My new Maelstrom G5 - likes/dislikes/suggestions

[Chevy-SS]

Received my new Maelstrom G5 a couple of days ago from 4Sevens (great speedy service, as always!). This is probably my 10th Quark flashlight purchase. I have mainly bought the small 'Quark tactical' 123*2 and the AA*2, which I give away as presents. They are awesome little lights. I carry a 123*2 'tactical' as my EDC...... Anyway, on to the G5.

This is not a 'review' by any means. I do not have the equipment nor the technical expertise to do a thorough review. Rather, this is simply my personal opinion, and likes/dislikes/suggestions about the G5.

LIKES:
1) Quality (it's nice)
2) Ability to use 123 or 18650 batteries

DISLIKES:
1) The UI - there's no 'turbo' mode in the general subset! Argh, what were they thinking? And I would have much rather had med/low available with the Max/strobe (who EVER uses SOS and beacon?). The small '123*2 tactical' I currently carry has a neat UI, where you can choose your two favorite modes, and then program them - one with tight head, one with loose head. Well, the G5 has four different positions available on the head. Why can't I program those four spots with the modes (and order) of my choosing? That would have been a thousand times better than the current UI (just MHO, of course).
2) OP reflector - I would like to see the option to get an OP reflector. This light is definitely a 'thrower', but how many times do you need to light something up at 100+ yards?
3) Lumens - would have liked more
4) Mode indicator - 4 modes, yet no visible, audible or tactile signal indicating which mode setting you're in

SUGGESTIONS for the ultimate G5:
1) UI change - mimicking 'Quark 123*2 Tactical', thus 4 FAVORITE modes available
2) OP reflector option
3) Nuke mode on strobe - overdrive the emitter for the strobe function
4) Larger emitter, perhaps SST-50

Anyway, those are my initial thoughts...............

-

 

[ebow86]

Seems like a nice light, what I'm anxious to hear over time is how well the quality control is. That's the reason I have stayed away from the 4sevens quarks, the quality control is just too poor. It's really a shame too, they are such well designed, bright, inovative lights. Hope you enjoy your G5, fill us in later on how well it holds up after a few months use.

 

[psychbeat]

Id probably just prefer a turbo head for my EG C2 if I wanted
throw and/or an XR-E pill or module.
some of the available XP-G modules offer as many
or more lumens already.

the G5 dosent seem to offer me anything a nice drop-in
offers except for more modes which Im not interested in.

as far as QC goes I only own one 4sevens light (a qmini123)
and I LOVE it for edc. I think they stand behind their
products and generally make cool stuff.
just gonna pass on this one.

 

[the.Mtn.Man]

Chevy-SS:

Your criticisms aren't taking into account the market the light was designed for. It's intended for law enforcement and other tactical situations and was built with those requirements in mind. According to the 4Sevens, 95% of intended users will just keep the light on Max with quick access to strobe if needed. All the other bells and whistles were added to appeal to flashlight enthusiasts but without compromising the light's primary function. It's a tactical light, but you seem to want a general purpose light.

 

[red02]

Chevy-SS:

Your criticisms aren't taking into account the market the light was designed for. It's intended for law enforcement and other tactical situations and was built with those requirements in mind. According to the 4Sevens, 95% of intended users will just keep the light on Max with quick access to strobe if needed. All the other bells and whistles were added to appeal to flashlight enthusiasts but without compromising the light's primary function. It's a tactical light, but you seem to want a general purpose light.

Regarding a general purpose light the criticisms hold valid. Saying that its was designed to have or not have some features does not take away from the fact that those features are there or not. OP simply stated his dislike for some of them, I don't think this type of thing should be discouraged.

Since I don't need a tac light I stay away for particularly those reasons and don't compromise on what I need.

 

[Chevy-SS]

Chevy-SS:

Your criticisms aren't taking into account the market the light was designed for. It's intended for law enforcement and other tactical situations and was built with those requirements in mind. According to the 4Sevens, 95% of intended users will just keep the light on Max with quick access to strobe if needed. All the other bells and whistles were added to appeal to flashlight enthusiasts but without compromising the light's primary function. It's a tactical light, but you seem to want a general purpose light.

I understand who it was "designed for". I bought this light with the intent of using it for civilian defensive purposes, so my use is fairly close to the target market. The thing is - why couldn't the UI be user-programmable, similar to the Quark 123*2 Tactical?

Regardless, I will be very curious to see G5 feedback from LEO's and military users. If any LEO's or military view this thread, please post your comments on the G5, especially the UI.

thanks

 

[the.Mtn.Man]

That's the reason I have stayed away from the 4sevens quarks, the quality control is just too poor.

I think this is a common misconception propagated by a vocal minority on this forum. I've owned three Quark lights over the past year, and the quality on all of them has been excellent. It's just that people who share my experience don't feel a compulsion to start multiple forum threads about it.

 

[the.Mtn.Man]

why couldn't the UI be user-programmable, similar to the Quark 123*2 Tactical?

Probably because it's designed for professionals who a need a light that "just works" and don't want to fuss around with having to program it.

Or to put it another way, keep it simple, stupid.

 

[Viper715]

I have had at least a dozen 4Sevens lights. Sold some just didn't like the form factor of some of the lights. The ones that I have kept have been the 123-2 tactical, 123-2 Turbo Tactical and several mini's and I must say that the quality on all of the lights Ive had have been excellent. They have stood up to a heck of a beating without any problems. The Turbo has been rifle mounted and has withstood the shock quite well. Every other light I have had has stood up against drops water you name it.

This question is directed at the OP. What is the purpose that you use this light for? The light was specifically designed to be a light for tactical operators and used on weapons. I do not own one but from what I have read about the light I think it is about the best UI for law enforcement like it was designed. When I am working the only two levels I ever use that really count are high and strobe. High is used 95% and strobe 5%. Most leo's and tactical operators don't have much need for other levels when it counts. Heck most are still using Magchargers including my department's car mounted lights. I think the G5 is set up the best for the job but maybe I am wrong and don't know what I am talking about.

 

[copperfox]

I would also like to see a VLOP reflector available. I almost took the DIY approach with mine - I had it removed and I was getting ready to spray it with clear spray paint, but I decided to wait.

For me the main reason this things needs a textured reflector is because of the dim spot in the center of the hotspot.

 

[TwitchALot]

I understand who it was "designed for". I bought this light with the intent of using it for civilian defensive purposes, so my use is fairly close to the target market. The thing is - why couldn't the UI be user-programmable, similar to the Quark 123*2 Tactical?

I'll take the easy one. For simplicity and uniformity. What if you pick up your buddy's G5 by accident while gearing up? You expect max and get low? Your BUDDY is equally messed up, expecting low and blinding himself on a white wall while checking a room out? Programmed modes may make sense for individual users, but if you're part of a team using similar gear (or at the very least, similar lights) in such situations, it's a liability, plain and simple.

 

[andrewnewman]

So I appreciate that professionals might not want to program a light but just "have it work". This doesn't mean that the light couldn't be pre-set for the target professionals but allow us enthusiastic amateurs an opportunity to customize the light.

I have to agree with the OP on the programmability issue. I would buy this light in an instant if I could set up the four positions to be moonlight -> medium -> turbo -> strobe.

As far as quality control is concerned, I have to, sadly, state that my own experience has been pretty mixed. I have had more returns with 4Sevens products than all other manufacturer's lights combined. I have a drawer with 4 Quark reverse clickies that all don't work reliably (25 to 50% of the time the contacts don't complete the circuit). The one that I use is *mostly* reliable but still glitches more than any other clicky light I own. The Quark forward clicky seems more reliable but I have several where a very small amount of un-anodized thread is visible. In two of my Q-Minis the gold plating on the positive contact covers an uneven splotch less than 50% of the surface area of the metal. My Preon I (titanium) has threads so rough that even after many months of use, it feels like finger nails scratching a blackboard when I twist it.

I love the design and features of the 4Sevens line of flashlights but I don't think it's entirely unfair to observe periodic Q/A issues.

 

[fishhead]

While the light was certainly designed for LEOs, the second set of modes was thrown in for us flashlight enthusiasts. It comes so close to being nearly the perfect light for me, if only that second set of modes were 'low-med-high-turbo' instead of 'moonlight-low-med-high'. It's not like I don't have a second light I can use if I really need moonlight mode....

 

[Chevy-SS]

......The light was specifically designed to be a light for tactical operators and used on weapons. .....

Well, if the primary purpose is a weapon-mounted light, then it most assuredly needs OP reflector, doesn't it? It's very throwy, with tiny hotspot, which I certainly wouldn't want on my gun. But then again, I'm not in SWAT or SOCOM.

 

[Chevy-SS]

I'll take the easy one. For simplicity and uniformity. What if you pick up your buddy's G5 by accident while gearing up? You expect max and get low? Your BUDDY is equally messed up, expecting low and blinding himself on a white wall while checking a room out? Programmed modes may make sense for individual users, but if you're part of a team using similar gear (or at the very least, similar lights) in such situations, it's a liability, plain and simple.

That's a good reply. I get your point. But if I was a tactical operator going on a night raid, one of the first things I would confirm is that my light is on the proper setting.... for the very reasons you mention.

 

[Saint_Dogbert]

With the programming on the tactical series lights, it is possible to accidentally enter programming mode - maybe not likely, but in a tactical light, why take that chance? Getting around this problem would probably add too much complexity to the design to make it worth including on the G5.

I am curious to know - how big a difference is there between 200 and 350 lumens? If you turn the light on at one of those levels, would you know what mode you were in without checking?

 

[TwitchALot]

So I appreciate that professionals might not want to program a light but just "have it work". This doesn't mean that the light couldn't be pre-set for the target professionals but allow us enthusiastic amateurs an opportunity to customize the light.

I have to agree with the OP on the programmability issue. I would buy this light in an instant if I could set up the four positions to be moonlight -> medium -> turbo -> strobe.

If we can program it, an operator could program it by accident. Or his buddy checking out his new light by twisting the head around could accidentally program it. The compromise was already made- we have a standard UI and a tactical UI, and there are already criticisms about that. No UI will satisfy everyone, and if you don't like it, don't buy the light; no light is for everyone. For people who don't like the fixed UI, there are people who don't like a programmable UI.

As far as quality control is concerned, I have to, sadly, state that my own experience has been pretty mixed. I have had more returns with 4Sevens products than all other manufacturer's lights combined.

Same, although I also own more 4Sevens lights than other manufacturer's lights.

I have a drawer with 4 Quark reverse clickies that all don't work reliably (25 to 50% of the time the contacts don't complete the circuit). The one that I use is *mostly* reliable but still glitches more than any other clicky light I own.

Did you tighten/loctite your tailcap retaining ring? As far as I'm concerned, a loose tailcap retaining ring is the #1 cause of "switch failures."

The Quark forward clicky seems more reliable but I have several where a very small amount of un-anodized thread is visible. In two of my Q-Minis the gold plating on the positive contact covers an uneven splotch less than 50% of the surface area of the metal. My Preon I (titanium) has threads so rough that even after many months of use, it feels like finger nails scratching a blackboard when I twist it.

I love the design and features of the 4Sevens line of flashlights but I don't think it's entirely unfair to observe periodic Q/A issues.

Sounds like you don't lubricate your lights (Q-Mini issue aside, which I didn't find to affect function noticeably) nor do any basic PM. To be fair, this isn't included in the instructions (IIRC), even though IMO, it should be. Nevertheless, it's your job to take care of your gear. If you don't lubricate your lights, don't expect silky smooth threads- especially in a Ti light.

I get your point. But if I was a tactical operator going on a night raid, one of the first things I would confirm is that my light is on the proper setting.... for the very reasons you mention.

And if you forget because there are a million other things you have to do and worry about, someone dies or gets injured because your light was in the wrong mode because someone thought it would be a good idea to make these lights programmable, and your team uses eight of these lights?

Or you could just make the lights consistently, so even if someone gets their lights mixed up, all they have to do is tighten the head (no matter the UI its in) to get a hell of a lot of light?

I know which one I'd pick. And I don't know about you, but if I were a tactical operator, what mode my flashlight is in is not something I'd want to be checking on top of armor placement, weapons and ammunition status, team status, entry plans, etc etc etc etc.

 

[recDNA]

Chevy-SS:

Your criticisms aren't taking into account the market the light was designed for. It's intended for law enforcement and other tactical situations and was built with those requirements in mind. According to the 4Sevens, 95% of intended users will just keep the light on Max with quick access to strobe if needed. All the other bells and whistles were added to appeal to flashlight enthusiasts but without compromising the light's primary function. It's a tactical light, but you seem to want a general purpose light.

I think they ARE taking law enforcement into account. Officers I know have no use for blinky modes so would be unable to access turbo. Without turbo this becomes just another XP-G flashlight for twice the money.

 

[recDNA]

With the programming on the tactical series lights, it is possible to accidentally enter programming mode - maybe not likely, but in a tactical light, why take that chance? Getting around this problem would probably add too much complexity to the design to make it worth including on the G5.

I am curious to know - how big a difference is there between 200 and 350 lumens? If you turn the light on at one of those levels, would you know what mode you were in without checking?

One difference is the value. How many Maelstroms would be sold at this price point if they only produced 200 lumens?

I don't see why so many people are making excuses for this UI.

All that need be done to "fix" it is add turbo to the general mode.

Is there anyone who wouldn't buy this flashlight or even complain if turbo were in the general mode? Please.

 

[recDNA]

While the light was certainly designed for LEOs, the second set of modes was thrown in for us flashlight enthusiasts. It comes so close to being nearly the perfect light for me, if only that second set of modes were 'low-med-high-turbo' instead of 'moonlight-low-med-high'. It's not like I don't have a second light I can use if I really need moonlight mode....

ANY UI that allows turbo, med, and some kind of low that are easily accessible would please me...and I believe the vast majority of users. The only problem with the general mode is that it lacks turbo. IF one of the other modes have to be left out to include turbo would people really miss it?