Swede74
Enlightened
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2011
- Messages
- 577
The main purpose of this thread is to discuss differences between two new AA lights from Zebralight: the SC5 II and the SC53.
For specific information about the SC5c II, I recommend this thread, and for information about the SC53c/w, I recommend this thread.
Output, runtimes and dimensions provided by Zebralight
SC5c II pros: Noticeably brighter on H1.
More aggressive knurling (personal preference)
Warmer tint (personal preference) and higher CRI
SC5c II cons: Clip is much too tight
Switch feels "gritty" when the light gets very hot. (my specimen) I believe this is caused by air trapped underneath the switch cover.
SC53w pros: If I am interpreting the data in my own table correctly, the SC53w is significantly more efficient in H2, M1 and M2
Smaller size. It actually feels even smaller in the hand than the dimensions suggest.
SC53w cons: Clip is still on the tight side, but not nearly as bad as the SC5c.
Side by side.
Looks can deceive. The SC53w is smaller than its big brother SC5c II.
Pogo pins inside the SC5 II tailcap; the spring inside the SC53 tailcap is larger than the one used for the SC52
LED slightly off-center on the SC53w. It does not seem to affect beam pattern.
That blob of solder is somewhat annoying, like a very small chip in the paint on the inside of the fuel cap door on a brand new car. It does not affect performance, but once you have discovered that it is there, it takes a while to push it to the back of your mind.
I used Zak's excellent app Ceilingbounce for the runtime tests.
For specific information about the SC5c II, I recommend this thread, and for information about the SC53c/w, I recommend this thread.
SC5 II | SC53 | |
Head diameter | 1.0 inch (25.4 mm) | 0.96 inch (23.6 mm) |
Length | 3.2 inch (80.3 mm) | 3 inch (77.6 mm) |
Weight | 1.8 oz (49 gram) | 1.4 oz (40 gram) |
Zebralight SC5c II | Zebralight SC53c | Zebralight SC53w | |||||||
Output | Time | lumens*h | Output | Time | lumens*h | Output | Time | lumens*h | |
H1 | 475+352 | 285 | 0,9h | 257 | 330 | 0,9h | 297 | ||
H2a | 352 | 0,9h | 317 | 238 | 1,6h | 381 | 275 | 1,6h | 440 |
H2b | 236 | 1,5h | 354 | 171 | 2,3h | 393 | 198 | 2,3h | 455 |
H2c | 144 | 2,8h | 403 | 106 | 4,2h | 445 | 122 | 4,2h | 512 |
M1 | 79 | 4,9h | 387 | 56 | 8,5h | 476 | 65 | 8,5h | 552 |
M2a | 40 | 9,6h | 384 | 26 | 21h | 546 | 30 | 21h | 630 |
M2b | 18 | 21h | 378 | 10,3 | 41h | 422 | 12 | 41h | 492 |
M2c | 7,4 | 48h | 355 | 3,5 | 4,5d | 378 | 4,1 | 4,5d | 442 |
L1 | 2,8 | 4,2d | 282 | 1 | 13d | 342 | 1,2 | 13d | 374 |
L2a | 1 | 14d | 336 | 0,26 | 1,1mo | 209 | 0,31 | 1,1mo | 250 |
L2b | 0,28 | 50d | 336 | 0,06 | 2,2mo | 97 | 0,07 | 2,2mo | 113 |
L2c | 0,08 | 4,3mo | 252 | 0,01 | 3,3mo | 24 | 0,013 | 3,3mo | 31 |
SC5c II pros: Noticeably brighter on H1.
More aggressive knurling (personal preference)
Warmer tint (personal preference) and higher CRI
SC5c II cons: Clip is much too tight
Switch feels "gritty" when the light gets very hot. (my specimen) I believe this is caused by air trapped underneath the switch cover.
SC53w pros: If I am interpreting the data in my own table correctly, the SC53w is significantly more efficient in H2, M1 and M2
Smaller size. It actually feels even smaller in the hand than the dimensions suggest.
SC53w cons: Clip is still on the tight side, but not nearly as bad as the SC5c.
Side by side.
Looks can deceive. The SC53w is smaller than its big brother SC5c II.
Pogo pins inside the SC5 II tailcap; the spring inside the SC53 tailcap is larger than the one used for the SC52
LED slightly off-center on the SC53w. It does not seem to affect beam pattern.
That blob of solder is somewhat annoying, like a very small chip in the paint on the inside of the fuel cap door on a brand new car. It does not affect performance, but once you have discovered that it is there, it takes a while to push it to the back of your mind.
I used Zak's excellent app Ceilingbounce for the runtime tests.
Last edited: