MrMom
Enlightened
I searched the posts to find a runtime listing on the new KL-1 and couldn't find one. Surefire's included flier lists the run at 4 hours BUT the literature included with the NEW KL-1 states that it is a 1 watt LED. We know that it is a LuxIII.
Side by side with a KL-4, the KL-1's hot spot is brighter and throws further. As reported in other threads, there is little side spill. Side spill is there, it's just very weak. I think that the lack of a strong side spill is a strength. You know...the right light for the right job. In a complex + busy 3D enviornment bright spill light from let's say a KL-4 will reflect back off the complex enviornment to the users eyes in effect severly blinding the user to everything beyond the close up. Let's say that you are hiking through the woods and want to see what is down the trail. Do you pull out a KL-1 or a KL-4? The KL-1 will light far and reach down the trail and shed just enough side spill to walk by. On the other hand a KL-4 would flood the area with soo much short range light in which the reflections off of trees, shrubs, etc would blind the user to everything beyond the close up. After extensive testing on trails, I have concluded that a beam pattern similar to what a KL-1 produces is best.
My EDC has been a KL-4. To evaluate a KL-1 in real life situations I began to carry both a KL-1 and KL-4 at work. As a facilities manager I often inspect building mechanics. Testing both lights on my power distribution equipment ( a large room full of HV to LV transformers and switching eqipment ) I find that the light from a KL-4 will give a good overview but lacks in providing detail to a specific spot in this 3-D enviornment due to the blinding reflections. The KL-1 provides superb illumination to a specific point deep within the 3-D structure but requires panning to sense the whole picture. In narrow passages such as in an evelator shaft, the KL-1 excells. On the other hand at home in my basement and back yard the KL-4 works best.
I believe that there is too much emphasis on side spill. Perhaps this preferance is based on the users specific uses. Do most users evaluate their lights based on walking the dog in city lights? I love a flood but it is not appropiate in all situations.
To sum it up, The KL-1 has it's place. It is an expert at providing what it does best.
I guess that my idea light for all situations would be e2 in size that would vary in brightness as a U2 and could vary the focus between the beam pattern of the KL-1 and the KL-4. Untill then, as the CPF motto goes; "Buy them both", I'll say use them both.
Now off to the run times... both were loaded with a Pila 168s @1400ma fresh off the charger and they were fired up.
KL-1: 1 hour 38 minutes
KL-4: 54 minutes
This post will not be edited for spelling,
Side by side with a KL-4, the KL-1's hot spot is brighter and throws further. As reported in other threads, there is little side spill. Side spill is there, it's just very weak. I think that the lack of a strong side spill is a strength. You know...the right light for the right job. In a complex + busy 3D enviornment bright spill light from let's say a KL-4 will reflect back off the complex enviornment to the users eyes in effect severly blinding the user to everything beyond the close up. Let's say that you are hiking through the woods and want to see what is down the trail. Do you pull out a KL-1 or a KL-4? The KL-1 will light far and reach down the trail and shed just enough side spill to walk by. On the other hand a KL-4 would flood the area with soo much short range light in which the reflections off of trees, shrubs, etc would blind the user to everything beyond the close up. After extensive testing on trails, I have concluded that a beam pattern similar to what a KL-1 produces is best.
My EDC has been a KL-4. To evaluate a KL-1 in real life situations I began to carry both a KL-1 and KL-4 at work. As a facilities manager I often inspect building mechanics. Testing both lights on my power distribution equipment ( a large room full of HV to LV transformers and switching eqipment ) I find that the light from a KL-4 will give a good overview but lacks in providing detail to a specific spot in this 3-D enviornment due to the blinding reflections. The KL-1 provides superb illumination to a specific point deep within the 3-D structure but requires panning to sense the whole picture. In narrow passages such as in an evelator shaft, the KL-1 excells. On the other hand at home in my basement and back yard the KL-4 works best.
I believe that there is too much emphasis on side spill. Perhaps this preferance is based on the users specific uses. Do most users evaluate their lights based on walking the dog in city lights? I love a flood but it is not appropiate in all situations.
To sum it up, The KL-1 has it's place. It is an expert at providing what it does best.
I guess that my idea light for all situations would be e2 in size that would vary in brightness as a U2 and could vary the focus between the beam pattern of the KL-1 and the KL-4. Untill then, as the CPF motto goes; "Buy them both", I'll say use them both.
Now off to the run times... both were loaded with a Pila 168s @1400ma fresh off the charger and they were fired up.
KL-1: 1 hour 38 minutes
KL-4: 54 minutes
This post will not be edited for spelling,
