This review was posted on CPF a couple years ago, but I did a search and can't bring it up, but it might help a little bit, at the risk of stealing the thread, my apologies therefore.
It's been seen before on CPF, but still is pertinent here.
This review had its genesis months ago when Jim Sexton reviewed the MagCharger60 and TigerLight11. After in depth analysis of his notes and thoughts, I realized that although the MC60 and TL11 were probably the most widespread of the incandescent high performance modifications, neither approached, even remotely, the numbers of stock MagChargers and Tigerlights out there. I have worked on it off and on for more than 3 months, changing my opinions as I have experimented with both the stock and modified versions of each light.
The two lights lend themselves to easy comparisons because of their very similar normal uses and runtimes, though the larger MagCharger has an obvious advantage there. However, a straight up comparison of the lights seemed pretty mundane, until I realized that adding the Surefire M6 with its low output lamp assembly would give me three lights with very similar runtimes and outputs. Where the MagCharger and Tigerlight are rechargeable, the M6 uses a battery carrier and 6 123A cells. I had hoped to add the Jim Sexton built regulated battery pack to the comparison, but then realized that it would best be left to a new comparison of the modifications of each light, and I will update this review with my thoughts on the modified lights when theM6-R pack becomes available.
Another drawback to my review was that I did not have a camera adequate to capture decent beamshots of each light. That has now been remedied, so I will attempt to add those shots, perhaps with the capable assistance of Codeman, who fixes all my posting deficiencies.
First, we should examine the manufacturers statements and specifications of the lights.
Each of the 3 is hard annodized with Type III annodizing, the Tigerlight and MagCharger in black, the Surefire M6 in natural gray/green.
The MagCharger is the largest, at 3D sized, with the Tigerlight shorter but fatter, and the M6 even shorter yet. The MC stands out from its lesser brethren by sporting 2 silver rings below the switch, which are actually the external charger contacts for the clip in charger.
The TL, comes in two versions, the FBOP and Standard versions. The FBOP (Federal Bureau of Prisons), reviewed here, is shorter due to the lack of a pepper spray compartment. For most modifiers, it is the preferred version, but performance of the flashlight portion is identical, with the Standard version losing any size advantage over the MagCharger. Tigerlights have a Gold ring at the neck of the light, giving it some distinction from any other all black flashlight.
The M6 is the most distinctive appearing of the 3, and indeed may be the most distinctive appearing flashlight, period. There is no doubt that it is something special from the first time you see it, with it's grooves and ridges and serrations. This is a SERIOUS light, and lest anyone forget it, the M6 itself screams out its seriousness. This light is the most weaponlike flashlight ever built, to my mind, while the new scalloped bezel version even intensifies that belief.
All three lights feature high output lamp assemblies or lamps. While the average 3D flashlight puts out less than 30 lumens, these lights all pump out upwards of 150, easily 5 times the output of stock 3D sized lights.
The MagCharger features a rounded tip lamp that appears to all in the know to be manufactured by WelchAllyn. The lamp, running at 6 volts on five 1/2D NiCad cells and updated a few years ago, produces 40,000 peak beam candlepower, according to Maglite. The bulb is believed to produce approximately 175-225 lumens. The beam is whiter than most stock beams, and obviously much brighter as well, due to the Halogen/Xenon construction. The reflector is smooth, spun stainless steel, polished to a mirror finish. It resides in a high temperature plastic enclosure which is cammed, allowing focusing with a simple ¼ twist of the head. This feature is patented and jealously guarded by Maglite. The light is 12.6 inches (320 mm) long 1.56 inches in diameter ( 39.67mm) and weighs 32 ounces (907 grams). The largest bezel diameter is 2.31 inches (58.72mm). Runtime is quoted at 2 hours, but realistically is closer to 70-85 minutes before significant dimming is noted. The pack will improve somewhat with use, so run time will go up slightly from that found on the first run.
The Tigerlight comes with a bulb believed to be produced by Carley lamps, which is believed to produce about 250-275 lumens at 7.2 volts running on six 4/5A NiMH cells, and is potted in a smooth spun aluminum highly polished reflector by Carley. Theoretically, this allows the filament to be placed at the ideal spot in the reflector for the least artifact. Theory, especially in mass production, plays little part in actuality, and the quality of the assemblies varies widely. For this comparison, I used the best of my two assemblies. The initial version, which had no lip on the reflector, while focused in a roughly circular pattern, left much to be desired, and the Generation II version is much preferred and is the version used for this review. Later versions are supposed to be patterned after the Generation II lamp assembly. The light is 8 inches in length (203.2 mm) and weighs 21 ounces. It is 1.71 inches (43.4mm) in diameter, and 2.4 inches (61 mm) in diameter at the bezel. Run time is quoted at 1.1 hours, but in reality, is more like 45-50 minutes before significant dimming is noted. Like most NiMH cells, the cells in the TL will improve somewhat from new until the reach a maximum undimmed runtime of around 50 minutes or so.
The M6, alone among the three, comes with 2 stock bulb options, both of which use the same shock isolated reflector. The MN20 produces 250 lamp lumens and the MN21 500 lamp lumens. Both bulbs run on 9 volts produced by a unique double stack of 123A lithium primary cells in a carrier. The stock reflector is heavily orange peeled and shock isolated with a dense, closed cell, foam. As with most Surefires, this produces a very dense hot spot, which is larger than the hotspots produced at focus by either of the other lights. Surefire, however, has mastered the art of filament placement, even with lights that feature fixed reflectors and replaceable bulbs, and the pattern produced when a new bulb is introduced is consistent from bulb to bulb, with only very minor variations. The light is 7.75 inches (197 mm) long, 1.75 inches (44.5mm) in diameter weighs 15.4 ounces, and is 2.5 inches (63.5 mm) at the bezel. Run time is quoted at 60 minutes with the 250 lumen lamp, though the lamp will dim and yellow before that point.
So much for the hardware, how about the evaluation?
First, subjectively and objectively, the M6 doesn't seem to belong here. It is lighter, smaller, and brighter than the other two. (It is almost exactly half the weight of the MagCharger!) Runtimes are close enough between the three, as is output, to make this a worthy clash, though.
Using a scale similar to boxing's "10 point must", where the best must receive 10 points and the rest are graded from there, the best in each category receives 10 points. Since small size and brightness are attributes I find desirable, the thumping capability of the larger MagCharger doesn't receive much weight, though it does receive its own, separated category, not factored into the final scoring.
First, my subjective evaluation of the feel of the lights: The M6 is in a class of its own. Light, maneuverable and easily carried compared to the other two. The grip of the light is the best of the three, and while my initial thoughts were that it was too aggressive, I came to appreciate the almost undroppable grip effected by it's combination of scallops, grooves and knuriling. The Tigerlight is next. With a sandpaper like finish that was harder to drop than I initially expected, the light was nearly as maneuverable as the M6, although almost 50% heavier. The MagCharger finishes last, though it's smaller diameter proves easier for some people to grip and its knurling is more than sufficient, it's length and weight make it the most difficult. Score M6-10, Tigerlight-8, MagCharger-5.
Second, subjective evaluations of the beam qualities of each light: There is no doubt, the M6 is the class act here. The Surefire displays a heavy, large, very slightly oblong white hot spot, with no real artifact in the corona, there is minimal light difference across the large area which is almost 14 inches across the dense white portion of the spot. The Tigerlight has a bilobed, dense hotspot as well, though much smaller, but significantly more artifact due to the smooth reflector. The MagCharger, alone among the three, can be focused to a near pinpoint of light, or defocused to a large corona. The TL and MC have very comparable beams overall, with a bilobed MC beam as well when the bulb is appropriately centered, but the MC can be focused more tightly due to it's smaller filament. This should equate to more throw, which will be judged later. Score M6-10, Magcharger 7, Tigerlight-6. (Some may argue that the Tiger wins this over the MC, but the ability to defocus has some uses, and thus the MC wins in my subjective view.)
Third, subjective rating of ergonomics: This will be the most controversial of the categories, because the uses of these lights are so wide. The M6 features a twisty tailcap with momentary on pushbutton like many tactical lights. Undoubtedly, this is the best solution so far for tactical situations, however the dual mechanism is tough to master for most users. The Tiger has a rear mounted pushbutton, allowing momentary on with a partial push, full on with a deeper push. Used overhand, like many tactical users, this allows the index finger to push the button, but in a conventional grip the button is much more difficult to locate without practice. Alone of the three, the MagCharger has the pushbutton where most flashlight users expect it, just beneath the head. The MC is easily activated in an overhand grip by either holding the head with the hand, or by using the little finger if a barrel grip is preferred. The underhand grip places the switch right beneath the thumb for easy activation. Momentary on is accomplished with a partial push, full on with a deeper push. Score MagCharger-10, TL-7, M6-6.
Those are the subjective scores.
Surefire-26
Magcharger-22
TigerLight-21.
Build quality: The M6 runs away and hides here. It, simply put, has the best build quality of any mass produced light, consistent with Surefire's history. The Tigerlight is well built and incredibly tough, with the build of a Sherman tank. Watch Tigerlights online demo of a light being thrown down the street and hit by a bat and you become a believer. Alone among the lights, though, it has a Lexan lens, much more likely to be scratched than the glass lenses in the M6 and MC. Tigerlight mitigates this by giving you a new lens with each lamp assembly, however. The Lexan lens also makes the lens tougher to break in those dropped or struck lights. The bezel threads are not as smooth as the bezel threads on the MC. The dual rings of the MC are more elegant than the TigerLight charging pins in my mind, and the system allows easier engagement than the TL system, although this is nitpicky on my part as both are very easy to engage. Score M6-10, MC-7, TL-7.
Runtime: As mentioned above, the Surefire uses primary cells, while the other two are rechargeables. The MC, by virtue of it's sheer size, has an advantage. Score MC-10,
TL-9, M6-9.
Light output: I should start by saying that flashlights cannot be rated solely by numbers. Lux/Lumen readings mean nothing, if the quality of the light is poor. A laser has an incredibly high Lux rating, but is useless as a light. So the lux readings I have undertaken are nothing more than an attempt to quantify the overall ambience of the respective lights, not the be all and end all of the light. There is little doubt that Surefire underrates the output of its lights. The 250 lumen MN20 obviously puts out more light than either of the other 2, regardless of what the ratings are. The ceiling bounce test shows a significant difference, easily discernable by everyone in my family. The TL and MC are much closer, with the TL winning by the slightest of margins. Measured output, though, shows why Lux readings of the hotspot do not do justice to lights. At 4 meters the average light output of the hotspots, measured at the greatest intensity and then at 2 inches around that spot, show that the Surefire wins with an average of 1638, using the inverse square law, the 1 meter equivalent would be 26,208 Lux, the MC is second at 1602, 1 meter equivalent of 25,632 Lux, and the TL is last at 1470, or a 1 meter equivalent of 22,432. However, measuring the corona at 1 foot from the hotspot shows a lux reading of 140 for the TL, 100 for the M6, and only 80 for the MC, where that tight spot hurts overall light distribution! If I had simply used the highest Lux reading, without averaging, the MC would have scored 31,200. The M6 would measure 28,640 and the TL, 27,040. As a point of reference, I had deliberately NOT read Quickbeams (flashlightreviews.com) reviews of the MagCharger and Tigerlight until I finished mine. Interestingly, we came very close to matching the numbers for output. Score Surefire M6 10, TL-8, MC-7.
Throw: This category is less important overall than the others, so I have arbitrarily decided to only award a maximum of 5 points to the winner. Some will argue that this is more important than I make it out to be, but each of these lights is bright enough to identify an individual at 100 yards, human eyesight is about at its limit at that distance anyway. The Magcharger, due to it's ability to focus, throws a tiny bit better than the other two. Score MC-5, TL-4, M6-4.
Since I haven't mentioned it elsewhere, I should weigh in on the problems associated with the MagCharger's focus mechanism. While many complain that it easily is knocked out of focus, and then must be refocused, and others argue that the bipin bulb is inherently unstable, I find that these are really minor concerns to me. I do occasionally have to refocus the light, but that is, at most, a quarter turn away! I do occasionally have to adjust the bulb to center it, after some blow or dropping the light, but once again, that is fairly infrequent. Neither is a major drawback to me. My good friend Jim Sexton would disagree, as he prefers constant focus lights, and given my choice between the MC and the M6 I would choose the M6 beam. Given the same choice between the MC and the Tigerlight, I'll take the MC, since I know I can improve the beam with some adjustments.
Objective Scores.
M6-33
TL-28
MC-29
Totals M6-59
MC-51
TL-49
These scores will, of necessity, show some bias in my weighting of the categories, since I rated the lights on what was important to me (and probably to normal users also)! The TL could be easily improved and jump ahead of the MC if the light pattern was a little more controlled or if the battery pack was more efficient. I replaced the stock pack with one of Jim Sexton's custom builds and the light output improved significantly.
(Jim, the following is only for you, but I thought you might like my private thoughts.)
The TL has 2 limitations that I would like to see improved:
The quality of the lamp assembly is inconsistent, (and thus also the beam pattern) and the problem of battery interchangeability.
The lamp assembly issue can probably be addressed, but making the batteries more easily swappable would require a redesign. I would recommend this be addressed by allowing a threaded section below the gold band that could be unscrewed as a unit and a new unit screwed on in its place. They could be sealed or semi-sealed battery units, requiring the redesign of the electrical coupler. (A rotating bayonet design?) A full turn or ¾ turn would seem adequate to do so and secure the unit. (This might be a design we want to look at for the light we are building, though.)
There are 3 other categories whose scores do not factor in, but which must be considered by those buying these lights.
They are:
Cost/Cost of use:
At around $100, with parts easily available, and a rechargeable battery, the MagCharger scores a 10 here. Bulbs, the only real expendable, are available in many hardware and sporting goods stores.
The Tigerlight, more expensive, comes in a close second, but the cost of lamp assemblies drives ownership costs up as well. A solid 8.
The Surefire is in a category all its own here as well! With a suggested retail price of $392.00 and few if any discounts, the M6 is nearly 4 times as expensive as its closest competitor. The cost of ownership goes up, with every hour of use costing between $6 and $8, even buying cells at the best prices. Lamps are not cheap, either, with Surefires quality at a cost! Jim Sextons rechargeable, regulated pack will pay for itself quickly at that price of use and is heartily recommended. A score of only 4.
Offensive/Defensive capability:
Though the MagCharger has been used by more LEO's to help subdue a suspect than the sales of the other two combined, all three do have some ability to protect the user. TL's patented pepper spray, available in the standard version, is the most obvious, but the new scalloped M6 bezel certainly can also be used as a protective device. That big, long MagCharger, though, is the next best thing to a baton, and has been used as such many times. The blinding ability of all three is a plus, but the big hotspot of the M6 makes that much more useable. Scores then are TL Standard-10, MagCharger 8, M6-7, TL FBOP-5.
Availability:
The MagCharger is available everywhere you look, the TL basically just online, and the M6 only in specialty stores or online. The MC wins easily.
So which light do I use the most? For now, the MagCharger, but for two reasons not allowed here. Mine have all be modded with WelchAllyn 1160 bulbs and high current battery sticks. The Tiger is a close second, though I really would like more runtime, and switching packs is tough in the field. Finally the M6. Though it is the favorite as far as size, light output, and ease of use for me, the cost is too high, at least until the rechargeable M6-R pack gets here!!
Bill
