I figured out how to make my Quark malfunction!

[batmanacw]

With all the Quark malfunction threads, I figured I would get in on the fun. I decided to figure out how to make my warm Quark 2AA tactical malfunction.

Not just so I would have a reason to send a light back, but so I could figure out what may be some of the issues that people have been dealing with. This is a way of being fair to those who have had issues and maybe we will find ways to fix this stuff easily.

First, if I leave the tail cap slightly loose, I will get some flickering if I tweek sideways on the tail cap. If I tighten it snug, the issues go away. I have the clip retaining ring pretty snug as well. If the clip retaining ring is too thick of out of shape, that could keep the ring from going all the way down, thereby keeping the cap from sitting properly on the end of the tube. If this was the case I would temporarily remove the clip and see if the light starts functioning.

Second, I have the low range set on medium and the high range programmed for high. If I have the light on high, then only slightly turn the bezel back to low, I can pull backwards on the bezel and get the light to trip on to turbo via the slop in the threads. Not sure why, but it does it reliably. The switch will turn the light off, but you cannot switch modes once it kicks to turbo.

Fixing requires turning it off for a few seconds and the head resets for some reason. It goes right back to running flawlessly. If I turn the head 1/4 turn when switching to low range, I will not show this malfunction at all. If I wiggle the head at 1/4 turn I can get it to very slightly flicker, but I don't want to break anything by tweeking super hard.


I also tried to get the same loosened head malfunction on my regular Quark 2AA. I was able to get the same malfunction. Just turning off the light for a few seconds seems to handle it. The light looses its modes until you turn it off.

The point to this exercise was to figure out how some of the complaints could be happening and how to fix them.
Both of my Quarks are functioning just fine now and now I know how to fix them if they freak out like they did when I forced a malfunction.


The process of forcing malfunctions does not make my leery of these lights. It actually makes me even more comfortable with them. Now I know how I can affect the light and how to remedy the situation. Just thought this would be of interest to folks here. :candle:

 

[Dude Dudeson]

I can't recommend them anymore.

Three lights, two people, seven months between purchases.

We're done.

 

[batmanacw]

I can't recommend them anymore.

Three lights, two people, seven months between purchases.

We're done.

Did you recognize any malfunctions I was able to produce?

 

[the.Mtn.Man]

Here's the thing: when you really need a light, you don't want to be fussing with trying to solve a malfunction. I personally really like the Quark brand, but I do recognize that they have some serious shortcomings that prevent them from being dependable.

 

[Wiggle]

I don't understand what would make them less reliable than say a Fenix, many of the the Fenix lights are effectively the same design physically. My AA Tac and AA2 Tac are both going strong. AA2 is newish and the AA I've carried everyday since Christmas.

 

[notsofast]

I am wondering if other peoples malfunctions happen under different scenarios than those you create. Thus can't be fixed in the same manner as well.

 

[Dude Dudeson]

Did you recognize any malfunctions I was able to produce?

No, the issues you listed were completely different from the issues we've experienced.

"Quark" is a new product, and I became a beta tester.

I try hard not to do that, but sometimes "tech specifications" lure me in.

Then I end up realizing why it's never wise to buy "version 1.0" of anything, or for that matter, version 2.0.......

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they're complete crap, not at all.

But a Quark, generally, at this point, is something only a flashaholic could love. Therefore I do not recommend them to "the people".

 

[batmanacw]

Here's the thing: when you really need a light, you don't want to be fussing with trying to solve a malfunction. I personally really like the Quark brand, but I do recognize that they have some serious shortcomings that prevent them from being dependable.

Yea, but when you have to wiggly it and pull on it unnaturally to get it to malfunction, then is it really an issue?

I am just trying to figure out the source of some of the malfunctions so we can help folks understand them.

If you read my post, you will see that merely turning the light off fixed the issue on the accidental mode changes. Is that fiddling with it?

 

[batmanacw]

I don't understand what would make them less reliable than say a Fenix, many of the the Fenix lights are effectively the same design physically. My AA Tac and AA2 Tac are both going strong. AA2 is newish and the AA I've carried everyday since Christmas.

I just checked. You can make a Fenix malfunction the same way. Only the fenix turns off after the third time. It doesn't go to turbo.

 

[batmanacw]

I am wondering if other peoples malfunctions happen under different scenarios than those you create. Thus can't be fixed in the same manner as well.

that is the point of this discussion. We might be able to figure out the issues and give folks solutions. Maybe even 4sevens.

 

[the.Mtn.Man]

I don't understand what would make them less reliable than say a Fenix...

I don't know, but you certainly hear more about Quark lights failing or not operating reliable than you do Fenix lights. Maybe it's just a matter of a vocal minority who have had problems, but I do know that the one Quark AA that I owned had intermittent flickering on high even after I did all the requisite maintenance (cleaning, lubing, tightening, etc.).

However, I do love my Quark MiNi AA, but there's also less that can go wrong mechanically with a twisty.

 

[the.Mtn.Man]

Yea, but when you have to wiggly it and pull on it unnaturally to get it to malfunction, then is it really an issue?

I really don't think your simulated "failures" prove anything one way or the other.

 

[mossyoak]

Then I end up realizing why it's never wise to buy "version 1.0" of anything, or for that matter, version 2.0........

the version 1.0 quarks seem to be the stoutest ones, ive never had a problem with any of them.

 

[batmanacw]

I really don't think your simulated "failures" prove anything one way or the other.

No, of course not, but someone might recognize their malfunction in what I did.

I am trying to be part of the solution. If you don't have anything helpful to add or want to discuss what was happening with your light that malfunctioned, you might enjoy other threads better. :kiss:

 

[Dude Dudeson]

but there's also less that can go wrong mechanically with a twisty.

Tell that to my Quarks. Tell it to my clicky Surefire, Maglite, and El Cheapo Walmart Plastic Special too.

I'll enjoy watching them all debate it to death while I pick what WORKS.

 

[red02]

Like Mnt.Man said, it doesn't prove anything. Its not really a "failure". You messed around with your lights until it started acting funny. A real failure wont be as forgiving.

 

[wyager]

I don't understand what would make them less reliable than say a Fenix, many of the the Fenix lights are effectively the same design physically. My AA Tac and AA2 Tac are both going strong. AA2 is newish and the AA I've carried everyday since Christmas.

I could make my fenix LD20 glitch reliably. There were multiple ways to do it, one that I could always reproduce was rapidly switching from turbo to low modes. It would lock up the microcontroller and cause it to act erratically, usually sticking on one mode. On one occasion it would not reset for a LONG time.

 

[mossyoak]

Tell that to my Quarks. Tell it to my clicky Surefire, Maglite, and El Cheapo Walmart Plastic Special too.

I'll enjoy watching them all debate it to death while I pick what WORKS.

uh, there is physically less that could go wrong with a twisty, thats not debatable, its a fact.

 

[wyager]

uh, there is physically less that could go wrong with a twisty, thats not debatable, its a fact.

I'm pretty sure the issue here is software, not hardware, so in this case switch/twisty is irrelevant... but in general you are correct. Of course, a "dead man's switch" offers the reliability of a twisty with the momentary of a forward clickie.

 

[mossyoak]

I'm pretty sure the issue here is software, not hardware, so in this case switch/twisty is irrelevant... but in general you are correct. Of course, a "dead man's switch" offers the reliability of a twisty with the momentary of a forward clickie.

thats still one of my favorite switching mechanisms, the only problem ive ever had with my quarks all related to the clickie module, its been a bit of a pain at times.