4Sevens Quark AA Comparison Review

[UnknownVT]

Originally Posted by flasherByNight

oh, had the impression somewhere in your review that they could be used, but would ultimately be pretty detrimental to the lights.
(just wondering if anyone had seen any effects by now)

Don't think I said that -
Perhaps you may have mistaken what I said about the Fenix and other lights that "get away" with using Li-Ion?
(please read the lower half of my Post#121)

[flasherByNight]

I see, thought you were alluding that those were your test cases and that is what you expected to happen to the quarks as well.

[UnknownVT]

Originally Posted by flasherByNight

I see, thought you were alluding that those were your test cases and that is what you expected to happen to the quarks as well.

er, no...
Is my writing really that bad?
I was saying precisely the opposite -
my exact words were-
" Why Buck? because the Quark AA, AA2 and 123 are rated a true 0.9-4.2V - this means they were designed to handle a single 3.7V rechargeable Li-Ion battery (eg: 14500 or RCR123) by bucking the voltage down to the true safe Vf -

This may not seem much -
since don't other lights all seem to handle 3.7V rechargeable Li-Ion?
well, kinda yes, more by "luck" than "design" -
most boost circuits are by-passed when the battery Vin exceeds the rated Vout (set for the Vf of the LED) of the circuit - and basically becomes direct-drive by the 3.7V rechargeable Li-Ion. "

was that really that UNclear?

[flasherByNight]

no no, my apologies. Just having a case of information overload I think

Thanks again for the review

[PlayboyJoeShmoe]

A comment and a question.

I think when I can afford to I will order a QAA and a 123 clipless body.

This is based on: Does the Standard Quark work EXACTLY like the Fenix L and P models?

IE: If you click it on in moonlight, will a bump at ANY interval later take it up a level?

That is the main feature that I like about Fenix.

[UnknownVT]

Originally Posted by PlayboyJoeShmoe

This is based on: Does the Standard Quark work EXACTLY like the Fenix L and P models?
IE: If you click it on in moonlight, will a bump at ANY interval later take it up a level?

If you turn any of the regular Quarks on with the head slightly loosened it will come on in the lowest "Moonlight" level.

From that point at any time -
1) tap the reverse clicky switch (giving a momentary off) the light will go to the next level up - what 4Sevens calls Low.
or
2) tighten the head - the light will go to the max level.

But there is a slight difference from the Fenix -
if one gets to one of the other higher levels -
then twist the head tight
on the Quark - the light goes to Max as expected - but loosening the head the Quark goes back to that last (higher) level -
whereas the Fenix would go back to its lowest level.

[PlayboyJoeShmoe]

Thanks Vincent!

Confirms that when able I will get a Quark!

[the.Mtn.Man]

Quick question if anybody knows the answer:

I happen to have some non-rechargeable 14500 Lithium cells and was wondering if they'd be safe to use in the Quark AA. They're branded as Saft batteries and indicate a 3.6V output. A legend on the bottom says "Li-SOCI2".

Here's a link with more info: http://www.batteryjunction.com/plc-ls14500-ba.html

Edit: I'll just post the pertinent part here so people don't have to go chasing links:

Energy+ Part: LS14500-BA
Brand: Saft
Type: Lithium
Voltage: 3.6
Capacity: 2450 mAh
Color: White Green
Size: 0.56" dia. x 1.97" tall
Contacts: Button Type

Thanks for the help.

[UnknownVT]

Originally Posted by the.Mtn.Man

I happen to have some non-rechargeable 14500 Lithium cells and was wondering if they'd be safe to use in the Quark AA. They're branded as Saft batteries and indicate a 3.6V output. A legend on the bottom says "Li-SOCI2".
Here's a link with more info: http://www.batteryjunction.com/plc-ls14500-ba.html

I would say.... actually I should say - ask 4Sevens.com.

But my best guess is that they ought to be OK since the nominal voltage is below the rated 4.2V max.

[the.Mtn.Man]

Yeah, I figured I'd ask here first before bugging them. I know the Quark is rated to handle up to 4.2V, so I figured these would be fine, but I wanted to make sure since all the stuff I've read only refers to 14500 rechargeables.

If the answer is yes then I should be set for a few years because I have about a dozen of these cells sitting in a drawer.

[pobox1475]

I happen to have some non-rechargeable 14500 Lithium cells and was wondering if they'd be safe to use in the Quark AA. They're branded as Saft batteries and indicate a 3.6V output. A legend on the bottom says "Li-SOCI2".

Wow, first time I have seen any cells like this. At $4.50 retail a pop I honestly IMO would save them and and take advantage of their 10 year shelf life for emergency use and run rechargeables daily. If the stuff ever hits the fan supplies like this will be indispensable.

[the.Mtn.Man]

Originally Posted by pobox1475

Wow, first time I have seen any cells like this.

They were for a portable heart monitor that my wife was using. The company we rented it from also gave us a bunch of these batteries, and when the testing period was complete, they just told us to keep whatever was left over.

Originally Posted by pobox1475

At $4.50 retail a pop I honestly IMO would save them and and take advantage of their 10 year shelf life for emergency use and run rechargeables daily. If the stuff ever hits the fan supplies like this will be indispensable.

Well, I don't have any rechargeables or a charger, so it could easily cost me $50+ to get some whereas I have these batteries now and they're free, so maybe I'll just take my chances.

[Lagerregal]

Hey! That is great! I never knew about 3,6V Lithium-Cells... Thanks. Now the argument "no primaries for AA-format" does not count any more.
Here in Germany you can buy some for 3,55€/piece. Thats not cheap, but for emergency or people who do not use them often it is ok

[the.Mtn.Man]

I figure based on my usage habits, I should get about a year out of each battery. I got over six-months out of a pair of Energizer lithiums in my Nitecore D20, so I'm guessing these will last even longer.

That's if 4sevens gives me the O.K. to stick them in my Quark AA (which I should have in my hands by Monday! ).

[NoFair]

Originally Posted by the.Mtn.Man

Quick question if anybody knows the answer:

I happen to have some non-rechargeable 14500 Lithium cells and was wondering if they'd be safe to use in the Quark AA. They're branded as Saft batteries and indicate a 3.6V output. A legend on the bottom says "Li-SOCI2".

Here's a link with more info: http://www.batteryjunction.com/plc-ls14500-ba.html

Edit: I'll just post the pertinent part here so people don't have to go chasing links:

Energy+ Part: LS14500-BA
Brand: Saft
Type: Lithium
Voltage: 3.6
Capacity: 2450 mAh
Color: White Green
Size: 0.56" dia. x 1.97" tall
Contacts: Button Type

Thanks for the help.

I think those are the same type we used in radio collars on animals (for tracking in the mountains) and they can't deliver more than about 100mA constantly so will not be able to power a quark at the higher levels.

They should last for ages on low though...

[the.Mtn.Man]

You're probably right. Found this on another site:

The LS14500 cell is designed specifically for long-term (3 to 15 years) applications, featuring a few UA based currents and periodic pulses, typically in the 5-150 mA range.

According to 4sevens, the current draw of the Quark AA on high and max is 250mA and 350mA respectively (medium is 50mA).

Ah well, and here I thought I was sitting on a gold mine. Guess I'll just stick with the cheap standard AA's and hang onto these as a do-or-die last resort since they'd probably work like a champ on medium and lower.

[pobox1475]

^ Don't know how often you use your lights, but after going to AW's and a Pila IBC I use at least one within a 24 hour period . Initial investment especially for charger is a little steep. The break even point comes within the first couple years on average and Mother Nature is much happier with me now . It is also nice to be able to "top-off" your cells often so you almost always have full run times available.

http://www.flashlightz.com/product.p...gory=#tabStart

There are other much cheaper units available. After I did extensive research got a Pila because it seems to be the best currently available.

Good luck . . .

[cave dave]

Originally Posted by the.Mtn.Man

You're probably right. Found this on another site:

According to 4sevens, the current draw of the Quark AA on high and max is 250mA and 350mA respectively (medium is 50mA).

Ah well, and here I thought I was sitting on a gold mine. Guess I'll just stick with the cheap standard AA's and hang onto these as a do-or-die last resort since they'd probably work like a champ on medium and lower.

The 3.6v Saft are designed for low current draw. No good for these lights, I have some but am afraid to use them.

The above info is incorrect. The current to the LED is 350mA. The current draw from the battery can be much higher on low voltage sources. (~1000mA on an AA)

[the.Mtn.Man]

pobox:

I use my flashlight a few times a night and occasionally during the day, so batteries tend to last me pretty good. I could easily convince myself that I need a good rechargeable system, but convincing my wife would be another story.

----------

Originally Posted by cave dave

The 3.6v Saft are designed for low current draw. No good for these lights, I have some but am afraid to use them.

The above info is incorrect. The current to the LED is 350mA. The current draw from the battery can be much higher on low voltage sources. (~1000mA on an AA)

Hmmm... good point.

[the.Mtn.Man]

Just got my Quark AA in the mail! Woohoo!

Quick first impressions:

The packaging is topnotch. It's very slick and thoughtfully designed without being pretentious like an Apple product.

The quality of the light itself has, at least on first look, lived up to my expectations. The fit and finish is excellent, and the beam is as gorgeous as advertised.

Operation is simple, although I was surprised at just how light a touch it takes to change modes, almost to the point that one could do it unintentionally if they happen to keep their thumb on the button after turning the light on. It's not a big deal, just a matter of learning how the light works.

The clip came pressed very tightly to the body and made a scraping noise whenever I turned the bezel. I don't see any damage, but I was concerned that long-term use would wear off the anodizing, so I bent the clip back slightly so now there's a tiny gap between the clip and the surface. It still holds securely in my pocket but it no longer scrapes against the bezel.

My light does exhibit the infamous pre-flash, but it's not like you get a face-full of night vision-killing high-power before it settles down to moonlight mode. In fact, it's so brief and only subtly brighter that I probably wouldn't have noticed straight away if people hadn't been talking about it here. It doesn't even rank as a minor annoyance in my book.

Looks like a terrific light. No buyer's remorse here!

[the.Mtn.Man]

A few more observations after playing around with the light for the better part of two days:

• SOS is way too slow, and the spacing between letters is way too long. Seems to me it'd be difficult for someone to recognize the pattern the way it's set-up. They should have asked some hams what it should look like when designing that feature.
• The difference between High and Turbo is barely perceptible with a AA cell, but that's what you'd expect going from 70 to 90 lumens.
• My light tends towards slightly greenish on moonlight and becomes more yellowish as I increase the brightness, very similar to the beam shots posted earlier in this thread.
• I wish the time it took to "reset" the light after turning it off was shorter. 3-seconds is a fairly long time (though it seems closer to 4). I think 1-second would have been sufficient. Short wait for it to reset, but you wouldn't have to rapid-fire click it to change modes.
• I love moonlight mode. It's just the right amount of usable light for dark-adjusted eyes.
• Surprisingly good throw for such a small light powered by a single AA. It puts a decent spot on my back fence about 100ft away, though I'd love to see what it could do with a higher power cell.

Just a few random thoughts.

[flasherByNight]

Originally Posted by the.Mtn.Man

A few more observations after playing around with the light for the better part of two days:
[*] SOS is way too slow, and the spacing between letters is way too long. Seems to me it'd be difficult for someone to recognize the pattern the way it's set-up.

+1 Almost makes it completely useless imo...same to beacon, way too long between blips. 10 seconds

[pobox1475]

For these simple reasons I favor my warm tac 123(2) over the warm standard 123 I got first. Really wish they could hide the blinking functions . With all the hoopla about low lows I actually run my tac tight high and loose max. Guess I'm one who feels more is better and even at night around house my eyes have not been affected by the mega output .

[the.Mtn.Man]

Did a quick eyeball comparison between the Quark AA and Nitecore D20:

Both lights have roughly the same size hotspot at roughly the same intensity. The Quark's spill is slightly larger than the D20's, but the D20's spill is about twice as bright. Both lights put out very similar amounts of light despite the D20 having bigger lumen numbers in the promotional literature which leads me to believe that Nitecore fudged the numbers a bit. The D20's low, which is advertised as 2 lumens, appears no brighter than the Quark's advertised 0.2 OTF lumens. On high, the D20 at (supposedly) 180 lumens is only slightly brighter then the Quark at 90 lumens. The D20's beam is a bit uneven and "ringy" but still very good while the Quark's is smooth and flawless.

So based on my informal tests, the Quark AA compares very favorably to the D20 in a package half the size and without the wonky piston drive interface.

[PlayboyJoeShmoe]

Having never even touched a Nitecore I do think I'd agree with "Wonky Piston Drive"

I like simple. I have a few lights in which it is all to easy to change modes without meaning to.

Quark Standard is about as simple as one could ask for and I REALLY want an AA.

[the.Mtn.Man]

Anybody know what kind of lubricants are safe to use on the Quarks? Do we need to stay away from petroleum lubes?

Regarding the D20 piston drive, yeah, I just didn't find it consistent or reliable enough even as a non-critical EDC light. I was never 100% sure that it would come on when I pressed the button -- it did the majority of the time, just not every time. I also had it happen on occasion that pressing the button to ramp up slightly from low could inadvertently trigger full-bright which was a real pain especially when all I wanted was just a little more light. You can get fairly predictable performance out of a D20 if you clean and lubricate it regularly -- like every few weeks -- but disassembling the thing requires small tools and is not a particularly easy or convenient project (and forget about trying to perform maintenance in the field). That's been my experience, but I know there are folks out there who wouldn't trade their D20 for the world.

The Quark, on the other hand, has so far operated reliably and consistently every time.

[pobox1475]

I use this stuff; http://www.lighthound.com/NyoGel-760...be_p_1344.html

http://www.cpfreviews.com/Flashlight...Lubricants.php

[the.Mtn.Man]

Yeeks! 10 bucks a tube? You know, one thing I gotta say for Maglites: I love the fact that you can use cheap and readily available petroleum jelly on them.

[flasherByNight]

Originally Posted by the.Mtn.Man

Yeeks! 10 bucks a tube? You know, one thing I gotta say for Maglites: I love the fact that you can use cheap and readily available petroleum jelly on them.

don't turn this into a lube thread

[DM51]

Further lube posts here will be deleted.

There's an existing thread for the discussion of lubricants.