**NEW** Fenix E40 (4AA, XP-E R4, 17500cd)

[gopajti]

I found this..

retail price approx.: 43.64 USD

 

[firelord777]

Looks interesting, but with a LD40 body no?

 

[BLUE LED]

Re: **NEW** Fenix E40 (4AA, XP-E, 17500cd)

Does it use a R2 or R3 XP-E ?

 

[inspirit]

Re: **NEW** Fenix E40 (4AA, XP-E, 17500cd)

Does it use a R2 or R3 XP-E ?

◎Cree XP-E (R4) LED

 

[firelord777]

Looks like it'll throw noticeably better than the LD40 XP-G, but slightly less bright:)

 

[kj2]

It;s just a new LD40 :p
Looks good, but won't take one.

edit; Had a look at this light, at my local dealer. Do think now that I'll take one. That plastic handle is very handy in cold-weather. :)

 

[yliu]

I can already imagine how concentrated the beam will be:devil:

 

[firelord777]

Yeah, reflector looks decently big

 

[Ezeriel]

Meh...

Only 3 brightness levels? the forth mode wasted on a strobe? :thumbsdow




Unless this thing is a throw-king, or a follow-up to the TK20, I don't really see a reason for it.

 

[kwalker]

Why get this when a Jetbeam PA40 delivers 468lm and is structurally almost identical? > love my PA40

 

[Abyssos]

Ack... Only 220 lumens??!!! What is the point?

 

[tobrien]

i think the point of this light is to bring dual switches (for instant strobe, mode switching, etc.) on a flashlight to the general population.

 

[firelord777]

Does anyone know how much it'll cost?

@Kwalker, the PA40 and this serve two different purposes. Your PA40, while surely much brighter, simply won't throw as far as this. The PA was around 5K lux I believe, this is 17K (supposedly). However, it is obviously not as bright as the PA:)

Cheers

 

[firelord777]

Tobrien my friend, yes, I believe you are correct, I assumed this as well seeing that "E" in E40 stands for "Economy", so perhaps it would be more feasible for more people?

Regards

 

[Blindasabat]

That looks SOOO much like that old Streamlight 4AA.

 

[tam17]

What happened to the efficiency? PA40 is supposed to run 6h on 220lm using the same battery format. A step backward IMHO...

 

[monkeyboy]

What happened to the efficiency? PA40 is supposed to run 6h on 220lm using the same battery format. A step backward IMHO...

That's to be expected really as the PA40 has 4 times the die area and therefore will be running much more efficiently at that level. The advantage of the E40 is throw. I would have expected a bit better from the E40 though but we need to see runtime graphs from both to compare. Specs tell you very little, even if they are ANSI rated.

 

[fiberguy]

$40 for a decent durable light from a trusted manufacturer? I'd probably buy one. It's a little throwy but it would have its function. I've wasted more on lights that were a bigger gamble before (and lost, of course)

 

[Animalmother]

$40 for a decent durable light from a trusted manufacturer? I'd probably buy one. It's a little throwy but it would have its function. I've wasted more on lights that were a bigger gamble before (and lost, of course)

E40 the rapper?
LOL, I am glad to see this. Pretty much for more throw. I am actually glad to see them use that emitter.
I figured I would seen the LD41/LD50 though. It's actually brighter then the LD40.

Still love my PA40(SMO) though.

 

[ico]

I think this would be just great specially for normal folks just like the E21 that is both affordable and built like a tank. As I was reading its specs, I was even ashamed because my Quark turbo X can only do about 10,000 lux; not that they can be compared but it is my farthest thrower as of now:mecry: