ExtremeBeam Alpha-TAC XT8 with the Metal MOLLE right-angle adaptor - Review

[RedForest UK]

...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/showthread.php?189480-American-(USA)-made-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.

That is a very useful nugget of information.

 

[127.0.0.1]

That is a very useful nugget of information.

this guy on linked in
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/c-david-wilson/44/250/1b7

 

[Gryffin]

Zero connections. Not much of a "people person" I guess.

 

[Chicago X]

Much thanks to member 'Aluminous' for the info below:

I've been following this thread and the 'Superfire mystery' posts... I thought I'd look into this, and here's what I've found from public records information. I don't claim conclusive knowledge of what this all means, but there are significant signs of a China connection, and I thought the results of this convoluted maze might be of interest.

The guy posts Superfire videos on Youtube as "TheBigCowboy": http://www.youtube.com/user/TheBigCowboy . The cowboy theme recurs elsewhere too.

"Superfire USA" has only had the superfireusa.com website since March 2008, which is also when the much-vaunted US trademark was registered.


So superfireusa.com was registered with all of the identity/contact info intentionally hidden. I tend to view that as a reason to be more suspicious about a business, particularly when the impression they try to put out is that they are a "recognized" American business.

US Trademark Electronic Search System:


Okay, so the Superfire name has been being used since November 2006, and the trademark is owned by a business called "FullColors LLC" which was incorporated in Nevada, and they say their address is "90 West Apple Ln, Glendale, Utah 84729". Slight problem, though - USPS says that address doesn't exist, not even as undeliverable.

Then, I checked the registration info for www.prolightsuperstore.com , which is an alternate url for the same content as superfireusa.com . The product images towards the bottom of the superfireusa.com homepage (right under the "3300 LUX!" text) link to prolightsuperstore.com/products.html , instead of superfireusa.com/products.html , with the same content. Superfireusa.com also mentions "ProLightSuperStore.com" in the title of each page (except the homepage), and the 'Limited Lifetime Warranty' page (superfireusa.com/warranty.html) says "For Warranty and shipping info, contact us at [email protected]". (Other pages mention another email address, "[email protected]".) Also, the 'official seller' on Ebay is 'prolightsuper' ("We are The OFFICIAL SuperFire USA Factory Outlet! Don't Buy a Fake from Hong Kong/China - Buy from Superfire USA - SuperFire is a Registered US trademark").


There we go, they didn't bother to hide the contact info on this one. Phone number is missing the area code, but this street address does actually exist.

Now let's look up the Nevada incorporation records for that company that owns the 'Superfire' trademark.


That matches up with the same contact info as the registrant of prolightsuperstore.com .

Searching for more info about "FullColors LLC" turned up a press release at www.prweb.com/releases/2006/2/prweb343824.htm , which says "FullColorsTM 5760 DPI Premium High Glossy Photo Paper and Professional Premium High Glossy Photo Papers are available for immediate delivery through www.overstockphotopaper.com. For more information, contact David Wilson, FullColorTM LLC Company Director, U.S. Sales & Marketing at (626) 643-1363." (There's the area code for that phone number.)

Related domains found:


FullColors is listed on global trade site tradekey.com/profile_view/uid/486595/FullColors-Tech-Corp-LTD.htm :


Looks like their paper is manufactured in China by a company called Fantac.


So this indicates that David Wilson's "FullColors LLC" (company that owns the "Superfire" trademark in the US) is a distributor of China-manufactured paper.

David was actually in China for some period of time, during which he jointly ran a restaurant called "Cowboy's Coffee and Buffalo Grill" located in the Shenzhen area of China.


Now to return to superfireusa.com and prolightsuperstore.com, in the sourcecode of every page, this is what they use for the meta description and keywords: "SuperFire,UltraFire,Military Combat Lights, Tactical Weaponry, Tactical Lighting, Gun Light, Rifle Light"
And this is what they use as the title on the homepage:
"SuperFire And UltraFire. Your Source for Military Combat Lights (MCL's) Where Brightness Needs Are Extreeme!"
So by their own admission, they indeed are closely related to Ultrafire flashlights, which we know come from China.

From an April 2008 CPF thread at www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=195979 :

And from a January 2008 CPF thread at www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=186661 :


So there are multiple Chinese factories copying each other, but the 'original' Superfire comes from one of the Chinese manufacturers too, it's just a matter of which one.

The manufacturer might be Shenzhen Zhangyang Technology Co Ltd. They manufacture lights offered as both Ultrafire and Superfire.

 

[Got Lumens?]

Much thanks to member 'Aluminous' for the info below:

That's awsome! Thanks to Aluminous for the research :thumbsup:
Here's a little more about Extremebeam. They actually have five live Urls associated with there Extremebeam business. I won't list them, but I will share a little company info. Off of a Dubai site. According to this post there were actually two companies that joined forces, I am guessing that would be David and Anthony :shrug: Emails to Anthony have bounced, and the holding compnay went out of business. Come on guys, jump in with some facts, to save yourselves some bad publicity. I know your lights are manufactured in China, I know that you have changed your website at least twice since you first posted here on CPF to correct misinformation.

My appologies to Subwoofer, your review has sparked quite the controversary
GL

 

[127.0.0.1]

.....

 

[RedForest UK]

Wow, it does actually say that right there, from the horses mouth so to speak.

I am coming round to the idea that they are a design team/company who have been around for a while behind the scenes working with/in China (probably under the Superfire brand, working with the factory/workers responsible for the original Ultrafires) and quite possibly with a good deal of input into the original designs of many of these ultrafire etc lights. Many of the similar ones available on the market now are clones of these and not as high quality. However. original ultrafires have been known to be of decent quality by more budget oriented members for quite a while and this seems to have been ignored/rebuffed by CPF moderators etc until they get a US front willing to pay some advertising fees, which to me seems a little dissapointing.

Anyway, some of their claims seem a little more reasonable now, maybe they have got a few of their lights used by the claimed military forces, but they can hardly claim to be first choice of them. Others are still downright laughable and wrong, such as being the world leaders/first choice/most durable out there, and the original '99% of all soldiers chose extremebeam over any other brand' (before it was slightly watered down) etc. They are better than I had originally worried, but way below what they claim (and may like to think).

I am still unsure as to some of their other lights, such as the one which is like the later clones of the Akoray K106. I do not understand how Akoray could have come out with a better quality fully programmable UI etc before them and then they release a similar light using the body exterior of the other cheaper clones of the Akoray.. Maybe they do just outsource manufacture to the same factories they originally worked with but specify a bit higher quality finish e.g. square threads, o-rings etc, or maybe they are still actively involved in the design process of these lights using a factory which just happens to have very porous system for protection of their intellectual property.


But they said it right there themseleves, they have very high product margins (something I don't think any of us would be surprised about). If you look at what Surefire charges for lights and they themselves claim higher product margins then it does suggest a low build cost, whether that's indicative of the quality I will leave for others to judge, but what it means for value for money is somewhat self-evident.


I would still love to know what they meant by their 'patent pending plunger system' they were claiming followed by a link to their sales website in their first post here; after a member asked about a 'plunger like system which holds the batteries' (Nitecore's Piston Drive). I would like to know if they gave license to whoever made that post to just make it up completely to draw a new customer to their sales website, or if they do genuinely have a 'patent pending plunger system' and it was an honest mistake.. That could to me speak quite a lot about the morals of the company.

 

[indychris]

*Content removed by Greta

This is a review thread... we've already done the "witch hunt" thing.

Please stick to the review, gentlemen... ok?

Thanks...

 

[Chicago X]

*Content removed by Greta

This is a review thread... we've already done the "witch hunt" thing.

Please stick to the review, gentlemen... ok?

Thanks...

Here's a quote from the thread I started to ask questions about the light:

There are currently a couple of review threads in the review forum authored by subwoofer, reading those may be helpful, it also looks like a good place to ask some question.

Norm

Sorry , Norm. :shrug:

Here's the thread for discussion, I suppose: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?336917-Any-ExtremeBeam-owners-care-to-chime-in

 

[jwyj]

These flashlights body looks familiar so I went to my budget bin and found 2 which I bought a few years ago during my pre-cpf days.
I put in the 6PL for size comparism. Seems like they are almost the same.

 

[RedForest UK]

What are the threads like on those old Ultrafires? I wouldn't be surprised if they are the same, Superfire (probably now extremebeam) were apparently closely related to the original Ultrafire (probably same factory/manufacturing). Then there were disputes and break ups of the company and cloning etc, I think the original Ultrafire team re-branded as Trustfire and kept doing some OEM etc, but still there are cheaper, poorer quality clones under the same names too, which makes the whole thing more confusing when comparisons are asked for. For example, you could be comparing to a supposed 'clone' or a genuine clone of what they claim is also a 'clone' (but is probably actually the same light), with very different results.

This whole thread seems to highlight what has been known by many more budget minded for quite a while now, not all ***fires are crap. Many are clones in a dodgy market area and are of poor quality, but there are good quality originals out there which are well worth the asking prices and more. I think a forum should be dedicated to helping a prospective buyer to sort out the genuine sellers and quality pieces from these actual clones rather than just using branding heuristics to dismiss all lights that have a similar name entirely.

I am currently imagining four types of light.


1. Actual crappy clones. Cheap and poor quality. Disapproved of by CPF, probably rightly so, but they can have their place for limited uses on a tight budget.
2. Original Ultrafires/Trustfires and some other chinese brands. Quite cheap but decent quality. Long also disapproved of by CPF, in my opinion very unfairly.
3. Good quality mid-high range brands e.g. Fenix, Jetbeam. Mid-price, decent to high quality. Approved of by CPF, fair enough.
4. Top quality high range name brands e.g Surefire, HDS etc. Very high price, high quality. Strongly recommended by CPF but for many out of price range.


The whole Extremebeam issue has helped highlight these tiers of quality/price to me very clearly. They claim strongly to be in bracket 4 for quality, while charging prices of bracket 3, but are actually in bracket 2. There are clones of them (bracket 1), but their claims of being tier 4 and that tier 3 lights are also clones (they made some crazy claims in the first thread) are just silly. This just seems unfair and is the crux of the problem for me.

It has also served to highlight the perhaps slightly unfair generalisation of crappiness to the tier 2 lights in the above comparison, I'd like them to be given a little more chance for genuine reviews on CPF, as they are in some other places.

 

[Racer]

For buying something off the internet, I use the same methodology whether it's a flashlight or power tools or pillow cases.

1. User review rating - people who bought the product and felt strongly enough (good or bad) to do a review.

2. User review quantity - Obviously the more reviews there are, the more likely you are to be able to spot issues with the product or company.

That's pretty much it. If there's a problem with the product or even the company, you'll see it in the 500 reviews. Sometimes there's a flaw that runs common to a lot of comments, and you can look at the flaw and decide for yourself if it's a deal breaker. Like I bought a tent, a bunch of the reviews said it was hard to put up, but I bought it anyway.

For flashlights it's harder because the vendors are usually smaller shops and it's harder to track the general consensus about a product or brand. The only way you can get a feel for that with flashlights is to look at individual threads on a few sites like this one. If 100 people bought one and nobody is reporting any major problems, that's usually good enough for me. Then if I see people raving about their good experiences with returns and such, then that's icing on the cake.

 

[Chicago X]

1. User review rating - people who bought the product and felt strongly enough (good or bad) to do a review.

I'm still looking for a single purchaser, both here and over at the CPFMP, for ANY input.

Until then, all we have are the sponsoring vendor's outrageous claims, and what amounts to a paid review.

 

[shelm]

and what amounts to a paid review.

+ 1

well said ChiX.
k = d

 

[shelm]

oops double post

 

[dc38]

Wow, it does actually say that right there, from the horses mouth so to speak.

I am coming round to the idea that they are a design team/company who have been around for a while behind the scenes working with/in China (probably under the Superfire brand

That would actually explain alot! I used to have a superfire before I lost it at school about 5 years ago, I was deeply saddened. The superfire did seem to match the extremely aggressive knurling of the EB's, had a slightly slimmer profile than the UF wf501b,(the knockoff), and was a tad shorter from head to tail. The build quality was a type 3 anodizing vs the type 2 on the ultrafire that i bought to replace the superfire (the UF was NOWHERE even close to the quality of the "budget" Superfire) Not only that, I cannot seem to find superfires around anymore Thank you for that little history lesson!

 

[RedForest UK]

I'm still looking for a single purchaser, both here and over at the CPFMP, for ANY input.

Until then, all we have are the sponsoring vendor's outrageous claims, and what amounts to a paid review.

Here are a couple of threads with responses from genuine owners of extremebeam lights:

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?327138-Extreme-Beam-xt8-pro-ranger

Then the OP of this thread is the same as the last poster from the above one.

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?327751-Fenix-TK-15-Maglite-x50-Extreme-beam-sx-21


Both users seem at least a little underwhelmed with what they got compared to extremebeam's claims.

 

[vickers214]

bottom link is dead, 330 meters is some claim, I have an XML U2 driven at 2.8 amp in a massive head that would only just to say put a tiny bit of light that far.

 

[RedForest UK]

Wow, something must be going on there. It definitely worked when I quoted it and now it is certainly gone.

Here is a quote of the main comment (a reply from someone who bought a tac-24) from the first thread in case that one mysteriously disappears too:

I unwittingly purchased their tac-24 a year ago and was very disappointed. They claimed it could throw 330 meters. It was obviously designed for throw as it had a small hotspot with mediocre spill. It was lucky to reach 220 yds as opposed to the claimed 330 meters. Supposedly, the light could also focus the spot with the twist of it's head. That feature was visually nonexistent. The tac had MSRP of over $300, however I was able to get it for around $170 (the xt8 can be had for $80). I'm sure you could find a light find a light that could putperform the tac-24 for under 80. Luckily, I was able to get a full refund for mine. I guess there is a reason why I've never found a review for any of the extreme beam lights.

The thread goes on for the OP to say that he already ordered an sx-21 and hopes it isn't as disappointing. The last post says he received it and the beam is good but 'time will tell' if he likes it.


In the next thread, which is now mysteriously gone, the same person says that he tested the sx-21 'when it got dark' (as can still be seen under the google search result) and was very disappointed. He said:

My mag x50 has only 104 lumens but it blows away the extreme beam . So now i have a Fenix TK 15 ordered to replace the Extreme .

If you search that quote it should still come up on google cache under the thread heading result. The OP meant the Maglite XL50 when he said the x50 by the way.

 

[Chicago X]

Wow, something must be going on there. It definitely worked when I quoted it and now it is certainly gone.

That's not shady. Not at all.