A Major step Forward: LPS' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

[K-T]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

Regarding the strange look/beam pattern of my T2:

On close inspection of the LA I found out that the glass body of the LA was loose in that cement kind of filling, I was able to move it when carefully touching it. When comparing the N2 with a second one I got today I realized that it was looking out of the bulb hoding compartement by 2-3 mm more. So I took an alkohol tissue and carefully tried to press the glass body back where it might have been when leaving the factory. And what a surprise: now the beam pattern gets pretty close to what was shown in the pictures earlier.

Klaus.

 

[Sean]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by K-T:
Regarding the strange look/beam pattern of my T2:

On close inspection of the LA I found out that the glass body of the LA was loose in that cement kind of filling, I was able to move it when carefully touching it...
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's not good!

I would call surefire, they will probably replace it for you. At least give it a shot.

 

[DonL]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by brightnorm:
Once again we used fresh Surefire 123A's dated 2011, and once again we were confined to very brief burns due to the illegality of our actions and the still fairly crowded streets.

Brightnorm<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Brightnorm, while slightly off-topic, I'm a bit confused by this part of your post. What specifically is illegal about playing with flashlights? I may seem strange, or even suspicious, but I don't know what would make this practice illegal.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by K-T:
This is another thing I don't understand about the rechargeables of Surefire. The threads of the 9N and 9AN are different. Why did they do that. All the lithium lights of different generations (only the 1" lights) have interchangeable parts, why not do that for the rechargeables, too? The 9N does not have a LOTC, someone could have used the LOTC of the 9AN on the 9N to upgrade it, but that is not possible since they don't fit. Also the wonderful 3" T3 doesn't fit. I don't get it?

Klaus. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Klaus. I think it has something to do with the change from being able to charge the battery while still in the to charging the battery without the light. There may have been design parameters requirements or liability issues as well. Dunno about that, though.

Either that or Surefire has been studying Microsoft for lessons in "planned obsolescence".

 

[brightnorm]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

DonL,

You have a point. I should have said "probable illegality", though I believe this sort of activity could be classified under "malicious mischief", "disturbing the peace", "creating a nuisance", even a form of "trespass". There are all sorts of statutes concerning acts that are disturbing, invasive, threatening, etc. and I'm sure that an alert LEO could easily find one that covered this kind of activity.

If we were simply shining the lights into the presumably deserted park, or toward a non-occupied area, my guess is that we would be OK.

If there are any lawyers in CPF it would be interesting to get their input.

Brightnorm

 

[LLLean]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

Brightnorm,

I trusted your review on the SRD3 so much,
that I bought one. So I now have my first
SureFire, having bought my first Stinger HP
4 days ago.

In the next few days, I'll compare them and I'll write a comparision review between the 2.

- Lean

 

[JoeyL]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

Hello all!

I was surprised by Ken Good's note. I have an ultrastinger and a M3. I recently bought a turbo head for the M3. (its 2.5" by the way)

I will say that I'm not an LEO and I would not be able to test it on those conditions. And if I had to pick one, I'll take the M3T. It takes the oval M3 beam and makes it much rounder.

But with the Ultrastinger, I think it takes some tweaking to make it work optimally. That's something you nearly never have to do with the SureFires. For example, when I first got the UStinger, the beam was so bad I called the factory and they told me the reflector was off and sent me a replacement. This helped, but I have found that the position of the bulb makes the biggest difference. If it is off center by a millimeter, the beam is crappy in my light. I can bend the contacts to put it in the center.

Once tweaked, I think the beam is equal or better than the M3T at a variety of distances. I'm not saying it's a better light overall. But it's a pretty good deal if your life doesn't depend on the light in a confrontation.

With the high output lamp, this reverses. The M3T beam is brighter, wider, fairly round and overall just great... for 20 short minutes.

After Brightnorm's posts, I mistakenly bought the Turbo thinking it was a 3". It is a 2.5 but I'm still pretty happy with what it does for the M3 oval beam.
Thanks, Brightnorm!

 

[brightnorm]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

LLLean and JoeyL

Thank you for your positive reactions to my review; they are much appreciated.

LLL I'm looking forward to that review. I've been interested in the HP since it came out; a review would be very timely.

Brightnorm

 

[LLLean]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

Brightnorm,

I'm a tad confused by your designation of T1/2. Are you saying that the T1 and T2 turbohead are the same? I checked some sites tonight and found T2 in a number of places.

I have the LPS SRTH turbohead on my C3. It's a great combo. But i like to go one up and I was wondering if it's worth my buying the T2. In your first review, you rated the T2 higher in terms of its intensity (hence, throw probably) but a subsequent brief review of yours mentioned that you can't quite tell the difference (the one with the 48storey building).

I'm also considering if i should get a M3 with the turbohead (M3T). This flashlight obsession of mine is getting out of hand a little. :eek

Thanks

 

[K-T]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

Yes, the T1 and T2 are both the same turbohead, the only difference between them is the bulb that is delivered with them. The T1 is for 6V lights, its bulb (N1) producing some ~65lm while the T2 with the N2 is for 9V lights/~105lm. So if you get a T2 you can only use it for 9V lights until you replace the bulb with the 6V version (N1).

Klaus.

 

[Sean]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LLLean:
Brightnorm,

I'm a tad confused by your designation of T1/2. Are you saying that the T1 and T2 turbohead are the same? I checked some sites tonight and found T2 in a number of places.

I have the LPS SRTH turbohead on my C3. It's a great combo. But i like to go one up and I was wondering if it's worth my buying the T2. In your first review, you rated the T2 higher in terms of its intensity (hence, throw probably) but a subsequent brief review of yours mentioned that you can't quite tell the difference (the one with the 48storey building).

I'm also considering if i should get a M3 with the turbohead (M3T). This flashlight obsession of mine is getting out of hand a little. :eek

Thanks<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


You know you can put the MN15 & MN16 in your SRTH don't you? The MN16 is a little brighter than the N2.

 

[Josh]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

LL, if you can find a T2 or T1 get one you will love it for a long range light.

 

[LLLean]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

Josh,
You mentioned that i would love the range of the T2/N2. How does the T2/N2 compare with the SRD3? Have you had the chance to compare both of them? I have the SRD3 and I like to know if i should get the T2/N2 also.
I definitely would if its beam/range is noticeable better than the SRTH (head of SRD3).
Thanks, everyone.

 

[brightnorm]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LLLean:
Brightnorm,

I'm a tad confused by your designation of T1/2. Are you saying that the T1 and T2 turbohead are the same? I checked some sites tonight and found T2 in a number of places.

I have the LPS SRTH turbohead on my C3. It's a great combo. But i like to go one up and I was wondering if it's worth my buying the T2. In your first review, you rated the T2 higher in terms of its intensity (hence, throw probably) but a subsequent brief review of yours mentioned that you can't quite tell the difference (the one with the 48storey building).

I'm also considering if i should get a M3 with the turbohead (M3T). This flashlight obsession of mine is getting out of hand a little. :eek

Thanks<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LLL,

This T1 and T2 business is confusing. As K-T says, and as I mentioned in my review, T1 and T2 are two different names for the same 3" turbohead. K1 = 60 Lumen lamp for 2x123 lights and T2 = 105 lumen lamp for 3x123 lights. I've tried some higher lumen options, but I have always come back to the N2 lamp in the 3" or 2.5" LPS turbos.

About your buying a T1(2); it's hard to know what to advise you. My 48 floor "vertical throw comparison test" was inconclusive because we had to rush through it. I really dislike doing things in that kind of "half buttocked" manner, but my options here are limited. Even if the 3" is a little better than the LRPH, the 2.5 incher performs nobly, as you have discovered through your own experience.

I would like to do a carefully conducted, properly done outdoor comparison between the Ultrastinger, the D3 with T1(2) + N2, and the D3 with LRPH + N2. Unfortunately I see no way to carry out these tests in this densely populated city.

I'm not familiar enough with the M3T to give you an intelligent response.

Brightnorm

 

[K-T]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

I need everybody's help one more time trying to solve some mystery:
on a second close inspection to find out why my T2 beam is still quite different than everybody elses' I found a little plastic spacer about 1/3 mm thick glued onto the base of the head where the bulb and the head make contact. Does anybody else has this (take a good look)? Can/should I remove it? Could it be some left over from production by accident?

TIA,

Klaus.

 

[Size15's]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

Never heard of that one!
You're saying that the TurboHead has something stuck to it? Can it be removed with the ability to put it back on without damage if the spacer turns out to be important?

Al

 

[K-T]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

Yes, I tried that out and the beam improved significantly. Before the hotspot was not that nice including a slightly blackish spot in the center, after that the hotspot got closer and more concentrated. I have a second one of these so I know how it should look like.

I guess if there would be another spacer I and I would take it away I would get the nice hotspot we are all talking about. But I don't want to start filling on the T. Any suggestions?

Klaus.

 

[brightnorm]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by K-T:
Yes, I tried that out and the beam improved significantly. Before the hotspot was not that nice including a slightly blackish spot in the center, after that the hotspot got closer and more concentrated. I have a second one of these so I know how it should look like.

I guess if there would be another spacer I and I would take it away I would get the nice hotspot we are all talking about. But I don't want to start filling on the T. Any suggestions?

Klaus.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Klaus,

Did you buy this unit factory-new? If not, that plastic spacer may represent the efforts of a previous owner to tweak the beam while experimenting with different lamps.

I tried this myself before writing my first disappointed review of the KT-2.

Have you tried contacting Ken about this?

Brightnorm

 

[brightnorm]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by K-T:
Now that is the strange part about the whole story. I got two of them One T1 and one 9PT - both factory sealed. The T1 is the good guy while the T2 on the 9PT is the bad guy. The lense looks a little bit foggy, the N2 bulb was loose in its socket and finally there is this strange spacer on the bottom of the T2. Maybe I should write Ken, or maybe PK. Both are pretty busy. What to do next?

That's the first time I am really helpless.

Klaus.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Klaus,

These were both factory sealed Surefire Products. Surefire stands behind its products and Ken and PK are the Surefire reps present on our forum. It is entirely legitimate to contact them, regardless of how busy you believe them to be. If they can't respond now, hopefully they will later.

Or, why not call up Surefire now and see what they have to say. Mention your membership in CPF.

Sorry I don't have an immediate solution.

Brightnorm

 

[Size15's]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

I'd contact SureFire Customer Service rather then Ken or PK.

So your TurboHead gives a far better beam now?

Al

 

[K-T]

Re: A Major step Forward: LPS\' new Compact Turbohead for SUREFIRES

Far better is a little bit too much. It improved but still lacks the center beam the other 3" has.
We'll see what SFCS says about it.