No rattles at all, and unlike the XXXfire, the XT8 has a forward clicky.
ExtremeBeam Alpha-TAC XT8 with the Metal MOLLE right-angle adaptor - Review
- Thread starter subwoofer
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
No rattles at all, and unlike the XXXfire, the XT8 has a forward clicky.
Chicago X
Enlightened
- Joined
- May 6, 2010
- Messages
- 439
The ridiculous claims are those perpetuated in your 'review' - the claims that EB was the originator rather than the imitator.
*"Glass lens won't melt...like Lexan." Yeah, that is a real concern with that XR-E. 300+ degrees F is what that takes.
*You received a free torch and were therefore compensated. Period. It's immaterial whether it works out to minimum wage, or even to what you're accustomed to being paid. You didn't pay for the torch, and you kept it. End of that discussion.
*On to your review: was the torch shipped with the scratches/chips in the ano, or did those occur during testing ?
I have NO PROBLEM with the majority of the reviews here, especially from the very even-handed and respected reviewers we all know.
Why? Because they can admit when a manufacturer's claim is over-the-top or nonsensical. They review the torches, warts and all.
This is little more than a love-letter to an already circumspect seller, and those who can look beyond the obvious can recognize it for themselves.
ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS WHO HAVE PURCHASED THIS LIGHT WHO MAY BE WILLING TO COMMENT ?
*"Glass lens won't melt...like Lexan." Yeah, that is a real concern with that XR-E. 300+ degrees F is what that takes.
*You received a free torch and were therefore compensated. Period. It's immaterial whether it works out to minimum wage, or even to what you're accustomed to being paid. You didn't pay for the torch, and you kept it. End of that discussion.
*On to your review: was the torch shipped with the scratches/chips in the ano, or did those occur during testing ?
I have NO PROBLEM with the majority of the reviews here, especially from the very even-handed and respected reviewers we all know.
Why? Because they can admit when a manufacturer's claim is over-the-top or nonsensical. They review the torches, warts and all.
This is little more than a love-letter to an already circumspect seller, and those who can look beyond the obvious can recognize it for themselves.
ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS WHO HAVE PURCHASED THIS LIGHT WHO MAY BE WILLING TO COMMENT ?
Well, this reputation and innovation seems to be very unknown here in CPF. But, according to your numerous comments, it seems to be very widely known among cheap clone manufacturers in China. And has been that for years.
Although I am not sure what reputation you are talking about. There seems to be no reputation at all among ordinary customers (the target market of those clone manufacturers). How can you exploit reputation that doesn't seem to exist?
Sure enough, the light seems to be very sturdy (except for the threads which are suspiciously short).
You have many comments about the original patents and designs by Extremebeam. Could you please give us some references on those patents? Surely you know they have patents, do you? You have been referring to them so many times. Or is it just that they told you they have them, but they think that the patents are secret and mustn't be released publicly? This is really THE ONLY information needed to shut down the skeptics. Extremebeam surely seem to be proud of the Molle (with a big text telling "Patents pending world-wide"). So, how about the lights? Do they really have any patents on them? If they do, what are they?
127.0.0.1
Flashlight Enthusiast
$100.00 extremebeam review challenge is still up for grabs. I want to help anyone who will irrefutably fully review the product
vs some clone that stole an extremebeam original design...that would mean any flashlight out there that looks near exact in many ways
get an akoray 109 and a sar 5 and see what the product is all about, do a complete exhaustive fair review of every last component.
If no one does this better than subwoofer before the end of 2012, then subwoofer will get the loot based on what I said in the closed thread.
(how to judge 'better' will have to be based on lack of backlash)
someone can reply 'I'll take it' and then you get 4 months to prep
vs some clone that stole an extremebeam original design...that would mean any flashlight out there that looks near exact in many ways
get an akoray 109 and a sar 5 and see what the product is all about, do a complete exhaustive fair review of every last component.
If no one does this better than subwoofer before the end of 2012, then subwoofer will get the loot based on what I said in the closed thread.
(how to judge 'better' will have to be based on lack of backlash)
someone can reply 'I'll take it' and then you get 4 months to prep
Got Lumens?
Flashlight Enthusiast
Subwoofer,
Thank You for the reply. I am just trying to be as objective as possible to the XT8 lights review. My comments were not made to offend anyone or yourself. I appologize if I seem offensive, that is not my intent.
I asked in a round about way if your review was self posted, You answered that question, and more. I asked about your test equipment, test environments, and questioned your already stated methods. You stated you didn't mind constructive critisism to improve upon your reviews and processes. I have offered you mine based upon my experiences and knowledge I have, and your response appeared very defensive to me.
I try to do reviews unbiased and objectively. I do each review independantly. I duplicate/replicate identical tests that may have been included in other reviews. This provides the most accurate comparisons I can with the methods and tests I perform. My interjected comments state they are my opinion. If someone finds fault, I admit it, and change my review or comments based on the new information. I have not asked any of my reviews to be moved here. I do not have the time, equipment, and resources to do so. I am not perfect, I make mistakes, and It helps me to do better and get more enjoyment from this hobby.
Yes, reviewing lights is very time consuming and expensive, as I have found out. My questions I asked come directly from this XT8's reviews' content. ~57% of my questions were directly related to the light, you indirectly answered one of them. ~34% of my questions were related to your testing methodoligy and setup, you answered none. ~9% of my comments are associated with the above, and you answerd one.
Time permitting, IMO It would be great to see some of them answered. I appreciate you considering to doing so. Some of them may greatly add to the XT8s review.
GL
Thank You for the reply. I am just trying to be as objective as possible to the XT8 lights review. My comments were not made to offend anyone or yourself. I appologize if I seem offensive, that is not my intent.
I asked in a round about way if your review was self posted, You answered that question, and more. I asked about your test equipment, test environments, and questioned your already stated methods. You stated you didn't mind constructive critisism to improve upon your reviews and processes. I have offered you mine based upon my experiences and knowledge I have, and your response appeared very defensive to me.
I try to do reviews unbiased and objectively. I do each review independantly. I duplicate/replicate identical tests that may have been included in other reviews. This provides the most accurate comparisons I can with the methods and tests I perform. My interjected comments state they are my opinion. If someone finds fault, I admit it, and change my review or comments based on the new information. I have not asked any of my reviews to be moved here. I do not have the time, equipment, and resources to do so. I am not perfect, I make mistakes, and It helps me to do better and get more enjoyment from this hobby.
Yes, reviewing lights is very time consuming and expensive, as I have found out. My questions I asked come directly from this XT8's reviews' content. ~57% of my questions were directly related to the light, you indirectly answered one of them. ~34% of my questions were related to your testing methodoligy and setup, you answered none. ~9% of my comments are associated with the above, and you answerd one.
Time permitting, IMO It would be great to see some of them answered. I appreciate you considering to doing so. Some of them may greatly add to the XT8s review.
GL
Post 2 updated to add a readers note.
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...aptor-Review&p=3917328&viewfull=1#post3917328
There has been no intention on my part to mislead or report false information (if I have). I shall be more careful in future reviews to highlight any unsupported manufacturer information or claims.
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...aptor-Review&p=3917328&viewfull=1#post3917328
There has been no intention on my part to mislead or report false information (if I have). I shall be more careful in future reviews to highlight any unsupported manufacturer information or claims.
Labrador72
Flashlight Enthusiast
Another nice review, thank you Subwoofer.
qwertyydude
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,115
I think what throws me on the skeptical side is not just the cheesy packaging, take a look at real American made lights like Surefire and Maglite. The packaging is very simple, mostly blister packs or a simple form fitting box. The only companies to use packaging as wasteful and grandiose as Extreme Beam are Chinese generics. And funny thing too is that I see the "Police" sticker on it. One thing you quickly catch on to when you're real flashaholics is that "Police" on a flashlight screams cheap.
And there's really nothing that distinguishes these lights at all form the generics. Not just that but even the Akoray K-109, which according to the OP is a clone of the SAR 5, has been around since at least 2009. If Extreme Beam was the originator, I'd say either the Chinese have top secret corporate spies, or Extreme Beam simply used Chinese manufacturers. I'm more inclined to believe Chinese manufacturers because I highly doubt that Extreme Beam originated ALL of those generic designs the OP is claiming were cloned by China.
I mean right now I'm looking at my Trustfire X8. True this is a relatively new flashlight, but it's basically a copy of the Ultrafire C8, the design of which dates back to the very beginning of Cree's domination of the power led market which strangely enough predates this company. So unless China specifically copied Extreme Beam before they were "popular", which is highly unlikely because China only copies what's popular, I'd say the burden of proof to prove originality lies with Extreme Beam. And after reading through their horribly designed website, I put them in the same category as Night Owl flashlights, who also claim to be the originators of their design.
Basically I don't think Extreme Beam is trying very hard.
And there's really nothing that distinguishes these lights at all form the generics. Not just that but even the Akoray K-109, which according to the OP is a clone of the SAR 5, has been around since at least 2009. If Extreme Beam was the originator, I'd say either the Chinese have top secret corporate spies, or Extreme Beam simply used Chinese manufacturers. I'm more inclined to believe Chinese manufacturers because I highly doubt that Extreme Beam originated ALL of those generic designs the OP is claiming were cloned by China.
I mean right now I'm looking at my Trustfire X8. True this is a relatively new flashlight, but it's basically a copy of the Ultrafire C8, the design of which dates back to the very beginning of Cree's domination of the power led market which strangely enough predates this company. So unless China specifically copied Extreme Beam before they were "popular", which is highly unlikely because China only copies what's popular, I'd say the burden of proof to prove originality lies with Extreme Beam. And after reading through their horribly designed website, I put them in the same category as Night Owl flashlights, who also claim to be the originators of their design.
Basically I don't think Extreme Beam is trying very hard.
Just to set the record straight, as the OP of THIS review thread, I did not say the Akoray K-109 is a clone of the SAR 5, nor did I claim the ExtremeBeam originated all of the generic designs.
Did you realise you are posting in a review thread for the XT8?
HAHA, extremebeam...I just had a good laugh at their website and all of their marketing hype. "With Law Enforcement S.W.A.T. , Military Scouts, the Hunter/Fieldsman, and Search and Rescue teams in mind, the TAC 24 provides the operator the precision advantage by producing a well refined High-Definition, High Contrast beam of extremely bright white light. The color spectrum of the TAC 24's High-Output beam allows for high color-contrast, for the detection of colored material hidden in surrounding brush.
This High-Definition advantage"
Is your flashlight High Definition?
Got Lumens?
Flashlight Enthusiast
Which of thier five live websites did you visit? I emailed Tony(Vice President of marketing) at extremebeam on Tuesday. I reemailed today and the email bounced.
Subwoofer, enjoy your Extremebeam flashlight.
Thank You for your review and bringing this manufacturer, and extemebeam international to our attention.
Anyone remembers the HuntLight FT-01XSE flashlight? Light that was selling at the beginning of Cree XR-E era at the end of 2006?
http://www.flashlightreviews.com/reviews/huntlight_ft01xse.htm
http://www.flashlightreviews.com/reviews/huntlight_ft01xse.htm
Got Lumens?
Flashlight Enthusiast
Thank You for sharing. What does that light have to do with the XT8 review?
GL
Edit: Gotcha Jirik :thumbsup: I do see the simularities, but it looks closer to the clone in this review and not the XT8, definately close though.
GL
Edit: Gotcha Jirik :thumbsup: I do see the simularities, but it looks closer to the clone in this review and not the XT8, definately close though.
Last edited:
:shakehead
I could be wrong, but I think it is the original design. Just my two cents to the discussion who copied who...
RedForest UK
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2009
- Messages
- 1,365
I am actually pleasantly surprised with the quality of that host and drop-in. Also, while the review may have made a few claims which are very much open to dispute, I do believe they were all made in good faith and it was, to the best of the OP's knowledge at least, an honest (and pretty good) review of one of their lights. It appears that extremebeam's customers are not being ripped off as badly as I would have believed before this review, which is certainly a good thing.
I don't however think it meets the $100 challenge set in the last thread, as that was specifically aimed at a teardown of construction lights to see the internals of a preferably non-P60 host light (the one that was externally the same as the Akoray clones was the preferable option) and the money was there in order to allow someone to purchase the light with themselves so as they are truly free from any bias, deliberate or not. Also to eliminate the possibility that the manufacturer could send a higher quality specially selected light than the production version (though I am not claiming this is what happened here).
However, while they may not be be ripping their customers off with poor quality lights at massively inflated prices as I worried previously, I'm afraid it seems almost certain that extremebeam are at best massively exaggerating their claims, and at worst still downright lying to their prospective customers.
They still have a lot to answer for from a marketing perspective. Let's hope this is the start of a more transparent approach to their business.
On a side note, I think I'll start a thread in the battery section to clarify if anyone has had the chance to test their own brand batteries. They seem to have removed their claims that they are the 'best' and 'latest technology' etc but their 'tungsten carbide' printed on the side of the primary cells seems at least a little misleading (and silly) to me.
I don't however think it meets the $100 challenge set in the last thread, as that was specifically aimed at a teardown of construction lights to see the internals of a preferably non-P60 host light (the one that was externally the same as the Akoray clones was the preferable option) and the money was there in order to allow someone to purchase the light with themselves so as they are truly free from any bias, deliberate or not. Also to eliminate the possibility that the manufacturer could send a higher quality specially selected light than the production version (though I am not claiming this is what happened here).
However, while they may not be be ripping their customers off with poor quality lights at massively inflated prices as I worried previously, I'm afraid it seems almost certain that extremebeam are at best massively exaggerating their claims, and at worst still downright lying to their prospective customers.
They still have a lot to answer for from a marketing perspective. Let's hope this is the start of a more transparent approach to their business.
On a side note, I think I'll start a thread in the battery section to clarify if anyone has had the chance to test their own brand batteries. They seem to have removed their claims that they are the 'best' and 'latest technology' etc but their 'tungsten carbide' printed on the side of the primary cells seems at least a little misleading (and silly) to me.
Last edited:
Hmm. Let's see if I got this right.
The original brand name was Superfire. But then that other company "Surefire" decided to exploit their excellent reputation and copied their name? Don't know about the truth, but according to everything I have read, it surely sounds logical.
Those lousy copycats. They just copy everything!
Hmm. Let's see if I got this right.
The original brand name was Superfire. But then that other company "Surefire" decided to exploit their excellent reputation and copied their name? Don't know about the truth, but according to everything I have read, it surely sounds logical.
Those lousy copycats. They just copy everything!
I was simply pondering. I don't know much about ExtremeBeam other than the fact that the name David Wilson of Utah shows up under patent applications for both ExtremeBeam and a company known as SuperFire as was revealed in this older CPF thread: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...-flashlights&p=2508810&viewfull=1#post2508810
I notice that there are some 'tactical' style lights still available online under the name SuperFire and was just curious if these might happen to be the earlier version of lights now manufactured under the ExtremeBeam name.
I was simply curious if anyone was aware if the two are related as a David Wilson of Utah seems to be connected to both.
