Unique Titanium
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 77

Thread: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

  1. #1

    Default Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Pretty simple. Which would throw further? I would assume the Fury because of it's 500 lumens however considering the LX2 is equipped with the TIR lens, maybe I am wrong. Thanks in advance.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    LX2 has approximately 9,000 lux (190 meters to 0.25 lux), while Fury does around 10,000 (200 meters to 0.25 lux).

    LX2 has tighter beam than Fury, but Fury's raw power allows it to brute force its way past LX2 at throw.

    The result will be slightly different under actual usage, however. Fury's wider and brighter spill means that it will illuminate lot more nearby objects within your FOV, meaning that you might get better peripheral vision but at the cost of reduced ability to see objects farther away due to the amount of light reflecting back. You will be able to make out objects farther away with LX2's tight beam, since it won't be compromising your vision since its tight beam will reduce nearby objects from reflecting the light back into your eyes.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Thanks and makes sense. So for a realistic situation, if I light up a tree from 200 yards away I'm more likely to see the beam of the LX2 rather than the Fury, correct?

  4. #4

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Not by much, but the difference will definitely be there, especially if there are lot of things reflecting the light back at you, such as snow, rain, fog, etc.

    If you are planning on getting LX2, I would recommend that you wait a while. Surefire has announced that they are updating the Lumamax line with updated LX2 and LX2 Ultra. The updated LX2 will have higher output (250 lumens) and throw (12,000 lux), while LX2 Ultra will have even higher output (500 lumens) but with same throw.

  5. #5
    *Flashaholic* Sgt. LED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Chesapeake, Ohio
    Posts
    7,486

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Hey!
    Isn't there a Fury with a big ol TIR in it coming out really soon?
    That should throw like a champ.

  6. #6
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Oxford, CT
    Posts
    254

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    I love my LX2 and E2DL, the TIR is awesome. I guess I will have to get a new LX2 soon.

    Sgt. LED They are here. M3LT and UB3T are 800 lumens and TIR and the M6LT is 900 lumens+TIR.
    SF lumens = gold.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Quote Originally Posted by Sgt. LED View Post
    Hey!
    Isn't there a Fury with a big ol TIR in it coming out really soon?
    That should throw like a champ.
    Ahh man, I totally just ordered (backordered) a Fury. TIR would be something to see...
    Wonder what the cost will be?

  8. #8

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Quote Originally Posted by Sgt. LED View Post
    Hey!
    Isn't there a Fury with a big ol TIR in it coming out really soon?
    That should throw like a champ.
    It's too bad I wouldn't touch Fury with a 10ft pole because of its UI--the same reason why I never got the E2DL even though I was really tempted.

    Besides, Fury with TIR will most likely throw as much as the LX2 Ultra. After all, you can only focus that huge XM-L so much.

  9. #9
    Flashaholic* Robin24k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,964

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Wait...you don't like the Fury's UI, and you don't like the E2DL's UI either? Are you looking for a single output light?

    I haven't heard anything about a Fury with a TIR (maybe the DM2 or LX2, which will be 500 lumen lights with a TIR?)...but if you want to look at something far away, the Fury will be better because of large hotspot will light up the entire area.

  10. #10
    Flashaholic* Blindasabat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,190

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    According to the 2012 catalog the Fury is continuing unchanged in 2012, but there are several other 500 Lumen TIR lights coming out with various UIs and some with programmability: UM2, DM2, ZM2.
    In the catalog the Fury has 9700lux and the new 2012 LX2 Ultra 500L TIR is 13,000 lux. And the upgraded "regular" LX2 is 250L 13,000lux. The new LX2s are programmable and have good throw, which means I may be forced to get one.

  11. #11
    Flashaholic funder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    153

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    TIR will not increase the throw, as compared with reflectors of similar diameter. Fury has a larger bezel, but its LED (XML) has a lower luminance (surface brightness) as compared with LX2. So they have very similar throw (as throw limit can be calculated as: luminance (surface brightness, in cd/m^2 or nit) x projection area x 1/(refractive index of first optics)^2 ).
    Welcome to the Chinsese Flashlight forum:
    www.shoudian.org

  12. #12

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Thanks alot guys. I'm just trying to decide between the Fury and LX2, really. I have the Fury currently but since LX2's can be had for around 140, might go that route. I like the fact that you can take it apart, unlike the Fury. At the same time I am worried that if "trade" them, I'll turn the LX2 on, and be like "that is it?", since coming from the 500 lumen fury.

    I know the newer LX2's will come out eventually, but A) I don't really feel like waiting, and B) I'm sure they will be at least $210+. I'd keep the Fury and wait for the new LX2 Ultra, but apparently it is going to have pretty yellowish/green tint, which I'm not to fond of.

    Decisions, decisions?

  13. #13

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    I should add, the reason I am putting so much thought behind this is because it will be only real quality flashlight I have as of right now, other than the Fenix LD01 on my keychain.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    To get higher rated lumens, greener tints are easier, and the ANSI ratings are biased towards frequencies the human eye is more receptive too...hence the yellow/green part of the spectrum.

    This is why neutral versions of the same light have lower ANSI lumen ratings.

    As throw is rated by range to 0.25 lux, a greener tint gets a higher throw rating.


    IE:

    SF Lumens = Green


  15. #15

    Popcorn Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Interesting...

    I can't decide for the life of me between these two, haha.

  16. #16
    Flashaholic Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The War Room
    Posts
    237

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jalcon View Post
    I should add, the reason I am putting so much thought behind this is because it will be only real quality flashlight I have as of right now, other than the Fenix LD01 on my keychain.
    If you have a Fury, then you already have a real quality flashlight.

    I have a Fury and an LX2 (actually an LX2 head on an E2E body, I prefer clickies even though I only have high). During informal testing on my son's 12 acre property, we found them roughly comparable in throw. Mind you, we didn't do measurements to a fraction of a lumen or hundredth of a millimeter, and we compared them against our specific needs, which isn't exclusively throw. Our opinions may have been skewed by the tremendous spill of the Fury, which we really found really useful. Our verdict? While both are great flashlights, for our type of everyday use we would choose the Fury over the LX2 because the usefulness of the spill outweighed any variation in throw . YMMV

    If you really want to try an LX2, I'd suggest picking up a used one on the marketplace to save some $$$. That way if you don't like it you can flip it without too much loss.
    "It used to be 'Merkwuerdigliebe'"

  17. #17

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
    If you have a Fury, then you already have a real quality flashlight.

    I have a Fury and an LX2 (actually an LX2 head on an E2E body, I prefer clickies even though I only have high). During informal testing on my son's 12 acre property, we found them roughly comparable in throw. Mind you, we didn't do measurements to a fraction of a lumen or hundredth of a millimeter, and we compared them against our specific needs, which isn't exclusively throw. Our opinions may have been skewed by the tremendous spill of the Fury, which we really found really useful. Our verdict? While both are great flashlights, for our type of everyday use we would choose the Fury over the LX2 because the usefulness of the spill outweighed any variation in throw . YMMV

    If you really want to try an LX2, I'd suggest picking up a used one on the marketplace to save some $$$. That way if you don't like it you can flip it without too much loss.
    Great info. Much appreciated. I will most likely hang on to the Fury, it is quite a light. I wish it had a pocket clip, but what are you going to do?

  18. #18

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Generally, I find a big 'ol floody beam to be more useful than a tight dowel shaped beam...with the exceptions being fairly task specific.

    SOMETIMES, too much light around you makes it harder to adjust your eyes to a far away darker target...othertimes, it just doesn't seem to hurt in that regard....with the reflectance of your vantage point being a main factor.

    Tactically, you sometimes don't want to light up your position, and a floody light, esp with spill, tends to show "the other guy" (the one you might be aiming AT) where YOU and your BUDDIES are, etc.

    For other than tactical use, a fat long beam is better than a thin long beam.

    Some lights are just lumen monsters, and the raw horsepower just overwhelms the lack of beam focusing....so it just floods a large enough area to INCLUDE lighting up what the dimmer but more focused beam lights can reach.


    The 4sevens S12 and X10 are good examples - The S12's beam is very wide, and its 800 lumens are thrown way out there in a broad cone of light. The X10's ~640 lumens is thrown in a much tighter beam...so, the end result, it that the X10's throw is STILL a bit shy of the S12's...but its close....but the S12 is lighting up EVERYTHING down range, not one bush, etc.

    For searching, the fatter the beam, the easier it is to FIND things...a narrow beam means sweeping back and forth the stitch together what's out there, etc....

    ..So the Fury wins the comparison between it and the LX2 at least...despite losing to say the XT11, S12, S10, etc.


  19. #19
    Flashaholic Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The War Room
    Posts
    237

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Quote Originally Posted by jalcon View Post
    Great info. Much appreciated. I will most likely hang on to the Fury, it is quite a light. I wish it had a pocket clip, but what are you going to do?
    Go to Lighthound and check out for Solarforce Pocket Clip Part Number SOLL2PC. It's for L2 hosts, but I'm pretty sure that it will work on the Fury. The Fury body has the same dimensions as the L2/6P series. And it only costs $5!
    "It used to be 'Merkwuerdigliebe'"

  20. #20
    Enlightened
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Mesa, AZ
    Posts
    43

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    I have both as well. Probably pissed off all my neighbors over the last few weeks shining my lights up and down the street. Id say the fury is 10-15% brighter at distance than the LX2, it is a noticeable difference, but the main difference is the Fury will light up the entire front of the house and around where the LX2 would just light up the garage door.

  21. #21

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    I think I might buy this clip for it

    http://darksucks.com/store%20DS_SFClip.html

    Pretty steep in price, but sweet.

    I wish the clip was black however, I gotta say.

  22. #22
    Flashaholic Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The War Room
    Posts
    237

    Default

    Yea, I saw the darksucks thread right after I sent the Solarforce information!

    Looks sweet, but costs almost a quarter of the price for an entire light! Ouch!
    "It used to be 'Merkwuerdigliebe'"

  23. #23
    Flashaholic* Blindasabat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,190

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Comparing the Fury (500L, 1.4" bezel reflector, 9400lux) and the 2012 LX2 Ultra (500L, smaller 1.1" bezel TIR, 13,000lux) it appears the TIR can get more throw out of what should be the same LED in both lights: an XM-L. The 1.5" bezel 2012 TIR lights (UM2, DM2, ZM2) seem to be built to have more spill, which hints at HOW the TIR can get more throw out of the same LED if you WANT to. The spill can be redirected, especially the less useful outer rim, and turned into main beam, where reflectors can do nothing with the light that exits the opening directly from the LED. That light is a significant portion of the LEDs output. An optic can do with that part of the LEDs output what the designer wants - for the most part. With a relector all you can do is make the reflector deeper to try to capture a little bit more of it, but a very large part of the total lumens still go into spill whether you want them to or not.
    In the UM2, DM2, ect., the optic designer decided they wanted more spill, and that spill will be a far more tapering off spill with a good corona and soft edge. Likely more like the original Malkoff M60 optic, which has a very nice balanced beam.
    In terms of your equation, you have to recognize that optics are more efficient and act on far more of (possibly all of) the emitted lumens where a reflector only acts on what hits the reflector surface.
    Quote Originally Posted by funder View Post
    TIR will not increase the throw, as compared with reflectors of similar diameter. Fury has a larger bezel, but its LED (XML) has a lower luminance (surface brightness) as compared with LX2. So they have very similar throw (as throw limit can be calculated as: luminance (surface brightness, in cd/m^2 or nit) x projection area x 1/(refractive index of first optics)^2 ).
    Last edited by Blindasabat; 03-16-2012 at 04:19 PM.

  24. #24
    Flashaholic funder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    153

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Quote Originally Posted by Blindasabat View Post
    Comparing the Fury (500L, 1.4" bezel reflector, 9400lux) and the 2012 LX2 Ultra (500L, smaller 1.1" bezel TIR, 13,000lux) it appears the TIR can get more throw out of what should be the same LED in both lights: an XM-L. The 1.5" bezel 2012 TIR lights (UM2, DM2, ZM2) seem to be built to have more spill, which hints at HOW the TIR can get more throw out of the same LED if you WANT to. The spill can be redirected, especially the less useful outer rim, and turned into main beam, where reflectors can do nothing with the light that exits the opening directly from the LED. That light is a significant portion of the LEDs output. An optic can do with that part of the LEDs output what the designer wants - for the most part. With a relector all you can do is make the reflector deeper to try to capture a little bit more of it, but a very large part of the total lumens still go into spill whether you want them to or not.
    In the UM2, DM2, ect., the optic designer decided they wanted more spill, and that spill will be a far more tapering off spill with a good corona and soft edge. Likely more like the original Malkoff M60 optic, which has a very nice balanced beam.
    In terms of your equation, you have to recognize that optics are more efficient and act on far more of (possibly all of) the emitted lumens where a reflector only acts on what hits the reflector surface.
    It's no evidence that LX2 Ultra will use XML, I believe it is XP-G or other LED which has a smaller die area than XML. So at same luminous flux, it has higher luminance (surface brightness).

    Redirect the spill into main beam (hotspot) WILL increase the luminance flux (power) of the main beam, in other words, more lumens in beam. But it will NOT increase luminous intensity (candela, or throw).

    And my formula is derived from theoretical deduction, it is free from optics or reflectors. All devices can not go beyond this limit.
    Last edited by funder; 03-16-2012 at 05:48 PM.
    Welcome to the Chinsese Flashlight forum:
    www.shoudian.org

  25. #25

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Quote Originally Posted by funder View Post
    It's no evidence that LX2 Ultra will use XML, I believe it is XP-G or other LED which has a smaller die area than XML. So at same luminous flux, it has higher luminance (surface brightness).

    Redirect the spill into main beam (hotspot) WILL increase the luminance flux (power) of the main beam, in other words, more lumens in beam. But it will NOT increase luminous intensity (candela, or throw).

    Did you mean to reverse/re-phrase that? Either I'm confused about what you MEANT (Plausible ) , or you have it backwards?


    Making more of the light emitted go into the hot spot WILL tend to increase throw...as the hot spot is essentially what is THROWN....as the less focuses corona and spill are dispersed along the way to a distant target, and do not add lux on target at range, etc.

    You can have a dimmer emitter with more throw BY having all of its light in the hotspot for example....I have a DEFT edc LR that doesn't produce as much lumen-wise as say my Jetbeam RRT-3 XML does, but it DEFINITELY out throws it.

    So the wee DEFT takes the few lumens it DOES make, and marches them out of the light in a nice column, with little spill, etc, wasted to the sides.

    My De-Domed SR90 DEFINITELY out throws the stock version of itself (It was the stock version of itself, until it was de-domed....and Re-beam shot at the same spots....) - And the De-Domed SR90 is the same reflector, etc...sacrificed some lumens, but took the lumens that were LEFT, and marched them out the light in a nice column with a lot of the corona now part of the hotspot...

    And moving the corona light to the hot spot increased the hot spot lux at 1 meter from 112,500 to 203,000...a BIG jump.

    That was evident in real world observation as well...500 meters was about all the stock SR90 was able to light up enough for ME (Disaster response use, etc...), and that increased to closer to 800 meters by moving the corona light to the hot spot.




    So - Taking corona, etc, and making it more hot spot DOES increase throw.


  26. #26
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    983

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    This conversation has gone way over my head...

    That said this thread makes me want a Fury. I have an LX2; love the UI but not crazy about the TIR. Not enough spill.
    I spend my days in the light thinking about flashlights in the dark

  27. #27
    Flashaholic* monkeyboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,240

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Quote Originally Posted by funder View Post
    It's no evidence that LX2 Ultra will use XML, I believe it is XP-G or other LED which has a smaller die area than XML. ...
    And my formula is derived from theoretical deduction, it is free from optics or reflectors. All devices can not go beyond this limit.
    If that's the case then Surefire are quoting specs for some imaginary future LED. There's no way a Cree XP-G can put out 500lm OTF without being severely overdriven. They do this every year. IIRC last year's catalog showed a light with an emitter that was clearly an XP-G yet it claimed 500lm OTF. This would suggest to me that the LX2 Ultra is just vapourware. Hopefully I'm wrong though as I'm really looking forward to this one.

  28. #28
    Flashaholic funder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    153

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Quote Originally Posted by TEEJ View Post
    Did you mean to reverse/re-phrase that? Either I'm confused about what you MEANT (Plausible ) , or you have it backwards?


    Making more of the light emitted go into the hot spot WILL tend to increase throw...as the hot spot is essentially what is THROWN....as the less focuses corona and spill are dispersed along the way to a distant target, and do not add lux on target at range, etc.

    You can have a dimmer emitter with more throw BY having all of its light in the hotspot for example....I have a DEFT edc LR that doesn't produce as much lumen-wise as say my Jetbeam RRT-3 XML does, but it DEFINITELY out throws it.

    So the wee DEFT takes the few lumens it DOES make, and marches them out of the light in a nice column, with little spill, etc, wasted to the sides.

    My De-Domed SR90 DEFINITELY out throws the stock version of itself (It was the stock version of itself, until it was de-domed....and Re-beam shot at the same spots....) - And the De-Domed SR90 is the same reflector, etc...sacrificed some lumens, but took the lumens that were LEFT, and marched them out the light in a nice column with a lot of the corona now part of the hotspot...

    And moving the corona light to the hot spot increased the hot spot lux at 1 meter from 112,500 to 203,000...a BIG jump.

    That was evident in real world observation as well...500 meters was about all the stock SR90 was able to light up enough for ME (Disaster response use, etc...), and that increased to closer to 800 meters by moving the corona light to the hot spot.




    So - Taking corona, etc, and making it more hot spot DOES increase throw.

    I am not sure if the confusion is caused by them use of terms. If you do not clear about the difference and calculation of the following terms, you will be confused:
    1. Luminous flux (in lumens)
    2. Luminous intensity (in candela)
    3. Luminance (in cd/m^2 or nits)
    Welcome to the Chinsese Flashlight forum:
    www.shoudian.org

  29. #29
    Flashaholic funder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    153

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Quote Originally Posted by monkeyboy View Post
    If that's the case then Surefire are quoting specs for some imaginary future LED. There's no way a Cree XP-G can put out 500lm OTF without being severely overdriven. They do this every year. IIRC last year's catalog showed a light with an emitter that was clearly an XP-G yet it claimed 500lm OTF. This would suggest to me that the LX2 Ultra is just vapourware. Hopefully I'm wrong though as I'm really looking forward to this one.
    As I mentioned in the earlier posts, it is difficult to make 500 OTF lm with XP-G or other small area ( <= 2mm^2) die emitter (XTE?). But it is even more difficult to make a under-driven XML (500lm) powered, ~22mm diameter optics or reflector collimated light with 13000 cd throw.

    SF's catalog hints that the emitter of LX2 ultra and X300 ultra is something special, with super-high luminous efficacy (Bin) in the same class: 1. Its availability is limited: only two special version use it. 2. It has yellow-greenish tint, which is observed in S3 or other high binned emitter from Cree.
    Welcome to the Chinsese Flashlight forum:
    www.shoudian.org

  30. #30
    Flashaholic funder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    153

    Default Re: Surefire LX2 Lumamax vs Surefire Fury

    Quote Originally Posted by TEEJ View Post
    Did you mean to reverse/re-phrase that? Either I'm confused about what you MEANT (Plausible ) , or you have it backwards?


    Making more of the light emitted go into the hot spot WILL tend to increase throw...as the hot spot is essentially what is THROWN....as the less focuses corona and spill are dispersed along the way to a distant target, and do not add lux on target at range, etc.

    You can have a dimmer emitter with more throw BY having all of its light in the hotspot for example....I have a DEFT edc LR that doesn't produce as much lumen-wise as say my Jetbeam RRT-3 XML does, but it DEFINITELY out throws it.

    So the wee DEFT takes the few lumens it DOES make, and marches them out of the light in a nice column, with little spill, etc, wasted to the sides.

    My De-Domed SR90 DEFINITELY out throws the stock version of itself (It was the stock version of itself, until it was de-domed....and Re-beam shot at the same spots....) - And the De-Domed SR90 is the same reflector, etc...sacrificed some lumens, but took the lumens that were LEFT, and marched them out the light in a nice column with a lot of the corona now part of the hotspot...

    And moving the corona light to the hot spot increased the hot spot lux at 1 meter from 112,500 to 203,000...a BIG jump.

    That was evident in real world observation as well...500 meters was about all the stock SR90 was able to light up enough for ME (Disaster response use, etc...), and that increased to closer to 800 meters by moving the corona light to the hot spot.




    So - Taking corona, etc, and making it more hot spot DOES increase throw.

    Given two systems of same diameter and same emitter, both are optimized for throw. System A collimate 100% of the light into the hotspot and no spill; System B collimate 50% of the light into hotspot and the rest 50% goes to spill. What will happen? These two systems will have very similar throw (It is simulation tested). The difference is, system A has a larger hotspot and no spill.

    This is what we observed from the comparison between TIR light like SF UB3T and reflector light like Sunwayman T40CS.

    As for you dedome case, it is a very good illustration of my formula: Best possible throw = luminance (surface brightness, in cd/m^2 or nit) x projection area x 1/(refractive index of first optics)^2

    When you dedome the emitter, you remove the third term, since now the refractive index of the first optics is 1 (air). If your emitter is unharmed and keep same lumens, you will get an increase of throw with ratio n^2, while n is the refractive index of the lens you removed. The typical value of n is about 1.5, so the ratio is about 2.25.

    This is what SF do to make a throw king of UDR dominator:

    http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...ing&highlight=
    Welcome to the Chinsese Flashlight forum:
    www.shoudian.org

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •