How come we hear so little of the Xeno E03 ???????????

[jasonck08]

Jason I emailed you a while ago with my address and where to send the new light engines and never heard back from you? Am I missing something?

Yes, I emailed you back a month ago saying that I don't just ship out 30 dollars worth of parts without getting the old ones back first. I need the old light engines so I can send them back to the supplier for credit.

I received my E03 Cool White XM-L, Awesome light!!! According to specs of the box it says 430 OTF Lms (I suppose only with 14500)...I really like how it performs....The only things I don´t like is the GITD (Glow in the Dark) silicon rubber tail cap, it lacks memory and the reverse clicky but for the money it is really very good (better than others at higher prices)...Question for Jason: Is there a way to have an standard black rubber tail cap one to replace the GITD? If it´s possible could you include it when ordering the NW?. Thanks!

490 OTF is what Xeno said they got with a freshly charged 14500 cell in an email to me. Output probably drops a little after a few minutes, hence the rating on the box. I don't have any black rubber tail cap boots. In the future I'll ask if Xeno has any. Thanks!

 

[SirJohn]

If anyone cares, I posted my review of this light on another forum. If people feel it is worthy, I can probably recreate it for this forum. Warning: it is very pic heavy if that concerns you.

 

[LED_Thrift]

Question: How 'warm' is the XML warm tint? They seem to be out of the XML neutral, but the warm is available. IIRC the XML neutral is a bit bluer than the XPG neutral, so I was wondering where the XML warm falls in the spectrum.

 

[hatman]

If anyone cares, I posted my review of this light on another forum. If people feel it is worthy, I can probably recreate it for this forum. Warning: it is very pic heavy if that concerns you.

Well done -- thanks!

 

[Cataract]

Very nice review. Makes me even more impatient for the neutrals to be back in stock...

 

[EngrPaul]

With 5/8" O-Rings

Very Happy

 

[weez82]

Please stop posting about your problem in public threads. Use email or pm's. From the info that you and Jason have posted, this sounds like your problem. Jason is/was trying to help you but you seem to not want it. If I was Jason I would tell you to bad, I've tried to help but you're not cooperating.

 

[SirJohn]

Back on topic: I took a few new quick outdoor beamshots and thought I would share.

Control

Fenix LD20 Q5 Turbo

E03 14500 High

 

[Newuser01]

I have just received a CW version of E03 and it is lovely. Floody pocket rocket is what I'm after, and this fits the bill.
But one thing bother me that I can't get a pocket clip for it.
I have seen some using other AA lights' clips but they seem rather crude! Do any one have better options?

newuser01

 

[Lightman2]

Jason you told me in Selfbuilt's thread on the XO3 (bold mine)



Its 117 ringit or +/- $40 US dollars to ship the 2 light engines to you. I emailed you and asked if you could just ship the light engines out to me and you never responded to my email. Of course it's your right to not ship me 2 good light engines without first determining if mine are indeed defective. How do you know I'm not scamming you and trying to get 2 extra light engines...

But the reality is, there are too many variable for it to be worth it to me to pay $40 to ship you my light engines.
1.) I don't know that the new lights really are any better and if they are not they are certainly not worth $40 for 2 of them to me. (BTW if they were reliable they are cool lights and they are worth more than what I paid for them... I can't remember $27)
2.) After paying $40 to send my defective light engines to you here are my risks:
- lost in outgoing Malaysia mail; pretty high here
- you look at my intermittant problem at a good moment and decide not to replace them.
- you replace them with the same cheap, easily breakable light engine
- you do fix them for me, mail them back but they get lost in the Malaysian mail.
- they don't get lost but I taxed for them coming back - intermittant and random. Could be $30
- everything goes according to plan. You send me back 2 good light engines, the lights work and you even pay my shipping both ways. Lots of money for you, ok for me though another 8 week wait on the lights.

I'm not saying its your fault Jason! But I'd love for Xeno to see this to get a better understanding of how much it costs to repair a tarnished reputation. They obviously know the reliability of the light sucks. Why else would they make a video with some Chinese guy dropping it on the ground 30 times.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZrH2...er_profilepage


And if they know that "some" of their light engines are bad but the new ones are good, and they want to try and fix their reputation as implied in the video, they would be absolute morons to make you produce the faulty ones before sending out new good ones for free, postage paid with an apology and a coupon to try a new xeno product further down the line.

Support quality products and ban crap before people start putting in their sig lines "10 is 1 and 5 is none!"

You guys should do some more emails or Private Messaging

 

[rickypanecatyl]

My comments are on topic. At the same time I am not blaming the dealer at all. His offer is generous though not good for my situation.

On topic, when I am interested in a new light I care about the reliability. Some may disagree with me, but when discussing a new light of this forum reliability is the most valuable opinion owners can offer. I know many would disagree with the statement "MOST" important, but I think most of you would agree that it is important.
Of course we all want to know run time, lumens and lux but with the new ANSI ratings becoming more popular that is getting easier to know. I'm not suggesting we just trust those ratings but there is not even a rating for reliability/durability/longevity. It would be extremely difficult to come up with a rating system for those issues.
This forum can be a bit like consumer reports where a ball park idea of reliability can be gathered from hundreds of users. It is a valuable tool of this forum!

Please don't stop posting both good and bad experiences with your lights because your afraid of stepping on someone's toes. If your light fell from 30' on the blacktop and still works prospective buyers should know that! If if stopped working after a fall from 3' prospective buyers should know that as well. Mine experience was interesting as I bought 2 of the same light and they were both dropped from about 3' and they both had the same experience - they stopped working but hitting both of them gets both of them to work intermitantly.

rickypayne this is not the place for your problems and as others have asked please use pm or e-mail for further personal issues. If you feel you have a jeer, and have followed all procedures, then post a jeer however as of now it seems a jeer is not proper......It seems as if you have been offered a few options by the maker.

To sum it up leave your comments out of this thread that are not on topic please.

 

[Robocop]

Rickypayne you either seem to be missing my point or are simply being stubborn. I will give you the benefit of the doubt once however choose your next reply wisely.

Your comments myself and other members have problems with are not those about the performance of the product but more so your comments of your problems with an individual. Much of your postings above have very little to do with anything other than a personal business transaction and as such do not belong in this thread.

Please understand what I have asked you to do and to sum it all up do not attempt to justify any further off topic, or improper, comments in this thread. It is not up for discussion any further and having explained myself more clearly I will not issue any further warnings. Any further violations from yourself will result in some time away from CPF without any explanation needed. You do seem to be an educated person and as such I believe you understand the nature of my request.

 

[EngrPaul]

How many instances of unreliability have occurred? Any with the XM-L?

I have 3 examples so far and the build quality is the tops. The components are excellent quality and the workmanship leaves nothing to be desired.

I can buy a more expensive Jetbeam for instance and get a light with mismatched body colors, a wobbly head with oversized o-rings to try to compensate, and no thermal grease under the emitter board.

 

[Cataract]

With 5/8" O-Rings

Very Happy

Nice Setup!

Back on topic: I took a few new quick outdoor beamshots and thought I would share.

Control

Fenix LD20 Q5 Turbo

E03 14500 High

Aaaaahhh! THAT's what I want to see! I would still prefer a low/med/high interface or last mode memory, but this picture screams it's a must-have.


I think that seeing both manufacturer and dealer supporting their product -and also see that they read other people's comments- shows some encouraging dedication.

 

[selfbuilt]

I think the E03 is great little light, for both flashaholics (especially on 14500 Li-ion or primary lithium 14505) and the general public (on standard cells).

Although I only tested the Cree XP-G version, my experience of XM-L lights to date lets me draw a couple of tentative conclusions:

First. you should reasonably expect greater output for equivalent runtime on Max with the XM-L, especially on 14500 Li-ion/14505 lithium. However, due to the floodier beam of the XM-L, this may not appear too noticeable at a distance (i.e. will be more noticeable at close/confined distances - where you are frankly unlikely to be using Max).

Lower levels are likely to be the same efficiency as the XP-G emitter. I don't know whether output will be increased compared the XP-G version, but the difference isn't likely to be huge, in either output or runtime (but will again be less throwy on the XM-L).

Although hard to say more without directly testing both, I would recommend you choose between the XM-L and XP-G versions on the basis on the beam pattern (i.e. flood vs throw, respectively).

 

[cccpull]

I think the E03 is great little light, for both flashaholics (especially on 14500 Li-ion or primary lithium 14505) and the general public (on standard cells).

Although I only tested the Cree XP-G version, my experience of XM-L lights to date lets me draw a couple of tentative conclusions:

First. you should reasonably expect greater output for equivalent runtime on Max with the XM-L, especially on 14500 Li-ion/14505 lithium. However, due to the floodier beam of the XM-L, this may not appear too noticeable at a distance (i.e. will be more noticeable at close/confined distances - where you are frankly unlikely to be using Max).

Lower levels are likely to be the same efficiency as the XP-G emitter. I don't know whether output will be increased compared the XP-G version, but the difference isn't likely to be huge, in either output or runtime (but will again be less throwy on the XM-L).

Although hard to say more without directly testing both, I would recommend you choose between the XM-L and XP-G versions on the basis on the beam pattern (i.e. flood vs throw, respectively).

Are you saying the E03 XM-L will have similar throw as the XP-G on high?

 

[weez82]

Are you saying the E03 XM-L will have similar throw as the XP-G on high?

He is saying it should have more output on high. More output doesnt always = more throw. I dont have the XP-G version so I can only comment on the XM-L version. It isnt a thrower. Here is a comparison shot by wacbzz http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/sh...-(CW-NW-WW!)&p=2659875&viewfull=1#post2659875

 

[Zeruel]

Has anyone found a clip compatible with E03?

 

[selfbuilt]

He is saying it should have more output on high.

That's right - it's hard to know how the two lights compare without directly measuring them. But again, in my experience, the increase in output by going from XP-G to XM-L is not enough to compensate for the loss in throw due to larger emitter size (assuming comparable optics are being used).

If you change the optics you could possibly make that a bit better - or worse (i.e. I understand from some comments here that the XM-L reflector is shallower? that would reduce throw further). Typically, the only way to improve the throw with XM-L would be to go with a larger head and reflector.

So, if you were shining the light at a distant target, the high-output XM-L version could very well seem dimmer than the lower-output (but relatively throwier) XP-G version. But if you are shining them both on the ground in front of you, the XM-L version will definitely look brighter on Max.

 

[Sci Fii]

Selfbuilt's analysis is correct. I have both versions and the XP-G throws farther and the XM-L is clearly brighter up close. I prefer the XP-G but I can see how many will like the XM-L.