I had some fun with my Surefires last night.

angelofwar

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 17, 2007
Messages
3,336
Location
South Carolina
Thanks for the "Testamonial" Big Ed. I'd rather have proven street facts than all the numbers in the world...but now i want an E2DL...:(
 

AA6TZ

Enlightened
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
276
Location
Encinitas, CA
Throw results from brightest to dimmest:
1- E2DL, hands down!

Thanks, Ed!!! Every time I read where someone's E2DL outperformed flashlight "A", "B" . . . "Z" -- it really makes my day! (I just purchased one a couple of months ago. :devil:)

Best Regards,

-Clive
 

Big_Ed

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 28, 2003
Messages
1,768
Location
Sycamore, Illinois
I gotta say I really LOVE the E2DL. When I first got it, it had a very green tint and was not any brighter than my E1B. It was still usable, of course, but for the amount of money I spent on it, I was disappointed, so I called Surefire, sent it back, and in less than 3 weeks, it came back with a much brighter beam, and an almost perfect warm tint. So be sure if you're not really impressed with your E2DL (or any Surefire light) call them and let them know. They'll take care of it for you.

I consider my E2DL to be my best light right now. It's the brightest light I own, it has the most ideal tint for outdoor use, has a very usable low level with good runtime, and of course top-notch build quality.

When I compared my Surefires, I pretty much expected the E2DL to perform as well as it did.

The neat thing I really didn't anticipate was how using a drive-in theater screen allowed me to compare throw as well as tint, being basically a huge white wall. And having the woods right next to the screen, I could see how the tint of the E2DL brought out detail in the trees that fell a little flat with the Malkoff (since the tint is so white, on the cool side.
 
Last edited:

jblackwood

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
795
Location
Miramar, FL
Anyone have any idea how the E2DL compares to a DBS with a smooth reflector and R2 pill? Maybe that's not too fair a comparison, but someone did bring up the Tiablo A10.

Oh, and I get the explanation about lux vs. lumens. After all, I compare my two DBS's all the time and I know one has over 500 lumens in a floody configuration vs. the concentrated 200+ of the R2 pill with a smooth reflector. Thanks!
 
Last edited:

1996alnl

Enlightened
Joined
Oct 10, 2008
Messages
649
Anyone have any idea how the E2DL compares to a DBS with a smooth reflector and R2 pill? Maybe that's not too fair a comparison, but someone did bring up the Tiablo.

The DBS is much bigger than the E2DL. Will throw farther due to its larger reflector. The beam from the DBS is much tighter too.

Were comparing apples to oranges here..
 
Last edited:

Illum

Flashaholic
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
13,053
Location
Central Florida, USA
Actualy it's 8.4V, 2xRCR123's..that's what i use.

:oops:

single cell is okay, two cells might kill it
When you say 3.7V cell I assumed you were using the 1x17670 configuration...which is what I use in my E2Ls.

2xRCR123A I dunno what might happen, but your better off using a single cell. If 17670s won't fit see if you can find 17600s or use a RCR123A spacer available from AW or lighthound.
 

1996alnl

Enlightened
Joined
Oct 10, 2008
Messages
649
:oops:

single cell is okay, two cells might kill it

Trust me when i say it's perfectly safe,my light is living proof of that.
I was originally using 3.0V LiFePo4 RCR's in it for about six months. The voltage reading of the batteries out of the charger was 3.9V each, so thats 7.8V right there and i was getting about 40 minutes of runtime on high.

Recently i ordered a few pairs of AW RCR123's from lighthound and i've been using these also with no problems.
The light has the same tint and brightness as with the primaries,just the run times are less due to the lesser capacity of the rechargables.

I've said it before.. Using a 17670 cell in this light is like driving a 911 with a brick behind the gas pedal.
Mind you you'd travel pretty far...but slowly:)
 
Top