Just got my Eagletac M2XC4..First Impressions

[mikekoz]

My M2XC4 was waiting for me at home today when I came home from work (YAY)!! I ripped open the box and took a look inside....we had the light, a holster, lanyard, 2 plastic CR123 tubes, a battery holder with switch, 2 spare O rings, and the switch cap. The light itself is heavy and appears to be very well made. The head is heavier than the body, and the body is relatively lightweight. I also had 2 Eagletac 18650 protected batteries in the box, and they tested at about 3.7v. I put them in the charger and at first the charger would not turn on. It is working now, but this is a slight concern. I put 4 Pentagonlight CR123's in it just to test it in my back yard. I pitted it against my Tiablo A9, which was my brightest light up until today. It seems to be about 2x as bright as the Tiablo, with both lights on high. I will test it with 18650's tomorrow. I was going to put the included clickie switch on the light, but the switch is plastic and appears flimsy and not very good quality. I also would not trust the lanyard connected to this plastic switch as it looks like it would break easily. The battery carriers also are a bit on the flimsy side, and I hope they do not break. The light appears useless without them. Oddly enough, I did not have the problem most people seem to be having with the ring selector. I had no problems turning the light on/off, or going from low to turbo.

Mike

 

[KRUPPSTAHL]

i cant wait so read how bright that light really is.

everybody is throwing hundreds of lumens around....

( flamesuit on ) i personally think it will not really break the 700 Lumen barrier.

 

[mikekoz]

I do not know how this lights lumens are rated, out the front, or at the emitter, but it is a very bright flashlight. My Tiablo A9 is rated at 250 lumens and the M2XC4 blew it away on turbo, and was noticably brighter at high. Eagletac rates this light as 360 lumens on high, so these numbers are probably pretty accurate. Somebody that has test equipment would have to supply actual figures.

 

[HKJ]

It is not the most powerful MC-E/P7 light around, in a ceiling bounce test both TK40 and M30 has more output, but I am also looking forward to see some real lumen measurements on these lights.

 

[maxilux]

In practise the EagleTac has more output as TK40 or M30, i have all the lights and the ET blows away the M30 and the TK40.
When you forget all the lumen ratings and go out with the lights you see the difference.

 

[swiftwing]

I'm thinking a ceiling bounce may not be the best way to guesstimate such floody lights. A better focused P7 / MC-E will give a brighter bounce around your person, but a floodier beam will light up much more of the room.

 

[HKJ]

I'm thinking a ceiling bounce may not be the best way to guesstimate such floody lights. A better focused P7 / MC-E will give a brighter bounce around your person, but a floodier beam will light up much more of the room.

I have tried with the lux meter both close to the light and some distance away, the M2 gives about 86% of the light that M30 and TK40 does (TK40 is a tiny bit above M30) in both settings. But for real world usage these differences does not really count, the beam profile has much more to say.

 

[Mjolnir]

I'm thinking a ceiling bounce may not be the best way to guesstimate such floody lights. A better focused P7 / MC-E will give a brighter bounce around your person, but a floodier beam will light up much more of the room.

Actually, it really doesn't matter all that much what the beam profile is. They are not really different enough to make a difference. Even if they were, if you put the lights much closer to the ceiling, it would basically make the beam all hotspot and negate any difference in beam pattern.

 

[mikekoz]

I just noticed something. I bought this light with the intention of using 18650's with it. Everything I read about it stated that the runtime was better with them. I just looked at a review at Light-reviews.com, and according to them, it gets better runtime with CR123's????:scowl:. I went to Eagletac's website and could not even find any of the M series lights. PTS's site where I bought the light from gives the same runtime as the Eagletac store. The runtimes given there are significantly better using 18650's on the first 3 settings. These are the modes I will use most of the time. Which figures are correct? I have no desire to run this light from primaries.

 

[mikekoz]

What a difference a week makes!! There are a few threads about this light all of a sudden, and I am beginning to think maybe I spent my hard earned money on the wrong light. Just last week I was trying to decide between the Fenix TK40 and the Eagletac M2XC4. They both looked great, but the Eagletac looked cool and well made. Now it appears we have the following issues:

1. Screws falling out of the light. This is an indication of poor quality control, plain and simple.

2. Waterproof problems. This apparently has been fixed, but we have to contact Eagletac.

3. The light drains batteries after 4 months unless the switch is installed. The switch is poorly made and I have no desire to use it. I actually like the selector wheel.

4. Apparently the switch has an odd delay when used. I have not installed it and tried it, but others are experiencing issues.

5. According to Light-reviews.com, the light runs longer on primary CR123's than 18650's. This is NOT what was advertised. I had no intention of using primary cells with this light.

6. This light has been out less than a month and there are posts all over the place where people are trying to fix the problems themselves.

I intend on sending Eagletac an email and see what they have to say. If I get a response, I will let all of you know.

Mike

 

[StandardBattery]

Well it looks like the honeymoon is over for many people. I'm still basking in the radiance.

People should remember there are three lights, the P7 version M2 and the 2 M2X with tri-emitters cool or neutral tint. As seen in the beam shots the output is different.

 

[mikekoz]

Well it looks like the honeymoon is over for many people. I'm still basking in the radiance.

People should remember there are three lights, the P7 version M2 and the 2 M2X with tri-emitters cool or neutral tint. As seen in the beam shots the output is different.

There is nothing wrong with the lights output. Despite what I said before, this light has some really good things going for it, and a lot of potential. The light is very bright, the finish on it is real nice, I like the feel of it in my hands, it has a nice low, etc. I think maybe it was not ready for prime time.

 

[bullettproof]

I like the Eagletac P7 a lot but you can EDC in your pocket. The M30 you can and also the beam profile and huge hot spot is a big plus the best I have seen in a quad die light.As far as brightness go's there all very very close in output.However the M30 is driven at full spec 2.8A for sure so its roughly a true 700 out the front.The M30 is only 1/4 inch longer then the M2 with the 3 123's set up and the pocket clip is great on the M30.The Eagle Im sure will out throw it but if you want really bright and lots of throw in a quad die I like my L950M it blows any other quad die I have had in Throw.Also the M30 is way brighter then my DBS MC-E.I hope this gives some info.

 

[vincebdx]

I....However the M30 is driven at full spec 2.8A for sure so its roughly a true 700 out the front...

But M30 have a poor regulation :shakehead
70lm only for the first minutes.

M30

http://www.light-reviews.com/olight_m30/

M2XC4

http://www.light-reviews.com/eagletac_m2xc4/

 

[mikekoz]

I just sent Eagletac an email about my concerns with this light. After using it a while, I am very happy with the lights output. I also am not having that flashing problem when I change modes and I have no issues with missing the turbo setting and hitting the strobe. I need to actually conduct a runtime test on it myself using the Eagletac 18650's I got with it. Has anybody other than Lightreviews tested the runtime?

Eagletac also just posted this light on their webpage. Looks like they are going to have a ring available for it with laser etchings on it. This should have been on the light to begin with! I mentioned this in my email. I will keep all of you posted.

 

[Zeruel]

Eagletac also just posted this light on their webpage. Looks like they are going to have a ring available for it with laser etchings on it. This should have been on the light to begin with! I mentioned this in my email. I will keep all of you posted.

That's definitely good. As to whether they should have it in the first place or not, perhaps they didn't have proper beta testing or garner enough feedbacks before they went into production. Well, good thing is they improved based on ours. Hope they are willing to send the ring to buyers like us. Do keep us posted. Thanks.

 

[swiftwing]

I just noticed something. I bought this light with the intention of using 18650's with it. Everything I read about it stated that the runtime was better with them. I just looked at a review at Light-reviews.com, and according to them, it gets better runtime with CR123's????:scowl:. I went to Eagletac's website and could not even find any of the M series lights. PTS's site where I bought the light from gives the same runtime as the Eagletac store. The runtimes given there are significantly better using 18650's on the first 3 settings. These are the modes I will use most of the time. Which figures are correct? I have no desire to run this light from primaries.

The light-reviews.com 18650 runtime test was conducted with 2200mah batteries while i think Eagletac rated the runtime with 2600mah ones. If you scale for capacity then they are spot on. Eagletac's estimate of 1.2hrs on CR123s is spot on so i don't think they'd be off with the 18650 estimates.

 

[Tohuwabohu]

The light-reviews.com 18650 runtime test was conducted with 2200mah batteries while i think Eagletac rated the runtime with 2600mah ones. If you scale for capacity then they are spot on. Eagletac's estimate of 1.2hrs on CR123s is spot on so i don't think they'd be off with the 18650 estimates.

I'm sure the 2200mAh AW batteries mev used for the runtime test must have been quite old and in a poor condition.
I got 95 minutes (1.58 hours) on level 4 with 2 black 2400mAh Trustfires in my neutral white M2XC4.

I did not yet do runtime test in the lower levels but from the measured current draw @7.4V I estimate the following runtimes:
off: 0.7mA -> 4 months
level 1 (33lm): 48mA -> 50 hours
level 2 (125lm): 214mA -> 11 hours
level 3 (300lm): 615mA -> 3.9 hours
level 4 (665lm): 1.5A (falling as the flashlight gets warmer) -> 1.6 hours
strobe : 780mA -> 3 hours

I'm not going to do any tests in level 1 or strobe mode or with CR123As but the level 2 and 3 runtimes with the Trustfire 18650s should be ready tomorrow.

 

[Mjolnir]

Wow, Eagletac completely redesigned their site, and it now has all of their products on it! It actually seems like it is designed pretty well.
I am kind of interested in how they have managed to come out with so many products in such a short time span, especially considering how different they are from other lights on the market (like XP-E lights).
Has anyone figured out yet where they came from?
I also seems like eagletac is going ot be offering diffusers and filters for their M2 series lights.
Oh, and apparently the "M" of the M2 lights stands for military.

 

[1dash1]

Eagletac's new website: link.

The new website is a monumental improvement over the old one. Navigation is much more straightforward. Pages are uncluttered. Very clean.

Still a work in progress, though. For example, all of the links for accessories either bring up a "coming soon" webpage or are dead links.