Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, MORE!

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, MORE!

Warning: pic heavy, as usual.
Welcome to my first review of lights featuring the new XP-G Gen2 (aka XP-G2) emitter. :party:

According to Cree, these XP-G2 emitters are supposed to have "up to 20% higher lumen output" over XP-G (more on that later ...). Foursevens has started swapping in XP-G2 to their existing XP-G line up. Note that with the recent name change from 4Sevens to Foursevens, the model numbers for all their lights have changed as well. In this case, I have the Foursevens QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR, formerly the Quark Tactical 123) and the QB2A (2xAA/NiMH, formerly the Quark Turbo AA-2).

Let's see how they do … :whistle:

QTLC004.jpg

QTLC005.jpg


QB2A009.jpg

QB2A010.jpg


Manufacturer Reported Specifications: (note: as always, these are simply what the manufacturer provides – scroll down to see my actual testing results).

Common Specs:
  • LED: CREE XP-G2
  • Current Regulation
  • Smart Circuit for Rechargeable Batteries
  • Reverse-Polarity Protection
  • Body & Bezel Material: Type-III hard-anodized aircraft-grade aluminum
  • Lens Material: Impact-resistant glass, sapphire coating, antireflective coating
QTLC (formerly the Quark Q123)
  • Maximum Output: 205 lumens
  • Battery: 1xCR123A
  • Voltage range: 0.9V-4.2V
  • Brightness Levels: Moonlight: 0.2 lumens, 15 days, 1ma / Low: 4 lumens, 2.5 days, 10ma / Medium: 22 lumens, 13 hrs, 50ma / High: 85 lumens, 2.7 hrs, 250ma / Maximum: 205 lumens, 0.8 hrs, 700ma
  • Special Modes: Strobe: 205 lumens, 1.6 hrs / SOS / Beacon: 0-205 lumens, 12 hrs
  • Spot Beam: Angle: 11°/Diameter at 3mm: 580mm
  • Flood Beam: Angle: 71.9°/Diameter at 3mm: 4.3M
  • Reflector: Textured
  • Dimensions: Length: 3.2 inches/Body diameter: 0.86 inches/Head diameter: 0.86 inches/Weight (without batteries): 1.4 oz
  • Accessories: Battery, lanyard, split ring for keychain attachment, spare o-ring, holster, finger-grip
  • MSRP: $59
QB2A (formerly the Quark Turbo AA-2)
  • Maximum Output: 205 Lumens
  • Batteries: 2xAA
  • Voltage Range: 0.9V-4.2V
  • Brightness Levels: Moonlight: 0.2 lumens, 30 days, 1ma / Low: 4 lumens, 5 days, 10ma / Medium: 22 lumens, 24 hrs, 50ma / High: 85 lumens, 5 hrs, 250ma / Maximum: 205 lumens, 1.3 hrs, 700ma
  • Special Modes: Strobe: 205 lumens, 2.5 hrs / SOS / Beacon: 0-205 lumens pulse, 18 hrs
  • Reflector: Smooth
  • Spot Beam: Angle: 9.5°/Diameter at 3mm: 580mm
  • Flood Beam: Angle: 59.1°/Diameter at 3mm: 3.4M
  • Dimensions: Length: 6.2 inches/Body diameter: 0.9 inches/Head diameter: 1.2 inches/Weight (without batteries): 3 oz
  • Accessories: Batteries, lanyard, split ring for keychain attachment, spare o-ring, holster, hand-grip
  • MSRP: $75
Interesting tid-bit here: Foursevens' specs do not appear to be updated for the XP-G2 (i.e., these specs are unchanged from the original XP-G models under the Foursevens label). :whistle:

QTLC012.jpg


QTLC007.jpg

QTLC008.jpg


QB2A012.jpg

QB2A011.jpg


Packaging for the Foursevens brand has also been updated from the earlier 4Sevens models. The lights now come in a thin gray cardboard box, similar to the original black-box Quark models (although the cardboard is much thinner and more easily damaged now).

Inside the presentation-style box, you will find a clamshell plastic case with the light and all bundled extras. Both lights came with batteries (Foursevens-branded CR123A, or Duracell alkaline AA), good quality lanyard, split ring for keychain attachment, spare o-rings, decent quality holster with velcro closing flap, and appropriate size rubber hand-grip.

I will focus here on the general build and common interface of the two lights, and then delve into the detailed testing results for each model.

QTLC
QTLC018.jpg

QTLC003.jpg

QTLC017.jpg


QB2A
QB2A026.jpg

QB2A008.jpg

QB2A006.jpg

QB2A001.jpg


Both lights have a glossy black finish (hard anodized), with no obvious chips or damage on my samples. Both lights have a generous amount of knurling to help with grip, and the knurling is of reasonable aggressiveness. Lettering is bright white and sharp against the black background.

The QTLC looks a lot like the original Quark 123, but without the pocket clip. The QB2A has a removable pocket clip secured in place by its own cover/grip ring (i.e. unscrew the ring to remove the clip, screw back down to cover the gap where the clip attaches).

The QTLC has holes on the side of the tailcap for a split-ring or lanyard attachment. The larger QB2A tailcap has a cut-out region of reasonable thickness. Both lights feature a protruding forward clicky switch (Foursevens "Tactical" interface, as explained below).

Both lights use square-cut screw threads (or more accurately, trapezoidal), at both ends of the battery tubes. Threads are not anodized on the body, but the tailcaps have anodization to provide tail lock-out. This arrangement is less secure for lock-out than dual anodizing, but it does allow you to reverse the direction of the body tube (useful for models with a clip, like the QB2A).

Emitters/Reflectors:

QTLC
QTLC002.jpg

QTLC015.jpg


QB2A
QB2A004.jpg

QB2A015.jpg


The QTLC has a medium orange peel (i.e., textured) reflector. The QB2A has larger head with smooth deep reflector for maximum throw. Both lights had well-centered reflectors on my samples. Visually, the XP-G2 doesn't look very different from a typical XP-G – except for a silver circuit board mask instead of green. I doubt the reflectors have changed any from the earlier XP-G models.

Note that the Cree specsheets report a lower emission angle for the XP-G2, down to 115 degrees (from 125 degrees on the XP-G). So there are likely to be some small beam pattern differences when used with the same reflector design.

Scroll down for specific beamshots of each model, relative to its class counterparts.

User Interface

Both lights use the standard Foursevens Tactical interface.

Turn the lights on/off by the tailcap switch – lightly press for momentary on, click for locked-on.

With the Tactical interface, you can configure the bezel loose/tight states to have one memorized level from the total mode set (i.e, head tight for one set mode, head loose for another). Available modes to select from when programming the states are Moonlight, Lo, Med, Hi, Turbo, SOS, Strobe, and Beacon mode, in sequence.

To reprogram the each bezel state, you need to loosen-tighten the head 4 times quickly, ending in the state you want to re-program. After 3 secs, the light will flash 3 times, and you can now advance through all the possible modes by soft-pressing or clicking off-on at the tailswitch. To select the mode you want memorized, wait 10 secs with the light on in that mode. The light will flash rapidly, signifying memorization of the mode state. It is now safe to turn off - it won't change unless you go through the programming mode again.

As always, please see my detailed examination of the build and user interface in my video overview:



Video was recorded in 720p, but YouTube typically defaults to 360p. Once the video is running, you can click on the configuration settings icon and select the higher 480p to 720p options. You can also run full-screen.

PWM/Strobe

There is no sign of PWM that I can see, at any output level – the lights appear to be current-controlled, as always. :)

QTLC-Strove.gif


Strobe is typical high-frequency "tactical" 12.5 Hz on my recent Foursevens samples.

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, except for any extended run Lo/Min modes (i.e. >12 hours) which are done without cooling.

I have devised a method for converting my lightbox relative output values (ROV) to estimated Lumens. See my How to convert Selfbuilt's Lighbox values to Lumens thread for more info.

-----------

QTLC Review

QTLC026.jpg

QTLC023.jpg

QTLC.jpg

From left to right: Duracell CR123A; Foursevens QTLC, Quark 123 Regular, Mini 123; Olight S10, Eagletac D25C Clicky; Jetbeam BC10; Sunwayman M11R.

All dimensions are given with no batteries installed:

Foursevens QTLC: Weight 36.4g, Length 84.1mm, Width (bezel) 22.1mm
Foursevens Quark Q123 Regular: Weight 39.9g, Length 82.5mm, Width (bezel) 22.0mm
Nitecore SENS CR: Weight: 23.4g, Length: 65.5mm, Width (bezel): 19.8mm
Nitecore EC1: Weight 43.0g, Length: 68.6mm, Width (bezel): 26.1mm
Olight S10: Weight 41.1g, Length: 70.6mm, Width (bezel): 23.0mm
Jetbeam BC10: Weight: 46.6g, Length: 90.3mm, Width (bezel): 23.2mm
Lumintop ED10: Weight: 21.5g, Length: 70.4mm, Width (bezel): 20.7mm

The QTLC is a reasonable size for the class.

Beamshots:

All lights are on Turbo/Max on 1x AW protected RCR in the first set of panels, followed by 1xCR123A in the second. Lights are about ~0.75 meter from a white wall (with the camera ~1.25 meters back from the wall). Automatic white balance on the camera, to minimize tint differences.

QTLC-RCR-Beam001.jpg
SENSCR-RCR-Beam001.jpg

EC1-RCR-Beam001.jpg
D25CXPG-RCR-Beam001.jpg


QTLC-RCR-Beam002.jpg
SENSCR-RCR-Beam002.jpg

EC1-RCR-Beam002.jpg
D25CXPG-RCR-Beam002.jpg


QTLC-RCR-Beam003.jpg
SENSCR-RCR-Beam003.jpg

EC1-RCR-Beam003.jpg
D25CXPG-RCR-Beam003.jpg


QTLC-RCR-Beam004.jpg
SENSCR-RCR-Beam004.jpg

EC1-RCR-Beam004.jpg
D25CXPG-RCR-Beam004.jpg


And now on primary 3V 1xCR123A:

QTLC-CR123A-Beam001.jpg
SENSCR-CR123A-Beam001.jpg

EC1-CR123A-Beam001-1.jpg
D25CXPG-CR123A-Beam001.jpg


QTLC-CR123A-Beam002.jpg
SENSCR-CR123A-Beam002.jpg

EC1-CR123A-Beam002-1.jpg
D25CXPG-CR123A-Beam002.jpg


QTLC-CR123A-Beam003.jpg
SENSCR-CR123A-Beam003.jpg

EC1-CR123A-Beam003-1.jpg
D25CXPG-CR123A-Beam003.jpg


QTLC-CR123A-Beam004.jpg
SENSCR-CR123A-Beam004.jpg

EC1-CR123A-Beam004-1.jpg
D25CXPG-CR123A-Beam004.jpg


Again, a fairly typical beam for this size light. Beam pattern doesn't seem very different from a standard XP-G-equipped light.

Throw/Output Summary Chart:

My summary tables are reported in a manner consistent with the ANSI FL-1 standard for flashlight testing. Please see http://www.flashlightreviews.ca/FL1.htm for a discussion, and a description of all the terms used in these tables. Effective July 2012, I have updated all my Peak Intensity/Beam Distance measures with a NIST-certified Extech EA31 lightmeter (orange highlights).

QTLC-FL1-Summary-1_zpse20c3331.gif


QTLC-FL1-Summary-2_zpsa0e31866.gif


Foursevens has done a good job keeping output consistent across primary CR123A and rechargeable Li-ion battery sources. However, as always, my estimated ANSI FL-1 lumens are higher than the Foursevens specs. But all my lights are tested in a consistent way, so the relative relationships in the tables still hold.

Output/Runtime Comparison:

QTLC-TurboRCR.gif

QTLC-HiRCR.gif

QTLC-MedRCR.gif


QTLC-TurboCR123A.gif

QTLC-HiCR123A.gif

QTLC-MedCR123A.gif


The QTLC is a good performer for the class and output level, but the XP-G2 doesn't appear to offer any obvious advantage over competing XP-G R5/S2 equipped lights. More on this in my comments at the end. :whistle:

-----------

QB2A Review

QB2A022.jpg

QB2A.jpg

From left to right: Duracell AA NiMH; Foursevens QB2A, Quark AA-2-X, Mini AA-2; Eagletac P20A2-II; Fenix LD20-R4; Nitecore EA2.

All dimensions are given with no batteries installed:

Foursevens QB2A: Weight 102.9g, Length 158mm, Width (bezel) 30.0mm
Eagletac D25A2: Weight: 54.8g, Length 148.5mm, Width (bezel): 21.0mm
Foursevens QAA-2 X (Tactical tailcap): Weight: 60.1g, Length: 149.1mm, Width (bezel) 22.0mm
Jetbeam PA20: Weight: 82.52g, Length: 160mm, Width (bezel) 22.6mm
Jetbeam BA20: Weight: 70.2g, Length: 156.4mm, Width (bezel) 23.2mm
Thrunite Neutron 2A: Weight: 76.4g, Length: 250mm, Width (bezel) 22.0mm

Beamshots:

All lights are on Max output on 2x Sanyo Eneloop AA NiMH. Lights are about ~0.75 meter from a white wall (with the camera ~1.25 meters back from the wall). Automatic white balance on the camera, to minimize tint differences.

Note: I have included a recent XP-G-equipped QB2A in the comparisons below. It is specifically labelled "QB2A XP-G". The new XP-G2-equipped QB2A is labelled "QB2A XP-G2".

QB2A-Beam001-1.jpg
QB2A-XPG001_zps7e845243.jpg

E2A-Beam001.jpg
D25A2-Ene-Beam001.jpg


QB2A-Beam002-1.jpg
QB2A-XPG002_zps1fd139ba.jpg

E2A-Beam002.jpg
D25A2-Ene-Beam002.jpg


QB2A-Beam003-1.jpg
QB2A-XPG003_zps7f3b3f8b.jpg

E2A-Beam003.jpg
D25A2-Ene-Beam003.jpg


QB2A-Beam004-1.jpg
QB2A-XPG004_zpsa8c30f45.jpg

E2A-Beam004.jpg
D25A2-Ene-Beam004.jpg


The XP-G2 version of the QB2A appears to throw a slightly tighter hotspot (i.e., more narrowly focused). Hard to tell from a single sample of each, though. In any case, the QB2A is one of the best throwing 2xAA lights I've tested to date.

Throw/Output Summary Chart:

My summary tables are reported in a manner consistent with the ANSI FL-1 standard for flashlight testing. Please see http://www.flashlightreviews.ca/FL1.htm for a discussion, and a description of all the terms used in these tables. Effective July 2012, I have updated all my Peak Intensity/Beam Distance measures with a NIST-certified Extech EA31 lightmeter (orange highlights).

UPDATE November 4, 2012: I've updated my summary table below with the results of an earlier stock Foursevens Quark AA-2 Turbo XP-G (identical to the QB2A XP-G model previously compared to here). See discussion at the end of the review.

QB2A-FL1-Summary-1.gif


Again, my estimated ANSI FL-1 lumens are higher than the Foursevens specs. But all my lights are tested in a consistent way, so the relative relationships in the table still hold.

Output/Runtime Comparison:

QB2A-HiEne_zpsf7cf79e2.gif

QB2A-MedEne_zpsd35e0e79.gif


QB2A-HiAlka.gif

QB2A-MedAlka.gif


QB2A-HiL91.gif


The first thing you are likely to notice above is that the XP-G2 version of the QB2A is not that much brighter or longer-lasting than the preceding XP-G version of the QB2A. :thinking:

On Hi or Turbo, the XP-G2 version of the QB2A is only ~4-6% brighter than the QB2A XP-G version, across most of the runs. Overall runtime is pretty much the same as well, with only a ~1-3% gain for the XP-G2 version on the modes tested (which is well within normal variation for a given model/emitter). I will discuss this limited output increase further in my comments at the end of the review.

---------

Potential Issues

Both my review samples show evidence the common "pre-flash" issue (i.e., when reset to a low output mode, the lights will sometimes come on with a brief high-intensity burst). This seems to occur mainly when you switch down to a lower output mode shortly after turning the light off in a higher mode. It is believed to be due some residual power remaining in the circuit for a short period of time after turning off (and has been around since the early days of the early Fenix, Olight and Foursevens models).

The tailcaps feature screw thread anodizing, so a physical lock-out is possible. However, this may not be as robust as lights where both the body and tailcap threads are anodized (i.e. a scratch to the tailcap threads may invalidate the lock-out). The body tubes are reversible in on these lights (i.e., identical threading), so you can reverse the pocket clip (when present) by switching the orientation.

Overall output with the new XP-G2 emitters does not appear to have increased much over typical XP-G emitters (see discussion below). But as usual with Foursevens, my estimated ANSI FL-1 lumens are higher than the reported output specs.

There was apparently some concern over available tint bins with the early XP-G2s. I haven't noticed anything unusual about my two samples. I would describe them as at the cooler end of cool white - but still within what I consider a normal acceptable range.

Preliminary Observations

XP-G2 vs XP-G

Before discussing the relative merits of the Foursevens lights, I thought I would explain the differences between these two classes of emitters – especially in terms of my output findings. I'm afraid the Cree marketing on the XP-G2 may be a bit misleading/confusing. "Increasing lumen output up to 20%" (relative to XP-G) is a phrase you are seeing lot of in their promotional material – it's even in the product data sheet.

But to be more technical, what has actually happened is that the XP-G2 delivers up to 20% more lumens per Watt than the classic XP-G of comparable output bin (see the Cree main XP-G2 product page). Lumens/W is the traditional measure of luminous efficacy, which is not the same thing as actual output (i.e., lumens, aka luminous flux). As an aside, they appear to have increased efficacy mainly by lowering the forward voltage (Vf) with the new die design.

What this means is that there is now more "headroom" on the new XP-G2 platform, and higher output XP-G2 emitters can ultimately be produced. Unfortunately, directly comparing back to XP-G is complicated by the more stringent testing and reporting measures Cree is now using for XP-G2 binning. XP-G emitters were previously output bin rated by luminus flux @350mA, @25 degree C. With the XP-G2, Cree has switched to a more representational (but more stringent) @85 degree C for binning purposes. This means that the XP-G2 output bins are actually brighter than the XP-G output bins with the same bin number. :shrug:

As a result, you have to be careful when looking up the spec tables to ensure you are comparing under the same conditions. If you do (i.e., compare both classes under the same 25 degrees C conditions), you will see that the new XP-G2 bins are exactly two bin steps brighter than the same bin number on XP-G. So a XP-G2 R3 is the same output bin as a XP-G R5, for example.

This will be confusing to many, as it now means that a typical XP-G2 R5 is – on average - ~13% brighter than a XP-G R5 (and so on, for the R3 and R4 bins). Of course, given the range within a bin, this also means that for any given specific XP-G2 sample could be anywhere from ~7-20% brighter than a comparably bin-numbered XP-G sample. This may be how they got that "up to 20% brighter" phrase. :rolleyes: You really have to think of these things statistically – the bins are a range, and you don't know where exactly in the range any given sample will fall.

And it doesn't stop there. What happens if you compare to the new XP-G2 R5 bin to XP-G S2 bin? In that case, you are only one bin step up now, which means a given XP-G2 R5 could be anywhere from ~1-14% brighter than a given XP-G S2 (on average, ~6-7% brighter). Note that the numbers above are based on the 350mA @25 degree C binning process specifically, but the general relationships should hold reasonably consistent across most drive levels in a regular flashlight.

Now, Foursevens (like most manufacturers) doesn't generally provide information on specific output bins in their lights (except for some limited edition runs). You will notice in my testing here that my XP-G2-equipped QB2A is only ~5% brighter than my XP-G-equipped QB2A. This suggests to me that my XP-G2 review light is likely only one bin step up from the earlier XP-G model. This may very well be why Foursevens didn't change the minimum specs for their lines when they went to XP-G2. :whistle:

UPDATE November 4, 2012: Given the single bin step difference on my QB2A samples, I strongly suspected my QB2A XP-G was a S2 output bin (but have no way to verify). I just picked up am old-stock model Foursevens Quark AA-2 Turbo (identical to the QB2A - it just has the earlier 4Sevens logo and model numbering). As you will see in the summary table, my QB2A XP-G was ~10% brighter overall than my Quark AA-2 Turbo XP-G. This would be consistent with a R5 output bin for the Quark AA-2 Turbo sample, and a S2 output bin for the QB2A, for example.

There is one other significant change between XP-G2 and XP-G – the emitter angle has dropped to 115 degrees from 125 degrees. As a result, you can expect to see some consistent beam differences when paired with the same secondary optic (i.e., when using the same reflector as a XP-G light). In my limited direct experience of the two QB2A lights, it seems like the XP-G2 equipped version has a smaller and more tightly-defined hotspot. This translates into increased throw in my testing (i.e., peak output was only ~4% higher on my QB2A XP-G2 sample, but lux @1m was ~16% higher than the XP-G version). :)

QB2A and QTLC lights

Although more evolutionary than revolutionary, I like the new updates to the venerable Quark line. Physically, the lights have gone through a number of revisions since their initial launch, and the feel and use is very good.

The lights also continue to come with a good number of extras – definitely a nice overall package. While I would like to see double-anodizing for the tail-threads, there is not much else to fault in the design – they are solid lights for their respective classes.

Note that this is my first review of a "Turbo" model from Foursevens, and I am impressed by how much throw you get for a 2xAA light. :thumbsup: The QB2A in particular feels comfortably "beefy" in the hand, with good grip and handling. Probably one of the better "throwy" options to consider in this class, if you don't want to step up to the larger 4xAA lights.

As explained above, the current XP-G2 upgrade added only a fairly nominal bump in output in my testing (with a more significant increase in throw). That might make the older XP-G versions a good buy, if you can still find any on close-out. :poke: Note however that my recent purchase of an old stock Quark AA-2 Turbo (earlier logo/labeling of the QB2A, but otherwise identical) was a clear two bin steps down for the new QB2A XP-G2 sample I reviewed here.

All in all, the XP-G2 is a better longer-term platform, and we will hopefully continue to see higher output bins coming. Definitely a nice update for those looking for more "throwy" options. :wave:

----

QTLC XP-G2 and QB2A XP-G2 provided by Foursevens.com for review.
 
Last edited:

Bwolcott

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 19, 2012
Messages
561
Location
California
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

excellent review thank you! I def prefer the extra throw
 

phantom23

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
2,044
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

I'm suprised how well tiny Nitecore EA2 with "old" emitter keeps up with QB2A in terms of throw and overall brightness/runtime.
 

MichaelW

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
1,789
Location
USA
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

This ANSI thing needs to stop, or they need to expand the window [at least double] when testing is done to determine maximum output. That way the rejected heat from the LED can't be greater than the body's dissipation ability.
That was very misleading of Cree & 4Sevens to say 20% more lumens, when they meant LPW.
So the only good things about this evolution of the Si3 'platform': slightly lower Vf, and reduced apparent size from larger dome. (and incremental improvements on light extraction, phosphor improvements)
oh and the xp-e2 should silence all those who keep nagging for the return of the xr-e. It is 2013, let it go.
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

I'm suprised how well tiny Nitecore EA2 with "old" emitter keeps up with QB2A in terms of throw and overall brightness/runtime.
Yes, the Explorer series are remarkably good throwers for the size. Of course, the only way it matches the throw of the XP-G-version of the QB2A is by being driven ~20% brighter initially (i.e., before step down occurs).

So the only good things about this evolution of the Si3 'platform': slightly lower Vf, and reduced apparent size from larger dome. (and incremental improvements on light extraction, phosphor improvements)
Yes, it seems like the main benefit of XP-G2 is that it provides more "headroom" to produce higher outputs bins. In terms of XP-G, except for the occasional "premium" S2 batch, they seem to have been largely tapped out around R5 for quite some time now. But based on the Cree specs, the current XP-G2 R5 is really just the next bin up from the XP-G S2. :shrug:
 

THE_dAY

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
1,818
Location
sfv, california
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

Thanks for another excellent review.
Your observations on XPG/XPG2 were extremely helpful in understanding the differences!
 

Burgess

Flashaholic
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
6,425
Location
USA
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

Great work here, Selfbuilt !


:goodjob::kewlpics::thanks:
_
 

shelm

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 8, 2011
Messages
2,047
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

Very good review, insightful, helpful!
Thank you very much!
 

phantom23

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
2,044
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

Yes, the Explorer series are remarkably good throwers for the size. Of course, the only way it matches the throw of the XP-G-version of the QB2A is by being driven ~20% brighter initially (i.e., before step down occurs).
But it's not much diommer after stepdown, with still very impressive runtime. I think that with XP-G2 EA2 would smash QB2A in basically every category. Unfortunately Nitecore isn't very keen to replace emitters in their flashlights.
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

But it's not much diommer after stepdown, with still very impressive runtime. I think that with XP-G2 EA2 would smash QB2A in basically every category. Unfortunately Nitecore isn't very keen to replace emitters in their flashlights.
It's true the EA2 is a good throw platform. But that light steps down >25% from its peak ANSI FL-1 output (reported here), so I would expect throw to be similarly reduced by a comparable amount.
 

Mr Floppy

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 19, 2007
Messages
2,065
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

Ahh, thanks. Finally understood the bin steps. It gets confusing when you take into account the new XP-E R4 or XP-E HEW which seemed like it was just following on from the old XP-E R3. I don't really understand why Cree are marketing the G2 this way. The 20% figure is very misleading.
 

SuLyMaN

Enlightened
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
326
Location
Light years away from you!
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

Sorry if I keep repeating myself over and over, but your reviews are truly phenomenal and you do answer questions which is awesome :)
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

I don't really understand why Cree are marketing the G2 this way. The 20% figure is very misleading.
Well, I can understand why they have switched to the more stringent bining process (i.e., 350mA @85 degrees C is more representational of the real world than 25 degrees C was). But I agree that "up to 20%" figure is not very helpful.

Sorry if I keep repeating myself over and over, but your reviews are truly phenomenal and you do answer questions which is awesome :)
Thanks, glad to hear folks are finding them useful.

As an aside, this is the first time I've reviewed a Quark "Turbo" model (i.e., the QB2A, which directly replaces the old Quark AA-2 Turbo). It definitely seems to be an excellent choice for those looking for max throw in the 2xAA format.
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

I've updated this review with the results of an earlier stock Foursevens Quark AA-2 Turbo XP-G that I just picked up. Note that this light is identical to the QB2A XP-G model previously compared to here (i.e., it is just the older logo/labeling).

QB2A-FL1-Summary-1.gif


Given the single bin step difference between my QB2A samples, I strongly suspected my QB2A XP-G was a S2 output bin (but have no way to verify). As you can see in the summary table, my QB2A XP-G was ~10% brighter overall than my Quark AA-2 Turbo XP-G. This would be consistent with a R5 output bin for the Quark AA-2 Turbo sample, and a S2 output bin for the QB2A, for example.

It thus seems reasonable that you could expect one or two bin steps up with the QB2A XP-G compared to the earlier QB2A/Quark AA-2 Turbo XP-G models. :wave:
 

roadkill1109

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
2,309
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

Nice review as always!

Would you know if they will be selling the heads separately? Would be nice to upgrade the head of my current EDC without having to end up again with another "spare" AA2 tube.
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

Would you know if they will be selling the heads separately? Would be nice to upgrade the head of my current EDC without having to end up again with another "spare" AA2 tube.
I don't know what their plans are in that regard. But I've always found it useful when makers make various other body parts available separately.
 

OneBigDay

Enlightened
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
406
Location
Minneapolis, MN
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

Thank You selfbuilt for the great explanation of XP-G vs. XP-G2, especially with regard to how the bins relate to each other.

My only experience so far with XP-G2 is a nailbender P60 dropin. I was very surprised with how well it throws for a standard P60 reflector, but to my eyes the hotspot was also larger than a typical XP-G P60. The XP-G2 hotspot was fatter than an XP-G, but still narrower than the XM-L. I'll give you that this is completely non scientific, but that is my first impression. I'll have to pay more attention to what you and others see because from what you have described here my dropin example is not exactly what I would expect to see.

Thanks again for the great review!
 

RBH

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Messages
186
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

Would the QB2A and Eneloops be a good recommendation for a friend that needs a light to check their dogs out behind their house out to 100 yards. My G5 does a good job at 100 yards, but wouldn't the Eneloops be safer for a non enthusiast than the 18650.

Thanks Bruce
 

selfbuilt

Flashaholic
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
6,936
Location
Canada
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

Would the QB2A and Eneloops be a good recommendation for a friend that needs a light to check their dogs out behind their house out to 100 yards. My G5 does a good job at 100 yards, but wouldn't the Eneloops be safer for a non enthusiast than the 18650.
The G5 is higher output and throwier than the QB2A, but I would think the QB2A would be a fine choice for a non-flashaholic at that distance. As you say, NiMH is a safer for the general user.
 

RBH

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Messages
186
Re: Foursevens XP-G2 Review: QTLC (1xCR123A/RCR) & QB2A (2xAA) RUNTIMES, BEAMSHOTS, M

Thanks for the reply. I think the QB2A will be the light I recommend.
 

Latest posts

Top