Surefire LX2 (Part 2)

Candle Power Flashlight Forum

Help Support CPF:

Status
Not open for further replies.
Enumerating the reasons for the mis match does not make it, in my opinion, any less disheartening - especially for a first time buyer with high expectations. I said I accept it, That's all.
When the Hummer comes out of the factory it is all the same color, but even if it werent the user would not care because we paid for it he did not, I accept that as well.


PS as I write this my LX2 just now arrived in my office.
Opening the package now.......
 
I'm so jealous at you at the moment....:huh:

Enumerating the reasons for the mis match does not make it, in my opinion, any less disheartening - especially for a first time buyer with high expectations. I said I accept it, That's all.
When the Hummer comes out of the factory it is all the same color, but even if it werent the user would not care because we paid for it he did not, I accept that as well.


PS as I write this my LX2 just now arrived in my office.
Opening the package now.......
 
PS as I write this my LX2 just now arrived in my office.
Opening the package now.......

Welcome to the club!!:thumbsup:

I have to say, I absolutely HATE optics. But Surefire I think has finally turned me around, with this latest version in the LX2. I can totally live with mine and I've been thrilled with it.

MSax
 
SureFire's anodisation is a functional performance (thickness) finish - individual components are anodised in batches as this allows for more uniform performance characteristics compared with anodising the 'whole flashlight' in one go. Different sizes, shapes (mass / surface area etc) require different anodisation processing to achieve the same quality (thickness).

I would have expected to give us Flashaholics more credit for having a deeper and more technical understanding and appreciation of flashlight design & manufacture whereas there does seem to be a challenge to explain things over and over again.

Mil. Spec. (MIL-A-8625) Type III Hard Anodisation is a performance finish for tools not a cosmetic finish for toys. The hint is the name - Military Specification.

Of course when we invest what for most of us is a not-inconsiderable sum of money is a SureFire flashlight we can tend to forget what we know about SureFire and set our expectations to an altogether different set of criteria to what SureFire do and always have done.

I don't understand why we so often set ourselves up for disappointment when there is so much written and discussed about SureFire on CPF. Nothing should come as a surprise. Our expectations should be perfectly managed. Perhaps we can not be happy with our SureFire products unless we feel there is something wrong with them?

Al :green:

I understand your explanation and it makes perfect sense as to why certain parts will have different coloring. But with that being said, SF has produced matching parts in the past, meaning that it can be done. I have some SF lights that are mismatched and others that are near perfect, and to be honest, it's not that big of deal.

My problem with my LX2 wasn't just the mismatched ano or even the slightly green beam tint, but mainly the smudged optic. It was the combination that prompted me to call SF. Honestly, before noticing the smudge, I was happy to keep the light as-is. The smudged optic put me over the edge.


Don't get me wrong, I love SureFire and truly believe they make the very best flashlights in the world and I'm obviously willing to pay the price they ask for them.

In the end, what exactly are we buying from SF? An indestructible, mil-spec anodized aluminum tube, or a high quality tool that produces light? When the optic is mudged and you get to play the tint lottery, I'm thinking it's an indestructible aluminum tube first, and a light emitting device second. 🙁

Maybe I should just stick to SF's incans. :laughing:
 
When I get home I will compare output to some of my other lights and expect to be impressed.

Must say though that the ano matching on mine is pretty good between the body and tail switch, only the head is different - but not of concern, not objectionable.

That said, the led is not centered in the optic so I dont have a nice round hot spot. It is a bit mal formed. But that is on a white wall 15 feet away.

Also on the white wall I have 2 very green and wide rings at the outer edge of the spill beam. I dont recall seeing these rings commented on before. Is it normal?? They are ugly.
 
SF has produced matching parts in the past, meaning that it can be done.
Good point. We notice difference from the norm. If there was always variation then it wouldn't be an issue. However, there can often be less variation and this, because it looks better, becomes the 'pattern' we see in the randomness.
I would also add that SureFire marketing may not help themselves by creating more uniform products through the publishing process where images, like text and graphics are designed. Sometimes what appears to be a photo of a product is actually a high-resolution rendering giving the designer freedom and the options to create and deliver the whole message without having to resort to re-shoots etc.

My problem with my LX2 [was] mainly the smudged optic.
It seems that as long as the beam is not visibly impacted by the smudged fingerprint then in SureFire's practical terms - the product does what it is designed to. It's not an issue. Same goes for the 'tint lottery' we CPFers get some excited about.

In the end, what exactly are we buying from SF? An indestructible, mil-spec anodized aluminum tube, or a high quality tool that produces light? When the optic is mudged and you get to play the tint lottery, I'm thinking it's an indestructible aluminum tube first, and a light emitting device second.
🙁
I think the fact that SureFire consider mis-matched anodising, smudges/hairs/dust on the optics, and less-than-desirable-tints to be 'acceptable' means they consider their products to be light emitting devices first. To use SureFire's terminology - they make illumination tools with far less emphasis on cosmetic considerations such as perfect looking finish, smudge-free (etc) optics and the perfect tinted beam.

Of course SureFire understand they have a small number of customers who have very high expectations against characteristics SureFire doesn't consider as important and where possible SureFire have made efforts to support these customers by replacing products if they are particularily disappointed with the beam or finish etc.
 
I think the fact that SureFire consider mis-matched anodising, smudges/hairs/dust on the optics, and less-than-desirable-tints to be 'acceptable' means they consider their products to be light emitting devices first. To use SureFire's terminology - they make illumination tools with far less emphasis on cosmetic considerations such as perfect looking finish, smudge-free (etc) optics and the perfect tinted beam.

Of course SureFire understand they have a small number of customers who have very high expectations against characteristics SureFire doesn't consider as important and where possible SureFire have made efforts to support these customers by replacing products if they are particularily disappointed with the beam or finish etc.

Surefire has been consistant over the years. To me, it has been a combination of questionable business practices combined with fantastic products. Like dating a Super Model with the emotional stability of a hurricane, you put up with the headaches because the "product" is so fine. But you worry, because you know there's a good chance that the product will degrade. With physical good-looks, it's pretty much going to happen somewhere down the road. With high-end lights, it's something that can be helped.

A company with questionable business practices, often means it's just a matter of time before the fantastic products begin slipping in quality. (It's the main reason why I bought each and every single Surefire model I wanted, as soon as I learned that Surefire existed... And then learned of some of the company's business practices).

Very early on, I bought cheap, No-Name, lights from China. Still have a couple lying around the house. While the tint on some of them isn't the greatest, the internals are decent. I have lights from more expensive Made-in-China brands. Things such as smudges, hairs, or dust on the optics or inside the reflectors would be unacceptable; and don't exist on the lights I've bought. Even companies based in China are aware that such a thing would be unacceptable.

I don't care about mis-matched ano. If someone wants a pretty pony, there are far better choices than an LX2; or any other HA Surefire model. But to have foreign matter inside the head or inside the reflector? And Surefire considers that to be "acceptable?" Let's just say, I'm glad I stocked up on Surefire models before the company became so accepting.

When a company is known for making high-end lights that are far from cheap, they should not be surprised if their customers have high-end expectations; especially in terms of quality.
 
You are obviously looking at a Surefire light from the prespective of a crazed CPF community/fan, rather than Surefire's customer BASE. I fall victom to this as well. But, keep in mind that Surefire designs tools for LE, Military, etc. not CPFers. That base ranks runtime, beam quality, durability, and reliability way over cosmetics. If CPFers were Surefire's main client base, I bet we'd have perfectly matching anodization in multiple colors.

Hope you get my point.

MSax
:shakehead :shakehead :shakehead

Surefire tries to sell its products to everyone even Joe the plumber.
Now we can buy Surefire products from a hardware store. What's next?
 
When the Military buys a new Hummer it is painted boring old flat desert sand.

But still only one color, not different colors for doors and hood etc.

I wonder why a hi-tech company like SF can not control the color better, small variations can happen, but some of the examples are rather big variations.
 
The purpose of the coating is not color. Hence color is not important.
It is interesting though that we are discussing the unimportant things.
Over and over again.

Speaks volumes about the quality of the discussions on CPF these days. The usefulness of what can be read is greatly diminished I think.

Then again ... that's IMHO, of course, and everyone has different priorities.

bernie
 
Well, I am over the colors also, she actually looks better the more I look at her.
I am even (just about) over the somewhat off center led.
But will someone PLEASE comment on the green rings my light has at the outer edge of the spill beam?
I will be over that too if the other LX2's out there exhibit the same characteristic.
Does your LX2 have those outer green rings?
Thanks for your input!
 
Well, I am over the colors also, she actually looks better the more I look at her.
I am even (just about) over the somewhat off center led.
But will someone PLEASE comment on the green rings my light has at the outer edge of the spill beam?
I will be over that too if the other LX2's out there exhibit the same characteristic.
Does your LX2 have those outer green rings?
Thanks for your input!


I don't have an LX2 to compare, but it sounds like the green rings MIGHT be an artifact produced by the LED seating off-center under the optic. I've worked with a number of similar heads... E2DL, E1B, KX2, and such... and every once in a while the LED and optic just aren't quite aligned properly in the head. It could also be a product of a glue overspill that impeded on part of the optical area inside the head. You might want to consider exchanging for another LX2, which your dealer and even SureFire directly ought to be able to take care of without much of a hassle. It just sounds like your specific piece might be a little off.
 
No green rings here, just some discoloration at the outer edges of the beam, not annoying. If the were brighter though they could detract the eyes, not because of the color, but because of the light in a place where it doesn't need to be.
bernie
 
FWIW, the LX2 I received has been a great tool for what I use it for. Mainly having enough throw to let me see overhead power lines above my TV Microwave Truck BEFORE I elevate the 48 foot mast, to make sure there are no overhead power lines to end my shift early and permanently. It is a critical tool for me that has performed flawlessly. I am quite frequently asked to perform under tight deadlines in the dark and I know I can depend upon my Surefires. I have a 5 year old TW4 that looks like brand new despite being carried every day for years alongside a Leatherman Crunch and a large kryring of keys. No scratches and a very tough exterior. The LX-2 also has no scratches. The TW-5 is not my backup anymore since the flood beam pattern of the Original Luxeon 5-Watt doesn't have quite the throw I need. My current backup EDC is a Quark 123-2. It has lost a lot of paint from the clip and the edges of the anodizing are showing a little bare aluminum but I really don't care! It has enough reach most of the time when I've loaned my Lx2 to friends from other TV stations to find dropped items or make a quick trip to the woods to make a leave a DNA sample at a remote location and not fall into a ditch. To make a long story short (I know, too late), for what I want a flashlight for, mainly reliability, efficiency, and durability, they don't get any better than Surefire.
 
This is my LX2 beam. Pictures are bounced off of a white ceiling at a distance of 3-4 feet.
The first 2 pictures make the problem appear worse than it seem in real life while the last 2 pictures make it look better than in real life.
I dont know why the camera takes such variations in the shots but it's a $250 point and shoot.
What do you think? (beside that I should get better at photography)


015.jpg

016.jpg

017.jpg

018.jpg
 
Just got my new one today. Doesn't have quite the perfect round beam the first one did, but still pretty good. Tint is about the same as my first one. No green on low, unless I just can't see it. I think I'll hold on to this one. Now I need someone to buy my E1B to take the $$$ bite out of this purchase!
 
I've worked in plating/Ano baths before and this is exactly what happens. When making natural HA there is always variation between lots. And a volume manufacturer like SF sends in every component separately for consistant thickness and strength (the important things as opposed to mixing different parts together just for color. Mixing different geometry parts will make the anodizing quality vary between parts because the current flow will not be the same for every part. What SF is doing is far better than trying to match color. And I suspect the predominance of dyed ano is used to cover up color variation across each single part that results from uneven current through the ano bath. We used to spend a lot of time designing the racks we hung the parts on to assure even current. That is impossible to do with mixed parts and the result is always uneven ano.
I prefer to see what SF is doing compared to what some others are doing. I have, use, and enjoy many brands of lights, but respect SF methods more.
It probably happens because the separate parts, rather than whole lights, are anodised together. In other words, all the tailcaps are done in one bath, all the bodies in another, the heads in a third... I don't know, but I guess that is what happens. They probably try to achieve uniformity, but there are bound to be some variations if it is done that way.
Because all the 'complaints' in this thread are quite mundane, I am actually tempted to get an LX2 - it must be a spectacular light.
 
Last edited:
Because all the 'complaints' in this thread are extremely mundane, I am actually tempted to get an LX2 - it must be a spectacular light.

It's my new favorite light by a long mile. I just ordered my second copy as a matter of fact, and I hated optics prior to this light. The beam has really grown on me, and I love the reach it has. The best throw from any LED light I've personally owned. I also love that it is nearly as complact as my original L4, with twice the output and better runtime with two stages. There's not much I'd change about it.
 
Numbers, this is roughly what I see with mine. A TIR beam won't win a beauty contest. But outside, I don't know any better. The outer rings are not brihgt enough to be a disturbance to me, but I guess this is a very subjective thing to say.

For example, the outer rings of the Photon Microlights are more disturbing than those rings to me.

bernie
 
I just got a SF diffuser cap for my LX2 and It works great. I highly recommend it! The LX2 has a nice defused/ flood beam with it and when you need more throw just pop it off. A must have for the LX2. My A2 just arrived today and I was messing around with the both after dark. If you gave me a choice between the two and I could also have the diffuser cap on the LX2, I would take the LX2. The flood is brighter and more diffused. The overall output is a lot better and again when you need more throw just pop it off.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top