, i loved it when you say it has brighter spill than fenix pd20 , i think fenix has very nice spill and i love spill for close range 


btw cheer up man , you sound depressed and you have a beauty in your hands :laughing:


----------



## Henk_Lu (Oct 25, 2009)

fiorano said:


> Yes, it functions fine. Perhaps better.
> 
> You are much less likely to scratch the head with the clip removed. With the clip on it touches the head as you twist it.



I wonder why nobody just bends that clip? That was my first idea, so, that it's just a milimeter or less over the body. Perhaps it's difficult to not overbend?

While I know that the clip becomes pretty unusable afterwards, I never use the clips and as it seems, someone who doesn't want scratches on his light (I'm one of them) won't ever need a clip! If I remove it, the result is the same, it doesn't serve anymore, but the flashlight looks "unfinished". As I want to expose the titaniums, I want them as they are. I even left the clips on my neutral white 123-2 and AA-2, because they look better. Same for all my other lights where the clips are removable...


----------



## WadeF (Oct 25, 2009)

For those complaining about the UI. If you are using your light in a situation where it is critical the light always come on in a certain mode, like moon mode, max, etc, you want the tactical version. For those of us where this isn't critical the regular Quarks are fine. I rarely turn my Quark off only to have to turn it right back on and have it come on in the wrong mode. Usually I have the bezel loose, so it comes on in moon mode. I can quickly tap to bump up the output as needed, quickly tap to cycle back to moon mode if needed, etc. If I'm going out doors and want it set up so I can quickly blast out a lot of light I'll just tighten up the bezel. If the strobe would come on after a quick on and off a simple tap returns it to the proper mode.


----------



## branespload (Oct 25, 2009)

^ knowledge. it has been dropped. /cpfn00bery


----------



## get-lit (Oct 26, 2009)

oops, wrong place to post.


----------



## Beamhead (Oct 26, 2009)

edited


----------



## get-lit (Oct 26, 2009)

My 123 is a bit too big for me to EDC so I'm letting it go for something smaller. Since the 123 is already as small as about any other clicky, I'll have to get used to a twisty. Wish I weren't so picky about size because this thing puts out LOTS of light. The ceiling bounce lights up the entire room like a ceiling light.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Oct 26, 2009)

:laughing:

I think it's funny.
There are so many photos of them now, and I don't even have a shipping confirmation yet. :laughing:


----------



## recDNA (Oct 26, 2009)

Nor do I...but I give you credit for having a sense of humor about it. I don't


----------



## PoliceScannerMan (Oct 26, 2009)

Early bird gets the worm, David said they are shipping in order of payments received. I dont see why some are so uptight, the lights will come. 

To be honest, this is the fastest preorder I have ever participated in.

I got one of the last 10 Ti Quarks, a 2 x 123 tactical. I am not holding my breath for my shipping notification. :green:

The 4 Sevens crew is small, not 100's of people. Its a lot of lights to send out, all while taking care of the rest of business: Order processing, the tons of EM's, payroll, customer service, returns, exchanges, toilet cleaning, there is alot going on.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Oct 26, 2009)

I'm not uptight, I just find it amusing. 

I'm happy that I know to pull the clip away when I open the tailcap on my light 

I'm in no hurry either


----------



## Th232 (Oct 26, 2009)

DimeRazorback said:


> I'm happy that I know to pull the clip away when I open the tailcap on my light
> 
> I'm in no hurry either



+1 on that. I'm giving thought to taking off the Quark clip and putting a Nitecore EX10 clip on instead. Just need to check how long the clip is first.


----------



## nismotor (Oct 26, 2009)

Henk_Lu said:


> I wonder why nobody just bends that clip? That was my first idea, so, that it's just a milimeter or less over the body. Perhaps it's difficult to not overbend?
> 
> While I know that the clip becomes pretty unusable afterwards, I never use the clips and as it seems, someone who doesn't want scratches on his light (I'm one of them) won't ever need a clip! If I remove it, the result is the same, it doesn't serve anymore, but the flashlight looks "unfinished". As I want to expose the titaniums, I want them as they are. I even left the clips on my neutral white 123-2 and AA-2, because they look better. Same for all my other lights where the clips are removable...


 
I, for one, bended the clip out about 1.5mm from the surface, and it is still a very functional clip. It took some precision and patient to do it though but I got it on the first try.

BUT, I still ended up giving that shiny surface a nice 9mm scratch. How? Given the short length of the single-cell Quarks, (and the rough Ti threads) there weren't much to grip onto while requiring some strength to turn the head. So it was only after I scratched it that I realize one of my fingers was pushing down on the clip slightly while turning it. 

Conclusion: Bending the clip out doesn't solve the whole problem. As the clip "anchor" isn't stiff enough, given its length. I now slip a microfiber towel or similar between the clip and head before turning it. PITA, but it's that or losing the clip. I can deal with it, some may not.


----------



## nismotor (Oct 26, 2009)

Th232 said:


> +1 on that. I'm giving thought to taking off the Quark clip and putting a Nitecore EX10 clip on instead. Just need to check how long the clip is first.


 
I believe there were several complaints awhile back about the Nitecore clips failing. The weak link being the screws. People have stated they lost their light b/c of that. 

Just to give you a heads up. 

BTW, someone in the marketplace thread posted pics of their Ti123 modded with a Ex10 clip like you stated. Post #1601 *ma sha1*
http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=198575&page=54


----------



## Sgt. LED (Oct 26, 2009)

Can these be fully taken apart?

I want to get mine stonewashed. Once it makes it here..................


----------



## Burgess (Oct 26, 2009)

If you *do* get it Stonewashed,

please take Before and After photos.


We'd LOVE to see them !


_


----------



## Th232 (Oct 27, 2009)

nismotor said:


> I believe there were several complaints awhile back about the Nitecore clips failing. The weak link being the screws. People have stated they lost there light b/c of that.
> 
> Just to give you a heads up.
> 
> ...



Hmm... may have to rethink that, thanks for the heads up.

Was inspired to do it by ma sha1's pics, have to admit it still looks good.


----------



## duboost (Oct 27, 2009)

yay i finally got my 123^2 today. i keep going back and forth between the black and blue buttons... i probably should've got two of these so i could have one black and one blue


----------



## Sgt. LED (Oct 27, 2009)

I now have found an orange and a red button!
It was in my parts bin and I've no clue where they came from but they match the exact size of the blue button I got from another CPF'er.


----------



## Glenn7 (Oct 27, 2009)

Sgt. LED said:


> I now have found an orange and a red button!
> It was in my parts bin and I've no clue where they came from but they match the exact size of the blue button I got from another CPF'er.



the Regalight snipe had an orange button - and I still have an orange boot left might give it a try - Hmmm now where did regalight go? :tinfoil:


----------



## GarageBoy (Oct 27, 2009)

Dang mine is BRIGHT and a nice cool/neutral white. 123^2 model
Only annoying part is opening the box and creasing the flap


----------



## berry580 (Oct 27, 2009)

Glenn7 said:


> the Regalight snipe had an orange button - and I still have an orange boot left might give it a try - Hmmm now where did regalight go? :tinfoil:


they're now worse than StupidFire, they ran for their lives....


----------



## eljuez (Oct 27, 2009)

670 of 750 here. First impressions: Nice and bright. ( It's the 123 tactical/no clip ) It's basically as bright as my Ra 170, maybe a tad less throw. It does get very warm on high, but so do most high-powered small lights. Sizewise, it fits in between my Ra and my EZ 123, but is lighter than the Ra by a pretty good margin. The Ra is more rugged and heavy duty. Overall, it appears to be a good light, well worth the price.


----------



## strinq (Oct 27, 2009)

eljuez said:


> 670 of 750 here. First impressions: Nice and bright. ( It's the 123 tactical/no clip ) It's basically as bright as my Ra 170, maybe a tad less throw. It does get very warm on high, but so do most high-powered small lights. Sizewise, it fits in between my Ra and my EZ 123, but is lighter than the Ra by a pretty good margin. The Ra is more rugged and heavy duty. Overall, it appears to be a good light, well worth the price.



That's good to hear. 

Forgot if this has ever been answered. Is the clip on the 1*123 also made of titanium? Cuz it's a part of the body right? Unless they fused the alu with the Ti?


----------



## recDNA (Oct 27, 2009)

GarageBoy said:


> Dang mine is BRIGHT and a nice cool/neutral white. 123^2 model
> Only annoying part is opening the box and creasing the flap


 
I got the 123 WITH the clip. Worst choice. Wish I got the 2XCr123 AND the clipless cr123


----------



## Flic (Oct 27, 2009)

recDNA said:


> Wish I got the 2XCr123 AND the clipless cr123



Those are the very ones I ordered. Still waiting for delivery though. Nice to hear that lucky early delivery owners think this is the pair to get.


----------



## nismotor (Oct 27, 2009)

eljuez said:


> 670 of 750 here. First impressions: Nice and bright. ( It's the 123 tactical/no clip ) It's basically as bright as my Ra 170, maybe a tad less throw. It does get very warm on high, but so do most high-powered small lights. Sizewise, it fits in between my Ra and my EZ 123, but is lighter than the Ra by a pretty good margin. The Ra is more rugged and heavy duty. Overall, it appears to be a good light, well worth the price.



For everyone who got their Ti quarks, Zot currently have a Ti Quark registry thread in the marketplace. Make sure you post there so the list can be updated.

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=202456&page=1


----------



## recDNA (Oct 27, 2009)

Flic said:


> Those are the very ones I ordered. Still waiting for delivery though. Nice to hear that lucky early delivery owners think this is the pair to get.


 

I don't have mine yet. I'm basing that judgement on early beamshots and the fact there is no way to use the CR123 model with the permanent clip without scratching it. Putting a piece of paper in there is hardly a solution if you intend to USE the flashlight. Hey, I'll likely scratch it up completely anyway. I'm not that careful and I plan to carry it in the watch pocket of my jeans.


----------



## recDNA (Oct 27, 2009)

nismotor said:


> For everyone who got their Ti quarks, Zot currently have a Ti Quark registry thread in the marketplace. Make sure you post there so the list can be updated.
> 
> http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=202456&page=1


 
What's the point of it?


----------



## PoliceScannerMan (Oct 27, 2009)

recDNA said:


> What's the point of it?



Fun, geekiness, and for reference.


----------



## strinq (Oct 27, 2009)

strinq said:


> Forgot if this has ever been answered. Is the clip on the 1*123 also made of titanium? Cuz it's a part of the body right? Unless they fused the alu with the Ti?



So does anyone know?


----------



## Morelite (Oct 27, 2009)

They should be Ti and I thought the others ones where SS, I know mine sticks to a magnet but very weak though.


----------



## PoliceScannerMan (Oct 27, 2009)

Ti is non-ferrous. Its steel.


----------



## CaseyS (Oct 27, 2009)

Bad news: Titanium scratches easily. I've been carrying an aluminum 123^2 in my pocket every day for a month and it doesn't have a mark on it. I carried my Ti 123 for one day and it showed some significant scratching.

Good news: It's really easy to repair. Get some MAAS metal polish or Flitz or something similar. My local Ace Hardware carries both. Takes the scratches right out. Tonight I found a nick on the bottom of the bezel, and I don't know if it came that way or I put it there. I took the scratch out with a few careful swipes of 3M 150 (Fine) sandpaper, then polished it for 15 seconds with the MAAS - good as new.


----------



## Morelite (Oct 27, 2009)

PoliceScannerMan said:


> Ti is non-ferrous. Its steel.


I was talking about two different clips, the removeable ones are stainless steel. The non-removeable ones like on the single 123 model are the ones in question. String wanted to know if they where Ti since it is part on the body. I don't have one of those to check but if it is part of the Ti body then it may be Ti.


----------



## PoliceScannerMan (Oct 27, 2009)

Oh, I thought you read a magnet barely sticks, Ti it wouldnt stick at all. If it barley sticks, then its steel. David said they were all steel I believe.


----------



## strinq (Oct 28, 2009)

Err...so does it mean the body is steel as well? Doesn't seem right...


----------



## bcwang (Oct 28, 2009)

Anyone notice the pre-flash is much worse on the XP-G? I notice it significantly more than on my neutral white quark which is actually not noticeable without the most careful observation. Still doesn't really bother me, but just my observation.


----------



## Th232 (Oct 28, 2009)

bcwang said:


> Anyone notice the pre-flash is much worse on the XP-G? I notice it significantly more than on my neutral white quark which is actually not noticeable without the most careful observation. Still doesn't really bother me, but just my observation.



Very significant. For me, I run moon mode with the head loosened, and max with the head tightened.

* Run Quark on max
* Turn Quark off
* Loosen head
* Turn Quark on
* Experience a flash of light on max before it drops back to moon mode.

Bye bye night vision.


----------



## polkiuj (Oct 28, 2009)

Th232 said:


> Very significant. For me, I run moon mode with the head loosened, and max with the head tightened.
> 
> * Run Quark on max
> * Turn Quark off
> ...



Close your eyes dude.


----------



## Th232 (Oct 28, 2009)

polkiuj said:


> Close your eyes dude.



Mate, I put the business end of the torch up against something before turning it on now.

Still a design problem, and one that seems to have gotten worse.


----------



## strinq (Oct 28, 2009)

Seems that no one really knows so I just fired an e-mail to 4sevens. Will update in this thread once i get the answer.


----------



## divine (Oct 28, 2009)

strinq said:


> Seems that no one really knows so I just fired an e-mail to 4sevens. Will update in this thread once i get the answer.


A week or two ago David announced that the clips are Stainless Steel. He also announed that specific models, like the CR123 with clip and AA with clip, the clip lands on a polished piece of the light and there is a good chance of the clip scratching the light.

Please don't make me search the announcement thread for this information. He has probably incorporated it in the OP of that thread.


----------



## Marduke (Oct 28, 2009)

Th232 said:


> Very significant. For me, I run moon mode with the head loosened, and max with the head tightened.
> 
> * Run Quark on max
> * Turn Quark off
> ...



Not in the slightest. The flash is far too brief to biologically affect night adapted eyes. It also does not flash on max...


----------



## strinq (Oct 28, 2009)

divine said:


> A week or two ago David announced that the clips are Stainless Steel. He also announed that specific models, like the CR123 with clip and AA with clip, the clip lands on a polished piece of the light and there is a good chance of the clip scratching the light.
> 
> Please don't make me search the announcement thread for this information. He has probably incorporated it in the OP of that thread.



Ah thanks. 
Now the I'm curious how he fused the Ti and Stainless Steel together. Unless like i mentioned earlier, the body is also SS.


----------



## Th232 (Oct 28, 2009)

Marduke said:


> Not in the slightest. The flash is far too brief to biologically affect night adapted eyes. It also does not flash on max...



Can't speak about other people, but I do experience some degradation of night vision. I'm not a biologist so I can't say why, but I do.

Regarding flashing on max, perhaps I should have said maximum brightness. When I turn it on using the procedure I mentioned above, I get a flash of light at the maximum brightness before it changes over to moon mode.

Just to confirm the actions I take:

Tightened head: max
Loosened head: moon mode

* Tighten head and turn it on => Torch goes on, maximum brightness as per the setting I chose.
* Turn torch off => Obviously, no light
* Loosen head to nominally set it to moon mode, as per the setting I chose.
* Turn torch on => A flash of light on the previous mode (in this case, maximum brightness), then it goes to moon.

Note how that procedure differs from:
* Turn torch on and loosen head => Torch is now in moon mode
* Turn torch off
* Wait 10 seconds
* Turn torch on => A flash comparable with low mode, then it goes to moon.

It's as though the torch immediately lights up on the mode it last remembers, and _then_ checks to see whether the head is tight or loose, then changes mode if so required.

If you're disputing the brightness of the flash, I've done this repeatedly for medium and high as well, and each time the flash is of the same brightness as the mode chosen for a tightened head, i.e. if I set the tightened head to medium brightness, that flash is the same brightness as that of medium mode.


----------



## Marduke (Oct 28, 2009)

Th232 said:


> Can't speak about other people, but I do experience some degradation of night vision. I'm not a biologist so I can't say why, but I do.
> 
> Regarding flashing on max, perhaps I should have said maximum brightness. When I turn it on using the procedure I mentioned above, I get a flash of light at the maximum brightness before it changes over to moon mode.
> 
> ...



People measured the flash before, it's nowhere near max output, and is not the level last used. That's not what causes it.

As they say, "it's all in your head".


----------



## f22shift (Oct 28, 2009)

Th232 said:


> Can't speak about other people, but I do experience some degradation of night vision. I'm not a biologist so I can't say why, but I do.
> 
> Regarding flashing on max, perhaps I should have said maximum brightness. When I turn it on using the procedure I mentioned above, I get a flash of light at the maximum brightness before it changes over to moon mode.
> 
> ...


 
i don't have the titanium version. i'm assuming it's the same.
i experience exactly the same.


----------



## John_Galt (Oct 28, 2009)

I'm really digging mine! It's great, on turbo, I flood the opposite end of my basement with a wall of light! It'll be great for airsoft (have to camoflauge it, though). I put some black heatshrink tubing on the clip, solved the gouging problem from the steel clip, and it grips even better now.

But, yeah, it's dfinitely a flooder with some throw! It'll light up my neighbors entire 130+ year old oak (I think) tree, from the street, approximately 75 feet away.:devil:


----------



## berry580 (Oct 28, 2009)

I have Quark AA Ti (the onle 47 product i have), the flash at the start of moon mode is still there.

I did an experiment myself. I walked into a pitch dark room and waited till i have adapted to light level, then i turned on turn and put the head against my body so that i can't see the light. I turned it off and loosened the head and turn it on in moonlight mode shining it at something bright white within a metre of me.

I did it, and the moonlight mode for onc looked very useably bright lol, but with little discomfort, although i did notice the initial flash.
But to be honest, if you were using turbo mode just seconds (or even minutes ago), what the chances of using moonlight mode so quickly? 

thats my $0.02


Th232 said:


> Very significant. For me, I run moon mode with the head loosened, and max with the head tightened.
> 
> * Run Quark on max
> * Turn Quark off
> ...


----------



## strinq (Oct 28, 2009)

At last...shipping order confirmed...

Oh yeah, got a reply from 4sevens.
The Ti Quark 123's clip is stainless steel matching a Ti body. I guess i gotta see myself how they did it.


----------



## berry580 (Oct 28, 2009)

i suppose this is no coincidence, i got the confirmation through email for my other order just then as well, but i didn't ask them anything.


----------



## bcwang (Oct 28, 2009)

With mine, I can actually see the flash every time I turn it on in moon mode, without having to go into other modes first. It is very brief, not that bright, and not a big deal, but much more than in my neutral white quark.


----------



## Th232 (Oct 28, 2009)

Marduke said:


> People measured the flash before, it's nowhere near max output, and is not the level last used. That's not what causes it.
> 
> As they say, "it's all in your head".



I take it you didn't notice the rest of the post that I edited in? 

I'm just about to upload a video to youtube just to make it clear what I'm talking about.

Edit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6N_S_TNMjek

Dunno about you, but I'm seeing a very big difference between the two flashes...


----------



## bcwang (Oct 28, 2009)

Is HA3 harder than stainless steel? I'm guessing it is if this problem of scratching the head never manifested itself in the regular Quarks. At least I never heard of it until the Ti Quarks were received by people. I'm assuming the clips are made of the same material in both versions of the Quarks.


----------



## Dan FO (Oct 28, 2009)

I received my Ti AA today and it had a small scratch from the clip during production. I took the light apart and lubed & cleaned it. While I had it apart I removed the scratch. I have worked quite a bit of titanium and this light is grade 5 titanium, the clip is a 300 series stainless steel. (The Type III anodizing is much harder than the stainless clip on the anoed models.)


----------



## jenskh (Oct 29, 2009)

I received my Ti Quark AA today (nr 390).
I is a very nice light.
At first I put in the supplied Duracell battery and turned it on. It gave a nice and floody illumination, but wat not very bright. I did not expect that either since it was only advertised as 90 lumens.

I then wanted to test the light output a little. I first did a ceiling bounce with my Fenix L2D which I have earlier measured to be 164 lumens. It gave 16,5 lux in the ceiling bounce. My new Quark gave 6.4 with the Duracell battery. I then did put in a NiMh battery. The output was about the same (6.3). I then put in a 14500 LiIon cell, and wow the room lit up and the luxmeter showed 25 lux!

Based on this, I doubt strongly that the light gives the advertised 90 lumens with alkaline or NiMh battery, but with the 14500 battery it really shines. I am really glad I had some 14500 batteries laying around.


----------



## recDNA (Oct 29, 2009)

Quark 123 w clip arrived today. Output blows away my P1D. The high beam is brighter than my MG Pli on medium. It also has a bigger spill and hotspot. Very floody. Some of you may not like that but I L O V E floody flashlights. 

The flashlight is easily the prettiest I own. I wish I bought one of each. I could have bought a AA from Canada (for a LOT more money than the U.S. website but that's the one I'd want least. I'd prefer the 2 X AA. 

Is the AA with 14500 as bright as the CR123? That would make it more attractive. Too late anyway. 

The only thing I find disappointing is that the beam is cooler than my P1D and my MG Pli. It looks greenish in comparison. I like cool colored lights but I would have preferred bluish to greenish. When viewed alone the beam looks great. I only notice the greenish shade when compared to the Fenix and the MG.

I bent the clip away from the bezel to avoid scratches but I scratched the head with my scissors taking the flashlight out of that darn impregnable plastic package it comes in. I'd like to murder the guy who invented those unopenable plastic packages. I'm going to EDC it so scratches will happen but.... :-(

I wish the clip allowed deep carry but many have discussed it so no surprise. The 47 symbol on the clip is a nice touch.

I'm pleased with my number though - 700 of 750...nice even number.

Now I've got to get a 2 trits that fit in the lanyard holes. I don't use a lanyard.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Oct 29, 2009)

Good to hear that you received it, and that you're enjoying it!


----------



## Norm (Oct 29, 2009)

recDNA said:


> I bent the clip away from the bezel to avoid scratches but I scratched the head with my scissors taking the flashlight out of that darn impregnable plastic package it comes in.


Open the end of the box and take out the clear package cut the clear spots holding the two halves of the internal shell and it just unclips. No need to destroy the packaging. 
Norm


----------



## Morelite (Oct 29, 2009)

recDNA said:


> Is the AA with 14500 as bright as the CR123? That would make it more attractive. Too late anyway.


IIRC all the heads are the same except for the 123², tactical and regular is the only difference.


----------



## recDNA (Oct 29, 2009)

Norm said:


> Open the end of the box and take out the clear package cut the clear spots holding the two halfs of the internal shell and it just unclips. No need to destroy the packaging.
> Norm


 

Thanks Norm. If David makes more of them that's useful information. Otherwise all you've done is aggravated the heck out of me! 

They might have used black spots I could see.

It's all good anyway. My wife is half a flashaholic. She's the half that LOVES nice flashlights but would never part with the money to BUY one!

Anyway, I showed her that nice shiny Quark and how it lights up half the yard and ...well I love my wife .... so it's in HER briefcase now. On the bright side she'll never get a scratch on it! Darn, I miss that flashlight already.


----------



## recDNA (Oct 29, 2009)

Morelite said:


> IIRC all the heads are the same except for the 123², tactical and regular is the only difference.


 
But they don't all have the same output. SO is the output the same with a 14500? The single AA with alkaline AA isn't as bright as the 1 X CR123


----------



## Morelite (Oct 29, 2009)

recDNA said:


> But they don't all have the same output. SO is the output the same with a 14500? The single AA with alkaline AA isn't as bright as the 1 X CR123


 The output will be the same when the battery voltage is the same or very close considering the difference in internal resistance of different cells.
So the AA model with a 14500 (3.7v) will be the same as a R123 model and a AAx2 (1.5v alkaline) will be the same as CR123 (3v) and so on. I haven't tested this out yet as I haven't received the 123 model. This is only want I have come to understand so far. 
I have been using my AA with a 14500 and it is as bright as the regular aluminum 123 model and both heads look the same when using either one with an Energizer Lithium primary on the AA body. The XP-G head does have a brighter and wider spill but the total output at a close range on a white wall look really close.


----------



## recDNA (Oct 29, 2009)

Morelite said:


> The output will be the same when the battery voltage is the same or very close considering the difference in internal resistance of different cells.
> So the AA model with a 14500 (3.7v) will be the same as a R123 model and a AAx2 (1.5v alkaline) will be the same as CR123 (3v) and so on. I haven't tested this out yet as I haven't received the 123 model. This is only want I have come to understand so far.
> I have been using my AA with a 14500 and it is as bright as the regular aluminum 123 model and both heads look the same when using either one with an Energizer Lithium primary on the AA body. The XP-G head does have a brighter and wider spill but the total output at a close range on a white wall look really close.


 

I know David is a man of his word and won't do another run of these Quarks since they are a limited edition but I wish these flashlights were available indefinitely. Then I could buy them all 1 at a time and not go broke doing it. 

Do you think anybody would actually be mad if 4 Sevens did another limited run of these lights? By limited mean no more than 10,000 of each type!


----------



## polkiuj (Oct 29, 2009)

Morelite said:


> The output will be the same when the battery voltage is the same or very close considering the difference in internal resistance of different cells.
> *So the AA model with a 14500 (3.7v) will be the same as a R123 model and a AAx2 (1.5v alkaline) will be the same as CR123 (3v) and so on. I haven't tested this out yet as I haven't received the 123 model. This is only want I have come to understand so far. *
> I have been using my AA with a 14500 and it is as bright as the regular aluminum 123 model and both heads look the same when using either one with an Energizer Lithium primary on the AA body. The XP-G head does have a brighter and wider spill but the total output at a close range on a white wall look really close.


That is correct but 2xAlkaline might drop it's output faster depending on the LED (usually not). NiMH is a better choice here.


----------



## DimeRazorback (Oct 29, 2009)

recDNA said:


> Do you think anybody would actually be mad if 4 Sevens did another limited run of these lights?



I wouldn't be mad!

I would be *very* happy!

How foolish I was to only order one!

:shakehead


----------



## BentHeadTX (Oct 29, 2009)

Interesting idea, you can call the 2nd run "The unlimited edition" with no numbers on the barrel. 



recDNA said:


> I know David is a man of his word and won't do another run of these Quarks since they are a limited edition but I wish these flashlights were available indefinitely. Then I could buy them all 1 at a time and not go broke doing it.
> 
> Do you think anybody would actually be mad if 4 Sevens did another limited run of these lights? By limited mean no more than 10,000 of each type!


----------



## Burgess (Oct 29, 2009)

I myself would be VERY upset !


How on earth am i possibly gonna' sell *mine* on EEbay for BigBuck$,

if 4Sevens keeps crankin' these babies out ? ? ?



_


----------



## DimeRazorback (Oct 29, 2009)

:laughing:

I was going to say a similar thing, but resisted the urge.


----------



## SFG2Lman (Oct 29, 2009)

woo i got mine and its beautiful! number 254, it even converted a TSA agent today in security before one of my flights...he showed my his 6P that he "modded" for LED use...i first blew him away with my Ti quark...and then pulled out my 6P with the nailbender SST-90 drop-in....i told him there was a safe place for people like us, that he wasn't alone, that this place was called candlepowerforums, and he should check it out...he then followed me around the terminal asking more questions that i was more than happy to answer  lovecpf


----------



## strinq (Oct 29, 2009)

The question is, will these babies really go for big bucks?

What would you guys estimate the price would be?
Pure speculation here.


----------



## Norm (Oct 29, 2009)

strinq said:


> The question is, will these babies really go for big bucks?
> 
> What would you guys estimate the price would be?
> Pure speculation here.


I hope not, if the TI quarks sell at inflated prices, then the manufacturers of similar lights is going to inflate the price by a similar amount. Then there will be no budget TI lights. :mecry:
Norm


----------



## DimeRazorback (Oct 29, 2009)

Agreed!


----------



## DM51 (Oct 30, 2009)

Continued here...


----------

