4Sevens Quark AA-2 X and 123-2 X Review (XM-L): RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS and more!

[dannstrait]

Just picked up a AA-2 X and am very impressed with the output compared to my old AA-2 Neutral (Q3 XP-E) - and all out of a couple of Eneloops!

That said, I have a question about the thermal protection on my AA-2 X version vs the 123-2 X. My AA-2 X heats up noticeably faster on Turbo compared to the XP-E version and I wonder if the 123-2 X's temperature stabilizes after the drop-down considering it only drops to the initial Turbo output level of my AA-2 X model. Does the DC-DC boost circuit in my AA-2 X generate more heat than the buck circuit on the 123-2 X version? Does the 123-2 X have additional or improved heat-sinking compared to the AA-2 X? If there is no heat difference between the circuits and if the heat-sinking is the same as well, would it be safe to say that the 123-2 X will run noticeably hotter throughout its Turbo run compared to the AA-2 X?

 

[4sevens]

Just picked up a AA-2 X and am very impressed with the output compared to my old AA-2 Neutral (Q3 XP-E) - and all out of a couple of Eneloops!

That said, I have a question about the thermal protection on my AA-2 X version vs the 123-2 X. My AA-2 X heats up noticeably faster in Turbo compared to the XP-E version and I wonder if the 123-2 X's temperature stabilizes after the drop-down considering the it drops to the same output level which heats up my version considerably. Does the DC-DC boost circuit in my AA-2 X generate more heat than the buck circuit on the 123-2 X version? Does the 123-2 X have additional or improved heat-sinking compared to the AA-2 X? If there is no heat difference between the circuits and if the heat-sinking is the same as well, would it be safe to say that the 123-2 X will run noticeably hotter throughout its Turbo run compared to the AA-2 X?

The X series Quarks with XM-L's are driven 44-50% more depending on model. The XM-L's are spec'd higher and can safely take more current.

 

[dannstrait]

The X series Quarks with XM-L's are driven 44-50% more depending on model. The XM-L's are spec'd higher and can safely take more current.

Wow, thanks David for the lightning fast response...that new branding is already paying off

I think you guys are wizards plus you stand behind the design with that great warranty policy; I wasn't implying that the light couldn't take the heat, just wondering if the 123-2 X model will be hotter in the hand than the AA-2 X after say, 30 straight minutes on Turbo.

 

[MichaelW]

Probably. But can you tell the difference between 106 & 111 degrees F ?

 

[dannstrait]

Probably. But can you tell the difference between 106 & 111 degrees F ?

lol. yea I suppose I didn't think it through since the 123-2 Quarks have always been driven harder than their AA-2 brethren and therefore probably run a bit hotter as well.

My thinking is as follows: since the 123-2 X can run for an hour+ at 400 lumens, the primary reason for the AA-2 X's step down to 300 lumens is for decent runtime and less so for thermal protection. Wrong?

 

[dannstrait]

lol. yea I suppose I didn't think it through since the 123-2 Quarks have always been driven harder than their AA-2 brethren and therefore probably run a bit hotter as well.

My thinking is as follows: since the 123-2 X can run for an hour+ at 400 lumens, the primary reason for the AA-2 X's step down to 300 lumens is for decent runtime and less so for thermal protection. Wrong?

Nevermind, literally all my questions have been answered thanks to HKJ and the search function

Both X models seem to stabilize at similar temperatures at their respective Turbo output levels. Interestingly, the 123-2 X runs at about the same temperature (if not slightly cooler) as the AA-2 X according to HKJ's testing.

 

[bfksc]

[h=2]

4Sevens Quark AA-2 X and 123-2 X Review (XM-L): RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS and more!

[/h]After reading this thread, I've decided to join the CR123 battery club. I used to use only AA-based lights since I have plenty of Eneloops/Duraloops, but after reading of the brightness of the Quark X 123x2 I can't resist any longer and I ordered one in Neutral White tint. I'll be using rechargeable cells, but I have a question regarding brightness levels using RCR123 x2 or a single 17670 - after the light steps down from full brightness after 3mins, is the single 17670 just as bright as the RCR123 x2?

 

[selfbuilt]

after the light steps down from full brightness after 3mins, is the single 17670 just as bright as the RCR123 x2?

Not quite (or at least, not on my sample). 1x17670 stepped down to a level that was maybe ~10% lower than 2xRCR or 2xCR123A after step-down. Not a huge difference, and certainly not one you will be able to tell by eye (just something the lightbox picks up on).

 

[bfksc]

Not quite (or at least, not on my sample). 1x17670 stepped down to a level that was maybe ~10% lower than 2xRCR or 2xCR123A after step-down. Not a huge difference, and certainly not one you will be able to tell by eye (just something the lightbox picks up on).

Thanks for that info, and thanks for the reviews. Your reviews are why I've bought four Quarks now (the 123x2 will be here next week), and moved to Neutral White versions. Like others, I used to think MagLites were good until I got my hands on one of these Quarks.

 

[HIDblue]

Ended up picking up a Quark X 123^2 Tactical version based upon selfbuilt's review. Great floody beam, albeit with a greenish tint :sick2:. The thing that surprises me most is how small, thin and compact this Quark X light actually is. I've always been carrying 1x123 lights primarily based on size, but I've been switching over to 2x123 lights for increased run times. I added 4Sevens' deep carry pocket clip which makes this Quark X basically disappear in the back pocket. Surprisingly, the Quark X is not much larger than my Jetbeam RRT-0.

Great review and great little pocket light.

 

[DIΩDΣ]

Thanks for the review Selfbuilt. Very impressed with the Quark 'X'. I decided to pull the trigger on an AA2 X neutral, was on sale + discount from the 4sevens site. Crossing my fingers on the tint. Seems like the brightest/most efficient 2xAA on high, and my ZL H51 is about the brightest/most efficient single AA, so should pair well I think.

 

[tlam]

Thanks for all of the excellent data Selfbuilt. I recently ordered the AA^2 X neutral white as well ( plus an AA body ) , had it for a day now and I am digging it.

 

[arsenic]

What about a little change for the non-tactical users out there!?

I want my quark without the blinky modes, maybe just one like beacon or strobe and only one of either.
I am an urban explorer and use it at work and it is really bothersome in both of these scenarios because it often alerts someone to my presence more quickly and angers fellow co-workers and one swore to me if it happened again he was going to fake an epileptic seizure due to the light
A bit of satire here however it's true.
I just ordered another quark, I purchased the newly branded 4Sevens Quark Pro XM-L 2AA Model and am looking forward to it very much as I have one other four sevens light and it is of great quality, both in build and function. These lights are a virtual godsend from what people were bound to in the way of mobile lighting solutions.
And a good scenario, so a separate model offerings would not have to be coined for such a change is leaving the Tatical to no tail-stand and all blinkys with the Pro only having one blinky mode(like it is loose=all mode and tightened bezel max and SOS) and the ability to tail-stand, so basically just removing all but SOS from the Pro model line of quarks and I do believe I would be in complete heaven and it would help market the non-gun attached lights and still give people the feeling and usability for a distress signal in case of emergencies.
Please let me know your thoughts and how I would go about suggesting this to 4sevens. Thanks and have a good one. I do love this place for quick, true, and honest evaluations of multiple products and power options to make these bright things we love blast light for long periods of times!
lovecpf

 

[Woods Walker]

Great review. For a short time on turbo those lights are spooky bright.

LOL! Forgot that I read this review. Just placed an order for one a little over a year later. Thanks again for taking the time to post this selfbuilt

 

[Mr. Shawn]

I just got my first Quark, an AA-2 X Regular UI, and I love it, especially since it was such a great price from the Going Gear clearance sale.

I've been eager to try out the moonlight mode after hearing all its awesome feedback here. However, moonlight mode is not as low as I was expecting. My lowest-level light is a NiteCore EX10 GDP, rated at ~ 3 lumens, and the Quark's moonlight mode at .3 lumens is only slightly dimmer. I'm not sure if the only-slight difference is due to the logarithmic scale of how our eyes process light, or that my Quark's moonlight is as low as it should be, or something else.

selfbuilt, do you still have your EX10 GDP from your review? http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...s-D10-amp-EX10-Reviews-BEAMSHOTS-RUNTIMES-etc If so, can you compare for me please?

Thank you for another incredible review!

 

[selfbuilt]

I just got my first Quark, an AA-2 X Regular UI, and I love it, especially since it was such a great price from the Going Gear clearance sale.
I've been eager to try out the moonlight mode after hearing all its awesome feedback here. However, moonlight mode is not as low as I was expecting. My lowest-level light is a NiteCore EX10 GDP, rated at ~ 3 lumens, and the Quark's moonlight mode at .3 lumens is only slightly dimmer. I'm not sure if the only-slight difference is due to the logarithmic scale of how our eyes process light, or that my Quark's moonlight is as low as it should be, or something else.

The Nitecore specs have never been very accurate for the lowest levels - I've generally found much lower output levels than they claim.

In the case of my EX10-GDP, I would estimate the lowest output of my sample at just under 0.3 lumens. My Quark AA-2-X estimate is just under 0.1 lumens. Taking into account the normal variability from one sample to the next, I'm not surprised you don't see much of a difference. The Foursevems lights have the more believable specs.

 

[Woods Walker]

I just got my first Quark, an AA-2 X Regular UI, and I love it, especially since it was such a great price from the Going Gear clearance sale.

I've been eager to try out the moonlight mode after hearing all its awesome feedback here. However, moonlight mode is not as low as I was expecting. My lowest-level light is a NiteCore EX10 GDP, rated at ~ 3 lumens, and the Quark's moonlight mode at .3 lumens is only slightly dimmer. I'm not sure if the only-slight difference is due to the logarithmic scale of how our eyes process light, or that my Quark's moonlight is as low as it should be, or something else.

selfbuilt, do you still have your EX10 GDP from your review? http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...s-D10-amp-EX10-Reviews-BEAMSHOTS-RUNTIMES-etc If so, can you compare for me please?

Thank you for another incredible review!

I also got the same deal and should have the light in a day or so. Maybe in time for the big "Frankenstorm"? Moonlight mode for a week of no power? Hope not. In any case how was the tint on your light?

 

[Mr. Shawn]

The Nitecore specs have never been very accurate for the lowest levels - I've generally found much lower output levels than they claim.

In the case of my EX10-GDP, I would estimate the lowest output of my sample at just under 0.3 lumens. My Quark AA-2-X estimate is just under 0.1 lumens. Taking into account the normal variability from one sample to the next, I'm not surprised you don't see much of a difference. The Foursevems lights have the more believable specs.

selfbuilt, I totally appreciate your prompt reply and the sharing of your experience. Based on your observations, of which I have the utmost respect, it looks like I need a light with a lower low to satisfy my moonlight-madness yearning!

I also got the same deal and should have the light in a day or so. Maybe in time for the big "Frankenstorm"? Moonlight mode for a week of no power? Hope not. In any case how was the tint on your light?

I'm wishing you the best in any potential inclement weather! About my Quark XML's tint, another CPF friend contacted me about it, and I shared that it might have a hint of green in the hot spot's corona, but that's all the green I can see. If it wasn't for the CPF feedback I read about the green tint, I never would have noticed the hint of it in mine. Of course, it's a gamble, but considering how nice a deal this is from GG, and the stellar service that GG and Marshall provide, I personally would not be concerned about the tint if I ordered another clearance Quark, regardless of the outcome. Please let me know what you decide.

 

[Woods Walker]

Shawn.

I just got my 2AA X today. Just in time for "Frankenstorm". Nice flashlight with centered LED and no chips off the anodizing etc. Yup the center of the beam does have a hint of green but the rest is white. Almost like the hot spot and spill are from two different lights. The net effect is I didn't win the tint lottery but not unhappy either. I liked the sub one lumen low and the brightness compared to my older L2D-Q5 is a big increase.

 

[biglights]

Nice light, with lots of usable levels. A steal at the price they are going for now.