Long scratch on new LOD-CE reflector... what would you do?

[4sevens]

Here is a suggestion: send Turbo DV8 a new light along with a prepaid UPS label. Even better inspect the flashlight before sending it to him. He can then send you back the other one.

This way he knows he is not getting his own back.

I'm totally up for that. But he needs to email or post to confirm.

 

[katx]

I'm totally up for that. But he needs to email or post to confirm.

Well, there is no need to email it because you are gonna post it anyway.

But seriously, I think this is a very nice jesture on part of 4Sevens.

 

[Vickers]

I'll bet that he tried taking pics with the light on, failed, and thought it impossible, then tried with the light off, and succeeded... as he also said earlier.

How con-VEEEEEEEEEEEEN-yent!

/churchlady


"I'm totally up for that."

Wow, that guy is so unreasonable...

/sarcasm

 

[TigerhawkT3]

How con-VEEEEEEEEEEEEN-yent!

/churchlady


"I'm totally up for that."

Wow, that guy is so unreasonable...

/sarcasm

With the naked eye, the scratch was most visible with the light on. He expected that would be the only way to photograph it. He later found that theory incorrect. Is that so hard to fathom? I don't see how I can make it much clearer than that.

 

[Turbo DV8]

How con-VEEEEEEEEEEEEN-yent!

/churchlady

"I'm totally up for that."
Wow, that guy is so unreasonable...

/sarcasm

What's this, I see? A bit of campy spunk still left in this thread? Good... makes the world go round!

Vickers:
I'm a little confused...there were several statements by you over the course of the thread describing the impossibility of capturing the scratch on film (sic), and yet here we have several photos clearly showing a scratch.

TigerhawkT3:
Unlike yourself, Turbo DV8 is not a photography pro, as he said earlier. I'll bet that he tried taking pics with the light on, failed, and thought it impossible, then tried with the light off, and succeeded... as he also said earlier.

zipplet:
If I remember correctly, Turbo DV8 had success when he took the picture with the light off and used the camera flash - whereas he thought the scratch would only be visible with the light on, and he tried to take a picture like that and failed previously.

What they said ... if someone read the thread, then there should be no problem "getting it." However, if one chooses not to "get it," then he won't, no matter what. One upstanding, and clearly unbiased, member has gone so far as to accuse me of either photoshopping the scratch into existence, or even that I disassembled the light, put a scratch on the reflector myself, reassembled the light, then took the photograph. This is a good example of someone who refuses to "get it." He is blinded by his indefatigable love of a certain dealer, and I'll just leave it at that. To him, and those like him, I say, "Good evening, and good night."

4sevens:
As before, my offer still stands for an exchange.

So, I do want to publicly acknowledge and thank 4sevens for publicly allowing me to return the light a second time. I assume that certainly the second replacement light sent to me would not be the same identical light which I originally returned. Yet, I made that foregone conclusion the first time, but I was incorrect. Again, I want to thank 4sevens for his offer, but I respectfully decline to return the light a second time, for the following reasons. In my original post, those that choose to may recall that I expressed concerns about whether I should return the light at all, due to the fact that the scratch was "faint," and it did not manifest itself in the beam. I also expressed my misgivings, as several others here have, about returning a defective product only to gamble receiving a replacement product with a different or even more egregious problem. (The eventuality of what ultimately transpired did not even cross my mind.) But the thought lingered in the back of my mind that for $45 one should not have to "put up" with a scratched reflector, so I returned the light.

Keeping these in mind, I also have also seen another member's LOD-CE, and have seen a significant difference in the throw-to-flood ratio. His has a significantly hotter throw, whereas mine is more floody, while sacrificing a little throw. When sufficient overall light is being produced, such as with the LOD-CE, I tend to be more of a floody kinda guy. For the record, I am happy with the beam my LOD-CE produces. Contrary to 4sevens' claims, I never asked or expected 4sevens to hand-pick any light for me, and I don't now, so I thank 4sevens for his offer, but I exercise the right to not return the light a second time and keep the one I have, due to, 1) the scratch does not manifest itself in the beam, 2) risk of the replacement having some other less desireable characteristic, and 3) historical perspective. Again, I want to make it clear that I do thank 4sevens for his public offer.

 

[onthebeam]

Geez, after all that. Turbo DV8, its sounds like you actually prefer to not have a resolution but perhaps deep inside enjoy continuing to have the platform to vent. And debate. And debate some more. You have every right, of course, but it sure makes it harder to enjoy life when everything always becomes a well-articulated debate.

I've been lurking at this thread for the past couple of weeks and was sorry that there was so much accusation and bashing. Some unfair. I made one earlier post that was a stab at humor to try to help change the "loud" tone but there was just so much overheated negative vibe all around. Literally hours and hours of people cutting and pasting quotes to prove "valid" points, as if in the Supreme Court of the Sacred Flashlight.

Turbo DV8, you have made some good points but they will always have more impact if you make them once, and not repeat over and over again.

As has been said before, these are flashlights we are talking about, not the great issues of our time.

 

[wintermute]

So, I do want to publicly acknowledge and thank 4sevens for publicly allowing me to return the light a second time. I assume that certainly the second replacement light sent to me would not be the same identical light which I originally returned. Yet, I made that foregone conclusion the first time, but I was incorrect. Again, I want to thank 4sevens for his offer, but I respectfully decline to return the light a second time, for the following reasons. In my original post, those that choose to may recall that I expressed concerns about whether I should return the light at all, due to the fact that the scratch was "faint," and it did not manifest itself in the beam. I also expressed my misgivings, as several others here have, about returning a defective product only to gamble receiving a replacement product with a different or even more egregious problem. (The eventuality of what ultimately transpired did not even cross my mind.) But the thought lingered in the back of my mind that for $45 one should not have to "put up" with a scratched reflector, so I returned the light.

Keeping these in mind, I also have also seen another member's LOD-CE, and have seen a significant difference in the throw-to-flood ratio. His has a significantly hotter throw, whereas mine is more floody, while sacrificing a little throw. When sufficient overall light is being produced, such as with the LOD-CE, I tend to be more of a floody kinda guy. For the record, I am happy with the beam my LOD-CE produces. Contrary to 4sevens' claims, I never asked or expected 4sevens to hand-pick any light for me, and I don't now, so I thank 4sevens for his offer, but I exercise the right to not return the light a second time and keep the one I have, due to, 1) the scratch does not manifest itself in the beam, 2) risk of the replacement having some other less desireable characteristic, and 3) historical perspective. Again, I want to make it clear that I do thank 4sevens for his public offer.

Then what the heck was the point of this entire thread in the first place???

Why would you make a thread about a light which had a scratch - but DID NOT effect the beam whatsoever. Why would you make a thread when you are actually "happy with the beam" which the said light produces. Why would you go on and on about the existence of a scratch that in actuality mattered so little, that you yourself would REFUSE a replacement flashlight once one is offered.

Did you just create this whole thread for attention??

You know, like Private Pyle in Full Metal Jacket...Didn't mommy and daddy show you enough attention...

I had a lot more to this post, but I realized I would probably get banned for a few days for saying it. I can't believe after all that - all that complaining about the scratch, about how much of a meanie the dealer was to you, etc. - that once offered a replacement you would decide to keep your original light.

Simply amazing!!!

 

[TigerhawkT3]

Geez, after all that. Turbo DV8, its sounds like you actually prefer to not have a resolution but perhaps deep inside enjoy continuing to have the platform to vent. And debate. And debate some more. You have every right, of course, but it sure makes it harder to enjoy life when everything always becomes a well-articulated debate.

I've been lurking at this thread for the past couple of weeks and was sorry that there was so much accusation and bashing. Some unfair. I made one earlier post that was a stab at humor to try to help change the "loud" tone but there was just so much overheated negative vibe all around. Literally hours and hours of people cutting and pasting quotes to prove "valid" points, as if in the Supreme Court of the Sacred Flashlight.

Turbo DV8, you have made some good points but they will always have more impact if you make them once, and not repeat over and over again.

As has been said before, these are flashlights we are talking about, not the great issues of our time.

Turbo DV8 only has to repeat himself when people ignore the info he posts and then ask him why he hasn't posted it. Let me tell, you, it takes a lot of patience to put up with that.

 

[greenstuffs]

I'd never thought 4sevens would have digged up emails from a year ago just to prove to the board that he had no wrongdoing and make a customer look pathetic. While OPs post being moderated the dealer wasn't it is pretty clear who feeds CPF and who has the voice here.
Next time we have a problem i recommend you all go file a complaint at the FTC here, but couple free keychains will wash out most of unaware consumers brains.

 

[katx]

I'd never thought 4sevens would have digged up emails from a year ago just to prove to the board that he had no wrongdoing and make a customer look pathetic. While OPs post being moderated the dealer wasn't it is pretty clear who feeds CPF and who has the voice here.
Next time we have a problem i recommend you all go file a complaint at the FTC here, but couple free keychains will wash out most of unaware consumers brains.

Agreed. I repeat my advice (even kinda request): I think 4Sevens should act like the gentleman that he is and edit out all those emails excerpts/quotes.

 

[wintermute]

I'd never thought 4sevens would have digged up emails from a year ago just to prove to the board that he had no wrongdoing and make a customer look pathetic. While OPs post being moderated the dealer wasn't it is pretty clear who feeds CPF and who has the voice here.
Next time we have a problem i recommend you all go file a complaint at the FTC here, but couple free keychains will wash out most of unaware consumers brains.

I'm not sure if you have a gmail account or not...but the way gmail is setup, it is really easy to have access to all email correspondence between yourself and another person. Probably one reason that FS uses gmail. Regardless, the point I am trying to make is it is not hard to "dig up" emails from the past year.

All I have to do is look at the actions of the OP to realize this was all a joke from the beginning. As I posted above, after all of this, he refuses the replacement light. What do you think he could tell the FTC?? "Hey, so I have this light...great light by the way, great beam...but, ummm, the seller didn't kiss my butt enough. I want to make a formal complaint about how this scratch is such a big deal, not that I want it replaced...but still. And I want to make a complaint that the seller was a big meanie. Just don't take the light in question...because I love it. Did I mention I want to keep the light??"

But hey, I'm just a fanboy right - I know that's what a couple of you will say. But to carry on for >100 posts about this scratch and how bad 4sevens was, to only refuse the replacement shows that the OP is just crying for attention. :thumbsup:

 

[katx]

I'm not sure if you have a gmail account or not...but the way gmail is setup, it is really easy to have access to all email correspondence between yourself and another person. Probably one reason that FS uses gmail. Regardless, the point I am trying to make is it is not hard to "dig up" emails from the past year.

All I have to do is look at the actions of the OP to realize this was all a joke from the beginning. As I posted above, after all of this, he refuses the replacement light. What do you think he could tell the FTC?? "Hey, so I have this light...great light by the way, great beam...but, ummm, the seller didn't kiss my butt enough. I want to make a formal complaint about how this scratch is such a big deal, not that I want it replaced...but still. And I want to make a complaint that the seller was a big meanie. Just don't take the light in question...because I love it. Did I mention I want to keep the light??"

But hey, I'm just a fanboy right - I know that's what a couple of you will say. But to carry on for >100 posts about this scratch and how bad 4sevens was, to only refuse the replacement shows that the OP is just crying for attention. :thumbsup:

Hey Wintermute, how has bashing the customer worked out for you guys/Fenix Store so far?

 

[wintermute]

Hey Wintermute, how has bashing the customer worked out for you guys/Fenix Store so far?

I figured that someone would say something like that (hence my statement of "but hey, I'm just a fanboy, right"). The only problem is, I am in Michigan and FS is in Georgia. I am in no way affiliated with FS other then being a satisfied customer. Anything to get on my case because I disagree with you. Katx, you really shouldn't even get into this considering that you can't even figure out the Fenix UI anyhow. :thumbsup: Do you think if I worked for FS, that I would need to try to buy broken Fenix lights to work with (see my sig line)??

I think the OP has shown that this entire thread did nothing except cause bad blood and had no point except to slander others - because the light was perfectly fine. So good - in fact - that he would refuse a replacement. This thread should have never been started - let alone reopened. Congrats to the OP for a complete wasted of time. :twothumbs

And congrats to everyone who supported him in his quest to have absolutely nothing accomplished since the light is so good anyway.

 

[JRTJRT]

I think TurboDV8 should send just the lens back (not the whole flashlight)and 4sevens should swap it with a new inspected unscratched lens.

Or 4sevens could just send Turbo the new lens.

Turbo should have the lens replaced for both parties here, and the rest of us lol... because he paid for a non-scratched lens and it is obvioulsy an issue to him (as it would be for me as well), and letting 4sevens fix the problem is a good gesture in itself that would benefit both parties involved. And Turbo gets to keep his original unit.

Sort of a way to shake hands and move on. Everyone wins.

 

[LukeA]

I think TurboDV8 should send just the lens back (not the whole flashlight)and 4sevens should swap it with a new inspected unscratched lens.

Or 4sevens could just send Turbo the new lens.

Turbo should have the lens replaced for both parties here, and the rest of us ... because he paid for a non-scratched lens and it is obvioulsy an issue to him (as it would be for me as well), and letting 4sevens fix the problem is a good gesture in itself that would benefit both parties involved. And Turbo gets to keep his original unit.

Sort of a way to shake hands and move on. Everyone wins.

But the scratch is on the reflector and disassembling the head voids Fenix's warranty.

 

[FlashKat]

Turbo DV8 should send it back and have 4 Sevens replace the reflector and modify it with a Q5 Cree under warranty:twothumbs

I think TurboDV8 should send just the lens back (not the whole flashlight)and 4sevens should swap it with a new inspected unscratched lens.

Or 4sevens could just send Turbo the new lens.

Turbo should have the lens replaced for both parties here, and the rest of us lol... because he paid for a non-scratched lens and it is obvioulsy an issue to him (as it would be for me as well), and letting 4sevens fix the problem is a good gesture in itself that would benefit both parties involved. And Turbo gets to keep his original unit.

Sort of a way to shake hands and move on. Everyone wins.

 

[katx]

I figured that someone would say something like that (hence my statement of "but hey, I'm just a fanboy, right"). The only problem is, I am in Michigan and FS is in Georgia. I am in no way affiliated with FS other then being a satisfied customer. Anything to get on my case because I disagree with you. Katx, you really shouldn't even get into this considering that you can't even figure out the Fenix UI anyhow. :thumbsup: Do you think if I worked for FS, that I would need to try to buy broken Fenix lights to work with (see my sig line)??

I think the OP has shown that this entire thread did nothing except cause bad blood and had no point except to slander others - because the light was perfectly fine. So good - in fact - that he would refuse a replacement. This thread should have never been started - let alone reopened. Congrats to the OP for a complete wasted of time. :twothumbs

And congrats to everyone who supported him in his quest to have absolutely nothing accomplished since the light is so good anyway.

1. "hence" nothing. Your "statement" or your sig do nothing regarding a claim that you are affiliated with FS. (I did not make that claim.)

2. Your being in Michigan also does nothing to that claim. Maybe you receive two free flashlights of your choice per month for your unconditional support. Or as you once said "I wonder" if you receive....or was it "I am not sure if you receive....."?

3. You did not comprehend my comment. It is not that I did not figure out the UI. It is that the UI is stupid, imo. (BTW: That was a cue for Fenix Troopers to now attack one more customer.)

4. "I wonder" if you claim you buy, and once in a while actually buy, broken lights so that you can claim you do not work for FS. How about that, Winermute?

5. Can you quote me a sentence in which I have supported the OP? And this is not a us v them situation. We all love flashlights. We all want good flashlights. We all want our money's worth and get what we pay for. Is that not enough common grounds?

BTW, Wintermute, I think you should stop banging your head.

 

[JRTJRT]

But the scratch is on the reflector and disassembling the head voids Fenix's warranty.

Oh.

Well obviously that leaves only one solution. Cage match. oo:

 

[4sevens]

Agreed. I repeat my advice (even kinda request): I think 4Sevens should act like the gentleman that he is and edit out all those emails excerpts/quotes.

I would be more than happy to edit everything out.
Turbo needs to either email me privated or publically here and I do it right away.
Or a moderator can contact me.

As mentioned, what I posted was in my defense and as a record of events
that has taken place. It was not intended to hard Turbo's reputation.

 

[katx]

I would be more than happy to edit everything out.
Turbo needs to either email me privated or publically here and I do it right away.
Or a moderator can contact me.

As mentioned, what I posted was in my defense and as a record of events
that has taken place. It was not intended to hard Turbo's reputation.

Huh? You do not need Turbo's permission or request to do the right thing. You have authority to edit your own post. You do not need a moderator to tell you to do the right thing either.

And "intent" is rather immaterial from the pov I am pushing. Customer info should be handled with respect and confidentiality and not be used to prove one's position on a public list. No *reasonable* person expects the info they give a business to be used later against them in a public forum.

You are obviously a thoughtful and reasonable person. Please consider removing the personal info.

This is not even necessarily about Turbo. This is about all of your customers (including me) who have emailed you and trusted you with their personal information.