I can't tell the difference between p60 and p61

[bobbagum]

Having just bought a p61 lamp, after installing it in a g2 and putting in new batteries, I really can't see the difference that much, I see that it's brighter, and it feels more hot and my eyes hurts more, but I really can't see the situation in the real world where I would need the p61 over the p60.

Considering the cost to the runtime, looks like the law of diminishing returns is at work here.; the p60 seems to be at the sweet spot between brightness/runtime... what are your thoughts?

So in my next upgrade what should I be looking at if I wanted more brightness? G3 or LEDs?

 

[bobbagum]

Here's the beamshots

Both were installed in G2 and a set of new batteries

 

[scott.cr]

It IS fairly difficult to tell the diff between Surefire's "standard" and "high output" lamps at first blush. A lot of people (myself included) totally expect to see a major difference in output. I think most of us are looking at the brightness of the beam's hotspot.

I tested this with my Sper Scientific lux meter several times. Surefire's high-output lamps have much brighter spill light than the standard lamps. The hotspot is brighter on the machine, but doesn't seem so to the naked eye. But then, I have only used the high-output lights for wall hunting and haven't really used them in a practical sense (partially because when I need my lights for practical uses, 20 minutes of runtime isn't enough).

 

[a99raptors]

My P61 has a bigger hotspot, but the range is about the same between the two. Definitely brighter though. Maybe your P60 is just better than others? I've tried three of my own, and one of my P60 is brighter and whiter than the other two.

 

[BIGIRON]

CPF legend has it that the p61 provides a greater "wall of light" for tactical purposes. ScottCR's post kind of verifies that.

 

[ampdude]

It absolutely does. I have a P61 in my C2 that I keep by the nightstand and it provides a great big hot spot compared to the P60. The P60 is a perfectly capable lamp, but the P61 makes it much easier to quickly identify what you're looking at.

Several times I have put a P60 in my nightstand light, but I keep going back to the P61 because it's just that much better for that particular purpose.

I don't think anyone will argue that the P60 isn't a better general usage lamp assembly or that it isn't closer to the sweet spot of lumens per watt in xenon halogen lighting.

 

[SunStar]

I would recommend using the P61 for about a month in various applications. Don't use it sparingly... use it like you would the P60. Then go back to the P60 and you will get a great contrast of the differences once you've become accustomed to the P61.

For me, its the P61 all the way. If I move "down" from the P61, I move to the 9V P90. The P60 just doesn't cut it for me. YMMV...

 

[ampdude]

Yes, exactly!

The hot spot of the average P61 is large enough to completely envelope a man sized target, where as with the P60 you are doing much more sweeping.

For example with a P60, you may be looking at somebody in a doorway 20 feet away, you can either choose to shine the light to identify their face or what they have in their hand. With the P61 the hot spot is large enough to be able to do both instantly.

 

[Size15's]

I would recommend using the P61 for about a month in various applications. Don't use it sparingly... use it like you would the P60. Then go back to the P60 and you will get a great contrast of the differences once you've become accustomed to the P61.

For me, its the P61 all the way. If I move "down" from the P61, I move to the 9V P90. The P60 just doesn't cut it for me. YMMV...

I believe the appropriate response to this is "Word."

I consider the first thing to recognise is that one must have a need/requirement/desire such that the operating costs are easily justified or not applicable in relation to the outcome or success for which the illumination tool is contributing to.

As a result the SureFire High Output Lamp Assemblies (HOLA's) are used without regard with the increased monetary cost of the SF123A's for the shorter runtime.

What matters is that one's use of light is such that the decreased runtime is an acceptable trade off for the increased performance.

Increased performance is when through use of the HOLA one can see more, more clearly, more quickly. And, those 'caught' in the beam are overwhelmed to a greater extent.

Success is when the outcome such as prevailing over an adversary is achieved more quickly, more completely, and with lower risk.

HOLA's produce larger main beams, and surround beams that are brighter and whiter. They are not intended to provide better illumination at obviously longer range.

This allows the operator to more quickly identify the target(s), assess the nature of the threat(s) they pose and ensure there are fewer places for additional threats to hide. The operator has better quality information and the ability to act more decisively.

Obviously if using the HOLA's does not result in an increase in performance [during training, and in use] then one may question whether using the HOLA's is worth the shorter runtime. One may also question whether the tactics and methods of employing light are conducive to realising the full benefit the HOLA's are capable of providing.

From my own personal perspective, with the exception of the M6's MN20 lamp and the N2 lamp in the 9PT or SRTH, I only ever use HOLA's when I use incandescent SureFires. The C2/M2/G2Z (P61), M3 (MN11), M3T (MN16), M4 (MN61 or N62). I enjoy the white light high (and you could argue I enjoy the 'reckless' use of expensive batteries since I have no real or perceived need for the HOLA other than my enjoyment of the brighter whiter light)

Al

 

[BIGIRON]

Enjoyment is enough.

 

[mdocod]

Your experience is a testament to the way human eyes perceive light. Doubling total light does not appear as double in perception. It's why there is no reason to nit pick about whether to get a 90 or 110 lumen light as it won't have any practical difference in use.

Choose a light based on the ballpark of illumination desired with the beam pattern that best suits that application. The floody beams of a SF HOLA are undoubtedly the appropriate choice for room clearing and other close quarters tactical engagements. While the piercing beam of a cree thrower combined with it's extended runtime makes a much better search and rescue light. Even though both can have very similar total output. (Like a P61 in a G2 vs a Tiablo A8, similar total output, very different applications).

To see big impressive differences, multiply the current amount of light by 5-10, that should be the next target.

 

[ptirmal]

try it outside too... I couldn't notice a huge difference between a p90 and p91 until I took them outside in a dark field