# PT Quad or PT EOS



## litehiker (Dec 30, 2005)

Both are regulated and waterproof.
Both use 3 AAA and have 3 levels of light and a strobe.
Both weigh around 3.5 oz.
The Princeton Tec Quad, which will come out early spring, will cost $33. The EOS is $39.

The Quad uses 4 super bright Nichia 5mm LED's which are described as 30% brighter than standard LED's. The burn time given is 25 hr to 150 hr.
The EOS uses a 1 watt LED that reportedly has a much narrower beam.

Which LED's are probably more efficient?
Would the wider beam from the Quad be better for hiking or is the EOS wide enough and maybe better because it would throw the light further?
Which would probably be better for hiking?


----------



## hank_moon (Dec 31, 2005)

If you are gonna be hiking on trails (i.e. no need for extensive routefinding), I would say that the Quad will be the way to go. I have compared the new Nichia 5mm headlamps with the current Luxeon headlamp crop and gotta say i'm more impressed with the Nichia 5mm for overall brightness and efficiency. 4 of those new Nichia give an awesome flood!


----------



## SilverFox (Dec 31, 2005)

Hello Litehiker,

Welcome to CPF.

Just to balance the opinions out...

Some of the EOS lights have a warmer tint to them. If you are in the store, you can easily see this. It is my humble opinion that the warmer tint gives you better contrast when you are out on the trail.

The Nichia's are probably more efficient, but there are times when I find the blue tint a bit anoying...

Tom


----------



## jar3ds (Jan 18, 2006)

well i don't have the quad ... I'm waiting for the review to be done on flashlightreviews.com ... 

but I can comment on the EOS that I have... The factory optic that is in the EOS i feel really a bad choice for a headlamp of this design... 

Personally if I am going to choose a headlamp that has the LED and battery pack as a single frontal unit then I usually am going to want my light to have good flood/spill... and usually I will be using that headlamp in 'closer' situations rather than throw/spotting....

For this reason I have changed by factory optic to a 17mm IMS reflector... since doing so there has HUGE improvement in the functionality of the headlamp... the beam pattern w/ the new reflector is very similar to an HDS beam pattern... the hot spot with the 17mm is a little tighter than the hds, the spill is larger than the hds, but that spill pattern is a little dimmer overall than the HDS is...

regardless... the new pattern is fantastic for spot and close flood usage... the huge spill allows for easily reading on low and easy walking on ruff terrain on the brighter settings

as for the quad:

i like the battery indicator... which is handy... the design is very nice and similar to the EOS... I find that as much as I like flood on a headlamp... I find having a decent hotspot is nice for spotting distant targets... when walking... etc

when I put a piece of matte tape over the reflector my EOS, it makes it diffused.. as much as it is really nice for reading and close indoor work... it has no throw at all which makes it hard for spotting distant targets... I wonder if this is how the Quad will feel! :-\

I would assume that something along the lines of the StenLight were having binary LED's with different patterns is the best solution...

but for now the EOS is working quite well and I plan on sticking with it with the 17mm reflector mod... 

Buying a:
$35 Grey w/Black Bezel EOS, 
$5 17mm reflector, 
and using 900mA Duracell NiMH is in my mind one of the best general flashlight combination you can buy for the money... 

having 3 fully regulated outputs almost perfectly spaced apart in brightness, a tough waterproof housing to 1m which can run off of tons of battery chemistries all for around $40? that is a fantastic deal...

Improvments for the eos:

a way to easily switch it to a red filter for very dim operations which I do find myself needing quite a bit... 

not require a tool (how simple) to open the battery compartment (minor issue)

the switch isn't the smoothest

and the blink mode is pointless... would have perfered a even dimmer setting instead...


----------



## cave dave (Jan 18, 2006)

Where does one buy the IMS reflector?


----------



## vtunderground (Jan 18, 2006)

cave dave said:


> Where does one buy the IMS reflector?



Here: http://theledguy.chainreactionweb.com/product_info.php?cPath=48_50_64&products_id=429


----------



## xcandrew (Jan 19, 2006)

Another opinion on the Eos... I inquired about the reflector options a few months ago, but I've decided that I like the beam as is. It really is good for most of my outdoor uses.

I would say that the optic is actually PERFECT for one of my main uses, nordic skiing. Going down a long fast twisting ski trail, the bright part of the beam can be directed well down the trail at 25 mph (40 kph), and the spill part lights up the near ground. The overall effect is even light from right in front of my feet/skis on forward, the spot part of the beam is not seen as a spot because it is directed much farther down the trail. This works because of the brightness of the snow on the ground. When there is no snow on the ground, the beam does seem a bit on the narrow side. That isn't a problem for me because I live far enough north that I don't worry about needing a light in the summer (can even read inside a closed up tent at midnight without a light in June...).


----------



## jar3ds (Jan 21, 2006)

have you tried the reflector? I am glad that the standard optic works for your task with skiing... 

something like skiiing and biking are excellent situations for optics to direct the light where you want it...

personally if I was skiiing @ night I'd be using something like an Apex or a StenLight... i'd want ultimate output...


----------



## chevrofreak (Jan 21, 2006)

*http://tinyurl.com/bc3e3*

I got my Eos from that fella, just under $33 shipped.

Very bright, seems to be 2x as bright as the one Quickbeam tested, and the beam color seems to be a W0 or close to it.


----------



## pae77 (Jan 23, 2006)

Which one (Quad or EOS) would be better for reading in bed?


----------



## cheapo (Jan 23, 2006)

I would recomend the EOS for hiking, either would do just fine for reading due to the levels, but I'd say the quad because the nichias are dimmer.

-David


----------



## vtunderground (Jan 23, 2006)

litehiker said:


> Both are regulated and waterproof.
> Which LED's are probably more efficient?
> Would the wider beam from the Quad be better for hiking or is the EOS wide enough and maybe better because it would throw the light further?
> Which would probably be better for hiking?



Personally, my first choice for hiking would be the EOS with IMS17 reflector. My second choice would be the Quad. My distant third choice would be the EOS with stock optic, unless you're hiking in flat terrain. And from Quickbeam's reviews, it looks like the EOS is more effiecient than the Quad.

pae77: The Quad should be better for reading in bed, because it has a better flood beam than the EOS. But if you're buying a headlamp strictly for reading in bed, you could get the EOS and just remove the optic alltogether. The bare emitter gives off a PERFECT flood beam.


----------



## jar3ds (Jan 24, 2006)

vtunderground said:


> Personally, my first choice for hiking would be the EOS with IMS17 reflector. My second choice would be the Quad. My distant third choice would be the EOS with stock optic, unless you're hiking in flat terrain. And from Quickbeam's reviews, it looks like the EOS is more effiecient than the Quad.
> 
> pae77: The Quad should be better for reading in bed, because it has a better flood beam than the EOS. But if you're buying a headlamp strictly for reading in bed, you could get the EOS and just remove the optic alltogether. The bare emitter gives off a PERFECT flood beam.



agree 99%! You think the Quad is less effecient than the EOS? I thought CS's are the best bang for buck? 

I'll have to try my headlamp with the bare emitter, thanks for the tip! But I do agree the IMS17 is such a great beam pattern upgrade for the EOS.. makes a good headlamp great...

pae77: Which one (Quad or EOS) would be better for reading in bed?

for readying in bed either will work... the quad may be a little better diffused but the EOS w/ims17 would be a great option since it has such a good spill... however like vtunderground said a bare emiter might be perfect for diffused light needs...

I do wish that PT would start to introduce some heat regulation in their headlamps... seeing problems with the Apex about over heating is scary... In the meantime I'll watch my EOS very closely when on the high setting or extreme temp changes...

- Jared


----------



## vtunderground (Jan 24, 2006)

jar3ds said:


> agree 99%! You think the Quad is less effecient than the EOS? I thought CS's are the best bang for buck?



Hmm... I said that based on the Flashlightreviews.com runtime numbers, which favor the EOS (as do PT's estimated runtime). But the overall output for the Quad looks to be greater than the EOS... so maybe the Quad has greater lumen output than the EOS, at the expense of runtime?


----------



## Skeeterbytes (Jan 24, 2006)

FWIW I've done EOS run-time tests, including on high, with only mild warming and definitely no evidence of heat damage. I believe that the design, with the batteries basically in contact with the works, provides more than enough mass to easily deal the heat. In cold conditions this seems to have the benefit of helping keep the batteries warm.

--Rick



jar3ds said:


> I do wish that PT would start to introduce some heat regulation in their headlamps... seeing problems with the Apex about over heating is scary... In the meantime I'll watch my EOS very closely when on the high setting or extreme temp changes...
> 
> - Jared


----------



## pae77 (Jan 24, 2006)

Thanks for the replies to my reading question.

Is it difficult to remove and put back the optic in the EOS or is it the kind of thing that can be done in a couple of minutes without tools?


----------



## jar3ds (Jan 24, 2006)

yes a couple of min without tools it can be done....

once you get the EOS seperated and you break the pins.. then you can take it out at will... its a nice feature!


----------



## floscherl (Jan 29, 2006)

My two cents:

Based on the Flashlightreviews.com runtime numbers the EOS IS more efficient than the Quad.

In the low setting, the EOS has 7.07 throw, 1.20 overall output and 44h (+16h dimmish thereafter) runtime. The Quad has 5.92 throw, 1.60 overall output and 24h runtime(+126h dimmish thereafter). So 44h/24h is self-explanatory 

Very nice is that you can change the Lux I star very easy. Change the tint (warm white or cold white) is no problem this way. 

The option to mod the EOS with reflectors is another big plus.


----------



## jar3ds (Jan 30, 2006)

i completely agree floscher... the EOS's ability to be modded easily makes it even a stronger choice for a headlamp...

once I find an even better LED i'll mod my EOS... anyone know where a good 1w led is?


----------



## Spypro (Jan 10, 2008)

Yeah I know that it is an old thread but I'm planning to buy an headlamp. I'm stuck between the EOS or the Quad.
I really don't know which one would the best.

So far I like the regulation on the EOS but I don't like the "tunnel effect" on it. I don't want to mod the headlamp, I just want it to be "stock friendly". I could mod it with a new reflector but I don't want to ruin it.
The Quad looks nice too with is great flood but I'm afraid of getting bluish light and I'm not sure about the regulation on High with nimh battery.

They both have their "+" and "-".

I'm looking for flood, good regulation, good runtime and I don't want to spend more than 50$.

Help will appreciated.

Thanks !


----------



## gunga (Jan 10, 2008)

For the best flood, get an EOS modded with a stippled reflector (seoul star is optional but a nice benefit, gives better tint control and double the light output).

Best of both worlds. 

I happen to have one in BST (it's above your asking price but I'm sure we can work something out).

:thumbsup:

I've had the quad, found it blue and ragged beam edges (tho you likely won't notice the beam edges). 

I have a few EOSes and just love them modded.


----------



## Uncle Bob (Jan 10, 2008)

I have an *EOS* but not a *Quad* and it is my EDC headlamp. I also use a *Petzl Tikka XP* a lot. It's not regulated but it offers switching from spot to flood. The *EOS* can take primary lithium but not the *XP*. 

There just doesn't seem to be a perfect headlamp for me. That's why I have several and pick one that best suits my activity. 

Got a *Petzl e+Lite* recently on sale to stick in my glove box for emergencies.

Frustrating, isn't it? :shrug:


----------



## Spypro (Jan 10, 2008)

Thank you for your advices.
The EOS looks like the best choice.
Is it difficult to mod with a new reflector ? I heard that we have to break some pins in order to apply the mod.


----------



## half-watt (Jan 11, 2008)

Spypro said:


> I'm stuck between the EOS or the Quad.
> I really don't know which one would the best.




as a long time backpacker (now in forced retirement) and for some years an ultralight backpacker, i've collected far too many headlamps.

i have both the Eos and the Quad. both very nice headlamps, IMO. the Quad is better at in camp task/proximity lighting, or walking a path where BLAZES, marking turns in the trail, do *NOT* have to be spotted. 

the Eos, due to its particular LED technology, is better at distance spotting. however, that said, the beam is TOO tight, making, what i term, "chicken walking" necessary, with one's head bobbing about moving the narrow beam from rock-to-tree-to-tree-etc.-etc... trying to spot blazes on indistinct, leaf-covered, unfamiliar trails.

so, depending upon your particular uses, you would pick one or the other (or in true CPF fashion - pick both and use them for their intended design purposes).


however, my real suggestion to you would be to do as i have more recently done. What's that? well,...

approx. two years ago, i switched from headlamps to Fenix flashlights. Why?

1. lighter - even carrying some spare batts

2. long burn times on low output levels

3. brighter with the new Cree LEDs when throw is needed

4. more robust and more waterproof than most headlamps

5. easy to mount the smaller/lighter flashlights to a ballcap brim using a MiniMag clip, or, for either the smaller or larger flashlights use a JakStrap headband (*NOT* the somewhat similar Nite-Ize version - have it & *CAN'T* recommend it) to headmount the light - either way "hands-free" use is easily doable.

6. often use fewer batts due to the burntimes and the fact that most of these lights use only ONE or TWO cells instead of the 3 or 4 cells used by most headlamps. so, cheaper to "fuel", so to speak, than most headlamps.

Fenix was the Mfr. that i first came across and there are several Fenix models that work fine for backpacking, hiking, or camping (car or otherwise).

Olight, LumaPower, and a couple of the newer Cree emitter Surefires (the two "Outdoorsman" models) are also fine choices for the forest, IMO, but the two Surefires i mentioned lack the flexibility of multiple lighting levels that the others provide.

hope this info helps.


----------



## Spypro (Jan 11, 2008)

Thank you, your advices are really appreciated. I already own a Fenix, the P3D. I'm really looking into a "true" headlamp and the EOS and Quad are in my price range.
I think the Quad would be the best for my needs since I'll use the headlamp for close-up works. But I'm afraid of the poor regulation on High and I'm also afraid of the bluish tint of the LEDs.


----------



## half-watt (Jan 11, 2008)

Spypro said:


> Thank you, your advices are really appreciated. I already own a Fenix, the P3D. I'm really looking into a "true" headlamp and the EOS and Quad are in my price range.
> I think the Quad would be the best for my needs since I'll use the headlamp for close-up works. But I'm afraid of the poor regulation on High and I'm also afraid of the bluish tint of the LEDs.



i have no problem with the tint of my two Quad headlamps. bluish? yeah,...i guess so, but it doesn't really bother me much, so much so, that i don't even notice it once using either of them. YMMV.

HIGH output semi-regulation might be helped by using Li primary cells or NiMH cells.

for close up work, which you mentioned you wanted the Quad for, you WON'T be needin' HIGH. LOW will probably be enough, and MED will work for most work involving "beyond arm's length", but NOT too far distant viewing. so, for your stated purposes, i wouldn't let the lack of true regulation on HIGH stop you from getting the Quad. you'll rarely be using HIGH for "close-up works".

my two shekels.


----------



## half-watt (Jan 11, 2008)

Uncle Bob said:


> There just doesn't seem to be a perfect headlamp for me. That's why I have several and pick one that best suits my activity.




hear ya. +1 to that.

even though i've given over 1/3 of my headlamps away to some boy scouts and other youths, i easily still have over 50 headlamps.

that said, for my purposes, i've found a Fenix flashlight to be a better all around solution. sure, i might need a Photon Freedom Microlight for reading if i'm carrying a high-powered 2xCR123A flashlight+JakStrap (or barrel clip) for hands-free use, but, as you alluded to, i'd need to carry two headlamps to accomplish the same goal (task/proximity lighting and distance viewing - and the Fenix will handle the distant viewing better than probably 90% or more of the headlamps i have - including some incandescent and hybrid headlamps, especially when burntime is factored into the distance viewing equation).


----------



## Spypro (Jan 11, 2008)

Thanks !
Which AAA battery would you recommend ?


----------



## half-watt (Jan 11, 2008)

Spypro said:


> Thanks !
> Which AAA battery would you recommend ?




not sure if you intended to reply to me or to another Poster. in case it was me,...

i've gone to AAA Eneloops NiMH LSD (low-self discharge) cells. 

still use AAA Sanyo NiMH cells sometimes. 

for alkalines, either Duracell or Energizer. 

for Li primaries, Energizer.


----------



## Spypro (Jan 11, 2008)

What about the regulation on High with the Eneloops ?
I saw this interesting thread: Here


----------



## hopkins (Jan 11, 2008)

Hello spypro
think the comments made by half-watt are on the mark for sure.

Wonder if a small hinge could be mounted to the EOS lens so it can flip down. Then the bare LED would give a nice flood like the Zebra's do. Bit of surgery on the lamp though... but would give it that myo xp versatility.

--Anyway I've taken 2 headlamps backpacking 
just for the fun of seeing
how different beams and colors work.
Why not buy both the Quad and the EOS? You deserve both as a CPF member!
and what about a homemade headband for the Fenix - probably your cheapest route to a headlamp.


----------



## Spypro (Jan 12, 2008)

Thanks for the help.
I'll take a look at the Mountain Coop shop today to see if they have the Quad in stock. I think it is a good bargain at 31$ CAD.


----------



## litehiker (Jan 19, 2008)

Spypro -
Since I started this thread a couple years ago, I might as well tell you what I ended up with.
The Fenix L0D-CE :thumbsup:from fenix-store.com.
Its light is a bit wider than that of the EOS, it has a better selection of brightness levels, it is much smaller (not much larger than the one aaa battery that powers it, it clips onto the bill of a baseball cap or is great in your hand when going over difficult terrain, it is super waterproof and durable, and with a much more efficient LED it gives much more light per battery than the EOS (or the Quad). I also like the fact that, unlike the EOS, it stays near the same brightness level for most of its battery life.
It works fine with alkalines, far better with rechargeables, and even better with lithiums.


----------



## Mark620 (Jan 20, 2008)

Spypro said:


> I heard that we have to break some pins in order to apply the mod.




The pins that hold the "guts" in...have to be cut/broke
I drilled mine out ...dont take too much...tho...


----------

