4Sevens Quark Round-up Review: Q123, QAA, Q123-2, QAA-2 - RUNTIMES, COMPARISONS, etc

SeanHatfield

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
53
More or less - there is always some variability from sample to sample (due to accepted variances in circuit, LED output bin, Vf, etc). And protected 14500s typically have slightly higher capacity than protected RCR, despite being rated the same (typically ~10-30% more in my testing).

At special request, I have now done the 17670 runtime on the QAA head (using the 123-2 battery tube). The result is interesting:

QuarkLi-ion.gif


As you can see, you get much longer runtime than RCR or 14500, as expected. But the buck/boost QAA circuit doesn't outperform the buck-only Q123-2 on 17670.

The reason for this appears to be in the regulation - the Q123/QAA head is fully regulated on 1x3.7V Li-ion, but the Q123-2 drops out of regulation and into something approaching direct drive after ~40 mins in the 17670 run. Direct drive is always more efficient that flat-line regulation, so it's not surprising to me that the Q123-2 wins out on 17670.

When the 123^2 goes into direct drive (from too low voltage), will the different modes still work? Or would you lose everything except high, like when a Fenix PD20 goes to direct-drive on 16340 from too high voltage?
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
When the 123^2 goes into direct drive (from too low voltage), will the different modes still work? Or would you lose everything except high, like when a Fenix PD20 goes to direct-drive on 16340 from too high voltage?
No, you should still have the lower modes running fine (and regulated). The direct-drive pattern is common on multi-mode lights driven at their highest level - the circuitry just can't maintain perfectly flat regulation at that level. It is only once the battery is nearly exhausted that you would loose distinct output levels - although that would mean the light producing low output not high at all levels.

FYI, this is a rather old review, based on the original XP-E R2 quarks. They long ago switched to higher output XP-G emitters, so the output levels and runtimes here are somewhat out of date.
 

SeanHatfield

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
53
Wow thanks for the fast response! In that case, i might consider buying a 123^2 head some time...
I didn't look at the actual runtimes, but only at the fact that the 123^2 head ran longer than the low voltage head, and i guess the circuits didn't change enough to reverse those results.
Now all i need is another NW Tactical run :D
 

recDNA

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
8,752
I'm hoping for an xm-l u2 run!

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk
 

vestureofblood

Flashlight Enthusiast
CPF Supporter
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
3,182
Location
Missouri
Hi selfbuilt,

Thanks for doing this review.

In your charts where is say Max Throw and gives the lux reading for ex. 75 (5700 lux) What is the number just to the left of the parenthesis? Is that yards or something?
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
In your charts where is say Max Throw and gives the lux reading for ex. 75 (5700 lux) What is the number just to the left of the parenthesis? Is that yards or something?
In my older reviews (before ANSI FL-1 was established), the "throw" number on the left is the beam distance (in meters) to 1 lux.

I used this measure as it was simple to calculate (i.e. it just the square root of the lux @1m). With ANSI FL-1, beam distance was set as distance to 0.25 lux (i.e. multiply the lux @1m by four, and take the square root). Either method is fine - both are basically a way to linearize the throw/beam distance - you just need to compare within the same chart (i.e. using the same method).
 

vestureofblood

Flashlight Enthusiast
CPF Supporter
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
3,182
Location
Missouri
Thanks.

For your testing do you position the sensor @ 1M or do you go father out and then multiply?
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
Since ANSI FL-1 has been established, I use a comparable method - in this case, 5 meters distance and calculate back to 1m. I also report the peak brighteness reading (which may not be absolute centre).

In my older reviews, I typically used hotspot centre, and measured at 1m or 5m, depending on the light. So for regular pocket lights (i.e. 1xAA, 1xCR123A), I typically measured at 1m. For thrower lights (2xCR123A), I typically measured at 5m and calculated back. Unless specified in the table or the text, you can reasonably assume the measurements were actually done at 1m (in older reviews, pre ANSI FL-1).
 

Nonprophet

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Nov 19, 2011
Messages
55
Hey Selfbuilt,

Just wondering if you were going to release any test results for the new xm-l emitters? I'm especially interested in knowing how the Quark AA with a xm-l head using 14500 batteries specs out.

Thanks!


NP
 

proud2pak

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Nov 13, 2011
Messages
7
It's obvious you put a lot of work into these reviews. Thanks for an outstanding review. :thumbsup:
 

dealer

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
12
I have two mini 123s. One broke after about a year and the other broke after a few months. I do not think the electronics are very good. I prefer the form factor, but need something more reliable.
 

kreisler

Banned
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
439
Location
Deutscheland
I have two mini 123s. One broke after about a year and the other broke after a few months. I do not think the electronics are very good. I prefer the form factor, but need something more reliable.
did you get FREE replacements (10 yrs warranty)?
 

PlayboyJoeShmoe

Flashaholic
Joined
Sep 4, 2002
Messages
11,041
Location
Shepherd, TX (where dat?)
Based quite a bit on this thread I have a 123 R5 with no clip on the way. I hope it's not violently green.

Some other reading in this thread made me mess around with my Jetbeam MKII and my Regal EDC. Both run ok on NimH but REALLY perk up with 14500!

Trying to see which among my 5 or 6 14500 are good enough. Don't have anything but Ultrafire in that size.

That is also why I got a 123 instead of AA on the way.
 

PlayboyJoeShmoe

Flashaholic
Joined
Sep 4, 2002
Messages
11,041
Location
Shepherd, TX (where dat?)
My Clipless 123 arrived today. I do not notice any green tint. Maybe even a bit blue in the lowest mode.

It has a bigger smooth edged hotspot than my P2D. And even Low is lower than P2D low. Moonlight is LOW!!!!!!!

And it clobbers P2D turbo to turbo.

I am a happy camper!
 

LightWalker

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Messages
1,631
Location
USA
The Quark 123 has a much better beam and is easier to hold as well. Have you looked at the XML versions?
 

shelm

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 8, 2011
Messages
2,047
i have the feeling that the rebranded Quarks have a different, improved build quality. look at the wall thickness, the tailcap and overall appearance. would be easy to find out if someone with the new Quark could measure the exact weight.



nice build quality!!
 

BigDak19

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 3, 2018
Messages
16
Location
Michigan
Reviewer's Note: This is a round-up review of all of the initial Quark lights - Regular version Quark AA, AA-2, 123, 123-2. Quark lights were supplied by 4Sevens of 4Sevens.com. For those of you also in Canada, these are now available locally through 4Sevens.ca.

UPDATE July 23, 2009: My original Q123-2 appeared to be defective on 2xRCR (i.e. abnormally high output and short runtime). 4Sevens has sent me a replacement head unit for testing, and the results are in keeping with expected performance. Review has been updated accordingly.

Warning: Even more pic heavy than usual! :rolleyes:

Quark-1.jpg

Quark-2.jpg


The Quark lights are the first offering designed in-house by the well-known CPF dealer 4Sevens. Since the interface is common to all members of the Quark Regular series, I am reviewing them all in one massive round-up review thread. :sweat:

Time to check under the hood and see how these Quark lights are built, and how they perform relative to the competition. ;)

Quark-8.jpg

(from left to right: 4Sevens CR123A, Duracell AA, Q123, QAA, Q123-3, QAA-2)

Common specs, taken from product insert:
  • Cree XP-E R2 LED, guaranteed to be perfectly centered
  • Modes: Regular has 8 output modes (2 with tightened bezel, 6 with loosened bezel). Tactical will also come in 8 possible output levels, but in a single programmable mode for each bezel state.
  • Regular has a reverse clicky switch, recessed to allow tailstanding. Tactical versions with have a protruding forward clicky
  • Regular comes on Moonlight (bezel loosened) or Turbo (bezel tightened) with no mode memory.
  • Circuits are digitally regulated by a microprocessor.
  • Specially coated lens to reduce reflective losses, orange-peel aluminium reflector for smooth beam.
  • Generous knurling to enhance grip.
  • Integrated clip that is reversible and removable (except for Q123 where it is permanently mounted, although you have the option to buy one without it).
  • Watertight to IPX-8 waterproof standard.
  • Aircraft aluminum, grade 6061, hard-coat anodized
  • Square-cut threads to ensure consistent use over lifetime
Battery configurations are as follows:
Quark 123: Uses 1 x CR123A / RCR123A battery (0.9V~4.2V)
Quark AA: Uses 1 x AA alkaline / NiMH rechargeable / 3.7V 14500 battery (0.9V~4.2V)
Quark 123-2: Uses 2 x CR123A/RCR123A batteries / 1 x 17670 battery (3.0~9.0V)
Quark AA-2: Uses 2 x AA alkaline / NiMH Rechargeable batteries (0.9V~4.2V)

Reported OTF (out-the-front) lumen outputs for constant output modes:
Moonlight: 0.2 lm
Lo: 3.5 lm
Med: 18 lm
High: 70 lm
Turbo: 170 lm (with exceptions: 190 lm for Q123-2, 90 lm for QAA on 1xAlkaline/NiMH)

Weight/dimensions: (actually measured by moi :kiss:)
Q123: Weight 39.9g, Length 82.5mm, Width (bezel) 22.0mm
QAA: Weight 46.5g, Length 95.8mm, Width (bezel) 22.0mm
Q123-2: Weight 47.2g, Length 113.2mm, Width (bezel) 22.0mm
QAA-2: Weight 60.7g, Length 147.0mm, Width (bezel) 22.0mm

Quark1232-1.jpg


Shown above is the packaging for the Quark 123-2, but the others are similar (except for a simpler finger-grip on the single-cell lights). Included with all lights is a good quality wrist lanyard, extra o-rings, good quality belt holster, finger/hand-grip, primary battery (Duracell alkaline or 4Sevens CR123A) and manual.

Here’s a close-up view of the main accessories:
Quark-3.jpg


All in all, a very nice package with a lot of goodies. :)

Here’s how the Q123-2 looks disassembled:

Quark1232-5.jpg


Note that the heads, tailcaps and body tubes are physically interchangeable among the four models. The Q123-2 uses a different circuit from the rest, but the Q123/QAA/QAA-2 versions use the same circuit (i.e. you could switch tubes between those models for different battery performance).

On the Q123-2/QAA/QAA-2 lights, there is a removable single-direction clip attached to either the tail or head region of the battery tube, depending on the model. One unusual twist here – the head and tailcaps are reversible on the battery tube of each individual light. :eek:oo: This is the first time I’ve seen this. It means you can “reverse” the direction of the clip by simply exchanging the head and tail regions. Here’s what I mean:

Quark1232-2.jpg

Quark1232-4.jpg


Note that I haven’t moved the clip in the pics above – just exchanged the head and tail. The light works properly in both orientations. This is an interesting (and novel) solution to problem of providing a bi-directional clip. It also explains why the tailcap threads are not anodized on the body to allow tailcap lockout (a feature I personally value) - this would prevent the ability to swap tail/head pieces.

The clip is secured in place by its own cover/grip ring, just like on the new Olight Infinitum lights (i.e. unscrew the ring to remove the clip, screw back down to cover the gap where the clip attaches).

Overall, I quite like this approach, as it allows you the freedom to position the clip as you prefer, and also allows easy removal of the clip without leaving a gap. :) The exception is the single-cell Q123 model:

Quark123-5.jpg


The Q123 differs in that the clip is permanently embedded inside the head (shown above). You can request a clip-less version when you check-out on the 4Sevens site. Personally, I find the clip gets in the way when changing batteries on the Q123, but YMMV. :shrug:

Quark-4.jpg


All lights use a standard reverse clicky, with a slightly stiffer feel than typical (note the embossed 4-7 logo on the button cover :rolleyes:). The lights can tailstand on these Regular series Quarks - the soon to be released Tactical versions will have a protruding forward clicky.

Quark-7.jpg


Note the similarity of the circuit board in the head to the current Fenix lights (i.e. you can see the reverse polarity detector). I believe 4Sevens is using the same circuit designer as Fenix, but don’t have any specific details. Note the overall dimensional similarity to Fenix and Olight.

Quark-5.jpg

Quark-6.jpg


The reflectors are what I would describe as medium orange peel, and are identical for all four models. 4Sevens uses a proprietary process to insure the LED is perfectly centered each time. :thumbsup:

Beamshots are provided with the individual light comparisons (below), to show you how the Quarks compare to other members of their respective classes.

As you will see when you scroll down, the most obvious beam characteristic is that the Quarks have a very broad beam compared to other lights. The maximum spillbeam width is one of the largest I’ve seen – at least as wide as the Lumapower Incendio/Connexion/Encore series lights. :eek:oo:

But for all that you still get very good throw with no rings and few artifacts. This seems to be the new norm for XP-E lights - you get a fairly narrow but still well-defined hotspot, with a smooth transition through the corona to the wide spillbeam (i.e. sort of a hybrid between a typical Cree XR-E and a SSC emitter). Clearly a good job on the Quark reflectors.

Build Quality

Overall build quality is very high – I would rate these lights right up there with Fenix, Olight, JetBeam and EagleTac. I realize individual members will have their personal preferences among those makers, but there are elements of all of the above in the Quark lights. I will discuss this in more detail in my preliminary conclusions at the end of the review. The only thing really missing is a tailcap lock-out.

Anodizing is type III (hard anodized), and lettering is fairly sharp and clear. Overall fit and finish is very good on all samples, although I did notice some fine cylindical scratches at the base of the QAA head and on the tailcap of the Q123 upon arrival. I suspect these were caused during assembly (i.e. as you screw the head/tail on, it rubs the clip against the smooth portion of the other end).

Battery tubes are wide enough to accommodate protected cells, although the Q123-2 can just barely take my protected AW 17670 cell (18650 won’t fit).

Features and User Interface

The Quark interface on the Regular series lights will seem very familiar to users of Fenix Lx/PxD and LDx0/PDx0 series lights. It’s basically exactly the same, with the addition of an extra “Moonlight” low output and beacon flash in the bezel loosened state.

With the bezel slightly loosened, click on to activate Moonlight mode. Soft-press to advance to Lo, followed by Med, Hi, SOS, and Beacon mode in sequence. With the bezel fully tightened, activation yields Turbo. Soft-press to advance to rapid Strobe, measured at a “tactical” (and nauseating :green:) 12.5Hz in my testing.

If you turn the light off-on within ~3 secs, you will advance to the next mode (i.e. acts as a soft-press). Otherwise, you will return to the first output state (i.e. Moonlight or Turbo, depending on the bezel state). There is no long-term mode memory. The exception is if you switch from one bezel state to the other without turning off the light - there is short-term memory to that retain what mode you were in if you switch back to the first bezel state (erased if you turn off the light),

Testing Method: All my output numbers are relative for my home-made light box setup, a la Quickbeam's flashlightreviews.com method. You can directly compare all my relative output values from different reviews - i.e. an output value of "10" in one graph is the same as "10" in another. All runtimes are done under a cooling fan.

Throw values are the square-root of lux measurements taken at 1 meter from the lens, using a light meter.

4Sevens CR123A Batteries:

Included with each light is an appropriate primary battery. For CR123A lights, 4Sevens has included their own branded CR123A. They have just begun selling these through their online store (made in China cells, to 4Sevens’ specifications).

In my battery testing, I have found that Duracell, Surefire and Panasonic have identical performance, which is just slightly higher than other made-in-the-USA brands such as Energizer, Rayovac, and Battery Station. Titanium Innovations (made-in-China) typically do as well (and sometimes better) than the USA brands in term of capcity. Tenergy (made-in-China) do noticeably worse.

QuarkBattery.gif


Not too shabby for these new 4Sevens cells … remarkably similar performance to the Duracells. :whistle:

UPDATE June 26, 2009: I have done a little more testing on the 4Sevens CR123A batteries in other flashlights, and the results are interesting. I've posted this analysis in its own mini-review in the batteries sub-forum: CR123A Comparison Review: 4Sevens, Titanium Innovations, Tenergy, Surefire, Duracell .

Throw/Output Summary Chart:

To allow you to better compare to the competition, I have decided to give detailed Throw/Output Summary Charts for each light individually (see individual comparisons below).

But to tide you over ;), here’s a chart showing the common output levels as measured by my lightbox. There are a couple of exceptions to the Turbo mode output (i.e. Q123-2 and QAA), and these are identified on the right with specific batteries listed. Otherwise, all lights have the same relative output levels shown on the left-side the chart below.

QuarkOutputChart.gif


A very nice relative spacing of levels, IMO. :thumbsup: And I quite like the consistency across models.

--------------------------------------

Quark 123 Comparison

Quark123-6.jpg

From left to right, 4Sevens CR123A, Quark 123, Fenix P2D, Olight T10, Nitecore EX10, LiteFlux LF3XT, Novatac 120P

Quark123-1.jpg

Quark123-2.jpg

Quark123-3.jpg

Quark123-5.jpg

Quark123-7.jpg


Beamshot Comparison

All lights ~0.5 m from a white wall, on 1xRCR AW Protected.

Exp 1/25 sec, f2.7
CR5-25.jpg


Exp 1/100 sec, f2.7
CR5-100.jpg


Exp 1/800 sec, f2.7
CR5-800.jpg


Throw/Output Summary Chart:

CR-Summary1.gif

CR-Summary2.gif


Output/Runtime Comparison:

Q123-MaxRCRgif.gif

Q123-MedRCRgif.gif

Q123-LoRCRgif.gif


Q123-MaxCR123A.gif

Q123-MedCR123A.gif


--------------------------------------

Quark AA Comparison

QuarkAA-6.jpg

From left to right, Duracell AA, Quark AA, Fenix LD10, Olight I15, NiteCore Defender Infinity, NiteCore D10, LiteFlux LF5XT

QuarkAA-1.jpg

QuarkAA-2.jpg

QuarkAA-3.jpg

QuarkAA-5.jpg

QuarkAA-7.jpg


Beamshot Comparison

All lights ~0.5 m from a white wall, on 1xEneloop NiMH.

1AA-Beam25-8.jpg


1AA-Beam100-8.jpg


1AA-Beam800-8.jpg


Throw/Output Summary Chart:

1AA-Summary1.gif

1AA-Summary2.gif


Output/Runtime Comparison:

QAA-Hi14500.gif

QAA-Med14500.gif


QAA-HiEne.gif

QAA-MedEne.gif

QAA-LoEne.gif


QAA-HiL91.gif


QAA-HiAlka.gif


--------------------------------------

Quark 123-2 Comparison

Quark1232-6.jpg

From left to right, 4Sevens CR123A, AW Protected 18650, Quark 123-2, Olight I20, JetBeam Jet-III PRO ST, Lumapower Encore, JetBeam Jet-III M, Olight M20

Quark1232-1.jpg

Quark1232-2.jpg

Quark1232-3.jpg

Quark1232-4.jpg

Quark1232-5.jpg

Quark1232-7.jpg


Beamshot Comparison

All lights ~0.5 m from a white wall, on 1x17670/18650 AW Protected.

18650-Beam5-25.jpg

18650-Beam1-25.jpg


18650-Beam5-100.jpg
18650-Beam1-100.jpg


18650-Beam5-800.jpg

18650-Beam1-100.jpg


Throw/Output Summary Chart:

18650-Summary1.gif

18650-Summary2.gif


UPDATE July 23, 2009: Note the 2xRCR results have been revised, due to a replacement sample that was received for further testing. Scroll down to the runtime charts for more updated info.

Output/Runtime Comparison:

Note that the Quark 123-2 runs are on 17670, compared to 14670 on the Olight I20 and T20, and 18650 on the rest of the competition.

Q1232-Max18650.gif

Q1232-Med18650.gif


Q1232-MaxRCR.gif


Q1232-MaxCR123A-2.gif

Q1232-MedCR123A.gif


UPDATE July 23, 2009: The replacement Q123-2 head now shows the expected performance on 2xRCR - the Max output graphs above have been adjusted with the new data for RCR, 17670, and primary CR123A. Below is a graph comparing the original Q123-2 with the replacement:

Q1232-Replace.gif


--------------------------------------

Quark AA-2 Comparison

QuarkAA2-6.jpg

From left to right, Duracell AA, Quark AA-2, Fenix L2D, Olight I25, NiteCore D20, EagleTac P100A2, Lumapower X2 2AA.

QuarkAA2-1.jpg

QuarkAA2-2.jpg

QuarkAA2-3.jpg

QuarkAA2-5.jpg

QuarkAA2-7.jpg


Beamshot Comparison

All lights ~0.5 m from a white wall, on 2xEneloop.

Exp 1/25 sec, f2.7
2AA-Beam1E.jpg

2AA-Beam1B.jpg


Exp 1/100 sec, f2.7
2AA-Beam2E.jpg
2AA-Beam2B.jpg


Exp 1/800 sec, f2.7
2AA-Beam3E.jpg
2AA-Beam3B.jpg


Throw/Output Summary Chart:

2AA-Summary.gif


Output/Runtime Comparison:

Q2AA-MaxEne.gif

Q2AA-MedEne.gif


Q2AA-MaxL91.gif


Q2AA-MaxAlka.gif


----------------------------------

Output/Runtime Pattern

Obviously, there is a lot of data to sort through up there. :sweat: But to give you the short version, the performance of these Quark lights is generally excellent across outputs and models (in keeping with their Fenix “circuit heritage”). I have noticed a few general trends:

  • My various samples appear to perform the best when run on 1x3.7V Li-ion configurations (i.e. 1xRCR, 1x14500, 1x17670). The various samples consistently matched or outperformed their competitors on this input source, especially on the lower output levels. :thumbsup:
  • I haven’t done Lo or Moonlight runtimes because of the length of time they would take, but I would expect similar class-leading performance.
  • Performance on 2xAA (NiMH or alkaline) seems a little lower than I would have expected (especially on higher outputs). I don’t think this is a one-off issue of my QAA-2, as I tested the QAA head on the 2xAA body and got similar performance. Of course, no one recommends you run alkalines on Max on heavily-driven modern lights … but if you really want to, you may be better off sticking with actual Fenix lights.
  • My original Q123-2 sample was defective on 2xRCR (i.e. output was higher than expected, unit got hot very quickly, and the batteries drained way too rapidly at a >3C discharge rate). The replacement head received from 4Sevens (shown above) has the expected performance on all batteries.
  • The 4Sevens-branded cells typically did as well as my Duracell or Titanium Innovations CR123 cells on Max output.

Potential Issues

Tail screw threads are not anodized, so tailcap lock-out is not possible.

All my samples had a noticeable odor emanating from the o-ring area when unscrewing the head/tailcaps. I suspect this is an interaction of the lube and o-rings (reminds me of the smell caused by the outgassing of plasticizers in sealed inexpensive plastic packaging). Should be harmless, and the o-rings don’t seem to be any the worse for wear so far.

Like the early Q5 Fenix circuits, my Quark samples all suffer from a brief "pre-flash" of momentary higher brightness when activating in the Moonlight mode. It is less severe than the earlier Fenixes, but may still be annoying for some.

UPDATE July 23, 2009: My original Q123-2 was defective on 2xRCR, with abnormally high output and short runtime on this battery source only. The replacement sample performs as expected on all batteries.

Preliminary Observations

The Quarks are a first-rate example of the principle that Dr. Frankestein would have done well to heed – always do your homework on what parts to include before you stitch everything together. :p

In large measure, the Quarks really do show the successful combination of the most popular features of a wide range of lights. Take the excellent output/runtime efficiency and popular user interface of the Fenix, add a few extra modes including an ultra-low like that found on LiteFlux, go for the mix-and-match body part lego of Fenix/Olight, add generous EagleTac knurling, a removable clip a la Olight, and JetBeam’s square-cut screw threads, and presto: out pops the Quark. [insert missing :magicwand: tag]

But the Quarks are not merely the sum of other people’s parts – there are a few innovations here too. Nice touches include the perfectly centered LEDs (finally!) and the additional rubber finger/hand grips. But most interesting is the reversible battery tube, allowing you to effectively point the clip in either direction, as you prefer. This is quite an elegant solution to problem of building a good bi-directional clip.

But there is a flip-side – no tailcap lock-out, since body screw thread anodizing would interfere with the bezel twist UI. However, a layer of anodizing on the screw threads in the tailcap could work to restore this feature. While not as full-proof as dual anodizing of both the body and tailcap screw threads, this would be better than nothing.

A very impressive first offering - I am sure these will be very competitive here at CPF. I haven't seen the Tactical versions yet, but with just a few minor tweaks to the current build, I think these have the potential to be outstanding lights.

I don’t generally discuss value-for-money in my reviews, since I think that is a very personal decision best left to the individual and his/her wallet. But I have to say that the Quarks make a very compelling argument at their price point. :whistle:

Looking forward to seeing what they come up with next. :)

P.S.: I will be adding the Quark testing results to my various Round-up Reviews over the next few days.

This may be the most impressive write up I have ever seen! I have been searching far and wide on the internet, looking for information on some of the older 4 Sevens lights that I just purchased off of eBay. Unfortunately there isn't much out there, and when 4 Sevens was 4 Sevens and not FourSevens, YouTube hadn't exploded with flashlight reviews yet. I purchased a Gen 1 Quark 123 as well as a 123^2 body, an QP2L-X head, a Quark Pro tail cap and a QB2L-X Turbo head. I was told these will all lego together and from what I've gather in the forums, that is correct. I'm just curious on what lumens I can come to expect as well as candela. I like little throwers for EDC:sssh:. Unfortunately, in my browser (Google Chrome) none of your photos are coming through.
 

Toohotruk

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
2,707
Location
The Highway to Hell
Thanks for reviving this old thread. I'm still carrying my first gen Q123 with a special edition warm LED head I bought when they first came out...it's beat to hell, but it still works like the day I bought it. I was just thinking the other day about how much lights have changed since then and was wondering what the specs were for the original Quarks. I don't care how many lumens, or how many fancy features lights have now days, it's tough to beat the first edition Quarks...they're tough as hell, and throw out a great beam. Personally, I think Mr. Chow hit a homerun right out of the box with these lights...after all these years, I can look back at them after owning many, many, many different lights, some of them I got in the last few months, and I can say they are truly great little lights.
 
Top