Surefire UA2 Optimus Will you OPtimize?

[270winchester]

As to buying one...almost surely not. The price is very high, and the benefits do not add up to it. The 200 lumens sounded great when the UA2 specs were first heard about, but now its ho-hum. (I count 4 flashlights in my collection already that match or surpass that--no, make that 5).

because as we all know, 200 lumens is 200 lumens regardless of who is saying it, right?

 

[TOOCOOL]

I'm going to wait for the Milky mod version :thumbsup:

 

[WadeF]

because as we all know, 200 lumens is 200 lumens regardless of who is saying it, right?

Do we know what emitter SF is using? I would guess a Cree XR-E. Since they are using an optic, they should be able to get 200 lumens out the front if they can generate around 240-250 emitter lumens. So are you trying to say other companies driving a Cree XR-E at 250-280 emitter lumens (Q5/R2 at 1 to 1.2A current) can't generate the same amount of out the front lumens SF can with the same LED? You don't think the Malkoff M60 Q5 with optic can match SF's set up for out the front lumens? Or the Dereelight pills with a Q5 driven at 1.2A?

 

[MattK]

If I understood correctly at SHOT it's a P7.

 

[Flashlight Aficionado]

I am still learning and I didn't check my facts before posting.

I thought the P7 was a multi die LED. Therefore was really hard to impossible to variable focus. So it might be in the Ub2. But not in the Ua2.

 

[e0603]

SureFire's 2008 catalog says the UB2 uses a four-die LED, but I don't think it mentions anything specific about the UA2's emitter.

I'm waiting for the first review with beamshots of how well the spot-to-flood focusing works to decide whether I can convince myself I need one. It sounds like they've put the engineering in to do it right, but I'm still cautious. If Vari-Beam doesn't live up to the hype, I'll definitely consider the UB2 (but no I don't really need 400 lumens, and what's the price going to be?). I really like the UI of both, giving you a wide range of modes plus momentary activation.

A couple quick questions...sorry if these were already discussed in an older thread and I missed it...

The tailcap design sounds good, with push/push further and twist/twist further for selected/maximum output, but does anyone know whether you can push for max output if twisted for selected output?

Also, I noticed there is an Off setting on the output selector ring as shown in the SF catalog...do you think it's designed to offer the option of leaving the tailcap twisted on and then just using the selector ring? (sort of like a giant Titan...) Or do you think it's sort of a secondary lockout to make sure the light stays off? Just curious what the intent was.

 

[Flashlight Aficionado]

The tailcap design sounds good, with push/push further and twist/twist further for selected/maximum output, but does anyone know whether you can push for max output if twisted for selected output?

My understanding after thinking/dreaming about it for far too long says you can twist a little for the ring setting and then push for full output. Here is why I believe it. Twisting the tailcap brings the tailcap closer to the body. So does pushing the button(though a slightly different way) Therefore you should be able to push it more after you slightly tighten the tailcap. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

Also, I noticed there is an Off setting on the output selector ring as shown in the SF catalog...do you think it's designed to offer the option of leaving the tailcap twisted on and then just using the selector ring? (sort of like a giant Titan...) Or do you think it's sort of a secondary lockout to make sure the light stays off? Just curious what the intent was.

Just thinking about it right now. If you wanted it to immediately stay on the selected level, you could slightly twist the tailcap and leave it there. Then all you have to do is turn the selector ring from OFF to SOS/level 1-8/strobe. I think it is just a way to give more options. Again, just my opinion.

 

[Size15's]

The proto-type UA2's at SS2008 could be disabled via the selector dial, and/or by locking out the TailCap.

 

[flashy bazook]

because as we all know, 200 lumens is 200 lumens regardless of who is saying it, right?

oh, I forgot, only Surefire can get 200 lumens out of one of the modern LEDs, all the other (multiple) companies that produce and use them are the ones who can't count. Or perhaps neither can Mr. Malkoff, who claims 235+ lumens out of his creations--and if you use them, you don't doubt his counting.

Sheesh.

 

[KROMATICS]

oh, I forgot, only Surefire can get 200 lumens out of one of the modern LEDs, all the other (multiple) companies that produce and use them are the ones who can't count. Or perhaps neither can Mr. Malkoff, who claims 235+ lumens out of his creations--and if you use them, you don't doubt his counting.

Sheesh.

Most manufacturers quote emitter lumens rather than measuring light output from the actual assembled flashlight.

 

[Patriot]

As to buying one...almost surely not. The price is very high, and the benefits do not add up to it. The 200 lumens sounded great when the UA2 specs were first heard about, but now its ho-hum. (I count 4 flashlights in my collection already that match or surpass that--no, make that 5).

If technically things work out, it will still be great, as the features will migrate down the food chain to cheaper flashlights. At that point, it may be worth getting them (together with yet more upgraded LEDs, better runtime...the usual).

I think this light will be a great value considering who the manufacturer is. Considering Surefire's track record, lifetime warranty and price which is very close to that of the U2, I'm surprised that the value of the UA2 doesn't strike you as shocking.

Just because these feature might make it's way into a DX light someday, doesn't mean the quality will. I think you pretty much summed it up when you said "migrate down the food chain." Also, if Surefire is advertising it at 200 lumens you can bet it will be impressive and probably at least the equal of current Q5 Malkoffs. It will all be housed in a great focusable package with one of the neatest user interfaces that enthusiasts have ever seen. If Surefire used emitter lumens and just called it 275, then would you be impressed? Geesh ....Tough crowd!

 

[270winchester]

sigh, people are so touchy these days.

the guy was saying 200 lumens sounds, and I quote, "ho-hum".

funny though, I never mentioned anything about Dereelight or anything else. I just said 200 lumens isn't always 200 lumens, depending on who is saying it.

Do we know what emitter SF is using? I would guess a Cree XR-E. Since they are using an optic, they should be able to get 200 lumens out the front if they can generate around 240-250 emitter lumens. So are you trying to say other companies driving a Cree XR-E at 250-280 emitter lumens (Q5/R2 at 1 to 1.2A current) can't generate the same amount of out the front lumens SF can with the same LED? You don't think the Malkoff M60 Q5 with optic can match SF's set up for out the front lumens? Or the Dereelight pills with a Q5 driven at 1.2A?

 

[270winchester]

I have an M60, and I think highly of it.

but I don't recall Gene ever claiming that his lumens are out the front. in fact according to this thread:


https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/180550&highlight=emitter

The new brass model with a Cree Q4 is running 800ma to the emitter with a 700ma draw at 6v

as far as the emitter output, he referred to this thread:

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/172379

only an IS can tell.
if you can find where he stated that his figures are out-the-front lumens, I would be curious to see that. Gene is honest in his ratings.

oh, I forgot, only Surefire can get 200 lumens out of one of the modern LEDs, all the other (multiple) companies that produce and use them are the ones who can't count. Or perhaps neither can Mr. Malkoff, who claims 235+ lumens out of his creations--and if you use them, you don't doubt his counting.

Sheesh.

 

[half-watt]

i've pre-ordered one, and am itchin' to do the same for a UB2 as well as a Al Titan (missed gettin' the Ti version).

 

[woodrow]

A couple of weeks ago I would have said yes. Now, I would rather have another P7 light. Something like Wolfeyes new P7 sniper. It would be too hard for me to spend over $250 for a Q5 (or equiv.) light.

 

[ninjaboigt]

sounds like a really great light, love all the features, esp the fuel monitor.

i do wish that instead of 200 lumens, it was 400....but 200 should be good enough or maybe i'll get the other one.

But this goes to what i was telling my gf, if i had a $300 flashlight i would need two, one to carry/use and the other one to sit on a shelf at home. because if i lost my carry light i'd be pissed, and i cant just let $300 dollars sit on a shelf, so yea.

so...i'd love two....or even one with it chained to my waist, but probably wont buy it..maybe ask for it as a present :thumbsup: