# Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS +



## selfbuilt

*Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS +*

*Warning: Pic heavy, as usual. *











Zebralight has gone through a couple of iterations of the 1xAA forward-projecting SC50 model flashlight – although most of these have been relatively minor circuit tweaks.

For this review, I have on hand a late model neutral-white XP-E emitter SC50w from just before the introduction of the SC50w+ version. Not much has changed - the “+” version has a new secondary Hi mode on 14500 instead of strobe (107 Lumen), and slightly brighter primary Med mode (36 instead of 33 Lumens) on both standard AA and 14500. But otherwise, the build is identical. 

I also have a soon-to-be-released new SC51 cool-white sample.  The SC51 uses the newer XP-G emitter (R4 output bin), but is otherwise identical in build to the SC50 line. The circuit seems similar to the SC50w, although strobe is no longer present at all (i.e. the secondary Hi mode is available on both standard AA and 14500). 

*SC50w+ Specifications (taken from Zebralight):*

LED: Cree XP-E Neutral White (color temperature 4000-4300 K) 
User Selectable Modes: 3 (High, Medium and Low). Each mode can be configured to one of the two sub-levels.
Light output values are out the front (OTF) Lumens. 
AA (alkaline/NiMH/lithium, runtimes based on Sanyo 2700mAh NiMH)
High: 107 Lm (2.3 hrs) or 2Hz strobe 
Medium: 36 Lm (10.5 hrs) or 18 Lm (21.4 hrs) 
Low: 4.4 Lm (4 days) or 0.6 Lm (22 days)
14500: Outputs same as above, except the the SC50w+ features a 169 Lm max output and a 107 Lm output as the secondary High mode (i.e. instead of 2 Hz strobe, which is still present on regular AA). 
Battery: One AA size alkaline, 1.5V lithium primary, NiMH rechargeable, or 3.7v 14500 Li-ion rechargeable. Batteries are not included in the package. 
Parasitic Current Drain: 5.6uA, equivalent to 55 years of battery life.
Beam Type: 76° spill beam spread, 8.6° (3 feet at 20 feet) hot spot
Dimensions: Diameter: 0.85 inch (22 mm), Length: 3.15 inch (80 mm)
Weight: 1.3 oz (36.5 gram) with clip, without battery or headband
Electronic soft-touch switch, with a 200,000 cycle operating life
Smart user interface provides fast and easy access to all brightness levels
Precision machined casing from premium grade Alcoa aluminum bar stock
Proprietary heat sinking design bonds the LED metal core board directly to the uni-body aluminum casing, providing unblocked thermal paths to over 94% of the surface area.
Durable natural hard anodized finish (Type III Class I)
SCHOTT ultra clear lens with anti-reflection coatings on both sides
Bezel down clip (pre-installed)
Can be used as a headlamp with the included headband (clip can remain installed when the light is on the headband)
Orange peel textured reflector
Anti-roll and tail-stand capable
Battery power can be locked out by slightly unscrewing the tailcap to prevent unwanted activations or parasitic drain
Waterproof to IPX8
Accessories in the package: One black silicone holder with headband, two o-rings
Estimated MSRP: $59
*SC51 Specifications (where different from above):*

LED: Cree XP-G Cool White (color temperature 6100-6500 K)
User Selectable Modes: 3 (High, Medium and Low). Each mode can be configured to one of the two sub-levels.
Light Output
High: H1 200 Lm (0.9 hrs) or H2 140 Lm (2 hrs)
Medium: M1 30 Lm (12 hrs) or M2 8 Lm (39 hrs)
Low: L1 2.5 Lm (3 days) or L2 0.2 Lm (16 days)
Light output are out the front (OTF) values. Runtime tests are done using Sanyo 2000mAh Eneloop AA batteries. 
Voltages: 0.7V - 2.5V
Battery: One 1.5V AA (NiMH, lithium or alkaline). 14500 Li-ion batteries are not supported. Batteries are not included in the package.
Parasitic Drain: Negligible (equivalent to 16 years)
Beam Type: 80° spill beam spread, 11° (3.8 feet at 20 feet) hot spot
Waterproof to IPX8 (1 meter 30 minutes)
Estimated MSRP: $64
Given that the lights and packaging look identical, I will only show one set in the pics here - except for the emitter shots, of course, where I will show both samples.






For both lights, included in the simple but firm cardboard box was the light with removable clip (attached), extra o-rings, and a one-page instruction sheet. The SC50w also came with the classic Zebralight headband with soft plastic light holder (shown above) – but the SC51 sample was lacking this accessory.









From left to right: Duracell alkaline, Zebralight SC51, SC50w, 4Sevens Quark Mini AA, Quark AA, NiteCore D10-SP, Fenix LD10-R4, ITP SA1

*SC50w*: Weight: 37.8g (no battery), Width (bezel) 22.4mm, (tailcap) 21.4mm, Length 80.5mm
*SC51*: Weight: 37.4g (no battery), Width (bezel) 22.4mm, (tailcap) 21.4mm, Length 80.5mm

As you can see, the SC50/51 series is quite tiny. 

The overall dimensions of the SC51 are exactly the same as the earlier SC50/SC50+ series – it’s only the emitter that appears different (XP-G on the SC51 instead of XP-E on the earlier models). SC50w first, followed by SC51:










The SC51 sample I have uses a XP-G emitter with R4 output bin. The SC50w doesn’t specify an output bin for the XP-E emitter, but I understand from Zebralight that the Neutral white version currently comes from a 5B4 tint bin.

Reflectors look identical, and are medium textured (medium orange peel), and a reasonable depth for this size light. 














The lights have flat-bottomed tailcaps and electronic control switches on their heads. The switches are covered with textured boot covers, and are easy to access. Feel of the switches are good for this type, with a lightly audible click as you make contact. Note that electronic switches are not like traditional mechanical clickies – think more like the buttons on your DVD player, flat-screen monitor, etc.

Tailcap threads are anodized, allowing for tailcap lockout. :thumbsup: This is important on all lights with electronic switches, since there is always some parasitic stand-by current drain to allow the switch to function. Scroll down for a discussion in this case.

The lights can both tailstand and headstand.

The lights come with a removable metal pocket clip, held in place by two regular Phillips head screws. 

Fit and finish on both of my samples are excellent. I really like the color – the SC51 is slightly darker than my SC50w specimen, but that is just natural anodizing lot variability. Either way, I personally quite like dark green-grey color. In both cases, the tailcaps are well-matched to the bodies. The overall effect is very similar to a number of Nitecore, JetBeam and SUNWAYLED lights. I would consider the anodizing of Zebralights to be in the same category as those makers. :twothumbs

One interesting feature – absolutely no identifying or warning labels of any sort on either light. Kind of a refreshing change, to be honest. 

There is little ridge detail or knurling, so I recommend you keep the clip on these lights. The heatsinking fins around the head do provide some additional grip, though.

*Beamshots*

_Sorry for the quality of the beamshots – I’ve recently moved, and haven’t had a chance to set up a proper beamshot closet yet. What you are looking at below is un-primed drywall, with a range of spakle/sanding marks._

All lights are on Max, ~0.5m from a white wall on Sanyo Eneloop. The camera was set to automatic white balance, and the SC50w doesn’t look that warm in real life. 


















Although the un-primed drywall makes things a bit messy, you can see that the SC50/SC51 have a wider beam profile than the Fenix LD10-R4. Throw on the Zebralights are reasonable for this class.

For an explanation and discussion of the various tints – including outdoor shots comparing how they look – please see my 4Sevens Mini Tint Comparison - Warm, Neutral, Cool White . The SC50w is slightly warmer than the Mini Neutral used in that comparison, but you’ll get the general idea.

*User Interface*

The Zebralights have a fairly unique user interface. While it may sound a little complex when first described, it is actually quite easy to use. Both the SC51 and SC50w function the same way, but there have been a few mode changes over time on the SC series.

On/off and mode switching is controlled by the electronic clicky switch. There are 6 possible output modes on either light, arranged in two sets of 3. Each output set is Lo – Med – Hi. There are two possible outputs at each level, commonly referred to as 1 or 2 (e.g. Lo1, Lo2, Med1, Med2, Hi1, Hi2). The light has independent mode memory to recall your preference at each of the Lo, Med, Hi levels. 

The SC50 series features a 2Hz strobe mode as the secondary Hi, and lacks a memory feature at this level (i.e. Hi1 constant output is the only memorized option). The updated SC50+ series features a 107 Lumen secondary Hi on 14500 only, as well a slightly brighter primary Med mode on both standard AA batteries (NiMH, alkaline, L91) and 14500. 

The SC51 has dispensed with the strobe mode altogether, and has a constant output secondary Hi mode on all batteries. Mode memory has been re-enabled at this level (i.e. you can select and memorize either Hi1 or Hi2)

From Off, a quick click turns on the light to Hi1 (SC50/SC50+) or your preferred Hi (SC51) instantly. Click quickly again to cycle from Hi to Med, and Low. You need to perform these clicks rapidly if you want to switch modes this way (i.e. from Off, single-click is Hi, double-click is Med, triple-click is Lo). After about a second or so of being On, a quick click will simply turn the light off.

Alternatively, from Off, a slightly longer press and hold (i.e. >0.5 sec) turns on the light to your preferred Lo mode. 

To advance from one mode to the next while the light is On, press and hold to cycle through Lo, Med and Hi, repeatedly (you can do this directly from Off too). Release the switch to select the level. As before, a quick click turns off the light.

Double click at any level to toggle between the two sub-levels for that level (i.e. 1 or 2). The light will memorize your choice and return to it next time you cycle or turn on at this level (except for Strobe on the SC50/SC50+). The memory even lasts through battery changes.

And that’s it – it is really very simple. Once you get used to the timings, you can basically have the light do anything you want, with your preferred Lo and Hi being the most directly accessible from Off.

*Strobe/PWM:*

*SC50w:*






The SC50/SC50+ strobe mode is a refreshingly slow “signaling” strobe of 2Hz. For once, we don’t have to put up with nauseating “tacticool” strobes on a 1xAA light. 






On the SC30/H31 series lights I reviewed previously, PWM was in the visible range on the secondary output modes (Lo2, Med2, Hi2) – typically 120-900 Hz. I am happy to report my SC50w sample only has measurable PWM on the Med2 level – and at an extremely high 3.7 kHz. :thumbsup:

*SC51:*










However, I am sad to report that the SC51 has reverted to visible PWM on Lo2 and Med2 levels. :sigh: Worse than that, the Lo2 mode is at a very visible 69 Hz (the Med2 is not as bad at 437 Hz).

This might have something to do with moving to the XP-G emitter, but I am sad to see a return to the low PWM freq – and one that is about half as fast as the older SC30/H31.

*Parasitic Stanby Drain:*

On the SC30/H31 lights, parasitic drain was typically sufficient to drain a fully charged cell in 1 year (for RCR) or 3 years (for primary CR123A). So how do these 1xAA brethren fare? The following were measured using a DMM:

*SC50w:* 7.4 uA on 14500, 2.3 uA on Eneloop NiMH
*SC51:* 41.8 uA on 14500, 14.2 uA on Eneloop NiMH

Assuming a standard 900mAh protected 14500, and a 2000mAh Eneloop NiMH, these currents would translate into:

*SC50w:* 13.9 years on 14500, 99.3 years on Eneloop oo:
*SC51:* 2.5 years on 14500, 16.1 years on Eneloop

Clearly, the SC50w drain is absolutely nothing to worry about. While the drain is higher on the SC51 it is still very good – certainly better than the earlier SC30 series. :thumbsup:

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

Throw values were taken at 1 meter for all lights shown below. 

*Throw/Output Summary Chart:*











And no, those output numbers for the SC51 on Eneloop are not misprints! 

Scroll down for a discussion ...

*Output/Runtime Comparison*





































I don’t know the output bin of the SC50w, but its performance is quite good for a neutral-white XP-E emitter. It certainly matches or exceeds most R2-equipped cool white lights in my collection. No surprises – all modes tested did very well on all batteries :thumbsup:

So how do you top that? Enter the SC51 - performance on standard batteries (Eneloop NiMH, alkalkine, L91) is simply outstanding. oo:

Zebralight informed me that the SC51 was optimized for standard batteries, but I wasn’t expecting this kind of performance. Output/runtime efficiency clearly outperforms even the Fenix LD10-R4 – in some cases by as much as 50% or more! Max output is also noticeably higher than the Fenix (which was itself head-and-shoulders above the other lights in my collection). The Eneloop, L91 and alkaline graphs all tell the story pretty well!

So has the SC51 skimped on 14500 performance? Not all – in fact, I would say it performs as well as any other light given the R4 output bin.

Something else to note – the regulation pattern (on all batteries) is excellent – perfectly flat in all cases except max output.

*Potential Issues*

The lights use PWM for the lower outputs of the Med/Lo settings. On the SC50w, I was unable to detect the frequency on Lo, and found a virtually undetectable 3.7 kHz on Med. However, the SC51 has a very noticeable 69 Hz on the lower Lo, and a more reasonable 437 Hz on the lower Med.

Although my SC50w took all my AW protected 14500 (including the older flat-top ones), my SC51 wouldn’t light up on any of them initially. I had to use a small magnet spacer on the positive contact pole of the battery for it to work. I don’t know if this is natural variability, or if there’s been a circuit change on the SC51. I note there is a quick flash when first making battery contact on the SC51, something that I do not see on the SC50w.

A parasitic standby current is needed for the electronic switch, but the levels are not a concern for either light (i.e. several years, to decades, of battery life). And in any case, the light can be easily locked-out by a twist of the tailcap.

_*UPDATE January 7, 2011:* Having EDCed the SC50w for several months now, I can tell you of another issue - the light easily turns on if something presses against the switch in your holster/pocket. You need to lock the light out at the tailcap to prevent this. Otherwise, you may notice some heat coming from your pants - the light usually comes on in Max with a quick press.  I've also had a few cases of finding it on Lo/Med, with a nearly depleted battery after being on for hours._

*Preliminary Observations*

To start, I found that the SC50w performed admirably – and consistently - on all battery sources. Although Zebralight doesn’t provide an output bin for its XP-E emitter, I’d estimate somewhere around a R2 output level compared to other lights I’ve tested. I'm not generally a huge fan of neutral-warm tints, but I like the 5B4 tint bin of the SC50w.

Some of the small issues that detracted from the 1xCR123A-based H31/SC30 Zebralights I recently reviewed have been fixed. The standby current has been reduced to negligible levels (i.e. 14/99 years before draining a 14500/Eneloop). The PWM has been raised to virtually undetectable levels (i.e. 3.7 kHz on lower Med, unmeasurable on lower Lo).

Basically, the SC50w is great little 1xAA light. I've been EDCing it for the last month, and have been happy with its performance.  

But it is also on the verge of being replaced by the SC51 – sporting the new XP-G R4. More than that, the SC51’s circuit has been tweaked for outstanding standard battery performance (i.e. Eneloop, NiMH, alklakine, L91 lithium). oo:

I’m frankly at a loss … I don’t understand how Zebralight has managed to pull off this sort of performance. :thinking: The SC51 blows away every XP-E light in my collection – both in terms of output/runtime efficeincy, and max output. For goodness sakes, it's max output on Eneloop is higher than most modern 1xAA lights on 14500!

And 14500 performance is still fine on the SC51 – while not as outstanding as the standard battery runtimes, it is consistent with a R4 output bin. Note though that I typically needed to use a small magnet spacer for the protected 14500s to make contact in the SC51 (something I didn’t need on the SC50w). Not sure why - the lights look to be the same build.

If this sort of performance is the wave of the future, I’m looking forward to more XP-G based 1xAA lights! 
----

_*UPDATE 9/11/2010*: I've gotten some updates from Zebralight on the issues identified for the SC51 in the review:

The H51 and SC51 share the same circuit (a buck-boost, that has been heavily optimized since the original H50)
My engineering sample had a lower PWM, but the final shipping version should be close to those found in the SC30/H31 (i.e. twice what I found on the SC51). 
ZL explains that they use lower freq PWM in the Low2 level for improved circuit efficiency. They claim to be able to filter out the visible PWM with the capacitor in the output stage, even though the PWM may still be detectable by oscilloscope. 
The positive contacts used in the SC51 are simply from a new batch, which presumably explains the heightened sensitivity to flat tops. Nothing is changed in terms of positive polarity detection.
ZL confirmed that parasitic drain is lower on the AA-series lights, compared to their other offerings. They say they will try to implement this feature on the SC30/SC60/H31 lights in the future.
One minor difference between the SC50 and SC51 that I didn't note - the threading is a bit thicker now - 1.25mm pitch. In addition to the same circuit, the SC51 and H51 also use the same thread, and tailcap.
_----

SC50w was provided by GoingGear.com for review. SC51 was provided by Zebralight for review.


----------



## gunga

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I can't wait for the neutral XP-G Zebralights. I hope they have them on the way, I have about 3 Zebralights in mind but am waiting for neutral XP-G. Thanks for the wonderful review!

:thumbsup:


----------



## davidt1

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Good stuff!!! Thanks for the review. Please review the H51F also when it comes out.


----------



## tre

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Wow! I am amazed how bright that thing is in the ceiling bounce test. That is brighter than most single Cr123a lights. That just went to the top of my list. I love my SC50+ and my SC30. I think I would love an SC51 even more. My SC50+ is going to be a gift for somebody when the SC51 comes out. amazing light. Simply amazing output/run time on an AA. 
Thanks for another great review.


----------



## LiteShow

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Great review selfbuilt! 

I have the original SC50 - EDCing that for about 4 months now and it has been a great EDC. As for the SC51, I am especially impressed with the Nimh performance on high. No need to mess around with a 14500. The beam from the XP-G is definitely bigger and more usable for EDC applications. The low frequency PWM is a little disappointing, since I use the low-low is one of my more popular modes. I hope Zebralight fixes that in that production release or is this it?.


----------



## chenko

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I'm definitely in for a SC51w when it will be available! It's a little dream-come-true light.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



gunga said:


> I can't wait for the neutral XP-G Zebralights.





tre said:


> Wow! I am amazed how bright that thing is in the ceiling bounce test. That is brighter than most single Cr123a lights.





chenko said:


> I'm definitely in for a SC51w when it will be available! It's a little dream-come-true light.


Yeah, the SC51 performance is surprising! If they come out with a neutral version of the XP-G, I am sure all the members of this forum would be all over it. 



LiteShow said:


> I have the original SC50 - EDCing that for about 4 months now and it has been a great EDC. As for the SC51, I am especially impressed with the Nimh performance on high. No need to mess around with a 14500. The beam from the XP-G is definitely bigger and more usable for EDC applications. The low frequency PWM is a little disappointing, since I use the low-low is one of my more popular modes. I hope Zebralight fixes that in that production release or is this it?.


Good points - I have actually been EDCing the SC50w for over a month now (on 14500), and find I quite like it. 

Honestly, I'm not sure if I'll switch to SC51 for EDC. Even though it is brighter on eneloop than the SC50w on 14500 (!), I've grown quite fond of the neutral-white emitter and lack of visible PWM. I am quite sensitive to PWM, and will do almost anything to avoid it. 

Dunno if there's any chance of ZL revising that before the release - I doubt it, since the SC30/H31 series also had visible PWM on the lower level. It is just the SC50w that seems to live in a "sweet spot" of undetectable PWM, for some reason.


----------



## FroggyTaco

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Under your run time graphs you wrote XR-E instead of XP-E for the nw SC50 FYI.

Man I really wanted the SC51(w) but the SC50w I had was really a great light too.


----------



## qtaco

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

The SC51's output and regulation is stunning on eneloops, truly a next generation light .

I just received a H51 yesterday, and I understand it uses the same circuit as the SC51 (certainly the low2 has a noticeable pwm frequency, but it doesn't worry me too much). It is an amazing little light, hitting the triple point of price, performance, and design for me. 

Zebralight is now arguably the leader in circuit design for AA's, a front runner for appealing physical design and UI design, and in my opinion one of the most talented flashlight manufacturers around.


----------



## AlphaZen

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



selfbuilt said:


> I’m frankly at a loss … I don’t understand how Zebralight has managed to pull off this sort of performance. :thinking: The SC51 blows away every XP-E light in my collection – both in terms of output/runtime efficeincy, and max output. For goodness sakes, it's max output on Eneloop is higher than most modern 1xAA lights on 14500!


The SC51 is certainly a leap forward in technology. 

Thank you, Selfbuilt, for the excellent review. I appreciate your candor and it was interesting to read your comments. I could feel your sense of amazement with what Zebralight has pulled off.

I want one...bad. :naughty:


----------



## choombak

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



qtaco said:


> The SC51's output and regulation is stunning on eneloops, truly a next generation light .
> 
> I just received a H51 yesterday, and I understand it uses the same circuit as the SC51 (certainly the low2 has a noticeable pwm frequency, but it doesn't worry me too much). It is an amazing little light, hitting the triple point of price, performance, and design for me.
> 
> Zebralight is now arguably the leader in circuit design for AA's, a front runner for appealing physical design and UI design, and in my opinion one of the most talented flashlight manufacturers around.



+1. I find Zebralights to have the best UI of all AA lights around, and the side-clickie is very appealing. They also have a reasonable low-low, and a sturdy pocket clip.

Its on my list, but the price is heavy for my wallet now.


----------



## leon2245

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



selfbuilt said:


>


 


I can't tell- where the clip attaches, are those two protrusions & ring permanently connected to the body, or is it a separate part that removes once you unscrew the clip? Just curious if removing the clip would render a more streamlined body underneath, like their headlamps.

Also, you mentioned locking it out. WOuld it be possible with this type of button to just leave it on a given setting, then turning it off & on by only twisting the tailcap? Or it will be twist tailcap, push button every time if you lock it out? Either way it's great you can lock it out. And I'm glad I waited for this one instead of letting their sc60 force me into using a battery type I wasn't excited about. Thanks for another great review as always S.B.


----------



## Lite_me

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I've been waiting for this review. Thanks selfbuilt! Great job as always. :thumbsup:


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Thanks for the support everyone. :grouphug:



AlphaZen said:


> The SC51 is certainly a leap forward in technology. ... I could feel your sense of amazement with what Zebralight has pulled off.


When you review a lot of lights as I do, you are always on the lookout for something new. Of course, that doesn't mean its useful or functional for everyone - the Icon Rogue comes to mind. I enjoyed delving into the exact behaviour of the circuit, although my apparent enthusiasm for discovery wasn't shared by everyone (I recall taking some crap in some quarters for "wasting" my time on it, for example ). 

The SC51 is different - what impresses me in this case (and what isn't obvious from a surface examination) is the performance of the circuit on standard batteries. The graphs speak for themselves - I've never seen anything quite like it. The _perfectly_ flat regulation on the secondary Hi mode is particularly impressive, given that the level is higher than most lights Max output (i.e. look at the alkaline or L91 graphs). Of course, while regulation patterns are interesting to me, what matters to the end user is really the other tidbit to be gleaned in the graphs - it runs more than twice as long as the competition for the same (or more) output! 

Although I don't plan on doing the lower output mode runtimes (they just take too long, and results can be more variable), it certainly seems like the SC51 is the light to recommend on standard batteries.



leon2245 said:


> I can't tell- where the clip attaches, are those two protrusions & ring permanently connected to the body, or is it a separate part that removes once you unscrew the clip? Just curious if removing the clip would render a more streamlined body underneath, like their headlamps.


No, the attachment point is permanent - it remains if you remove the clip.



> Also, you mentioned locking it out. WOuld it be possible with this type of button to just leave it on a given setting, then turning it off & on by only twisting the tailcap?


No, locking out the tailcap turns off the light - you would needed to press the switch again to re-activate once the tailcap is re-tightened. But of course, your selection of relative outputs for each level is maintained, and it's pretty easy to jump to the level you want from off (i.e. Hi or Lo directly from off, Med is just an extra long press-hold from off).



LiteShow said:


> The beam from the XP-G is definitely bigger and more usable for EDC applications.


A thought occurs to me here - both my lightbox and ceiling bounce measures are similarly affected by beam pattern. Lights with narrow spill beams focused for throw tend to report lower than lights with wider and more diffuse spill. So it's possible the tables and runtime graphs are artificially giving the SC51 a slight output advantage compared to some lights. But this effect likely isn't huge - and after all, a number of the other lights also have wider dispersion beams.


----------



## orbital

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

+

Looks like Zebralight has set the bar for single AA lights,
*simple & efficient,...just like it should be*
{the PWM does need to be increased}}}

thanks again selfbuilt..:thumbsup:


----------



## tandem

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Oh, so, close... I've been waiting to hear more opinions on the SC50 and now a soon to be released model hits most of my hot buttons... great runtimes on AA's... the utility and form factor suit me to a T. But... but... I'm really disappointed to learn about the SC51's low frequency PWM on the lower modes indicated. I'd prefer it didn't employ pwm at all (and still deliver the same performance) but would certainly park my PWM predjudice if the frequency was higher and undetectable to at least the human eye.

(Detectable by the human eye or not, I don't like PWM as a rule as it frequently interfers with some bike computers)

I am also sensitive to low frequency light oscillation - back in the day of CRT's it seemed like I was the only one in the office bothered by 60Hz sync on monitors and I'd go around and fix everyone's device. PWM also interferes with some bike computers.

Still I'm very interested in the smaller form factor and love the side clicky for regular users and would probably buy three of these in a heartbeat (my wife wants a headlamp, I'd like to get her something like this that does double duty as well as a couple or three more for my boys and myself) if not for the low freq. pwm.

Hopefully a newer release addresses this and I'll be shopping then.


----------



## TwinBlade

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

A great review as usual SB, but I cannot find a ZL SC51 anywhere...

There are all sorts of SC50+, no SC51's that I can find. Are you sure you didn't mean H51?


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



tandem said:


> Hopefully a newer release addresses this and I'll be shopping then.


There's always the SC50/SC50+ series (while still available) .... the SC50w I tested here performed quite well for the class, and no visible PWM.



TwinBlade said:


> A great review as usual SB, but I cannot find a ZL SC51 anywhere...


I don't believe any of the dealers have in on hand yet. Should be released soon by ZL, but I don't have an ETA. I gather the H51 is now out - so I imagine the SC51 should be shipping soon.


----------



## TwinBlade

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Right on man.

Any input on who the "usual" stockers will be? I am very interested in this pocket carry pal...


----------



## Mr Floppy

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

This one has just gone to the top of my purchase list. Unless of course you get to do a review of the H51 and they have the same beam profile. Incredible. Maybe I'll have to get a warm full flood version of the H51 instead. Zebralight were claiming 200 lumens out of the H51 and it looks like they have delivered if this is anything to go by.

These are the claimed runtimes by ZL for H51. They look pretty close to SC51:
Light Output 
High: H1 200 Lm (0.9 hrs) or H2 100 Lm (2.1 hrs) 
Medium: M1 30 Lm (12 hrs) or M2 8 Lm (39 hrs) 
Low: L1 2.5 Lm (3 days) or L2 0.2 Lm (19 days)

Thanks selfbuilt and thanks zebralight!


----------



## pae77

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Nice reviews. 

Perhaps I missed it but one thing I didn't see mention of anywhere in the review is the maximum lumen output of the SC50w (and w+) on High 1 on 14500's, which is *169 lumen OTF* according to ZL. H2, as was mentioned in the review, is 107 lumen on 14500s. 

I find I use the 0.6 lumen lower low a lot on my SC50w+ (in fact I frequently leave it on that level all night since it has a 22 day runtime on the lower low level) so I would hope that ZL fixes the noticeable PWM issue on the low level for the production version of the SC51. I would rather have the 31 less lumens OTF of the SC50w+ on H1 (max with 14500s), than put up with noticeable PWM on the low modes of the SC51, but that's just my preference, of course.

It's nice that the hotspot is a little larger on the SC51 than it is on the SC50. Wish the transition to spill was a little smoother though (iows, wish the spill was a bit brighter) on both models, even if achieving that required making the large size of the spill area a little smaller.


----------



## tandem

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



selfbuilt said:


> There's always the SC50/SC50+ series (while still available) .... the SC50w I tested here performed quite well for the class, and no visible PWM.



Couldn't go there now as I'm an AA runtime/output junkie. I've been very pleased with my Fenix LD10 R4 in that regard and up to this point had planned on picking up a few more but given your evaluation of the SC51 I'll have to consider that plan.

Given the following from your review:



> However, the SC51 has a very noticeable 69 Hz on the lower Lo, and a more reasonable 437 Hz on the lower Med.



... I could probably live with that for biking as the lower low and medium are not of interest for riding, only the higher and lower highs are of any use, plus strobe (eliminating the H51 in my mind). I wonder if the light employs PWM in its strobe modes; hopefully not. I've found PWM from various lights quite reliably interferes with the operation of wireless (wheel motion sensor is not wired to computer) bike computers.


----------



## leon2245

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

So I'm only aware of PWM from CPF, but never noticed it on l1, l4, l5, and a fenix & brinkmann LED- am I just not sensitive to it, or do these models not use this technology at all? They all appear to blink when I point them at a fan (ceiling fan test?), but so do the incans.

:thinking:


----------



## yowzer

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



leon2245 said:


> So I'm only aware of PWM from CPF, but never noticed it on l1, l4, l5, and a fenix & brinkmann LED- am I just not sensitive to it, or do these models not use this technology at all? They all appear to blink when I point them at a fan (ceiling fan test?), but so do the incans.



Not all lights have PWM. Using a light in rain or snow is a good test for it: If you see streaks coming down, it's because of low frequency PWM strobing.

Between the PWM and running my SC50w+ on a 14500, I think I'll pass on upgrading to the SC51w when it comes out. And hearing that the H51 has low-frequency PWM is disappointing... hope that gets fixed to SC50 frequency levels.

I don't think the SC51 and H51 have the exact same circuit; ZL's been saying the headlamp's not compatible with the voltage of 14500 cells, and they don't seem to blow up the SC51...


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Mr Floppy said:


> These are the claimed runtimes by ZL for H51. They look pretty close to SC51:
> Light Output
> High: H1 200 Lm (0.9 hrs) or H2 100 Lm (2.1 hrs)
> Medium: M1 30 Lm (12 hrs) or M2 8 Lm (39 hrs)
> Low: L1 2.5 Lm (3 days) or L2 0.2 Lm (19 days)





yowzer said:


> I don't think the SC51 and H51 have the exact same circuit; ZL's been saying the headlamp's not compatible with the voltage of 14500 cells, and they don't seem to blow up the SC51...


It's a good question - Zebralight hasn't informed of the specs for the SC51. They also didn't confirm 14500 compatibility - I just went ahead and tested that myself. It's possible the lights could use the same circuit - there is certainly precedent for that in their other SC/H models. Time will tell ...



pae77 said:


> Perhaps I missed it but one thing I didn't see mention of anywhere in the review is the maximum lumen output of the SC50w (and w+) on High 1 on 14500's, which is *169 lumen OTF* according to ZL. H2, as was mentioned in the review, is 107 lumen on 14500s.


Sorry, accidentally dropped that when condensing the spec text. It's added back in.



tandem said:


> I could probably live with that for biking as the lower low and medium are not of interest for riding, only the higher and lower highs are of any use, plus strobe (eliminating the H51 in my mind). I wonder if the light employs PWM in its strobe modes; hopefully not. I've found PWM from various lights quite reliably interferes with the operation of wireless (wheel motion sensor is not wired to computer) bike computers.


Interesting finding about wireless bike sensors, I've never heard of that one before.

For a full power strobe, there would be no additional cycle sequence within the constant output. In essence, you get very slow PWM - 2 cycles per second (strobe) instead of hundreds or thousands of cycles per second (PWM). If you had a light with a low output strobe, then I suppose it's possible that PWM could be used (although I would expect a low current would be far more likely).


leon2245 said:


> So I'm only aware of PWM from CPF, but never noticed it on l1, l4, l5, and a fenix & brinkmann LED- am I just not sensitive to it, or do these models not use this technology at all? They all appear to blink when I point them at a fan (ceiling fan test?), but so do the incans.


Fenix doesn't use PWM for its low mode - all are current controlled. Frankly, PWM isn't really an issue if the freq is high enough. It is pretty much undetectable in kHz range, and typically only enters your perception threshold somewhere <1kHz. Under ~200 Hz or so is very noticeable for those who are sensitive to it. You will see it as a corner-of-your-eye "flicker" (or more accurately, latent "ghost" images during your eye saccades).

Most makers who use it keep the frequency high, but some circuit designs make that difficult (for technical reasons that I am not an expert on).


----------



## LiteShow

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Hi Selfbuilt,

Would you be able to measure the current draw at the tail cap of the SC51 in high mode using a nimh?

The current draw on my SC50 in high mode using a nimh is about 1.1 A - with a rated 122 lumens output. I am just curious how much current is needed for the SC51 to push 14500 brightness using only 1.2 volts.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



LiteShow said:


> Would you be able to measure the current draw at the tail cap of the SC51 in high mode using a nimh?


Ok, but first with the BIG caveat that I don't trust tailcap current draws on max output. Even on my DMM's 10A scale, I know from previous testing the actual output tends to drop somewhat when doing these, suggesting a resistance issue somewhere with the DMM. That being said, here are the initial readings that I get with a Sanyo Eneloop NiMH:

SC50w: 1.15A on max Hi (i.e. 107 Lm for the "w" version, 120 Lm for the cool white equivalent)
SC51: 2.15A on max Hi (i.e. 200 Lm?)
SC51: 1.05A on secondary Hi (i.e. 100 Lm?)

Lumen estimates for the SC51 are simply based on the H51 numbers - I have no reliable info yet. But these numbers do seem reasonable for those potential specs.


----------



## tandem

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



selfbuilt said:


> Interesting finding about wireless bike sensors, I've never heard of that one before.



Within the night cycling community it's a known problem for a while now and it seems a great many wireless bike computers are affected. I suspect the magnet-induced signal from the wheel sensor is transmitting a fairly simple digital pulse; some more advanced units might include some basic encoding to avoid cross talk between nearby bikes. Typically what happens is when a light using PWM is within proximity (mounted on the handlebar) the computer either freezes or registers no motion regardless of current velocity. Simple EMI jamming!

I've not used an all-metal general purpose flashlight that employs PWM on my bike so I can't be sure that the EMI issue would remain present but would not be surprised.



> For a full power strobe, there would be no additional cycle sequence within the constant output.



agreed



> If you had a light with a low output strobe, then I suppose it's possible that PWM could be used (although I would expect a low current would be far more likely).



This may be more common in bike oriented lights which tend to use not a constant strobe at X frequency but issue instead a pattern of light bursts, higher and lower outputs. Perhaps some general purpose flashlights have a beacon-ish type mode which puts out this typically attention getting sort of pattern.

A major bike light producer, Planet Bike, has a pretty bright product out - the "Blaze 2W" - sadly it uses PWM on both its low and strobe outputs. Running the unit on max output does not, as you'd expect, employ PWM. Sadly, strobe seems to, and that's such a common use case that it makes the output mode unusable.



> Fenix doesn't use PWM for its low mode - all are current controlled.



And they still get great runtimes in lights like the LD10 R4.

After discovering the PWM EMI problem with bike computers I've more or less avowed never to knowingly buy a bike light or flashlight (that could see duty on a bike) that uses PWM. In the case of the SC51 it at least has output levels that are not so afflicted and these are more likely the levels that would be actually used on a moving bike. 

I could see an H51 or SC51 worn on my noggin... I'll have to try a test with a known offender attached to my helmet to see if the increased separation is enough to minimize EMI jamming.


----------



## tandem

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



yowzer said:


> I don't think the SC51 and H51 have the exact same circuit; ZL's been saying the headlamp's not compatible with the voltage of 14500 cells, and they don't seem to blow up the SC51...



_One notable difference is the lack of a strobe output in the H51's published specs unless I've missed that somewhere._

Oops, ignore the above, I confused the SC50 with the SC51, according to Selfbuilt's review the SC51 dropped strobe mode, and published specs on the H51 also indicate no strobe output. Hmnn, that's a negative for bikers for the H51/SC51. I use strobe output on the LD10 all the time during the day for riding in traffic. it'd have been nice to optionally enable it.


----------



## RedForest UK

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

This was the review I've been waiting for. :thumbsup: 

What impresses me most is the SC51's output on High2 mode, the Fenix LD10 R4 has been independently measured at over 170 lumens OTF on turbo. The SC51 on H1 shows possibly the 200 lumen claimed, but the H2 shows what appears to be roughly 150 lumens from a single eneloop for 90 minutes! Even more than advertised on the specs of the H51. :thinking:


----------



## davidt1

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



tandem said:


> _One notable difference is the lack of a strobe output in the H51's published specs unless I've missed that somewhere._
> 
> Oops, ignore the above, I confused the SC50 with the SC51, according to Selfbuilt's review the SC51 dropped strobe mode, and published specs on the H51 also indicate no strobe output. Hmnn, that's a negative for bikers for the H51/SC51. I use strobe output on the LD10 all the time during the day for riding in traffic. it'd have been nice to optionally enable it.



It's unfortunate that Zebralight left out the emergency mode on the new lights. They jumped on the maximum brightness mentality that's popular at the moment. There are six modes. How many people need all six modes? My H501 has 3 modes plus an emergency mode. I am very happy with those modes. Five modes plus an emergency mode would make the light more versatile. But no they have to listen to the whining morons who don't like emergency modes.


----------



## LiteShow

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



selfbuilt said:


> Ok, but first with the BIG caveat that I don't trust tailcap current draws on max output. Even on my DMM's 10A scale, I know from previous testing the actual output tends to drop somewhat when doing these, suggesting a resistance issue somewhere with the DMM. That being said, here are the initial readings that I get with a Sanyo Eneloop NiMH:
> 
> SC50w: 1.15A on max Hi (i.e. 107 Lm for the "w" version, 120 Lm for the cool white equivalent)
> SC51: 2.15A on max Hi (i.e. 200 Lm?)
> SC51: 1.05A on secondary Hi (i.e. 100 Lm?)
> 
> Lumen estimates for the SC51 are simply based on the H51 numbers - I have no reliable info yet. But these numbers do seem reasonable for those potential specs.



Thanks for the info Selfbuilt. That helps alot! Yes the internal resistance of the DMM may play a part, but at least we get some rough idea how much current is drawn.

That being said, this means that the SC51 on high is roughly pulling 1C on a 2000M mAh Eneloop. Is there a Max/Safe discharge rate for an AA LSD Nimh, and is it safe to run for long periods of time? I am assuming Nimh to be very tolerant so am not expecting the cell to leak or vent, but would that high of a discharge rate shorten the life of the cell? Maybe this question belongs in the Battery section?


----------



## tandem

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



LiteShow said:


> That being said, this means that the SC51 on high is roughly pulling 1C on a 2000M mAh Eneloop. Is there a Max/Safe discharge rate for an AA LSD Nimh, and is it safe to run for long periods of time?



No doubt this belongs in the battery subforum but in general for the crop of newer high performance single AA lights the situation is bright indeed...







Sanyo's information site suggests that even > 1C discharge rates will deliver good performance but it doesn't talk about cell longevity degradation. At 2$ a cell on sale for Eneloop/Duraloops, I simply don't care much if I get 300 cycles or 500 or even 100. Edit: Here at CPF Silverfox has a study where higher rate charge and discharges were performed to get a sense of cycle life.


----------



## HKJ

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



selfbuilt said:


> For a full power strobe, there would be no additional cycle sequence within the constant output. In essence, you get very slow PWM - 2 cycles per second (strobe) instead of hundreds or thousands of cycles per second (PWM). If you had a light with a low output strobe, then I suppose it's possible that PWM could be used (although I would expect a low current would be far more likely).



Some light does not disable pwm at full power, but uses 98% or 99% pwm for full power (IFE1 uses 62%, but they also did everything to spoil a good idea and good construction).
No light that I have tested disables pwm for flashing modes, but they combines pwm with the flashing mode, sometimes lowering the pwm frequency.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



davidt1 said:


> It's unfortunate that Zebralight left out the emergency mode on the new lights. They jumped on the maximum brightness mentality that's popular at the moment. ... Five modes plus an emergency mode would make the light more versatile. But no they have to listen to the whining morons who don't like emergency modes.


Although I didn't get into it in the review, I personally like 2Hz signaling strobe on the older SC50 series.

I think the issue with all the modern ZL light is that a lot of people complained about the lack of a secondary Hi (i.e. they found primary Med too far away from primary Hi, especially on 14500/RCR). This is presumably why they partially removed it on the "+" modes (i.e. replaced with secondary Hi on 14500). I guess this is the progression of that thinking. :shrug:

To be honest, I do like the idea of the secondary Hi - it's probably secondary Med that I could most easily dispense with of all 6 modes. But that would clutter up the interface to have Strobe as secondary Med.

As a personal plea, I hope other makers abandon the ever-present "tacticool" high freq strobes on consumer lights. I'm not going to try and incapacitate someone with a 1xAA or 1xAAA light.  A nice slow signalling strobe (1-2 Hz) is ideal for the regular user, methinks.



tandem said:


> No doubt this belongs in the battery subforum but in general for the crop of newer high performance single AA lights the situation is bright indeed...


Yes, this is definitely more an area for those with expertise in the battery forum. Personally, I wouldn't worry about ~1-1.5C discharge rate.



HKJ said:


> Some light does not disable pwm at full power, but uses 98% or 99% pwm for full power (IFE1 uses 62%, but they also did everything to spoil a good idea and good construction).
> No light that I have tested disables pwm for flashing modes, but they combines pwm with the flashing mode, sometimes lowering the pwm frequency.


Interesting, thanks HKJ. Most of my lights with PWM don't seem to have it at full power - at least, I'm not able to detect it with my setup. What is your experience as to how common it is to still see PWM (98-99%) on full power?


----------



## HKJ

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



selfbuilt said:


> Interesting, thanks HKJ. Most of my lights with PWM don't seem to have it at full power - at least, I'm not able to detect it with my setup. What is your experience as to how common it is to still see PWM (98-99%) on full power?



I can not really put a percent on it, but it happens. Here are a few examples: C2H: Max is 91%, Mr.Lite 98% and the IFE1: 62%.
One reason to not reach 100% (i.e. no pwm) at full power is to save a few bytes in the program, I have not tried to program a microprocessor for a flashlight (But have done it for many other application) and do not really know if this is a valid reason (I would suspect not).
As you probably have seen I can easily catch a fast pwm (100+ kHz), and with the setup I am using I can show it or filter it out when showing flashing modes or brightness. Filtering it out can be a advantage when looking for the actual brightness.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I've gotten some updates from Zebralight on the issues identified for the SC51 in the review:


The H51 and SC51 share the same circuit (a buck-boost, that has been heavily optimized since the original H50)
My engineering sample had a lower PWM, but the final shipping version should be close to those found in the SC30/H31 (i.e. twice what I found on the SC51). 
ZL explains that they use lower freq PWM in the Low2 level for improved circuit efficiency. They claim to be able to filter out the visible PWM with the capacitor in the output stage, even though the PWM may still be detectable by oscilloscope. 
The positive contacts used in the SC51 are simply from a new batch, which presumably explains the heightened sensitivity to flat tops. Nothing is changed in terms of positive polarity detection.
They purposefully toned down the 14500 performance to closer to the L91/NIMH for safety concerns on Li ions (protected or not).
ZL confirmed that parasitic drain is lower on the AA-series lights, compared to their other offerings. They say they will try to implement this feature on the SC30/SC60/H31 lights in the future.
One minor difference between the SC50 and SC51 that I didn't note - the threading is a bit thicker now - 1.25mm pitch. In addition to the same circuit, the SC51 and H51 also use the same thread, and tailcap.
:wave:


----------



## hazna

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

If the circuit is the same as the h51 does this mean its not meant to run on 14500?


----------



## tandem

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



selfbuilt said:


> the final shipping version should be close to those found in the SC30/H31 (i.e. twice what I found on the SC51



+1 for x2!

I'm so blown away by the output and runtimes of the SC51 (and I've been blown away by the LD10R4 in real use) that I think I'll overlook the lack of strobe and figure one or two of these in to my buying plans. I sure hope the LD10 R4 and now the SC51 introduction are road signs pointing on more optimizations to come from these and other manufacturers.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



hazna said:


> If the circuit is the same as the h51 does this mean its not meant to run on 14500?


ZL also informed that they purposefully toned down the 14500 performance to closer to the L91/NIMH for safety concerns on Li ions (protected or not).

So that would tell me that 14500 are supported ... but I suppose they may still not be officially supporting them. :shrug: In any case, I don't see a problem - unless you need a magnetic spacer to make contact as mine did. I seriously do not recommend that, as those magnets are a real safety concern (i.e. they could potentially short the cell)


----------



## RedForest UK

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Did they give you any info on a possible release date? Or a neutral version?


----------



## Brasso

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

If the performance on a Nimh and 14500 are the same, why would you use a lower capacity 14500 anyway?


----------



## mellowman

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Brasso said:


> If the performance on a Nimh and 14500 are the same, why would you use a lower capacity 14500 anyway?



14500 weighs less than a NiMh bat, almost 1/2 as much.

+1 for adding a low freq. strobe to second med. or better yet a programmable UI like IBS.


----------



## FroggyTaco

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Brasso said:


> If the performance on a Nimh and 14500 are the same, why would you use a lower capacity 14500 anyway?



Umm a 14500 cell has 2.775 Wh of energy.

A Eneloop has 2.4 Wh of energy. 

So technically a 14500 has more capacity than a eneloop. 

However the Nimh circuit may be more efficient than the Li-on circuit within the light.

Travis


----------



## Gregozedobe

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



davidt1 said:


> But no they have to listen to the whining morons who don't like emergency modes.


 
Hmmm, you have just directly insulted an awful lot of CPFers with that statement. I thought this forum had a policy of "attack the post, not the person" ? 

I'd also be interested in finding out why you think your preferences should take priority over mine ? :devil:

I hate strobes with with a passion, so I'm happy to either not have them at all, or have them hidden away so well I can't accidentally activate them unless I specifically want them (which is probably the best compromise, but does complicate the UI). 

There are so many conflicting preferences amongst potential customers it is impossible for any manufacturer to satisfy everybody with just one UI (and yes, I include programmable lights in that statement). Of all my lights, I prefer the Zebralight style of UI. 

I guess the marketplace will have the final say (there are lots and lots of cheap lights that DO have strobes - some with a choice of more than one frequency) 

PS As soon as the SC51 is available I will be buying one, it looks very promising (and I like the two ZL lights I have now).


----------



## leon2245

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



> detectable by oscilloscope


 
So the production model's PWM can no longer be seen with the naked eye? If I wasn't looking for it with a ceiling fan test or something I wouldn't notice? I've since found out my would-be alternative to this light already has some other type of flickering anyway (& at a much higher cost), so I still welcome any improvement in this regard. Thanks for the updated specs.






Gregozedobe said:


> Hmmm, you have just directly insulted an awful lot of CPFers with that statement. I thought this forum had a policy of "attack the post, not the person" ?
> 
> I'd also be interested in finding out why you think your preferences should take priority over mine ? :devil:
> 
> I hate strobes with with a passion, so I'm happy to either not have them at all, or have them hidden away so well I can't accidentally activate them unless I specifically want them (which is probably the best compromise, but does complicate the UI).
> 
> *There are so many conflicting preferences amongst potential customers it is impossible for any manufacturer to satisfy everybody with just one UI (and yes, I include programmable lights in that statement). Of all my lights, I prefer the Zebralight style of UI.*
> 
> I guess the marketplace will have the final say (there are lots and lots of cheap lights that DO have strobes - some with a choice of more than one frequency)
> 
> PS As soon as the SC51 is available I will be buying one, it looks very promising (and I like the two ZL lights I have now).


 
Wish more companies could appease these competing interests like S.F. did with their M3LT & M3LT-S. Otherwise identical except for strobe. That's pretty rare though for obvious reasons. At least Z.L.'s listening, so our moronic whining IS working. Let's keep it up! And yes personal insults are sometimes okay- but only when you're _really_ angry, about flashlights.

Hey the heads don't unscrew on these right, just the tailcaps? So no swapping out with one of their headlights' bodies & using the SC51's head to avoid the whole clip situation?


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



leon2245 said:


> So the production model's PWM can no longer be seen with the naked eye? If I wasn't looking for it with a ceiling fan test or something I wouldn't notice?


Well, ZL is hoping to have the PWM freq higher on the shipping version - as always, no guarantees.

Personally, even at ~120 Hz (the Lo2 freq on the SC30/H31), I find PWM quite noticeable in use. But other report not finding it an issue at this level. Certainly no problem with 450+ Hz .... although detectable with a ceiling fan, I don't know anyone who complains about it in practice. 



> Hey the heads don't unscrew on these right, just the tailcaps? So no swapping out with one of their headlights' bodies & using the SC51's head to avoid the whole clip situation?


That's right, the head is a sealed unit - only the tailcap opens.


----------



## Dioni

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Thanks for this great review!


----------



## yowzer

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Having higher PWM in the shipping version is good. Higher than 120hz would be nice, but personally, it's under 100hz where it's really annoying.


And not having silly useless strobe and sos and such automatically makes a light more appealing than one with der blinkenlights. :sick2:


----------



## Lobo

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I've been away for a while from here, but it's very nice to see that you still are keeping up the great work. :thanks:
As always, awesome review Selfbuilt!

And holy crap, what kind of output on a regular AA. Seems like I chose the right time to look for another light.

A small request if you have the time. Since the light is so tiny, it would be nice to see it together with other recent popular AA-lights in the review(your regular comparison pics you usually have are great to judge the sizes). I was kind of surprised when I googled and couldn't find any good comparison pics anywhere with the SC50/51 and other popular AA-lights like D10, Quark AA, Fenix etc etc. Seems like the SC50 hasn't reached the popularity as the previous mentioned lights, yet.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Lobo said:


> A small request if you have the time. Since the light is so tiny, it would be nice to see it together with other recent popular AA-lights in the review(your regular comparison pics you usually have are great to judge the sizes). I was kind of surprised when I googled and couldn't find any good comparison pics anywhere with the SC50/51 and other popular AA-lights like D10, Quark AA, Fenix etc etc. Seems like the SC50 hasn't reached the popularity as the previous mentioned lights, yet.


A good point:







Added to the review (I'll leave you guessing which is the SC51 and which is the SC50w ... ).


----------



## Lobo

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Thanks! 

Damn, it's as short as a quark mini. Think you just pushed me off the fence there with that pic. =) 
Can't wait til the sc51 is available(and hopefully with the standard zebralight headband).


----------



## tandem

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I keep wanting to like Li-ion cells (maybe the TK12 and 18650's will convert me yet) in single cell lights so I was staring at the review charts of nicely flat regulated SC51 output on Hi-1 and Hi-2 on AW Protected 14500 cells (good job!) until finally I noticed that output and runtimes on High-2 are more or less the same for Sanyo Eneloops and AW Protected 14500's. The AW cells provided 10 minutes more runtime but at what appears to be a negligible drop in output compared to the Eneloops.


----------



## pae77

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

If you want to like Li-ion cells, it's best to try them in a light that is optimized for them, unlike the SC51 which is most definitely not.


----------



## pae77

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I happen to agree about the desirability of having a signaling flashing mode available but well hidden. However, I would never refer to other posters who hold a different opinion as "whiners." That kind of language/behavior is just obnoxious and uncalled for, imo.


----------



## RedForest UK

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



pae77 said:


> I happen to agree about the desirability of having a signaling flashing mode available but well hidden. However, I would never refer to other posters who hold a different opinion as "whiners." That kind of language/behavior is just obnoxious and uncalled for, imo.



+1


----------



## DM51

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Lobo said:


> I've been away for a while from here, but it's very nice to see that you still are keeping up the great work. :thanks:
> As always, awesome review Selfbuilt!


I've been away too - for the last 10 days. 

Excellent review! This new ZL seems extraordinary...


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



DM51 said:


> Excellent review! This new ZL seems extraordinary...


Yes, it certainly is upping the ante for the 1xAA realm!

FYI, having EDCed the SC50w for the last month or so, I can report I am still pleased with its performance. But the SC51 does have an improvement in terms of switch timings that isn't immediately obvious: it doesn't move through the modes quite as quickly.

This is important, as I find sometimes on the SC50w I still don't hold the button down long enough to get only Min, and instead get treated to Max output when I release too early. It usually happens when I have dark-adapted eyes and I'm trying to avoid it cycling up to Med by holding too long - an unpleasant surprise to get hit with Max, to put it mildly. 

As such, I'm glad to see the SC51 gives slightly more time before cycling on a press-hold. The difference isn't huge - and I can't quantify it - but I can tell the difference if I let the lights cycle through a few rounds repeatedly. The SC51 cycles through them slower than the SC50. :thumbsup:


----------



## LiteShow

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



selfbuilt said:


> Yes, it certainly is upping the ante for the 1xAA realm!
> 
> FYI, having EDCed the SC50w for the last month or so, I can report I am still pleased with its performance. But the SC51 does have an improvement in terms of switch timings that isn't immediately obvious: it doesn't move through the modes quite as quickly.
> 
> This is important, as I find sometimes on the SC50w I still don't hold the button down long enough to get only Min, and instead get treated to Max output when I release too early. It usually happens when I have dark-adapted eyes and I'm trying to avoid it cycling up to Med by holding too long - an unpleasant surprise to get hit with Max, to put it mildly.
> 
> As such, I'm glad to see the SC51 gives slightly more time before cycling on a press-hold. The difference isn't huge - and I can't quantify it - but I can tell the difference if I let the lights cycle through a few rounds repeatedly. The SC51 cycles through them slower than the SC50. :thumbsup:




That's a small but significant improvement IMO. Low mode for me is used very often and after 4 months of EDC use with the SC50, I still make the occasional mistake (especially if I am in a big rush) in letting the switch go too quickly when attempting to start in low - blinding my night adapted eyes with high mode. With the extra time between modes, that's a welcome feature indeed. Of course the other way to absolutely guarantee I start in low is to cover the front of the light (and leaving a small crack) when turning it on. I can then check the output and making it sure it is on low before uncovering it. 

I do wish that Zebralight could find a way to keep the strobes (fast and slow speeds) in there - maybe add some sought of hidden modes somewhere (accessed by a sequence of long and short presses). I have used strobes with my EDC a few times in the past for either getting people's attention form a distance or at the scene of a traffic accident to warn other drivers. Plus, strobes add a little cool factor too IMO. OK, I know this topic about having stobes in lights is highly subjective and I don't want to start yet another debate about it. However, if strobes can be hidden away until when needed and not interfere with regular use, I think that would be ideal.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



LiteShow said:


> Low mode for me is used very often and after 4 months of EDC use with the SC50, I still make the occasional mistake (especially if I am in a big rush) in letting the switch go too quickly when attempting to start in low - blinding my night adapted eyes with high mode. With the extra time between modes, that's a welcome feature indeed.


Agreed. Note that the difference with the SC51 is subtle (I hadn't noticed at first). But it does seem to lead to less accidental middle-of-the-night blindings (at least for me). 



> Plus, strobes add a little cool factor too IMO.


Yeah, nothing impresses non-flashaholics like a strobe mode. :laughing: I do like the slow strobe of the SC50w, but would also like a secondary Hi (as a battery saving measure for relatively high output). Not sure how to implement "hidden" modes with this design, though.


----------



## pae77

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



selfbuilt said:


> . . . . :laughing: I do like the slow strobe of the SC50w, but would also like a secondary Hi (as a battery saving measure for relatively high output). Not sure how to implement "hidden" modes with this design, though.


I have the SC50w+ (used to have the SC50w), and since I use 14500s, I have the secondary high with no strobe. I miss the slow strobe sometimes (usually when crossing the street or walking though a big parking lot at night), but I also really value the secondary high which appears subjectively to be almost as bright as the max high but has about twice the runtime. Most of the time, I find the secondary high to be bright enough and very much appreciate the extra runtime it provides. 

Btw, on 14500s, the SC50w+ defaults into the lower high mode every time the high mode is activated. If the higher high is needed, two quick clicks brings it up.


----------



## iqwozpoom

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

After reading your review and mulling over it a bit I'm hoping they make an sc50w tribute model. Just put an xpg in it and I'd be more than happy. I read in the headlight forum that somebody had zebralight put a green led in on of their HL's, so maybe..... Who knows?


----------



## LiteShow

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



selfbuilt said:


> Not sure how to implement "hidden" modes with this design, though.



Well, if I were asked by Zebralight how I would like the mode to be hidden, here's what I might suggest as an example - not sure if it can be programmed that way: Create a total separate & hidden strobe mode with 2 levels. From off, 5 quick presses (under 2 seconds) followed by press and hold for 2 seconds enters strobe mode. Default first strobe mode is slow 2 Hz strobe. Double press while in strobe mode give you fast 5 - 8 Hz strobe. Single press in strobe mode exits the mode, returns to regular mode and turns off the flashlight. What do you think?


----------



## hazna

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Has anyone notice on the SC50+ models, there is quite noticeable PWM on Hi2 (the lower high), when run on 14500? There is no PWM on Hi1 using 14500. There is also no PWM on Hi when using NiMH


----------



## Mr_Moe

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

This is really a great review. Thanks. I've been watching and reading for a long time now, waiting for the right moment and product to get as replacement for my beloved Novatac edc 85. Want an AA light as CR123s are more expensive over here and don't feel like getting into rechargables.

Just one question to those who have the Zebralight SCs: do you like the side clicky? I like the regular tailcap switches and wonder if I'll get into the side clicky. What's your experience? Thanks for sharing.


----------



## pae77

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

The side click switch is great and is one of the reasons the lights are so compact. Only negative I have found with it is a tendency to occasionally activate in some pockets if the light is not locked out with the tail cap.


----------



## Mr_Moe

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



pae77 said:


> The side click switch is great and is one of the reasons the lights are so compact. Only negative I have found with it is a tendency to occasionally activate in some pockets if the light is not locked out with the tail cap.



Thanks. I lock out my light all the time, just to be sure. I guess I can't find an excuse not to get that light! Woohoo.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



pae77 said:


> The side click switch is great and is one of the reasons the lights are so compact. Only negative I have found with it is a tendency to occasionally activate in some pockets if the light is not locked out with the tail cap.


Good point - I find this happens to me sometimes too. FYI, I carry mine in an old Fenix holster (the type with elastic side bands and no flap). So I can spot it pretty quickly if it gets turned on.

Of course, the same can happen with all lights (even my previous EDC - the LiteFLux LF3XT - although that small rear button was harder to hit accidentally).


----------



## MojaveMoon07

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Hi

Two questions about the beamshots in the comparison photo on page one of this thread.

(1) In that photo since the spill of the SC51 is considerably bigger than the spill of the LD10-R4, does that come at the cost of the SC51's spill being dimmer than the brightness of the Fenix's spill ?

(2) Based on the comparison photo, it looks like what the SC51 and the LD10-R4 have in common is a very defined hotspot of a uniform brightness and a very defined spill of a uniform brightness. In other words, it appears that neither flashlight has a beam pattern like that of, say, the Fenix E01 in which the brightness of the hotspot _gradually_ tapers off into the dimmer brightness of the spill. Is that so ?


----------



## MojaveMoon07

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I'm not sure how useful this might be toward answering the first part of my earlier two part question. The beamshots _(below)_ are from the following site _(link)_

http://fonarik.com/test/img/W_Fenix_LD10_Cree_XR-E_Q5_120lm.jpg

http://fonarik.com/test/img/W_Zebra_SC50_Cree_XP-E_R2_193lm.jpg

http://fonarik.com/test/img/W_Zebra_SC50_Cree_XP-E_R2_105lm.jpg

In the beamshots from *fonarik*'s website the emitters in his LD10 and SC50 are different than the emitters in the Fenix and Zebralight models in *selfbuilt*'s review. The spill of *fonarik*'s SC50 is noticeably dimmer than the spill of fonarik's LD10; therefore I hope that Zebralight made an improvement in the brightness of the spill in *selfbuilt*'s test unit.


----------



## pae77

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

You've put your finger on my biggest disappointment with the SC50w and +, and that is the lack of brightness in the spill relative to the bright hot spot. I think it is caused in part by ZL's insistence on making the spill on their flashlights very wide, probably in some kind of effort to emulate or maintain their floody headlamp heritage in their flashlights. But I think this apparently characteristic relatively dim spill on ZL's flashlights greatly detracts from the utility and desirability of these otherwise very nice lights. Jmho.


----------



## Watts Up!

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I'm definitely going to pick up one of these as soon as they come out. Was going to get the SC50 earlier this week then saw this thread so I'll be waiting for this one instead.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



MojaveMoon07 said:


> (1) In that photo since the spill of the SC51 is considerably bigger than the spill of the LD10-R4, does that come at the cost of the SC51's spill being dimmer than the brightness of the Fenix's spill ?


No. While it's true the SC50w spill is not as bright as the LD10-R4 (due in part to the wider dispersion), the SC51 is sufficiently brighter than the LD10-R4 to compensate. This means that effectively, the brightness of the spill of the SC51 is about the same as the LD10-R4 - but the SC51's spill extends over a wider area. The lower exposure beamshots help show this.

Again, the SC51 is quite a different beast in terms of output on NiMH than the earlier SC50.



> (2) Based on the comparison photo, it looks like what the SC51 and the LD10-R4 have in common is a very defined hotspot of a uniform brightness and a very defined spill of a uniform brightness. In other words, it appears that neither flashlight has a beam pattern like that of, say, the Fenix E01 in which the brightness of the hotspot _gradually_ tapers off into the dimmer brightness of the spill. Is that so ?


The SC51 has a smoother transition than the LD10-R4, but neither is particularly floody. The LD10-R4 has a slightly more defined edge to its hotspot.

Personally, I consider the SC51 profile to be very nice for this class of light. I like the wider spill for up-close work (i.e. walking around the house at night) - but of course, the hotspot still dominates. You would really need a diffuser to fully smooth it out.


----------



## Flashfirstask?later

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Another thread I kinda wish I had not seen as I may want to get a SC51 now.

Thanks a lot 

Well At least I know it will be a great light If I do get one.


----------



## DM51

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Flashfirstask?later said:


> Another thread I kinda wish I had not seen as I may want to get a SC51 now.
> 
> Thanks a lot


Yes, selfbuilt's reviews tend to have that effect, LOL. _Aaaargh_, my poor $$, now an endangered species... :laughing:

I didn't mention it before, but IMO the side-switch has been an extremely clever move by ZL. It saves on length, and it is extremely easy and natural to use. Almost all "civilian" (i.e. non-flashoholic-type) flashlights use a side-switch - from Mag to all those B&M plastic things, etc etc.


----------



## HIDblue

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Flashfirstask?later said:


> Another thread I kinda wish I had not seen as I may want to get a SC51 now.
> 
> Thanks a lot
> 
> Well At least I know it will be a great light If I do get one.


 
+1. Great review selfbuilt. It's pretty extraordinary that ZL has come up with a 1xAA form factor light that is designed for a max output of 200 lumens on a regular AA battery. And it seems like the parasitic drain isn't really as much of a factor as it was with the smaller SC30.


----------



## Flashfirstask?later

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



DM51 said:


> Yes, selfbuilt's reviews tend to have that effect, LOL. _Aaaargh_, my poor $$, now an endangered species... :laughing:
> 
> I didn't mention it before, but IMO the side-switch has been an extremely clever move by ZL. It saves on length, and it is extremely easy and natural to use. Almost all "civilian" (i.e. non-flashoholic-type) flashlights use a side-switch - from Mag to all those B&M plastic things, etc etc.


Plus I have the JETBeam BK135A taunting me and my wallet also.

Problem is this excellent side switch light may be more expensive then many may care to spend unless they a need like for work or serious hobby and such.


----------



## davidt1

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



pae77 said:


> You've put your finger on my biggest disappointment with the SC50w and +, and that is the lack of brightness in the spill relative to the bright hot spot. I think it is caused in part by ZL's insistence on making the spill on their flashlights very wide, probably in some kind of effort to emulate or maintain their floody headlamp heritage in their flashlights. But I think this apparently characteristic relatively dim spill on ZL's flashlights greatly detracts from the utility and desirability of these otherwise very nice lights. Jmho.



I wish Zebralight has gone the other way and give their non-flood lights the most throw possible. Since they already make near perfect floody lights, why not complement them with throwy lights?


----------



## BentHeadTX

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Now that Nitecore has screwed up their force high/force low ramping UI with force disco modes  The SC51 looks to replace my D10 Q5 eventually. 

Once Zebralight rolls out the neutral R4 emitter--paypal locked and loaded! 

Thanks for the great review, Selfbuilt--your extensive reviews are very educational--and education costs money! 

A nice, smoooooth neutral-white beam with the switch in the heads sounds like a winner to me. Don't let the non-tech heads complaining about your circuit investigations, they can skip over that if not interested. Myself, I like to know about the circuits but I'm a geek--heck, I read posts in a flashlight forum so....


----------



## Minjin

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Have you considered that the SC51 might be a ringer? The performance when compared to the Fenix (which is fairly well known as one of the leaders in circuits) leaves me wondering if the LED was hand selected. Car manufacturers have been known to do this by giving journalists cars with tweaked engines to test. I wonder if we might be starting to see that happen in the flashlight world. :laughing:


----------



## FroggyTaco

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Minjin said:


> Have you considered that the SC51 might be a ringer? The performance when compared to the Fenix (which is fairly well known as one of the leaders in circuits) leaves me wondering if the LED was hand selected. Car manufacturers have been known to do this by giving journalists cars with tweaked engines to test. I wonder if we might be starting to see that happen in the flashlight world. :laughing:



Allegedly ZL chose a driver with a very limited voltage range(1.2-2.1V) in order to achieve above average efficiency & performance. Beyond that an EE will probably have to weigh in on the matter.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Minjin said:


> Have you considered that the SC51 might be a ringer? The performance when compared to the Fenix (which is fairly well known as one of the leaders in circuits) leaves me wondering if the LED was hand selected. Car manufacturers have been known to do this by giving journalists cars with tweaked engines to test. I wonder if we might be starting to see that happen in the flashlight world. :laughing:


This is always a potential concern, but to date it does not seem to be a problem. I've bought a number of shipping versions of lights I've reviewed (different makers), and performance has always been within a typical expected range (so far ...).

I would think using ringers would be a dangerous game to play. Once the shipping lights get into enough hands, any significant discrepancy to the comparison results here would be noted pretty quickly (i.e. I am not just "test-driving" but directly measuring and comparing performance metrics). And that would tarnish a company's reputation pretty fast (and for a long while, since folks here have a long memory ).

Also, unless someone seriously altered the components, a ringer in one sense is likely to underperform in others (i.e. higher output but shorter runtime, or vice versa). Cherry-picking a good tint is always possible - most everything else would be tougher, unless defined bins were known (e.g. Vf).

Besides, if ZL were going to send a ringer, I would think they would have picked one with a higher PWM on Low2.  (although there again is an example of trade-off - lower PWM usually translates into higher efficiency).


----------



## Minjin

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I was looking at this again and I still find it crazy. I don't get how ZL is able to achieve this performance with a PWM circuit when Fenix, Quark, and others use a current regulated design which to the best of my knowledge SHOULD have a better output/runtime ratio. :shrug:


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Minjin said:


> I was looking at this again and I still find it crazy. I don't get how ZL is able to achieve this performance with a PWM circuit when Fenix, Quark, and others use a current regulated design which to the best of my knowledge SHOULD have a better output/runtime ratio. :shrug:


Actually, I believe the runtimes above are all in current-controlled modes. I only found evidence for PWM on Med2 and Lo2. I haven't tested the runtime performance on those levels, due to the length of time it would take. 

But judging from the SC50w specs (which similarly uses PWM on Med2), you can see there's a loss of efficiency there - i.e. half the lumen output, but only twice the runtime for Med2 compared to Med1. Since emitters become more efficient at lower drive levels, that illustrates a performance hit. I'm sure a current-controlled Med2 would last a lot longer than twice Med1 runtime for half the output. 

I imagine the problem is producing low output through current-control - not easy to do (especially on circuits with a wide voltage range). You see this on some of the 4Sevens lights as well, a combination of PWM (and lower modes) and current-control (on higher ones).


----------



## Lobo

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Selfbuilt, did you get any word on when zebralight is going to start sell the SC51? After reading the review, I can barely wait. 
Would be a perfect light for a lot of my outdoorsy friends who are not that keen on spending money on a good light. But the size, output((the wow factor is pretty important to convince non flashoholics), easy battery format and ability to use as a headlamp makes it perfect for about all the activities my friends are up to (backpacking, ultralight weight hiking, fishing, general use etc etc).

And you won't happen to review the new nitecore D11? :naughty:
Would be interesting to see how the output and throw have been affected in the latest D10(well, D11). Especially compared with the new zebralights.


----------



## Wire Edge

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Your review pushed me over the edge. My first Zebralight is on it's way. Thought I'd give the SC50+ a try. The UI sounds very interesting, looking forward to trying it out first hand!


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Lobo said:


> Selfbuilt, did you get any word on when zebralight is going to start sell the SC51? ... And you won't happen to review the new nitecore D11? :naughty:


I don't have any details about the launch of the SC51. Probably best to check with typical ZL dealers (they would be in the best position to know). I gathered it was supposed to be soon. :shrug:

Don't know about the D11 yet ... I expect Nitecore will send it along for review, but as yet I haven't heard.


----------



## Lobo

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



selfbuilt said:


> I don't have any details about the launch of the SC51. Probably best to check with typical ZL dealers (they would be in the best position to know). I gathered it was supposed to be soon. :shrug:
> 
> Don't know about the D11 yet ... I expect Nitecore will send it along for review, but as yet I haven't heard.



I'll send a mail to zebralight then, and one to nitecore as well. I'll post back here if I get any informative replies.


----------



## jason978

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

it's up for preorder now, shipping est is oct 23


----------



## jason978

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Also, according to ZL website, 14500 batteries are NOT supported.


----------



## mhphoto

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Great review!



selfbuilt said:


> Frankly, PWM isn't really an issue if the freq is high enough. It is pretty much undetectable in kHz range, and typically only enters your perception threshold somewhere <1kHz. Under ~200 Hz or so is very noticeable for those who are sensitive to it. You will see it as a corner-of-your-eye "flicker" (or more accurately, latent "ghost" images during your eye saccades).



I'm not sure why, but I'm extra sensitive when it comes to that flicker. I can definitely tell if PWM is in use, even with little movements. Heck, I don't even like being under fluorescent lights for too long, makes me nauseous. :sick2:


----------



## davidt1

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



jason978 said:


> it's up for preorder now, shipping est is oct 23



Thanks for the information, but it's a "no go" for me. What's the difference between 200lm and 140lm? Very little, to the eyes. In other words, I think the 200lm is unnecessary. They already have a great mode setup with the SC50+. Why did they have to change it? Why? Why? Why?


----------



## qtaco

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

200lms from a AA is nice to have, and a significant factor in all the buzz around the new Zebralight lights. I think of it like this: 200lms for 0.9hrs is included for the prestige; 140lms for 2hrs is there as a good compromise between runtime and output.


----------



## bigfish5

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Talking about the beam on this little light, it sounds like this light has a big hotspot with alot of spill. But looking at the lux numbers would make you think it might be a little throwy. Which is it, i cannot really tell from the whitewall shots.


----------



## davidt1

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



bigfish5 said:


> Talking about the beam on this little light, it sounds like this light has a big hotspot with alot of spill. But looking at the lux numbers would make you think it might be a little throwy. Which is it, i cannot really tell from the whitewall shots.



There are some great beam shots of the H51 here (same light as the SC51 but with an angled head).

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/283934&page=8


----------



## Lite_me

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Can you comment on why they removed 14500 support (per their website) on the SC51? Your testing sample seemed to manage the two battery types just fine according to your charts. They must have _some_ reason. :thinking:


----------



## FroggyTaco

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Lite_me said:


> Can you comment on why they removed 14500 support (per their website) on the SC51? Your testing sample seemed to manage the two battery types just fine according to your charts. They must have _some_ reason. :thinking:



The original commentary during development was the the driver they were using to achieve the high output & long run times was achieved by limiting the voltage range.

If memory serves me the max voltage was 2.1V so that would exclude 14500's for sure.


----------



## SloNicK

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Lite_me said:


> Can you comment on why they removed 14500 support (per their website) on the SC51? Your testing sample seemed to manage the two battery types just fine according to your charts. They must have _some_ reason. :thinking:



Response to my question is this: "We are somewhat concerned with safety of using off-brand 14500 batteries."


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



mhphoto said:


> I'm not sure why, but I'm extra sensitive when it comes to that flicker. I can definitely tell if PWM is in use, even with little movements. Heck, I don't even like being under fluorescent lights for too long, makes me nauseous. :sick2:


I find some fluorescent lights better than others - some don't bother me, and some have obvious 60Hz flicker (may have more do with the ballast?). So I also avoid lights with visible PWM.



davidt1 said:


> What's the difference between 200lm and 140lm? Very little, to the eyes. In other words, I think the 200lm is unnecessary. They already have a great mode setup with the SC50+. Why did they have to change it? Why? Why? Why?


I agree that the difference between 140lm and 200lm is not that great. Personally, I'm glad to have the lower Hi mode, as it makes a great battery runtime saver.



bigfish5 said:


> Talking about the beam on this little light, it sounds like this light has a big hotspot with alot of spill. But looking at the lux numbers would make you think it might be a little throwy. Which is it, i cannot really tell from the whitewall shots.





davidt1 said:


> There are some great beam shots of the H51 here (same light as the SC51 but with an angled head).
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/283934&page=8


Thanks for the link - the H51 should look the same as the SC51.

I wouldn't really call this light throwy relative to other lights. As for the lux numbers, you have to keep in mind that the overall output of the SC51 is much higher than the other lights. If the other lights were matched for output level, the SC51 would likely be below average for throw.



Lite_me said:


> Can you comment on why they removed 14500 support (per their website) on the SC51? Your testing sample seemed to manage the two battery types just fine according to your charts. They must have _some_ reason. :thinking:





FroggyTaco said:


> The original commentary during development was the the driver they were using to achieve the high output & long run times was achieved by limiting the voltage range.





SloNicK said:


> Response to my question is this: "We are somewhat concerned with safety of using off-brand 14500 batteries."


I really don't know - except to say that if the driver were limited in voltage range, then the 14500 runs here would likely have fried it. 

There are a number of examples where makers choose to be conservative and not officially support 14500 (even if the driver can handle the voltage). That may be the case here. I honestly don't know. :shrug:

P.S.: :welcome: SloNick.


----------



## Gaffle

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

As of right now the 2 most intriguing lights IMO are the SC51 and the Jetbeam RRT-0. I must say that I am really really leaning toward the SC51 now. 

Is the headband a regular accessory with this light or was that a fluke? I mean I know that the SC50W had the band, but was that just a mistake in shipping?


----------



## SloNicK

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Recently bought a SC50+, this is my EDC, very pleased. Wrote a little review here. Read about the imminent appearance of SC51 and would like to order, but was very disappointed with the lack of support 14500.
Perhaps this is due to the fact that the scheme improve the driver is more efficient in this case, perhaps it is a commercial step manufacturer.
Maybe we are somehow able to influence the manufacturer? ))


----------



## Dan FO

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

My SC50+ is rated at 193 lumens on a 14500 and the SC51 is rated at 200 with an AA *BUT* I think the XP-E in the SC50+ will throw better. 

http://www.zebralight.com/SC50-Flashlight-AA-193Lm_p_24.html

I think I will keep the +, I don't think I will miss those 7 lumens.


----------



## pae77

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I feel the same way about the SC50w+. I already am and like using Li-ion rechargeables anyway, so the fact the SC51 performs a tiny bit better on NiMH cells than the SC50 on Li-ion, while certainly a great achievement, is not especially meaningful to me.

And I really like those no visible PWM low modes on the SC50/SC50w+.

Plus, after getting accustomed to using the bigger reflectored P60 hosts with bright lamp modules for outdoors, I now find all the small lights to be somewhat inadequate for outdoor use.


----------



## kiwicrunch

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Selfbuilt (or anyone else who has experience with the SC51 and SC50w),

Would you mind giving some feedback regarding the real-world difference in output between the SC50w and the SC51 using NiMH AAs? I see from your numbers that the SC51 has bit of an edge in throw, and a significant one in overall output. How perceptible are these differences to your eye?

The reason I ask is I really want a warm tint, with some throw to complement my H501w. I'm torn between waiting for a SC51w or getting the already-available SC50w.

Thank you for this review, and your many other contributions to the forum.


----------



## Colonel Sanders

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Any plans to test the SC60? I recently bought one and I gotta say it's a great little light. :thumbsup:


----------



## yowzer

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



kiwicrunch said:


> Selfbuilt (or anyone else who has experience with the SC51 and SC50w),
> 
> Would you mind giving some feedback regarding the real-world difference in output between the SC50w and the SC51 using NiMH AAs? I see from your numbers that the SC51 has bit of an edge in throw, and a significant one in overall output. How perceptible are these differences to your eye?
> 
> The reason I ask is I really want a warm tint, with some throw to complement my H501w. I'm torn between waiting for a SC51w or getting the already-available SC50w.
> 
> Thank you for this review, and your many other contributions to the forum.



Comparing the high and turbo on my SC50w+ running a 14500 (107 (Max output on AA) and 169 lumens) there is a notable but not extreme increase in brightness. The difference on the 51 is going to be less, because of the higher high (Advertised as 140 on the cool version, so... 120ish on nw? Turbo's probably going to be 170-180ish.)

Going to the other end of the range, the 51's low and medium levels seem, to me, to be better selected than on the 50. I use mine mostly on the lower settings, so that's attractive to me.

If you don't want to run 14500s, or like the lower lows, wait for the 51w. If you're okay with 14500 cells, get the 50w now unless you also want the 51's lower levels. Or get the 50w now and sell it off when the 51w comes in.


----------



## 10.10.2010

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I was wondering, on max mode (H1) why 14500 is more capable to produce flat output rather than eneloop and energizer lithium AA ? Is it because the battery voltage or battery chemistry or both ?


----------



## mighty82

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

The efficiency and features of this light looks extremely nice. I just had to pre-order one. It even has fine regulation on alkaline and L2's. Zebralight seems to be the best at circuit technology by far right now.

I just hope they are telling the truth about "smoothening" the pwm so that it's not visible. I hate that flickering. Even the LD01 was too bad for me.


----------



## SloNicK

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Today sent a SC51. Let's see ...


----------



## ZebraLight

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



SloNicK said:


> Today sent a SC51. Let's see ...


 
The shipping started on last Friday. 

The second sub-level of the High (H2) is expanded to include 100Lm, 140Lm and a 4Hz strobe. Double click 6 times in High to enter the configuration mode for the H2. Further double clicks to cycle throgh the list. Short click or long click to exit. 

All sub-levels except the 100 and 0.2Lm are now current regulated. L2 PWM flickering has been reduced to a much lower level. 

These updates are also implemented in the H51.


----------



## jason978

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

HI ZEBRALIGHT,

it says that 14500 Li-ion batteries are not supported. Does that mean that we CAN'T use them?


----------



## Sarlix

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



ZebraLight said:


> All sub-levels except the M2 (8Lm) and L2 (0.2Lm) are now current regulated. L2 PWM flickering has been reduced to a much lower level.
> 
> These updates are also implemented in the H51.




Good news :thumbsup: 

I kick myself for purchasing the H51 prior to these changes though :-( Oh well still an excellent light


----------



## ZebraLight

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



jason978 said:


> HI ZEBRALIGHT,
> 
> it says that 14500 Li-ion batteries are not supported. Does that mean that we CAN'T use them?


 
The 3.7V voltage is above the oprating range of the SC51 and thus not recommended.


----------



## pae77

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Sarlix said:


> Good news :thumbsup:
> 
> I kick myself for purchasing the H51 prior to these changes though :-( Oh well still an excellent light


I've learned the lesson the hard way not to order a new ZL model until it's been out for at least a few months as it's not uncommon for ZL to make modifications and fine tune them in the first few months after release (not that I mind them doing that, I just want to get the benefit of it).


----------



## dmn42

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



ZebraLight said:


> All sub-levels except the M2 (8Lm) and L2 (0.2Lm) are now current regulated. L2 PWM flickering has been reduced to a much lower level.
> 
> These updates are also implemented in the H51.



What is the PWM freq? Is it more than 1000Hz?


----------



## ZebraLight

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



dmn42 said:


> What is the PWM freq? Is it more than 1000Hz?


 
The frequency is not that high. However, a very large (relative to the load at L2) capacitor is put there to filter out most of the L2 PWM pulses.


----------



## davidt1

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



ZebraLight said:


> The shipping started on last Friday.
> 
> The second sub-level of the High (H2) is expanded to include 100Lm, 140Lm and a 4Hz strobe. Double click 6 times in High to enter the configuration mode for the H2. Further double clicks to cycle throgh the list. Short click or long click to exit.
> 
> All sub-levels except the M2 (8Lm) and L2 (0.2Lm) are now current regulated. L2 PWM flickering has been reduced to a much lower level.
> 
> These updates are also implemented in the H51.



4Hz strobe! Yes! Thank you! Thank you! Now the wait for neutral white begins.


----------



## nanotech17

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



davidt1 said:


> 4Hz strobe! Yes! Thank you! Thank you! Now the wait for neutral white begins.



I just received my H51 on the 10/22/10 so i thought there is no strobe after using it for 2 days now but after reading this i tried mine and it has that 4Hz strobe YESSSSSS!! I have got the latest H51 with the updated driver circuit lovecpf


----------



## dmn42

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



ZebraLight said:


> The frequency is not that high. However, a very large (relative to the load at L2) capacitor is put there to filter out most of the L2 PWM pulses.



Well.. Lets try. Hope lowest low will be usable for me. 

Btw, why didn't you simply increase freqency instead of putting capacitor?


UPD: oups, availability ot SC51 changed to back order. The first batch is sold out?


----------



## tandem

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



ZebraLight said:


> The second sub-level of the High (H2) is expanded to include 100Lm, 140Lm and a *4Hz strobe*.



That is excellent news regarding the addition of the strobe output. Can you tell us what nominal output level (lumen) the strobe is at? Is it run at/near max, or 140 or ?

Thanks and regards!


----------



## photonhoer

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I need some feedback from actual users about the 80° "spill beam" angle combined with the 11° hot spot on the new H-51 ZebraLight headlamps.

I have used 3 H-50's since they first came out all over the world, in some very demanding situations doing medical volunteering in the jungles of Africa, Central and South America, among others. They are reliable and the floody 120° angle is very useful in lots of situations, tho certainly not all [so I do carry other lights as well.]

I am contemplating purchasing an H-51 to have more available light, and wondered if some actual users have tried reading in bed with the H-51's 80°-11° angle combination? Does the 11° *fully and evenly* cover the open pages of a book when you are reading? I really don't like a strong or even noticeable hot spot on the page when I am reading in otherwise complete darkness.

Thanks very much for sharing your experience!! And I want to echo the thanks of many others to members like *selfbuilt* who have done such careful and extensive reviews of lights here on the Forum.

John


----------



## nanotech17

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



photonhoer said:


> I need some feedback from actual users about the 80° "spill beam" angle combined with the 11° hot spot on the new H-51 ZebraLight headlamps.
> 
> I have used 3 H-50's since they first came out all over the world, in some very demanding situations doing medical volunteering in the jungles of Africa, Central and South America, among others. They are reliable and the floody 120° angle is very useful in lots of situations, tho certainly not all [so I do carry other lights as well.]
> 
> I am contemplating purchasing an H-51 to have more available light, and wondered if some actual users have tried reading in bed with the H-51's 80°-11° angle combination? Does the 11° *fully and evenly* cover the open pages of a book when you are reading? I really don't like a strong or even noticeable hot spot on the page when I am reading in otherwise complete darkness.
> 
> Thanks very much for sharing your experience!! And I want to echo the thanks of many others to members like *selfbuilt* who have done such careful and extensive reviews of lights here on the Forum.
> 
> John




i use my H60w while reading to avoid stress on my eyes,i have just received the H51 and tested it while reading,with H51 the best level to read a book is on the medium mode (M2 which is on 8lumens),but overall performance (for reading ) i still prefer the H60w ( 80 degree flood beam, with no hotspot) YMMV


----------



## ZebraLight

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



tandem said:


> That is excellent news regarding the addition of the strobe output. Can you tell us what nominal output level (lumen) the strobe is at? Is it run at/near max, or 140 or ?
> 
> Thanks and regards!


 
140


----------



## ZebraLight

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



photonhoer said:


> I need some feedback from actual users about the 80° "spill beam" angle combined with the 11° hot spot on the new H-51 ZebraLight headlamps.
> 
> I have used 3 H-50's since they first came out all over the world, in some very demanding situations doing medical volunteering in the jungles of Africa, Central and South America, among others. They are reliable and the floody 120° angle is very useful in lots of situations, tho certainly not all [so I do carry other lights as well.]
> 
> I am contemplating purchasing an H-51 to have more available light, and wondered if some actual users have tried reading in bed with the H-51's 80°-11° angle combination? Does the 11° *fully and evenly* cover the open pages of a book when you are reading? I really don't like a strong or even noticeable hot spot on the page when I am reading in otherwise complete darkness.
> 
> Thanks very much for sharing your experience!! And I want to echo the thanks of many others to members like *selfbuilt* who have done such careful and extensive reviews of lights here on the Forum.
> 
> John


 
Wait for 2-3 weeks for the H51F.


----------



## davidt1

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



ZebraLight said:


> Wait for 2-3 weeks for the H51F.



More good news! Awesome! 

Note to self: must wait for neutral white.


----------



## photonhoer

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



ZebraLight said:


> Wait for 2-3 weeks for the H51F.



Thanks very much for the advice. After using them A LOT, I am a big fan of ZebraLights. I just do not want to order the wrong tool.

John


----------



## davidt1

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



nanotech17 said:


> I just received my H51 on the 10/22/10 so i thought there is no strobe after using it for 2 days now but after reading this i tried mine and it has that 4Hz strobe YESSSSSS!! I have got the latest H51 with the updated driver circuit lovecpf



Good deal! You might the first person to get the H51 V2.


----------



## nanotech17

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



davidt1 said:


> Good deal! You might the first person to get the H51 V2.



:thanks: i couldn't believe it at all


----------



## NightTime

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I had a shipping confirmation today from Zebralight. Can't wait to receive the beast !


----------



## g.p.

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Just put my order in for one of these last night. I noticed in the review that you used 14500 batteries for some of the tests. Zebralight's website says that they are unsupported though, and that the max input voltage is 2.5v. Was the prototype used in the review special, or will I be able to safely use 14500's? Looking at the graphs there probably won't be much gain to using 14500's, but it would be nice to know if it's safe to do or not.

Thanks!


----------



## pae77

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

If the max input voltage is 2.5V, then I don't see how it can be safe (for the light) to use batteries with a nominal voltage of 3.7V, regardless of whether it works in the short term. If nothing else, it probably voids the warranty. Plus, as you noted, there doesn't appear to be much, if anything, to gain by using 14500's with this light that has been optimized for NiMH.


----------



## g.p.

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Yeah, I think I'll just stick with AA's since I've get them free at work, and I've got a bunch of Eneloops too.


----------



## pae77

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



g.p. said:


> Yeah, I think I'll just stick with AA's since I've get them free at work, and I've got a bunch of Eneloops too.


Eneloops would be the best, much better performance than regular Alkaline AA's. And also much less risk of any leakage occurring with Eneloops.


----------



## davidt1

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



NightTime said:


> I had a shipping confirmation today from Zebralight. Can't wait to receive the beast !



People are liking this light. I think you will too.


----------



## mellowman

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Selfbuilt, If I read the graphs in post #1 right. This light only hits 200 lumens on 14500 bats. On eneloops its 160 lumens on H1 (80% of 200 lumens, assuming 100% relative output is 200 lumens). Is this correct?


----------



## srfreddy

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



mellowman said:


> Selfbuilt, If I read the graphs in post #1 right. This light only hits 200 lumens on 14500 bats. On eneloops its 160 lumens on H1 (80% of 200 lumens, assuming 100% relative output is 200 lumens). Is this correct?


 
Its pretty much impossible to have flat regulation when getting 200 lumens.


----------



## FroggyTaco

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



srfreddy said:


> Its pretty much impossible to have flat regulation when getting 200 lumens.



Are you talking exclusively about the SC51 or any light?


----------



## srfreddy

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Any light with an XPG/XML, on one AA.


----------



## mellowman

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



srfreddy said:


> Its pretty much impossible to have flat regulation when getting 200 lumens.


 


srfreddy said:


> Any light with an XPG/XML, on one AA.


 
So you're saying there is something funny with the High mode 14500 graph?

Seems there is something funny about calling the SC51 a 200 lumen flashlight on eneloops too.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

_Written by *selfbuilt* on 11-02-2010 07:42 AM GMT_



g.p. said:


> Just put my order in for one of these last night. I noticed in the review that you used 14500 batteries for some of the tests. Zebralight's website says that they are unsupported though, and that the max input voltage is 2.5v. Was the prototype used in the review special, or will I be able to safely use 14500's? Looking at the graphs there probably won't be much gain to using 14500's, but it would be nice to know if it's safe to do or not.


Good question, I don't know. 14500 certainly ran fine on my engineering sample, but they may have changed something on the shipping version. Good question, I don't know. 14500 certainly ran fine on my engineering sample, but they may have changed something on the shipping version. :shrug:



> Written by *jason978* on 11-06-2010 01:16 PM GMT
> 
> so, has anyone been brave enough to try 14500's yet?





> Written by *SloNicK* on 11-10-2010 10:56 AM GMT
> 
> No, wait daredevil. ))
> 
> Received yesterday a torch. It seems that it shines a little weaker than my SC50 +. Perhaps because the tone a little colder.





> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 11-12-2010 01:48 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> ZebraLight said:
> 
> 
> 
> The shipping started on last Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> Does any dealer have this in stock and for sale now? Does any dealer have this in stock and for sale now?
Click to expand...




> Written by *d.frentzel* on 11-12-2010 03:24 AM GMT
> 
> Thanxs for the the Review.
> 
> regards Dirk





> Written by *Johnno* on 11-12-2010 03:40 PM GMT
> 
> Ordered a SC51 from Zebralight's site 4 days ago - my order shipped 3 days ago, right before they went into back-order mode... Hoping it arrives tomorrow. The only thing better than actually owning a light is the anticipation of awaiting its arrival!!
> 
> Great review by the way - looks like its going to be a fantastic addition to my rather meager collection.





> Written by *coyote* on 11-15-2010 11:03 AM GMT
> 
> any news from those who have a new one in hand???????
> 
> comments, criticisms, likes/dilsikes????





> Written by *coyote* on 11-15-2010 11:10 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> LetThereBeLite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does any dealer have this in stock and for sale now?
> 
> 
> 
> yes. a buddy just ordered two factory direct (in Texas) and instantly recieved an email that they were shipped. yes. a buddy just ordered two factory direct (in Texas) and instantly recieved an email that they were shipped.
> 
> here's the link: Zebralight SC51 $64 with free shipping
Click to expand...




> Written by *Justintoxicated* on 11-15-2010 07:00 PM GMT
> 
> So how much brighter would this be than a quark AA, or Mini 123?





> Written by *NightTime* on 11-16-2010 07:05 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> any news from those who have a new one in hand???????
> 
> comments, criticisms, likes/dilsikes????
> 
> 
> 
> I received mine about a week ago. Great little light. I changed my Preon 1 for the SC51 as my keychain light. What a brightness difference ! Small, powerfull, lightweight and tought. Also I received mine about a week ago. Great little light. I changed my Preon 1 for the SC51 as my keychain light. What a brightness difference ! Small, powerfull, lightweight and tought. Also very well machined. A masterpiece.
> 
> The light went on while in my pocket though. I always unscrew the tail cap a bit now. I like the UI (took a few practice sessions), but never found the 100 lumens mode. I've got 2 low, 2 medium, 2 high & the strobe but no << *100* Lm (2.4 hrs) >> mode. Is the 100 lumens for the strobe ? Doesn't look like it.
> 
> Anyone found it ?
> 
> thx
Click to expand...




> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 11-17-2010 08:02 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> yes. a buddy just ordered two factory direct (in Texas) and instantly recieved an email that they were shipped.
> 
> here's the link: Zebralight SC51 $64 with free shipping
> 
> 
> 
> Really strange as the status on their website has consistently been "Availability Really strange as the status on their website has consistently been "Availability*:** Back Order*"
Click to expand...




> Written by *davidt1* on 11-17-2010 08:48 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> NightTime said:
> 
> 
> 
> I received mine about a week ago. Great little light. I changed my Preon 1 for the SC51 as my keychain light. What a brightness difference ! Small, powerfull, lightweight and tought. Also very well machined. A masterpiece.
> 
> The light went on while in my pocket though. I always unscrew the tail cap a bit now. I like the UI (took a few practice sessions), but never found the 100 lumens mode. I've got 2 low, 2 medium, 2 high & the strobe but no << *100* Lm (2.4 hrs) >> mode. Is the 100 lumens for the strobe ? Doesn't look like it.
> 
> Anyone found it ?
> 
> thx
> 
> 
> 
> Glad you like it. And glad you brought up the 100lm. I thought that is a another high mode. But after reading the specs closely, I now think that's for the strobe. Glad you like it. And glad you brought up the 100lm. I thought that is a another high mode. But after reading the specs closely, I now think that's for the strobe.
Click to expand...




> Written by *JA(me)S* on 11-17-2010 10:36 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> NightTime said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is the 100 lumens for the strobe ? Doesn't look like it.
> 
> thx
> 
> 
> 
> I do not yet own the SC51 (waiting for neutral). However, ZL's website states the 100 lm is for the 4Hz strobe for 2.4 hrs: I do not yet own the SC51 (waiting for neutral). However, ZL's website states the 100 lm is for the 4Hz strobe for 2.4 hrs:
> 
> "High: H1* 200* Lm (0.9 hrs) or H2 *140* Lm (1.7 hrs) / _*100* Lm (2.4 hrs) / 4Hz Strobe"
> 
> - Jas.
> _
Click to expand...




> Written by *NightTime* on 11-17-2010 02:50 PM GMT
> 
> Thanks for your point guys. But I'm still not convinced the 100 lumens is for the strobe mode for these reasons.
> 
> First, I find the strobe mode fairly bright, but it's hard to tell went it's flashing.
> 
> Secondly, following the syntax of the sentence, the "slash" found in << *140* Lm (1.7 hrs) / *100* Lm (2.4 hrs) / 4Hz Strobe >> suggest to me that we are talking about another mode.
> 
> Third, have a look at this statement:
> 
> << _The second sub-level of the High can be further configured to different brightness level*s* or strobes._ >> don't know why "strobe" is plural here though.
> 
> So if the 100 lumens is for the strobe, we should read:
> 
> << _The second sub-level of the High can be further configured to strobe. _>>
> 
> Anyways, I won't die for that. There are more important things in life. I wouldn't use the 100 lumens mode anyways . lol





> Written by *Lite_me* on 11-17-2010 04:48 PM GMT
> 
> Best I can tell, I have my SC51 configured on high mode for, H1 - 200Lm, (un-adjustable) and H2 for 100Lm. When adjusting the L2 hi setting in the configuration mode, when cycling through the the 3 options, I see the 2 brightness levels and a strobe. If I choose the brighter of the 2 output levels, (140Lm) and save, when testing the light afterwords, there is very little noticeable difference between the 2 Hi outputs. (140Lm & 200Lm) I don't even see a need to offer the 140Lm level if this is working correctly. So I went back into the programing mode and set the H2 setting to the lower of the 2 outputs (100Lm) and now there is a great enough difference to justify the setting.
> 
> With the SC51 settings programed like this, the spacing on the 6 different outputs is near perfect. The Lm specs might not indicate this, but the actual output spacings are about as good as it gets I think. HTH and makes sense.





> Written by *dmn42* on 11-18-2010 10:12 AM GMT
> 
> PWM is visible on lowest low ;(





> Written by *g.p.* on 11-19-2010 09:12 AM GMT
> 
> I can't notice it.





> Written by *Lite_me* on 11-19-2010 08:10 PM GMT
> 
> I can 'see' it. But only if I study the beam on something up-close. In actual use, the output is so low I can't detect it at all. On some of my older lights that have PWM, I sometimes detect it when moving the light around from one object to another. The output on the SC51 on low-low isn't enough for me to see it or the PWM is high enough not to be a problem for me I guess. I rarely use that setting anyways.





> Written by *iocheretyanny* on 11-19-2010 08:15 PM GMT
> 
> I really wish this was available with S2 or R5 instead of R4...





> Written by *leon2245* on 11-21-2010 12:04 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Advanced Operation and Configuration
> 
> Short click turns on the light to High. Short click again quickly to cycle from High to Medium, and Low.
> 
> Press and hold to cycle from Low to High, release to set. When press and hold, the light always cycle from Low to High regardless which level you are currently in.
> 
> Double click to toggle and select between the two sub-levels for that main level. Sub-level selections (except the strobe) for the 3 main levels are memorized after the light is turned off and through battery changes.
> 
> The *second sub-level of the High can be configured after 6 double clicks.* Double click (startng with the 7th) to cycle and select different brightness levels or strobes. Short click to turn off the light when finishing configurations. The selections for the second sub-level of the High are memorized after the light is turned off and through battery changes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the part in bold just refers to reprogramming the strobe's brightness right? It doesn't mean that unless you double clicked 6+ times while on high, you'd never even see the strobE?
> 
> For instance if I double clicked twice to get to high's third sublevel of 100l, that sublevel would be memorized for the next time I turned directly to high, & one double click at that point would take me to strobe? Or before you get anything byeond the one default sublevel for hi, you'd have to do the 6 double clicks to choose from the others & strobes?
> 
> I REALLY like the idea of jumping directly to low or hi with the short or long click options, just trying to understand the configuration stuff.
Click to expand...


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



> Written by *Lite_me* on 11-21-2010 01:44 AM GMT
> 
> You can*not* adjust the brightness of the strobe. And there is only one.
> 
> You can only configure 2 settings for the hi mode. The 200Lm setting is non-configurable. It will always be one of them. The other hi output setting can either be 100Lm, 140Lm or strobe. If you choose the strobe to be your secondary option, it can not be the default when jumping to high mode. Jumping to hi will go right to 200Lm. If you choose one of the other 2 levels of output (100Lm or 140Lm) to be secondary hi, then you can set one of those to be the default when jumping to high, and the 200Lm will be available with a dbl clk. Or vice versa.





> Written by *leon2245* on 11-21-2010 02:10 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ou can only configure 2 settings for the hi mode
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you- so as it comes from the factory, can you confirm the following statement is true: Thank you- so as it comes from the factory, can you confirm the following statement is true:
> 
> "unless you double clicked 6+ times while on high (at once while it's on), you'd never even see the strobE?" true?
> 
> If so that's far enough removed for me, & i won't even worry about programming it for the 100l sublevel on high. I was just making sure it doesn't cycle through all those sublevels on hi just by double clicking through them. Thanks again.
Click to expand...




> Written by *Lite_me* on 11-21-2010 02:36 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> leon2245 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you- so as it comes from the factory, can you confirm the following statement is true:
> 
> "unless you double clicked 6+ times while on high (at once while it's on), you'd never even see the strobE?" true?
> 
> 
> 
> You know, I don't even remember whether the strobe was programed from the factory or not. It's really no biggie tho. It can be easily be reprogrammed to one of the constant outputs and you'll never accidentally ever run into the strobe again. You know, I don't even remember whether the strobe was programed from the factory or not. It's really no biggie tho. It can be easily be reprogrammed to one of the constant outputs and you'll never accidentally ever run into the strobe again.
Click to expand...




> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 11-21-2010 02:42 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> Lite_me said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can *not* adjust the brightness of the strobe. And there is only one.
> 
> You can only configure 2 settings for the hi mode. The 200Lm setting is non-configurable. It will always be one of them. The other hi output setting can either be 100Lm, 140Lm or strobe. *If you choose the strobe to be your secondary option, it can not be the default when jumping to high mode. *Jumping to hi will go right to 200Lm. If you choose one of the other 2 levels of output (100Lm or 140Lm) to be secondary hi, then you can set one of those to be the default when jumping to high, and the 200Lm will be available with a dbl clk. Or vice versa.
> 
> 
> 
> Can you explain the easiest method to get the strobe feature functioning on this light? For my use, easy and immediate access to strobe is a requirement. I don't want to be fiddling with numerous clicks or turns to get emergency strobe functioning. Can you explain the easiest method to get the strobe feature functioning on this light? For my use, easy and immediate access to strobe is a requirement. I don't want to be fiddling with numerous clicks or turns to get emergency strobe functioning.
> 
> How do you activate strobe on the SC51?
Click to expand...




> Written by *Sarlix* on 11-21-2010 03:59 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> LetThereBeLite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can you explain the easiest method to get the strobe feature functioning on this light? For my use, easy and immediate access to strobe is a requirement. I don't want to be fiddling with numerous clicks or turns to get emergency strobe functioning.
> 
> How do you activate strobe on the SC51?
> 
> 
> 
> It was explained by the Zebralight rep dude a few pages back: It was explained by the Zebralight rep dude a few pages back:
> 
> 
> 
> ZebraLight said:
> 
> 
> 
> The second sub-level of the High (H2) is expanded to include 100Lm, 140Lm *and a 4Hz strobe. Double click 6 times in High to enter the configuration mode for the H2. Further double clicks to cycle throgh the list*. Short click or long click to exit.
> 
> All sub-levels except the 100 and 0.2Lm are now current regulated. L2 PWM flickering has been reduced to a much lower level.
> 
> These updates are also implemented in the H51.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...




> Written by *nlight3318* on 11-21-2010 11:16 AM GMT
> 
> great review! I have zebralight H60 headlamp ,works pretty good, haven't tried zebra's flashlight , looks like I have to get one too.





> Written by *g.p.* on 11-21-2010 01:06 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> Lite_me said:
> 
> 
> 
> I can 'see' it. But only if I study the beam on something up-close. In actual use, the output is so low I can't detect it at all. On some of my older lights that have PWM, I sometimes detect it when moving the light around from one object to another. The output on the SC51 on low-low isn't enough for me to see it or the PWM is high enough not to be a problem for me I guess. I rarely use that setting anyways.
> 
> 
> 
> I still can't see it....even if I try. Guess my eyes have a lower frame rate than most. I still can't see it....even if I try. Guess my eyes have a lower frame rate than most. :thinking:
> 
> Well, I'm loving mine. It didn't blow me away at first, but the more that I use it, the more that I love it. The UI is the best that I have ever used. It takes a few minutes to figure out, but after that it's perfect. It's very well made too, and just looks quality. The best part is that I'm sure that it puts out more light than my 3 D cell maglite of years past. When you think of it that way, it's pretty amazing for a light of this size!
Click to expand...




> Written by *SloNicK* on 11-22-2010 01:06 PM GMT
> 
> so, has anyone been brave enough to try 14500's yet? (с)





> Written by *susuman* on 12-01-2010 12:58 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> NightTime said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for your point guys. But I'm still not convinced the 100 lumens is for the strobe mode for these reasons.
> 
> First, I find the strobe mode fairly bright, but it's hard to tell went it's flashing.
> 
> Secondly, following the syntax of the sentence, the "slash" found in << *140* Lm (1.7 hrs) / *100* Lm (2.4 hrs) / 4Hz Strobe >> suggest to me that we are talking about another mode.
> 
> Third, have a look at this statement:
> 
> << _The second sub-level of the High can be further configured to different brightness level*s* or strobes._ >> don't know why "strobe" is plural here though.
> 
> So if the 100 lumens is for the strobe, we should read:
> 
> << _The second sub-level of the High can be further configured to strobe. _>>
> 
> Anyways, I won't die for that. There are more important things in life. I wouldn't use the 100 lumens mode anyways . lol
> 
> 
> 
> It has the 100lm mode, just switch it on HIGH , then keep double click until you see the strobe, now keep double click to cycle through the selection of Stobe/100lm/140lm for the H2 mode. The single click to memorized the mode(100/140). It has the 100lm mode, just switch it on HIGH , then keep double click until you see the strobe, now keep double click to cycle through the selection of Stobe/100lm/140lm for the H2 mode. The single click to memorized the mode(100/140).
Click to expand...




> Written by *Tuikku* on 12-06-2010 05:56 AM GMT
> 
> Thanks for the review!
> 
> I have ordered 3 H51 Zebralights for presents based on this review.
> for batteries





> Written by *Tierdaen* on 12-09-2010 09:58 AM GMT
> 
> After reading the review here, I was so disappointed to find that both the SC50 and SC51 are unavailable where I live, and I cannot put money in my PayPal account for an international order at the moment. I was leaning toward an LD10 for a bit, then saw this review, then hunted around for it like mad, and, unable source one locally, I settled for the LD10 instead. I have a feeling I'll continue looking for the SC51 periodically, even though I'm mostly satisfied with my LD10 R4.





> Written by *Dino2010* on 12-10-2010 11:00 PM GMT
> 
> I saw that it has different type of model and Zebralight has gone through a couple of iterations. What is the regulation of this type of model?


 


> Written by *maniacyak* on 12-11-2010 07:25 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> Dino2010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I saw that it has different type of model and Zebralight has gone through a couple of iterations. What is the regulation of this type of model?
> 
> 
> 
> From ZebraLight's From ZebraLight's web page for the SC51:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 200, 140, 30, 8 and 2.5 Lumen output are current regulated. 100 and 0.2 Lumen output are PWM generated.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...




> Written by *chadvone* on 12-12-2010 09:35 PM GMT
> 
> ZL claiming 12 hours on Medium 1, Selfbuilt got 7h 47m both on Eneloops. Why would there runtimes be off that much??
> 
> Quark AA medium 6 hours, Selfbuilt got 12h 25m.
> 
> Wonder how the Med2 on ZL would compare to the Med on the Quark.
> 
> I want this light, I want this light.
> 
> SelfBuilts reviews have always been spot on, and I hardly buy AA lights that he hasn't reviewed.





> Written by *LightObsession* on 12-12-2010 11:36 PM GMT
> 
> Thanks for the review. This light is quite tempting.



_Written by *selfbuilt* on 12-13-2010 08:05 AM GMT_



chadvone said:


> ZL claiming 12 hours on Medium 1, Selfbuilt got 7h 47m both on Eneloops. Why would there runtimes be off that much??
> 
> Quark AA medium 6 hours, Selfbuilt got 12h 25m.


Well, I often review early versions of lights. It is quite possible that manufacturers have tweaked outputs on later batches, and the runtimes are no longer comparable. Well, I often review early versions of lights. It is quite possible that manufacturers have tweaked outputs on later batches, and the runtimes are no longer comparable. 

But this is also why I always post the manufacturer's specs at the time of the review - if my numbers don't match, then it does indeed call into question the manufacturer's specs. But as time goes by, it's harder to know.




> Written by *Flying Turtle* on 12-20-2010 09:18 AM GMT
> 
> Based on this great review I've recently received a SC50w+. An impressive light it is. That body design probably should be in a industrial museum. The olive anodizing is a nice change from most of my lights. Must more robust than I expected.
> 
> It's kind of funny that in size, weight, high, and low output it is almost identical to my old favorite LF3XT. Not quite as smart as that light, however.
> 
> Of course, now they're coming out with the 51w in a few weeks. I did know about it, but didn't expect it so soon. Heck, I seldom use those high levels anyway.
> 
> Geoff





> Written by *pae77* on 12-20-2010 09:37 AM GMT
> 
> I've really come to like my SC50w+, especially for it's two low modes which are, imo, very well spaced and I find them very useful for navigating around the house w/o disturbing anyone. I don't have any problems with the pulse modulation which is pretty much undetectable to me.
> 
> Used the light in an emergency situation (dealing with some basement flooding) for several hours today and it performed well with a pair of 14500's (one at a time of course). It packs a lot of power in a very small package and the various levels are pretty well spaced, imo. For now, it's my main single AA light, although I usually EDC only my LF2XT (single AAA) and use my larger Solarforce lights powered by a single 18650 for most outdoors stuff. But for it's size, the SC50w+ is a great light, imo.



_Written by *selfbuilt* on 12-20-2010 11:04 AM GMT_



Flying Turtle said:


> It's kind of funny that in size, weight, high, and low output it is almost identical to my old favorite LF3XT. Not quite as smart as that light, however.


Yes, it is almost exactly the same height (the LF3XT is fatter, though). FYI, the SC50w (on 14500) has replaced the LF3XT on my belt as well. Yes, it is almost exactly the same height (the LF3XT is fatter, though). FYI, the SC50w (on 14500) has replaced the LF3XT on my belt as well. 

A shame that LiteFlux doesn't seem to have updated anything in awhile. But the SC51/SC50 series covers a lot of the ground that I need.




> Written by *davidt1* on 12-27-2010 12:54 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> SloNicK said:
> 
> 
> 
> so, has anyone been brave enough to try 14500's yet? (с)
> 
> 
> 
> SC50 needs 14500 for maximum brightness. SC51 does not need 14500 for maximum brightness. SC50 needs 14500 for maximum brightness. SC51 does not need 14500 for maximum brightness.
Click to expand...




> Written by *mellowman* on 12-28-2010 12:08 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> davidt1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> SC50 needs 14500 for maximum brightness. SC51 does not need 14500 for maximum brightness.
> 
> 
> 
> The question was not about "need" but about if it works or not. The reviewer says yes but may have been an engineering sample and production versions of SC51 may not work. The question was not about "need" but about if it works or not. The reviewer says yes but may have been an engineering sample and production versions of SC51 may not work.
> 
> The best response todate is "not recommended" from zebralight which doesn't answer the question if productions versions can work with 14500 bats. There are some of us who'd prefer a straight Yes or No answer.
> 
> A "not needed" or "not recommended" is not an answer to the question as it still leaves open the question that 14500 can work.
> 
> If the answer is NO a further clarification that this is because it would fry the driver which has a limit of 2.5v would really be a definitive answer. Again the reviewer used 14500 with no problems and none of the changes related to us since the original review has specifically mentioned a driver voltage limitation.
Click to expand...


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



> Written by *NightTime* on 12-28-2010 09:24 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> susuman said:
> 
> 
> 
> It has the 100lm mode, just switch it on HIGH , then keep double click until you see the strobe, now keep double click to cycle through the selection of Stobe/100lm/140lm for the H2 mode. The single click to memorized the mode(100/140).
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Thanks _*susuman*_ & _*Lite_me*_ for your explanations. I got it all now !
Click to expand...




> Written by *pae77* on 12-28-2010 09:57 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> mellowman said:
> 
> 
> 
> The question was not about "need" but about if it works or not. The reviewer says yes but may have been an engineering sample and production versions of SC51 may not work.
> 
> The best response todate is "not recommended" from zebralight which doesn't answer the question if productions versions can work with 14500 bats. There are some of us who'd prefer a straight Yes or No answer.
> 
> A "not needed" or "not recommended" is not an answer to the question as it still leaves open the question that 14500 can work.
> 
> If the answer is NO a further clarification that this is because it would fry the driver which has a limit of 2.5v would really be a definitive answer. Again the reviewer used 14500 with no problems and none of the changes related to us since the original review has specifically mentioned a driver voltage limitation.
> 
> 
> 
> But the question that arises (in my mind at least), is why would anyone want (or need) to run the SC51 on 14500s since it supposedly performs best (brightest as well as longer runtime) on NiMH which is the type of cell it was optimized for. But the question that arises (in my mind at least), is why would anyone want (or need) to run the SC51 on 14500s since it supposedly performs best (brightest as well as longer runtime) on NiMH which is the type of cell it was optimized for.
> 
> On the other hand, the SC50's perform best on 14500's rather than on NiMH. But a 14500 appears to be wasted in the SC51. Jmo.
Click to expand...




> Written by *mellowman* on 12-28-2010 11:02 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> pae77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> But the question that arises (in my mind at least), is why would anyone want (or need) to run the SC51 on 14500s since it supposedly performs best (brightest as well as longer runtime) on NiMH which is the type of cell it was optimized for.
> 
> On the other hand, the SC50's perform best on 14500's rather than on NiMH. But a 14500 appears to be wasted in the SC51. Jmo.
> 
> 
> 
> Question is not about "want" or "need", question is about "can" 14500's work without damaging the flashlight. Question is not about "want" or "need", question is about "can" 14500's work without damaging the flashlight.
> 
> Also you are misinformed. Look at the first post in this thread again. Even with the SC51 the 14500 are a little brighter and last a little longer. 14500's are not wasted in an SC51. At least not with the version the reviewer had.
> 
> BTW, some of us still have 14500's we would like to use rather than buy a few more eneloops. 14500 are also a bit lighter than an eneloop which is appreciated, but not a deal breaker, when EDC'ing.
> 
> I don't expect to get an answer from zebralight as they seem to want to distance themselves from 14500 for safety reasons, however since they don't come out and explicitly state not to use 14500 does seem to suggest it does work. Zebralight can PM me and I promise not to tell anyone.
Click to expand...




> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 12-29-2010 02:17 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> mellowman said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Question is not about "want" or "need", question is about "can" 14500's work without damaging the flashlight.
> *
> 
> Also you are misinformed. Look at the first post in this thread again. Even with the SC51 the 14500 are a little brighter and last a little longer. 14500's are not wasted in an SC51. At least not with the version the reviewer had.
> 
> BTW, some of us still have 14500's we would like to use rather than buy a few more eneloops. 14500 are also a bit lighter than an eneloop which is appreciated, but not a deal breaker, when EDC'ing.
> 
> I don't expect to get an answer from zebralight as they seem to want to distance themselves from 14500 for safety reasons, however since they don't come out and explicitly state not to use 14500 does seem to suggest it does work. Zebralight can PM me and I promise not to tell anyone.
> 
> 
> 
> You can phrase your question in whatever way you want but I find you purposely trying to be argumentative. It's been stated to you NOT RECOMMENDED to use 14500 with the SC51. Can ZL force you to not use 14500. No, they cannot. You still have the ability to use 14500 despite their warnings. So the correct linguistic answer is to recommend that you not use 14500. That's all they can do. They can't prohibit you from using it. You can phrase your question in whatever way you want but I find you purposely trying to be argumentative. It's been stated to you NOT RECOMMENDED to use 14500 with the SC51. Can ZL force you to not use 14500. No, they cannot. You still have the ability to use 14500 despite their warnings. So the correct linguistic answer is to recommend that you not use 14500. That's all they can do. They can't prohibit you from using it.
> 
> It's pretty clear from your posts that you really want to use 14500, even despite warnings against doing so. Why don't you go ahead and do it? Come back and let us know how your real world experience is. If you report that your light got fried after a while, then we'll know for certain that you can't use 14500 with the SC51. :devil:
Click to expand...




> Written by *mellowman* on 12-29-2010 02:43 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> LetThereBeLite said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can phrase your question in whatever way you want but I find you purposely trying to be argumentative. It's been stated to you NOT RECOMMENDED to use 14500 with the SC51. Can ZL force you to not use 14500. No, they cannot. You still have the ability to use 14500 despite their warnings. So the correct linguistic answer is to recommend that you not use 14500. That's all they can do. They can't prohibit you from using it.
> 
> It's pretty clear from your posts that you really want to use 14500, even despite warnings against doing so. Why don't you go ahead and do it? Come back and let us know how your real world experience is. If you report that your light got fried after a while, then we'll know for certain that you can't use 14500 with the SC51. :devil:
> 
> 
> 
> Your post adds nothing to this thread. Your logic is silly. They can use stronger language than "not recommended" and still be "correct linguistically", like prohibited. Then it would be very clear. If you want to argue the meaning of words take it to another forum. Your post adds nothing to this thread. Your logic is silly. They can use stronger language than "not recommended" and still be "correct linguistically", like prohibited. Then it would be very clear. If you want to argue the meaning of words take it to another forum.
> 
> Seems more like it does work but they don't want to take on any liability from people using cheap 14500's and they don't want to lose any sales either so they say not recommended.
> 
> I don't have an SC51, might consider buying one if I can get an answer to the question.
> 
> I'm not the only one asking. Check the thread it's been asks for weeks with no definitive answer. I'm just trying to get a definitive answer.
> 
> What is the purpose of this forum? This thread? I think the question is very CPF.
Click to expand...




> Written by *pae77* on 12-29-2010 04:10 AM GMT
> 
> Speaking of "silly logic," (btw, I would normally never use such argumentative words to describe another member's post), but I find it rather amusing that the contention or theory that ZL apparently doesn't "want to take on liability from people using cheap 14500's . . . ," based on their lack of specificity wrt the use of li-ion cells with SC51, seems especially deserving of such characterization in light of ZL's past history wrt li-ion cells because: 1) ZL specifically designed the circuit in the SC50 to use 14500's and even posts lumen data with respect to the light being used with 14500's on their site; 2) ZL makes other lights that are designed to run on li-ion cells; and, 3) They even makes some lights that can_only_ be run on li-ion cells (e.g., SC60 which runs on an 18650). So the contention, conclusion or speculation that ZL doesn't want to take on liability from people using "cheap" li-ion cells doesn't seem very logical at all in light of the actual facts and circumstances concerning ZL's product line and history wrt li-ion powered lights.


 


> Written by *hazna* on 12-29-2010 04:41 AM GMT
> 
> well, zebralight don't recommend it... selfbuilt's review seems to indicate it can run on 14500, but we do not know the long term ramifications of doing so. From peoples lack of response to your question... it seems most people are afraid to run the sc51 on 14500 due to zebralight's warning.
> 
> You can either buy the sc51 and take a punt to see what the long term results are using 14500, or get the sc50+ which does officially support 14500 batteries.





> Written by *mellowman* on 12-29-2010 06:19 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> pae77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of "silly logic," (btw, I would normally never use such argumentative words to describe another member's post), but I find it rather amusing that the contention or theory that ZL apparently doesn't "want to take on liability from people using cheap 14500's . . . ," based on their lack of specificity wrt the use of li-ion cells with SC51, seems especially deserving of such characterization in light of ZL's past history wrt li-ion cells because: 1) ZL specifically designed the circuit in the SC50 to use 14500's and even posts lumen data with respect to the light being used with 14500's on their site; 2) ZL makes other lights that are designed to run on li-ion cells; and, 3) They even makes some lights that can _only_ be run on li-ion cells (e.g., SC60 which runs on an 18650). So the contention, conclusion or speculation that ZL doesn't want to take on liability from people using "cheap" li-ion cells doesn't seem very logical at all in light of the actual facts and circumstances concerning ZL's product line and history wrt li-ion powered lights.
> 
> 
> 
> SC51 is the latest design. Past history does not guarantee the future. ZL not liking 14500 because of cheap bats comes from others posting who apparently have spoken with ZL. I've said nothing about 18650. Get a grip. SC51 is the latest design. Past history does not guarantee the future. ZL not liking 14500 because of cheap bats comes from others posting who apparently have spoken with ZL. I've said nothing about 18650. Get a grip.
Click to expand...




> Written by *mellowman* on 12-29-2010 06:32 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> hazna said:
> 
> 
> 
> well, zebralight don't recommend it... selfbuilt's review seems to indicate it can run on 14500, but we do not know the long term ramifications of doing so. From peoples lack of response to your question... it seems most people are afraid to run the sc51 on 14500 due to zebralight's warning.
> 
> You can either buy the sc51 and take a punt to see what the long term results are using 14500, or get the sc50+ which does officially support 14500 batteries.
> 
> 
> 
> Well it would be nice to hear a bit more from ZL about it. What's the point of their participation in the forum if not for simple questions like this? Just to generate product hype? Well it would be nice to hear a bit more from ZL about it. What's the point of their participation in the forum if not for simple questions like this? Just to generate product hype?
> 
> Yes, an alternative is to buy one and do long term evaluation. Except if something happens long term how will I know it was using 14500 or something with the build that would have happened even with eneloops. Lets be honest, ZL's build quality rep is not exactly spotless now is it.
> 
> Too many other worthy lights to consider. If such a simple question cannot be addressed then why should I buy it.
Click to expand...




> Written by *hazna* on 12-29-2010 07:17 AM GMT
> 
> Well you could ask zebralight directly about 14500 support. I have found they have been fairly responsive to my questions previously.
> http://www.zebralight.com/crm.asp?action=contactus
> 
> Please keep us informed on what they say.
> 
> If you are worried about 14500 support get the sc50+. One of the benefits I feel of the sc50+, is the strobe mode is slower and more useable (YMMV). Or as you said, you could get another light completely.
> 
> 
> 
> mellowman said:
> 
> 
> 
> ZL not liking 14500 because of cheap bats comes from others posting who apparently have spoken with ZL.
> 
> 
> 
> I am interested where you read this. I haven't been trawling through all the threads on sc51/sc50... I am interested where you read this. I haven't been trawling through all the threads on sc51/sc50...
Click to expand...




> Written by *g.p.* on 12-29-2010 11:20 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> mellowman said:
> 
> 
> 
> If such a simple question cannot be addressed then why should I buy it.
> 
> 
> 
> They have addressed the issue: They have addressed the issue:
> 
> "Battery: One 1.5V AA (NiMH, lithium or alkaline). *14500 Li-ion batteries are not supported*." http://www.zebralight.com/SC51-Flash...00Lm_p_43.html
> 
> I absolutely _LOVE_ my SC51..........love it......way too much to risk destroying it for a minor potential gain. I strongly suggest that you buy one and see for yourself though, then let us know how it goes! :naughty: I bet that if you buy one you will fall in love with it too, and won't want to chance it either. By far the best UI, nicest finishing, most beautiful beam, most practical level spacing, and smallest useable light that I have ever owned. I still can't believe that something the size of a single AA cell has replaced my mini mag, and 3D mag work lights (and it blows them both away in light output too, even compares to my 3D Maglite with Malkoff drop-in).
Click to expand...




> Written by *pae77* on 12-29-2010 12:00 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> mellowman said:
> 
> 
> 
> "SC51 is the latest design. Past history does not guarantee the future. ZL not liking 14500 because of cheap bats comes from others posting who apparently have spoken with ZL. I've said nothing about 18650. Get a grip." [Emphasis added.]
> 
> 
> 
> True, you've not specifically referenced 18650's per se, but I was under the impression that both 14500 (which you did mention) and 18650, in many if not most cases, use the same type of Li-ion chemistry. And therefore it seems reasonable to conclude (at least to me) that if a company is supposedly concerned about liability with respect to one of those li-ion cell sizes, they would logically similarly be concerned about liability wrt other li-ion cell sizes. But I guess since I don't apparently, in your opinion, have "a grip," (btw, was it really necessary to add that unpleasant barb to your post?), that something must be wrong with my logic, although tbh, I still don't see where I've gone wrong. True, you've not specifically referenced 18650's per se, but I was under the impression that both 14500 (which you did mention) and 18650, in many if not most cases, use the same type of Li-ion chemistry. And therefore it seems reasonable to conclude (at least to me) that if a company is supposedly concerned about liability with respect to one of those li-ion cell sizes, they would logically similarly be concerned about liability wrt other li-ion cell sizes. But I guess since I don't apparently, in your opinion, have "a grip," (btw, was it really necessary to add that unpleasant barb to your post?), that something must be wrong with my logic, although tbh, I still don't see where I've gone wrong.
Click to expand...




> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 12-29-2010 12:48 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> mellowman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your post adds nothing to this thread. Your logic is silly. They can use stronger language than "not recommended" and still be "correct linguistically", like prohibited. Then it would be very clear. If you want to argue the meaning of words take it to another forum.
> 
> Seems more like it does work but they don't want to take on any liability from people using cheap 14500's and they don't want to lose any sales either so they say not recommended.
> 
> I don't have an SC51, might consider buying one if I can get an answer to the question.
> 
> I'm not the only one asking. Check the thread it's been asks for weeks with no definitive answer. I'm just trying to get a definitive answer.
> 
> What is the purpose of this forum? This thread? I think the question is very CPF.
> 
> 
> 
> Your posts add even less to this thread. Question has been asked and answered. The definitive answer is NOT RECOMMENDED. Period. Move on. Your posts add even less to this thread. Question has been asked and answered. The definitive answer is NOT RECOMMENDED. Period. Move on.
Click to expand...




> Written by *g.p.* on 12-30-2010 06:59 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> mellowman said:
> 
> 
> 
> BTW, some of us still have 14500's we would like to use rather than buy a few more eneloops. 14500 are also a bit lighter than an eneloop which is appreciated, but not a deal breaker, when EDC'ing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mellowman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Too many other worthy lights to consider. If such a simple question cannot be addressed then why should I buy it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have some 14500's laying around, but have been having trouble finding any good lights for them. Can you please point me in the direction of a light that is comparable in size and weight to the SC51? I would also expect a 14500 light to put out more lumens too. So far the Lumapower Trust 1 is the only 14500 EDC light that I have found that does better (lumenwise) than the SC51. It's I have some 14500's laying around, but have been having trouble finding any good lights for them. Can you please point me in the direction of a light that is comparable in size and weight to the SC51? I would also expect a 14500 light to put out more lumens too. So far the Lumapower Trust 1 is the only 14500 EDC light that I have found that does be
Click to expand...




> Written by *pae77* on 12-30-2010 07:11 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> g.p. said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have some 14500's laying around, but have been having trouble finding any good lights for them. Can you please point me in the direction of a light that is comparable in size and weight to the SC51? I would also expect a 14500 light to put out more lumens too. So far the Lumapower Trust 1 is the only 14500 EDC light that I have found that does better (lumenwise) than the SC51. It's_ much_ heavier and _much_ bigger though. :shakehead :thumbsdow
> 
> 
> 
> How about the SC50 or SC50w+? If it's not exactly the same, then it's How about the SC50 or SC50w+? If it's not exactly the same, then it's _almost_ exactly the same size as the SC51 but, unlike the SC51, the SC50 line _is_ optimized for 14500's. It uses a different emitter though. Instead of the XPG, it uses the XPE, iirc (not bothering to check the first post). Anyway, on 14500's the SC50/SC50w+ put out about the same amount of light as the SC51 on Eneloops.
> 
> Btw, the SC51's performance on Eneloops is very unusual. I don't think any other light puts out so many lumens on a single AA Eneloop. So expecting to find a single 14500 powered light that does a much better than that is not going to be easy. 200 lumens or so on a 14500 is about what I think you can currently expect, at least until the new XM-L emitter perhaps finds its way into a single 14500 powered light. If that happens, it will be a whole lot brighter than any of the currently available single 14500 lights, but runtime at max brightness will be quite limited due to the limited capacity of 14500s and the high current draw the XM-L requires to get really bright. I have one I currently run on a single 18650 that puts out about 500 to 600 lumens (my estimate) on max and gets about 40 minutes of runtime from a 2400 mAh battery (on max). It's awesome. I'm looking forward to ZL putting that emitter in the SC60's body which I'm pretty sure they will be doing in the not too distant future.
Click to expand...




> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 12-30-2010 07:15 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> mellowman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well it would be nice to hear a bit more from ZL about it. What's the point of their participation in the forum if not for simple questions like this? Just to generate product hype?
> 
> Yes, an alternative is to buy one and do long term evaluation. Except if something happens long term how will I know it was using 14500 or something with the build that would have happened even with eneloops. Lets be honest, ZL's build quality rep is not exactly spotless now is it.
> 
> Too many other worthy lights to consider. If such a simple question cannot be addressed then *why should I buy it*.
> 
> 
> 
> Narcissistman, don't buy. Who really cares if you buy or not. NO one. Take it to another thread. Narcissistman, don't buy. Who really cares if you buy or not. NO one. Take it to another thread.
> 
> Question has been asked and answered: NOT RECOMMENDED.
Click to expand...




> Written by *g.p.* on 12-30-2010 08:30 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> pae77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How about the SC50 or SC50w+? If it's not exactly the same, then it's _almost_ exactly the same size as the SC51 but, unlike the SC51, the SC50 line _is_ optimized for 14500's. It uses a different emitter though. Instead of the XPG, it uses the XPE, iirc (not bothering to check the first post). Anyway, on 14500's the SC50/SC50w+ put out about the same amount of light as the SC51 on Eneloops.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I like the SC50, but there's no benefit of buying it when I've already got the SC51. I thought maybe there was something amazing out there that I didn't know about. Something approx the same size as the Zebralight since he's concerned about the weight of a 14500 vs the weight of an Eneloop! Yeah, I like the SC50, but there's no benefit of buying it when I've already got the SC51. I thought maybe there was something amazing out there that I didn't know about. Something approx the same size as the Zebralight since he's concerned about the weight of a 14500 vs the weight of an Eneloop!
Click to expand...




> Written by *pae77* on 12-30-2010 09:10 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> g.p. said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I like the SC50, but there's no benefit of buying it when I've already got the SC51. I thought maybe there was something amazing out there that I didn't know about. Something approx the same size as the Zebralight since he's concerned about the weight of a 14500 vs the weight of an Eneloop!
> 
> 
> 
> I see. Well there is something truly amazing but it remains to be seen if it will ever find its way into small lights like the SC50/51. And that is the XM-L emitter I mentioned in the other post. It's like having 3 XPGs rolled into one emitter. Very bright, huge hot spot, big smooth floody beam but very good throw that is a little better than the throw of most XPGs. But I think they will need to be powered by an 18650 to have a practical amount of runtime on max brightness. But ZL has already put an 18650 into a pretty small package with the SC60, so what I'm waiting for next (unless Liteflux comes out with something new, but that's another subject) is ZL to put an XM-L in a single 18650 powered light like the SC60 has done. That will be like having a xenon car headlight that fits into the palm of your hand (and pocket). Should be quite an achievement. I see. Well there is something truly amazing but it remains to be seen if it will ever find its way into small lights like the SC50/51. And that is the XM-L emitter I mentioned in the other post. It's like having 3 XPGs rolled into one emitter. Very bright, huge hot spot, big smooth floody beam but very good throw that is a little better than the throw of most XPGs. But I think they will need to be powered by an 18650 to have a practical amount of runtime on max brightness. But ZL has already put an 18650 into a pretty small package with the SC60, so what I'm waiting for next (unless Liteflux comes out with something new, but that's another subject) is ZL to put an XM-L in a single 18650 powered light like the SC60 has done. That will be like having a xenon car headlight that fits into the palm of your hand (and pocket). Should be quite an achievement.
Click to expand...




> Written by *hazna* on 12-30-2010 11:02 PM GMT
> 
> maybe you could try the xeno e03. I don't have one, but it seems to run on 14500. Measures: 96.5mm x 21.5mm. Or Quark AA... there's quite a few choices actually.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



> Written by *JA(me)S* on 12-30-2010 11:10 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> pae77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> But ZL has already put an 18650 into a pretty small package with the SC60, so what I'm waiting for next (unless Liteflux comes out with something new, but that's another subject) is ZL to put an XM-L in a single 18650 powered light like the SC60 has done. That will be like having a xenon car headlight that fits into the palm of your hand (and pocket). Should be quite an achievement.
> 
> 
> 
> You beat me to the punch! I was going to post this very concept in the LED lights forum for discussion... You beat me to the punch! I was going to post this very concept in the LED lights forum for discussion...  I would jump on this in a heartbeat (well, when the XM-L neutral is available) :thumbsup:
Click to expand...




> Written by *pae77* on 12-30-2010 11:15 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> JA(me)S said:
> 
> 
> 
> You beat me to the punch! I was going to post this very concept in the LED lights forum for discussion...  I would jump on this in a heartbeat (well, when the XM-L neutral is available) :thumbsup:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if all the XM-L's are like the one I got but although mine (in a drop-in) is the normal T6 bin white, it's actually really almost neutral in tint. I quite like the tint and I'm one who buys neutral whenever possible. So I would suggest not to be afraid to try one of the regular XM-L T6 drop-ins (if you are into using drop-ins). KD is selling a couple of surprisingly good ones for only $18.80 shipped atm. There is a 5 mode and a one mode. I got the 5 mode version and it's quite awesome, imo. It has a limited voltage range, however, so it can only be run on one li-ion cell (which is not a problem for me though as I like single 18650 powered lights). The one mode module can take a much wider voltage range, however. Sorry to go off topic but these new "affordable" high power emitters from Cree are really quite impressive and they are just a very few dollars more expensive than XPG's. I don't know if all the XM-L's are like the one I got but although mine (in a drop-in) is the normal T6 bin white, it's actually really almost neutral in tint. I quite like the tint and I'm one who buys neutral whenever possible. So I would suggest not to be afraid to try one of the regular XM-L T6 drop-ins (if you are into using drop-ins). KD is selling a couple of surprisingly good ones for only $18.80 shipped atm. There is a 5 mode and a one mode. I got the 5 mode version and it's quite awesome, imo. It has a limited voltage range, however, so it can only be run on one li-ion cell (which is not a problem for me though as I like single 18650 powered lights). The one mode module can take a much wider voltage range, however. Sorry to go off topic but these new "affordable" high power emitters from Cree are really quite impressive and they are just a very few dollars more expensive than XPG's.
Click to expand...




> Written by *g.p.* on 12-31-2010 12:05 AM GMT
> 
> Cool! I didn't realize that the XM-L's were that much brighter. I've just started reading up on some new XM-L's throwers and my initial impression was that they were slightly brighter, but mostly just used less power to do it. That will be cool when Zebralight makes a light with an XM-L LED.....'cause I already love my Zebrealight!





> Written by *g.p.* on 12-31-2010 11:36 AM GMT
> 
> Sorry, just saw the reply. I can't find any lumen numbers on the Quarks with 14500's. It seems as though they are not officially supported. I'll check the xeno e03 though.
> 
> I received my Trust 1 last night, and it compliments the SC51 nicely when used with 14500's. It's a bit brighter, and a little larger which is good when using gloves at work. My SC51 may stay at home now, because I like it too much to get hydraulic fluid all over it! I really hope that Zebralight does come out with a brighter 18650 light. Now that I've moved into 18650's, I love them. Their current 18650 offering just doesn't drive it hard enough though. I like to have a really high mode, even if it means that I can only use it for a minute or two at a time. That way I don't have to carry any bigger lights around all night for those few seconds that I need one.





> Written by *pae77* on 12-31-2010 11:54 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> g.p. said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, just saw the reply. I can't find any lumen numbers on the Quarks with 14500's. It seems as though they are not officially supported. I'll check the xeno e03 though.
> 
> I received my Trust 1 last night, and it compliments the SC51 nicely when used with 14500's. It's a bit brighter, and a little larger which is good when using gloves at work. My SC51 may stay at home now, because I like it too much to get hydraulic fluid all over it! I really hope that Zebralight does come out with a brighter 18650 light. Now that I've moved into 18650's, I love them. Their current 18650 offering just doesn't drive it hard enough though. I like to have a really high mode, even if it means that I can only use it for a minute or two at a time. That way I don't have to carry any bigger lights around all night for those few seconds that I need one.
> 
> 
> 
> While we are waiting for ZL to come out with an XM-L based light, if you don't mind something a little larger (about the size of a Surefire 6P), you can pair a Solarforce L2 or L2P flashlight body (host) either of which are available for under $20 shipped, with the XM-L drop-in from KD (also under $20 shipped) and those Solarforce bodies can run on a single 18650. (Or 2 - 16340's or 2 - 18350's, assuming the drop-in being used can handle the additional voltage generated by using multiple cells. Also, battery tube extensions are available that enable the use of more than one 18650. But I usually prefer to just use a single 18650 which is all the 5 mode XM-L drop-in from KD can take anyway.) While we are waiting for ZL to come out with an XM-L based light, if you don't mind something a little larger (about the size of a Surefire 6P), you can pair a Solarforce L2 or L2P flashlight body (host) either of which are available for under $20 shipped, with the XM-L drop-in from KD (also under $20 shipped) and those Solarforce bodies can run on a single 18650. (Or 2 - 16340's or 2 - 18350's, assuming the drop-in being used can handle the additional voltage generated by using multiple cells. Also, battery tube extensions are available that enable the use of more than one 18650. But I usually prefer to just use a single 18650 which is all the 5 mode XM-L drop-in from KD can take anyway.)
> 
> Anyway, with that combo, you can have the benefits of XM-L and 18650 now in an inexpensive but slightly larger package. But it makes an awesome powerhouse for under $40 shipped. And the quality of both the body (especially the L2P) and drop-in are much higher than the price would suggest.
> 
> The Solarforce bodies are available from several vendors, some on Ebay and there are some websites. The one I personally use and prefer (because it usually seems to have the lowest prices and they provide good cust svc) is here.
Click to expand...


_Written by *selfbuilt* on 01-01-2011 01:49 PM GMT_



pae77 said:


> 200 lumens or so on a 14500 is about what I think you can currently expect, at least until the new XM-L emitter perhaps finds its way into a single 14500 powered light. If that happens, it will be a whole lot brighter than any of the currently available single 14500 lights, but runtime at max brightness will be quite limited due to the limited capacity of 14500s and the high current draw the XM-L requires to get really bright.


I rather doubt we would ever see that configuration - for exactly the points you mentioned. The XM-L draws a lot of power at higher outputs, and that would not be safe on the low-capacity 14500 (i.e. discharge rates would be too high for standard Li-ion). And if you are limited to lower outputs, there's not much point for a manufacturer to go with the more expensive XM-L (i.e. much the same reason why you don't see a 14500-based MC-E or SST-50 light). I rather doubt we would ever see that configuration - for exactly the points you mentioned. The XM-L draws a lot of power at higher outputs, and that would not be safe on the low-capacity 14500 (i.e. discharge rates would be too high for standard Li-ion). And if you are limited to lower outputs, there's not much point for a manufacturer to go with the more expensive XM-L (i.e. much the same reason why you don't see a 14500-based MC-E or SST-50 light). 

Something like the XP-G S2 seems to be in the sweet spot for 1xRCR/14500 lights right now.




> Written by *pae77* on 01-01-2011 02:46 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> selfbuilt said:
> 
> 
> 
> I rather doubt we would ever see that configuration - for exactly the points you mentioned. The XM-L draws a lot of power at higher outputs, and that would not be safe on the low-capacity 14500 (i.e. discharge rates would be too high for standard Li-ion). And if you are limited to lower outputs, there's not much point for a manufacturer to go with the more expensive XM-L (i.e. much the same reason why you don't see a 14500-based MC-E or SST-50 light).
> 
> Something like the XP-G S2 seems to be in the sweet spot for 1xRCR/14500 lights right now.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I certainly agree with you and that's why I qualified my speculative remarks you quoted with the word "perhaps." But just speculating here but if the XM-L is really 20% more efficient than the XPG as Cree has claimed, then Yes, I certainly agree with you and that's why I qualified my speculative remarks you quoted with the word "perhaps." But just speculating here but if the XM-L is really 20% more efficient than the XPG as Cree has claimed, then perhaps there would be a benefit to putting an XM-L in a light designed to be run at considerably lower power levels than the max the XM-L can handle, simply to gain the benefit of that increased efficiency and perhaps also be designed to have a level that allows a slightly increased max power level over what an XPG could be run at, so it could also be some modest amount brighter than an XPG (but not so much as to create a high risk of damaging smaller capacity batteries).
> 
> There is also the benefit of the better, imo, beam pattern (i.e., bigger hot spot, wider brighter spill), that the XM-L puts out at almost all power levels. For example, the beam of my XM-L drop-in on low is still very smooth and big with relatively bright spill and a very big hot spot. So, imo, there are still other reasons besides running at the max brightness the XM-L is capable of, to put the emitter in a lower power drawing light. But certainly it's total speculation at this point whether any manufacturer or custom maker will agree and decide to actually produce such a light. Another thing to remember is that the XM-L currently is only a couple of dollars more expensive per unit than the XPG and that difference will likely shrink even more after the "newness" premium currently built into the price goes away. So it likely won't be much more expensive to use the XM-L in place of the XPG before too much more time has passed, imo.
Click to expand...




> Written by *RBWNY* on 01-08-2011 09:19 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> g.p. said:
> 
> 
> 
> I absolutely _LOVE_ my SC51..........love it......way too much to risk destroying it for a minor potential gain. I strongly suggest that you buy one and see for yourself though, then let us know how it goes! :naughty: I bet that if you buy one you will fall in love with it too, and won't want to chance it either. By far the best UI, nicest finishing, most beautiful beam, most practical level spacing, and smallest useable light that I have ever owned. I still can't believe that something the size of a single AA cell has replaced my mini mag, and 3D mag work lights (and it blows them both away in light output too, even compares to my 3D Maglite with Malkoff drop-in).
> 
> 
> 
> I can't agree more! My SC51 arrived yesterday and I'm totally thrilled with it I can't agree more! My SC51 arrived yesterday and I'm totally thrilled with it  For cryin' out loud it's the SAME SIZE as a Quark 123!! How can you get much better than that when it's using a single AA? Anyway, I too will recommend it highly. I just hope and pray that single clickie switch stands the test of time. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...


_Written by *selfbuilt* on 01-08-2011 12:53 PM GMT_



RBWNY said:


> I just hope and pray that single clickie switch stands the test of time. :thumbsup:


Having EDCed the SC50w for several months now, I can tell you the switch still works as new. However, there is a an issue there as well - the light easily turns on if something presses against the switch in your holster/pocket. You need to lock the light out at the tailcap to prevent this. Having EDCed the SC50w for several months now, I can tell you the switch still works as new. However, there is a an issue there as well - the light easily turns on if something presses against the switch in your holster/pocket. You need to lock the light out at the tailcap to prevent this. 

Otherwise, you may notice some heat coming from your pants - the light usually comes on in Max with a quick press.  I've also had a few cases of finding it on Lo/Med, with a nearly depleted battery after being on for hours.




> Written by *g.p.* on 01-08-2011 05:19 PM GMT
> 
> Yeah, I only made the mistake of not locking it out once......my pants got very hot! :eeksign:





> Written by *tandem* on 01-09-2011 11:03 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> pae77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I certainly agree with you and that's why I qualified my speculative remarks you quoted with the word "perhaps." But just speculating here but if the XM-L is really 20% more efficient than the XPG as Cree has claimed, then perhaps there would be a benefit to putting an XM-L in a light designed to be run at considerably lower power levels than the max the XM-L can handle, simply to gain the benefit of that increased efficiency and perhaps also be designed to have a level that allows a slightly increased max power level over what an XPG could be run at
> 
> 
> 
> You don't need to speculate, you can look at Cree's data. Here is a snapshot I took of Cree's product comparison application showing output at different drive current rates for the XP-G R5 compared with the XM-L T6 and XM-L U2 output bins. The T6 is readily available right now.
> 
> Of course short of asking the maker or doing surgery on our lights we've no way of knowing exactly what the drive current at the emitter is in the SC51 so we'll have to estimate by working backwards, sideways and maybe upside down. Bear with me while I puzzle this out and realize that I may be way off base on this:
> 
> How about we use 75% as the efficiency factor to convert emitter to out the front lumens so to go backward we'll divide by 0.75. 200/.75 = 266 emitter lumens. From the data sheet we can see the XP-G can generate ~266 lumens with roughly 0.75A but with Vf at 3.2V. A fresh AA NiMH is no where near 3.2V so that voltage has to be stepped up and since you get no useful work without power this requires more current... roughly 2.2A of current in fact, just over 1C for a 2000 mAh cell. I wonder if we can estimate current at the LED, even if roughly so? 2.2A / 0.75A = a factor of 3.
> 
> Does that hold up? Let's see... the light is said to put out 100 lumen out the front on High 2. 100/.75 = 133 emitter lumens. The Cree table doesn't go that low so we'll have to extrapolate. Assuming Vf of 3.2 and lumens per watt at 130 (close enough) drive current P=IV so I = P/V = 1W/3.2V = 0.3A or thereabouts for the XP-G.
> 
> Using the same cell for measurement of the light on High 1, I get 0.8A for High 2, so the conversion factor isn't exactly linear (no surprise) but works out to 0.8/0.3 = 2.66. That sounds about right as these LEDs are all supposed to be more efficient at lower drive levels. I suppose I could have used lumens per watt and nominal NiMH voltage to get at this too.
> 
> Anyway... would a light designer want to draw more than 2.2A from a NiMH cell? To do so you start dropping the light's runtime on max. Let's say they were willing to introduce a burst or "High 3" feature and go up to 3A draw from the cell. 3 divided by our conversion factor of 3 = 1A.
> 
> 1A at the emitter produces 347 lumens on a XP-G R5 and 388 on an XM-L for a 12% improvement. 388*.75 = 291 OTF lumens for the XM-L vs 260 for the XP-G. I guess 11% is worthwhile enough a difference, **if one were to decide pulling 3A from a 1xNiMH cell was a design objective**. But as the XP-G can already be driven by 1A (at the emitter, 3A at the tailcap for a 1xNiMH light) and since no production 1xAA does this today, one has to assume the introduction of the XM-L won't change that.
> 
> I guess that is the real bottom line - for 1x NiMH or alkaline powered lights the XM-L doesn't really introduce anything new by way of potential except for perhaps a different beam profile much as the XP-G is different than the XR-E. There is a downside to going XM-L early on as initially at least you lose access to all manner of tint bins.
> 
> Where the XM-L really shines for flashlight makers is lithium ion powered lights, particularly those taking larger capacity cells that can deliver 1.5 - 3A without being driven (much) over a 1C rate. Li-ion powered lights have an efficiency advantage over NiMH/Alkaline given their drivers can be more efficient since they operate much closer to Vf for the LEDs. Plus they are physically larger lights that will handle heat better.
> 
> Edit: To bring this all directly back to the Zebralight -- Maybe a 14500 powered SC51/H51 would auto-enable a somewhat higher high simply by virtue of detecting the higher input voltage. But the lack of official support for 14500's seems to suggest that Zebralight isn't as keen on supporting lithium ion cells in AA format lights, so why would they enable such a thing? Lithium ion cells are truly an enthusiast's domain, not the mainstream. As this industry matures the volume producers surely are looking more at the mainstream than a few of us here on CPF.
Click to expand...




> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 01-15-2011 02:50 AM GMT
> 
> Placed my order for a SC51 with goinggear tonight. I think I snagged the last unit of their current batch.
> 
> I'm anxious to finally get my hands on one of these. I still think ZL lights in general are quite ugly but the 200 lumen and its UI does impress me so I'm hoping to overlook the ugliness for it's impressive feature set.





> Written by *g.p.* on 01-15-2011 10:27 AM GMT
> 
> Your opinion might change once you have it in your hand. I used to think it was ugly too.....





> Written by *Russ Prechtl* on 01-15-2011 11:11 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> LetThereBeLite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Placed my order for a SC51 with goinggear tonight. I think I snagged the last unit of their current batch.
> 
> I'm anxious to finally get my hands on one of these. I still think ZL lights in general are quite ugly but the 200 lumen and its UI does impress me so I'm hoping to overlook the ugliness for it's impressive feature set.
> 
> 
> 
> I used to think they were ugly as well until I got my SC51 and carried it for awhile. Now I've grown quite fond of it! It grows on you after awhile. I don't even notice the looks any more...now it's about the features. I love the ability to go to virtually any brightness I want quickly. If they would just recess the button or make it harder to turn on in a pocket without locking the tailcap out, it would be as close to perfect as you could get. I used to think they were ugly as well until I got my SC51 and carried it for awhile. Now I've grown quite fond of it! It grows on you after awhile. I don't even notice the looks any more...now it's about the features. I love the ability to go to virtually any brightness I want quickly. If they would just recess the button or make it harder to turn on in a pocket without locking the tailcap out, it would be as close to perfect as you could get.
Click to expand...




> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 01-15-2011 04:47 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> g.p. said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Your opinion might change once you have it in your hand*. I used to think it was ugly too.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russ Prechtl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I used to think they were ugly as well until I got my SC51 and carried it for awhile. * Now I've grown quite fond of it! It grows on you after awhile. * I don't even notice the looks any more...now it's about the features. I love the ability to go to virtually any brightness I want quickly. If they would just recess the button or make it harder to turn on in a pocket without locking the tailcap out, it would be as close to perfect as you could get.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quite possible. Many people--including myself--have a tendency to comment more positively about or favor an item one owns. Sometimes I think it's a form of self convincing one does to believe/think that a thing is better than it really is because one now owns it or have paid x amount of money for it. So I wanted to publicly put it out there that I now think it's quite ugly. Quite possible. Many people--including myself--have a tendency to comment more positively about or favor an item one owns. Sometimes I think it's a form of self convincing one does to believe/think that a thing is better than it really is because one now owns it or have paid x amount of money for it. So I wanted to publicly put it out there that I now think it's quite ugly.  It's quite possible that after a while of carrying it around, I'll change my mind and start '_thinking_' the appearance of the SC51 is not bad.  But then, you guys can point/cite to this post and keep me honest. :naughty:
> 
> I'm sure the SC51 will impress me with its abilities/features. I'm ok with changing my mind to liking its appearances as time goes on.
> 
> BTW, GoingGear shipped it out today. LOL. I didn't realize they shipped on Saturday. Perhaps I'll be able to get it on Monday. LOL.
Click to expand...




> Written by *Anto* on 01-17-2011 03:57 AM GMT
> 
> WOW. I recently began looking for a work/SHTF 1xaa light, decided on a D10 with an emitter swap. Then I saw the D10 Tribute, and wanted that. Now, I stumble across the SC51 and most definitely want this one over the other two. Way more efficient, and smaller OAL as well.
> 
> What are the chances ZL is going to be offering this with a rear switch? I like the ergonomics of holding a rear clicky light vs. a side clicky one. Maybe they can streamline the head to be good looking too





> Written by *g.p.* on 01-17-2011 08:27 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> Anto said:
> 
> 
> 
> What are the chances ZL is going to be offering this with a rear switch?
> 
> 
> 
> Slim to none is my guess. I don't think they've ever offered a light with a rear switch. Slim to none is my guess. I don't think they've ever offered a light with a rear switch.
> 
> The side switch is much more versatile IMO. You can change modes with one hand while holding it underhand, or verhand with a pencil type of grip. A tail clicky is very limiting in my experience as I can only change modes while holding it overhand, which is tiring and awkward for lor long periods of time. Plus my thumb gets sore at the weird angles that it has to bend to change the modes on smaller rear clicky lights, especially if they have recessed switches for tail standing.
> 
> Give it a try, you'll probably find that it's more natural and end up liking it. If not I'm sure you wouldn't have any problem getting rid of it in the marketplace.
Click to expand...

 


> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 01-17-2011 04:35 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> g.p. said:
> 
> 
> 
> Slim to none is my guess. I don't think they've ever offered a light with a rear switch.
> 
> *The side switch is much more versatile IMO. You can change modes with one hand while holding it underhand, or verhand with a pencil type of grip. A tail clicky is very limiting in my experience as I can only change modes while holding it overhand,* which is tiring and awkward for lor long periods of time. Plus my thumb gets sore at the weird angles that it has to bend to change the modes on smaller rear clicky lights, especially if they have recessed switches for tail standing.
> 
> Give it a try, you'll probably find that it's more natural and end up liking it. If not I'm sure you wouldn't have any problem getting rid of it in the marketplace.
> 
> 
> 
> I would have to agree. I like side switches much better than tail switches. I doubt ZL will make tail switches. They know side switches work for them and they're going to stick with side switches. I would have to agree. I like side switches much better than tail switches. I doubt ZL will make tail switches. They know side switches work for them and they're going to stick with side switches.
Click to expand...




> Written by *Lite_me* on 01-17-2011 06:14 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> Anto said:
> 
> 
> 
> What are the chances ZL is going to be offering this with a rear switch?
> 
> 
> 
> A tailswitch also adds length. That's another reason why it's smaller. If it had a tailswitch, it'd be like most other lights. I like different. Especially when it's in a good way. A tailswitch also adds length. That's another reason why it's smaller. If it had a tailswitch, it'd be like most other lights. I like different. Especially when it's in a good way.
Click to expand...




> Written by *Anto* on 01-19-2011 03:17 AM GMT
> 
> You guys bring up some good points. I just picked up an SC51 off the MP. Can't wait!





> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 01-19-2011 03:25 AM GMT
> 
> Just received mine from GoingGear today. Interesting light. It does grow on you.
> 
> I do like how tiny it is and it is NOT as ugly in person as it is photos.
> 
> However, my SC51's LED is *WAY *off center. Of all my 4 quality LED flashlights, the SC51's LED is by far the *most *off center. Should I return it and have it replaced? Does anyone else have this problem? Anyone have a very centered LED?





> Written by *qtaco* on 01-19-2011 05:39 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> LetThereBeLite said:
> 
> 
> 
> However, my SC51's LED is *WAY *off center. Of all my 4 quality LED flashlights, the SC51's LED is by far the *most *off center. Should I return it and have it replaced? Does anyone else have this problem? Anyone have a very centered LED?
> 
> 
> 
> Does it affect the beam? If not I'd let it slide. Does it affect the beam? If not I'd let it slide.
Click to expand...




> Written by *pae77* on 01-19-2011 08:02 AM GMT
> 
> My SC50w+'s LED is perfectly centered, imo. I'd send a photo of it that shows how off center it is to ZL and see what they have to say about it.





> Written by *Flying Turtle* on 01-19-2011 02:34 PM GMT
> 
> The LED in my SC50w+ is also nicely centered. I've not heard of this being a problem with Zebralights. Sorry you got a bum one.
> 
> Geoff





> Written by *RedForest UK* on 01-19-2011 02:53 PM GMT
> 
> Just be glad it isn't like mine, which is off centre and it also seems they touched it with the soldering iron at some point as it has that thin translucent layer on the dome. There's a small scratch on the reflector as well.. I bought directly from zebralight however and as it doesn't seem to affect the performance of the light I don't want to pay $10 to send it back for replacement.
> 
> All in all it's still a nice light so I'll keep it until/if it breaks then send it back. If it doesn't ever break then it makes up for the cosmetic issues in durability I guess.





> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 01-19-2011 04:07 PM GMT
> 
> Here is a close-up of my SC51:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You guys tell me, is that off center enough for a replacement? I tend to think so, especially for a brand new item.
> 
> 
> 
> pae77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My SC50w+'s LED is perfectly centered, imo. I'd send a photo of it that shows how off center it is to ZL and see what they have to say about it.
> 
> 
> 
> I may do that, but first I'd like to here what other users/owners of the SC51 think. I may do that, but first I'd like to here what other users/owners of the SC51 think.
> 
> 
> 
> qtaco said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does it affect the beam? If not I'd let it slide.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm uncertain how a perfectly centered beam looks like for a SC51. Because it's such a floody light with OP reflector, everything is smoothed out pretty well. Still, the center hot spot is not perfectly round on my light. I'm uncertain how a perfectly centered beam looks like for a SC51. Because it's such a floody light with OP reflector, everything is smoothed out pretty well. Still, the center hot spot is not perfectly round on my light.
> 
> 
> 
> Flying Turtle said:
> 
> 
> 
> The LED in my SC50w+ is also nicely centered. I've not heard of this being a problem with Zebralights. Sorry you got a bum one.
> 
> Geoff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What do you think of my photo above? Is yours like mine? What do you think of my photo above? Is yours like mine?
> 
> 
> 
> RedForest UK said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just be glad it isn't like mine, which is off centre and it also seems they touched it with the soldering iron at some point as it has that thin translucent layer on the dome. *There's a small scratch *on the reflector as well.. I bought directly from zebralight however and as it doesn't seem to affect the performance of the light I don't want to pay $10 to send it back for replacement.
> 
> All in all it's still a nice light so I'll keep it until/if it breaks then send it back. If it doesn't ever break then it makes up for the cosmetic issues in durability I guess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are a few nicks and scratches on the externals of my unit, but it doesn't bother me enough to want to return it for a replacement. I know I'm going to scratch it up in time anyway but the off center LED bothers me. It may be enough for me to ask for a replacement. There are a few nicks and scratches on the externals of my unit, but it doesn't bother me enough to want to return it for a replacement. I know I'm going to scratch it up in time anyway but the off center LED bothers me. It may be enough for me to ask for a replacement.
Click to expand...




> Written by *pae77* on 01-19-2011 04:23 PM GMT
> 
> Too me it doesn't look like it would have that much effect on the beam, but it certainly couldn't hurt to ask for a replacement if it bothers you. It definitely looks off center to me. Be interesting to hear what ZL says about it.





> Written by *RBWNY* on 01-19-2011 08:07 PM GMT
> 
> I got mine directly from Zebralight as well, which certainly appears as well centered as any I've ever seen. If the hotspot (on yours) is noticeably off center when white wall hunting at close range, then you know (as I would) that it's going to be something that sticks in the back of your mind ALL the time. Although in practical situations when lighting a large area you probably won't notice it.
> 
> All in all... you would think they'd have better quality control to check for such imperfections before they go out to paying customers :shakehead.
> 
> P.S....................
> 
> I TOO considered it kinda funny lookin'... but its functionality and features have caused me to overlook that from the first day I had it :thumbsup:





> Written by *g.p.* on 01-20-2011 09:18 AM GMT
> 
> Mine is off center too, but it's not quit as bad as the one in the picture. My beam looks perfect though, so I never worried about it. Actually, it's the nicest beam out of all of my lights IMO.





> Written by *Lite_me* on 01-20-2011 04:26 PM GMT
> 
> I am not sure which ver of the SC51 some of you are referring to. I think RedForest is referring to the SC51*w* per the post in the LED forum. Guess it doesn't really matter tho.
> 
> I ordered 2 of the SC51w's, about a week apart. The first one came with the LED off-centered. It doesn't effect the beam enough to be a problem. In fact, I tend to like it better for my use compared to the other one, which *is* perfectly centered... for two reasons. The tint is a little better, and the hotspot is a little larger and less defined. It probably doesn't have as much throw but illuminates a larger area in its spot at usable distances. I tend to prefer that.
> 
> The second light that came, that has the LED properly centered, is a little warmer in tint, with a very defined hotspot circle. But, it has the clouding over ~half the LED dome like RedForest alluded to.
> 
> I not sure at all whether or not this clouding effects the output or how much. I welcome comments on this from those with more experience.
> 
> I am otherwise happy with the lights as they seem to perform well despite the noted defects. I'll take some pics to substantiate my findings.
> 
> Comments welcome.
> 
> Here is the off-centered one. The dark spot on the reflector is just a reflection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is the centered one. Note the clouding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a closer view so as to better see the LED clouding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And for comparison, the other one that has no clouding, but is off-center.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, the clouding looks worse by the naked eye through a magnifying glass though. That may be understandable though too.
> 
> So, are we being nit-picky, or should we expect better for our money? Like I said, otherwise fit & finish is good and the light performs well. I do like them!





> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 01-20-2011 08:29 PM GMT
> 
> Hi Lite_me. That's very interesting. Your photo of your off-center SC51w seems even a little worse than my off-center SC51. SZ needs better quality control. I actually want more focus and throw so the extra diffusion is a concern for me but if it's at the cost of a cloudy LED, I wouldn't like that too much either. I'd almost suggest you return both as they both seem to have defects from manufacturing. But that is of course up to you. I'm still debating whether I should return mine or not.
> 
> 
> 
> Lite_me said:
> 
> 
> 
> I ordered 2 of the SC51w's, about a week apart. The first one came with the LED off-centered. It doesn't effect the beam enough to be a problem. In fact, I tend to like it better for my use compared to the other one, which *is* perfectly centered... for two reasons. The tint is a little better, and the hotspot is a little larger and less defined. It probably doesn't have as much throw but illuminates a larger area in its spot at usable distances. I tend to prefer that.
> 
> The second light that came, that has the LED properly centered, is a little warmer in tint, with a very defined hotspot circle. But, it has the clouding over ~half the LED dome like RedForest alluded to.
> 
> I not sure at all whether or not this clouding effects the output or how much. I welcome comments on this from those with more experience.
> 
> I am otherwise happy with the lights as they seem to perform well despite the noted defects. I'll take some pics to substantiate my findings.
> 
> Comments welcome.
> 
> And for comparison, the other one that has no clouding, but is off-center.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, are we being nit-picky, or should we expect better for our money? Like I said, otherwise fit & finish is good and the light performs well. I do like them!
Click to expand...


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

_Written by *selfbuilt* on 01-21-2011 07:15 AM GMT_

Thanks for the pics everyone. It seems clear that the centering on these lights is variable. However, as the SC51/50 series is not focused for throw, I imagine that it is not disturbing the overall beam pattern too much. Of course, that's a call only you can make - if it bothers you, by all means contact your dealer/ZL for a RMA.

Personally though, I would be more concerned about any "clouded" emitters. That's an emitter QC problem that could potentially lead to shortened emitter lifespan and reduced output. Just personal preference again, but I wouldn't want to trust any partially damaged emitter for long-term use.




> Written by *mikeyx* on 01-21-2011 09:10 AM GMT
> 
> I just ordered a flood version and I wonder how easy it will be to determine if the emitter is cloudy.
> 
> Mike





> Written by *macnoodle* on 01-23-2011 08:20 PM GMT
> 
> I don't know how you would check the emitter with the flood version, but it looks like their recent QC is not so good. Some people here already complained about decentered LEDs and sometimes cloudy LEDs, as if the emitter was partly melted during construction, or exposed to some glue or solvent. My SC51W arrived today, and this is what I found
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have to day that I'm very disappointed! I love the light and the UI, but for the sort of money they ask, I expect better! This one will be going back for a refund. Not yet sure if I want to order another one. Currently it looks like Zebralight QC is non-existent, or very close to it. :shakehead





> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 01-23-2011 11:24 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> macnoodle said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow! You have a great camera that can take very up close macro photos. My photo really pails in comparison. Wow! You have a great camera that can take very up close macro photos. My photo really pails in comparison.
Click to expand...




> Written by *spoonrobot* on 01-24-2011 01:44 AM GMT
> 
> My SC51w also has a off-center emitter as well as two small black spots on the emitter dome.





> Written by *Tierdaen* on 01-24-2011 07:44 AM GMT
> 
> I haven't even gotten mine yet. Now I'm reading about these issues and will be stuck wondering if I'll even have something worth waiting for.





> Written by *FroggyTaco* on 01-24-2011 09:03 AM GMT
> 
> I had a SC50 that had some cloudiness in the emitter dome. I sent a pic with questions about it to ZL & they promptly replaced the light. Life happens & this is what warranties are for.
> 
> My understanding when you enter contract with a manufacturer in China often times they will try to lower the quality & see if they get away with so the factory makes more money. It takes some effort to keep these factories honest with regard to making stuff to the quality you ordered.
> 
> Does anyone here honestly think ZL would intentionally damage their reputation by selling less than ideal products so they can increase profit margins 1-2%? And then lose most of that so called profit savings on freight costs for replacement lights & processing the returned lights. They likely can't resell the cloudy lights since they don't want them in the marketplace.
> 
> My personal perspective is the ZL lights would cost at least 50% more if they were American made in a American factory. Saving that much money is a worthwhile trade off for the potential to have to deal with a return now & then.
> 
> Travis





> Written by *davidt1* on 01-24-2011 09:20 AM GMT
> 
> What they should do is have the lights sent to their TX office first and do a quick inspection before sending the lights out to customers.





> Written by *g.p.* on 01-24-2011 09:47 AM GMT
> 
> I'm sure a check and balance could be put into place without adding the time and cost of sending it to the U.S. just to have someone look at it. Not only would that add time and shipping costs, but it would add duty fees for those of us that aren't in the U.S..





> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 01-26-2011 06:03 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> g.p. said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure a check and balance could be put into place without adding the time and cost of sending it to the U.S. just to have someone look at it. Not only would that add time and shipping costs, but it would add duty fees for those of us that aren't in the U.S..
> 
> 
> 
> I've been told by ZL that they now check the lights before it leaves the manufacturers and that they also check the lights here before they leave ZL in TX. I've been told by ZL that they now check the lights before it leaves the manufacturers and that they also check the lights here before they leave ZL in TX.
> 
> Here is the email I received from ZL:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi LTBL,
> 
> Yes, we check it [LED] before we ship our lights now.
> 
> The issue has been addressed in the manufacture as well.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Lillian Xu
> 
> ZebraLight
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm sending my SC51 back to ZL for a replacement. I hope I get back a new SC51, not a refurbished one. I was told only to send back the light and nothing else. So that's what I'm sending back. Postage came out to $1.75 for 3 oz. I was specifically directed to send it back USPS First Class mail, NOT FedEx or UPS. Very interesting directions. I'm sure it was suggested to save the customer some money on return shipping, but if the light is lost during transit, the shipper is out the money, not the receiver. I'm sending my SC51 back to ZL for a replacement. I hope I get back a new SC51, not a refurbished one. I was told only to send back the light and nothing else. So that's what I'm sending back. Postage came out to $1.75 for 3 oz. I was specifically directed to send it back USPS First Class mail, NOT FedEx or UPS. Very interesting directions. I'm sure it was suggested to save the customer some money on return shipping, but if the light is lost during transit, the shipper is out the money, not the receiver.
Click to expand...




> Written by *XtremeLaplander* on 01-29-2011 09:44 AM GMT
> 
> Hi Folks!
> 
> I have been reading the CPF for about 2 years and have also become a flashaholic during this time. Now I couldn´t resist anymore of joining to the community and decided it´s time for me to register to the CPF  There maybe some mistakes in my language, because I´m not native English speaking (I´m from Finland) but try to keep up with me
> 
> About the ZL SC-51, I have 3 of those and there definitely seems to be some lack in QC, because one of them has really badly off-center led (haven´t ever seen so bad), second one has perfectly centered led and the third has some cloudiness in the emitter.. Though the off-center led doesn´t seem to affect the beam so much, it´s just not so well defined and a tiny bit more floody, but I think it´s good because the beam looks kind of "softer" But seriously thinking my opinion is that if a light is at this price range we should expect perfect quality.





> Written by *pae77* on 01-29-2011 11:14 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> XtremeLaplander said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Folks!
> 
> I have been reading the CPF for about 2 years and have also become a flashaholic during this time. Now I couldn´t resist anymore of joining to the community and decided it´s time for me to register to the CPF  There maybe some mistakes in my language, because I´m not native English speaking (I´m from Finland) but try to keep up with me
> 
> About the ZL SC-51, I have 3 of those and there definitely seems to be some lack in QC, because one of them has really badly off-center led (haven´t ever seen so bad), second one has perfectly centered led and the third has some cloudiness in the emitter.. Though the off-center led doesn´t seem to affect the beam so much, it´s just not so well defined and a tiny bit more floody, but I think it´s good because the beam looks kind of "softer" But seriously thinking my opinion is that if a light is at this price range we should expect perfect quality.
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome to CPF (as a poster) and your English is great. Welcome to CPF (as a poster) and your English is great.
> 
> I agree with you about the quality we should expect from ZL. It sounds like they have addressed it but there probably are still a lot of lights with defects in the pipeline. I'm sure ZL would exchange any lights with defects, however, the customer usually has to pay to ship the light back to ZL or the vendor. I suppose that might be expensive from Finland.
Click to expand...




> Written by *dandism* on 02-04-2011 03:19 PM GMT
> 
> Can these lights be taken apart for LED swaps? I think an XM-L would make it brighter and floodier.





> Written by *pae77* on 02-04-2011 03:25 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> dandism said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can these lights be taken apart for LED swaps? I think an XM-L would make it brighter and floodier.
> 
> 
> 
> Not really, although I think someone has done it. But it's not easy or practical to take them apart. Not really, although I think someone has done it. But it's not easy or practical to take them apart.
Click to expand...




> Written by *Rej* on 02-07-2011 07:13 PM GMT
> 
> Thank you everyone for all this added info, and of course a great review Selfbuilt!
> 
> Once again, shamefully I must admit, I've succumb to this evil disease :devil:
> 
> I went an ordered the SC51 after reading only the review!
> 
> My heart sunk, when I got to page 8, and I see all these off center & cloudy LED's
> 
> So as a preemptive strike, I created a case file yesterday 'after placing my order' and sent Zebralight an email voicing my concern and what fellow CPF'rs have been seeing lately with their Q.C., and sent a link to these pictures (I hope you don't mind; Lite_Me, Macnoodle & LetTherebelite).
> 
> I'll say their customer service is excellent; I received this email today in response;
> 
> ---------
> 
> Ticket status: Completed
> 
> Department: Customer Serivce
> 
> Subject: Quality Control for SC51 LED; Order #103xxxxx
> 
> We'll check again before shipping out your light.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Lillian Xu
> 
> ZebraLight, Inc.
> 
> 8320 Sterling Street
> 
> Irving, TX 75063
> 
> --------------------
> 
> Not saying much, but they did get back to me
> 
> See what happens...order status was updated....shipping from China. which I figured since the price included free shipping.





> Written by *LetThereBeLite* on 02-11-2011 08:26 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> LetThereBeLite said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been told by ZL that they now check the lights before it leaves the manufacturers and that they also check the lights here before they leave ZL in TX.
> 
> Here is the email I received from ZL:
> 
> I'm sending my SC51 back to ZL for a replacement. I hope I get back a new SC51, not a refurbished one. I was told only to send back the light and nothing else. So that's what I'm sending back. Postage came out to $1.75 for 3 oz. I was specifically directed to send it back USPS First Class mail, NOT FedEx or UPS. Very interesting directions. I'm sure it was suggested to save the customer some money on return shipping, but if the light is lost during transit, the shipper is out the money, not the receiver.
> 
> 
> 
> Just wanted to update you guys that ZL did replace my SC51. Just received my replacement today. I don't think it's perfectly centered, but it's acceptable (like 95-97% centered). I'm satisfied with ZL's customer service. Will purchase ZL lights in the future. I'm now waiting for this SC600. Just wanted to update you guys that ZL did replace my SC51. Just received my replacement today. I don't think it's perfectly centered, but it's acceptable (like 95-97% centered). I'm satisfied with ZL's customer service. Will purchase ZL lights in the future. I'm now waiting for this SC600.
Click to expand...

 


> Written by *Lite_me* on 02-12-2011 01:13 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> LetThereBeLite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just wanted to update you guys that ZL did replace my SC51. Just received my replacement today. I don't think it's perfectly centered, but it's acceptable (like 95-97% centered). I'm satisfied with ZL's customer service. Will purchase ZL lights in the future. I'm now waiting for this SC600.
> 
> 
> 
> Along the same line, I just ordered an H51w and ask that they check the emitter for centering and clouding. It arrived from Texas and the LED is very close to centered. Way close enough. There isn't anything I would call clouding, but there is what I would call a small smudge mark on one side of the dome. It most likely has little-to-nothing to do with output. I'm happy with the lite as the tint is wonderful. Very neutral looking with Along the same line, I just ordered an H51w and ask that they check the emitter for centering and clouding. It arrived from Texas and the LED is very close to centered. Way close enough. There isn't anything I would call clouding, but there is what I would call a small smudge mark on one side of the dome. It most likely has little-to-nothing to do with output. I'm happy with the lite as the tint is wonderful. Very neutral looking with _maybe_ a hint of peach. I'd go on about how more versatile I think this model lite is, but it's the wrong thread.
Click to expand...




> Written by *tygger* on 02-12-2011 07:27 PM GMT
> 
> Good to know they're checking the lights before shipping. Ordered a SC51w last week. I really think I'm gonna like this light.





> Written by *tygger* on 02-17-2011 03:11 AM GMT
> 
> Update. SC51w received. Perfectly centered and clean emitter. Very pleased, and I'm getting addicted to the side switch. Thanks for the great review Selfbuilt.





> Written by *Lobo* on 02-17-2011 09:08 PM GMT
> 
> Two H51 received(basically the same light). The regular one is centered, the neutral white I wouldn't call centered, but since it doesn't affect the beam, I don't really care. No clouding.
> 
> Shame to hear that they had problems with their QC and hope they get it straight. As a manufacturer Zebralight offers a lamp nobody else have.





> Written by *Federal LG* on 02-20-2011 07:33 PM GMT
> 
> I don´t know if here is the correct place but...*Can someone indicate me a trustable Zebralight dealer?*
> 
> Their factory website is offline.
> 
> I intend to buy one or two ZL. I live in South America, so it has to be a dealer which works with international shipping...
> 
> Thanks!





> Written by *pae77* on 02-20-2011 08:00 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> Federal LG said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don´t know if here is the correct place but... *Can someone indicate me a trustable Zebralight dealer?*
> 
> Their factory website is offline.
> 
> I intend to buy one or two ZL. I live in South America, so it has to be a dealer which works with international shipping...
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know about international shipping but I've been pleased with the service and prices for ZL at Illuminationgear.com. There is also a CPF forum member discount for use with that vendor on the I don't know about international shipping but I've been pleased with the service and prices for ZL at Illuminationgear.com. There is also a CPF forum member discount for use with that vendor on the CPF specials page.
Click to expand...




> Written by *tygger* on 02-20-2011 08:46 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> Federal LG said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don´t know if here is the correct place but... *Can someone indicate me a trustable Zebralight dealer?*
> 
> Their factory website is offline.
> 
> I intend to buy one or two ZL. I live in South America, so it has to be a dealer which works with international shipping...
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> ZL website is working now. Free international shipping. ZL website is working now. Free international shipping.
Click to expand...




> Written by *Federal LG* on 02-21-2011 05:35 AM GMT
> 
> Unfortunately it´s not.
> 
> Since February 18 it´s offline.





> Written by *macnoodle* on 02-21-2011 06:32 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> Federal LG said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately it´s not.
> 
> Since February 18 it´s offline.
> 
> 
> 
> It's working for me... It's working for me...
Click to expand...




> Written by *treek13* on 02-21-2011 06:46 AM GMT
> 
> Works fine for me, too.





> Written by *Hickorystick* on 02-21-2011 02:55 PM GMT
> 
> I received my H31 from GoingGear on Friday and the LED was perfectly centered and clear. So, I went ahead and ordered an SC51 from them today. I did include a note with my order requesting them to inspect the LED before shipping.
> 
> I don't know about international shipments, but I can say they (GoingGear) are very fast here in the US. I ordered my H31 on 2/16 and received it on 2/19. After placing my order for the H51 today, I received a shipping notice in less than 1 hour. This was all with their free shipping.





> Written by *Federal LG* on 02-21-2011 04:54 PM GMT
> 
> Damn... maybe it´s my browser? Sorry for the off topic...
> 
> I´ll try GoingGear. Thanks for the tip!





> Written by *Tierdaen* on 02-21-2011 11:16 PM GMT
> 
> Site still works for me too.
> 
> As an extra note, people who live in Chinese-speaking countries like Taiwan might benefit by including their Chinese address in their order. I ordered with my English (international) address and the shipment never came, but it came quite promptly once I sent it to them in Chinese. I suppose most CPF members won't benefit from this advice, but perhaps someone will.





> Written by *Filip* on Yesterday 02:20 AM GMT
> 
> Hello, does SC51W suffer from pre-flash?
> 
> Thank you





> Written by *macnoodle* on Yesterday 04:40 AM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> Filip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hello, does SC51W suffer from pre-flash?
> 
> Thank you
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. Nope.
Click to expand...




> Written by *Ralls* on Yesterday 10:42 AM GMT
> 
> I just ordered a SC51w from Zebralight and I'm really looking forward to trying this light out. I was holding out for one of the new HDS EDC Tacticals, but they're taking too long to be released and I saved a hundred bucks by going with the ZL. The fact that the ZL uses a common AA is very appealing, as well, as I think that I'm going to try to make AA and AAA the only cells that I use from now on.
> 
> I've been using a neutral Quark Tactical 123 and I'm not crazy about the UI, or the pre-flash. It did introduce me to neutral tints, though, which I'm now a big fan of.
> 
> I'll report back here with my impressions of the light when I receive it.
> 
> Thanks for the excellent review selfbuilt!





> Written by *Tierdaen* on Yesterday 12:14 PM GMT
> 
> 
> 
> Filip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hello, does SC51W suffer from pre-flash?
> 
> Thank you
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have experience with lights that have "pre-flash", so I'm not entirely sure what it is. The SC51w doesn't have a bright blink before any low mode though, if that's what you're curious about. I don't have experience with lights that have "pre-flash", so I'm not entirely sure what it is. The SC51w doesn't have a bright blink before any low mode though, if that's what you're curious about.
> 
> When you push the button, you can see that it automatically goes into the low mode, but if you release the button in less than half a second or so (like a standard click), it jumps into high mode. If you instead hold the button for longer than that half second (instructions say 0.6s), the light will _remain_ in low mode.
> 
> So when you want to use high mode from off, you'll probably see it "step up" the brightness from low to high very quickly. I don't think I'd call it a flash, but it is something you'll probably notice. I find it pretty inoffensive.
Click to expand...




> Written by *Rej* on Unknown
> 
> This is killing me....ordered my SC51 and zebralight shipped from China direct to me in Canada.
> 
> Tracking number has been in 'limbo' since Feb 13th->destination Greece...ahhh :sick2:





> Written by *pae77* on Unknown
> 
> Maybe nothing is wrong. Could be a data entry error, I suppose.
> 
> On the other hand, this kind of thing is why I prefer to order my ZL's from one of the dealers who give free shipping and discounts to forum members. Usually turns out to be cheaper than direct from ZL and the customer service is usually better too. But I don't know if that applies to orders with destinations outside of the U.S. Probably not. Maybe you should contact ZL about the shipping problem. . . Perhaps they would reship if you don't receive the light w/i a certain time frame.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

The main review post has been updated with the final review text.

The thread discussions for the last few months have been *fully restored* from the search engine cache data (thank you tandem!).

A few new posts were added to the thread before I could take care of the reconstruction - they are in post # 135-139. Below is my initial response to them.

Please carry on! 




mellowman said:


> Selfbuilt, If I read the graphs in post #1 right. This light only hits 200 lumens on 14500 bats. On eneloops its 160 lumens on H1 (80% of 200 lumens, assuming 100% relative output is 200 lumens). Is this correct?


This review pre-dates my ANSI testing, so I don't have all the numbers off-hand. I'll take a look when I am done doing all the thread updates.

Be advised that I have nearly 4 pages of threads to recover for this review, which I will hopefully get to tomorrow. I've left placeholders above, so any further posts won't get trapped before the recovery.


----------



## Glow_Worm

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



mellowman said:


> So you're saying there is something funny with the High mode 14500 graph?
> 
> Seems there is something funny about calling the SC51 a 200 lumen flashlight on eneloops too.



I noticed the same thing when selfbuilt first published his review, and I tested my SC51 when I got it back in Nov last year. Based on a bounce test and compared to a 100 Lumen HDS Hi-CRI clicky, I estimated about 160-165 Lmns on Eneloops.

However, when I tried a NiZn I got right around 200 Lmns, and it held above 90% for 33 mins, then to 75% at 39 mins, and then dropped rapidly after that. I got 43 mins to 75% on an Eneloop. Once you hit 75%, it drops like a rock on either chemistry.

So, total run-time is just slightly shorter on Nizn, but roughly comparable to Eneloops. I've repeated the test several times since with the same results. I don't get the full 200 Lms w/ Eneloops, but definitely do w/ the higher voltage NiZn's. I haven't the courage to risk trying a 14500, as selfbuilt did before he knew they were not recommended, but there's not much point IMO if you get the full brightness w/ a NiZn.

Perhaps Zebralight got their max lumen rating w/ a 1.7v Lithium primary, but then used an Eneloop for the run-time rating? Pure speculation on my part on that, but I sure can't get 200 lms from any of my Eneloops.

Still a fabulous light in any event, good enough that I don't mind using NiZn's in it at all (some folks have found NiZn's very cheap at Big Lots I hear). Yeah, it's another battery type & charger to deal with, but that's no big deal to me, and it's still plenty bright even on Eneloops. 

I do agree that it's perhaps a bit deceptive when they strongly imply you get 200 lumens on eneloops, but perhaps they have some extra-powerful ones that we mere mortals don't have access to. 

Just my $0.02...


----------



## Rej

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Thank you for getting this review back up Selfbuilt....now waiting patiently for my SC51 arrival which shipped Feb 13th, arrived in Vancouver, Canada March 2nd....still not here :hairpull:

Thanks Glow worm for those detailed runtimes and brightness info, I've got some 14500's coming too...but after all these warnings I don't want to be the 1st to fry my new baby, whenever it arrives


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

The thread discussions for the last few months have been *fully restored* from the search engine cache data (thank you tandem!).

Basically, all the original posts from pages 5-9 of this thread have been captured and reposted in 5 posts above (#140-144). :sweat: You can now carry on with everything in place.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



mellowman said:


> Selfbuilt, If I read the graphs in post #1 right. This light only hits 200 lumens on 14500 bats. On eneloops its 160 lumens on H1 (80% of 200 lumens, assuming 100% relative output is 200 lumens). Is this correct?


I've double-checked my data for the ZL, and get the following ANSI FL-1 ratings (i.e. estimated lumens at 3+ mins into the run)

SC51 on Hi1 on 14500: 245 estimated lumens
SC51 on Hi1 on eneloop: 200 estimated lumens
SC51 on Hi1 on L91: 175 estimated lumens

Over the course of the run, the SC51 on 14500 stays pretty close to ~245 estimated lumens for awhile. The eneloop runs seems to level off at something closer to ~180 estimated lumens. The L91 run actually increase slightly and levels off at about the same ~180 lumen estimate.

The put those numbers in perspective, here are the FL-1 ratings for the SC50w:

SC50w on Hi1 on 14500: 140 estimated lumens
SC50w on Hi1 on eneloop: 85 estimated lumens.


----------



## Glow_Worm

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Thanks much for the addition of those lumen numbers selfbuilt, now we know what your 100% value actually represents. I know your ratings are much more accurate than my bounce test guesstimates.


----------



## mellowman

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



selfbuilt said:


> The put those numbers in perspective, here are the FL-1 ratings for the SC50w:
> 
> SC50w on Hi1 on 14500: 140 estimated lumens
> SC50w on Hi1 on eneloop: 85 estimated lumens.



FWIW, my H51w seem to be about 140 lumens @ Hi1 on eneloops. So that would seem like an improvement, which it is, however my fenix mc10 and jetbeam BK135a also seem to be about 140 lumens @ Hi on eneloops though those are cool white tint leds.

I have my highs setup to be H1 and H3 (lowest high), and with H3 ~ 85 lumens it is hard to appreciated there is around 2x as many lumens when I double click between them (runtimes also corroborate this). Weber–Fechner law in action. :mecry:


----------



## Deal4

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Well, a few months ago I thought Zebralight made the ugliest light in the world and would never own one!
Well, now, after reading all these posts and all the (mostly) rave reviews, I've broken down and bought one!
All I can do now, is keep reading reviews and wait for it to come. I just love how small it is!:thumbsup:
This light won't be leaving my pocket for a long time!
Thanks everyone for helping me "see the light"!


----------



## Kyle K

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I have a SC51 and I agree, it's a great light! Amazingly bright on eneloops and I like the UI. Does anyone know if the rubber switch cover can be replaced? It may never be an issue since the switch has very little movement and requires very little pressure, but it would be nice if it could be changed by the user. I emailed ZL but got no response.


----------



## dankyball

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Hello guys,
For newbies, is there an article to fully illustrate different brand's advantages and dis? I am about to start collections, but dont know how to start off.
Thanks.
Danky


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



dankyball said:


> Hello guys,
> For newbies, is there an article to fully illustrate different brand's advantages and dis? I am about to start collections, but dont know how to start off.
> Thanks.
> Danky


It is difficult to maintain an updated comparison, since models change rapidly. My last 1xAA round-up review predates the SC50/51 lights, but can be found here:

1xAA Round-up Review - Part IV - RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, & more!

I am afraid I don't have time to keep these round-up reviews up to date. I suggest you check out the master review list in my signature for other lights that may interest you.


----------



## FroggyTaco

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Kyle K said:


> I have a SC51 and I agree, it's a great light! Amazingly bright on eneloops and I like the UI. Does anyone know if the rubber switch cover can be replaced? It may never be an issue since the switch has very little movement and requires very little pressure, but it would be nice if it could be changed by the user. I emailed ZL but got no response.



It appears to me that switch & rubber cover are all integrated into the light engine & are not user serviceable. The chrome ring is pressed into the light & holds that all in place.


----------



## Kyle K

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

That's what I thought. It wouldn't stop me from buying more of them, though. I love these lights!


----------



## Flucero28

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Just wanted to share something interesting that I have discovered with my zebralights. I currently have three different models; H31, SC30, SC51w. I found the following information for my SC51w on zebralights website, and have changed the font color of the important information to red:

Light Output 

*High: H1 172 Lm (0.9 hrs) or H2 86 Lm (2.4 hrs) / 120 Lm (1.7 hrs) / 4Hz Strobe*
Medium: M1 *26* Lm (12 hrs) or M2 7Lm (39 hrs)
Low: L1 *2.2 *Lm (3 days) or L2 *0.18* Lm (16 days)
 Light output are out the front (OTF) values. Runtime tests are done using Sanyo 2000mAh Eneloop AA batteries.
 172, 120, 26, 7 and 2.2 Lumen output are current regulated. 86 and 0.18 Lumen output are PWM generated.

This light has 3 main levels (High, Medium, and Low). Each main level can be configured to one of its two sub-levels. *The second sub-level of the High can be further configured to different brightness levels or strobes*.
 

 Basic Operation
 Short click turns on the light to High or turns off the light.
 Long click (press and hold for about 0.6 seconds) turns on the light to Low.
 
Advanced Operation and Configuration
 Short click turns on the light to High. Short click again quickly to cycle from High to Medium, and Low.
Press and hold to cycle from Low to High, release to set. When press and hold, the light always cycle from Low to High regardless which level you are currently in.
 Double click to toggle and select between the two sub-levels for that main level. Sub-level selections (except the strobe) for the 3 main levels are memorized after the light is turned off and through battery changes.
 *The second sub-level of the High can be configured after 6 double clicks. Double click (startng with the 7th) to cycle and select different brightness levels or strobes. Short click to turn off the light when finishing configurations. The selections for the second sub-level of the High are memorized after the light is turned off and through battery changes.*
 
This suggests for the SC51w that you can obviously choose from different settings for the H2 mode, which even includes a slow strobe. I have tried this on all of my zebralights and have confirmed that they all have these hidden settings to choose from, even though it is not indicated on the product descriptions! Just wanted to pass on my discovery for those who may not have already tried this, and I wonder if all zebralights have these hidden modes? :wave:


----------



## Colonel Sanders

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Hmmm....I can't get that to work on my SC30w. I'll try it on the SC60 and H31 next.


----------



## Flucero28

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Just in case there is confusion, switch the light on into the highest mode. Then just double click switching between high 1 and high 2. On the seventh double click you should see the light begin to cycle through the different options each time you double click. Once you pick the desired High 2 mode simply turn off the light and it will be saved as the default high 2 mode.


----------



## Lite_me

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Flucero28 said:


> Just in case there is confusion, switch the light on into the highest mode. Then just double click switching between high 1 and high 2. On the seventh double click you should see the light begin to cycle through the different options each time you double click. *Once you pick the desired High 2 mode simply turn off the light and it will be saved as the default high 2 mode.*


Except in the case of strobe. Strobe can not be saved as the _default_ high mode. It will be saved, but as H2, accessible by dbl clicking once you are in high.


----------



## srfreddy

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Lite_me said:


> Except in the case of strobe. Strobe can not be saved as the _default_ high mode. It will be saved, but as H2, accessible by dbl clicking once you are in high.


 
Isn't that the case for everything?


----------



## Lite_me

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



srfreddy said:


> Isn't that the case for everything?


Well not everything but most probably, but I'm not familiar with _all_ the lights that have a strobe mode. I was just clarifying what you indicated. I have 2 JetBeams that will remember the strobe mode, as well as a NiteCore, so there may be others.


----------



## Flying Turtle

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Tried the trick with my SC50w+, with no changes.

Geoff


----------



## mrlysle

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Works just fine on my SC51 and my SC60w. Hey selfbuilt. Any crystal ball visions of your reviewing the SC60/SC60w anytime? Would love to see your review of that series! Most of the lights in my meager collection are the result of one of your reviews. You do a superb job my friend! I read all your reviews, even if it's not a light I'm considering for purchase. The SC51 was such a light. Hadn't really considered it until I read your review. Them BAM! I'm poorer now! lol! Excellent work. My hats off to you!


----------



## Russ Prechtl

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Lite_me said:


> Well not everything but most probably, but I'm not familiar with _all_ the lights that have a strobe mode. I was just clarifying what you indicated. I have 2 JetBeams that will remember the strobe mode, as well as a NiteCore, so there may be others.



My DST TLR Ti will remember it as well. It will save it in any of the three programmable positions you desire.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Lite_me said:


> Well not everything but most probably, but I'm not familiar with _all_ the lights that have a strobe mode. I was just clarifying what you indicated. I have 2 JetBeams that will remember the strobe mode, as well as a NiteCore, so there may be others.


It's rare for most multi-level selectable lights to allow a strobe mode as the first mode accessed (i.e. to be set as default). Case in point - my recent review of the Thrunite Neutron series shows mode memory is present for the head-loosened state, but not the head-tightened state (where strobe is located). In contrast, most fully programmable lights allow this, as it is part of their programming structure (e.g. Jetbeam IBS, Novatac/HDS/Ra, LiteFlux, Armytek Predator, Ray D1, etc.). Nitecore is bit more variable, depending on the model.

Zebralight falls into their intermediate category that is somewhat programmable, but still really a selectable multi-level light. But ZL also has a tendency to change feature sets between model revisions, so you never know what may be coming.



Russ Prechtl said:


> My DST TLR Ti will remember it as well. It will save it in any of the three programmable positions you desire.


That's because the DST TLR Ti uses the original Jetbeam IBS circuit.  See my review here.


----------



## pageyjim

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I am new to this forum. Thanks to all for the reviews and well informed questions and answers. At first I thought these lights were ugly but now not so much since mine should be in my mailbox any day.


----------



## Rinspeed

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Lite_me said:


> Except in the case of strobe. Strobe can not be saved as the _default_ high mode. It will be saved, but as H2, accessible by dbl clicking once you are in high.





Works fine with my SC51.


----------



## Lite_me

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Rinspeed said:


> Works fine with my SC51.


Please enlighten us as to what series of clicks enables strobe mode to be turned on with a single click from off. Mine won't do it, and it even states on the Zebralight website under their Features and Specifications section that this is not an option.

*°* *Advanced Operation and Configuration
*
Double click to toggle and select between the two sub-levels for that main level. Sub-level selections (except the strobe) for the 3 main levels are memorized after the light is turned off and through battery changes.


----------



## Rinspeed

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Lite_me said:


> Please enlighten us as to what series of clicks enables strobe mode to be turned on with a single click from off.


 


I shouldn't have quoted you as I was just agreeing that the strobe works fine as the default high second mode.


----------



## Lite_me

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Rinspeed said:


> I shouldn't have quoted you as I was just agreeing that the strobe works fine as the default high second mode.


 Ok, I now see why I was confused.


----------



## Deal4

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Just thought I would update that I have now gotten my SC51 from illuminationgear! Highly recommend them! Free shipping and pretty quick delivery time.
I totally love the light! Perfect EDC light! I really like how I don't have to use a clicky on the end of the light to turn it on. For EDC purposes there is no reason that this light needs a rear clicky, and I am a huge fan of the rear forward clicky! Zebralight has made a believer out of me!
I can't believe the light that comes out of such a small package!


----------



## Rej

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Ahh...finally got my SC51, it took 6 weeks...but it was worth it!
Boy is this thing small and bright.
And best of all...perfectly centered LED with no clouding....I'm happy again.


----------



## Federal LG

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I just pulled the trigger in one SC51w... but I have a doubt:

Here in Selfbuilt´s review he said: "Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & *SC50w (XP-E Neutral)*...", but there is no SC50w in Goinggear website. I bought a *SC51w*. Is it the same light?? Or is it a new model?

By reading the specs in GG website, high mode of their SC51w looks higher than Selfbuilt´s sample...

Another question: what kind of LED my new SC51w has?

Thanks!


----------



## srfreddy

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Federal LG said:


> I just pulled the trigger in one SC51w... but I have a doubt:
> 
> Here in Selfbuilt´s review he said: "Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & *SC50w (XP-E Neutral)*...", but there is no SC50w in Goinggear website. I bought a *SC51w*. Is it the same light?? Or is it a new model?
> 
> By reading the specs in GG website, high mode of their SC51w looks higher than Selfbuilt´s sample...
> 
> Another question: what kind of LED my new SC51w has?
> 
> Thanks!


It's the new one, the SC51 except neutral. So its probably R2 ish, maybe Q5?


----------



## Glow_Worm

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Federal LG said:


> I just pulled the trigger in one SC51w... but I have a doubt:
> 
> Here in Selfbuilt´s review he said: "Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & *SC50w (XP-E Neutral)*...", but there is no SC50w in Goinggear website. I bought a *SC51w*. Is it the same light?? Or is it a new model?
> 
> By reading the specs in GG website, high mode of their SC51w looks higher than Selfbuilt´s sample...
> 
> Another question: what kind of LED my new SC51w has?
> 
> Thanks!



Selfbuilt's review was done before the production SC51 & SC51W hit the commercial market, so his measurements & specs don't necessarily match up exactly to what is currently available. I *think* that the production SC51 has a XP-G R5 and the SC51W (actually more of a "neutral") has a XP-G R4. This also equates nicely to the 7% output difference between the two.

I have both, and the SC51 is very-slightly brighter, but you won't notice the diff. in real use (unless comparing them side-by-side), and the tint of the SC51W is definitely nicer IMO.

Both are fabulous lights, and I'm happy w/ each!!


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Glow_Worm said:


> Selfbuilt's review was done before the production SC51 & SC51W hit the commercial market, so his measurements & specs don't necessarily match up exactly to what is currently available. I *think* that the production SC51 has a XP-G R5 and the SC51W (actually more of a "neutral") has a XP-G R4. This also equates nicely to the 7% output difference between the two.


That's right, my review was written when the SC50w (XP-E) was currently shipping and the SC51 (XP-G) was in development. The currently shipping SC51w should be a neutral XP-G, but I don't know what the output bin would be (ZL typically doesn't specify).


----------



## Federal LG

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Great!

Thanks for the info! Can´t wait to get mine...


----------



## RedForest UK

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

So, has anyone recieved an SC51 or H51 with faster PWM on L2 yet? Mine is still in the 40hz range I would estimate.


----------



## Rej

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

My SC51 received about 1 week ago, direct from China....shows no visible PWM in any of the levels, that I can tell.


----------



## srfreddy

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I think they're still busy figuring the SC600 and updated SC30 out... and the higher power SC60.


----------



## mellowman

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

SC51 & H51 are cool white XP-G R4 not R5. The SC51w and H51w are R2 neutral whites which I think are from the Cree neutral white bins not the outdoor white bins so they have a bit more CRI 75 vs 70 for the outdoor.


----------



## dongkoo

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I see your reveiw, I want it.
Thanks for great reveiw.


----------



## Federal LG

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I got my first Zebralight today. It´s a *SC51w*. I´m amazed with it´s quality! Machining is perfect and I love natural colored HA. Threads and tailcap are smooth and fits perfectly too. I love the electronic button too, with it´s soft touch.

I´m shocked with it´s size. This thing is more smaller than I thought! By seeing it on pictures I thought it would be like a Surefire E1B, but it´s smaller... real tiny. Perfect for EDC!

Beam pattern is perfect. No rings, only a huge hotspot with soft transition to spill. It´s powerful too, with 172 lumens on high mode (warm tint).

I gotta say... I´m a huge Surefire fan, but Zebralight, in my opinion, is the "non american" flashlight that almost reach Surefire machining quality. It´s the number one in chinese lights for sure! 

I am really, really impressed with it´s overall quality and tiny size...


----------



## jbdan

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I just got a sc51w and sc51 as well this light is spectacular especially the "w" version. Thanks for the time put into the reviews that make it easier to purchase lights


----------



## curry__muncha

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Recently recieved my SC51. the 200 Lumen output is simply awesome. Build quality is to spec, LED is centred and not cloudy, fit and finish is superb, waterproof, beam pattern is perfect.

Unfortunately the PWM is noticable when waving the light around. Very barely noticable when actually being used properly. Not really an issue as there are plenty of non PWM modes. Either way, Zebralight have stated that all their newer lights will be purely current regulated, so thats gonna be sweeeeeet.


----------



## agoston.berko

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

i also want to buy that extraordinary EDC.
i struggling between SC51 and H51. 
Which is better ? 
And which exact typ-nr has the strongest LUMENS with eneloop on HIGH-MODE ?

do i have to order it from china ? or is there any shop in the EU-region ? 

thank you. 

or is there any stronger AA light out there (eneloop) ?


----------



## Enzo

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Your question is the best edc and for that my choice is the SC51, which is my edc light. However if your question was the best headlamp, then the H51 would be my choice.
I think for an edc light you want a little more throw and a more concentrated beam.


----------



## igoman

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Do any of you guys still prefer the Fenix LD10 over the Zeabralight SC51 and why?


----------



## Russ Prechtl

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



igoman said:


> Do any of you guys still prefer the Fenix LD10 over the Zeabralight SC51 and why?


 
I don't. I don't think the LD10 can touch the 51's versatility.


----------



## Chongker

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

My LD10 has been gifted away


----------



## igoman

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

What about using the sc51 like a camp lantern? I need a light that I can use in a tent or on a table to stand like a candle to light up the room. I know that there are diffusers for the LD10 that you can attach to use the flashlight as a lantern, but what about the SC51?


----------



## chrisbright

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

"Voltages: 0.7V - 2.5V. 14500 Li-ion batteries are not supported." 

I'm still not clear, is using 14500s OK or not, in the SC51?

Some people seem to be fine with it, some wouldn't do it. Has anyone using 14500s had trouble with SC51 LED or circuit damage?


----------



## B0wz3r

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



chrisbright said:


> "Voltages: 0.7V - 2.5V. 14500 Li-ion batteries are not supported."
> 
> I'm still not clear, is using 14500s OK or not, in the SC51?
> 
> Some people seem to be fine with it, some wouldn't do it. Has anyone using 14500s had trouble with SC51 LED or circuit damage?


 
A few users here have reported success with 14500's in the 51's, but I am not willing to try it with my H51w. I think you'd be sacrificing a lot of efficiency and risk frying the light, let alone voiding the warranty. 

If you really want a ZL that is 14500 capable, get one of the SC50's... they have them on clearance right now. My main EDC is a 50w+ and I don't see any reason why I should 'upgrade' to a 51w. I am considering getting a 51c though; but I'm a neutral snob and don't do ANY cool tints, so I'm biased.


----------



## mat_the_cat

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Glow_Worm said:


> the SC51 is very-slightly brighter, but you won't notice the diff. in real use (unless comparing them side-by-side), and the tint of the SC51W is definitely nicer IMO.


After quite a lot of reading up on this forum, I think that the SC51 sounds like my ideal light! I really can't think of anything I would change, apart from maybe (in an ideal world) making parts user replaceable. But, the question remains - should I go for the cool or warm version? Does the warm version offer any _practical_ advantages, apart from the 'nicer' colour? Is a case of although the light is slightly dimmer, it's easier to pick things out with a colour temperature closer to daylight?

The main use it will see is an EDC, where usability is more important than absolute brightness (as typically I'm never far from a source of 1-2000 lumens), but there is part of me that likes the 'wow factor' of a bright light in a small package! If anybody could come up with some side by side beamshots of the two different SC51 versions (I'm slightly leaning towards the SC51w at the moment) that would be most helpful.


----------



## Lite_me

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



mat_the_cat said:


> Does the warm version offer any _practical_ advantages, apart from the 'nicer' colour?


Well, the Med modes have longer runtimes on the w version vs the cool. And you'll not likely notice the difference in output between the two. Cool vs the warm. And the Med modes have some very useful output for intermediate needs. It's surprising how much light the 26 Lms actually is on M1. I use that setting a lot on my SC51w. Runtime for that mode with the new XX Eneloop is 15 hrs. That's an amazing amount of light and runtime for a single AA light.


----------



## lightsandknives

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



mat_the_cat said:


> After quite a lot of reading up on this forum, I think that the SC51 sounds like my ideal light! I really can't think of anything I would change, apart from maybe (in an ideal world) making parts user replaceable. But, the question remains - should I go for the cool or warm version? Does the warm version offer any _practical_ advantages, apart from the 'nicer' colour? Is a case of although the light is slightly dimmer, it's easier to pick things out with a colour temperature closer to daylight?
> 
> The main use it will see is an EDC, where usability is more important than absolute brightness (as typically I'm never far from a source of 1-2000 lumens), but there is part of me that likes the 'wow factor' of a bright light in a small package! If anybody could come up with some side by side beamshots of the two different SC51 versions (I'm slightly leaning towards the SC51w at the moment) that would be most helpful.



I just received the cools SC51, and it's a beautiful tint. It's actually a creamy white light. I compared it to my Quark Mini CR2 and the ZL is much warmer. I think mine is the perfect tint. But, I'm not a fan of real warm tints.


----------



## mat_the_cat

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Lite_me said:


> Well, the Med modes have longer runtimes on the w version vs the cool.


 Thanks for that, I'd missed the subtle difference in the specs. As I don't generally like normal LED lights, and flourescent lighting I think I will go for the w version.


----------



## Marc999

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I'm interested in the SC51W. I would like confirmation though as whether or not the pwm is noticeable [as in: annoying] on low-low or medium modes?

Some are saying yes, others are saying not noticeable. 

cheers,
Marc


----------



## hatman

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



B0wz3r said:


> If you really want a ZL that is 14500 capable, get one of the SC50's... they have them on clearance right now. My main EDC is a 50w+ and I don't see any reason why I should 'upgrade' to a 51w. I am considering getting a 51c though; but I'm a neutral snob and don't do ANY cool tints, so I'm biased.


 

Did you get the 51C and are you using primaries or some other battery?


----------



## flatline

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Marc999 said:


> I'm interested in the SC51W. I would like confirmation though as whether or not the pwm is noticeable [as in: annoying] on low-low or medium modes?
> 
> Some are saying yes, others are saying not noticeable.
> 
> cheers,
> Marc



I don't normally mind PWM, but I do find the L2 level to be annoying (it's a flicker right on the edge of my awareness that makes me think my eyes are playing tricks on me).

The PWM on the other level (H2?) is unnoticeable. I can barely detect it if I'm looking at it, but it has no negative effect during use.

--flatline


----------



## Lite_me

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Marc999 said:


> I'm interested in the SC51W. I would like confirmation though as whether or not the pwm is noticeable [as in: annoying] on low-low or medium modes?
> 
> Some are saying yes, others are saying not noticeable.
> 
> cheers,
> Marc


The PWM on the SC51w doesn't bother _me_ at all. Even though I do have some older lights with PWM that do bother me.


----------



## Marc999

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Lite_me said:


> The PWM on the SC51w doesn't bother _me_ at all. Even though I do have some older lights with PWM that do bother me.



Thanks for the feedback. I also heard back from a Zebralight rep. [from zebralight customer service] in regards to PWM. Apparently they have moved the 2 PWM modes to 2 lesser used light settings [M2 & H2] as well as increased the PWM frequency. So now the 0.18 setting is current controlled.


----------



## Flying Turtle

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

This is good news. Thanks Marc. Not going to immediately move up from my SC50, but now it's a possibility.

Geoff


----------



## Marc999

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



flatline said:


> I don't normally mind PWM, but I do find the L2 level to be annoying (it's a flicker right on the edge of my awareness that makes me think my eyes are playing tricks on me).
> 
> The PWM on the other level (H2?) is unnoticeable. I can barely detect it if I'm looking at it, but it has no negative effect during use.
> 
> --flatline


 

Regarding durability, has anyone here accidentally dropped their sc51 or sc51w on the ground? I'd like to know if it can withstand some abuse like this.


----------



## Ian2381

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Marc999 said:


> Regarding durability, has anyone here accidentally dropped their sc51 or sc51w on the ground? I'd like to know if it can withstand some abuse like this.


 If its the same with SC50w I did, dropped mine more than 3feet on a solid marble floor. It survived with av few dents near the swith and tail.


----------



## FroggyTaco

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I have dropped both mo my SC50 multiple times onto concrete & asphalt and less firm surfaces and they continue to work as advertised.


----------



## Federal LG

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

+1

Unfortunately... because I really hate when gravity pulls my lights onto the floor!


----------



## Marc999

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Hey guys,

I just received the SC51W. Great light, lots of fun. I'm still trying to get the button press timing down pact to access low mode without accidentally releasing too quickly and getting high mode. Nervous thumb!

Could someone please explain how to access 1 of 2 brightness settings for H2 mode? 86/120 lm? It mentions 6 double clicks; is that a total of 12 clicks [6 doubles] and then double click again to get 86 or 120? Or is one of those H2 settings the strobe? 

thanks,
Marc


----------



## Enzo

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Let me suggest you watch this video on the light and how to operate. This video convinced me to buy the SC51, great light!

http://goinggear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=14_20&products_id=2235


----------



## Lite_me

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Marc999 said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> I just received the SC51W. Great light, lots of fun. I'm still trying to get the button press timing down pact to access low mode without accidentally releasing too quickly and getting high mode. Nervous thumb!
> 
> Could someone please explain how to access 1 of 2 brightness settings for H2 mode? 86/120 lm? It mentions 6 double clicks; is that a total of 12 clicks [6 doubles] and then double click again to get 86 or 120? Or is one of those H2 settings the strobe?
> 
> thanks,
> Marc


The easiest way for me to explain it is... when in High mode, start dbl clicking until you see the light start to strobe. The next dbl click will be your 86Lm setting, the next will be the 120Lm setting. Dbl clicking again will start it strobing again. Do it again and you'll be back to 86Lm again, and so on. It will keep cycling through 86Lm, 120Lm and strobe. Stop at the level you want to program for your H2 setting and click once to turn the light off. That will now be memorized as your H2 setting. H1 will always be 172Lm.


----------



## Marc999

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Lite_me said:


> The easiest way for me to explain it is... when in High mode, start dbl clicking until you see the light start to strobe. The next dbl click will be your 86Lm setting, the next will be the 120Lm setting. Dbl clicking again will start it strobing again. Do it again and you'll be back to 86Lm again, and so on. It will keep cycling through 86Lm, 120Lm and strobe. Stop at the level you want to program for your H2 setting and click once to turn the light off. That will now be memorized as your H2 setting. H1 will always be 172Lm.



Thanks, that's a great explanation and it works. I also received a reply from a Zebralight rep. that explained it similar to you. From H1 or H2, 7 dbl.clicks [each double = 2 clicks], = 86lm, 8 dbl.clicks = 120, 9 dbl.clicks = strobe. Turn off to set desired H2 setting.


----------



## Mikellen

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Lite_me said:


> Well, the Med modes have longer runtimes on the w version vs the cool. And you'll not likely notice the difference in output between the two. Cool vs the warm. And the Med modes have some very useful output for intermediate needs. It's surprising how much light the 26 Lms actually is on M1. I use that setting a lot on my SC51w. Runtime for that mode with the new XX Eneloop is 15 hrs. That's an amazing amount of light and runtime for a single AA light.



Could the specs be a mistake? It just doesn't seem right to me that the runtimes would be lower on the cool white led compared to the neutral.
I would think the cool led would be a tiny bit brighter but maintain the same runtime.

Any explanations? :shrug:


----------



## tbenedict

This might be the wrong thread, but I got some enlightenment from comparing the specs of models on their site. They all have the same runtime on the current reg levels. What was more interesting was the c was more efficient on the low level PWM levels and the Cree versions better on the high end. This was consistent with what I read in other threads I read about the emitters.

Feel free to laugh, I still have a lot to learn.


----------



## bodhran

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Nothing to laugh about. I think we all are still learning.


----------



## kreisler

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



Deal4 said:


> That said, you can still use 14500 with the SC51 as well.


How come? Does the PROTECTED TrustFire 14500 fit, are you sure?

The website says:


> Operating Voltage Range: *0.7V - 2.5V*
> Battery: One 1.5V AA (NiMH, lithium or alkaline). *14500 Li-ion batteries are not supported.* Batteries are not included in the package.



selfbuilt, you have quoted the webpage for SC51 correctly (see my quote). it says "not supported" and "2.5V" max. How come you tested the SC51 with Protected 14500's? Shouldnt 14500's fry the driver?


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



kreisler said:


> selfbuilt, you have quoted the webpage for SC51 correctly (see my quote). it says "not supported" and "2.5V" max. How come you tested the SC51 with Protected 14500's? Shouldnt 14500's fry the driver?


Although the current specs state that, I tried 14500 on my engineering sample and it worked fine. However, since 3.7V Li-ion is not supported, you are running a risk of damaging the light if you try it. Note also that circuits tend to evolve over the life of product, so there is no guarantee that currently shipping lights still perform the same as my early sample.

The question of what is "supported" in specs isn't absolute. In some case, you will immediately destroy a circuit when running out of spec, in other cases it is simply not supported and may lead to problems/damage (or at a minimum, looses warranty coverage). It is impossible to know from a spec sheet which is the case, as it depends on how conservative a manufacturer is being.

To quote the episode of ST-TNG where Scotty made an appearance: "A good engineer is always a wee bit conservative, at least on paper."


----------



## kreisler

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

So you did run the risk of damaging the zebra, poor animal! *ggg*
in your test, the zebra survived .. but there is no guarantee that all sc51 samples would do so. (the sc50 is certified for 14500's. interesting too!)

Scotty? i only know Ally McBeal


----------



## tobrien

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

yea, I own an SC51 and did a double-take when I saw you wrote 14500 as being supported in the review haha


----------



## revolver

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Might be a dumb question since I'm still a noob, but is it okay to run this light on its highest setting while tailstanding until it dies?

Selfbuilt thanks for the great review! one question though, when you do your output v runtime tests do you have a fan blowing on your lights or anything? Or is there only passive cooling? Sorry if you mentioned it in the review, I couldn't find it anywhere.


----------



## tobrien

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



revolver said:


> Might be a dumb question since I'm still a noob, but is it okay to run this light on its highest setting while tailstanding until it dies?
> 
> Selfbuilt thanks for the great review! one question though, when you do your output v runtime tests do you have a fan blowing on your lights or anything? Or is there only passive cooling? Sorry if you mentioned it in the review, I couldn't find it anywhere.


those are good questions, no worries. 

i never thought about the first one, so i'd be interested to know!


----------



## kreisler

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



revolver said:


> Might be a dumb question since I'm still a noob, but is it okay to run this light on its highest setting while tailstanding until it dies?


yeah good question.

i did several runtime tests with Xeno E03 and 14500's on all its three modes. Several. I figured that is very possible to heat sink the torch with the bare hands (and alternating them), it's winter now anyway (=my hands are cold lol). Apart from that discovery i cooled it with a wetted dishcloth wrapped around its body. And i also immersed it into cold water for the full runtime. so there *are* many methods to control the temperature of a XML torch (the E03 has the XML heat monster).

now you're asking if it is safe to do several runtime tests without any effective cooling in Turbo mode for the full length of the runtime?

With the Xeno E03 my answer would: Why would you want to do so?.. the torch gets hot and the high temperature will degrade the LED's life span. So even if the heat doesnt damage it in place, nobody would recommend it .. even though the specs clearly tell that you ARE allowed to run it in tailstand mode unattended for the full (official) "20 mins". So, yes, it IS safe to do so. But i highly do not recommend it anyway. Try to touch the torch after 20mins. (the XML Xeno). It IS almost burningly hot because of the accumulated heat.

If you hold the E03 in Turbo Mode in your cold hands, as mentioned, then there is no temperature build up in the torch and everything is really safe.

So what about the SC51?

Here, the LED is a XP-G R5 and the energy source is not a 3.7V cell. It's a harmless 1.5V cell.

My clear assessment is: Yes, it is 100% safe to leave it in tailstand for the full length of the runtime in Turbo+ mode. That's what 1.5V torches are designed for. They never break or fail when you leave them in attended turbo mode.


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



revolver said:


> Might be a dumb question since I'm still a noob, but is it okay to run this light on its highest setting while tailstanding until it dies? Selfbuilt thanks for the great review! one question though, when you do your output v runtime tests do you have a fan blowing on your lights or anything? Or is there only passive cooling? Sorry if you mentioned it in the review, I couldn't find it anywhere.


Second question first - yes, all my runtimes are done under a cooling fan  (it's mentioned at the start of the methods section, right before the summary tables).

As to the first question, the answer is it depends. As kreisler points out above, 1xAA-sized lights get very hot when heavily driven on 1x3.7V Li-ion sources. You could reasonably expect this to damage the emitter over time, if left running for extended periods without cooling. Plus the light would get very hot and it would hurt when you go to pick it up again.

As an aside, hand-holding (against skin) is a form of cooling, as your own circulatory system would help transport heat generated by the light - just not as efficiently or quickly as a fan would. This is why tail-standing lights get hotter than hand-held lights.

But as for standard 1.5V cells (i.e. alkaline/NiMH) in the SC51, I wouldn't be worried too worried about running the light in tailstand mode. The heat will not be as high, and is far less likely to damage anything.

However, I should point out that you should never run NiMH cells down to the point where the light dies (or even near to it). This will damage the cell - as manifested in an enhanced rate of self-discharge. Modern Eneloop-style NiMH have the relative advantage that they keep their charge stored for a very long period of time. Excessive discharge will damage this characteristic, greatly limiting how long it will be able to continue to hold a charge.


----------



## tobrien

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

so I tried those 3.2v Titanium Innovations CR14505 cells and my SC51 won't accept them. HOWEVER, it WILL accept AW 3.7v 14500s. Weird?

and for what it's worth, I didn't notice any brightness differences between the AW cells and the eneloop. call me crazy, but I know what I saw!

edit: and by "won't accept them," I mean it plain won't start with them in. The cells are fresh and work but the SC51 doesn't like them. Weird...


----------



## hazna

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



tobrien said:


> so I tried those 3.2v Titanium Innovations CR14505 cells and my SC51 won't accept them. HOWEVER, it WILL accept AW 3.7v 14500s. Weird?
> 
> and for what it's worth, I didn't notice any brightness differences between the AW cells and the eneloop. call me crazy, but I know what I saw!



Maybe it considers 3.0V batteries to be an overdischarged 3.7V li-ion, and doesn't turn it on? 

It doesn't not surprise me that the eneloop and AW are the same brightness. The sc51 is optimised to run on AA


----------



## shelm

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



tobrien said:


> and for what it's worth, I didn't notice any brightness differences between the AW cells and the eneloop.


you crazy 

the OP measured 100 lumens on 14500 and 91 lumens on XP-G!


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



hazna said:


> Maybe it considers 3.0V batteries to be an overdischarged 3.7V li-ion, and doesn't turn it on?


It's likely the wide anode button size on the 14505. I just tried one as well, and it wouldn't light up in my SC51. I observed the same for the older-style AW 14500 with the wide button top (i.e. I needed to use a small magnet to make contact).



> It doesn't not surprise me that the eneloop and AW are the same brightness. The sc51 is optimised to run on AA


Yes, I had found little difference in output on 14500 and AA on my SC51. Of course, mine was an early review sample, so things may have changed since then.


----------



## TweakMDS

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I just noticed something new (that might have been posted) in the ZL product comparison page that might be of interest here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...authkey=CNqP6KIC&hl=en&authkey=CNqP6KIC#gid=0

On a few of their lights they now state the following: *3/2012: all levels current regulated.*
This includes the SC51w and H51, but not the SC51 (which might be a mistake though, or they're running existing stock out).

There doesn't seem any additional info on the product page, but this takes away one of my main concern with these lights. Now if there was only a way to figure out which one you'd get...


----------



## ThirstyTurtle

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I ordered a SC51W this weekend after reading your review and a few other's. I really appreciate all the pictures and opinions!


----------



## Mr Floppy

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



TweakMDS said:


> Now if there was only a way to figure out which one you'd get...



You could try this:
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?335237-Detecting-PWM-with-a-camera-phone


----------



## ThirstyTurtle

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

I received my SC51W in the mail today and I genuinely love the interface. It is by far the most complicated user interface I've used (i'm still pretty new here though) but it really is pretty easy to get the hang of and I suspect after carrying it for a little while it will become second nature. I'm very happy with the tint, although it looks a bit muddy when compared next to a perfectly white light like my Thrunite Ti, it looks just perfect on its own and I suspect much better for me than the standard 51 which looks awfully blue for my taste.

The only thing I'm not happy with is how off-centered the LED is. I've read and seen pictures of many other people's who's arrived off-center but I really didn't think it would be an issue for me, but here's a pic:






It's pretty bad in my opinion but as far as I can tell it's not effecting the beam, even at a couple inches away from a wall I can't tell that it's not a perfect circle of light with a centered hotspot. One more thing to note is that I love the large (in my opinion) spill of my Thrunite Ti but the SC51's is WAY bigger and I can't wait to use it once the sun goes down...


----------



## iocheretyanny

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

Considering how bright this light is on R4 it will be amazing once G2 version is released.


----------



## g.p.

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*

SC51 has been moved to the "discontinued" section on the ZL spreadsheat. 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...authkey=CNqP6KIC&hl=en&authkey=CNqP6KIC#gid=0

Too bad, I like the feel of the SC51 in my hand better than the new SC52. 

:thumbsdow


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



g.p. said:


> Too bad, I like the feel of the SC51 in my hand better than the new SC52.


FYI, a SC52 is supposedly on its way for me to review. So I will be doing a full review of that model once it is here (with comparison to the SC51).


----------



## g.p.

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



selfbuilt said:


> FYI, a SC52 is supposedly on its way for me to review. So I will be doing a full review of that model once it is here (with comparison to the SC51).


Looking forward to lit.

I already have one and it's a great upgrade to the SC51 in terms of performance and UI. The downside is that it has some sharp ridges and not much of a transition between the body and the much fatter head. It just doesn't feel as nice in my hand as the SC51. The ridges or waves on the flashlight body are great for extra grip though, and the battery indicator is nice.

If ZL could make the SC51 officially take 14500's with a bump in lumens, it would be the best of both worlds.


----------



## reppans

*Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS +*



selfbuilt said:


> FYI, a SC52 is supposedly on its way for me to review. So I will be doing a full review of that model once it is here (with comparison to the SC51).



I'll throw in an unusual request, but of course will understand if it is not considered. 

ZL has spec'd the SC52 to be equal to or better than both the FourSevens Quark AA2-X (QP2A-X) and the EagleTac D25C Clicky XML across most of the modes, which interestingly, lining-up quite closely between the three lights. Since the single cell XML versions of the Quark AA and D25A have not been previously tested by yourself, perhaps the tested 3v versions would be worthy of inclusion on the comparison charts, particularly given the closely matching manufacturer specification claims. 

Without any representation from XML Quark AA or D25As, then it seems the only other XML/1xAA/sub-lumen competitor light in the comparison will be the ThruNite Neutron 1A. 

Just trying to get a more complete comparison, without being unfair (once again, given the matching spec sheets).


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



reppans said:


> Without any representation from XML Quark AA or D25As, then it seems the only other XML/1xAA/sub-lumen competitor light in the comparison will be the ThruNite Neutron 1A.


It's a good point, I do have a limited number of 1xAA comparators in the XM-L class. I can certainly include a couple of tables with some of the recent XM-L based 2xAA and 1xCR123A/RCR lights, should make for some interesting comparisons.

I'm just pulling everything together for the review now anyway, should have it up in a couple of days.


----------



## reppans

*Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS +*



selfbuilt said:


> ....I can certainly include a *couple of tables *with some of the recent XM-L based 2xAA and 1xCR123A/RCR lights, should make for some interesting comparisons.



Awesome...and on your Output/Runtime graphs (please?), considering the SC52 is competing at the same 280 lms/0.9 hrs mark (and, well, nearly every other mode too) against the best of the best.

Looking forward to your review.... as usual


----------



## selfbuilt

*Re: Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOT*



reppans said:


> Awesome...and on your Output/Runtime graphs (please?), considering the SC52 is competing at the same 280 lms/0.9 hrs mark (and, well, nearly every other mode too) against the best of the best.


That's a little more work to pull together, given that runtime data is categorized by battery type (i.e., I have to transfer the data and re-generate each curve in a different template). I suppose I could do it for direct comparisons to the 2xAA lights, as it would at least be comparable battery chemistries (for alkaline and NiMH).

Man, this is shaping up to be a long review ... :laughing:


----------



## reppans

*Zebralight SC51 (XP-G R4) & SC50w (XP-E Neutral) 1xAA Reviews: RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS +*

Sorry Selfbuilt... please don't go out of your way for this request. I just thought I might have been interesting with just these three lights given they are (or probably will be) the brightest three lights in the 1xAA, 2xAA and 1xCR123 class that you've tested, and interestingly, with nearly identical specifications across the board. 

Do whatever you think is fit and beneficial for your reader base. Thanks for the consideration.


----------

