Curious about some of Surefire's run times ?

[Brasso]

I have a couple of Surefires. But looking at their product lineup, some things seem out of whack in regards to run times.

For instance:

The L1 gets 1.5 hrs on Hi at 65 lumens with a single 123. The E1B gets 110 lumens for 1.5 hrs. How can the E1b get more lumens at the same run time?

Or why does the E2L get 11 hrs on 60 lumens with 2 CR123's, but the L1 only gets 1.5 hrs at 65 lumens on one CR123? One would think that either the L1 should get about 4 to 5 hrs runtime on Hi, or the E2L only 3 to 4.

I've picked these two lights out as an example, but this question goes across the entire line to some degree. I realize that there must be some reason for this. Is it the emitter? The driver? When all the lights are at the same general price point, you would think the same level of hardware would be used.

Can someone edjumacate me?

 

[cm_mtb]

The E1B probably uses a newer, more efficient emitter.

My understanding is that using two batteries is more efficient because there is less load on the cells, which is at least part of the reason why the E2L is much more efficient than the L1, E1L, and E1B.

 

[Brasso]

That makes sense. But does it really make that much of a difference?

 

[cm_mtb]

The E2L actually runs for 6 hours, not 11, but that is still a lot better than the L1.

 

[GarageBoy]

This is why I'm hoping the LX1 is better regulated

 

[Dude Dudeson]

Surefire is awesome with their lumen ratings, but they border on flat out lying with their runtimes.

 

[ebow86]

I believe surefire's runtime rating;s is pretty accurate and honest on it's incandescent light's, but I do think they are pretty optimistic with their LED runtimes, although I wouldn't go so far as to say they are flat out lying .

 

[red02]

They will list the runtime to a certain condition. Say 50lm, or 1lm or something else. A little trickery and market gimmicks maybe, not really the complete picture, definitely but far from outright lying.

The runtime on my Saint with AAs is dead on (the only SF model I've tested...).

 

[Roger999]

I think it may be a typo on the E2L, they used to have "tactical runtime" and "total useful runtime", tactical runtime being till output drops below 50lumens, total runtime includes the output even at 2lumens. Prior to the new LED heads, some of the lights had total useful runtime, eg G2L used to be rated at something like 11 hours, now they put tactical runtime on all lights except the E1L.

 

[Dude Dudeson]

To those accusing me of accusing Surefire of lying about runtimes - DID YOU (yes you did) miss the part where I said they BORDER ON lying about runtimes?

I did NOT flat out accuse them of this. I merely pointed out that they put out rather optimistic specs on this...

Reality is hard for people to digest I guess. Reality is everyone pumps their "stuff", and reality is that it seldom meets the hype.

Then people who've invested money become either fanboys or haters.

Just like politics.

Pathetic.

 

[ebow86]

To those accusing me of accusing Surefire of lying about runtimes - DID YOU (yes you did) miss the part where I said they BORDER ON lying about runtimes?

I did NOT flat out accuse them of this. I merely pointed out that they put out rather optimistic specs on this...

Reality is hard for people to digest I guess. Reality is everyone pumps their "stuff", and reality is that it seldom meets the hype.

Then people who've invested money become either fanboys or haters.

Just like politics.

Pathetic.

Explain to me how someone can "border" on lying? Either you are lying, or you aren't, there's nothing in between. No one accused you of anything. And why are you getting so hostile man? All that was said is that we wouldn't consider surefire to be lying. No reason to go off the handle because you think someone didn't read you comment the way you intended it or they misinterpreted it. Geez.

 

[pjandyho]

Hey Dude, from what I see no one is accusing you. I think you are way too sensitive. Cool it.

 

[fabienne]

I think it may be a typo on the E2L, they used to have "tactical runtime" and "total useful runtime", tactical runtime being till output drops below 50lumens, total runtime includes the output even at 2lumens. Prior to the new LED heads, some of the lights had total useful runtime, eg G2L used to be rated at something like 11 hours, now they put tactical runtime on all lights except the E1L.

I would agree more with Roger999 that runtime used to be more detailed in explanation and not many people understand about the concept of regulated output, and unregulated output, the same concept as tactical runtime and total useful runtime, where one have to dig more to know the whole truth. We didn't say lie, but usually it's called half-truth, where we have to dig deeper for the other half.

 

[angelofwar]

I think Surefire list's there runtimes the way they do to inform the general public, or "non-flasaholic".

Other Customers: "How long will this light run on a set of batteries?"
Surefire: "11-hours"

Flashaholic #1: "How long until this light drops out of regulation?"
Flashaholic #1: "What's the initial lumen out-put, and when does it start to drop below 80 Lumens?"
Flashaholic #2: "How Long until it drops below 10 lumens?"
Flashaholic: "What emitter does this use?"
Flashaholic: "What LED Bin is used in this light?"
Surefire: "Here's the 'Tactical' runtime, and 'Useful' Runtime"

Other Customers make up 95% of there purchases
Flashaholic's make up the other 5% (if that high).

It isn't lying, or even bordering on it. It's giving the average customer what they want to know...the warm fuzzy they get by an 11 hour "useful" runtime. Or giving COPS/Soldiers the warm fuzzy of a "Tactical Runtime".

They can take Inova's lead though, and publish Runtime/output charts/graphs on the back of there packaging, but it could/would cause delays, as they would have to switch packaging everytime they upgraded a model, per-se. But, that would be a big plus in my book for SF if they did that.

If you want flashaholic runtimes, that's what CPF is here for.

 

[NE450No2]

Runtimes with Incandescents is pretty easy to measure, ie how long does it glow in the dark...

With LED's the problem is that they Glow much longer, and get dimmer, but still "glow".

So there should be 2 numbers given. How long they go til say 50 lumens, and then how long they go until they no longer have a "useful" amount of lumens.

And then it must be decided how many low lumens are still useful???

I use an A2 Aviator most every night to wald through my dark house form my "Man Cave" to the bedroom, and I have used it in Texas, Idaho, California, Montana, Alaska, Canada, South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Botswana, in the "bush", on the planes, and in Motels, at all places in between, and I find the 3 lumens of its LED's most useful.

 

[ebow86]

Runtimes with Incandescents is pretty easy to measure, ie how long does it glow in the dark...

With LED's the problem is that they Glow much longer, and get dimmer, but still "glow".

So there should be 2 numbers given. How long they go til say 50 lumens, and then how long they go until they no longer have a "useful" amount of lumens.

And then it must be decided how many low lumens are still useful???

I use an A2 Aviator most every night to wald through my dark house form my "Man Cave" to the bedroom, and I have used it in Texas, Idaho, California, Montana, Alaska, Canada, South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Botswana, in the "bush", on the planes, and in Motels, at all places in between, and I find the 3 lumens of its LED's most useful.

NE450No2, Do you have the older A2 aviator or the newer round body with brighter LED's? And what color LED's? I have never used the older A2 but the new round body I have is putting out way more than 3 lumens even though that's what it's rated at. But regardless, I agree the LED flood is absolutely perfect for walking around the house at night or navigating outside, and it's great to know you have that 80 lumen blast on tap when you need it:thumbsup:

 

[Size15's]

Given that CPFers seem to want more detailed runtime information than SureFire provides; I am baffled as to why there are so few user-generated runtime charts. This seems especially absent from 'reviews'...One could almost conclude that we prefer to wallow in ignorance rather than dispell our uncertainty by producing and sharing performance data that allows accurate informed discussion and comparison.

That said, I would prefer all Flashlight manufactures to provide runtime charts for their products. If not on their packaging then on their websites and in their product instruction manuals.

Al

 

[gr8divas]

Well if you need good lumen rating such as Soulfire lights you might have to sacrifice the Runtime a bit...

 

[entoptics]

Selfbuilt (and others) show graphs. It can't be that hard for a major manufacturer. No need to put it on the packaging in this day and age, pretty much anyone and everyone can click a link.

Any flashlight manufacturer who doesn't list a true "Time To 50% Output" number is, IMHO, intentionally deceiving their customers. There is absolutely no excuse for not having/publishing this data other than a willful desire to mislead.

Is that "bordering on lying" or just "lying" or "honest". Either way, SureFire and many others are guilty.

I've heavily tested 2 Quarks, 1 NiteCore, 3 iTPs, and 2 EagleTacs. Every single one was within a couple percent of their stated runtime numbers. In the case of the Quark AA regular I'm currently testing, they actually UNDERESTIMATED their runtime by 25% (at least on Rayovac 4.0 LSD cells).

American manufacturers may be "all that" in terms of $$ (and presumably quality), but they sure as heck aren't particularly honest about runtimes. Maglite, Coast, and SureFire all quote runtimes which are RIDICULOUS, and obfuscate their emitter choices, regulation systems, and product specs in order to prevent knowledgeable folks from figuring out just how silly their claims are.

They know that very few folks have the time/resources to really do a Selfbuilt style test for themselves, so they have nothing to lose with their shady marketing.

Just my 2 cents of course...:shrug:

 

[civic77]

I agree with what size15 is saying about runtimes, I almost never buy a light til I can find out about their runtimes or if the company has a good reputation for giving fairly accurate runtimes.

CPF member Chao has tested several Surefire lights runtime on high and cpf member illum has a runtime index listed for some additional Surefire model runtimes. Thanks to both members and others as well who perform these time consuming test for providing this valuable info.