# The Quark lights thread! (Part 2)



## Badbeams3 (May 30, 2009)

_*[Continued from **Part 1**]*_


Announcing the new Quark lights...

10 year performance warranty!!!

Let`s try to keep this thread from getting closed down from nonsense 

Here is a link to pricing info http://www.4sevens.com/index.php?cPath=297&osCsid=bc618af22d259d4eea13647d9b03f0a2


----------



## Zeruel (May 30, 2009)

*Re: The Quark lights thread!*

And here're the pics posted by 4Sevens.


----------



## DM51 (Jun 16, 2009)

Part 1 was >400 posts, so the discussion is now continuing here.


----------



## LightWalker (Jun 16, 2009)

The 2x123 light looks nice.





I just don't know if I want the warm tint or the regular tint. Is the warm tint better? Someone should make a poll.


----------



## Mostly (Jun 16, 2009)

~ *NonSenCe *(from Part 1)



> i only hope thats a typo on the price of two (7$) as 10pack is 19$.


Consider it a shipping and handling cost. Since 4Sevens doesn't charge shipping, there has to be a pricing curve to keep them from taking a hit on small, low cost items, in case someone wants to just keep buying two batteries at a time. I'd do the same thing if I were them. 

I used to buy from CFR Lights if I only wanted a couple of batteries... but now CFR charges (modest) shipping too... probably because of people like me. 

Buy the ten pack. 

Getting mostly back on topic... I really like the sensible pricing scheme for Quarks. The equivalent tactical and the regular versions cost the same. I like it.


----------



## ninjaboigt (Jun 16, 2009)

are these batteries going to be "safe"? i dont want anything blowing off...

I am assuming these batts are made in china?


----------



## 4sevens (Jun 16, 2009)

ninjaboigt said:


> are these batteries going to be "safe"? i dont want anything blowing off...
> 
> I am assuming these batts are made in china?


They are as safe as any american made cell. They have a PTC unit on the top (which most china cells do not have). The PTC was a significant cost of the cell but we would never bring a cell to the USA without it.


----------



## ninjaboigt (Jun 16, 2009)

Ahh intresting, but what is a PTC?


----------



## zipplet (Jun 16, 2009)

PTC = Positive Temperature Coefficient resistor
It's a disc of material that under normal conditions will conduct a lot of current. If the temperature rises too much it will greatly increase in resistance greatly reducing current flow.

If too much current is drawn from a cell with a PTC causing it to overheat the PTC will stop the cell going into thermal runaway and exploding/venting.


----------



## ninjaboigt (Jun 16, 2009)

Whoa, thats pretty high tech, are these used in any other CR123A or lithum AA( engerizer?)


----------



## zipplet (Jun 16, 2009)

All quality CR123A cells have a PTC for example Surefire, Panasonic, Duracell, Energizer and clearly 4Sevens 

I'm not sure about Lithium AA's, I'd hope they do though.


----------



## Burgess (Jun 16, 2009)

Any run-time graphs yet ?


_


----------



## ninjaboigt (Jun 16, 2009)

well thats good to hear! good job 4sevens...!


----------



## 4sevens (Jun 16, 2009)

Burgess said:


> Any run-time graphs yet ?


Here is one




These are the max and high modes for the Q123-2


----------



## wapkil (Jun 16, 2009)

4sevens said:


> Here is one
> These are the max and high modes for the Q123-2



Nice. Even very nice. Why do you underrate these lights in the specification? The high mode here runs almost twice longer than advertised (9h vs. 4.5h). I suspect similar situation for Med mode in QAA. I know that you plan to under-specify and over-deliver but isn't two times too much? :nana:


----------



## 4sevens (Jun 16, 2009)

wapkil said:


> Nice. Even very nice. Why do you underrate these lights in the specification? The high mode here runs almost twice longer than advertised (9h vs. 4.5h). I suspect similar situation for Med mode in QAA. I know that you plan to under-specify and over-deliver but isn't two times too much? :nana:


Yes it does seem a bit much. Two reasons 
1) We're tired of the bs other manufacturers out there are putting out just to get an edge on others. We're following sf's pattern of underrating. This is how we want to start building our reputation 
2) We have to accomodate for cheap underperforming batteries. Trust me there are some pretty bad stuff out there. We can always bump up our specs as reviews roll out. But never can we bump down specs.


----------



## gottawearshades (Jun 16, 2009)

I'm interested in the regulation on a lithium AA. 

If it's more like a Fenix than the Nitecore D10, I'd be very interested.


----------



## carrot (Jun 16, 2009)

I just got the passaround today and man are they great! I do not like the 123A as much as I thought I would... it is just "too small" even compared to my McLux, but both the AA and 123x2 lights are awesome! I will probably be ordering myself a 123x2 in the very near future!


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 16, 2009)

I ordered both...a clipless 123 and a 1AA body, for the best of both worlds. :twothumbs

$20 for the extra body seems like a good price IMHO.


----------



## Optik49 (Jun 16, 2009)

_Thanks for the update carrot. I can’t wait to see them. _


----------



## GarageBoy (Jun 16, 2009)

carrot said:


> I just got the passaround today and man are they great! I do not like the 123A as much as I thought I would... it is just "too small" even compared to my McLux, but both the AA and 123x2 lights are awesome! I will probably be ordering myself a 123x2 in the very near future!


=p The McLux is HUGE
I'm soo anxious to see the runtime for the 123 model (I really want you to outdo Fenix)
Also, 4sevens, how about a nicer font (sans serif) for the "123" part?


----------



## 4sevens (Jun 16, 2009)

GarageBoy said:


> =p The McLux is HUGE
> I'm soo anxious to see the runtime for the 123 model (I really want you to outdo Fenix)
> Also, 4sevens, how about a nicer font (sans serif) for the "123" part?


Sorry no font changes. These were done about a month ago.
I don't have graphs of any other light. This was mainly a run to test our
batteries


----------



## GarageBoy (Jun 16, 2009)

Looks pretty good


----------



## csshih (Jun 16, 2009)

Hello all..

I'm currently doing a runtime test,

and need someone to help me out:

can anyone check the current draw from a fresh battery on the Quark123?

thank you;
Craig Shih


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 16, 2009)

Wouldn't they follow fairly closely to the P2D, since the circuit is made by the same company?


----------



## 4sevens (Jun 16, 2009)

Toohotruk said:


> Wouldn't they follow fairly closely to the P2D, since the circuit is made by the same company?


It is not made by the same company. The same designer made the circuits 
for the earliest Fenixes. We worked with this person to make a better, more versatile circuit.


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 16, 2009)

Even better...thanks for the clarification. I misunderstood what I had read on one of the Quark threads.


----------



## toby_pra (Jun 17, 2009)

I really dont like the design of these Quark's....looks like Fenix or Nitecore,
but nothing new...:shakehead

Why should i buy such a light? what makes it special?


----------



## Sharpy_swe (Jun 17, 2009)

toby_pra said:


> I really dont like the design of these Quark's....looks like Fenix or Nitecore,
> but nothing new...:shakehead
> 
> Why should i buy such a light? what makes it special?



Some suggestions;
_
Moonlight mode 0.2 lumens
__OTF lumens_
_Square threads
10 years warranty
....



_


----------



## vali (Jun 17, 2009)

1 month runtime...


----------



## toby_pra (Jun 17, 2009)

Sharpy_swe said:


> Some suggestions;
> 
> _Moonlight mode 0.2 lumens_
> _OTF lumens_
> ...


 
0.2Lumens setting is nothing new...OTF lumens? The Quarks are not brighter
than similar flashlights with the same output...

10years warranty is a very nice gesture. but IMO no new design. this would be what i would also expect from a new flashlight...


----------



## defloyd77 (Jun 17, 2009)

There's also the fact that it uses the Cree XP-E and will have neutral tints available. The pysical design needs nothing else, the design does it's purpose and I like it doesn't have any silly "bling".

So if I understand the specs right, everyone's concerns about it being underperformed by Fenix's equivalent sould be disregarded as the Quarks are "sandbagging", correct?


----------



## toby_pra (Jun 17, 2009)

Infact everybody likes different designs...but IMO it could have another design, something new!


----------



## Grumpy (Jun 17, 2009)

Do the Quark lights have over discharge protection built in?

I just ordered one a couple days ago and I sure hope they do.


----------



## jblackwood (Jun 17, 2009)

toby_pra said:


> 0.2Lumens setting is nothing new...OTF lumens? The Quarks are not brighter
> than similar flashlights with the same output...
> 
> 10years warranty is a very nice gesture. but IMO no new design. this would be what i would also expect from a new flashlight...



Even though the STATED lumens are only 90, those are REAL OTF lumens that outdo the 100 lumen nitecore D10's I own as well as the LD10 I just got from 4sevens, which all beat it in At the emitter lumens, NOT OTF. That's the difference. So they're brighter than at least my two D10's (GDP and Q5) and my LD10. :ironic:


----------



## toby_pra (Jun 17, 2009)

The stated lumens might be the "real" OTF lumens, and there are many 
flashligts that describe the emitter lumen...but interesting is the comparing
between the different flashlights...IMO i really cant see that these quarks are noticeable brighter, than other lights with the same type of led.


----------



## HKJ (Jun 17, 2009)

jblackwood said:


> Even though the STATED lumens are only 90, those are REAL OTF lumens that outdo the 100 lumen nitecore D10's I own as well as the LD10 I just got from 4sevens, which all beat it in At the emitter lumens, NOT OTF. That's the difference. So they're brighter than at least my two D10's (GDP and Q5) and my LD10. :ironic:



The Quark AA has a bit more output than D10, nut it can not match the LD10, except with LiIon batteries. 
I have compared them here: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/234102


----------



## Federal LG (Jun 17, 2009)

Perfectly centered R2 LED... (and nice tint!)


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jun 17, 2009)

Seems to me the Quark heads are optimized for 3 volts...where it seems to take a slight lead over the competion. So a 14500 is the trick for the AA model. On a AA bat they run good...but are not the brightness champ. My guess is the Nitecore D-10 R2 is a leader off 1.5 volts...but would have bow to the Quark on a 3 volt contest.


----------



## matrixshaman (Jun 17, 2009)

The Quark lights are really great in so many ways. I do have one little issue that I'd like to mention to see if anyone else is having this and what can be done for it. I think one other member mentioned something similar - that is the head is difficult to tighten to get into the 'high' and strobe mode. I'm using an AW 14500 in this AA Quark. I found I could barely get the high to come on until I backed off the ring holding the clip a little. It still seems the head is very tight to turn and I've got strong hands. I lubed it with PTFE (teflon) which I have found has made every light I own twist easier and smoother removal of tailcaps and so on to change batteries. This was done after I noticed how difficult it was to turn the head. I think it may have improved slightly but not to where I'd like it. Maybe this will loosen up with use? In the meantime are others finding it hard to turn (noticeably harder than the Fenix Turbo mode done by twisting the head)?


----------



## WadeF (Jun 17, 2009)

toby_pra said:


> Infact everybody likes different designs...but IMO it could have another design, something new!



There are other lights that do this and that, but they are often lacking in one area or another. The Quark seems to have a lot of good features all in one light, as well as some new things.

If you can't appreciate what the Quark offers there are plenty of other lights to choose from. I have a lot of different lights and I appreciate what the Quark offers and can clearly see what is new about it.


----------



## hiredgun (Jun 17, 2009)

toby_pra said:


> I really dont like the design of these Quark's....looks like Fenix or Nitecore,
> but nothing new...:shakehead
> 
> Why should i buy such a light? what makes it special?



What we need to see in the market right now, is something Fenix did with the E01 and that is offer up some colors. I'm getting very sick of the same "tactical" and "special ops" black and OD green. Personally I love the look of anodized purple or orange (not gold).


----------



## qip (Jun 17, 2009)

i like it cuz it merges 2 great lights into one , i love the fenix ui its simple /+ hopefully regulation ..others may not like ui, i love the nitecore/novatac knurling and the added low/low ...im a bore ,im not into blingy & sharp tac bezels as much i like sleek simple bold 

as david once mentioned its the plain potato chip people that sells lots of lights "thats me"


----------



## gunga (Jun 17, 2009)

I have to agree on many of these points. I'm getting a few in the pass-around so wil report more then.

The quark is basically a refined Fenix LxD series with:

- good knurling
- Low low
- Extra modes (hidden away, at the end of the cycle)
- clips
- smoother beams, XP-E emitters, with warm tint option.
- Buck boost circuitry to handle Li-on

The Tactical quark is basically a hybrid of the LxD and LxT v2. 

- 2 modes, but programmable.
- Forward clicky.

I personally like the Fenix lights. Not super exciting, but very solid and functional. The Quark is a nice refinement based on many CPF requests.

So what's not to like?

:devil:


----------



## LightWalker (Jun 17, 2009)

I just got my Quark 2xAA light and it is very nice. I tried it out in a dark bathroom and compared it to some of my other lights.

I compared it on level 1 to my Nitecore D10 on low and it seems like the D10 is only a little brighter.

The Quark on high, not max looked very simular to general mode on my Fenix TK10. The beam on the Quark is very smooth like the TK10.

The Quark 2xAA is brighter than my Fenix L2D Q5 on max and about the same on high, tint is much nicer on the Quark. 

The Quark on level 3 is about the same as my L2T V2 RB80 on low.

I think I'll get the Quark Tactical 2x123 next.


----------



## GarageBoy (Jun 17, 2009)

I hope selfbult gets his hands on them


----------



## burntoshine (Jun 17, 2009)

toby_pra said:


> The stated lumens might be the "real" OTF lumens, and there are many
> flashligts that describe the emitter lumen...but interesting is the comparing
> between the different flashlights...IMO i really cant see that these quarks are noticeable brighter, than other lights with the same type of led.



comparing my quark to my other lights, it is definitely brighter than what my other lights are stated to be in terms of lumens. my nitecore EX10 Q5 on the lowest setting is said to be 3 lumens; the quark on moonmode is said to be 0.2 lumens (OTF), but quark's moodmode seems dead even or a tad brighter than the nitecore's 3 lumens. the quark's OTF 90 lumens is WAY brighter than 90 emitter lumens on my other lights. i thoroughly appreciate this flashlight's modesty!



matrixshaman said:


> The Quark lights are really great in so many ways. I do have one little issue that I'd like to mention to see if anyone else is having this and what can be done for it. I think one other member mentioned something similar - that is the head is difficult to tighten to get into the 'high' and strobe mode. I'm using an AW 14500 in this AA Quark. I found I could barely get the high to come on until I backed off the ring holding the clip a little. It still seems the head is very tight to turn and I've got strong hands. I lubed it with PTFE (teflon) which I have found has made every light I own twist easier and smoother removal of tailcaps and so on to change batteries. This was done after I noticed how difficult it was to turn the head. I think it may have improved slightly but not to where I'd like it. Maybe this will loosen up with use? In the meantime are others finding it hard to turn (noticeably harder than the Fenix Turbo mode done by twisting the head)?



yeah, i had the same tightness issue with the head of my quark. i think maybe the o-rings are a little thick, or maybe the o-ring slots are a few thousandths of an inch shallow. i took mine out and relubed it, twisted the head back and forth for about a minute and now it's much better. firm, but not too tight.



toby_pra said:


> Infact everybody likes different designs...but IMO it could have another design, something new!





hiredgun said:


> What we need to see in the market right now, is something Fenix did with the E01 and that is offer up some colors. I'm getting very sick of the same "tactical" and "special ops" black and OD green. Personally I love the look of anodized purple or orange (not gold).



i'm not much on fancy designs or crazy colors. i like uniqueness, but nothing too outlandish. to me, a flashlight design should be fairly simplistic, with an emphasis on functionality. i think there's more to be said about subtle design attributes. anything too crazy and far out and you end up with something that looks ridiculous; look at the Pontiac Aztek!! i think the quark is just about perfect all the way 'round. i already mentioned what's great about this light way back in part 1. as far as colors go, i usually prefer black, stainless steel... something bada** looking. nothing too bright or blingy for me. although the splash anodizing on the special edition nitecore 'sunspot' and 'whetstone' are somewhat appealing, but not worth the crazy jacked up prices.

a variety of different brands, models and designs exist because different people like different things.

the quark may be for you; then again, it may not.

i'm assuming that the quark 'regular tail' selling on the 7777 site for $9 comes with the clicky switch and not just the housing... am i correct? 'cause i kinda just bought one for an extra just-in-case replacement clicky. anyone know?


----------



## Federal LG (Jun 17, 2009)

Oh man... the wait is killing me! Damn Postal Service!!


----------



## burntoshine (Jun 17, 2009)

Federal LG said:


> Oh man... the wait is killing me! Damn Postal Service!!



tell me about it! i ordered some batteries from 7777 recently... i tracked the shipment and it went to New Jersey before heading here to Missouri. it took about a week instead of the usual 2 days. i'da been pissed if they sent the quark to nj, too.


----------



## matrixshaman (Jun 17, 2009)

matrixshaman said:


> The Quark lights are really great in so many ways. I do have one little issue that I'd like to mention to see if anyone else is having this and what can be done for it. I think one other member mentioned something similar - that is the head is difficult to tighten to get into the 'high' and strobe mode. I'm using an AW 14500 in this AA Quark. I found I could barely get the high to come on until I backed off the ring holding the clip a little. It still seems the head is very tight to turn and I've got strong hands. I lubed it with PTFE (teflon) which I have found has made every light I own twist easier and smoother removal of tailcaps and so on to change batteries. This was done after I noticed how difficult it was to turn the head. I think it may have improved slightly but not to where I'd like it. Maybe this will loosen up with use? In the meantime are others finding it hard to turn (noticeably harder than the Fenix Turbo mode done by twisting the head)?



As somewhat of an answer to my own question I received the 123 body today and it is totally different than the AA body in regards to ease of turning the head. It was smooth with just the right amount of friction - exactly the way it should be on the AA body. I honestly don't think a lot of people could even turn the head on my AA body. I'll take a close look with the magnifiers to see if I can determine the difference on the AA body but I think this piece needs a return to 4Sevens. 

I'd like to hear from any others that have the AA body if theirs is also this tight - sounds like burntoshine's one was somewhat tight. Anyone else?

Edit : I took a close look under magnifiers at both the 123 body and AA body. First I found that the AA body works great if the head and tail are reversed so it's in the bezel up carry position. The head turns easy. And it works great on the 123 body. I used a micrometer on a number of dimensions but could not find anything of significance that would cause the extreme tightness on one end of the AA body. What I finally noticed and I believe is the problem is the last half turn of thread has the groove mostly missing. I think this is the problem and it's supported further by the fact that removing the O-ring from that end did little in aleviating the problem - almost no difference with the O-ring off. This would have been difficult to spot initially by QC as it is somewhat in the area under the clip. I'm guessing this may be a one of a kind or just one of very few that have this problem.


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Jun 18, 2009)

After enjoying the past week with my great Q123 I finally got around to unpacking the Q123-2.

It came well packed with similar accessories and the neat magnetic flap box. I put the two included 4Sevens CR123's in and turned on the light to compare it to the single cell version. On max it was about the same, perhaps slightly brighter. After a minute or so I noticed the Q-123-2 was getting hot so I switched to the lower levels. Somehow, they were missing. Six clicks with the head untwisted gave what looked like four shots of max and two shots of high. With the head twisted tight the strobe function was missing, only max. The head continued to feel uncomfortably warm so I turned the light off and removed the batteries. The head had a burnt electrical smell.

I tried a set of used Surefire CR123's and some 3.0 volt Tenergy RCR's, same result, most modes missing and the light gets hot fast. I probably should have quit on the first set of batteries but I noticed that the Q123 worked with some RCR's and not with others and someone else had reported problems with the included batteries so I thought it was worth a try. 

Well, it's been a bad week for flashlights I suppose.:sigh: My Nitecore EZAA failed after a day when the small spring in the head came loose. I e-mailed 4Sevens support over the weekend, so far haven't heard back. I'll try copying the e-mail to the web form, I tried e-mail first because I wanted to include a picture of the broken spring.

And I guess I'll see what I need to do to get this Q123-2 replaced. I really don't want to swap parts with the Q123 to troubleshoot since it seems to be working perfectly so far.


----------



## toby_pra (Jun 18, 2009)

WadeF said:


> There are other lights that do this and that, but they are often lacking in one area or another. The Quark seems to have a lot of good features all in one light, as well as some new things.


 
IMO a good light stands also for a good new design...sure all the tecnical 
features important too, but not only. The design of the Quarks is not new.
I don't like the design, the Quarks look like all the other Fenix, Nitecore lights...

But its a subjective point of view.


----------



## toby_pra (Jun 18, 2009)

burntoshine said:


> comparing my quark to my other lights, it is definitely brighter than what my other lights are stated to be in terms of lumens. my nitecore EX10 Q5 on the lowest setting is said to be 3 lumens; the quark on moonmode is said to be 0.2 lumens (OTF), but quark's moodmode seems dead even or a tad brighter than the nitecore's 3 lumens. the quark's OTF 90 lumens is WAY brighter than 90 emitter lumens on my other lights. i thoroughly appreciate this flashlight's modesty!


 
Funny, when i look at the beamshots from UnknownVT in his review the
Quark AA for exapmle is not brighter, than the compared Nitecore or Fenix,
with the same type of battery...perhaps i am blind?! 

In fact i think the Quarks may have some improvements, but i cant understand
why they have no new design. This is my opinion, and the reason why i
never would buy one...:shakehead :nana:


----------



## jgraham15 (Jun 18, 2009)

Vox Clamatis in Deserto said:


> After enjoying the past week with my great Q123 I finally got around to unpacking the Q123-2.
> 
> It came well packed with similar accessories and the neat magnetic flap box. I put the two included 4Sevens CR123's in and turned on the light to compare it to the single cell version. On max it was about the same, perhaps slightly brighter. After a minute or so I noticed the Q-123-2 was getting hot so I switched to the lower levels. Somehow, they were missing. Six clicks with the head untwisted gave what looked like four shots of max and two shots of high. With the head twisted tight the strobe function was missing, only max. The head continued to feel uncomfortably warm so I turned the light off and removed the batteries. The head had a burnt electrical smell.
> 
> ...



That just sucks A**!!!! 

I hope the rest of your week goes better! :twothumbs


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 18, 2009)

Then why do you bother wasting your time posting on this thread? Seems like you're trying desperately to start an argument here...

Why read about and continually post about lights you do not like, and do not impress you? :thinking:


----------



## jblackwood (Jun 18, 2009)

toby_pra said:


> Funny, when i look at the beamshots from UnknownVT in his review the
> Quark AA for exapmle is not brighter, than the compared Nitecore or Fenix,
> with the same type of battery...perhaps i am blind?!
> 
> ...



Well, pictures are one thing and I can't speak for the reviewer's lights, but my D10's aren't as bright as my QuarkAA and neither is my LD10. Plus, the tint is oh so much better than the Green (D10) , Violet (D10, GDP), and 60's batman blue (LD10) of my other ights. Take me at my word or ask me to post pictures. Either way, I've said it twice on this thread, I won't say it again. Have a great one, man.


----------



## jgraham15 (Jun 18, 2009)

GarageBoy said:


> I hope selfbult gets his hands on them



A big +1

I can't wait to see a selfbuilt review on the Quarks


----------



## defloyd77 (Jun 18, 2009)

Toohotruk said:


> Then why do you bother wasting your time posting on this thread? Seems like you're trying desperately to start an argument here...
> 
> Why read about and continually post about lights you do not like, and do not impress you? :thinking:



+1

4Sevens knew what he was doing when he designed these lights and I wouldn't have him change a thing physically speaking. When I do get my AA tac Quark, I am not going to care it looks like "just another light" I'm going to be enjoying that awesome beam and the ability to program the 2 modes any way I want them. Are there any other lights that you can program the UI that I love so much about my L2T and P100A2?


----------



## toby_pra (Jun 18, 2009)

Toohotruk said:


> Then why do you bother wasting your time posting on this thread? Seems like you're trying desperately to start an argument here...
> 
> Why read about and continually post about lights you do not like, and do not impress you? :thinking:


 
No not really...but this is a thread about discussing advatages and disadvantages of the Quarks and its my good right to say what i not
like respectivly could be better IMO! :tired:


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Jun 18, 2009)

> I hope the rest of your week goes better! :twothumbs


 
Thanks, I've bought lights from David for years now, the EZAA and the Q123-2 are about the only casualties I can think of. I probably should have sent only one support e-mail but there were two order numbers involved.

I love the Q123, it has the low low and high high that I admire in Henry's lights. I've got a Novatac EDC 120P handy for comparison, it looks like a Hummer next to a Volkswagen beside the Q123 but the Q is brighter on max. The default lowest settings are about the same, just right for maintaining dark adaptation with just enough light to get around.

I've got enough CR123's to last the rest of my life (if I die next Tuesday ) but I'll probably get the QAA's to give to family members.


----------



## DM51 (Jun 18, 2009)

toby_pra said:


> No not really...but this is a thread about discussing advatages and disadvantages of the Quarks and its my good right to say what i not
> like respectivly could be better IMO! :tired:


That is so - but only up to a point. You have repeated yourself several times now, and your posts are becoming tiresome and disruptive. We've heard enough from you on this topic. Continued negativity of this sort may be regarded as trolling.


----------



## toby_pra (Jun 18, 2009)

Sorry i never wanted to become my posts in this thread disruptive. 
I just had the feeling, that other opinions are not acepted in this thread
and criticism is not desired or in any way be taken seriously.​


----------



## defloyd77 (Jun 18, 2009)

Toby, what would you change about the Quark?


----------



## toby_pra (Jun 18, 2009)

There are some aspects of the quark are well managed, I can not deny that. I have already said, i had a different design is desired. 

For example: 
-a different color also (HAIII oliv)
-to have a retaining ring / or bezel to choose
-upside-down clip...​


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jun 18, 2009)

toby_pra said:


> There are some aspects of the quark are well managed, I can not deny that. I have already said, i had a different design is desired.
> 
> For example:
> -a different color also (HAIII oliv)
> ...



Perhaps in the future there will be some color choices. The clip is reversible on all except the 123. 

I know what you mean about the brightness being more less the same as other R2 lights...it would have been nice if they were clearly brighter. But I guess there is only so much one can get out of the R2 without pushing it to the point of risk...and 47`s has to stand behind these with the 10 year performance warranty. It does have a very nice beam pattern...for the "fine wine" folks. Great throw...wide spill.

These lights incorperate many small improvements that in total make it a very nice light at a great price. Every CPFer will find something they wish was different...but most folks will be happy romancing it for a while...till the 47`s MC-E comes out.


----------



## LightWalker (Jun 18, 2009)

What other light gives 30 days runtime for less than $100?

The only thing I would change about the Quark light is how stiff the regular clickie is.


----------



## copperfox (Jun 18, 2009)

I like the Quarks, and I fully intend to buy one. Almost all of the features I think are great. However, the only disappointing feature IMO is that the clip is not deep-carry. The whole complaint about bezel-up carry is that it leaves a lot of flashlight exposed out of the pocket, and the quark clip, despite being reversible, suffers from this too. I don't think it would be difficult to sell just a clip that allowed for deep carry, would it? I don't think it would be necessary to redesign the way the clip mounts or any other part of the light. Ideas?


----------



## Federal LG (Jun 18, 2009)

I believe that EVERY light has pros and cons.

I don´t get my Quark AA yet (damn USPS!), but I think it´s a kind of light that has just a few disavantages, if compared to other lights in the same category.

David (4Sevens) is a flashaholic, and he´s been around here a long time, reading all our opinions about this and that, and I believe he tried to build the most perfect light, based in our (and his) opinions through the years...

Quark lights has more "pros" than "cons", IMO.

As a flashaholic, I love low-low mode, good knurling, perfectly centered LED, nice tint, nice bin, small size, good overall construction, good regulation and runtime, fair prices, acessories...

Of course everything could be better. I love that natural anodizing of Surefire L1, or the silver finish of Surefire Backup, for example. I love their optics too! Even brand new Quark lights could be even better, but IMHO, right now, they´re the best thing your money can buy, in their category...

But I would LOVE a natural finish anodized Quark... hehehe.

Damn postal service... where´s my Quark AA ??


----------



## chrisWELD (Jun 18, 2009)

copperfox said:


> I don't think it would be difficult to sell just a clip that allowed for deep carry, would it? I don't think it would be necessary to redesign the way the clip mounts or any other part of the light. Ideas?



I've just received my Q123. Great light and am v happy with it 

An optional deep carry dual direction clip which fits in the same way as the std clip would be something a lot of people would be willing to pay for IMO - myself included. 

Maybe something akin to the SF backup clip - loops back on itself for clipping in either direction.

I'd also like to see a lighter action on the std tailcap clicky. I noticed in the marketplace threads that 4Sevens will be issuing new rubber boots with a softer compound which should fix the issue. These will be available in 3 weeks time or so.

So he's listening to peoples' comments and responding


----------



## JermsMalibu (Jun 18, 2009)

I do like the Quarks. I wish you could get an optional smooth reflector though. That'd be awesome to have something that size that could throw like a Lowe's Taskforce 2C or better. I also wouldn't mind a bit deeper pocket carry as well. However, I love that the clip can be turned around to allow it to clip to a hat or something. Overall, they're very nice lights.


----------



## burntoshine (Jun 18, 2009)

toby_pra said:


> Funny, when i look at the beamshots from UnknownVT in his review the
> Quark AA for exapmle is not brighter, than the compared Nitecore or Fenix,
> with the same type of battery...perhaps i am blind?!



i'm just going by my own observations. i can definitely see the difference between rating a flashlight by 'out the front' lumens and rating it by 'emitter' lumens. i read somewhere that they gave the light a conservative rating because they have to consider people using crappy batteries. 

i was NOT expecting this light to be as bright as it is due to the fact that it's rated 90lm OTF; i had forgotten about the different rating. i was pleasantly surprised!

compare the quark AA on turbo to a fenix L1D-CE or another light rated at 90 or 100 emitter lumens and you'll see what i'm talking about.



Federal LG said:


> Damn postal service... where´s my Quark AA ??



have you checked New Jersey?



copperfox said:


> I like the Quarks, and I fully intend to buy one. Almost all of the features I think are great. However, the only disappointing feature IMO is that the clip is not deep-carry. The whole complaint about bezel-up carry is that it leaves a lot of flashlight exposed out of the pocket, and the quark clip, despite being reversible, suffers from this too. I don't think it would be difficult to sell just a clip that allowed for deep carry, would it? I don't think it would be necessary to redesign the way the clip mounts or any other part of the light. Ideas?



i agree. that's one of the few things i think could be better, BUT i LOVE the fact that it's reversible/removable; very, very cool! ...but then i don't like the fact that you have to take off the o-ring to remove the clip. ...but then again it's totally worth it and it'd probably be a pain and/or more costly to engineer it so you don't have to remove the o-ring... though i guess they could've just made the flashlight a few millimeters longer so they could have given that metal ring (that tightens over the clip) more room to let the clip out, but i guess now i'm just rambling; my bad.


----------



## Lux-ury (Jun 18, 2009)

*Re: The Quark 123-2 comment and question*

I got my Q123-2 yesterday. I like the idea but I have a few issues with the execution.

First, the good: I like the UI. It fits with how I use a light, as I explained earlier in Part 1. Beam is clean. Packaging very nice. Very classy lanyard. No skimping there. The low low is very nice, although I think it is a tiny bit brighter than the low on my RA-Clicky, and the Clicky has a broader and even smoother beam, but of course costs more than double. The Quark is a good price/performance balance.

The so-so: I wonder how we're supposed to attach that tiny split ring. I gave up after about 15 minutes. Not a big deal. Like some others, I'd prefer a clip that lets the light ride very low, but the one on the 123-2 is not bad. And the light is really too slim and long to tail-stand. It falls over at the slightest disturbance. But that's a small price to pay for the compact body.

The bad: That switch. Works waaaay too hard for me. I only manage to turn the light on about half the time. If you're going to have that hard a switch, the light needs much more aggressive knurling, or even rubber ribs. I use a cigar grip, and pushing the switch almost forces the light out of my hand. This is a very big drawback. 

Not to end on the negative, can anyone tell me if rechargeable batteries can be used? I'm not technical so I don't know. RCR123? Or?

[P.S. I hope it's okay that I changed the subject.]


----------



## LightWalker (Jun 18, 2009)

*Re: The Quark 123-2 comment and question*



Lux-ury said:


> I got my Q123-2 yesterday. I like the idea but I have a few issues with the execution.
> 
> First, the good: I like the UI. It fits with how I use a light, as I explained earlier in Part 1. Beam is clean. Packaging very nice. Very classy lanyard. No skimping there. The low low is very nice, although I think it is a tiny bit brighter than the low on my RA-Clicky, and the Clicky has a broader and even smoother beam, but of course costs more than double. The Quark is a good price/performance balance.
> 
> ...


 
I used a toothpic to attach the split ring to mine. You can use RCR123's in both single and double cell lights and a 17670 in the double cell light, according to 4Sevens.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jun 18, 2009)

*Re: The Quark 123-2 comment and question*

Just received my review units today. Observations begin now and continue until I have everything written (and beyond). My initial impressions though are very high indeed. These lights are quite a force to be reckoned with.


----------



## Grumpy (Jun 18, 2009)

I just noticed that someone had already answered your question above but will leave my answer here also.


The instruction booklet shows a operating voltage of 3.0v to 9.0v

2 R123 batteries hot of the charger would be 4.2v x 2 or 8.4v so it should be OK to use rechargeables.

Please let someone else confirm before you try it however.


----------



## Hiker (Jun 18, 2009)

How are the Quarks on throw? 

If they have good throw how do they compare with an LD20 or something similar?

I have not read the whole thread so if this has already been discussed my apologies.


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 18, 2009)

I just got my Quark 123 and 1AA body and I must say, VERY, VERY nice!!! :twothumbs

I really do love this light! I was very pleasantly surprised by the great tint of this light...I didn't expect it to be as warm/neutral as it is. It's even better than my L2D Q2, which is MUCH better than my L1D Q5. My new Quark makes my L1D's tint look so blue, it's like a cheap 5 MM coin light, only very bright! I was going to wait for the warm tints to come out before I got a Quark, but I'm glad I didn't...VERY nice tint and no loss in output for the warm tint LED. 

Excellent beam as well, no artifacts, very smooth, tight (but not _too _tight) hotspot, great spill, VERY nice!!! 

And I actually think the button tension is just right...this light is going in my pocket with the keys and change and whatnot , so it's a good thing it's slightly stiff to prevent accidental activation.

And for those of you that thought there was too much branding on the Quarks...get yourself a clipless 123...the "4 7" on the tailcap is the _only _branding on this light, period. 

And as far as the clip goes (1AA body), very heavy duty and solidly attached...I don't use clips as a general rule, but this one is nice. I can see the point about deep carry as well, but I don't see why one couldn't be made for it using the same attachment point, sometime in the future.

Great job 7777!!! :rock::rock::rock:

PS. I too would love to see an HA olive color at some point...all of my Fenix lights are olive, and I really like that color. It seems to hide scratches and wear better than black as well.


----------



## Stress_Test (Jun 18, 2009)

How's the runtime on max?

One of the reviewers here (can't remember who; maybe UnknownVT?) compared the Quark AA to the L1D Q5, and the L1D was brighter in turbo mode. The Quark should therefore have longer runtime on max than the L1D on max, yes? (The binning info I saw on Cree's site indicates the XP-E R2 has more lumens at 350ma than does the XR-E Q5, ie greater efficiency)


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 19, 2009)

From another thread care of *csshih*...












If you saw how bright this little sucker is, and how far it throws, this is pretty respectable, IMHO.


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 19, 2009)

I just compared my new Quark with my L1D, both with Duraloops, and to my eyes, the Quark kicks the L1D's @ss! YMMV.

And to Hiker, I can't speak for the L2D (don't have one), but Quarks definitely throw very well...especially for their size! With the 123 body on Max, its flat out amazing! :rock:


----------



## oldpal (Jun 19, 2009)

Well yesterday I received my Quark AA. I had a pre-order for a warm emitter, but after reading the Quark posts I broke down and changed my order. The light is very nice and works great with 14500s. It appears to be my brightest light. I previously posted that I didn't believe that I would like the clip and even stated that I thought the Ra Clicky clip to be better. Well I have changed my mind, the Quark clip is not too bad. The little bit of light that sticks out of my pocket doesn't bother me at all. I won't have any problem carrying it in my right-front pocket.

Has it been reported in this forum that, with the light on, two clicks within about three seconds of one another act as a momentary press and therefore advance to the next light mode? Maybe it was assumed because of the stated wait from off to return to first mode in the sequence.

Anyway, I'm just tickled with the Quark AA.:twothumbs

Hugh


----------



## Mikellen (Jun 19, 2009)

oldpal said:


> Well yesterday I received my Quark AA. I had a pre-order for a warm emitter, but after reading the Quark posts I broke down and changed my order.
> 
> 
> How were you able to previously pre-order the warm emitter version? I can't find the pre-order for the warm emitter Quarks on the 4sevens website.
> ...


----------



## Nos (Jun 19, 2009)

Mikellen said:


> oldpal said:
> 
> 
> > Well yesterday I received my Quark AA. I had a pre-order for a warm emitter, but after reading the Quark posts I broke down and changed my order.
> ...


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jun 19, 2009)

oldpal said:


> Well yesterday I received my Quark AA. I had a pre-order for a warm emitter, but after reading the Quark posts I broke down and changed my order. The light is very nice and works great with 14500s. It appears to be my brightest light. I previously posted that I didn't believe that I would like the clip and even stated that I thought the Ra Clicky clip to be better. Well I have changed my mind, the Quark clip is not too bad. The little bit of light that sticks out of my pocket doesn't bother me at all. I won't have any problem carrying it in my right-front pocket.
> 
> Has it been reported in this forum that, with the light on, two clicks within about three seconds of one another act as a momentary press and therefore advance to the next light mode? Maybe it was assumed because of the stated wait from off to return to first mode in the sequence.
> 
> ...



Hi Oldpal, can you comment on the brightness compared to your D10 GDP with both powered by 14500?


----------



## oldpal (Jun 19, 2009)

Mikellen said:


> oldpal said:
> 
> 
> > Well yesterday I received my Quark AA. I had a pre-order for a warm emitter, but after reading the Quark posts I broke down and changed my order.
> ...



Just use the special instructions area to specify a warm-emitter.



Badbeams3 said:


> Hi Oldpal, can you comment on the brightness compared to your D10 GDP with both powered by 14500?



The QAA looks to be the brighter. It has a fairly concentrated beam, to me much more so than the D10 GDP. The D10 GDP has a more gradual transition from hot-spot through the corona to spill. Again, I think that the QAA appears to be much brighter than the D10 GDP. It's, however, my subjective opinion. I think that the post by HKJ reporting on the lux values at 2 meters will bear this out even though the measurements were made, I think, using Eneloops. https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2983671&postcount=37

Hugh


----------



## HKJ (Jun 19, 2009)

oldpal said:


> The QAA looks to be the brighter. It has a fairly concentrated beam, to me much more so than the D10 GDP. The D10 GDP has a more gradual transition from hot-spot through the corona to spill. Again, I think that the QAA appears to be much brighter than the D10 GDP. It's, however, my subjective opinion. I think that the post by HKJ reporting on the lux values at 2 meters will bear this out even though the measurements were made, I think, using Eneloops. https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2983671&postcount=37
> 
> Hugh



The lux measurements are in my first post, the one you links to is a evaluation of the optic system, i.e. if the reflector is designed for throw or flood.


----------



## bodhran (Jun 19, 2009)

Just got my 2AA body. The included protective caps look sharp and it's nice that they included a clip. I suppose they didn't have to, as the clips are removable on most of the lights, but the purpose of giving us a spare battery holder is a nice touch. Just have to be patient and wait until dark to give the 2AA a try. I know that 4 sevens likes to tease...but to release this light when we are approaching the longest day of the year is a little much.


----------



## NonSenCe (Jun 19, 2009)

warm tints ready on site for pre-order. should i really get one pre order.. i hate those things. paying for something that is basically non existant still.


----------



## MicroE (Jun 19, 2009)

I bought two of the AA2 lights and I like them very much. 
The switch is a bit loud and a bit stiff, but the Quarks have so many positive features (brightness, throw, small size, long battery life) that I will probably buy more in the Quark series.
They were a lot less expensive than my Surefires, so I can buy more.


----------



## Grumpy (Jun 19, 2009)

I really like my Quark 123 so far.

The only thing I don't like is the stiff switch. 

I love the clip that is made in to the light. I can clip it to my hat and it holds very well and makes a good headlight that way. I fish a lot of the night time and this is a big + for me. 

I also like the size of the light. 

I like the user interface a lot also. 

I can always get low low or turbo from off which is very handy.

Also if you bump it up from low low and then twist the head to get turbo it remembers where it was at when you twist the head back. This is a very neat feature because I can set it where I want it while walking around and if a hear a noise in the distance I can simply tighten the head for turbo and after checking out the situation I just twist back and get the same level of light that I was using when I was walking etc. Very neat feature of the user interface.

I don't have to worry about messing my night vision up and also can get maximum light when needed.

I would like to thank 4 sevens for making a nice light that comes with a clip to attach to a hat etc. A good clip is very important to me.


----------



## mbiraman (Jun 19, 2009)

You know i've just started reading these threads on flashlights a few days ago and my head hurts. Too much info for my newbie brain so i've decide just to jump in and get the Quark AA. I have a couple of quick questions. Seems like i can use either reg AA or nimh or liIon. Have i got that right?. If so what would give me the most bang for my buck and whether its nimh or LiIon what batteries and charger (if needed ) would you recommend. Thanks ahead of time especially to HKJ for all the comparison stuff.


----------



## Grumpy (Jun 19, 2009)

Does anybody know if the Quark flashlights have low voltage protection?

It is not listed in the specifications but I just want to make sure.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jun 19, 2009)

Grumpy said:


> Does anybody know if the Quark flashlights have low voltage protection?
> 
> It is not listed in the specifications but I just want to make sure.


I think it would be safe to say that no, they do not have low voltage protection. The same circuitry that is capable of 4.2v to run Li-ions is also capable of running the 1.2v Ni-MH cells which would mean it would be draining the Li-ion far below it's safe voltage.


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Jun 19, 2009)

> How were you able to previously pre-order the warm emitter version? I can't find the pre-order for the warm emitter Quarks on the 4sevens website.


 


> Somehow you can write a comment to your ....... like warmwhite emitter..... but im not sure how or where -.-


 
I had the same question, if you click on the 4Sevens brand logo on the home page, it takes you to a page with six items, the regular Quark lights and a ballcap.

There is a link that says 'For more information on all of the Quarks Click HERE' That gives you a nice brochure but no more lights.

However, on a menu on the upper left side of the '4Sevens Lights' page you can select other pages for 'Quark Tactical', 'Quark Limited-Run' and 'Quark Accessories'.

Needless to say, I need to avoid those pages before I order more Quarks!



> I can always get low low or turbo from off which is very handy.
> 
> Also if you bump it up from low low and then twist the head to get turbo it remembers where it was at when you twist the head back. This is a very neat feature because I can set it where I want it while walking around and if a hear a noise in the distance I can simply tighten the head for turbo and after checking out the situation I just twist back and get the same level of light that I was using when I was walking etc. Very neat feature of the user interface.
> 
> I don't have to worry about messing my night vision up and also can get maximum light when needed.


 
I've been using the instant low and high, thanks for pointing out the transition to high and back from an intermediate setting.



> I would like to thank 4 sevens for making a nice light that comes with a clip to attach to a hat etc. A good clip is very important to me.


 
I tried this out with the Q123 and it works great on a ballcap. I used to carry a headlight in my backpack, quit using it but I do always have a ballcap in the pack. This light with a cap is just what I need for my occasional headlight use.



> With the 123 body on Max, its flat out amazing! :rock:


 
I agree, it really rocks.


----------



## defloyd77 (Jun 20, 2009)

"These neutral white limited-run Quarks are a one-time production due to special request by members of candlepowerforums.com. We have a very VERY limited quantity of these. When we run out then there will be no more."

Crap! That means by the time I have the money, there won't be any neutrals left.


----------



## Vox Clamatis in Deserto (Jun 20, 2009)

> "These neutral white limited-run Quarks are a one-time production due to special request by members of candlepowerforums.com. We have a very VERY limited quantity of these. When we run out then there will be no more."


 
Ouch, I hadn't seen that.

Uh, new order sent...

Maybe I need to get a boat or a mistress, it might be cheaper.:shakehead


----------



## insanefred (Jun 20, 2009)

I think I'll pre-order a Quark 2xAA warm tactical.
I am glad there isn't gonna be any price difference.

I have to ask though, why is the warm emitters limited?!:mecry:


----------



## Zeruel (Jun 20, 2009)

mbiraman said:


> You know i've just started reading these threads on flashlights a few days ago and my head hurts. Too much info for my newbie brain so i've decide just to jump in and get the Quark AA. I have a couple of quick questions. Seems like i can use either reg AA or nimh or liIon. Have i got that right?. If so what would give me the most bang for my buck and whether its nimh or LiIon what batteries and charger (if needed ) would you recommend. Thanks ahead of time especially to HKJ for all the comparison stuff.



Yes, you can. But take note not all lights can take Li-ion, check the specs.
As to best bang for your buck, get primary batteries if you don't need to use your Quark AA often, nimh if you do. Li-ion only if you want to spend more for the most output. For nimh, eneloop batts and charger will do. For Li-ion chargers, it's still debatable but most users here recommend Pila. I'm using Ultrafire WF-139 (new version) without any problem so far. For more info on batteries and chargers, do a search, you can find almost anything you need to know.


----------



## Mikellen (Jun 20, 2009)

Grumpy said:


> Also if you bump it up from low low and then twist the head to get turbo it remembers where it was at when you twist the head back. This is a very neat feature because I can set it where I want it while walking around and if a hear a noise in the distance I can simply tighten the head for turbo and after checking out the situation I just twist back and get the same level of light that I was using when I was walking etc. Very neat feature of the user interface.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## BigBluefish (Jun 20, 2009)

Just pre-ordered a Quark 123, no-clip, warm-tint, tactical, with a 2 x AA body tube. 

Think it's time for a yard sale here! 

Need... more... money....


----------



## matrixshaman (Jun 20, 2009)

AardvarkSagus said:


> I think it would be safe to say that no, they do not have low voltage protection. The same circuitry that is capable of 4.2v to run Li-ions is also capable of running the 1.2v Ni-MH cells which would mean it would be draining the Li-ion far below it's safe voltage.



Not necessarily true. The Liteflux LF2XT can use Alkaline(1.5V), NIMH(1.2V), NICD(1.2), Primary Lithium(1.7V) & rechargeable Li-Ion 10440(4.2V) and it DOES have the ability to protect from over discharge. I think it depends on what it sees as the starting voltage when a battery is inserted as to what point it sets for over discharge cutoff. That's not to say that the Quark has OD protection but I think it's possible - however if it hasn't been advertised I doubt it has it.


----------



## trapperjay (Jun 20, 2009)

I love my new single 123! In fact, I'm ready to say goodbye to the LD20 Fenix. The Fenix was my first quality flashlight and as impressive as it was/is, it has a purple tint that I just don't care for. 4sevens did good!


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jun 20, 2009)

matrixshaman said:


> Not necessarily true. The Liteflux LF2XT can use Alkaline(1.5V), NIMH(1.2V), NICD(1.2), Primary Lithium(1.7V) & rechargeable Li-Ion 10440(4.2V) and it DOES have the ability to protect from over discharge. I think it depends on what it sees as the starting voltage when a battery is inserted as to what point it sets for over discharge cutoff. That's not to say that the Quark has OD protection but I think it's possible - however if it hasn't been advertised I doubt it has it.


Good to know. I was unaware of that. I agree though that the quarks likely don't since it hasn't been advertised.

I keep hoping for a chance to review a Liteflux, but I haven't found an opportunity yet. They seem like really nice lights.


----------



## mbiraman (Jun 20, 2009)

Zeruel, Thanks


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 20, 2009)

Mikellen said:


> Grumpy said:
> 
> 
> > Also if you bump it up from low low and then twist the head to get turbo it remembers where it was at when you twist the head back. This is a very neat feature because I can set it where I want it while walking around and if a hear a noise in the distance I can simply tighten the head for turbo and after checking out the situation I just twist back and get the same level of light that I was using when I was walking etc. Very neat feature of the user interface.
> ...


----------



## burntoshine (Jun 20, 2009)

anyones else's quark sometimes flicker when you turn it to the forth level (high, bezel loosened)?

it only does it every once in a while, but it's pretty darn stupid.

it did it before on a eneloop and i thought it was the battery because the battery was indeed low, but then i put a freshly charged eneloop in and it still does it. seems like 1 out of 15 or maybe even 1 out of 20 times when turning it onto high mode. i think it did it a lot on the first battery when it was really low, but it still does it on a fresh battery. i'm going to try messing with high on a lithium and an alkaline and see what's what.

mine's a quark AA.

anyone?

i'm going to email 4sevens.


----------



## burntoshine (Jun 20, 2009)

Toohotruk said:


> Mikellen said:
> 
> 
> > It only remembers levels while the flashlight is on...once turned off, it will start on either Moonlight or Max, depending on which way the head is set.
> ...


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 20, 2009)

Well, excuse me! :ironic:


----------



## Mikellen (Jun 20, 2009)

Toohotruk said:


> Well, excuse me! :ironic:


 
Thank you Toohotruk for your answer to my question. Please don't take offense by that statement I think the reply was more directed to me.

My apology to burntoshine for not reading part 1.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jun 20, 2009)

Sounds like a memory like mine


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 20, 2009)

No problem.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jun 20, 2009)

Sounds like a memory like mine :green:


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 20, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> Sounds like a memory like mine




Me too...I've read so much about these lights on so many threads, that I'm losing track of where I read what.

Then there's that oldtimer's thing...:shrug:


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jun 20, 2009)

:thinking: I meant the lights memory :nana: 

I meant the lights memory


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 20, 2009)

What were we talking about??? :thinking:


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jun 20, 2009)

Toohotruk said:


> Mikellen said:
> 
> 
> > It only remembers levels while the flashlight is on...once turned off, it will start on either Moonlight or Max, depending on which way the head is set.
> ...


----------



## gorkon (Jun 20, 2009)

I just got my Quark 123 clipless today. Dropped in a Tenergy LiFePO4, set it to max, and was amazed at the amount of light that exits this thing.

I compared it to a P1D Q5 on max, and the Q123 is noticeably brighter, which makes sense (170 OTF vs 180 emitter). Build quality is excellent and mine only has a slight and barely noticeable anodizing flaw on the tail. Moonlight mode is very low, but brighter than a LF2X on min, but it is low enough for most duties when needing to preserve night vision and/or not disturb anyone else. It is lower than a D10.

Clicky is perfect, not too hard to press and not too loud. Mine also has no brand marking except the '47' on the tail making it look like a custom light. The LED is perfectly centered and the beam is very smooth and, surprisingly, slightly on the warm side. Throw seems very good for such a small reflector although I haven't had a chance yet to try it outdoors.

One other note is that the tail button domes out when the light is opened and closed again due to trapped air pressure. This makes tail standing a bit unstable until the air slowly leaks out over a few hours. I noticed that the P2D I had did the same thing - not a big deal and shows the waterproofness of the light.

Overall, I like it alot and I thank 4sevens for designing and getting a light like this into production. It is really an impressive light and the effort that went into the packaging alone is amazing.

One last thing is if anyone knows if this light has any parasitic drain. It's a clicky, so it most likely doesn't, but if anyone knows for sure, please respond. TIA.


----------



## loanshark (Jun 20, 2009)

QUOTE=Toohotruk;2989089] 
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Mikellen* 

 

_It only remembers levels while the flashlight is on...once turned off, it will start on either Moonlight or Max, depending on which way the head is set._

"Alright...someones got to ask...isn`t that the same as no memory?"



The way my Fenix L1D works is no memory...


----------



## burntoshine (Jun 20, 2009)

Mikellen said:


> Thank you Toohotruk for your answer to my question. Please don't take offense by that statement I think the reply was more directed to me.
> 
> My apology to burntoshine for not reading part 1.



no, my bad guys. no one has time to read everything. i never should have even posted that.

sorry if it came across ignorantly.


----------



## burntoshine (Jun 20, 2009)

i'm not sure if i should even worry about my 4th level flicker. it barely ever does it. i might write 7777 just to check and report; see what they say.


----------



## Mikellen (Jun 20, 2009)

gorkon said:


> I just got my Quark 123 clipless today. Dropped in a Tenergy LiFePO4, set it to max, and was amazed at the amount of light that exits this thing.
> 
> I compared it to a P1D Q5 on max, and the Q123 is noticeably brighter, which makes sense (170 OTF vs 180 emitter). Build quality is excellent and mine only has a slight and barely noticeable anodizing flaw on the tail. Moonlight mode is very low, but brighter than a LF2X on min, but it is low enough for most duties when needing to preserve night vision and/or not disturb anyone else. It is lower than a D10.
> 
> ...


 

According to 4sevens there is no parasitic drain on the Quark flashlights.


----------



## drmaxx (Jun 21, 2009)

mbiraman said:


> You know i've just started reading these threads on flashlights a few days ago and my head hurts. Too much info for my newbie brain so i've decide just to jump in and get the Quark AA. I have a couple of quick questions. Seems like i can use either reg AA or nimh or liIon. Have i got that right?. If so what would give me the most bang for my buck and whether its nimh or LiIon what batteries and charger (if needed ) would you recommend. Thanks ahead of time especially to HKJ for all the comparison stuff.



For a newbie, I would recommend to get some NiMH (eneloops) and a single chanel charger. There is a large choice and it is cheap. If you start using LiIon be aware of the dangers and buying something decent requires more careful investigation. Additionally, I am not aware of any tests that shows that LiIon are more efficient in the Quarks. Theoretically they should - because of the higher voltage they might be more efficient. But as seen from Zebralight, this does not have to be in all cases.
So before investing in LiIon - I would wait until the first reviews are out.


----------



## IceRat (Jun 21, 2009)

I just got my Quark aa and I really like it! I liked the tint of the EZaa but my Qaa is alot warmer. I ordered on Tuesday and the wife received it on Saturday and hid it from me till today. Now to buy the aa2 and 123 tubes.

Well done 4sevens!! :goodjob:

And now to wait for night....:rock:


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jun 21, 2009)

Does anyone know the discount code for CPF when ordering stuff from 47`s? I want to order some batts.

Thanks!


----------



## matrixshaman (Jun 21, 2009)

greenLED maintains the discount list on CPFM here: click


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jun 21, 2009)

matrixshaman said:


> greenLED maintains the discount list on CPFM here: click



Thanks a bunch


----------



## Crenshaw (Jun 21, 2009)

PLaced a preorder for a warm tactical 123A, maybe i can provide a comparison between that and the normal version when the passaround comes my way

Crenshaw


----------



## BigBluefish (Jun 21, 2009)

insanefred said:


> I think I'll pre-order a Quark 2xAA warm tactical.
> I am glad there isn't gonna be any price difference.
> 
> I have to ask though, why is the warm emitters limited?!:mecry:


 
I don't believe that there are as many emitters that come out with warm-white tints. IIRC, they don't plan the specific tints in production of the a particualr emitter, but rather, the output levels the emitters are capbable of, run at a specific voltage. So, some of these emitters are "cool white" some are "neutral white", while some are "warm white," and a few, unfortunately, are "squid-urine green," as another poster so eloquently put it.

At least, that's what I think happens with the Cree XR-Es, and XP-Es, so, in a run of emitters that get binned at say, Q2, Q3, Q5, or R2, there will be a range of tints produced within each "bin." I guess maybe differnt types of emitters (Seoul, Luxeon) will have a different range of possible tints within each bin. It just happens that there are fewer of the "warm whites," and it may just be that CPF types have come to decide these are desireable, so they may either cost more, or be available in lower quantities, or both.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jun 21, 2009)

"Once their gone their gone"...jeese...that does put the pressure on. A brighter R2 or a warmer but dimmer beam. Soon to be rare. Brighter better...or nice and warm.

Could buy one AA R2 and a 2xAA warm so I had different bodies. But for $60 bucks I could take my gal out for dinner and a movie...she expects that every weekend...could pretend to be sick...skip a weekend...hmm

One other idea would be to just order a warm AA...and a standard head for $40...be less than $100 with the CPF discount.


----------



## wapkil (Jun 21, 2009)

BigBluefish said:


> I don't believe that there are as many emitters that come out with warm-white tints. IIRC, they don't plan the specific tints in production of the a particualr emitter, but rather, the output levels the emitters are capbable of, run at a specific voltage. So, some of these emitters are "cool white" some are "neutral white", while some are "warm white," and a few, unfortunately, are "squid-urine green," as another poster so eloquently put it.



My impression (unfortunately not backed by any knowledge, only some logic) is that the manufacturers actually do plan the production of cool, neutral and warm tints. That's why we see warmer tints of new performance bins only some time after the cool ones. They don't happen accidentally and the production for some reason has not started yet. 

You are probably right that the specific bins are selected after the LEDs are produced but I think the LEDs are produced differently for different warmth larger "big-bins" within which the actual final bins are selected.

It would be nice if someone who actually knows the production process could offer real information here 

I suspect that even though warmer tints are still in minority, their importance will grow with growing influence of LEDs in "generalized lighting market". The most popular currently "angry blue" cool ones will find their niches but the majority will be in neutral or neutral-warm ranges.


----------



## LightWalker (Jun 21, 2009)

The Knurling on the Quark lights is nice, makes me want to throw my Fenix lights againts the wall.


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 22, 2009)

I love the knurling on the Quarks too. :twothumbs



Sure makes it easier to do a one handed head twist!


----------



## Egsise (Jun 22, 2009)

Grumpy said:


> Does anybody know if the Quark flashlights have low voltage protection?
> 
> It is not listed in the specifications but I just want to make sure.





> Power: One AA Battery (0.9V~4.2V)



Low voltage protection at 0.9V?
Could someone confirm this?


----------



## matrixshaman (Jun 22, 2009)

No low voltage protection AFAIK. The 0.9v to 4.2v is just the stated range of operating voltage it can work with. I'm not sure though if it will totally cutoff when a battery gets below 0.9v or whether it can keep running at dimmer levels. I guess if it totally cuts off at that point then you could say it's a sort of protection for NiMH.


----------



## 4sevens (Jun 22, 2009)

No voltage protection for li-ions.

I have to say at this juncture that UNPROTECTED li-ions are NEVER recommended. In any of our lights or others. It's not worth the risk.
You've read in the news about exploding cell phones - people getting their face burned - those are from unprotected aftermarket cells.

We don't even like to sell our protected ones. Folks, please becareful.
Don't use unprotected li-ions. Just don't do it!


----------



## Egsise (Jun 22, 2009)

4sevens said:


> No voltage protection for li-ions.
> 
> I have to say at this juncture that UNPROTECTED li-ions are NEVER recommended. In any of our lights or others. It's not worth the risk.
> You've read in the news about exploding cell phones - people getting their face burned - those are from unprotected aftermarket cells.
> ...


Wut, I was talking of regular AA NiMH!
The question was: is there over discharge protection at 0.9V or not?


----------



## gorkon (Jun 22, 2009)

I just noticed/reminded myself of the function of lights with twisty functions that if the head of the Quark is backed off a just a little, a bit of thumb pressure can get it to go to max from moonlight or any mode and back again.

This can be useful when a quick blast of max is needed.


----------



## burntoshine (Jun 22, 2009)

link invalid


----------



## EugeneJohn (Jun 22, 2009)

burntoshine said:


> caught on video



Hi Burntoshine, 
does the flashlight ever show this behavior on 'max' mode, bezel tightened?

If thats the case then you might try cleaning all the electrical contact surfaces with rubbing alcohol or some other light solvent to remove any invisible schmutz that might be interfering with electricity flow at the high current settings?

Other than that, I'm at a loss. Good luck.

John.


----------



## burntoshine (Jun 22, 2009)

EugeneJohn said:


> Hi Burntoshine,
> does the flashlight ever show this behavior on 'max' mode, bezel tightened?
> 
> If thats the case then you might try cleaning all the electrical contact surfaces with rubbing alcohol or some other light solvent to remove any invisible schmutz that might be interfering with electricity flow at the high current settings?
> ...



hasn't flickered on max yet, but i've been directing all my attention to the high mode. i will check max mode each time, too. i've taken out the eneloop and put in the duracell (that it came with) and cleaned the threads & contacts. it hasn't done it since, but it would only flicker every once in a while. it needs further testing since these changes. 

it's very strange. it works perfectly 95% of the time, but every once in a while, when i turn it on and step up to high mode, it's crazy from the get-go and won't stabilize; only in high mode so far.

never had a problem before that was this inconsistent.

hopefully it's just something with the eneloops or was a contact issue.


----------



## lightwait (Jun 22, 2009)

Ok, I want a Quark 123-1 cell with no clip. I want a 1AA body with the option to use the clip. Do I order a clipless 123 and a AA body OR order the 1AA Quark and the spare 123 body?? Will either setup work, or is one prefered? The 1AA light is slightly cheaper, but I just want to make sure I can do the swap I described. Thanks


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jun 22, 2009)

That one sounds like you could go either way. I believe that you would end up with exactly the same setup there.


----------



## defloyd77 (Jun 22, 2009)

It'll be the same, 1aa complete will be cheaper.


----------



## Girryn (Jun 23, 2009)

lightwait said:


> Ok, I want a Quark 123-1 cell with no clip. I want a 1AA body with the option to use the clip. Do I order a clipless 123 and a AA body OR order the 1AA Quark and the spare 123 body?? Will either setup work, or is one prefered? The 1AA light is slightly cheaper, but I just want to make sure I can do the swap I described. Thanks



Depends on what size you want the holster to be, buy the full unit based on holster size then get the other body.


----------



## Xak (Jun 23, 2009)

Can the Quark 123 and AA handle RCR123 and 14500 @ 3.6 volts? How do they compare to other EDC 1 cell lights as far as efficiency? Ex: Lumapower IncenDio, Lumapower ConneXion, Dereelight C2H, Olight Infinity series, etc.


----------



## Palor (Jun 23, 2009)

lightwait said:


> Ok, I want a Quark 123-1 cell with no clip. I want a 1AA body with the option to use the clip. Do I order a clipless 123 and a AA body OR order the 1AA Quark and the spare 123 body?? Will either setup work, or is one prefered? The 1AA light is slightly cheaper, but I just want to make sure I can do the swap I described. Thanks .


 
Tried something similar:
I also intended to buy the AA version with the 2AA body. I asked 4sevens if for the 2AA body also a the bigger holster and the longer rubber strip will be delivered. The response was, that this is a good question but right now there is no solution. Maybe as an option in the future. :thumbsup:

So I ordered the Quark 2AA yesterday (my wife decided, that AA is too small! :huh.
But I still need to substitute my old Maglite Solitaire! Maybe a Nitecore D10R2? Or if the Quark is as good as expected, than either the AA body or a full AA version.....


----------



## wild68fury (Jun 23, 2009)

Anyone else have trouble with RCR123 in their Q123x2. My new aw's are too long.


----------



## Julian Holtz (Jun 23, 2009)

Hi burntoshine,

If the problem has not been solved yet, I would disassemble the tailcap, flood the switch with alcohol, click it several times, let it dry up really good at a dry place, and assemble everything again.
After that, I can't think of anything else to do...


----------



## lightwait (Jun 23, 2009)

Girryn said:


> Depends on what size you want the holster to be, buy the full unit based on holster size then get the other body.


Ah, great point, I didn't even think about the holster. Looks like the clipless 123 should be the complete unit for me. Thanks.


----------



## 4sevens (Jun 23, 2009)

Egsise said:


> Wut, I was talking of regular AA NiMH!
> The question was: is there over discharge protection at 0.9V or not?


Sorry I was thinking li-ions. Yes there is protection.
Yes it should be very dim at 0.9v. I'm making a runtime test right now.
Yes it cuts off a 0.9v which should be safe for nimh. By the time it gets close to 0.9v it should be very noticeable already.



burntoshine said:


> i'm not sure if i should even worry about my 4th level flicker. it barely ever does it. i might write 7777 just to check and report; see what they say.


I investigated this. Sometimes this is due to some resistance from between the head and the body. Since the threads are also needed to conduct electricity, it needs to be clean, free from debris and lubricated (deoxit is best). What you're describing is specific to the state of charge or capacity of your battery. The slight bit of resistance is causing the light to jump in and out or regulation. It jumps into regulation, increasing the load on the battery thus lowering the V, then it jumps out of regulation but then the V goes up which after a while the circuit decides to jump back into regulation. 


Xak said:


> Can the Quark 123 and AA handle RCR123 and 14500 @ 3.6 volts? How do they compare to other EDC 1 cell lights as far as efficiency? Ex: Lumapower IncenDio, Lumapower ConneXion, Dereelight C2H, Olight Infinity series, etc.


Yes they are designed to take 3.6v (actually 4.2v when full). There is full buck/boost regulation. 

Efficiency? Two part answer - Yes, our circuit is more efficient than PWM (as demostrated by the 30 day 1ma runtime) And Yes it's more efficient than a just a boost circuit which overdrives the LED for the first 10-20 minutes. But regulating both buck and boost allows efficient use of your battery. I always say, a flashlight that runs out of juice is WORSE than a rock when backpacking. You can always throw away the rock but you're forced to keep the useless flashlight for the rest of the hike until you find batteries. Efficiency = smart.

Second part of the answer. Buck/boost is slightly less efficient than say just buck or just boost. Effectively you're supporting to sets of drivers - each kicking in as needed. Boost, pushing voltage up as needed and Buck pushing voltage down as needed. We had this consideration when we designed the circuit and considered everything. 1) we wanted to fully support li-ion properly with buck/boost - not many manufacturers do this because it's a hassle and more expensive 2) since you're bucking for the first bit of the runtime, the little bit of efficiency hit (from supporting two circuits) is outweighed by the extra runtime from bucking the circuit instead of direct drive from boost only (which wastes lots of energy as well is dangerous for the LED).

Sorry for such a long answer, but there it is. I hope it helps.


lightwait said:


> Ok, I want a Quark 123-1 cell with no clip. I want a 1AA body with the option to use the clip. Do I order a clipless 123 and a AA body OR order the 1AA Quark and the spare 123 body?? Will either setup work, or is one prefered? The 1AA light is slightly cheaper, but I just want to make sure I can do the swap I described. Thanks


Either way will work  Lego's (tm) are fun aren't they?


----------



## f22shift (Jun 23, 2009)

sort of weird question. could it run on 3 nimhs? i guess so based on the volt range. i'm trying to think if there would be any advantage of 3 as in a 3aa body. maybe longer runtime?


----------



## zipplet (Jun 23, 2009)

Remember NiMH can be 1.4V hot off the charger, making 4.2V - at the upper limit of the voltage range. What if the user puts in alkalines (4.5V) or even lithium AA's? Could fry the light with a 3 cell body.


----------



## f22shift (Jun 23, 2009)

actually one serious question that i'm not sure if it was answered. maybe somebody can chime in. i know the the regular versions dont have the anodized tailcap thread(no lockout) which is not a deal killer entirely since it's recessed. 
but what about the tactical series with the exposed button?


----------



## DHart (Jun 23, 2009)

David... have there been any changes or modifications to the switches or switch boots on Quarks to make the activation a little easier? I seem to recall some mention of a mod/revision of some sort.... :thinking:

One thing I noticed is that when using the AA tube, the effort required to turn the head for mode changes is much greater than it is when I use the 123 body. It seems that perhaps the o-ring on my AA tube is larger, causing a lot more friction between the head and the body. Or the diameter of the AA body/threads is slightly larger. Any thoughts on this? I am going to try switching 0-rings between the AA body and the 123 body to see if that helps...

EDIT to add: the turning effort I experienced is in part due to increased spring pressure due to longer 14500 cells... by choosing a shorter 14500 cell and backing off the tailcap just a bit, the pressure is reduced and the turning effort required is less. With Eneloops and L91 primaries, which are shorter than 14500 cells, there is no head turning issue whatsoever. 

However, when reversing which end of the battery tube faces forward, required turning pressure is different, in one direction it's still very stiff and less so when the tube is reversed >>>> this is due to thread cut not completed for last 1/2 turn opn the one end of the AA tube. 4Sevens contacted about this.

The tint from my Quark XP-E R2 emitter is wonderful, very neutral, not cold, not blue, not green, not pink, not warm... clean and neutral! The beam is virtually artifact-free with a nice, wide spill. Very nice. Here is how my Quark beam looks racked up next to some other popular lights...


----------



## wapkil (Jun 23, 2009)

4sevens said:


> Efficiency? Two part answer - Yes, our circuit is more efficient than PWM (as demostrated by the 30 day 1ma runtime)



Well, I don't think it's a good example. Actually at 0.2lm for 30 days the light average efficacy is only around 20lm/W. That's probably two or three times less than in other modes (and in other lights). As I wrote in another discussion, this can be expected because with such a low current the LED efficacy is pretty poor. You simply cannot get a high efficacy from a constant current light at that level. It would be more interesting to compare the Quarks to other lights on higher levels, where the constant current regulation could have some advantages.


----------



## oldpal (Jun 23, 2009)

wapkil said:


> Well, I don't think it's a good example. Actually at 0.2lm for 30 days the light average efficacy is only around 20lm/W. That's probably two or three times less than in other modes (and in other lights). As I wrote in another discussion, this can be expected because with such a low current the LED efficacy is pretty poor. You simply cannot get a high efficacy from a constant current light at that level. It would be more interesting to compare the Quarks to other lights on higher levels, where the constant current regulation could have some advantages.



You mean efficiency,don't you?

Hugh


----------



## wapkil (Jun 23, 2009)

oldpal said:


> You mean efficiency,don't you?
> 
> Hugh



No, I don't. I mean efficacy (luminous efficacy to be precise). Efficiency is generally dimensionless, while I'm talking about lm/W figures.


----------



## oldpal (Jun 23, 2009)

wapkil said:


> No, I don't. I mean efficacy (luminous efficacy to be precise). Efficiency is generally dimensionless, while I'm talking about lm/W figures.



That's efficiency.

Hugh


----------



## wapkil (Jun 23, 2009)

oldpal said:


> That's efficiency.
> 
> Hugh



Interesting, could you provide some explanation to back that claim? 

I'm not a lighting expert so I may be wrong but even a simple google search shows that "luminous efficacy" is indeed what I'm talking about. As opposed to "luminous efficiency" which is (obviously) dimensionless and would be related to radiant flux and not luminous flux we are interested in.


BTW, I don't think it is necessary to be that precise on a public forum and I wouldn't correct anyone for using the term efficiency to denote efficacy. I used it only to avoid confusion between the the driver efficiency and overall luminous efficacy. It is another situation though to be corrected for using what I believe is already the correct wording.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jun 23, 2009)

I thought it was at lower ma setting that leds were more efishant.


----------



## jcw122 (Jun 23, 2009)

toby_pra said:


> IMO a good light stands also for a good new design...sure all the tecnical
> features important too, but not only. The design of the Quarks is not new.
> I don't like the design, the Quarks look like all the other Fenix, Nitecore lights...
> 
> But its a subjective point of view.



Why are you judging this light based on aesthetics? So what if it looks similar? That has absolutely no real world application. So what if he doesn't have a "new" design? "New" does not mean better. New usually just means exciting, and marketable. 

Also, the Quarks have clips, which not many Fenix lights have. I would really like to have a clip, I think holsters make people look silly, and I can't have something of weight loose in my pocket when I run, as it is uncomfortable.


----------



## oldpal (Jun 23, 2009)

wapkil said:


> Interesting, could you provide some explanation to back that claim?
> 
> I'm not a lighting expert so I may be wrong but even a simple google search shows that "luminous efficacy" is indeed what I'm talking about. As opposed to "luminous efficiency" which is (obviously) dimensionless and would be related to radiant flux and not luminous flux we are interested in.
> 
> ...



Looks like your right.

Hugh


----------



## 4sevens (Jun 23, 2009)

f22shift said:


> sort of weird question. could it run on 3 nimhs? i guess so based on the volt range. i'm trying to think if there would be any advantage of 3 as in a 3aa body. maybe longer runtime?


It very well can use a 3aa body - however the 2aa body is already quite long.
Most people here like compact lights.


wapkil said:


> Well, I don't think it's a good example. Actually at 0.2lm for 30 days the light average efficacy is only around 20lm/W. That's probably two or three times less than in other modes (and in other lights). As I wrote in another discussion, this can be expected because with such a low current the LED efficacy is pretty poor. You simply cannot get a high efficacy from a constant current light at that level. It would be more interesting to compare the Quarks to other lights on higher levels, where the constant current regulation could have some advantages.


Actually, a good bit of the energy is from the overhead of the driver. It's like leaving a car running on idle - it may run for quite a long time but hardly efficient. The 1ma mode can't claim to be the most lumen per watt. I think the peak efficiency is between 20ma and 30ma. So low and medium are your best bang for your buck as far as your batteries goes (10ma and 50ma).


DHart said:


> David... have there been any changes or modifications to the switches or switch boots on Quarks to make the activation a little easier? I seem to recall some mention of a mod/revision of some sort.... :thinking:
> 
> One thing I noticed is that when using the AA tube, the effort required to turn the head for mode changes is much greater (not enjoyable at all) than it is when I use the 123 body. It seems that perhaps the o-ring on my AA tube is larger, causing a lot more friction between the head and the body. Or the diameter of the AA body/threads is slightly larger. Any thoughts on this? I am going to try switching 0-rings between the AA body and the 123 body to see if that helps...
> 
> The tint on my Quark is wonderful; the beam is nearly artifact-free with a nice, wide spill. Very nice. Here is how my Quark beam looks racked up next to some other popular lights...


New boots are being made. We'll send them to those who ordered the first run upon request. Please don't ask until we have them. thanks 


Badbeams3 said:


> I thought it was at lower ma setting that leds were more efishant.


There's circuit efficiency and LED efficiency. Typical peak LED efficiency (power LED's) is between 20ma and 30ma. Peak driver efficiency is around 350ma and the closer to Vf the better (usually 3.0~3.5).


----------



## oldpal (Jun 23, 2009)

DHart said:


> One thing I noticed is that when using the AA tube, the effort required to turn the head for mode changes is much greater (not enjoyable at all) than it is when I use the 123 body. It seems that perhaps the o-ring on my AA tube is larger, causing a lot more friction between the head and the body. Or the diameter of the AA body/threads is slightly larger. Any thoughts on this? I am going to try switching 0-rings between the AA body and the 123 body to see if that helps...



Dhart, I have the same hard-to-turn head on my QAA. Today I received a Q 2xAA body, including clip, O-rings and end caps. If I put the Quark head on the 2xAA body and the head turns fairly easily. I used a magnifying lens to look at the O-rings and the QAA one looks fatter (larger diameter.) Swapped the O-rings and the QAA head turns much easier. I guess you could try the other O-rings that came with your QAA, even the one on the tail cap.

Hugh


----------



## DHart (Jun 23, 2009)

oldpal said:


> Dhart, I have the same hard-to-turn head on my QAA. Today I received a Q 2xAA body, including clip, O-rings and end caps. If I put the Quark head on the 2xAA body and the head turns fairly easily. I used a magnifying lens to look at the O-rings and the QAA one looks fatter (larger diameter.) Swapped the O-rings and the QAA head turns much easier. I guess you could try the other O-rings that came with your QAA, even the one on the tail cap.
> 
> Hugh



Hugh... thanks for your comments... that's exactly my next move to swap around o-rings and see if that takes care of the problem. The way my AA body is now, I don't like using it at all, it's just takes too much effort to turn the head!


----------



## loanshark (Jun 23, 2009)

DHart said:


> Hugh... thanks for your comments... that's exactly my next move to swap around o-rings and see if that takes care of the problem. The way my AA body is now, I don't like using it at all, it's just takes too much effort to turn the head!


 
My QAA is nice and tight, the 2AA body is just a bit too easy to turn for my taste...


----------



## wapkil (Jun 23, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> I thought it was at lower ma setting that leds were more efishant.



David already explained that there is the driver and the LED that matters. The power LEDs perform poorly both at high and low currents but low are usually not the concern as they are rarely driven so low. I thought about the driver but some of the current consumption measurements I saw in Q123 HKJ's review were surprising enough for me (e.g. almost equal driver efficiency for moonlight, and max with CR123s? :shrug that I decided not think about them until there are enough runtime graphs to explain any doubts (i.e. waiting for Selbuilt's review ).

My point anyway was that there is not much sense in comparing the lights at the 0.2lm level where every one will perform poorly.


----------



## DHart (Jun 23, 2009)

Head turning tension...

Changing o-rings didn't result in much change... I did find that of the two ends on the AA body, one end provided a slightly easier head turn than the other, when the same o-ring was used on each end... and I also quickly found that the longer the cell, the harder the turn. 

Li-Ion cells are generally significantly longer than NiMH cells and lithium/alkaline primaries. There is no head turning issue with the short NiMH and primaries. But it's another story with the Li-Ions, which are longer.

It seems that some Li-Ion makers now, in their zeal to beef-up capacity, are making their cells ever longer and longer... and this is making fitment issues start to arise and more difficulty to turn the head on a light like the Quark, which relies on head turning for mode changes. 

Backing off the tailcap can help with the longer cells, if you don't mind the tailcap being less than fully tightened on. I found that my AW 14500 750 mAh protected cell is the same length as my Trustfire 14500 900 mAh protected cell and both are noticibly shorter than my longest 14500 protected cell, which is an Ultrafire 900 mAh 14500 protected (silver wrapper) cell. Of these three cells, the AW & Trustfire allow a little easier head turning. In my D10, I found the Ultrafire 900 mAh 14500 protected (silver wrapper) cell to be somewhat reliable (have had some operation quirkiness with this cell). With any of my Li-Ions, I need to back the tailcap off somewhat from fully tightened to ease the tension on the cell and allow easier head turning. Using an Eneloop or L91 circumvents any head turning issues, but I happen to prefer Li-Ions, generally, and they are my #1 power source choice.

NOTE: regardless of the cell type used, when I mount the head on the end of the AA tube that does not have the clip tightening collar, the turning effort is heavy, when I mount the head on the end of the AA tube that does have the clip collar, turning effort is easier. It turns out that this is due to a thread cut problem... threads not cut all the way on one end of my AA tube.


----------



## NathanJK (Jun 23, 2009)

I have one really quick and probably silly question....If I order the 123 version, will the light be just as bright if I use RCR123 batteries? I'm down to the battery ordering part of the process and my lack of knowledge is slowing me down!


----------



## wapkil (Jun 23, 2009)

NathanJK said:


> I have one really quick and probably silly question....If I order the 123 version, will the light be just as bright if I use RCR123 batteries?



You mean RCR123s instead of CR123s? According to the description and tests should be, only the runtime will be shorter.


----------



## NathanJK (Jun 23, 2009)

wapkil said:


> You mean RCR123s instead of CR123s? According to the description and tests should be, only the runtime will be shorter.



Yes, that is what I meant! Thanks for the clarification, I have read a lot but it's all starting to just mush together in my head...


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jun 23, 2009)

DHart said:


> Head turning tension...
> 
> Changing o-rings didn't result in much change... I did find that of the two ends on the AA body, one end provided a slightly easier head turn than the other, when the same o-ring was used on each end... and I also quickly found that the longer the cell, the harder the turn.
> 
> ...



Disappointing to hear the problems 14500 batts are causing. I just bought a AW 14500 batt from the 47`s store. Then today I ordered a AA Quark. Hope I don`t need a pipe wrench to go with it.

Have you tried vegetable oil on the O rings? I have had good luck with this in the past regarding slightly fat O rings...might make a small improvement.


----------



## DHart (Jun 23, 2009)

Badbeams... I think you'll be ok with the AW 14500 Li-Ion... and if you do find the tension too tight, just back the tailcap off a little (and try the vege oil) and you will find the tension decreases. I'll give a try with the vege oil on mine too, thanks.


----------



## LightWalker (Jun 23, 2009)

OOPS wrong thread. Deleted.


----------



## burntoshine (Jun 23, 2009)

4sevens said:


> I investigated this. Sometimes this is due to some resistance from between the head and the body. Since the threads are also needed to conduct electricity, it needs to be clean, free from debris and lubricated (deoxit is best). What you're describing is specific to the state of charge or capacity of your battery. The slight bit of resistance is causing the light to jump in and out or regulation. It jumps into regulation, increasing the load on the battery thus lowering the V, then it jumps out of regulation but then the V goes up which after a while the circuit decides to jump back into regulation.



yes, i got an email back from Trevor. i do believe that is indeed what was going on. i think some silicone grease got around in there. the grime was difficult to see. i had cleaned the threads, but i guess not good enough. no further problems! you did a great job with this light! i love it! thanks!



Julian Holtz said:


> Hi burntoshine,
> 
> If the problem has not been solved yet, I would disassemble the tailcap, flood the switch with alcohol, click it several times, let it dry up really good at a dry place, and assemble everything again.
> After that, I can't think of anything else to do...



thanks! but i knew it wasn't the tail cap since i have two for the quark and it flickered on both. appreciate the tip though!


----------



## IceRat (Jun 23, 2009)

I just thought of something... 

Hey 4Sevens!!! How about a nice little keychain QUARKaaa. 

lovecpf


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 23, 2009)

WOW! Looks like the Quark has just about the sweetest beam in all of those pictured...not too surprising to me though. I think the tint is perfect as well, it's just what I always wanted from my Fenix lights, but never got.

I think I finally found my perfect EDC light in the 123! 

Thanks for posting the pics DHart!


----------



## jcw122 (Jun 23, 2009)

I think I might have to pick up the Quark AA as my very first high-end light 

I really love how well rounded it is, and I can't find anything else I like as much for such a good price.

Now to figure out if I want the Tactical and/or Neutral White versions, haha.


----------



## 4sevens (Jun 23, 2009)

IceRat said:


> I just thought of something...
> 
> Hey 4Sevens!!! How about a nice little keychain QUARKaaa.
> 
> lovecpf


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 23, 2009)

4sevens said:


>




Now, why do I get the feeling there is something special behind that smile...


----------



## loanshark (Jun 23, 2009)

4sevens said:


>


 
OH ohhh oh oh!!! I know what that smile means. Spill!!!


----------



## burntoshine (Jun 24, 2009)

jcw122 said:


> I think I might have to pick up the Quark AA as my very first high-end light
> 
> I really love how well rounded it is, and I can't find anything else I like as much for such a good price.
> 
> Now to figure out if I want the Tactical and/or Neutral White versions, haha.



it's a great light! i highly recommend it.


----------



## jcw122 (Jun 24, 2009)

burntoshine said:


> it's a great light! i highly recommend it.



I keep hearing that, but I'm wondering if I should consider the Tactical version, I'm just not sure how much tailstanding, momentary on, or the difference in programming will matter to me.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jun 24, 2009)

One thing I noticed looking at Selfbuilts excellent review was the run time (max) on a rechargable 123 batt was 30 minutes...but on a 14500 it was 46 minutes.

More than 50% longer.

On hi (level below Turbo) the 123 ran 2 hours 10 min...14500 ran 3 hours 20 min. Huge diff again.

I think both batts were AW brand...both claim to be 750ma.

:thinking::thinking::thinking: Maybe the 123 batt used has seen some wear...or there is some incorrect ma specs on these. 

If the difference is on account of the heads...well that a big diff...


----------



## matrixshaman (Jun 24, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> One thing I noticed looking at Selfbuilts excellent review was the run time (max) on a rechargable 123 batt was 30 minutes...but on a 14500 it was 46 minutes.
> 
> More than 50% longer.
> 
> ...



While these two battery types might appear to be about the same in power based on the AW ratings I think they are low for the 14500. There might be differences in how good of shape each battery was in but the 14500's should have more power just based on the volume of the cyliner. I think the 14500 has roughly 29% more volume than the RCR123. That will usually equate to about 29% more power.


----------



## DHart (Jun 24, 2009)

I've wondered about RCR123 vs. 14500 as they both are 3.7v (well, 4.2) and both rated for 750 mAh.... so one would think from the specs that they should give about the same runtimes... but as Ken indicates, if the cell volume is significantly different, one would expect more capacity from the larger cell even if the stated specs are the same. But why would the stated specs be the same then? Seems odd, no? On the other hand, some of my 14500 cells are labeled 900 mAh. Not that I would necessarily trust the stated caacity on the label, but it does seem reasonable that a cell with 29% greater volume would have perhaps 29% greater capacity... other factors being relatively equal. My 14500 AW protected cells claim 750 mAh. My Trustfire and Ultrafire 14500 protected cells claim 900 mAh. Who know what the true capacities really are... I don't. I'm starting to feel the need to do some runtime tests for myself to learn from it what I can.


----------



## diff_lock2 (Jun 25, 2009)

What is the tactical UI like? I was about to order a tactical warm quark, but there is no UI info.


----------



## ingokl (Jun 25, 2009)

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=196499




> Operating your Quark 1232 Tactical is simple. Insert its batteries with the
> positive side (+) toward the head. Make sure the head and tailcap are
> tightened, then depress the tailcap button fully so that it ‘clicks’ and the light
> turns on. You can also press the tailcap lightly (you don‘t have to ‘click’ it on)
> ...


----------



## diff_lock2 (Jun 25, 2009)

Thanks.


----------



## nanotech17 (Jun 25, 2009)

i found a new ui for the quark,once you are on medium mode than twist the head to turbo mode than twist the head back to medium mode,the medium mode is still there


----------



## DHart (Jun 25, 2009)

selfbuilt reported in his Quark evaluation thread that he maintains close control on cell quality and capacity for the cells used in his testing. He also mentions that he typically finds a 10-30% greater capacity with protected 14500s vs. protected RCR123s, despite the common rating stated at 750 mAh. 

Some 14500 protected cells are now labeled as having a 900 mAh capacity, which would reflect about 20% greater capacity than 750 mAh rated/labeled RCR123s.

It looks like a fairly solid conclusion that one can usually expect somewhat longer runtimes from a protected 14500 vs. a protected RCR123, all other factors equal, even if they are both labeled as having 750 mAh capacity.

For myself... this adds a lot of fuel to the decision to choose the AA body vs. the 123 body. Longer runtime on 14500 Li-Ion with the AA vs the RCR123 and also the considerable merits of being able to drive the light with a AA lithium, AA Eneloop NiMH, AA alkaline. The Quark in AA configuration is a very appealing choice.


----------



## f22shift (Jun 25, 2009)

*Quark tactical UI programming*

I guess this is for the potential owners or people who preordered. how will you end up programming the 2 settings on what kind of activity.
for ex

activity : loose/tight

indoor/house : moonlight/med
biking : beacon/high
camping : moonlight/high
security : high/strobe

etc.


----------



## jcw122 (Jun 25, 2009)

DHart said:


> For myself... this adds a lot of fuel to the decision to choose the AA body vs. the 123 body. Longer runtime on 14500 Li-Ion with the AA vs the RCR123 and also the considerable merits of being able to drive the light with a AA lithium, AA Eneloop NiMH, AA alkaline. The Quark in AA configuration is a very appealing choice.



While I never considered the 123 version myself, I liked the Quark AA vs. the 123 because of the size. The 123 version almost seems too small. That and the battery config.


----------



## DHart (Jun 25, 2009)

jcw122 said:


> While I never considered the 123 version myself, I liked the Quark AA vs. the 123 because of the size. The 123 version almost seems too small. That and the battery config.



While I think the AA version makes the most sense generally, I also bought a 123 body for my Quark AA just for additional versatility... this because I have a lot of 123 lights and plenty of RCR123 cells and (in cold storage for potential emergency use) a lot of Panasonic 123 lithium primaries... and Energizer L91 AA lithium primaries on hand. For pocket carry, the 123 version is a bit more convenient. But I agree overall that the AA form factor and cell versatility makes a lot of sense!


----------



## NonSenCe (Jun 25, 2009)

oh i caved in.. ordered quark tac aa warm tint.


----------



## pobox1475 (Jun 25, 2009)

Is there a way to _lock-out_ a tac 123 in bag carry scenerios?


----------



## Shimmy (Jun 25, 2009)

I was about to get an O-light T25 until I saw these...

A couple of thing's I would like to know... 
I am looking at the AA2 Warm tint Tac.

I apologize if some/most of this has already been mentioned, I couldn't be bothered going through all the other posts (5am here).

How much dimmer is the warm tint? Any other differences between the warm and cool?

For the tactical model, say the most common brightness I use is low and high, and in some places want to use max or moonlight does it mean going through the whole programming thing to get to them?
As I understand it, to select between the 2 saved brightness levels is a twist of the head?
Does the momentary do anything when the light is turned on? (I think I got the right version?)

Main reason I am looking at the tactical is that there is no needing to cycle through strobe and sos... I personally have no use for them.

It also looks like it has a pretty tight albiet bright spot? How bright is the spill? How good is the throw on it? 
I guess what I am really asking here is, does it have good enough throw for a decent distance (anything similar to the Olight T25?) and bright/wide enough spill for close by things?
I saw the beam pics on another thread and they looked pretty good for me, but didn't really show the throw.

Any other nifty features added to this?
I like that the clip can be put on both ends, I personally prefer the head facing down, with a big/bright enough spill I figure it would be alright with it pointing at the ground and still see what needs to be done with 2 free hands.
I quite like the hand grip thingy, seems quite handy, probably makes my previous point obsolete.

I am sure I am forgetting something... will post it up when I remember.

Cheers.


----------



## DHart (Jun 25, 2009)

Shimmy... to get a warm tint, you are definitely going to take a hit in brightness. Until more official confirmation arrives, based on other lights I have with these emitters, I would expect the R2 to be somewhere in the neighborhood of perhaps 30% brighter than the Q3 5A. This brightness difference will likely be quite noticible as will a greater apparent contrast with the R2.

I have two L-Mini IIs, one with an R2 and and the other with a Q3 5C. Based on my experience with these lights, which may roughly translate over to the Quarks as far as comparing emitters goes, I much prefer the brighter, somewhat cooler, more contrasty R2 emitter for outdoors use... where I can really see the illumination difference in more distant objects. And I prefer the warmer tint, somewhat less bright Q3 emitter for indoor use & ceiling bounce room illumination. Of course, your mileage may vary! 

P.S. Look at my post #154 in this thread... there you will see comparative beamshots for the Quark XP-E R2 and also my L-Mini II w/ Q3 5C... the Quark R2 actually is a very neutral, clean white, not blue, not cold, not warm either... quite neutral. By comparison, the Q3 5C is VERY warm, which I like indoors, but not outside. Of course, tints can and sometimes do vary a bit from one light to another.


----------



## jcw122 (Jun 25, 2009)

Shimmy said:


> I was about to get an O-light T25 until I saw these...
> 
> A couple of thing's I would like to know...
> I am looking at the AA2 Warm tint Tac.
> ...



Here is the 4Sevens video for the Quark Tactical interface: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qtrg1ivqJtg

Not sure about throw.

Other neat features...hmm, I think the self-centering LED is neat. Not exactly a feature, but a lot of people say they like that.


----------



## jhc37013 (Jun 25, 2009)

*Re: Quark tactical UI programming*

Tighten will be set to max and loosened will be set to about half of max. Thats about perfect my my usage.


----------



## buraianto (Jun 25, 2009)

This light made me join the forum. Hello everyone. I have a question about holsters. So I bought a Quark AA with an AA2 body (boy, did it come fast!), without realizing that it came with a holster. Now I want a holster for the AA2 body size in addition to the single AA size holster. I don't see them sold separately on the 4sevens website. Can anyone recommend a good place to buy a holster that will fit the AA2 Quark? Thanks.


----------



## carrot (Jun 25, 2009)

*Re: Quark tactical UI programming*

I bet I am only one of two people with a T in hands right now.

I have it set to Max and Medium, and I think it is perfect. I can't wait for the production models to come out!

Review to come later.


----------



## jcw122 (Jun 26, 2009)

buraianto said:


> This light made me join the forum. Hello everyone. I have a question about holsters. So I bought a Quark AA with an AA2 body (boy, did it come fast!), without realizing that it came with a holster. Now I want a holster for the AA2 body size in addition to the single AA size holster. I don't see them sold separately on the 4sevens website. Can anyone recommend a good place to buy a holster that will fit the AA2 Quark? Thanks.



Why not try e-mailing 4Sevens? I bet they can hook you up with the holster.


----------



## Danbo (Jun 26, 2009)

I just have one silly question, that I haven't seen asked yet. Why reverse clicky? 

I just got a Quark 123-2 and I love it. Bright as heck. Beam is flawless, as is build quality. Just wondering why they went with a reverse clicky switch?


----------



## cslinger (Jun 26, 2009)

*Re: Quark tactical UI programming*

So Carrot, if possible, could you explain the UI to me?

So the twist head works like every other Fenix, correct?

The tactical lets the user choose one (1) output for each twist position (tight/loose)?

How does it get programmed?

Does the tail switch offer momentary on?

Thanks
Chris


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jun 26, 2009)

Danbo said:


> I just have one silly question, that I haven't seen asked yet. Why reverse clicky?
> 
> I just got a Quark 123-2 and I love it. Bright as heck. Beam is flawless, as is build quality. Just wondering why they went with a reverse clicky switch?


The reverse clicky was decided upon for the standard version of the Quarks because of the ease it affords in changing modes. The Tactical version soon to be offered will feature a slightly different UI and a protruding forward clcky to go along with it.


----------



## m16a (Jun 26, 2009)

Both the Quark threads are quite long, so I don't want to wade through everything, but does anyone have comparison of the throw of a Malkoff M30 verse the throw of the Q123 and the Q123 2? Any info in that regard would be very helpful! :thumbsup:


----------



## LightWalker (Jun 26, 2009)

*Re: Quark tactical UI programming*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qtrg1ivqJtg


----------



## JermsMalibu (Jun 27, 2009)

Well, I just got a Quark AA-2 in the mail yesterday and I must say that I really like the light. I got it to replace an L2D that I had gotten my dad that broke. This AA-2 is brighter than my P3D Q5 and the tint is amazing. I really like it. Great job 4Sevens. :thumbsup: The tint on this is pure white and the grass just pops compared to my other lights (P3D and NDI). The only downside I can see is that the switch is so hard to press. Hopefully when 4Sevens comes out with the new switch boots it'll fix the problem. Either way, I'm quite impressed with the light.


----------



## Burgess (Jun 28, 2009)

Can anyone tell me what is the *tint*

on these (Cool-White) Quark flashlights ?



Don't recall it ever being discussed.



Thank you.

_


----------



## zipplet (Jun 28, 2009)

Hard to describe but my Quark AA has a nice tint. Not blue and horrible like some other lights - it is whiter than my Nitecore D10. Kinda inbetween that and a fenix rebel light.


----------



## jcw122 (Jun 28, 2009)

Burgess said:


> Can anyone tell me what is the *tint*
> 
> on these (Cool-White) Quark flashlights ?
> 
> ...



Looking at some of the comparison pics, it looks neither warm nor cold, a nice white without odd color balance.


----------



## DHart (Jun 28, 2009)

Burgess said:


> Can anyone tell me what is the *tint* on these (Cool-White) Quark flashlights ?



Burgess, I don't have the answer to your question. All I know is that the emitter is an XP-E R2. No idea on the tint bin code. Hopefully someone will know and chime in with that.

I can refer you to post #154 where you can see that in comparison with quite a number of other popular lights, the tint on the Quark is relatively neutral. Not cold, not warm. Of course, neutral has something of a wide range in and of itself. In use on real world subjects, it is relatively difficult, if not impossible, to discern the subtle differences in tints. The Quark also has an exceptionally clean and relatively artifact-free beam. Spill beam is very wide and bright too. Very nice!


----------



## MichaelW (Jun 28, 2009)

The Quarks are still cool-white, that is why there is the special run of 1K neutral-white versions.
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2995680


----------



## Burgess (Jun 28, 2009)

Thank you for all the replies !

:twothumbs




To DHart, your photo-grid of 20 beams

was *very* helpful !

:twothumbs




Guess i'll hafta' rely upon *4Sevens & crew*

to tell us the actual *tint bin code*.




( hint, hint )

_


----------



## MichaelW (Jun 28, 2009)

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showpost.php?p=2315282&postcount=119
It is Quark-mania, hard to keep up.

Now the last 'series' of lights from 4-7s, the 18650 & MC-E


----------



## LightWalker (Jun 28, 2009)

MichaelW said:


> http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showpost.php?p=2315282&postcount=119
> It is Quark-mania, hard to keep up.
> 
> Now the last 'series' of lights from 4-7s, the 18650 & MC-E


 
Don't forget about the AAA.


----------



## tab665 (Jun 29, 2009)

i finnaly pulled the trigger on a clipless 123 quark to hold me over until the MC-E. although it will be hard to resist a tactical 123-2 until then. can anyone who owns both a M20 and a 123-2 quark comment on how the beams copmare (in regards to output).


----------



## antiplex (Jun 29, 2009)

*sigh* its been 2 weeks now since my quark 2aa was shipped and i'm anxiously awaiting its arrival.

i've read on the 4sevens page that shipping may take 2-5 weeks, but as far as i can recall, airmail packets in the past took about 8-10 days from the us to here (germany). 
anybody here who also got a quark shipped to germany? how long did it take?

hope it gets here soon because i could use this nice light pretty well from right now on...


----------



## qip (Jun 29, 2009)

2 weeks that is straight torture


----------



## burntoshine (Jun 29, 2009)

zipplet said:


> Hard to describe but my Quark AA has a nice tint. Not blue and horrible like some other lights - it is whiter than my Nitecore D10. Kinda inbetween that and a fenix rebel light.



i agree.


----------



## insanefred (Jun 29, 2009)

*Quark 2xAA questions*

I am planing on the getting the tactical 2xAA warm tint.
I have a few concerns and questions from other users.


First, is there any sign of the a "squeal" on turbo mode? (i.e. Fenix TK20) :shakehead

How is the brightness compared to tk20's low mode or a propoly lux 4xAA, when on high (70lumens)? 

Are the run times bloated or conservative when useing Sanyo eneloops?

Thank you in advance.


----------



## Federal LG (Jun 30, 2009)

antiplex said:


> *sigh* its been 2 weeks now since my quark 2aa was shipped and i'm anxiously awaiting its arrival.
> 
> i've read on the 4sevens page that shipping may take 2-5 weeks, but as far as i can recall, airmail packets in the past took about 8-10 days from the us to here (germany).
> anybody here who also got a quark shipped to germany? how long did it take?
> ...



Antiplex... I live in Brazil, and my Quark AA took exactly *12 days* to arrive. 

It arrived yesterday, and it´s great! I can´t see one single bad point about this light. I´m in love with mine, and I loved the new rubber fingergrip. Great idea!

_*"Patience you must have, young jedi"*_ - Yoda


----------



## insanefred (Jun 30, 2009)

*Re: Quark 2xAA questions*

111 views and no answers :shrug:


----------



## f22shift (Jun 30, 2009)

*Re: Quark 2xAA questions*

i don't think alot of ppl have it. maybe a reviewer can answer if you ask in their thread?


----------



## LightWalker (Jun 30, 2009)

*Re: Quark 2xAA questions*

The tactical 2xAA warm tint will ship 7-20-09.


----------



## insanefred (Jun 30, 2009)

*Re: Quark 2xAA questions*



LightWalker said:


> The tactical 2xAA warm tint will ship 7-20-09.




But by then... It'll be too late!:mecry:


----------



## LightWalker (Jun 30, 2009)

*Re: Quark 2xAA questions*



insanefred said:


> But by then... It'll be too late!:mecry:


 Yea, I guess you're probably right.


----------



## LightWalker (Jun 30, 2009)

*Re: Quark 2xAA questions*



insanefred said:


> I am planing on the getting the tactical 2xAA warm tint.
> I have a few concerns and questions from other users.
> 
> 
> ...


 
I have the regular 2xAA with regular tint and there is no squeal on any mode.


----------



## jcw122 (Jun 30, 2009)

*Re: Quark 2xAA questions*



insanefred said:


> I am planing on the getting the tactical 2xAA warm tint.
> I have a few concerns and questions from other users.
> 
> 
> ...



Earlier posts state that run times and lumens are conservative. Lumens were taken from the out the front, not at the emitter.


----------



## Toohotruk (Jun 30, 2009)

*Re: Quark 2xAA questions*



insanefred said:


> ...Are the run times bloated or conservative when useing Sanyo eneloops?
> 
> Thank you in advance.




Your answer can be found HERE.


----------



## Bushman5 (Jun 30, 2009)

qip said:


> 2 weeks that is straight torture


two weeks aint nothing, us canucks are used to having our parcels sit in Customs for two to three weeks......


----------



## EKL (Jun 30, 2009)

deleted


----------



## EKL (Jun 30, 2009)

Bushman5 said:


> two weeks aint nothing, us canucks are used to having our parcels sit in Customs for two to three weeks......



Not if you are getting it from 4Sevens.ca. Delivered in 3 Days.


----------



## Bushman5 (Jul 1, 2009)

true! i recently found that site and was not only delighted, but i also noticed price adjustments to correct for the CDN $ ! lower prices! :twothumbs 

two more days and i get a tax rebate from the gubmint. It will pay for a Quark 123! :naughty::twothumbs


----------



## recDNA (Jul 1, 2009)

All this talk of discharge protection and thread shape and not a word about whether there is a keychain loop on the single CR123 version? (I hate clips)

Anybody know if the single CR123 version is keychain-able?


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jul 1, 2009)

The Quark series all come with a Lanyard, clip, holster and rubber finger/handgrip. The lanyard attachment is a standard split ring on the tailcap. If you are looking for no clip on the 123 though you need to specifically purchase the clipless version since the clip on the standard version is non-removable.


----------



## Toohotruk (Jul 2, 2009)

recDNA said:


> All this talk of discharge protection and thread shape and not a word about whether there is a keychain loop on the single CR123 version? (I hate clips)
> 
> Anybody know if the single CR123 version is keychain-able?



The tailcap has holes in it and it comes with a small split ring that will fit in these holes, so keyring attachment shouldn't be a problem.


----------



## tab665 (Jul 2, 2009)

Toohotruk said:


> The tailcap has holes in it and it comes with a small split ring that will fit in these holes, so keyring attachment shouldn't be a problem.


 an EXTREMELY small split ring. im not sure if i trust it to hold; not that it matters, i found it too small to even get on.


----------



## Mr. Tone (Jul 2, 2009)

Hi guys. I am new and didn't see this question asked/answered in the Quark threads so here goes. Does anyone know if the warm tinted Quarks will have an XP-E 5A Q3, or a XR-E 5A Q3? I know the R2 is XP-E, but just unsure of the 5A emitter. I bought a DBS V3 with the 5A Q3 pill and can't get over how much more I like the tint over my Fenix LD20 and L2D CE, especially outdoors.


----------



## jcw122 (Jul 2, 2009)

Mr. Tone said:


> Hi guys. I am new and didn't see this question asked/answered in the Quark threads so here goes. Does anyone know if the warm tinted Quarks will have an XP-E 5A Q3, or a XR-E 5A Q3? I know the R2 is XP-E, but just unsure of the 5A emitter. I bought a DBS V3 with the 5A Q3 pill and can't get over how much more I like the tint over my Fenix LD20 and L2D CE, especially outdoors.



You can probably e-mail 4Sevens for that one.


----------



## copperfox (Jul 2, 2009)

Neutrals will also be XP-E. No reason to change the model of LED, that would just mess up the beam and might not even fit.


----------



## Mr. Tone (Jul 2, 2009)

I was hoping the 5A would be XP-E. I just wasn't sure if the warm tint was available in that emitter size or not. There is so much to learn around here.


----------



## Burgess (Jul 2, 2009)

to Mr. Tone --


Welcome to CandlePowerForums !


:welcome:



Good luck in yer' quest to find the perfect flashlight.


:candle:

_


----------



## nu3gawhat (Jul 2, 2009)

MichaelW said:


> http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showpost.php?p=2315282&postcount=119
> It is Quark-mania, hard to keep up.
> 
> Now the last 'series' of lights from 4-7s, the 18650 & MC-E


 


> We looked into the 18650 and decided against it because it would mean a complete redesign of the Quarks and we didn't want that. We'll save the 18650's for the upcoming tactical series.


 
So my question is, will the Quark 123^2 Tactical [Q123-2-T] that's available for pre-order on 4seven's site accept 18650's?


----------



## Mr. Tone (Jul 3, 2009)

Thanks for the welcome. My quest for the perfect flashlight, as if only one could ever fit the bill! My wife thinks my thing with flashlights is silly, and I told her that there is a whole lot of other flashaholics out there. Thanks CPF for keeping me from feeling alone. When is the next Flashaholics Anonymous meeting?


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 3, 2009)

nu3gawhat said:


> So my question is, will the Quark 123^2 Tactical [Q123-2-T] that's available for pre-order on 4seven's site accept 18650's?


 No, but it will accept a 17670.


----------



## burntoshine (Jul 3, 2009)

Mr. Tone said:


> Thanks for the welcome. My quest for the perfect flashlight, as if only one could ever fit the bill! My wife thinks my thing with flashlights is silly, and I told her that there is a whole lot of other flashaholics out there. Thanks CPF for keeping me from feeling alone. When is the next Flashaholics Anonymous meeting?



there's many worse things to be addicted to; at least ours is practical and useful, albeit a tad excessive. for me, it's the quest for the perfect _group_ of flashlights. you've got your EDC (every day carry), your camping light(s), nightstand light(s) (one of them is the TK40 to blind intruders, the other is now the Quark AA), keep-in-vehicle light, lights you keep throughout the house; and then of course you need at least a few backups. 

people are into some strange things out there, ours is purty darn normal by comparison. buy your wife a key chain light. i bought mine a purple fenix E01 and she's found how useful having a light by your side can be. i used to feel silly about my addiction, and partially in denial; but the older i get, the more i accept who i am and the less i care about what other people think about me. my wife thinks my addiction is "cute", which i'm okay with, i guess.


----------



## recDNA (Jul 3, 2009)

Toohotruk said:


> The tailcap has holes in it and it comes with a small split ring that will fit in these holes, so keyring attachment shouldn't be a problem.


 
Thanks
...now a high power beamshot right next to a TK11 would be nice. LOL


----------



## DHart (Jul 3, 2009)

It is remarkable how beautiful and clean the beam is AND how great the throw is... with the Quark AA/123. The engineers/designers really got the emitter/reflector design combination down perfectly. Wonderful.


----------



## Mugrunty (Jul 3, 2009)

I've been thinking about getting a tactical version of the quark. I don't have any 123 flashlights yet, so was aiming at either the 123 or the 123-2. I like the 123-2 because its a little brighter and not much bigger. I cannot help but notice how almost nobody is ordering the 123-2. Is there something bad about it?

So in the end I'm thinking this:

123: Smallest but as bright as my L2D RB100, but runtime is a little short.

123-2: Smaller and brighter than my L2D RB100 and runtime is longer.

Plus both versions have all the cool modes to choose from...particularly the moon mode.

What do you guys think? Is the single 123 best out of the two?

Also, I'm guessing the 123-2 only has a buck converter while the 123 has a buck/boost converter.
Arg! I don't know why I think I need another flashlight!!!


----------



## DHart (Jul 3, 2009)

Mugrunty... speaking only for myself, I dislike two-cell flashlights generally. Especially lights which I will want to run with li-ions and lithium primaries (which is pretty much all of my lights!). With lithium cells used together, you have to be sure the cells are well matched or you can be creating a serious and dangerous hazard. Mismatched lithium cells used together and mismatched li-ions can and do cause *bad* things to happen - these ain't like grandpa's alkalines!  With single cell lights you never need to worry about cell matching. I also like the smaller size of single cell lights. Those are my reasons why I won't be adding any two-cell Quarks to my single cell Quarks!

Two NiMH or alkalines used together in a flashlight aren't so troublesome, but I don't use cells with these chemistries unless I have to.


----------



## jcw122 (Jul 3, 2009)

Mugrunty said:


> I've been thinking about getting a tactical version of the quark. I don't have any 123 flashlights yet, so was aiming at either the 123 or the 123-2. I like the 123-2 because its a little brighter and not much bigger. I cannot help but notice how almost nobody is ordering the 123-2. Is there something bad about it?
> 
> So in the end I'm thinking this:
> 
> ...



The 123-2 was on backorder for a while (or something), it looks like it's in stock now. That's probably why.

4Sevens discusses the converters in a post somewhere in this thread. Do a search in the thread for buck or boost.


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 3, 2009)

Mugrunty wrote: "Arg! I don't know why I think I need another flashlight!!!"


Flashaholism.:mecry:I do try to think of uses/needs for them, but it's getting hard to do. 

Edit: I think long term power outages are likely in the near future but you will not hear much in the mainstream media.


----------



## Mugrunty (Jul 3, 2009)

Never thought too much about the cell mismatch thing. I'd probably be using rechargeable 123 cells. They'd be pretty well balanced. 

I'll have to think about it. I might pick up one of the neutral tints for my dad, and then get a normal tint for me. I'd get the single cell for him because he seems to like the smaller lights. It's also an excuse to get another so I can see both of them.

I just need to figure out what I want for me. It's either the 123-1 or the 123-2. I dunno, I just like the extended runtime of the 123-2 and the boost in brightness. The size isn't all that big of a deal...it's still smaller than a 2xAA.


----------



## EugeneJohn (Jul 3, 2009)

burntoshine said:


> there's many worse things to be addicted to; at least ours is practical and useful, albeit a tad excessive. for me, it's the quest for the perfect _group_ of flashlights. you've got your EDC (every day carry), your camping light(s), nightstand light(s) (one of them is the TK40 to blind intruders, the other is now the Quark AA), keep-in-vehicle light, lights you keep throughout the house; and then of course you need at least a few backups.



Its a very useful hobby for those friends and family who get our cast-offs, even if they find our interest in lights a bit 'silly'. After getting a Quark AA(love the light) I couldn't justify keeping my P1D-CE around as just a 'back-up'. It's low was just too bright but it was my first good light and served me well for more than a year. I want to see it get used rather than sit in a drawer waiting for the infrequent chance to shine. 

I gave it to my brother-in-law to use as a backpacking/hiking/around the house light. His only other lights are a couple of 9led AAA cheapos and a 3D mag that never seems to have fresh batteries in it.


----------



## Mugrunty (Jul 3, 2009)

After looking at the runtimes of the 123-2 with rechargeables...I think I might have to go with either the 123 single cell light...or one of the AA type versions. Or I might just stay with my Fenix L2D RB100 for now.


----------



## DHart (Jul 3, 2009)

Mugrunty said:


> After looking at the runtimes of the 123-2 with rechargeables...I think I might have to go with either the 123 single cell light...or one of the AA type versions. Or I might just stay with my Fenix L2D RB100 for now.



Mugrunty... the option I decided on was to order a Quark AA and a 1xCR123 body tube... and I use it exclusively with li-ion for the amazingly potent output (mostly 14500 li-ion in the AA body). One can run the light with any AA size cell from 14500 Li-Ion, to AA Eneloop NiMH, Energizer L91 lithium, or as a last resort, an alkaline, if necessary. And if I want to run with any of the many RCR123 and CR123 cells I have, I can switch the AA body out for the 123 body. I find the brightness and beam from the single AA/123 Quark to be exceptional... no desire whatsoever for a 2-cell Quark body.


----------



## jahxman (Jul 4, 2009)

Yeah, I like the single cells too - I've ordered the AA tactical in warm and the no-clip 123 tactical. Waiting anxiously for my quarks! :naughty:

I also have a DBS with both MC-E pill and Q5 pill and aspheric lens on the way, and a RL-2088, and a LR631A light meter ......What is this flashaholism you speak of? 

Here's how my story has gone recently:
:welcome:
...:thumbsup:
...:thumbsup:
 ... :devil: ... ... wife::whoopin:





 ... :naughty:

 .... :shrug:

:welcome:


----------



## DHart (Jul 4, 2009)

jahxman... looks like my tale of flashaholicism as well!


----------



## tab665 (Jul 4, 2009)

my wife hates my addiction to flashlights, but she prefers my 123 quark over my olight m20 or m30.... women...


----------



## Mugrunty (Jul 4, 2009)

Alrighty, I think maybe the AA version with the 14500 cell seems like the best deal. I also like the tactical version I think. Maybe. Yup. Now I just have to find out if I should get the warm tint version. I don't have any of those yet. Maybe this quark if I get it will replace my EDC light LD01. 

Maybe I'll get both tints and give the one I don't like away. Haha. You guys think the tactical version is best?


----------



## pobox1475 (Jul 4, 2009)

> You guys think the tactical version is best?


 Yes, IMO. Single warm 123 is what I'm shooting for if they are around when I can order. As far as EDC lights go, smaller is better to me. Easier to always have with you. Wish they had deep pocket clips though. Tactical does not have the flashing modes that I probably would never need. The ability to quickly switch between two brightness levels is enough for me. Just hope the raised button is easier to activate than then the standard which has been said to be somewhat stiff.


----------



## jcw122 (Jul 5, 2009)

pobox1475 said:


> Yes, IMO. Single warm 123 is what I'm shooting for if they are around when I can order. As far as EDC lights go, smaller is better to me. Easier to always have with you. Wish they had deep pocket clips though. Tactical does not have the flashing modes that I probably would never need. The ability to quickly switch between two brightness levels is enough for me. Just hope the raised button is easier to activate than then the standard which has been said to be somewhat stiff.



4sevens mentioned there will be replacement buttons or something like that. Or maybe that was a replacement for the High tightness issue, ugh too much info.


----------



## Xak (Jul 5, 2009)

jcw122 said:


> 4sevens mentioned there will be replacement buttons or something like that. Or maybe that was a replacement for the High tightness issue, ugh too much info.


 
Wonder if he'll offer GITD switch covers.


----------



## Inliner (Jul 5, 2009)

I appologize if it's been addressed already, but why is 1AA not rated higher on a 14500 cell? Is it a different head than the 2AA? Would the 2AA still hit it's rated 170 lumens on one 14500 and one dummy cell? Is anyone thinking of using the 2AA Quark head on a 1AA body for higher output with 14500? I'd sacrifice a little run time to be able to get 2AA output on the 1AA body.


----------



## zipplet (Jul 5, 2009)

The Quark 1xAA and 2xAA heads are identical. The rating given in the spec for the 1xAA is with a 1.2-1.5V cell. If you use a 14500 it should be the same as with 2xAA.


----------



## Mr. Tone (Jul 5, 2009)

Well guys, I couldn't hold out anymore. I preordered a warm tint AA Quark and also a warm tint tactical AA Quark. The thought of having the nice 5A tint and the low low mode was too much to pass on. Also the ability to use all AA batteries and also 14500 for more output is nice and makes the Quarks quite versatile. I would have waited but since there is the chance of not getting the warm tint later I bit the bullet.


----------



## pobox1475 (Jul 5, 2009)

> Wonder if he'll offer GITD switch covers.


 One of my other branded lights has a GITD o'ring just below the lens. It always puts a smile on my face when I see it illuminated. Wish other makers would adopt this feature.


----------



## jcw122 (Jul 5, 2009)

pobox1475 said:


> One of my other branded lights has a GITD o'ring just below the lens. It always puts a smile on my face when I see it illuminated. Wish other makers would adopt this feature.



What is a GITD?


----------



## zipplet (Jul 5, 2009)

GITD = Glow In The Dark


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 5, 2009)

jcw122 said:


> What is a GITD?


 
Glow in the dark.


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 5, 2009)

zipplet said:


> GITD = Glow In The Dark


 
You beat me by one minute.


----------



## Girryn (Jul 5, 2009)

I will definately be trying to replace my o-rings with GITD


----------



## DHart (Jul 6, 2009)

I'm eager to receive the pass-around samples of the Quark lights so that I can compare them to my purchased example of the Quark AA with accessory 123 body.

As most here will know, I've been a huge advocate of the Quark AA light... I love mine and consider it to be among (if not THE) best of my flashlights considering the many elements we expect our best flashlights to provide to use.

But, while it's not a huge issue, I've asked for some help on this from 4Sevens customer service and from David's e-mail, and I have only received a single reply asking for confirmation of the problem, but no reply in recognition of my description of the problem, or of the photo of the threads, nor assistance in remediation. Perhaps 4Sevens is just contemplating the issue and deciding what to do... or, perhaps the problem is more widespread than I am aware of... I really don't know... all I know is that since explaining the issue, I've gotten no further feedback from 4Sevens.

Here's the deal.

The threads on the non-clip side of my QAA were not cut to completion, so when attempting to turn the head to turbo, when the head is mounted on that side of the body, is very difficult - and turning to turbo when the head is mounted on that side is probably further flattening the threads on my head!!! Actually, I'm not real happy about that!







For the meantime, I'm not using the clip, nor using that end of the tube for mounting the head. (If I wanted to carry the light in a pocket with the head down, I would mount the head on this incompletely threaded end and the clip on the other end.) 

Interestingly, the threads on my 123 body are quite fully completed on each end... but not on my AA body... the threads on the one end stop short of completion and mounting the head on that side of the tube is problematic for turning to turbo mode. 

I know of a couple other Quark AA owners on this forum who have the same problem... incomplete threading on one end of the AA tube leading to difficulty in turning the head to turbo mode when the head is mounted on that end of the body. So obviously the problem is not entirely isolated.

Enough time has passed since my last reply to 4Sevens that perhaps I should contact 4Sevens again to ask about what's going on. I will do so and report back here.

Overall, it should be obvious to anyone observing my many comments on this forum about this wonderful light, that I am totally thrilled with it, overall. And I'm sure that 4Sevens will make good on what may be a fairly insignificant thread issue with my light. I'm just a little perplexed at the lack of any communication from them on this matter. :thinking:


----------



## antiplex (Jul 6, 2009)

qip said:


> 2 weeks that is straight torture





Bushman5 said:


> two weeks aint nothing, us canucks are used to having our parcels sit in Customs for two to three weeks......



another week has gone by and the total waiting time increases now to 3 weeks. i guess somebody at the customs has a damn lot of fun with my quark 2aa :shakehead
still nobody from germany around here who can say a word about how long shipping usually takes?
i'm starting to get nervous because i really need the light beginning of next week, thought 4 weeks would be more than enough but well... lets see.


----------



## andi15 (Jul 6, 2009)

Hi,

I´m from Germany and the last thing I recieved from 4sevens.com , 50 Tenergy CR123 s, took about 5 days for shipping!

Now I´m looking forward to my Q123 T, but it isn´t even shippend.


Greetings from Germany

Andi 15


----------



## 4sevens (Jul 6, 2009)

DHart said:


> I'm eager to receive the pass-around samples of the Quark lights so that I can compare them to my purchased example of the Quark AA with accessory 123 body.
> 
> As most here will know, I've been a huge advocate of the Quark AA light... I love mine and consider it to be among (if not THE) best of my flashlights considering the many elements we expect our best flashlights to provide to use.
> 
> ...


We are still looking this issue as well as working on a remedy.


----------



## DHart (Jul 6, 2009)

David... thank you for the reply. It's reassuring to know that you are working on the resolution. Great lights you have designed! Thank you.


----------



## hatman (Jul 6, 2009)

Got an e-mail that my tactical 123-2 shipped today.

No word yet on my separate order for tactical AA.


----------



## 4sevens (Jul 6, 2009)

hatman said:


> Got an e-mail that my tactical 123-2 shipped today.
> No word yet on my separate order for tactical AA.


We're working hard to get them out today.
Right now we're just verifying our shipment of several dozen boxes. The entire warehouse floor is covered


----------



## hatman (Jul 6, 2009)

David,
Thanks -- and thanks for the update!


----------



## horsehunter (Jul 6, 2009)

Hey guys, After reading all the Quark threads I decided I needed one. I ordered a tactical 123. I got an email earlier today saying that my new order status is Back-order. Hopefully won't have to wait long.

Hopefully a false alarm. Got another email about an hour after the first one saying its been shipped.


----------



## recDNA (Jul 6, 2009)

David, don't read this....

Hey you guys...I want a Quark 123 X2 for the stand by my bed but I'm waiting for the price to drop. Would you please stop buying them so I can get a bargain?

Thanks. :naughty:


----------



## jcw122 (Jul 6, 2009)

*Deleted*

Nevermind.


----------



## DHart (Jul 6, 2009)

jcw122 said:


> DHart, that issue was already talked about in the thread



jcw... yeah... but until my post last night with the photo, we hadn't had any acknowledgement from David that the threading defect is a known issue and that 4Sevens is presently trying to figure it out/correct it.


----------



## jcw122 (Jul 6, 2009)

DHart said:


> jcw... OK... I thought I had read the entire thread... but perhaps I missed that somewhere... was it stated that this is a known issue and that 4Sevens is presently trying to figure it out/correct it?
> 
> If you can direct me with a post #, that would be fantastic, this is a huge thread... thanks.



Sorry DHart, I realized that was a stupid/useless post, so I edited it out. I can't find the post, but I do recall someone discussing how it was very difficult to get to either High or Max mode because of the threads. I do think that 4Sevens had replied to the post saying they are looking into it.


----------



## jcw122 (Jul 6, 2009)

What does everyone think the advantages of the Tactical vs. the Regular are? I'm looking at the Quark as my first high end flashlight, and I can't decide.


----------



## DHart (Jul 6, 2009)

jcw122 said:


> Sorry DHart, I realized that was a stupid/useless post, so I edited it out. I can't find the post, but I do recall someone discussing how it was very difficult to get to either High or Max mode because of the threads. I do think that 4Sevens had replied to the post saying they are looking into it.



jcw... yes, David replied and commented that they are working on a new boot to help switching become easier, but he didn't comment then about the threading defect making it difficult to turn the bezel to turbo mode. Now he mentioned that they are aware of the threading issue, as well as the switch boot thing, and are working on a resolution to that as well.


----------



## HKJ (Jul 6, 2009)

jcw122 said:


> What does everyone think the advantages of the Tactical vs. the Regular are? I'm looking at the Quark as my first high end flashlight, and I can't decide.



One big difference, the tactical has two levels (that can be programmed), the regular has 5 levels. I have ordered a tactical, but for my use the regular might be best, because I can easy access all 5 levels. I will try a tactical forward switch on my regular, to see how that works.


----------



## burntoshine (Jul 6, 2009)

jcw122 said:


> What does everyone think the advantages of the Tactical vs. the Regular are? I'm looking at the Quark as my first high end flashlight, and I can't decide.



the most used modes for me are moonmode and max and since those are the first modes on each setting, the only real difference that the tactical would make for me is momentary on. they're both equally as impressive. i think it really comes down to what modes you're going to use and if you want a protruding tailcap with momentary on. one of the things the tactical has over the standard is the ability to have instant strobe/momentary strobe.

i particularly like being able to flip through the 4 main brightness levels with ease, that's why i bought the regular one. if you're using the light mainly for a specific task (at your job maybe) where you're going to use only one or two levels, i say go with the tactical. the protruding button makes it easier to activate; on the flip side, it makes it easier to accidentally activate, too. so that also depends on how you plan to carry the light.

i bought a standard quark AA, but i'm tempted to get a tactical as well; maybe down the road when i have a bit more free cash.

p.s. a well known unwritten rule is to buy both!


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jul 6, 2009)

I wonder if there will be a T tail switch sold as an option?


----------



## mbiraman (Jul 6, 2009)

DHart said:


> I'm eager to receive the pass-around samples of the Quark lights so that I can compare them to my purchased example of the Quark AA with accessory 123 body.
> 
> As most here will know, I've been a huge advocate of the Quark AA light... I love mine and consider it to be among (if not THE) best of my flashlights considering the many elements we expect our best flashlights to provide to use.
> 
> ...



Dhart; when i first got my Quark AA a couple of weeks ago i wrote somewhere on these forums that the head was very hard to turn. It never occurred to me to switch head and tail and see what happens till i read your post a few minutes ago. When i switch head and tail the problem was gone and the head turns the way i think normal should be which is about twice as easy as original. The only problem now is the clip is in a strange place . I too love this light . I got out my reading glasses and a mag glass and it looks to me like one of the last threads on the head end of body isn't cut to full depth. Not sure if thats what's doing it but good to know I'm not crazy. There is a big difference. Now i have to decide to use it the way it came or clipless. Still its a great light. Happy to have it, maybe something will be resolved later.


----------



## losthope (Jul 6, 2009)

*Normal Switch Problem*

Does anyone else have a problem with the normal tailcap ?

Mine works perfectly when the tailcap is barely holding onto a couple of threads i.e. it's virtually unscrewed.

When fully screwed on as it should be I need to apply constant pressure to the tailcap or the light goes off.


This isn't the strobe or anything silly. It's almost as if the spring pressure is too high and is stopping the switch working properly.


----------



## DHart (Jul 6, 2009)

mbiraman said:


> Dhart; when i first got my Quark AA a couple of weeks ago i wrote somewhere on these forums that the head was very hard to turn. It never occurred to me to switch head and tail and see what happens till i read your post a few minutes ago. When i switch head and tail the problem was gone and the head turns the way i think normal should be which is about twice as easy as original. The only problem now is the clip is in a strange place . I too love this light . I got out my reading glasses and a mag glass and it looks to me like one of the last threads on the head end of body isn't cut to full depth. Not sure if thats what's doing it but good to know I'm not crazy. There is a big difference. Now i have to decide to use it the way it came or clipless. Still its a great light. Happy to have it, maybe something will be resolved later.



mbiraman... I'm certain the problem trying to turn the head to turbo mode is related to the last thread not being cut because I have two bodies, AA and 123, and therefore four possible ends to mount the head on. Examining the four threaded ends, just one of them has the incomplete thread cut (the non-clip end of the AA tube) with the other three ends having complete and perfectly cut threading. The head turns to turbo just right on the three properly threaded ends, but with the end having incomplete threading, that's the only time the head is difficult to turn to turbo mode. 

Unfortunately, if I want to carry the AA light bezel down in my pocket using the clip, the head is on that one end where turning to turbo is a problem!


----------



## zipplet (Jul 6, 2009)

*Re: Normal Switch Problem*



losthope said:


> Does anyone else have a problem with the normal tailcap ?
> 
> Mine works perfectly when the tailcap is barely holding onto a couple of threads i.e. it's virtually unscrewed.
> 
> ...



Tighten the tailcap retention ring using a pair of tweezers or needle nose pliers


----------



## losthope (Jul 6, 2009)

*Re: Normal Switch Problem*



zipplet said:


> Tighten the tailcap retention ring using a pair of tweezers or needle nose pliers



It's already quite tight. I've had the retention ring on Fenix tailcaps unscrew itself but that isn't the case here.


----------



## zipplet (Jul 6, 2009)

*Re: Normal Switch Problem*



losthope said:


> It's already quite tight. I've had the retention ring on Fenix tailcaps unscrew itself but that isn't the case here.



Can you unscrew it then, take out the switch and inspect the solder joints. Make sure it all looks fine and give it an extra clean even if you can't see any oxidisation. Clean the threads too and reassemble. If it still does it can you try shorting the bottom of the battery to the tube to confirm it is the tailcap.

Either way, 4sevens will make it right


----------



## Xak (Jul 6, 2009)

Great, so am I pretty much guaranteed that the QAA I ordered is going to be faulty when I finally receive it? 

...and I thought the 2 cell lights and one cell lights all had interchangeable parts, including the heads. I heard somewhere the Q123-2 head is setup for a certain voltage and the QAA head for a different voltage. Can I swap the 2? If so, will they perform the way they are supposed to?


----------



## jcw122 (Jul 6, 2009)

Xak said:


> Great, so am I pretty much guaranteed that the QAA I ordered is going to be faulty when I finally receive it?
> 
> ...and I thought the 2 cell lights and one cell lights all had interchangeable parts, including the heads. I heard somewhere the Q123-2 head is setup for a certain voltage and the QAA head for a different voltage. Can I swap the 2? If so, will they perform the way they are supposed to?



Of the four Quark sizes, the the 123-2 is the only one that runs at a different voltage, so you can't swap it. Two 123's make for a higher voltage than either 1x123 or 2xAA.


----------



## Ratchet_Gear (Jul 6, 2009)

Hey guys,

Selfbuilt stated in his review that running the Quark 123-2 on max using 2xRCR was not recommended because they got too hot. Would one be able to run the 123-2 head on a 2xAA body powered by 2 14500 batteries? I know they share the same chemistry but was wondering if the different shape in size would actually make a difference. I am new to the flashlight scene so am sorry if it sounds like an obvious question. 

Thanks,


----------



## Toohotruk (Jul 6, 2009)

They would still have the same voltage, both being Li-Ion batteries, so both would have the same output.


----------



## Ratchet_Gear (Jul 7, 2009)

I’m sorry I should have explained myself better. I was actually wondering if by using 2 14500 batteries if it would have the same effect as the 2 RCR batteries did in terms of them getting to hot and draining to rapidly when the light was used in turbo mode.


----------



## ingokl (Jul 7, 2009)

Ratchet_Gear said:


> I’m sorry I should have explained myself better. I was actually wondering if by using 2 14500 batteries if it would have the same effect as the 2 RCR batteries did in terms of them getting to hot and draining to rapidly when the light was used in turbo mode.


 
14500 rechargeables deliver the same voltage than RCR123 cells do. So basically there should be no difference between usind two RCRs and two 14500 cells. I dond't think the higher length and smaller diameter make a significant difference.


----------



## Mr. Tone (Jul 7, 2009)

The performance of the Quark on 1x14500 is very impressive to me. 170ish lumens OTF on 14500 for this light is amazing! The more I read the reviews about the Quarks and see the specs I get more excited for mine to arrive. There was clearly a lot of thought involved in putting all the details of these together. It is a problem for some not being able to tailcap lockout but that is something I never do anyway. For my needs the AA Quark seems near perfection.


----------



## oldpal (Jul 7, 2009)

I have had my QAA for about three weeks now. Initially the head was very hard to turn to max-output mode. I replaced the O-ring and it seemed to help quite a bit. 

Since DHart showed the photos of the incomplete thread cuts on his Quark, I thought I should take a closer look at my Quark body's threads. I have both a 1xAA and a 2xAA body. One end of my 2xAA body has the incomplete thread-cut problem and my QAA, that I use my EDC, has an OK tail end, but the head end looks much like DHart's photo. 

You know by forcing the head's threads against the incomplete cut body threads may eventually cause more damage.

Hugh


----------



## f22shift (Jul 7, 2009)

hmm seems like some bodies need to be recalled. i hope the new ones shipping out don't have the faulty machining. i'm willing to wait:thumbsup:


----------



## DHart (Jul 7, 2009)

oldpal said:


> I have had my QAA for about three weeks now. Initially the head was very hard to turn to max-output mode. I replaced the O-ring and it seemed to help quite a bit.
> 
> Since DHart showed the photos of the incomplete thread cuts on his Quark, I thought I should take a closer look at my Quark body's threads. I have both a 1xAA and a 2xAA body. One end of my 2xAA body has the incomplete thread-cut problem and my QAA, that I use my EDC, has an OK tail end, but the head end looks much like DHart's photo.
> 
> ...



Until I receive a replacement, I won't use the head on the end which allows bezel-down pocket carry... forcing it into turbo mode repeatedly can only cause some damage to the threads on the head itself.


----------



## oldpal (Jul 7, 2009)

DHart said:


> Until I receive a replacement, I won't use the head on the end which allows bezel-down pocket carry... forcing it into turbo mode repeatedly can only cause some damage to the threads on the head itself.



That's the way I feel. I'm reversing the light now.

Hugh


----------



## 4sevens (Jul 7, 2009)

oldpal said:


> That's the way I feel. I'm reversing the light now.
> Hugh


I'm carrying QAA and have no problems. I doubt wear will be any issue and if so we'd repair/replace to resolve any issues should they come up.


----------



## AardvarkSagus (Jul 7, 2009)

That's what I was thinking. If there are any problems with these things wearing out because of the thread issues, it'll likely surface within the next decade right? Then you're covered. No worries!


----------



## oldpal (Jul 7, 2009)

4sevens said:


> I'm carrying QAA and have no problems. I doubt wear will be any issue and if so we'd repair/replace to resolve any issues should they come up.



David, that's good to hear. I'll replace the clip and return my QAA to the original configuration. I really have gotten used to the clip and bezel down carry. But the bezel up just isn't for me where the light sticks too far out of my pocket.

Hugh


----------



## tsask (Jul 7, 2009)

Mr. Tone said:


> The performance of the Quark on 1x14500 is very impressive to me. 170ish lumens OTF on 14500 for this light is amazing! The more I read the reviews about the Quarks and see the specs I get more excited for mine to arrive. There was clearly a lot of thought involved in putting all the details of these together. It is a problem for some not being able to tailcap lockout but that is something I never do anyway. For my needs the AA Quark seems near perfection.


 
I hope my "warm" version will have comparable power!:thumbsup:
That extra 2 AA tube may come in handy. I wonder if it'll will be brighter than my Nitecore Extreme Q5 on a RCR123:thinking:


----------



## DHart (Jul 7, 2009)

4sevens said:


> I'm carrying QAA and have no problems.



David, by that do you mean that your AA also has the incomplete thread cut on one end which made turning to turbo difficult - but by repeatedly forcing it to turbo, it's gotten better? 

Or do you mean that your AA works fine because the threads on both ends of your AA tube are fully cut to completion?


----------



## Mr. Tone (Jul 7, 2009)

tsask said:


> I hope my "warm" version will have comparable power!:thumbsup:
> That extra 2 AA tube may come in handy. I wonder if it'll will be brighter than my Nitecore Extreme Q5 on a RCR123:thinking:


 
I also ordered the warm tinted versions. Standard CPF policy I ordered *both* QAA and QAA tactical.:thumbsup: I doubt that we would notice much difference in brightness between the emitters, but the small loss in efficiency is sooooooooo worth the 5A tint to me.


----------



## bodhran (Jul 7, 2009)

Just got home last night after spending 10 days camping in the Sierra's. I had brought along a few of my flashlights but after a couple days I was just using my Quark 2AA with Eneloops. All I can say is I love this light. Used around camp, walks at night, and with the Twofish lockblocks on my bike. The different levels were perfect for my needs and even though I had plenty of spare batteries on hand, it was nice to know that I could pick up some AA's anywhere.


----------



## mbiraman (Jul 7, 2009)

oldpal said:


> I have had my QAA for about three weeks now. Initially the head was very hard to turn to max-output mode. I replaced the O-ring and it seemed to help quite a bit.
> 
> Since DHart showed the photos of the incomplete thread cuts on his Quark, I thought I should take a closer look at my Quark body's threads. I have both a 1xAA and a 2xAA body. One end of my 2xAA body has the incomplete thread-cut problem and my QAA, that I use my EDC, has an OK tail end, but the head end looks much like DHart's photo.
> 
> ...



I have the same problem and have had the same thoughts about forcing it to turbo


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Jul 7, 2009)

Somebody could get a pretty kick arse deal by ordering me a Quark AA with a Clipless 123 body...

See my WTT thread in Marketplace.


----------



## 4sevens (Jul 7, 2009)

Dhart, the former. It's loosened up after some use. It's not causing any damage to the head as someone suggested.


----------



## nanotech17 (Jul 7, 2009)

i wonder if this has been discuss before but when are we got a chance to have the Quark series with a Luminus emitter 
http://www.luminus.com/stuff/content...lumination.pdf
and yeah of course with a proper reflector minus the public guinea pig test


----------



## CaNo (Jul 8, 2009)

Mr. Tone said:


> The performance of the Quark on 1x14500 is very impressive to me. 170ish lumens OTF on 14500 for this light is amazing! The more I read the reviews about the Quarks and see the specs I get more excited for mine to arrive. There was clearly a lot of thought involved in putting all the details of these together. It is a problem for some not being able to tailcap lockout but that is something I never do anyway. For my needs the AA Quark seems near perfection.



I just checked the tracking that 4SEVENS provided, and mine came in to my towns facility at 7pm last night! So I should have it in my hand by 10:30am when my mailman comes! WOO HOO!!! I just hope that I didn't build it up too much in my head to leave room for disappointment...

This whole threading and turbo mode problem does worry me as well... hmmm... :shakehead


----------



## Palor (Jul 8, 2009)

I received my Quark 2AA one week ago. I did not check every detail of the flashlight but head turning to turbo mode is easy to perform. Nice and smooth. 
The only thing which disturbs some people is the hard to press button. But for me this is okay, because so it is hard to activate the light unwillingly.
Switching modes by half pressing the button works perfect. 

So for me: Nice flashlight so far with lots of people watching me passing them by on my bycicle last saturday night! 

But I will check the threads on both ends today and I will also change the head and tail position to check the function afterwards.

Palor


----------



## CaNo (Jul 8, 2009)

Palor said:


> I received my Quark 2AA one week ago. I did not check every detail of the flashlight but head turning to turbo mode is easy to perform. Nice and smooth.
> The only thing which disturbs some people is the hard to press button. But for me this is okay, because so it is hard to activate the light unwillingly.
> Switching modes by half pressing the button works perfect.
> 
> ...



Now that you mentioned that you have the Quark 2AA... I wonder if the problem is only with the QAA model...:thinking:


----------



## MichaelW (Jul 8, 2009)

bodhran said:


> Used around camp, walks at night, and with the Twofish lockblocks on my bike.



What output level did you use while biking?


----------



## oldpal (Jul 8, 2009)

oldpal said:


> I have had my QAA for about three weeks now. Initially the head was very hard to turn to max-output mode. I replaced the O-ring and it seemed to help quite a bit.
> 
> Since DHart showed the photos of the incomplete thread cuts on his Quark, I thought I should take a closer look at my Quark body's threads. I have both a 1xAA and a 2xAA body. One end of my 2xAA body has the incomplete thread-cut problem and my QAA, that I use my EDC, has an OK tail end, but the head end looks much like DHart's photo.
> 
> ...





mbiraman said:


> I have the same problem and have had the same thoughts about forcing it to turbo



Mbiraman, I am now not concerned about the incomplete thread problem. David has said that it appears to be a minor issue and that if, in the future, there is any damage, it's warranted. I now have my QAA back in its original configuration and pleased with its operation.

Hugh


----------



## Mr. Tone (Jul 8, 2009)

I apologize in advance if this question has been answered already. I did use the search and also tried to post the question in 7777's marketplace but could not.

Will 7777 be offering a 18650 body for the Quark line? 

If not, could I buy a 123x2 body and bore it?

I have ordered the AA Quarks so voltage wise the 18650 should work without problems except maybe the size.


----------



## recDNA (Jul 8, 2009)

4sevens said:


> Dhart, the former. It's loosened up after some use. It's not causing any damage to the head as someone suggested.


 
Is the pictured incomplete thread issue present in the Cr123 models?


----------



## DHart (Jul 8, 2009)

recDNA said:


> Is the pictured incomplete thread issue present in the Cr123 models?



I've only know of people having problems with the incomplete threads on one end of their single AA tube - the end which their clip does NOT attach to. 

My Q123 has perfect threads on both ends and I haven't heard of anyone with 123 or 2xAA tubes having the incomplete thread issue... just the single AA tube.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 8, 2009)

I just opened my new QAA and am in AWE! Aside from the excellent presentation and stuff it came with, I turned the beam on and was blown away! That is the cleanest beam I've seen! It is beautiful! Another thing I thought of was... there is noway in h*ll that that is 90 lumens (power mode)! I can only imagine what it will look like when I get my 14500's in the mail! This is definitely my new toy and EDC! Excellent recommendation DHART! And This light defines the reason why I go to 4Sevens for my lights period! GOOD JOB David! :twothumbs


----------



## jcw122 (Jul 8, 2009)

CaNo said:


> I just opened my new QAA and am in AWE! Aside from the excellent presentation and stuff it came with, I turned the beam on and was blown away! That is the cleanest beam I've seen! It is beautiful! Another thing I thought of was... there is noway in h*ll that that is 90 lumens (power mode)! I can only imagine what it will look like when I get my 14500's in the mail! This is definitely my new toy and EDC! Excellent recommendation DHART! And This light defines the reason why I go to 4Sevens for my lights period! GOOD JOB David! :twothumbs



It is rated as 90 lumens because the reading was taken Out the Front not At the Emitter like most manufacs. I can't wait for mine!


----------



## DHart (Jul 8, 2009)

CaNo... told ya you'd love it!  Once you run that baby with a 14500, you'll be amazed. When you get the 14500, take it out at night and check the throw... fantastic! Having an awesome, clean beam _and_ great throw is not common... but this light has it.


----------



## jzmtl (Jul 8, 2009)

For those of you who have both regular and tactical, is the tac's tint as warm as regular?


----------



## digitaleos (Jul 8, 2009)

jzmtl said:


> For those of you who have both regular and tactical, is the tac's tint as warm as regular?



I have the 123 and AA regular Quark and I just received my Tactical 2x123 today. The tactical has the same tint as the AA regular Quark. My 123 Quark is whitest of the bunch, when compared to my other two Quarks, it makes them look like there is a slight purplish color.


----------



## jzmtl (Jul 8, 2009)

digitaleos said:


> I have the 123 and AA regular Quark and I just received my Tactical 2x123 today. The tactical has the same tint as the AA regular Quark. My 123 Quark is whitest of the bunch, when compared to my other two Quarks, it makes them look like there is a slight purplish color.



Thanks. Sounds like there's still a bit of tint lottery going on.


----------



## ninjaboigt (Jul 8, 2009)

I dont know if this has been mentioned or not, but is there a limit on how long you can use the light on turbo mode? sorta like the way fenix has it?


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 8, 2009)

jzmtl said:


> For those of you who have both regular and tactical, is the tac's tint as warm as regular?


 My regular 2xAA is slightly warmer than my tactical 2x123.


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Jul 8, 2009)

Ante has been bumped up in my thread over in marketplace.

Check it out for a deal....


----------



## gunga (Jul 8, 2009)

That is refered to as cross posting right?



ANyways, I will be getting some quarks in the passaround soon, stay tuned for another review.

:wave:

Funny thing is, I already ordered some warm quarks. I guess this is just a teaser for me!

:devil:


----------



## adept1 (Jul 8, 2009)

I just want to say I love my Quark 123 (clipless) and it's replaced my Fenix P2D as my EDC light. The Fenix was a great light too, but the Quark has better knurling, lower low, officially supports RCRs, and has an even better beam. Really great product, especially considering it's from a new manufacturer.

That said, when can we expect some 18650 driven Quarks? I would like to replace the TR-801s I'm using for cycling because the electronics are a bit unreliable and the beams too cool, and a Quark 18650 neutral white tactical would be PERFECT!


----------



## CaNo (Jul 8, 2009)

jcw122 said:


> It is rated as 90 lumens because the reading was taken Out the Front not At the Emitter like most manufacs. I can't wait for mine!



I figured that much when I turned this sucker on! lol 

Now since it is 90 lumens OTF... how many lumens is it actually if it were advertised like every other flashlight? Because compared to my D10... this thing is brighter... so at least over 130... :thinking:


----------



## CaNo (Jul 8, 2009)

DHart said:


> CaNo... told ya you'd love it!  Once you run that baby with a 14500, you'll be amazed. When you get the 14500, take it out at night and check the throw... fantastic! Having an awesome, clean beam _and_ great throw is not common... but this light has it.



Ya, I'm guilty for judging a book by its cover  lol
But I'm glad I listened to your advice. I'm still waiting for my protected Trustfire 14500's from DX. And truthfully I thought this light would not be as fun to carry around or even use without a stronger cell because I did not realize that David used OTF lumen ratings. So I was like... 90 lumens... bleh! Boy was I surprised lol I love pocket throwers! And I can already see that this light does have the potential to throw further than my other ones due to that beautiful beam it produces. Its quite nice to look at. The beam on this thing is better than my Ra Clicky which says alot. Sadly for a $200 light, I can still see halos... :sigh:. Which is quite disappointing since this light cost me under $60 and the beam is more pleasant to look at. I'm just waiting for it to get darker so I can compare it's throw to the Clicky Tactical's narrow beam :twothumbs


----------



## DHart (Jul 8, 2009)

CaNo said:


> Ya, I'm guilty for judging a book by its cover  lol
> But I'm glad I listened to your advice. I'm still waiting for my protected Trustfire 14500's from DX. And truthfully I thought this light would not be as fun to carry around or even use without a stronger cell because I did not realize that David used OTF lumen ratings. So I was like... 90 lumens... bleh! Boy was I surprised lol I love pocket throwers! And I can already see that this light does have the potential to throw further than my other ones due to that beautiful beam it produces. Its quite nice to look at. The beam on this thing is better than my Ra Clicky which says alot. Sadly for a $200 light, I can still see halos... :sigh:. Which is quite disappointing since this light cost me under $60 and the beam is more pleasant to look at. I'm just waiting for it to get darker so I can compare it's throw to the Clicky Tactical's narrow beam :twothumbs



My best throwers are JetBeams, with the new Jet I Pro IBS v3.0 (a single AA/14500 light) being my best pocket thrower by far.... and I must say, my QAA does a pretty respectable job throwing compared to my Jet I Pro! But the QAA has a much cleaner beam for general use, a lower low, better indoors, and has some strobe & signaling goodies (I would ONLY use these modes if I found myself in an emergency situation - but they're great modes to have just in case!). 

I'm a huge fan of the QAA! :candle: Right now, this is a really tough light to beat as a general use light. But it still hasn't displaced my D10 R2 (and it may never), but between these two lights, I'm feeling really well covered! (Now, what to do with the other 28 awesome lights I bought in the last few months?  - well, they're still useful now and then!  )


----------



## Mr. Tone (Jul 8, 2009)

adept1 said:


> That said, when can we expect some 18650 driven Quarks? I would like to replace the TR-801s I'm using for cycling because the electronics are a bit unreliable and the beams too cool, and a Quark 18650 neutral white tactical would be PERFECT!


 
Does anyone know if there will be a body for 18650? Or if the 123x2 Quark body tube could be bored for 18650? 

*ANYONE? ANYONE? *


----------



## DHart (Jul 8, 2009)

I would pounce on an 18650 Quark in a HOT HURRY!

David???????


----------



## AFAustin (Jul 8, 2009)

DHart, I have enjoyed your posts on the Quarks, esp. the QAA. I was lucky enough to get 2nd place in 4Sevens' 4th of July story contest: http://www.4sevens.com/fireworks09/, and got to pick a Quark as my prize (many thanks to David and the 4Sevens Team for their generosity). 

Although I've been a little concerned about the interesting "incomplete threading" issue you raised, I decided that the QAA was the most appealing to me and so chose it, in the tactical regular tint version. I'm looking forward to trying it out.


----------



## DHart (Jul 8, 2009)

AFAustin said:


> DHart, I have enjoyed your posts on the Quarks, esp. the QAA. I was lucky enough to get 2nd place in 4Sevens' 4th of July story contest: http://www.4sevens.com/fireworks09/, and got to pick a Quark as my prize (many thanks to David and the 4Sevens Team for their generosity).
> 
> Although I've been a little concerned about the interesting "incomplete threading" issue you raised, I decided that the QAA was the most appealing to me and so chose it, in the tactical regular tint version. I'm looking forward to trying it out.



AFAustin... hey, my friend, I'm glad if I could help you find your way to a new light that you will love!  The thread issue notwithstanding, I am a dyed-in-the-wool believer in the Quarks. But I don't pull punches and do feel this thread issue needs to get gone from the QAAs. Regardless, I'm sure you will LOVE your QAA and I'm very happy that you have won one! I love mine in spite of the thread thing... but I'm rooting for David & Team to find a way to see that complete threads are put on all both ends of all Quarks for once and for all! 

As for 18650... I'll be at the front of the line to buy an 18650 Quark! I'm a huge fan of 18650 power and I think the combination of Quark with 18650 will be a very sweet light to have! :twothumbs My favorite 18650 light these days is the MG L-Mini II R2, which is a very lean and very mean, three level, 18650 light. I love the size and the amazing output/runtimes. Can you just see a Quark in the form factor of the L-Mini below?







If David and Team were to match up a Quark XP-E R2 head with an 18650 tube in a compact form factor like this, I think it would be an amazing light! David????


----------



## CaNo (Jul 8, 2009)

DHart said:


> My best throwers are JetBeams, with the new Jet I Pro IBS v3.0 (a single AA/14500 light) being my best pocket thrower by far.... and I must say, my QAA does a pretty respectable job throwing compared to my Jet I Pro! But the QAA has a much cleaner beam for general use, a lower low, better indoors, and has some strobe & signaling goodies (I would ONLY use these modes if I found myself in an emergency situation - but they're great modes to have just in case!).
> 
> I'm a huge fan of the QAA! :candle: Right now, this is a really tough light to beat as a general use light. But it still hasn't displaced my D10 R2 (and it may never), but between these two lights, I'm feeling really well covered! (Now, what to do with the other 28 awesome lights I bought in the last few months?  - well, they're still useful now and then!  )



What is it about the Nitecore D10 that you like so much compared to the QAA? Is it the results after the 14500? Or the ramping? Because the D10 is an amazing light... but the QAA has it beat in beam quality and throw... so you have me wondering now. Perhaps its the size, clip, am I missing something? :shrug:


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Jul 8, 2009)

I want a Quark so bad because my current EDC is P2D and Quark (even AA) ups the ante with knurling and lower low but the same WONDERFUL ui!!!


----------



## DHart (Jul 8, 2009)

CaNo said:


> What is it about the Nitecore D10 that you like so much compared to the QAA? Is it the results after the 14500? Or the ramping? Because the D10 is an amazing light... but the QAA has it beat in beam quality and throw... so you have me wondering now. Perhaps its the size, clip, am I missing something? :shrug:



What I like about the D10: the infinitely variable ramp by just pressing and holding, 2 clicks to minimum output, click/press to maximum output, and the central beam is wide with a very soft, gradual transition to spill. This makes for an arguably better close-range, indoor-use light. And the D10 has a relatively small form factor for a AA light. The D10 is a fantastic light.

Where the Quark's beam really excels is in outdoor use... the throw is considerably better than the D10. It's nice indoors as well. And the beam is certainly clean, clean, clean.

I like both of these lights very much and could not easily decide to choose one over the other... fortunately, I don't have to!


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jul 8, 2009)

Holding a 18650 in the Quark head I don`t think there is enough space for the body threads and batt to fit...to tight. 

Guess we`ll have to be happy with the 18650 47`s body attached to the upcoming 47`s MC-E head  My 18650 Eagletac batt is just relaxing...lounging around...waiting...teasing me :scowl:


----------



## Toohotruk (Jul 8, 2009)

PlayboyJoeShmoe said:


> I want a Quark so bad because my current EDC is P2D and Quark (even AA) ups the ante with knurling and lower low but the same WONDERFUL ui!!!




You're gonna love the Q123!!! I too used to EDC a P2D CE (OK, I still carry it once in awhile), and the Quark more than makes up for the P2D's shortcomings (no knurling, Low not low enough, the dark Cree ring around the hotspot, not being able to get full function on Li-Ion, etc.)...and as stated many times before, the beam (and tint) is as sweet as I've ever seen. I really am completely satisfied with this light, I honestly can't find anything to _not_ like about it! :thumbsup:


----------



## Mr. Tone (Jul 8, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> Holding a 18650 in the Quark head I don`t think there is enough space for the body threads and batt to fit...to tight.
> 
> Guess we`ll have to be happy with the 18650 47`s body attached to the upcoming 47`s MC-E head  My 18650 Eagletac batt is just relaxing...lounging around...waiting...teasing me :scowl:


 
You're killing me with that info!:mecry: Maybe the 18650/Quark combo is possible, I can still dream can't I?


----------



## hatman (Jul 8, 2009)

DHart said:


> What I like about the D10: the infinitely variable ramp by just pressing and holding, 2 clicks to minimum output, click/press to maximum output, and the central beam is wide with a very soft, gradual transition to spill. This makes for an arguably better close-range, indoor-use light. And the D10 has a relatively small form factor for a AA light. The D10 is a fantastic light.
> 
> Where the Quark's beam really excels is in outdoor use... the throw is considerably better than the D10. It's nice indoors as well. And the beam is certainly clean, clean, clean.
> 
> I like both of these lights very much and could not easily decide to choose one over the other... fortunately, I don't have to!



Just received my Quark AA tactical today. I like it even better than the non-tactical version, and I like that one a lot.

Also received the 123-2 tactical. While bigger than the AA, it too is compact enough for pocket carry.

I also like the D10.

All three feel good in my hand.
Each has its own virtues and, with its clip, makes a wonderful pocket carry.

Congratulations to the 4Sevens Team. I didn't think I'd find another light I like as much as the fantastic D10.


----------



## diff_lock2 (Jul 9, 2009)

Just pre ordered the tactical warm emitter quark AA. Now I wait.


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 9, 2009)

DHart said:


> AFAustin... hey, my friend, I'm glad if I could help you find your way to a new light that you will love!  The thread issue notwithstanding, I am a dyed-in-the-wool believer in the Quarks. But I don't pull punches and do feel this thread issue needs to get gone from the QAAs. Regardless, I'm sure you will LOVE your QAA and I'm very happy that you have won one! I love mine in spite of the thread thing... but I'm rooting for David & Team to find a way to see that complete threads are put on all both ends of all Quarks for once and for all!
> 
> As for 18650... I'll be at the front of the line to buy an 18650 Quark! I'm a huge fan of 18650 power and I think the combination of Quark with 18650 will be a very sweet light to have! :twothumbs My favorite 18650 light these days is the MG L-Mini II R2, which is a very lean and very mean, three level, 18650 light. I love the size and the amazing output/runtimes. Can you just see a Quark in the form factor of the L-Mini below?
> 
> ...


 
The 2x123 is about that size and the runtimes and regulation are very good with a 17670 battery.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

DHart said:


> What I like about the D10: the infinitely variable ramp by just pressing and holding, 2 clicks to minimum output, click/press to maximum output, and the central beam is wide with a very soft, gradual transition to spill. This makes for an arguably better close-range, indoor-use light. And the D10 has a relatively small form factor for a AA light. The D10 is a fantastic light.
> 
> Where the Quark's beam really excels is in outdoor use... the throw is considerably better than the D10. It's nice indoors as well. And the beam is certainly clean, clean, clean.
> 
> I like both of these lights very much and could not easily decide to choose one over the other... fortunately, I don't have to!



You want to know something strange? I've used both the D10 R2 and the QAA outside, and why is it that the D10 (on AA) lights up all the street signs for the entire block and the block after that, while no other light of mine can do this... including the QAA, Ra Clicky, Fenix L2D and L1D Q5, EZAA, etc...

It is awfully strange, and does kind of bother me. The light is a descent thrower, but it just doesn't strike me as normal that it can do this, and the other lights with more lumens, narrower beams, and what not... cannot. Only my D10 R2. It maybe the specific type of CREE... I guess, but when I tried this test with the QAA (whose CREE is supposedly newer), I do not get the same results... 

It seems to work its magic off of reflective objects, but when beamed on the side of a building, obviously not as strong as some of the others. The Fenix lights have more flood and wider beams and they still don't behave this way. I hope someone can explain this to me. :tired:


----------



## diff_lock2 (Jul 9, 2009)

Try shining the lights from your forehead or nose. Even my l2d on med on my helmet lights up all the signs.


----------



## Xak (Jul 9, 2009)

Mr. Tone said:


> Does anyone know if there will be a body for 18650? Or if the 123x2 Quark body tube could be bored for 18650?
> 
> *ANYONE? ANYONE? *



No idea, but I saw a review that showed the Q123-2 runs amazingly well with a 17670 battery. Far better than with 2xRCR123.

I hope the QAA I ordered doesn't come with the messed up threads.


----------



## Palor (Jul 9, 2009)

Rehi,

I checked my Quark 2AA yesterday, changed position of head and tail on the tube and everything worked as supposed.
There is only a little silver gap which in my opinion has no negative influence but could annoy flashoholics....
The reason is simple. The thread on one side of the tube is not anodized to the end.
As people here have already stated: The to hard to turn head (for power mode) must be a thread problem of the Quark AA tube.

Off-Topic:
I found a new task for my Quark.
Every evening when I go to bed I light a tea-candle/tea-light for atmosphere and things like that. Yesterday I used my Quark (tailstand) and lowest output for this task. Great! Even my wife was impressed. 
I also told her that the Quark could do this for the next 30 days without changing batteries....

Palor


----------



## Mr. Tone (Jul 9, 2009)

Xak said:


> No idea, but I saw a review that showed the Q123-2 runs amazingly well with a 17670 battery. Far better than with 2xRCR123.


 
I saw the 17670 specs thanks to Selfbuilt. I already have 18650 batteries to go with my DBS. I am probably already going to buy some 14500 batteries because of the Quark and don't want to buy yet _another _Lion battery format.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jul 9, 2009)

Run times for the 17670 are 1:45 minutes. Cost of a 2x123 body $20. Batt cost $13. So $33. Nice way to add some flexibility.


----------



## pobox1475 (Jul 9, 2009)

> I would pounce on an 18650 Quark in a HOT HURRY!


 *+1.* I've got an AW protected 18650 lying unused that I got for future use. I knew that I would get a light for it eventually. A Quark would be purrrfect.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

DHart said:


> What I like about the D10: the infinitely variable ramp by just pressing and holding, 2 clicks to minimum output, click/press to maximum output, and the central beam is wide with a very soft, gradual transition to spill. This makes for an arguably better close-range, indoor-use light. And the D10 has a relatively small form factor for a AA light. The D10 is a fantastic light.
> 
> Where the Quark's beam really excels is in outdoor use... the throw is considerably better than the D10. It's nice indoors as well. And the beam is certainly clean, clean, clean.
> 
> I like both of these lights very much and could not easily decide to choose one over the other... fortunately, I don't have to!



I just received my 14500 3.7v 900mah Trustfire cells from DX. I popped them in the D10 R2, Nitecore EZAA, and the QAA. 

It felt way too big for the D10, and momentary mode is the only way to use the light, as it would not stay turned on because the size of the cell, and would turn off on its own.

In the EZAA, it would turn off as well in the beginning, but seems to be tolerated more in this light than all the others. Now it is running fine.

When putting this in the Quark AA, It would turn off in like 3 seconds. The main problem was with the turbo mode. It had no problem when the bezel was untightened (moonlight mode, etc). But it refuses to stay on with turbo. I feel like im destroying my lights from the inside with this cell (since it does feel too big for the lights design). Although shouldnt these lights be accepted by these lights? Should I have gotten the 3.6v instead? Oh btw, when I took the light out of the Quark... it reaked of gas. :shakehead


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 9, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> Run times for the 17670 are 1:45 minutes. Cost of a 2x123 body $20. Batt cost $13. So $36. Nice way to add some flexibility.


 The runtime on high, the next level down, was 6:07. Runtimes on a 17670 are better than the 2xAA and are only a little shorter than with two CR123 primaries according to Selfbuilt's runtime graphs.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

Update: 

I used a different cell on the D10, and noticed the one I used before had a piece of the battery sticking out (Prob the part protecting the cell from overdischarging, etc) And I can use the D10 better now... but it is no longer a clicky light, and can only be used properly as a twisty. You cannot even press down on the button when twisted in a descent manner, anything else would have to be momentary. So basically I sacrifice lumens for that function and also its ramping capabilities... I only have one mode to work with and that is the mode I left before putting the cell in, in my case that is max.:shakehead

The other batteries seem to function well (I bought 4). I just was testing the cells on the deformed battery...


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

On the brighter side, like I stated before the EZAA works great with it now, and the Quark works perfect. This light is just flat out amazing! I'm loving the extra lumens!


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 9, 2009)

CaNo said:


> Update:
> 
> I used a different cell on the D10, and noticed the one I used before had a piece of the battery sticking out (Prob the part protecting the cell from overdischarging, etc) And I can use the D10 better now... but it is no longer a clicky light, and can only be used properly as a twisty. You cannot even press down on the button when twisted in a descent manner, anything else would have to be momentary. So basically I sacrifice lumens for that function and also its ramping capabilities... I only have one mode to work with and that is the mode I left before putting the cell in, in my case that is max.:shakehead
> 
> The other batteries seem to function well (I bought 4). I just was testing the cells on the deformed battery...


 
AW's cells are usually a little shorter than the Ultra/Trustfire cells and usually fit better in my two cell lights.


----------



## chadvone (Jul 9, 2009)

Recieved my AA tactical today, super simple to program. You don't have to twist exactly 4 turns, 5-6-7 will do also. 

Directions is missing the turbo or max setting on Operation page.

Shows moonlight-low-med-High-MaxSoS-strobe-beacon.

should be moonlight-low-med-High-Max-MaxSos-strobe-beacon.

When turning it on in moonlight mode you get a blast of brighter light before it settles down.

the head twist alot easier in bezel up than bezel down.

The O ring on the clip side of the body, needs some lube it wanted to crawl out of its slot.

On NiMH cells I cant tell Hi and Max apart indoors.

The beam is amazing. No Rings. good spill.

Cant wait for darkness. Wonder if it can out throw my D10.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

LightWalker said:


> AW's cells are usually a little shorter than the Ultra/Trustfire cells and usually fit better in my two cell lights.



So pretty much if I buy the AW cells, I will get back the features I originally had on my Nitecore when using AA cells? Whats the difference between the AW cells and the trustfire/ultrafires? I see the ultra/trustfires have 900mah, and the AW's only have around 750ish or 700? So you are losing out on juice I take it? 

Now the Eneloops (AA) have 2000mah... and I am going to put a 700mah 14500 cell in... but the 700mah gives me better runtime? I'm missing something here. Im guessing that the Li-Ion cells are measured differently correct?

So basically going from ultra/trustfire to AW, I am sacrificing around 200-150mah of power, for the portability?


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

I am not damaging the Quark AA by leaving this size of a cell twisted on turbo turned off am I?
I also noticed when using this cell (Trustfire 14500) that the clicky protrudes further out. So when tailstanding the light, it is wobbly... unlike with the AA cells...


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

chadvone said:


> Recieved my AA tactical today, super simple to program. You don't have to twist exactly 4 turns, 5-6-7 will do also.
> 
> Directions is missing the turbo or max setting on Operation page.
> 
> ...



Your Quark will definitely out throw your D10. On AA cells it is trickier to spot the difference between high and Max, but on 14500's you can definitely tell.

I just compared the QAA (14500) to my Ra Clicky tactical, and it blew it out of the water. 

Then compared it to my Fenix L2D on (2xL91) which is supposed to be 180 lumens on turbo... and it too got beat out by the QAA... which is weird, since the QAA is only supposed to be 170 lumens with the 14500... I'm starting to think otherwise...


----------



## Henk_Lu (Jul 9, 2009)

Yesterday I added a 2 x AA neutral white to my already ordered 123 and 2 x 123 (tactical)... 

Am I the only one who wants a lanyard (Fenix type) with the Quarks??? 

As for the 123, I ordered the no-clip because I never use clips. Logical not to want a light with one, isn't it? I only wondered why the price is the same as with the clip and why a clip costs 5$? Is the no-clip another built, so that no clip can be attached?

David, did I already say that I like lanyards attached to my lights? It could be an accessoire, I wouldn't have a problem to pay 2 or 3 $ for a little lanyard, I would even buy some more, because lanyards can break and because other lights don't have one either or have very long ones, which I don't preffer (unless for the lights I'm gonna hang around my neck)... :candle:


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

Henk_Lu said:


> Yesterday I added a 2 x AA neutral white to my already ordered 123 and 2 x 123 (tactical)...
> 
> Am I the only one who wants a lanyard (Fenix type) with the Quarks???
> 
> ...



The lanyard David uses is 550 paracord. It has 7 little strands of cord inside it. It can support 550lbs hanging off of it. I wouldn't be worried about it breaking. I do agree with you though, it is too big. I never carry my lights around my neck. If you want to go the creative route, just cut the provided one in half and take one of the tightening balls out and put it on the other half. Now you have 2 lanyards! Give or take you have to tie them in a knot now, or if you want burn them together. I do like the paracord David uses though, it is reflective, and when attached to ur light, and you drop it somewhere, it can easily be spotted by shining your secondary EDC light or keychain light on it.

I am actually going to do what I just suggested to you! lol Thanks for the inspiration for that thought Henk!


----------



## ingokl (Jul 9, 2009)

CaNo said:


> Now the Eneloops (AA) have 2000mah... and I am going to put a 700mah 14500 cell in... but the 700mah gives me better runtime? I'm missing something here. Im guessing that the Li-Ion cells are measured differently correct?
> So basically going from ultra/trustfire to AW, I am sacrificing around 200-150mah of power, for the portability?


 
They are all measured exactly the same way. But Li-Ion cels deliver 3.6V, Eneloops only 1.2V. So theoretically one eneloop has a power capacity of about 1.2Vx2Ah=2.4 Wh. The 14500 cell delivers 3.6x0.7Ah=2.52Wh. Another point is, that for the same power you need 2A of current from the eneloop opposed to only 666mA from the Li-Ion cell. That will result in lower losses in the swith and the battery itself.
Regarding Trustfire and AW. Don't take capacity numbers on cheap cells (not saying bad) like Trusfire or Ultrafire for granted. They are mostly overstated. Real capacity should be similar to AW's cells. And the Trustfires are said to be a little longer than AW's.


----------



## DHart (Jul 9, 2009)

I find the blue Trustfire protected 14500 and black AW protected 14500 fit well. The Red/Black striped Trustfire protected cells tend to be longer, I think. I bought a couple of the Red/black Trustfire protected 18650 cells and they were quite loooong, but good quality! So I'm guessing that the same model in 14500 might be long as well.

I also bought three Ultrafire Silver label protected 14500 cells and two of them had a slightly misaligned PCB component in the bases... making insertion into some lights difficult... funky build quality for sure. No more of those for me.

I would recommend AW protected 14500 and Trustfire blue label protected 14500 for good fit! :thumbsup:

http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.3435


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

ingokl said:


> They are all measured exactly the same way. But Li-Ion cels deliver 3.6V, Eneloops only 1.2V. So theoretically one eneloop has a power capacity of about 1.2Vx 2Ah= 2.4 Wh. The 14500 cell delivers 3.6x0.7Ah= 2.52Wh. Another point is, that for the same power you need 2A of current from the eneloop opposed to only 666mA from the Li-Ion cell. That will result in lower losses in the swith and the battery itself.
> Regarding Trustfire and AW. Don't take capacity numbers on cheap cells (not saying bad) like Trusfire or Ultrafire for granted. They are mostly overstated. Real capacity should be similar to AW's cells. And the Trustfires are said to be a little longer than AW's.



Thank you for explaining that. That's very helpful information.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

Henk_Lu said:


> Yesterday I added a 2 x AA neutral white to my already ordered 123 and 2 x 123 (tactical)...
> 
> Am I the only one who wants a lanyard (Fenix type) with the Quarks???
> 
> ...



I did just as I said, and am happy with the results! I made one that is a finger lanyard for my LD01 and made one wrist lanyard. I had enough to make two equal sized wrist lanyards with enough breathing room for my wrists, but these are my preferences. Just a tip: If you are going to tie the knot on these, do not burn the edges shut.... they turn black and look very fugly lol Instead, wet the end of the exposed lanyard from where you cut, and use scissors to cut it all the way down so it does not get in your way.

Because in reality... I had no use for the stock lanyard provided... this... I will use.:twothumbs


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 9, 2009)

CaNo said:


> So pretty much if I buy the AW cells, I will get back the features I originally had on my Nitecore when using AA cells? Whats the difference between the AW cells and the trustfire/ultrafires? I see the ultra/trustfires have 900mah, and the AW's only have around 750ish or 700? So you are losing out on juice I take it?
> 
> Now the Eneloops (AA) have 2000mah... and I am going to put a 700mah 14500 cell in... but the 700mah gives me better runtime? I'm missing something here. Im guessing that the Li-Ion cells are measured differently correct?
> 
> So basically going from ultra/trustfire to AW, I am sacrificing around 200-150mah of power, for the portability?


 
I do not think that the Trustfires have more capacity than the AW's, Trustfire and the like are known for over inflated numbers.

AW's cells are usually shorter and run longer than the Trust/Ultrafire batteries but cost quite a bit more also.

The Li-Ion batteries have higher voltage than the Eneloops so that is why they have longer runtime in single cell application, the 1.2v NIMH is working on a boost circuit.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

DHart said:


> I find the blue Trustfire protected 14500 and black AW protected 14500 fit well. The Red/Black striped Trustfire protected cells tend to be longer, I think. I bought a couple of the Red/black Trustfire protected 18650 cells and they were quite loooong, but good quality! So I'm guessing that the same model in 14500 might be long as well.
> 
> I also bought three Ultrafire Silver label protected 14500 cells and two of them had a slightly misaligned PCB component in the bases... making insertion into some lights difficult... funky build quality for sure. No more of those for me.
> 
> ...



Where's a good place to buy the AW's DQuark? lol


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

LightWalker said:


> I do not think that the Trustfires have more capacity than the AW's, Trustfire and the like are known for over inflated numbers.
> 
> AW's cells are usually shorter and run longer than the Trust/Ultrafire batteries but cost quite a bit more also.
> 
> The Li-Ion batteries have higher voltage than the Eneloops so that is why they have longer runtime in single cell application, the 1.2v NIMH is working on a boost circuit.



Ah ic... so different ways of distributing power. Gotcha. That makes sense then. I shoulda went with the AW's from the get go. But will this added length damage my lights when twisted to turbo or high i.e. the D10, QAA, EZAA?


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 9, 2009)

CaNo said:


> Ah ic... so different ways of distributing power. Gotcha. That makes sense then. I shoulda went with the AW's from the get go. But will this added length damage my lights when twisted to turbo or high i.e. the D10, QAA, EZAA?


 
I get my AW cells here: http://www.4sevens.com/index.php?cPath=53&osCsid=d8b09ca16c7effb33f48463248c5dcf3

I don't think the longer cells will damage your lights, although they may squash the springs, but those can be streched back out. Your lights may damage the batteries though.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

LightWalker said:


> I get my AW cells here: http://www.4sevens.com/index.php?cPath=53&osCsid=d8b09ca16c7effb33f48463248c5dcf3
> 
> I don't think the longer cells will damage your lights, although they may squash the springs, but those can be streched back out. Your lights may damage the batteries though.



I was just worried about having too much pressure to the head. I also have some relief recalling that I bought all these lights from 4Sevens, and they do have excellent warranty. I should stop stressing out lol

I would rather damage the cell than the light anyday, but then again, with a damage cell comes a very unpleasant leak or an unwanted  which can result in a damaged light... 

Thanks for the link. But are these the rechargeable ones?


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jul 9, 2009)

My AW 14500 does not work well in my D-10. It work like a charm in my Quark...


----------



## mbiraman (Jul 9, 2009)

Quark AA stiff head update.
I'll try and keep this short as i just wrote a long email to 4 seven's a few minutes ago. For those of you who have had a stiff head on your AA you'll know i have had that problem. I tried many things to get it to loosen up to no avail. I tried teflon grease, other lubs etc , nothing. Put in a new o-ring, nothing. When i switched tail and head it worked fine but could no longer use the clip. On a hunch yesterday i switched just the tail and head o-rings leaving the head, body and tail in original configuration. Bingo it works. This morning i took some calipers and did some o-ring measuring and they were different thicknesses, not by much but there is a difference and the tail o-ring was thinner so when i placed it on the head end of the body the head now works much better.Whether this will cause me a problem later when i have to change o-rings is unknown but for now, problem is solved and it works good. A relief because this is a very nice light and it was a bit frustrating to have part of it not working properly. It sounds like this isn't the same issue some are having but for now things are fixed at my end. Now what about a 14500 and a lanyard?


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> My AW 14500 does not work well in my D-10. It work like a charm in my Quark...



With the Trustfire that I currently have, you are only stuck on momentary and to have the light stay on you have to twist it tighter. Is this the same case? Or can you actually ramp up and down and do the shortcuts to min and max as well?


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 9, 2009)

CaNo said:


> I was just worried about having too much pressure to the head. I also have some relief recalling that I bought all these lights from 4Sevens, and they do have excellent warranty. I should stop stressing out lol
> 
> I would rather damage the cell than the light anyday, but then again, with a damage cell comes a very unpleasant leak or an unwanted  which can result in a damaged light...
> 
> Thanks for the link. But are these the rechargeable ones?


 
The black AW batteries are rechargable Li-Ion. Charging a damaged Li-Ion battery could result in


----------



## ntalbot (Jul 9, 2009)

Not sure if anyone has brought this up yet, but for those of you with Quark AA's:
Do you think the body can be milled out to fit a 17500 battery?
I did the math and a 17500 would give you about 50% more runtime (47% to be exact) than a 14500.
That would rock! 

From AW:
Protected 17500 ( 1100mAH ) 
Protected 14500 ( 750 mAH )

Neil


----------



## Henk_Lu (Jul 9, 2009)

CaNo said:


> I did just as I said, and am happy with the results! I made one that is a finger lanyard for my LD01 and made one wrist lanyard. I had enough to make two equal sized wrist lanyards with enough breathing room for my wrists, but these are my preferences. Just a tip: If you are going to tie the knot on these, do not burn the edges shut.... they turn black and look very fugly lol Instead, wet the end of the exposed lanyard from where you cut, and use scissors to cut it all the way down so it does not get in your way.
> 
> Because in reality... I had no use for the stock lanyard provided... this... I will use.:twothumbs



If I understand correctly, there is actually a lanyard provided? I couldn't find any information about that on the Quarks website, was I blind? :duh2: 

Though your idea isn't bad to shorten a lanyard, I still need a second clip to make two out of them and you need big holes in your lights for the clips. Therefore I preffer the lanyards with the thin loop at one end...


----------



## oldpal (Jul 9, 2009)

mbiraman said:


> Quark AA stiff head update.
> I'll try and keep this short as i just wrote a long email to 4 seven's a few minutes ago. For those of you who have had a stiff head on your AA you'll know i have had that problem. I tried many things to get it to loosen up to no avail. I tried teflon grease, other lubs etc , nothing. Put in a new o-ring, nothing. When i switched tail and head it worked fine but could no longer use the clip. On a hunch yesterday i switched just the tail and head o-rings leaving the head, body and tail in original configuration. Bingo it works. This morning i took some calipers and did some o-ring measuring and they were different thicknesses, not by much but there is a difference and the tail o-ring was thinner so when i placed it on the head end of the body the head now works much better.Whether this will cause me a problem later when i have to change o-rings is unknown but for now, problem is solved and it works good. A relief because this is a very nice light and it was a bit frustrating to have part of it not working properly. It sounds like this isn't the same issue some are having but for now things are fixed at my end. Now what about a 14500 and a lanyard?



I observed the same thing with the O-rings. See this post https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2992081&postcount=164

Hugh


----------



## mbiraman (Jul 9, 2009)

oldpal said:


> I observed the same thing with the O-rings. See this post https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2992081&postcount=164
> 
> Hugh


I had not seen these posts but it seems we've had some similar experience.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jul 9, 2009)

CaNo said:


> With the Trustfire that I currently have, you are only stuck on momentary and to have the light stay on you have to twist it tighter. Is this the same case? Or can you actually ramp up and down and do the shortcuts to min and max as well?



Same case...will not ramp up/down. My understanding is the newer ones are ok with 14500. Mine is one of the older GDP one`s. Still love it...I just stick with AA.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

Henk_Lu said:


> If I understand correctly, there is actually a lanyard provided? I couldn't find any information about that on the Quarks website, was I blind? :duh2:
> 
> Though your idea isn't bad to shorten a lanyard, I still need a second clip to make two out of them and you need big holes in your lights for the clips. Therefore I preffer the lanyards with the thin loop at one end...



It comes with a long lanyard, a flashlight finger grip, a duracell battery, a holster with velcro strap, O-rings, small keyring, and a great box. 

I have other lights that included o-rings that I dont use, and clips, etc. The one I used was the one that came with my LD01 to make the second lanyard.

Btw the lanyard was inside the velcro case.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> Same case...will not ramp up/down. My understanding is the newer ones are ok with 14500. Mine is one of the older GDP one`s. Still love it...I just stick with AA.



Thats odd I bought mine around 2 months ago... they have another version?


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jul 9, 2009)

CaNo said:


> Thats odd I bought mine around 2 months ago... they have another version?



Well they have or had a Q5, Golden Dragon Plus, and of course the popular one now, the R2. But I`m not sure what makes the 14500 work/not work...seems to be more about the length of the piston and/or case. There`s a thread going on right now about the D-10`s problems/confusions.


----------



## pobox1475 (Jul 9, 2009)

> I would recommend AW protected 14500


 *+1. *

http://www.lighthound.com/Batteries-carriers-testers_c_20.html


----------



## Mugrunty (Jul 9, 2009)

Do the ultrafires work ok in the aa quarks? I just ordered two from eBay for about 12 bucks. If not, I'll just get the AW cells from 4Sevens or something.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

Mugrunty said:


> Do the ultrafires work ok in the aa quarks? I just ordered two from eBay for about 12 bucks. If not, I'll just get the AW cells from 4Sevens or something.



I just got mine today. So far so good. It is just big. But aside from that, it does what a 14500 should!


----------



## CaNo (Jul 9, 2009)

I am still in disbelief on how beautiful the beam is on this light is! 14500 definitely compliments this light's capabilities! It may not be the most attractive light in my arsenal (Ra Clicky), but it is the most dependable, versatile, and brightest pocket carry I have. I am so glad I purchased it! (Is it so wrong of me to feel like purchasing another just cause?) Oh and Dhart you can say "I told you so" because if it weren't for your persuasion, I would not of even thought of buying this light. :thanks:

(And to think... I could have bought all 4 of these lights for the price I paid altogether for my Custom Ra Clicky... (3 bodies and 1 body tube))

But then again, to be a true flashaholic, you do have to have at least 1 Ra light lol! So no regrets there! lovecpf


----------



## DHart (Jul 9, 2009)

CaNo said:


> I am still in disbelief on how beautiful the beam is on this light is! 14500 definitely compliments this light's capabilities! It may not be the most attractive light in my arsenal (Ra Clicky), but it is the most dependable, versatile, and brightest pocket carry I have. I am so glad I purchased it! (Is it so wrong of me to feel like purchasing another just cause?)
> 
> Oh and Dhart you can say "I told you so" because if it weren't for your persuasion, I would not of even thought of buying this light. :thanks:



CaNo... you are very welcome, my friend. I'm really happy that you are so thrilled with the QAA and the 14500... I KNEW you would be!... and I don't even mind you calling me DQuark!  

I think the Quark lights are at the top of the game at the moment... a truly fantastic series of lights. So wonderful, in fact, that I couldn't help myself today: I decided I just had to have a 123x2 so I could power it with one of my 17670 li-ions thanks:TO BADBEAMS3 for the SUGGESTION!). I have a few AW 17670s which, at present, are languishing at 3.8v, suspended in chilled-animation, sealed in a Ziplock tub in my refridgerator! Can't have that. :sigh: I yearn for an 18650 Quark, but in the meantime, a 123x2 with an AW protected 17670 in it is a really sweet second place to an 18650. CAN'T WAIT FOR MY 123x2!


----------



## chadvone (Jul 9, 2009)

Been outside with Quark AA, D10 and LD20

Fresh Nimh Batterys.

The Quark just barley out throws my D10.

On trees from 55-85 yards can see inter limbs with both lights.

D10 has brighter spill that covers more of the surrounding trees.

Quark has pattern very much like my LD20 on Med at these distances.

Going back out with fresh eneloops to test differnce between Hi and Max.


----------



## chadvone (Jul 9, 2009)

There is a difference between Hi and Max on fresh batterys, tried some new Energizer L91's seamed to be more of a difference, put the NiMh that had about 40 minutes on them and there was no difference.

The Quark AA tactical will tailstand in a water bottle cap. Same cap used to make diffuser on D10.

Moonlight mode is dimmer than the Moon.

I love this light.

anyone tell me real world use how the AA2 compairs to LD20


----------



## CaNo (Jul 10, 2009)

DHart said:


> CaNo... you are very welcome, my friend. I'm really happy that you are so thrilled with the QAA and the 14500... I KNEW you would be!... and I don't even mind you calling me DQuark!
> 
> I think the Quark lights are at the top of the game at the moment... a truly fantastic series of lights. So wonderful, in fact, that I couldn't help myself today: I decided I just had to have a 123x2 so I could power it with one of my 17670 li-ions thanks:TO BADBEAMS3 for the SUGGESTION!). I have a few AW 17670s which, at present, are languishing at 3.8v, suspended in chilled-animation, sealed in a Ziplock tub in my refridgerator! Can't have that. :sigh: I yearn for an 18650 Quark, but in the meantime, a 123x2 with an AW protected 17670 in it is a really sweet second place to an 18650. CAN'T WAIT FOR MY 123x2!


You better take some beamshots of that Q123x2 w/ 17670 compared to the QAA w/ 14500... I want to see if its a huge difference lol Do you have a rough estimate of how many lumens it will produce with that cell? If im not wrong, didnt it say on the 4Sevens website that it can take up to 9 volts? Im tempted, but I think i'll wait til the 18650 comes out... if it even gets produced... 

Has David even considered this yet? How many volts does the 18650 produce? Because as stated before... all you need is the Q123x2 head (3-9v), and if it never gets produced, a 3rd party can produce an 18650 body... if you are willing to spend around a $100 for one that is... 

Im crossing my fingers in hopes this one gets produced. Ive read alot of people in many threads saying they want an 18650 as well... maybe I should create a thread and put a poll up to see what the next Quark light or atleast body tube accessory production should be... so he can atleast see what his consumers want... 

Ill post the link here.... LET US BE HEARD!!!:buddies:

***UPDATE***

Vote here: 
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/236311


----------



## DHart (Jul 10, 2009)

chadvone said:


> The Quark just barley out throws my D10.



No doubt... the Quark will out throw the D10, regardless of your choice of powering options. But the difference in throw is much more pronounced with lithium-ion chemistry! If one chooses to limit their use to NiMH or lithium primaries, that's all well and good. But if you are only considering NiMH, lithium, or (God forbid) alkaline cells... consider that on different chemistry, these lights perform MUCH differently.

These lights perform incredibly on 14500 li-ion cells. They are built to handle 14500 li-ion cells and believe me, li-ion performance is in an entirely different league than performance with NiMH, lithium primary, or alkaline. On li-ion, the Quark easily out throws the D10. But this is not a put down of the D10 (which is a great flashlight!)... the D10 is not designed for great throw... it's designed more for general use. The Quark, while designed for general use, has a design which enables more throw than the D10 does.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 10, 2009)

DHart said:


> No doubt... the Quark will out throw the D10, regardless of your choice of powering options. But the difference in throw is much more pronounced with lithium-ion chemistry! If one chooses to limit their use to NiMH or lithium primaries, that's all well and good. But if you are only considering NiMH, lithium, or (God forbid) alkaline cells... consider that on different chemistry, these lights perform MUCH differently.
> 
> These lights perform incredibly on 14500 li-ion cells. They are built to handle 14500 li-ion cells and believe me, li-ion performance is in an entirely different league than performance with NiMH, lithium primary, or alkaline. On li-ion, the Quark easily out throws the D10. But this is not a put down of the D10 9which is a great flashlight!)... the D10 is not designed for great throw... it's designed more for general use. The Quark, while designed for general use, has a design which enables more throw than the D10 does.



Quark is excellent outdoors, and D10 is excellent indoors. What do they have in common? They are both excellent lights! One thing I do have to comment on is that the QAA works better (control wise) than the D10 on 14500's. The QAA still has all it's modes, while the D10 only provides me with one mode, losing the ramping, click on and off feature, and shortcuts to min and max... with the 14500 cell. :mecry:


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jul 10, 2009)

chadvone said:


> There is a difference between Hi and Max on fresh batterys, tried some new Energizer L91's seamed to be more of a difference, put the NiMh that had about 40 minutes on them and there was no difference.
> 
> The Quark AA tactical will tailstand in a water bottle cap. Same cap used to make diffuser on D10.
> 
> ...



Even thou the brightness appears to be the same on AA it will use up the batt much faster in turbo.

Compared...Quark AA (running on 14500) to Fenix L2DQ5 (no LD20)...tint is warmer on Quark. The Quark has a slightly brighter, tighter hot spot...and a wider spill but same brightness. I would have to say the Quark simply out lumens my Fenix just a tad. 

But in actual use...I have to say they are pretty similar...light my backyard pretty much the same.


----------



## DHart (Jul 10, 2009)

CaNo said:


> One thing I do have to comment on is that the QAA works better (control wise) than the D10 on 14500's. The QAA still has all it's modes, while the D10 only provides me with one mode, losing the ramping, click on and off feature, and shortcuts to min and max... with the 14500 cell. :mecry:



CaNo... your D10 troubles are quite likely a function of the particular choice of li-ion you have made, not the light itself. The operation of many of these lights is partially dependent on the length of the cell used. You should note that there is a very wide range of cell length from one brand of li-ion to another. The longer ones can create troublesome operation with some lights.

My D10 runs flawlessly on AW black and Trustfire blue label 14500 protected li-ions.

Try the shorter blue label Trustfire 14500 protected cells (two for $5.64 including shipping from DX) or if you don't mind spending the the money, one AW protected 14500 for about $10 from Lighthound (PLUS shipping) or one for $12 from 4Sevens (PLUS shipping). This makes AW a very costly, but arguably reasonably good (and quicker-to-be-had), choice. 

I did a runtime test today in my Quark AA using:

• Trustfire blue label protected 14500 from DX (TWO for $5.64 incl. shipping)
• AW protected 14500 from Lighthound (ONE for $9.95, NOT incl. shipping)

I got about 48 minutes from the AW and 50 minutes from the Trustfire. For the money, I think the Trustfire is a reasonably solid choice. That's not to say the Trustfire is _better_ than the AW or that the AW is _better_ than the Trustfire... just that on a cost/runtime basis... I think the Trustfire is a fairly sound choice for less than 1/4 of the price of AW. Even if the Trustfire only provides half the total service life of the AW (I don't expect that much of a difference, to be honest), the Trustfire blue label protected 14500 is still about 1/2 the price of the AW for relatively comparable performance. I wouldn't be at all surprised if all of these cells (AW, Trustfire, Ultrafire, etc.) are all made in the same factory in China... albeit with possibly different spec/tolerance requirements.

If saving some money is your desire, and you can wait a week to 10 days, I'd recommend ordering a pair of blue label Trustfire protected 14500 cells (two for $5.64 including shipping) from DX.

If the cost isn't a factor and/or you want the cells within a few days at most, spend 4x+ the money and buy AW protected 14500s from Lighthound or 4Sevens. Either way, I think you'll be just fine.


----------



## Toohotruk (Jul 10, 2009)

7777 doesn't charge for regular shipping.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 10, 2009)

DHart said:


> CaNo... your D10 troubles are quite likely a function of the particular choice of li-ion you have made, not the light itself. The operation of many of these lights is partially dependent on the length of the cell used. You should note that there is a very wide range of cell length from one brand of li-ion to another. The longer ones can create troublesome operation with some lights.
> 
> My D10 runs flawlessly on AW black and Trustfire blue label 14500 protected li-ions.
> 
> ...



Hmmm... I will try your approach Dhart. I really dont need an AW at the moment, because I will be tempted to buy their charger as well and that is less money in my pockets. For the price of 1 AW, I can get 5 trustfires... I think you a have valid point. Considering that I need a minimum of 4 14500 cells (That's 40 bucks + shipping for AW's! AHHHH!!!)... I'm going to place the order now and let you know my results when I receive them in August! Stay tuned! :nana:


----------



## CaNo (Jul 10, 2009)

Order complete  lol


----------



## DHart (Jul 10, 2009)

CaNo said:


> Order complete  lol



CaNo... I just bought FOUR Trustfire blue label protected 14500 cells today from DX for about $11 including shipping. 

Considering that the cost of two of these cells (including shipping! at $5.64) is about the same price as a Wendy's double cheese burger with fries meal... I can't see how this would really be any big deal, especially for any type of a flashaholic... _even_ a flashaholic on a tight budget! :shrug:


----------



## CaNo (Jul 10, 2009)

DHart said:


> CaNo... I just bought FOUR Trustfire blue label protected 14500 cells today from DX for about $11 including shipping.
> 
> Considering that the cost of two of these cells (including shipping! at $5.64) is about the same price as a Wendy's double cheese burger with fries meal... I can't see how this would really be any big deal, especially for any type of a flashaholic... even a flashaholic on a tight budget! :shrug:



I guess you didn't catch my sarcasm haha! Now you got me hungry....  lol


----------



## CaNo (Jul 10, 2009)

DHart said:


> CaNo... I just bought FOUR Trustfire blue label protected 14500 cells today from DX for about $11 including shipping.
> 
> Considering that the cost of two of these cells (including shipping! at $5.64) is about the same price as a Wendy's double cheese burger with fries meal... I can't see how this would really be any big deal, especially for any type of a flashaholic... _even_ a flashaholic on a tight budget! :shrug:



Imagine what a DX double cheese burger with fries meal would taste like... once it gets delivered... they must have some hardcore preservatives on that thing *shivers*


----------



## DHart (Jul 10, 2009)

CaNo said:


> I guess you didn't catch my sarcasm haha! Now you got me hungry....  lol



USA retailers need to made a decent profit to cover their butts... and I don't begrudge them their reasonable pricing by any means! I'm a small business owner in the USA and I know how much it costs just to be open for business! Many don't understand these basic costs of doing business. 

That said, when you can buy a couple of good quality 14500 protected li-ions for less than $6 DELIVERED! that is difficult to deny! Local suppliers can give you the goods quickly and can be easier to deal with if there are problems - at a cost. Distant suppliers can't offer the quick delivery or the easiest customer service... but they have price! Simply choose what is most important to you and chances are, you'll be fine either way! 

I compete with a barrage of much lower cost providers in my industry.. and I survive by providing a much higher quality product, at a higher price, and obviously, at lower volume... but that's just the business model that works best for me. When it comes to buying batteries, I'm ok with saving a BUNCH and giving something up. When it comes to buying more significant products or services, I'm ok with spending more and receiving a more satisfactory experience overall.

Over time... the world's economy for goods and services ultimately evens out... and along the way, some purveyors do battle with others who are difficult to compete with. Life is a struggle to survive... no matter who you are or where you are! Those of us here in the USA have recently become a little more aware of this reality.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 10, 2009)

DHart said:


> USA retailers need to made a decent profit to cover their butts... and I don't begrudge them their reasonable pricing by any means! I'm a small business owner in the USA and I know how much it costs just to be open for business! Many don't understand these basic costs of doing business.
> 
> That said, when you can buy a couple of good quality 14500 protected li-ions for less than $6 DELIVERED! that is difficult to deny! Local suppliers can give you the goods quickly and can be easier to deal with if there are problems - at a cost. Distant suppliers can't offer the quick delivery or the easiest customer service... but they have price! Simply choose what is most important to you and chances are, you'll be fine either way!
> 
> ...



The reason I buy from 4Sevens is because they include the price of shipping in the price advertised, which to me is a HUGE plus! I hate guessing games with shipping. It is a pet peave of mine. Plus no need to upgrade to priority, since the shipping time is so fast! This is a selling point for me. I'm the type of person that will drive a good distance to get what they want the same day. But I also dont mind waiting for something that will save me alot of money :nana:. In this case DX and their Trustfires that are comparable to the AW's at a quarter of the cost. Because really, since all these lights are covered under warranty, all I needed was the size change. If they were not under warranty... I might of thought twice.


----------



## DHart (Jul 10, 2009)

deleted post...


----------



## CaNo (Jul 10, 2009)

DHart said:


> deleted post...



???


----------



## Henk_Lu (Jul 10, 2009)

CaNo said:


> It comes with a long lanyard, a flashlight finger grip, a duracell battery, a holster with velcro strap, O-rings, small keyring, and a great box.
> 
> I have other lights that included o-rings that I dont use, and clips, etc. The one I used was the one that came with my LD01 to make the second lanyard.
> 
> Btw the lanyard was inside the velcro case.



Wow, that is a lot of not-mentionned stuff! :thumbsup:

I don't know what a flashlight finger grip is, but I will find out soon. The lanyard is an "Olight-type". I call them that way, I once got a few from a dealer and had some with a few Olights...

I have to look in the boxes of the LD01ss if I have such clips, I don't remember them, but I always leave all the stuff I don't need in the boxes which I always keep. If I find clips, I'll cut some lanyards as well! :wave:


----------



## digitaleos (Jul 10, 2009)

Has anyone else noticed their 2x123 Quark flickering on moon mode when using a 17670?:shrug: All other modes appear to work normally, but on moon mode there is like a PWM flashing.:thinking: When I run the light on two cr123's everything is fine.

Edit: I should have mentioned that this the tactical version and also the bezel came unsealed. I have two regular Quarks, AA and 123 and they work perfectly on rcr's.


----------



## chadvone (Jul 10, 2009)

My AA seams to pulse on moon mode.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 10, 2009)

Henk_Lu said:


> Wow, that is a lot of not-mentionned stuff! :thumbsup:
> 
> I don't know what a flashlight finger grip is, but I will find out soon. The lanyard is an "Olight-type". I call them that way, I once got a few from a dealer and had some with a few Olights...
> 
> I have to look in the boxes of the LD01ss if I have such clips, I don't remember them, but I always leave all the stuff I don't need in the boxes which I always keep. If I find clips, I'll cut some lanyards as well! :wave:



The clip I think may have come from my EZAA. I am not certain. It was one of those lights lol Pardon the dust on the finger grip, but this is it. It is very helpful in situations like jogging, hiking, etc when you dont want your light to dangle. It forms in your hand perfectly for thumb to clicky operation. In this picture I am showing you how it attaches... One hole through finger, and one through flashlight. It is made of rubber as well. Ive never thought something like this can be so helpful, but i would rather take this with me jogging than a lanyard. Check it out for yourself!







And I would rather make wrist or finger lanyards with the lanyard provided, than to put it on my neck. It is way too long, and would just look foolish, worn the way it is. Selfbuilt did a review on this light, and he does show the contents of the box towards the middle of the page. Maybe this will help answer some of your questions Henk!

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


----------



## Mugrunty (Jul 10, 2009)

My 4Sevens AA Tactical Quark arrived today! (Normal tint). I rode my bike over to the post office to pick it up. 
So far it seems very good. I need to have those 14500s though!! It's very bright with just my AA Rechargable energizers! The Tint is somewhat cooler than my RB100 though. I still like the RB100 best for it's tint and extreme runtime. I'll have to see if the Quark is brighter than it when I get those 14500s. I have a feeling that it will be.

The Box was also almost the coolest thing ever! The awesome rubber coating was awesome. (And the magnets that hold it shut) lol. It's a nice way to advertise the quality of the quarks.

Anyway, I might be forced into getting the AA Tactical in warm tint as well. I still dont have a light that is "neutral" tint. Do I really need both quarks???

My logical brain says no, but my stupid flashaholic side says I need it right now. You can order the neutral tints right up until 7/20 correct? That way I can think about it over the weekend with this normal tint one. I still need those 14500s.

Awesome light! And I really don't notice the initial flash everyone's talking about when going into moon mode. Maybe it's because I'm so used to my Rb100. If the flash is there, it's only a few mS...you'd miss it in 1/2 of a blink of an eye. (But I've only had it for a few minutes...maybe it shows up after it's been off for a while.)


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jul 10, 2009)

I went to order a 123x2 body to use with my AA head (planned to buy the 17670 LI-ion too for the long run time) but guess what...not available! Whats up with that?!! Also why isn`t the warm white AA head sold seperatly...I was going to buy that too! I thought these were going to be lego lights. Just keep adding on as I wish till I`m completly broke. How am I supposed to keep pushing my wallet thru the internet into the 47`s company?   

Guess David just wants to make sure I can buy food and stuff...he is a great guy :wave:


----------



## Mugrunty (Jul 10, 2009)

OK I found something out. Not sure if anyone else has said it or noticed it. The AA Tactical light I have will only do the pre-flash if the following happens:

1.) You use the light in a higher mode, ex. MAX
2.) You then turn the light off...
3.) Twist the head to moonlight mode while the light is off.
4.) Upon turning the light back on...it will Pre-Flash to the higher level before returning to moonmode.
From then on it will not pre-flash again unless you do the above steps again.

If the light was in moon mode before turning it off, it will not pre-flash.

Now that I think of it, I think someone did say this before. Oh well, no big deal.

Dangit, I want the neutral tint version too! And my 14500 cells!:huh:


----------



## chadvone (Jul 10, 2009)

The AA tactical that I have will do the pre flash in moon mode if you just let is set a bit in moon mode.


----------



## pobox1475 (Jul 10, 2009)

> Do I really need both quarks???


 I would get a standard warm 123 2 for outdoor use.


----------



## digitaleos (Jul 10, 2009)

chadvone said:


> My AA seams to pulse on moon mode.



Your Quark with the pulse, is that a Tactical model?


----------



## chadvone (Jul 10, 2009)

digitaleos said:


> Your Quark with the pulse, is that a Tactical model?


 
Yes tactical AA

when I shake the light in moon mode , looks like is strobing.+


----------



## Mugrunty (Jul 10, 2009)

> when I shake the light in moon mode , looks like is strobing.+



I think that is due to the circuit design. Although thats not what I mean by the pre-flash.

The subtle PWM-like effect seen in the moonmode probably has to due with how the output current is very low. You cannot see it in any other mode (or if your superman, see it in low). I'm completly guessing that their boost circuit goes into some sort of discontinuous mode and can't quite keep the current constant when in moon-mode. Who knows...maybe David could help us out here. If I had my light to sound converter, it could tell us if it is blinking. It works by feeding light into a sensor and sending that signal to a speaker. If the light is DC, it makes no tone. If there is any frequency in the light, it plays it through the speaker. Crude, but works.

Here is a picture of the stange PWM effect. It's really hard to capture on camera.







I don't think it would bother even the pickiest of people. It doesn't look as bad as a real PWM light.



> I would get a standard warm 123 2 for outdoor use.



If I get a warm version, it will still be the AA quark (not sure on tactical or not). It can be nearly as bright with a 14500 cell. Plus, I could always get the AAx2 tube. I like the regulation beter with the AA light.


----------



## chadvone (Jul 10, 2009)

Yes Mugrunty that was was I was talking about.

Quark AA Tactical just preflashed again on moonlight mode.


----------



## digitaleos (Jul 10, 2009)

Mine is behaving just like the Novatacs on their lowest setting. It is quite noticeable. I just sent an email to 4sevens asking about this.


----------



## Mugrunty (Jul 10, 2009)

I dunno, mine never preflashes while in moon mode. Your not somehow squeezing the light or putting pressure in some way to cause the head to tighten are you? I think I did that once.


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 10, 2009)

The 2x123 with 17670 has better runtime than the 2xAA and is only a little bigger than the 1xAA.


----------



## chadvone (Jul 10, 2009)

The preflash on moonlight mode is annoying, but something I can live with.

I just kill first press in my hand , or on my leg.


----------



## chadvone (Jul 10, 2009)

I just set moonlight mode to both bezel tite and bezel loose.

And it preflashes on both.


----------



## digitaleos (Jul 10, 2009)

chadvone said:


> I just set moonlight mode to both bezel tite and bezel loose.
> 
> And it preflashes on both.




I think it's been established that most of the Quarks are going to have this pre-flash. It's not the pre-flash that bothers me, it's the continuous flickering in moon mode while using a 17670.


----------



## Mugrunty (Jul 10, 2009)

Hold on a second... Is this preflash occuring when using a nimh cell or a 14500? Currently I'm using a nimh cell.


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 10, 2009)

digitaleos said:


> I think it's been established that most of the Quarks are going to have this pre-flash. It's not the pre-flash that bothers me, it's the continuous flickering in moon mode while using a 17670.


 
Try streching the spring in the tailcap out a little, a 17670 is a little shorter than two 123 batteries.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jul 10, 2009)

Mugrunty said:


> Hold on a second... Is this preflash occuring when using a nimh cell or a 14500? Currently I'm using a nimh cell.



Mine does the preflash on 14500...and on AA.


----------



## DHart (Jul 10, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> I went to order a 123x2 body to use with my AA head (planned to buy the 17670 LI-ion too for the long run time) but guess what...not available! Whats up with that?!! Also why isn`t the warm white AA head sold seperatly...I was going to buy that too! I thought these were going to be lego lights. Just keep adding on as I wish till I`m completly broke. How am I supposed to keep pushing my wallet thru the internet into the 47`s company?
> 
> Guess David just wants to make sure I can buy food and stuff...he is a great guy :wave:



I tried to buy a 123x2 body as well (after your suggestion) and found it was not being offered. I agree, all bodies, all tailcaps, all heads should be offered individually, then we lego-freaks can keep piling on parts and parts and parts! As it was, I ordered a complete 123x2 flashlight... this way I can compare the AA head and the 123x2 head, each running on a 17670 to see how they differ in output and runtime on a 17670. Can't wait to get the 123x2 and stuff a 17670 into it! I have two AW black protected 17670s all charged up and ready to rumble!


----------



## digitaleos (Jul 10, 2009)

LightWalker said:


> Try streching the spring in the tailcap out a little, a 17670 is a little shorter than two 123 batteries.




Ok, I tried stretching the spring. It didn't work, but thanks for the suggestion. I also tried the 2x123 head on my other bodies(123 & AA) running rcr's and it did the same thing. Now something else I just noticed, although I really have to look for this it seems to do the flickering slightly when running it with 2 cr123's. I'm afraid this one may be going back for an exchange unless this is common with the tactical models :shrug:.


----------



## CaNo (Jul 10, 2009)

DHart said:


> I tried to buy a 123x2 body as well (after your suggestion) and found it was not being offered. I agree, all bodies, all tailcaps, all heads should be offered individually, then we lego-freaks can keep piling on parts and parts and parts! As it was, I ordered a complete 123x2 flashlight... this way I can compare the AA head and the 123x2 head, each running on a 17670 to see how they differ in output and runtime on a 17670. Can't wait to get the 123x2 and stuff a 17670 into it! I have two AW black protected 17670s all charged up and ready to rumble!


Is the head for the 123x2 the same as the head for the lower models? I got the impression that the 123x2 models required more energy, as compared to the lego-able 123,AAx2,AA... I just dont know about that... so your telling me the head that I got for my AA can support up to 9 volts? I could have sworn it was 4.2 max... :thinking:


----------



## CaNo (Jul 10, 2009)

Mugrunty said:


> Here is a picture of the stange PWM effect. It's really hard to capture on camera.



This looks like a picture taken from a 1990's horror flick! haha Creepy! :devil:



Badbeams3 said:


> Guess David just wants to make sure I can buy food and stuff...he is a great guy :wave:



I'm sure this is the case.... haha! :nana:
What a great business tactic I must say! How good will your consumer's money be if they died from starvation?! lol What a great guy indeed!


----------



## DHart (Jul 10, 2009)

CaNo said:


> Is the head for the 123x2 the same as the head for the lower models? I got the impression that the 123x2 models required more energy, as compared to the lego-able 123,AAx2,AA... I just dont know about that... so your telling me the head that I got for my AA can support up to 9 volts? I could have sworn it was 4.2 max... :thinking:




Q 123x2 head runs on: 3v to 9v
All other Q heads run on: .9v to 4.2v

So when you are mixing and matching heads/bodies/cells just make sure you aren't sending more than 4.2v to any head other than the Q 123x2 head, which can take up to 9v.

My interest in the Q123x2 running on a 17670 cell is RUNTIME. (Plus, I only run with li-ion rechargeables -with lithium primaries as backup/emerg- so for safety reasons and simplicity, I don't like using two cells in a light; I much prefer single-cell powering.) 

Here's a comparison of runtimes measured and reported by selfbuilt in his review of the Quarks.

Light / cell.......................Runtime on TURBO to 50%
Q123 on RCR123...........................30 minutes
QAA on 14500...............................46 minutes
Q123x2 on 17670...................1 hr. 45 min. !!! :thumbsup:

The Q123x2 is just slightly longer than the QAA yet offers an amazing increase in runtime when powered with a 17670 cell. I think this setup is going to be my favorite Quark of all, with the QAA coming in a close second. I will only use the 123 tube I bought, when I need the smallest form factor I can get with a Quark. The 123 form factor does make a pretty tidy pocket carry light and is a great choice when you need small size more than you need runtime!


----------



## CaNo (Jul 10, 2009)

DHart said:


> Q 123x2 head runs on: 3v to 9v
> All other Q heads run on: .9v to 4.2v
> 
> So when you are mixing and matching heads/bodies/cells just make sure you aren't sending more than 4.2v to any head other than the Q 123x2 head, which can take up to 9v.



Awesome! Thanks for confirming. Now I can go back to thinking I am sane again! :thumbsup:


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jul 10, 2009)

DHart said:


> I tried to buy a 123x2 body as well (after your suggestion) and found it was not being offered. I agree, all bodies, all tailcaps, all heads should be offered individually, then we lego-freaks can keep piling on parts and parts and parts! As it was, I ordered a complete 123x2 flashlight... this way I can compare the AA head and the 123x2 head, each running on a 17670 to see how they differ in output and runtime on a 17670. Can't wait to get the 123x2 and stuff a 17670 into it! I have two AW black protected 17670s all charged up and ready to rumble!


Yep...if I had it to do over again I would have ordered the 123x2 Quark & 17670 and a AA body & 14500. I have used the Quark purchase as an excuse to shift over to Li-ion batts...and I find them funtastic. As it is I`m in the same boat as you...forced to purchase two lights.

It looks like the AA head is pointless for my desired batt choices as the 123x2 head works as well or better on the higher Li-ion batt outputs (1AA-14500...2AA-14500x2...and 17670). Might even shift to moon mode at a higher voltage, protecting the Li-ion batts from over discharge better (not the 2AA-14500x2 setup).

Without knowing, I think the 123x2 neutral white head on an AA 14500 powered body would be the sweetest thing...bright, fantastic tint, great size, 40~50 minute bright burn time...cute little devil. Don`t know if tactical or regular would be my pick...


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 10, 2009)

digitaleos said:


> Ok, I tried stretching the spring. It didn't work, but thanks for the suggestion. I also tried the 2x123 head on my other bodies(123 & AA) running rcr's and it did the same thing. Now something else I just noticed, although I really have to look for this it seems to do the flickering slightly when running it with 2 cr123's. I'm afraid this one may be going back for an exchange unless this is common with the tactical models :shrug:.


 Have you tried cleaning the threads real good?


----------



## DHart (Jul 10, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> Yep...if I had it to do over again I would have ordered the 123x2 Quark & 17670 and a AA body & 14500. I have used the Quark purchase as an excuse to shift over to Li-ion batts...and I find them funtastic. As it is I`m in the same boat as you...forced to purchase two lights.
> 
> It looks like the AA head is pointless for my desired batt choices as the 123x2 head works as well or better on the higher Li-ion batt outputs (1AA-14500...2AA-14500x2...and 17670). Might even shift to moon mode at a higher voltage, protecting the Li-ion batts from over discharge better (not the 2AA-14500x2 setup).
> 
> Without knowing, I think the 123x2 neutral white head on an AA 14500 powered body would be the sweetest thing...bright, fantastic tint, great size, 40~50 minute bright burn time...cute little devil. Don`t know if tactical or regular would be my pick...



I'm thinking an ideal set-up for the li-ion lover would be this:

123x2 complete flashlight running on a 17670, then use the head and tailcap alternately, as desired on:
AA body w/14500
123 body w/16340

COST? $69 for the 123x2, $20 each for the AA and 123 bodies = $109

I really like the very small form factor of the Q123... a pretty cool choice when you want the smallest Quark to drop in the pocket and don't need much runtime... like for during the day carry.

Then, for a nice balance of smallish size and longer runtime, move the head and tailcap over to the AA body w/14500. When you expect you will use the light a bit more.

And finally, when runtime is most important and small size isn't... move the head and tailcap to the 123x2 body w/17670... for when you go out in the evening and expect you will be using the light a fair bit for sure.

Basically, a system of one head, one tailcap, and three bodies: the same light with options to go with each of three different set-ups. I like that a LOT.

When my 123x2 arrives next week I'm going to run some tests of output on these variations, also mixing in using my .9v-4.2v AA head as well... this will be fun.


----------



## DHart (Jul 10, 2009)

Badbeams3 said:


> Yep...if I had it to do over again I would have ordered the 123x2 Quark & 17670 and a AA body & 14500. I have used the Quark purchase as an excuse to shift over to Li-ion batts...and I find them funtastic. As it is I`m in the same boat as you...forced to purchase two lights.
> 
> It looks like the AA head is pointless for my desired batt choices as the 123x2 head works as well or better on the higher Li-ion batt outputs (1AA-14500...2AA-14500x2...and 17670). Might even shift to moon mode at a higher voltage, protecting the Li-ion batts from over discharge better (not the 2AA-14500x2 setup).
> 
> Without knowing, I think the 123x2 neutral white head on an AA 14500 powered body would be the sweetest thing...bright, fantastic tint, great size, 40~50 minute bright burn time...cute little devil. Don`t know if tactical or regular would be my pick...



Building on ideas being kicked around here from Badbeams, Lightwalker, and others...I'm thinking an ideal and very versatile set-up for the li-ion lover (which fits me to a "T") would be this:

123x2 complete flashlight running on a 17670, then use the head and tailcap alternately, as desired on:
AA body w/14500
123 body w/16340

COST? $69 for the 123x2, $20 each for the AA and 123 bodies = $109

I really like the very small form factor of the Q123... a pretty cool choice when you want the smallest Quark to drop in the pocket and you know you don't need long runtime... like for running around during the day.

Then, for a nice balance of smallish size and longer runtime, move the head and tailcap over to the AA body w/14500. When you expect you will use the light a bit more, but not extensively.

And finally, when runtime is most important and small size isn't... move the head and tailcap to the 123x2 body w/17670... for when you go out in the evening and expect you will be using the light a lot.

Basically, a system of one head, one tailcap, and three bodies: the same light with options to go with each of three different set-ups. I like that a LOT.

When my 123x2 arrives next week I'm going to run some tests of output on these variations, also mixing in using my .9v-4.2v AA head as well... this will be fun.


----------



## gunga (Jul 10, 2009)

If you could buy the 2x123 body separately at some point, wouldn't it make sense to do the same thing with the AA/123 head?

THen you could use: AA, 14500, CR123, 16340, 17670
but not 2x CR123/16340.


I think that would be perferable because you can use AA and primary CR123.


----------



## Badbeams3 (Jul 10, 2009)

DHart said:


> I'm thinking an ideal set-up for the li-ion lover would be this:
> 
> 123x2 complete flashlight running on a 17670, then use the head and tailcap alternately, as desired on:
> AA body w/14500
> ...



:thumbsup: 

I`m still romancing my AA. But I would add the 123x2 head...if I could, but it`s not there to order. I would now have to order the whole light. And since the neutral white is supposed to be limited and I do like a warm tint I would go with that...probably the tactile one...for no special reason. 

The reality for me is a poor wallet right now. And I really need to hold on to what little I have for a 300+ lumen light. So unless something changes for me...no 123x2 Quark light. If they offer the head, SOLD... or if they offer the body, SOLD as well as a 17670 batt.


----------



## digitaleos (Jul 10, 2009)

LightWalker said:


> Have you tried cleaning the threads real good?



I'm leaving this up to 4sevens, it exhibits the same behavior on every body I put it on. When I use the other heads on the bodies there are no problems, it has to be something with the 2x123 head.


----------



## DHart (Jul 10, 2009)

gunga said:


> If you could buy the 2x123 body separately at some point, wouldn't it make sense to do the same thing with the AA/123 head?
> 
> THen you could use: AA, 14500, CR123, 16340, 17670
> but not 2x CR123/16340.
> ...



That's essentially what I did, since I already had the AA complete light and a 123 body... and couldn't order just a 123x2 body, I ordered the 123x2 complete flashlight... so I have one of each type of head (.9v-4.2v and 3v-9v) and three bodies, AA, 123, and 123x2/17670. In this way I can power those two heads in an amazing number of different sizes/cell configurations.    Flashaholic's dream!


----------



## Xak (Jul 11, 2009)

DHart said:


> That's essentially what I did, since I already had the AA complete light and a 123 body... and couldn't order just a 123x2 body, I ordered the 123x2 complete flashlight... so I have one of each type of head (.9v-4.2v and 3v-9v) and three bodies, AA, 123, and 123x2/17670. In this way I can power those two heads in an amazing number of different sizes/cell configurations.    Flashaholic's dream!



Same here, ordered complete QAA, complete Tactical Neutral Q123-2, and Q123 body. That way I will have one of each head, one of each body, and one of each tail cap.

Only thing I may want to get later is a standard tint 123-2 head, though I have a feeling I would choose the neutral tint over it every time, unless the R2 is significantly brighter and/or has significantly longer runtimes. I haven't seen anyone compare the 2 against each other, yet.

After reading about the Q123-2 I have a feeling I'm going to be disappointed in it. Had I known it's max only runs 17min on 2x123 and gets really hot I wouldn't have bought it, but then again I would have needed the head to put on my QAA as now I hear the standard head the QAA comes with can ruin a 14500 cell. Sure it will be cool to get a 17670 for the Q123-2, but then it's just a light with the output of a single RCR123 that is bigger and runs longer. I wanted the Q123-2 to have a small, hopefully almost as bright, but floody alternative to my Olight M20 Warrior. Guess that won't happen because I WILL NOT run 2x123 in it.

The ONLY thing lego about these lights (that is safe) seams to be their tailcaps.


----------



## jahxman (Jul 11, 2009)

Gaah! It's 3 in the morning and I just ordered a Q123-2! and a EZ123! and some 17670's! 

You people gotta stop discussing these interesting lights......:duh2:


----------



## DHart (Jul 11, 2009)

Xak said:


> Same here, ordered complete QAA, complete Tactical Neutral Q123-2, and Q123 body. That way I will have one of each head, one of each body, and one of each tail cap.
> 
> Only thing I may want to get later is a standard tint 123-2 head, though I have a feeling I would choose the neutral tint over it every time, unless the R2 is significantly brighter and/or has significantly longer runtimes. I haven't seen anyone compare the 2 against each other, yet.
> 
> After reading about the Q123-2 I have a feeling I'm going to be disappointed in it. Had I known it's max only runs 17min on 2x123 and gets really hot I wouldn't have bought it, but then again I would have needed the head to put on my QAA as now I hear the standard head the QAA comes with can ruin a 14500 cell. Sure it will be cool to get a 17670 for the Q123-2, but then it's just a light with the output of a single RCR123 that is bigger and runs longer.



WHAT? Nothing wrong with that in my book!

From selfbuilt's Quark review:

http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff97/selfbuilt/QuarkOutputChart.gif


----------



## gunga (Jul 11, 2009)

DHart said:


> That's essentially what I did, since I already had the AA complete light and a 123 body... and couldn't order just a 123x2 body, I ordered the 123x2 complete flashlight... so I have one of each type of head (.9v-4.2v and 3v-9v) and three bodies, AA, 123, and 123x2/17670. In this way I can power those two heads in an amazing number of different sizes/cell configurations.    Flashaholic's dream!


 

Oh right! I see what you mean. AUgh! DOn't tempt me, don't tempt me!


----------



## antiplex (Jul 11, 2009)

hi folks,

after a looong journey of almost 4 weeks my ordered quark 2aa finally arrived today which is just in time because soon i'll be on a trip where i guess i could use this nice little light real good.
first impression i really good, i like the thu built quality, knurling, beam-color (appears just plain white to me, maybe a slight green/yellow touch but absolutely ok), ui etc etc.
the only thing i would have liked to be a little different is that i could use either some more spill or a little wider hotspot, but thats really just my personal preference. i feel i could get used to it as it is and maybe once come to the point where a light with more spill/wider hotspot would appear less ideal. lets see.

anyway, thanks to 47s (david and his team) for bringing us such a nice piece of light for a fair price and with the nice features it has!

i had been looking around for a light like this for ages and in fact it was the main reason i once signed up on cpf. the quark is of course not my first led-flashlight but for sure its the first regulated quality flashlight i got and i feel happy with it. for now it seems i've found what i was looking for.
btw, that probably doesn't mean my time on cpf is over, i am aware of the drive that gets you once hopping on the led-torch train...

greez - anti


----------



## DHart (Jul 11, 2009)

antiplex said:


> the only thing i would have liked to be a little different is that i could use either some more spill or a little wider hotspot, but thats really just my personal preference. i feel i could get used to it as it is and maybe once come to the point where a light with more spill/wider hotspot would appear less ideal. lets see.



The Quarks excel at being throwers. ANd they're great general use lights as well. But they can't be everything for all needs.

The kind of light you are describing with a wider, softer edge hotspot and brighter spill makes for a wonderful general use light, especially indoors, and there are a few awesome lights which will give you that: LF3XT, LF2XT, D10, etc. 

No single light can perfectly meet every illumination need!


----------



## Biginboca (Jul 11, 2009)

DHart said:


> The Quarks excel at being throwers. ANd they're great general use lights as well. But they can't be everything for all needs.
> 
> The kind of light you are describing with a wider, softer edge hotspot and brighter spill makes for a wonderful general use light, especially indoors, and there are a few awesome lights which will give you that: LF3XT, LF2XT, D10, etc.
> 
> No single light can perfectly meet every illumination need!


 
What if there was a light like the QAA on 14500 with an adjustable focusing, so you could go from thrower to flood.

It might exist, I don't know. But I think it would meet all my needs if I had it...


----------



## Xak (Jul 11, 2009)

Haven't been able to hold one yet (still waiting on my order), but in Selfbuilt's review he said the Quarks have similar flood to the Lumapower IncinDio. That should be plenty floody! By his photos they sure look like they have quite a bit of flood over other lights.


----------



## DHart (Jul 11, 2009)

Quarks do have a very wide spill beam, which helps give them good general useability. The beam is remarkably clean for a light which throws well... attributable largely to the XP-E emitter and a well designed reflector.

Here are some beamshots to peruse...


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 11, 2009)

The Quark lights do have very nice beams, you can illuminate a large area up close and it still has good throw and no rings/halos.


----------



## Egsise (Jul 11, 2009)

Biginboca said:


> What if there was a light like the QAA on 14500 with an adjustable focusing, so you could go from thrower to flood.
> 
> It might exist, I don't know. But I think it would meet all my needs if I had it...


Well yes and no. 
With integrated adjustable focus you propably would loose IPX8.(Led Lenser type solution, they literally suck if you adjust the beam)
One solution is to buy thrower, if you need flood use a diffuser.(Surefire F04 diffuser etc.)

With my Fenix TK20 I have replaced the red lens adapter lens with white plastic.
Readings are lightbox lumens.











I have preordered the QuarkAA Q3 5A, and I really really _really_ would like to have a diffuser cone and diffuser lens to it too.


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 11, 2009)

I think I read somewhere that the Olight T-series diffuser filters will fit the Quark lights.


----------



## chadvone (Jul 11, 2009)

Been playing with my Quark AA tactical.
Wanted to check out the low voltage protection. Installed a Alk battery that was near dead,

If I left the light on it just kept getting dimmer and dimmer. 

If I shut it off it would not light up again.

If I took the battery out replaced it with fresh one, turned it on, then off, replaced the dead battery it would run again as long as I didn't shut it off. I have done this several times to the same Alk battery and it is now down to .61 volts.


----------



## chadvone (Jul 11, 2009)

Now have fresh Alk battery running to the death to see if it will eventually shut off on its own.


----------



## chadvone (Jul 11, 2009)

On high mode, gets so dim you have to look into the end to see if its on. removed battery and checked voltage, .87.

Installed battery, started up on Moon mode.


----------



## chadvone (Jul 11, 2009)

checked voltage after short run in moon mode, 1.31.

moon mode, twist to High, 45 seconds of brighter light .89 volts

Low voltage protection. Yes 
Extended runtime after low voltage. Yes

I love this light


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Jul 11, 2009)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulVDM0a49Lw


----------



## matrixshaman (Jul 11, 2009)

Hi DHart, Have you compared brightness with the 2x123 body using 2xCR123's or 2xRCR123's with the 17670? Just curious if it's close to the same. I've been running 17670's in a SF L4 and they are really nice for runtime. Even if it wasn't as bright it's a great setup. If it's like some of the Nitecore drivers it may be just as bright on the lower voltage.


----------



## DHart (Jul 11, 2009)

matrixshaman said:


> Hi DHart, Have you compared brightness with the 2x123 body using 2xCR123's or 2xRCR123's with the 17670? Just curious if it's close to the same. I've been running 17670's in a SF L4 and they are really nice for runtime. Even if it wasn't as bright it's a great setup. If it's like some of the Nitecore drivers it may be just as bright on the lower voltage.



Hey buddy... I haven't received my 123x2 yet (expected to arrive Tuesday.) But from selfbuilt's review it looks like the 123x2 on a single 17670 puts out a bit more light than either the AA on a 14500 or the 123 on a 16340. (That's an fantastic amount of output!) The 123x2 driven with two RCR123's puts out a little more yet. Quite a potent punch with really great throw.

Aside from output, the runtime of the 123x2 on a 17670 far exceeds that of the AA or 123 on li-ion.

Approximate TURBO runtimes to 50%
Q123 on RCR123......... 30 min.
Ideal for smallest form factor, high output, no need for long runtime.

QAA on 14500............ 46 min.
Ideal for compact size, high output, extreme versatility in powering options.

Q123x2 on 17670....... 1 HOUR 45 minutes! 
Ideal for handy size, very high output, where awesome loooong runtimes are desired.

Each of the above set-ups are awesome in their own right, depending
on the specifics of the application at hand. I love how the purchase of
one flashlight and two bodies can achieve this combination of set-ups! :thumbsup:

More on this in selfbuilt's review... 

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


----------



## Palor (Jul 12, 2009)

LightWalker said:


> I think I read somewhere that the Olight T-series diffuser filters will fit the Quark lights.



Yep! I bought the Olight T-series Red Filter and it fits perfectly to the Quark 2AA. 
Fenix filter will not function (they have a smaller diameter).


----------



## DM51 (Jul 12, 2009)

Continued...


----------

