Quark "Turbo" Thread

[Nickyan]

EDC = Every Day Carry.

Preferrably a not to large, heavy or bulky light/knife/etc so you can have it on or with you every day, throughout the day. Preferences vary, I wouldn't consider anything larger than 1xAA or 1xCR123 as an EDC.

 

[corvettesR1]

Hi gamehawker .I sent you a private message . Find your private messages at the top /right side of the page .

 

[gamehawker]

Thanks for all of your advice, I decided to go with the Fenix PD30+. I added a flip up diffuser too.

I also got a 12 pack of Surefire CR123s.

 

[kwkarth]

I received the Quark Turbo 123x2 today. I love it! It's a great light! The beam is much tighter than from the Ti 123x2. Everything is nicely done.
Thanks 4Sevens!!

 

[dudu84]

I received the Quark Turbo 123x2 today. I love it! It's a great light! The beam is much tighter than from the Ti 123x2. Everything is nicely done.
Thanks 4Sevens!!

Do you notice any dark spot in the beam due to smooth reflector?

 

[Hikin-Mike]

Still deciding between the Fenix PD30+ and the Quark turbo.

I'm on the same fence.

Two years ago I bought a Fenix P3D Q5. I really liked that light until it ran away and didn't come back. I like the size of the 123x2. Although the P3D was useful at lighting dark areas, my favorite thing to do was to show it off. (A mines-brighter-than-yours thing.)

 

[kwkarth]

Do you notice any dark spot in the beam due to smooth reflector?

I was expecting a pretty flawed beam due to the smooth reflector, but I was pleasantly surprised to see a pretty artifact free beam with lots of throw. From about 4 inches on out it pretty clean beam profile. At about 10 feet, I see a 10-11 foot diameter, very usable spill with a 1 ft diameter hot spot. Nice transition from one to the other. In the hotspot itself, it seems brightest in the outermost ring from 12 in. to maybe 10 in. the rest is uniform. The "ring" is just perceptible when hunting white walls, but invisible when looking at anything else.

Compared to a Ti Quark the hotspot of the TQ is about half the size of the QTi, and of course, twice as bright.

 

[BentHeadTX]

Thank you kw, I'm getting my AA2 Turbo tomorrow

Since mine will be used for outdoors, I'm sure I'll be pleased with the beam. White wall hunting outdoors in not in season so I'll have to suffer.

 

[jhc37013]

I was expecting a pretty flawed beam due to the smooth reflector, but I was pleasantly surprised to see a pretty artifact free beam with lots of throw. From about 4 inches on out it pretty clean beam profile. At about 10 feet, I see a 10-11 foot diameter, very usable spill with a 1 ft diameter hot spot. Nice transition from one to the other. In the hotspot itself, it seems brightest in the outermost ring from 12 in. to maybe 10 in. the rest is uniform. The "ring" is just perceptible when hunting white walls, but invisible when looking at anything else.

Compared to a Ti Quark the hotspot of the TQ is about half the size of the QTi, and of course, twice as bright.

Do you have any of these lights to compare throw.

MG Mini II with turbo head
Eagletac P20C2 or T100C2
Fenix PD30+ or TK11

 

[dudu84]

I was expecting a pretty flawed beam due to the smooth reflector, but I was pleasantly surprised to see a pretty artifact free beam with lots of throw. From about 4 inches on out it pretty clean beam profile. At about 10 feet, I see a 10-11 foot diameter, very usable spill with a 1 ft diameter hot spot. Nice transition from one to the other. In the hotspot itself, it seems brightest in the outermost ring from 12 in. to maybe 10 in. the rest is uniform. The "ring" is just perceptible when hunting white walls, but invisible when looking at anything else.

Compared to a Ti Quark the hotspot of the TQ is about half the size of the QTi, and of course, twice as bright.

Thanks for your experience, Kwkarth :thumbsup:
I'm waiting for a full review

 

[Burgess]

(i posted this first in the MarketPlace thread.
Hope it's OK that i'm running it here, also.)


Glad to see these first-hand reports of new Quark Turbo.

My request, if anyone could do so . . . .


I would really like to see this new flashlight, on High mode (not Maximum)

compared with the venerable Streamlight ProPolymer 4AA Luxeon.


Does Quark Turbo have similar tight beam and throw ?


No photos are necessary -- verbal descriptions will be quite sufficient.

Just wanna' know if it can match the "reach" of the Streamlight.

(when running in High mode, not the maximum)


Thank you, everyone, for your help and assistance.

_

 

[Moonshadow]

No photos are necessary --

Hmmm - speak for yourself. We want beamshots !!

 

[run4jc]

It's an amazing light for the money! Took mine out this morning and, unfortunately, the photos I took in the dark did not take - in the fumbling around in darkness I failed to set up my camera correctly. I did manage to grab 2 quick photos shown below. Before the photos, my benchmark for 'small' light is the Surefire LX2. Cut to the chase - does the 123.2 Turbo match the LX2? Darn near. The beam does have a slight 'warm spot' in the middle - and the spot is about 50% the size of the LX2, but the spill is brighter and has the defined edge that some love....the LX2 still has the less bright spill with a more gradual transition. The LX2 is still my favorite for the design, beam quality and UI. But the Quark is VERY close (that's why I've purchased 4 different versions already including one I gave to my brother for his birthday.)

Bottom line? If a friend asked me what is the BEST value for the money in a small flashlight, I would not hesitate to recommend one of the Quarks, particularly one of the iterations of the Turbo. I did get an 18650 battery tube but haven't used it yet - mine was running off two Ultrafire RCRs this morning.

Here's the Quark 123T Neutral white versus the 123.2 Turbo against a beige wall at about 6 feet:

And here is the Surefire LX2 left, 123.2 Turbo right, same conditions:

All in all, the team at 4Sevens has a home run on their hands! I still love my Surefires, but the Quark lights are a tremendous value that are obviously created for the members of this forum. I EDC my 123T neutral and it is taking some abuse with no ill effects - the build quality of all these lights is terrific.

Great deal - great job!

:twothumbs:twothumbs

 

[gswitter]

I would really like to see this new flashlight, on High mode (not Maximum)

compared with the venerable Streamlight ProPolymer 4AA Luxeon.

Does Quark Turbo have similar tight beam and throw ?

The High beam is very similar to the Streamlight, and the spill intensities are about equal. But the Streamlight's hot spot is more concentrated, and it throws farther.

Every time I lament the lack of an update to the Streamlight, it's hammered home yet again how well the ProPoly 4AA Lux has held up. Such a great light.

 

[apontes]

Every time I lament the lack of an update to the Streamlight, it's hammered home yet again how well the ProPoly 4AA Lux has held up. Such a great light.

+1
Don't forget form factor. Very confortable to handle.

 

[bcwang]

The High beam is very similar to the Streamlight, and the spill intensities are about equal. But the Streamlight's hot spot is more concentrated, and it throws farther.

Every time I lament the lack of an update to the Streamlight, it's hammered home yet again how well the ProPoly 4AA Lux has held up. Such a great light.

Hmm, isn't the propoly 4AA lux supposed to be 40 lumens? And yet you're saying the spill is equal but the streamlight has a more concentrated hotspot? I still have a hard time believing the propoly is only 40 lumens. I've always said it looks way brighter than 40 lumens and your test is reinforcing that thought.

 

[uplite]

2 x CR123 version drives the LED at 990mA...Strange that it is rated for only 230 lumens out the front, the LED is screaming along at over 350 lumens

WTF? :thinking:

Those numbers would mean that the Turbo head, with a smooth reflector, loses 34% of the emitter lumens at 990mA.

Meanwhile the regular Q123 with a rough reflector is rated 170 lumens OTF with 194 emitter lumens...so it loses only 12% of the emitter lumens.

Maybe 4sevens posted the wrong numbers for this light?

-Jeff

 

[gswitter]

Hmm, isn't the propoly 4AA lux supposed to be 40 lumens? And yet you're saying the spill is equal but the streamlight has a more concentrated hotspot?

Here are my lux readings - all taken at one meter except ceiling bounces:

Streamlight PorPolymer 4AA Luxeon (on 4x Duracell alkaline AA cells)

• 3290 lux, center of hot spot
• 27 lux, mid point of spill
• 8 lux, ceiling bounce*

Quark 123^2 Turbo (on 2x 4Sevens CR123A cells)

• 2410 lux, center of hot spot
• 31 lux, mid point of spill
• 11 lux, ceiling bounce*

* Ceiling bounce tests were done in a small bathroom, light was one meter from the ceiling, meter was two meters from the ceiling.
​

The center lux readings are a little deceptive though, because the Quark hotspot dwarfs the ProPoly's in diameter.

 

[kyhunter1]

Got my turbo 123'2 today. It is my first quark, and well pleased well the quality of these lights. I held off on quarks for a long time, but did not realize what I was missing out on. I think it is brighter than 230 lumens compared to some of my other 200ish lumen lights. The tint appears to be bright white. 4sevens probably gave a very conservative OTF rating. Im thinking closer to 300 OTF. It has the dreaded light area in the hotspot. It's not horrible, but is a little noticeable. This will be my last light of any manufacturer with a SMO reflector until beam issues are worked out. I love throw and would rather use a SMO, but if I put a considerable amount of money in a light, I want a perfect beam. The UI was easy to figure out and program modes. Right now, I have Turbo on tight, and strobe on loose. It is a versatile light to have with the choice of modes and option to have insane runtimes. When it gets more dark this evening, I will have a better idea of throw.

 

[Marduke]

WTF? :thinking:

Those numbers would mean that the Turbo head, with a smooth reflector, loses 34% of the emitter lumens at 990mA.

Meanwhile the regular Q123 with a rough reflector is rated 170 lumens OTF with 194 emitter lumens...so it loses only 12% of the emitter lumens.

Maybe 4sevens posted the wrong numbers for this light?

-Jeff

47's doesn't advertise typical values, but lower bound conservative.