Surefire tactician
- Thread starter teak
- Start date
I hope so. Where did you hear that?
It's pretty much a rumor. Someone stated on tactical response FB page that they called surefire and was told the 27th. So take that for what it's worth. [emoji16]
I gotcha. I just checked tactical response web store and now it states shipping November.
I just placed my order as well. It states November shipping.
To me, the E-series is my favourite platform, so I ordered it. $150 for a brand new SF design doesn't sound too expensive to me. Once it comes in, I'll see how it does with standard E-series parts, and if a 16650 will work it.
guarded optimism on this new torch!
~D
To me, the E-series is my favourite platform, so I ordered it. $150 for a brand new SF design doesn't sound too expensive to me. Once it comes in, I'll see how it does with standard E-series parts, and if a 16650 will work it.
guarded optimism on this new torch!
~D
My L4 works fine with a 16650. But it’s not as bright as the tac will be. We will see when they arrive.
Jose Marin
Enlightened
Yeager's latest video he stated he made sure it wouldnt work with rechargeables because he doesnt think they belong in this light. I bet sf still made it compatible with 2x16340 or 16650 i duno just have a feeling
leon2245
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2008
- Messages
- 2,335
What? How did he make sure? Tightened the inner diameter of the body? IDK if he is actually dictating absolutely every specification.
Either way, you can always use a different e body.
KentuckyMike
Enlightened
Yeah, he also initially said it wasn’t possible to use any other tailcap or head with the Tactitian body and he’s already walked that back. Take everything he says with a healthy dose of salt.
Modernflame
Flashlight Enthusiast
Yeager is a self defense guru, but I don't get the impression that he knows batteries that well. When he said rechargeables don't work, I had the impression he was referring specifically to 18650's.
Correct. I’m betting a lot of members might not like this light because they won’t understand it’s intended use.
Yes. Certain lights I only run primaries in. They tend to be the ones I rely on the most. Same goes for tailcaps. I use twistys instead of clickys. Broke too many clickys to put the utmost trust into them.
I almost tore the wrapper on one of my 16650’s trying to cram it in my LX2. It would not fit. Mine was an older logo LX2 that I since sold. Wonder if that had anything to do with it. I forget the battery brand, got it from mtnelectronics.
Exactly. Reliability in recreational lights is one thing, but for self defense it absolutely positively has to work at an instant every time.
And continue to work under stress.
Jose Marin
Enlightened
Besides cr123s having superior resistance to cold, what do they have on a sanyo ur16650zta unprotected as far as being more dependable?
Or really any unprotected lithium ion actually.
Or really any unprotected lithium ion actually.
Last edited:
Modernflame
Flashlight Enthusiast
Not much, really. I suppose one might argue that most lights cut off abruptly at a certain voltage when running on li-ons , whereas the primaries taper off slowly. For me personally (just one guy's opinion), I'd trust any of my unprotected AW cells on a full charge.
One might also add that primaries are maintenance free when left unused for years, while li-ons will need attention.
Yep. Pretty much the only differences. If one chooses to run lion batteries unprotected is the way to go for more reliability.
mk2rocco
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2015
- Messages
- 2,228
I used to run protected AW cells in my duty light.. I dropped it from about 5ft and the protection circuit failed. I've been running unprotected AW cells since and have added orings to act as battery bumpers. After that experience I can understand why Yeager only wants primaries, they are as close to 100% reliable as you can get.
Last edited:
