Choosing between 2 lights for EDC use (Rough use)

[chanjyj]

Here goes my condensed summary:

I'm trying to decide between the:
1. RA EDC Tactical, 170 lumens
2. Quark MiNi 123 Titanium

The prices are vastly different ($189 former, $69 latter), can anyone clue me in on the reason for the price difference
I know both to be good manufacturers so there must be some reason I'm not seeing a reason for the price differential.

• Brightness
  The RA is 170 lumens, the Quark, 189 lumens (Both OTF). Quark wins
• Waterproofing
  The RA is rated to 20m static, the Quark, IPX8. RA wins
• Toughness
  The RA has been dropped repeatedly from a height of 6 meters (20 feet) on to concrete, pavement and rocks, then thrown at concrete, pavement and rocks for over an hour. The Quark, is made of Titanium. I have no idea which one wins

It would be appreciated if one who owns both lights can nudge me in the right direction! I want a quality light yes, but spending a bomb on something that is marginally better is not my cup of tea either

Further Info

• I plan to use the lights or RCR123s (primarys are EXPENSIVE in my country)
• I do not mind a complicated interface. But when the poop hits the fan, I want the light to come ON with minimal fuss. If anything, I want it to be like my TK10. Click=ON, twist the head left for lower output, twist the head right for max output.
• This light will be abused.
• I have no experience with titanium lights. I assume people buy them because of the 'shiny' factor. I personally couldn't care less, but if titanium provides better 'bombproof-ness' (I would assume so) then I'm prepared to go for it.
• Brightness is important to me. I would like to go for the RA High CRI, but it has been thrown out of my shortlist because of the 100 lumens figure.
• When I say I need something bright, I know what I'm asking for, so please do not attempt to convince me that I don't need something bright, or that "our eyes will adapt" et al. I know the common pitfalls, and I know my needs. Thanks in advance!
• This light CANNOT die. It may be used in emergency situations. I have a primary light, but this will be the secondary light if the primary fails. Runtime is therefore also important.
• High CRI not needed. As long as it's not like the Olight SR90 I'm fine.

EDIT
Due to some misconceptions in this thread, I'd better further clarify my needs.
1. Small enough to carry WITHIN a pocket (standard pants pocket), or around the neck.
2. Able to TAKE OVER the role of a primary light should the primary fail:
- For at least 60mins
- At a level above or equal to 150 lumens.
3. Can withstand abuse to the level of what I dosed out to my Fenix TK10 daily sometime back (that's my benchmark) [http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...8&postcount=18, http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...&postcount=20]
4. Price is justified (okay, I know this is somewhat controversial so I am prepared to ignore this point if need be)

Thanks!

 

[smokelaw1]

Ra. ZERO question.

If reliability is the #1 concern, then Ra beats 4Sevens, period. Now....this comes form a HUGE 4Sevens supporter. I own like 7 quarks and quark minis. I recommend them constantly and carry them fairly often. They are often a back-up to my Ra and other lights.

But when you absolutely, postiively MUST have a light that will not die, few, if any brands give you better chances of that than Ra. If you really, really, need to always have light (caves, other life-dependent situations) Ra WITH AT LEAST ONE backup!!

 

[Flying Turtle]

Sounds to me like you need the RA. I have a QMini123 (not Ti) that I like, but it would not be nearly as tough. Thin walls help keep it small, maybe less than half the volume of the RA, but don't go throwing it about. In a way it's almost like apples and oranges. Both make light and use the same battery, but abilities are way different. I sure someone with both lights will provide a better comparison.

Geoff

 

[sol-leks]

The quark mini, while a fantastic light is kind of like quarks budget line. If anything I would get a quark regular, but I think the RA is a good choice. Also I personally dislike titanium when it comes to twisty lights because of the galling. If you want titanium get a clicky.

In general, it sounds like a clicky will better suit your needs anyway.

 

[fyrstormer]

From www.ralights.com:

How tough is the EDC TacticalTM?

"To get things going, we started by dropping this production EDC Tactical repeatedly from a height of 6 meters (20 feet) on to concrete, pavement and rocks. We then moved on to throwing the light at concrete, pavement and rocks for over an hour. The light still functions normally using the original battery. The glass lens did not break even with this severe abuse. Can your flashlight survive this kind of punishment?."

 

[red02]

As a rule won't consider any light that runs on CR123 cells, but I'm getting an Ra. In the year I've been lurking I've never seen so many positive reviews of the Ra, so I have to see what all the hubub is about, I suggest you do too.

 

[abarth_1200]

Why do you think the Quark is so cheap, its not like your buying the HDS name, really. Your buying the CS the reliablity and the bulletproofness of the RA, plus I dont think the Quark could run for over an hour on its high setting, its only 19 lumens more, nobody could detect that with their own eyes

 

[chanjyj]

The quark mini, while a fantastic light is kind of like quarks budget line. If anything I would get a quark regular, but I think the RA is a good choice. Also I personally dislike titanium when it comes to twisty lights because of the galling. If you want titanium get a clicky.

In general, it sounds like a clicky will better suit your needs anyway.

I don't know about the mini(s) being quark's budget line. I thought they were simply - mini versions of the bigger counterparts.

The way I saw it was they served different purposes. Mini Quarks as secondary lights or EDCs to stuff in your pocket/hang around your neck and Regular Quarks to put on your belt as your primary light.

In summary:
Regular/Tactical Quark: Primary Light
Mini Quark: Secondary Light

But you've presented an interesting scenario. The price of the regular quarks ARE more expensive. Then again, for a primary light I want 18650s, for runtime alone. CR123s are too expensive and RCR123s runtime don't cut it.

 

[chanjyj]

As a rule won't consider any light that runs on CR123 cells, but I'm getting an Ra. In the year I've been lurking I've never seen so many positive reviews of the Ra, so I have to see what all the hubub is about, I suggest you do too.

It's the same here. My primary lights revolve around 18650s.

However it has to be accepted that for the light to be small we need 10440/14500/CR123. Right now my "stuff in the pocket" light is a Fenix LD01 running on 10440 (steroids?). But I'd like to have a tougher light to stuff in my pocket.

As it is, I used to carry a TK30 in my bag.. as an EDC. Time to slim down.

The hype about the RA? I really don't know. And the answers so far aren't really enlightening.
I mean, yes, the RA is good, but why SO good? People can say their SureFires never die. The RA never dies. Point taken and point agreed upon. But I can also say my TK10 has never died and my TA21 has never died too. And I doubt few of the people torture their lights like me.

 

[red02]

The Ra has an optional 18650 tube...

 

[chanjyj]

From www.ralights.com:

How tough is the EDC TacticalTM?

"To get things going, we started by dropping this production EDC Tactical repeatedly from a height of 6 meters (20 feet) on to concrete, pavement and rocks. We then moved on to throwing the light at concrete, pavement and rocks for over an hour. The light still functions normally using the original battery. The glass lens did not break even with this severe abuse. Can your flashlight survive this kind of punishment?."

Thanks fyrstormer, I've seen it. My first post in this forum referenced it too.

This is the abuse I want my light to take. I am wondering though, if the use of titanium can negate the fact that the Quark Mini 123 has thinner walls.

 

[chanjyj]

The Ra has an optional 18650 tube...

Yeah.. then it becomes a "BIG" light again

No. What I want for this purchase is a small light. A secondary light, or even a tertiary one. So my choices are 10440/14500/CR123.
Of these, I've come to the conclusion CR123 (Even RCR123 which I plan to use) provides the best weight and size vs output and runtime ratio.

 

[chanjyj]

Sounds to me like you need the RA. I have a QMini123 (not Ti) that I like, but it would not be nearly as tough. Thin walls help keep it small, maybe less than half the volume of the RA, but don't go throwing it about. In a way it's almost like apples and oranges. Both make light and use the same battery, but abilities are way different. I sure someone with both lights will provide a better comparison.

Geoff

Thanks Geoff. I've been wondering if the use of Titanium negates the negative effects of the thin walls though? (That's why I'm only looking at the Ti and not the regular mini).

The RA is tough I agree. But I can buy almost 3 Ti Quark Mini 123s for the price of 1 RA!

 

[chanjyj]

Why do you think the Quark is so cheap, its not like your buying the HDS name, really. Your buying the CS the reliablity and the bulletproofness of the RA, plus I dont think the Quark could run for over an hour on its high setting, its only 19 lumens more, nobody could detect that with their own eyes

Agreed it's only 19 lumens more. Then why almost 3x the price?

Reliablity and bulletproofness of the RA? I don't know. I'd agree it's one tough light but I don't think the Quark falls far behind.

I'm still inclined to think I'm buying the brand. Hopefully more can chime in and enlighten me. And I hope there will be some reports here of either torch dying.

 

[Pericles]

I own both a Ra Clicky and a Quark Mini 123. However, my Ra is the Executive 120 and my Mini is aluminum. I don't EDC either of them.

The Ra is too bulky and heavy for pocket carry; I don't like to use a holster. This is my preference. Others, of course may feel differently.

The Q Mini has so much slack in the threads that it feels like the head is about to fall off. This seems to be a common problem. There is a thread here somewhere on that topic. I have eight lights from 4sevens and this is the only one I'm disappointed with. If you are interested in a Q Mini, I would recommend the AA model. With a 14500 cell it will produce about the same amount iof light as the 123. But, it will also work just fine on a standard AA cell.

As to the toughness issue, I agree with what's been said above: the Ra lights are about as tough as a light can be. If my life were riding on it, I would endure the bulk in my pocket, or break down and use a holster and carry the Ra.

However, there is the oft stated axiom, "one is none and two is one." This suggests the other CPF axiom, "buy both." In this case I would point out that if you opted for the 120 lumen EDC Tactical, at $109.00 plus a Q mini AA at $39.00 (less CPF discount) you could buy both and still come in under the price of the Ra 170. While a 50 lumen difference seems like a lot, you'd be surprised at how small it really is.

I hope this helps.

Peri

 

[jugornot]

Thanks Geoff. I've been wondering if the use of Titanium negates the negative effects of the thin walls though? (That's why I'm only looking at the Ti and not the regular mini).

The RA is tough I agree. But I can buy almost 3 Ti Quark Mini 123s for the price of 1 RA!

No the titanium is not enough to make up the difference. It will dent. As much as I like my quark mini ti, it hangs around my neck. Not even in my pocket. So if those are your two choices my quark mini loses out.

 

[red02]

Thanks Geoff. I've been wondering if the use of Titanium negates the negative effects of the thin walls though? (That's why I'm only looking at the Ti and not the regular mini).

The RA is tough I agree. But I can buy almost 3 Ti Quark Mini 123s for the price of 1 RA!

You get what you pay for...

 

[chanjyj]

I own both a Ra Clicky and a Quark Mini 123. However, my Ra is the Executive 120 and my Mini is aluminum. I don't EDC either of them.

The Ra is too bulky and heavy for pocket carry; I don't like to use a holster. This is my preference. Others, of course may feel differently.

The Q Mini has so much slack in the threads that it feels like the head is about to fall off. This seems to be a common problem. There is a thread here somewhere on that topic. I have eight lights from 4sevens and this is the only one I'm disappointed with. If you are interested in a Q Mini, I would recommend the AA model. With a 14500 cell it will produce about the same amount iof light as the 123. But, it will also work just fine on a standard AA cell.

As to the toughness issue, I agree with what's been said above: the Ra lights are about as tough as a light can be. If my life were riding on it, I would endure the bulk in my pocket, or break down and use a holster and carry the Ra.

However, there is the oft stated axiom, "one is none and two is one." This suggests the other CPF axiom, "buy both." In this case I would point out that if you opted for the 120 lumen EDC Tactical, at $109.00 plus a Q mini AA at $39.00 (less CPF discount) you could buy both and still come in under the price of the Ra 170. While a 50 lumen difference seems like a lot, you'd be surprised at how small it really is.

I hope this helps.

Peri

Thanks alot Peri. After reading about your encounter with loose threads I'm starting to look at the Quark with a wary eye :laughing:

Yes, I'd buy 2 if I can. But I'd rather not, and while what you suggested is a good compromise to those who are not demanding of their lights, I think the 50 lumens is important to me so not really an option.

Do you remember the Fenix T1 torture tests? That will (obviously) be the limit I will push the light to. I believe the RA can also stand up to it. Would you say the Quark Mini 123 is able to (assuming Ti instead of Alu)?

The Quark Mini (AA) won't fulfill my needs, I need runtime at full output above 150 lumens. While a 14500 can do it, the runtime certainly won't be near to a RCR123 I think?

Okay. I'd better clarify my needs.
1. Small enough to carry WITHIN a pocket (standard pants pocket), or around the neck.
2. Able to TAKE OVER the role of a primary light should the primary fail:
- For at least 60mins
- At a level above or equal to 150 lumens.
3. Can withstand abuse to the level of what I dosed out to my Fenix TK10 daily sometime back (that's my benchmark) [http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2957168&postcount=18, http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2957174&postcount=20]
4. Price is justified (okay, I know this is somewhat controversial so I am prepared to ignore this point if need be)

 

[chanjyj]

No the titanium is not enough to make up the difference. It will dent. As much as I like my quark mini ti, it hangs around my neck. Not even in my pocket. So if those are your two choices my quark mini loses out.

Thank you! I needed a firm statement like "Ti is not good enough".
Was looking for someone with practical experience with Ti lights, since I have zilch.

Anybody has an alternative to the RA? I'm open to suggestions

 

[pwatcher]

Still another vote for the Ra for the toughness you require!

As for alternatives, a McGizmo Haiku would be high on my short list, but it could be painful for some people to see it dinged up from rough usage.

OTH, being titanium, it's far easier to "repair" scrapes/scratches than knurled aluminum.

Yes, the price of admission is high, but it will hold its value better than most lights on the market!