Surefires in CPF

[Federal LG]

The only SF I use are the SF123 batteries. I need some torches. What's a good first SF to buy?

E1B Backup. I just bought one, and I´m love with it. Little size, but high power. Awesome!

 

[Federal LG]

Police are civilians, in the US anyway. So if you're talking markets you'd probably have to break it down to government sales versus sales to private citizens. On SureFire's own website we see the following,



3 out of 5 of the suggested uses apply to private citizens. That's probably a clue as to where the bread and butter is, at least these days.

I believe the original point of contention was whether or not feedback from CPF matters. Clearly CPF knows a lot about flashlight performance, clearly SureFire is marketing lights to the entire spectrum of CPF members be they government users or private citizens, clearly there are thousands of SureFire lights in the hands of CPF members and this thread has established there are over 300 active SureFire users/owners on CPF. That's a pretty good study group any way you cut it. If I made a product I'd be interested in feedback from such a group.

Exactly. That´s a point I totally agree too.
I never understood why Surefire never practiced deep listening with all CPF members. I mean, based on what someone said around here that CPF is not the target market for Surefire, but IMHO, customers are customers, and money is always welcome.

CPFers have some knowledge about flashlights that common people don´t. CPFers can point some aspects and impressions that common people don´t, turning them in a precious type of customer. But Surefire has to know that our critics are harder than common people critics. Can they handle the fire?

Maybe we (civilians) are not the main target market for Surefire, but I see no harm to listen us, to collect suggestions, to improve their products while listening ALL their customers, and to sell more lights (and make more money).

Ask for any company in the world, if they prefer to sell 7 millions to military, OR if they prefer to sell 7 millions to military + 1 million to civilians.

I guess all of them will choose the second option... :shrug:

Well, any capitalist company will. All the rest is bullshit.

 

[GreyShark]

Originally Posted by Size15's
Are there more Fenix flashlights for example?
Of course, no doubts about it.

The interesting part about this online poll, is that there are only 333 Surefire owners among the thousands of CPF members. Out of the 333 Surefires owners, 89 are hardcore Surefire fanatics who own more than 10~100+ SF.

You have to consider what that data would really mean though. Right now Fenix offers better performance at a lower price than SureFire. If more people on CPF own a Fenix or other brand it is probably really suggesting that SureFire performance is falling behind the competition's so they're less attractive to people who are interested in high performance lights. This is interesting because it mirrors the transitional era when people were switching from Mag-lites to SureFires. I haven't heard of anyone on CPF using a Mag in stock form. Similarly fewer and fewer people are using stock SureFire lamps and emitters.

 

[kelmo]

Ahhh... Malkoff drop-ins and Cree TIRs... is there a pattern here?

Perhaps you should change your name to "Creecodilo?"

I'm crying Creecodilo TIRs of envy...

Nice collection BTW!!!

 

[Size15's]

Of the 333 people who voted; about a quarter of us are 'hardcore SureFire fanatics' with more SureFires than appears sensible.
How many members with SureFires, even those who saw this thread title, even those who read the thread, decided not to vote? I guess we'll never know, especially since "zero" SureFires, and "abstain" were not voting options.
As a proportion of the number of times this thread has been viewed, taking into account the number of posts the thread has (and the number of subscriptions to it), is the number of voters obviously greater or fewer than one might expect for a poll in this subforum of CPF? I don't know...

You have to consider what that data would really mean though. Right now Fenix offers better performance at a lower price than SureFire.

You're right - the data can be interpreted in a variety of ways - spun to suit a diverse range of opinions such as the opinion you're giving (that is different from my own)

Performance and Price are opinions as purchases and selections are subjective and individual. There is considerable scope for differences of opinion.

If more people on CPF own a Fenix or other brand it is probably really suggesting that SureFire performance is falling behind the competition's so they're less attractive to people who are interested in high performance lights. This is interesting because it mirrors the transitional era when people were switching from Mag-lites to SureFires. I haven't heard of anyone on CPF using a Mag in stock form. Similarly fewer and fewer people are using stock SureFire lamps and emitters.

I agree that CPF members are often driven by the desire for ever brighter flashlights [regardless of whether they actually need them or not!]
I also agree that as CPF membership grows ever larger the 'majority' of those who seem to desire cheaper, lower cost flashlights increases and becomes ever more strong and vocal.
We have a strong membership of people who will pay seemingly high sums of money for niche or specialist lights as well as those who spend considerable sums of money on modifying flashlights. Has this group of CPF members changed along the same lines (grown at the time rate?)

I think one of the things we're experiencing is an improved accessibility 'output enhancing' modifications as enterprising individuals improve their economies of scale by increasing production.
There are large numbers of members hungry for such products targeted at price-points within their reach.

On CPF we are experiencing a number of manufacturers playing a game to take advantage of the market the CPF community has become. Playing off each other and pusher for ever higher output – This seems to suit many members.

I don't think SureFire are interested in playing this game. SureFire was not created for this purpose; nor has it evolved to take advantage of it. SureFire have created their own path and have been on their own journey. Sometimes this intersects with the path the CPF community are taking. Sometimes the path is shared so that members can jump on and off without being taken too far from the path they are travelling. Other times SureFire seems to be somewhere else altogether heading in an altogether different direction!

Don't get me wrong - CPF members are a wealth of information and resource to product developers - we can rightly offer flashlight manufacturers an experience found nowhere else.

From what I see; SureFire don't have the resources to formally gain interacting feedback with the CPF community. They have determined how much customer interaction to resource and where to deploy it. Their approach may not suit us but that doesn't make it wrong - just annoying given our apparent interest in SureFire products.

What interests me is that even though SureFire seem to be considered lower-performing and higher priced they are still highly desirable and this creates friction and often intense feelings. I guess because it provokes emotional conflict between wanting it and not being able/willing to afford it.

Perhaps next time a survey or poll of flashlight ownership is wanted it can be discussed, designed, constructed and managed so as to achieve responses from a far larger percentage of the CPF community?

Al

 

[GreyShark]

I'd be interested in that. I don't make flashlights but I am interested in the economic and marketing aspects almost as much as the design and performance aspects of lights. Clearly an astounding number of high performance flashlights are being sold to the masses and it's kind of interesting to put a face on that. When you're dealing with a global population nearing 7 billion even a tiny fraction of a percent of that population is still a market numbering in the millions.

 

[LED61]

I don't think SureFire are interested in playing this game. SureFire was not created for this purpose; nor has it evolved to take advantage of it. SureFire have created their own path and have been on their own journey. Sometimes this intersects with the path the CPF community are taking. Sometimes the path is shared so that members can jump on and off without being taken too far from the path they are travelling. Other times SureFire seems to be somewhere else altogether heading in an altogether different direction!

This statement is key, and I fully agree on Al´s view in it.

Why are we always pretending that Surefire should treat CPF as an institution with rights ? that somehow we should speak with a common voice that should be heard ?

To me CPF is just a social gathering where we come to talk about lights, there are a wide variety of amateurs, recreational users, and professional LEO´s and aviators possibly.

But Surefire has probably got all the input they need from these sectors to which they have directed their market and CPF is just an add on voice.

 

[Federal LG]

Why are we always pretending that Surefire should treat CPF as an institution with rights ? that somehow we should speak with a common voice that should be heard ?

To me CPF is just a social gathering where we come to talk about lights, there are a wide variety of amateurs, recreational users, and professional LEO´s and aviators possibly.

I agree with your definition of Candle Power Forums. I don´t think CPF is an institution with rights, I only think that CPFers have more light knowledge than common people, and THAT make them a valuable resource of customer opinion, for ANY light manufacturer... Some of them see that, and some of them don´t see that. Patience...

I only disagree when I saw people treating Surefire like if they´re the Vatican, with some sacred aura of santity, so you can´t complain about them in public, you can´t criticize their lights, you can´t scare their representants, because if you do that, it´s a sin, or something like that.

All brands have their pros and cons. IMHO, trouble starts when people don´t accept some critics over their beloved manufacturer. Why so passionate?

And I still believe that 2 heads think better than just 1.

 

[Lightraven]

Surefire and Paul Kim have been supportive of CPF, so the CPF admins and mods are more positive in their feelings about Surefire and Paul Kim than the average CPF member.

Surefire also has a reservoir of good will and respect in the U.S. military and law enforcement. Some of the mods and admins are also part of the military and law enforcement in the U.S.

I was at some night live fire training over the weekend. Just from casual observation, I think everybody present (SEAL officer, federal agents, SWAT) had at least one Surefire light. That's gotta say something. That is the bullseye of Surefire's target market, regardless of revenue sources. The owners of Surefire have made military and LE their most important customer. And maximizing profits may not be the goal of those owners, any more than it is mine.

 

[GreyShark]

I see two distinct issues in that. One is marketing and the other is performance.

I was at some night live fire training over the weekend. Just from casual observation, I think everybody present (SEAL officer, federal agents, SWAT) had at least one Surefire light. That's gotta say something. That is the bullseye of Surefire's target market, regardless of revenue sources.

SureFire has had excellent success marketing to the military, police and shooting community. Much of this has been based on the reliability, durability and relative performance of their lights. Which brings us to the second issue...

The owners of Surefire have made military and LE their most important customer. And maximizing profits may not be the goal of those owners, any more than it is mine.

Profit margins are beside the point. Time and technology have marched on. I'm not convinced that lower output, lesser runtime and incompatibility with the batteries many/most advanced users are interested in are what the warrior elite are really looking for a in a light. That takes us full circle back to marketing, or brand name recognition anyway.

As I've said before I believe most of this debate is stemming from SureFire fans who are simply concerned the brand is falling behind the times. We like the brand so we'd like to see it stay on top. Especially those of us who like to buy American.

 

[Federal LG]

Totally agreed.

 

[gary3911]

Similarly fewer and fewer people are using stock SureFire lamps and emitters.

I don't know if this is true or not, but I find something very beautiful and marvellous about stock SFs. I have switched out various parts of my 6P types with drop-ins and tailcaps claiming all sorts of death-ray type effects, but I have always gone back to the stock parts and used them as they were designed. I don't notice huge benefits from the gains in output, just as I find the stock incans to be some of the finest lights around. I work in the dark indoors and outdoors daily, and I have yet to find a situation which finds the E2e lacking.

Not to say there isn't something cool about bad-boy 3rd party components - just that I find the lights completely adequate as designed.


*I exclude Milky from this. The Milkys are more art than modification.

 

[american lockpicker]

You have to consider what that data would really mean though. Right now Fenix offers better performance at a lower price than SureFire. If more people on CPF own a Fenix or other brand it is probably really suggesting that SureFire performance is falling behind the competition's so they're less attractive to people who are interested in high performance lights. This is interesting because it mirrors the transitional era when people were switching from Mag-lites to SureFires. I haven't heard of anyone on CPF using a Mag in stock form. Similarly fewer and fewer people are using stock SureFire lamps and emitters.

I use a stock 5D, 2AA, 2AA LED, Solitaire and 2C with mag xenon bulb.

 

[Retinator]

3 so far :

6PL (Feb/08)
E1L (Jan/09)
G2 (Incan, in yellow) Mar/09

P61 for 6PL just a couple of weeks ago.

Twiddling over a 9P or G3. Wanna try a P91 someday 🙂
Wouldn't mind something in a tan colored nitrolon, G2 or G2Z.
Olive is nice but a tad dark for my tastes.

Oh and an E2L could be fun too.
2nd/3rd job anyone? Forget the new models, I'm still playing catchup!

 

[Sean]

I voted. 😀

 

[Toohotruk]

Me too! (4)

Listed earlier in the thread.

 

[nzgunnie]

I voted (8) although I realised just afterwards that it should probably be 9 as I've cobbled together a 660 weapon light out of pieces I got off ebay and here.

And it could be 10 if you count the E2L body and E1e/E2e head that I've combined with the clicky tail cap from my M600 Scout light to make a kind of E2e.

Plus I've got quite a few accessories that make a couple of extra lights too - a KT2 and a KL3 for example.

 

[firefly99]

This statement is key, and I fully agree on Al´s view in it.

Why are we always pretending that Surefire should treat CPF as an institution with rights ? that somehow we should speak with a common voice that should be heard ?

To me CPF is just a social gathering where we come to talk about lights, there are a wide variety of amateurs, recreational users, and professional LEO´s and aviators possibly.

But Surefire has probably got all the input they need from these sectors to which they have directed their market and CPF is just an add on voice.

I agreed with Al's view and your definition of CPF as a social gathering.

I don´t think CPF is an institution with rights, I only think that CPFers have more light knowledge than common people, and THAT make them a valuable resource of customer opinion, for ANY light manufacturer... Some of them see that, and some of them don´t see that.

We may be a source of customer opinion for any light manufacturer. But whether manufacturer value CPF feedback is a different issue.

I only disagree when I saw people treating Surefire like if they´re the Vatican, with some sacred aura of santity, so you can´t complain about them in public, you can´t criticize their lights, you can´t scare their representants, because if you do that, it´s a sin, or something like that.

All brands have their pros and cons. IMHO, trouble starts when people don´t accept some critics over their beloved manufacturer. Why so passionate?

I disagreed with your statements. It is not about passion, it is about fairness & respect. Surefire had put in a lot of research to build high end flashlights and setting a lot of benchmarks in the process. They had become the yard stick for the rest of industry to follow. Besides Surefire, I also respect other companies such as Pelican, Mag, etc. that put in an honest day work to create their own unqiue products.

This is a free market. By all means support the light manufacturer who are perceived to value CPF members feedback and thirst for the latest high tech whiz bang.

Bashing any light manufacturers online because they did not release products with the latest technology or value feedback from online forum is uncalled for.
Product ownership does not imply the light manufacturer had an obligation to listen to you. It is very naive to expect a large manufacturer to cater to your whim or demand, just because you own a single unit from their product range.

Remember you can always vote with your wallet.

..I find something very beautiful and marvellous about stock SFs.

Agreed. Me too.

I have switched out various parts of my 6P types with drop-ins and tailcaps claiming all sorts of death-ray type effects, but I have always gone back to the stock parts and used them as they were designed. I don't notice huge benefits from the gains in output, just as I find the stock incans to be some of the finest lights around. I work in the dark indoors and outdoors daily, and I have yet to find a situation which finds the E2e lacking.

Not to say there isn't something cool about bad-boy 3rd party components - just that I find the lights completely adequate as designed.

It is not surprising since Surefire had done their homework.

If more people on CPF own a Fenix or other brand it is probably really suggesting that SureFire performance is falling behind the competition's so they're less attractive to people who are interested in high performance lights.

Disagreed with your statements. These are the "value for money" people. who want maximum brightness on a cheap light. They still want a Surefire flashlight but either they cannot afford it or they are not willing to pay for it.

Al had phase it in a very nice manner. see below:

What interests me is that even though SureFire seem to be considered lower-performing and higher priced they are still highly desirable and this creates friction and often intense feelings. I guess because it provokes emotional conflict between wanting it and not being able/willing to afford it.l

 

[GreyShark]

Bashing any light manufacturers online because they did not release products with the latest technology or value feedback from online forum is uncalled for.
Product ownership does not imply the light manufacturer had an obligation to listen to you. It is very naive to expect a large manufacturer to cater to your whim or demand, just because you own a single unit from their product range.

It isn't about bashing, it's about wanting a favorite brand to put out lights that are competitive with what else is available on the market. If the manufacturer doesn't want to deliver what it's customers are wanting, well, then we get to this,

Remember you can always vote with your wallet.

Many of us like the SureFire company and would rather it not come to that. Hence we urge them to make improvements and are disappointed when that doesn't happen or when exciting new models are promised but not delivered. I'm sure there are people out there who are strictly about bashing but that's a totally separate issue than product feedback and customer satisfaction.

Disagreed with your statements. These are the "value for money" people. who want maximum brightness on a cheap light. They still want a Surefire flashlight but either they cannot afford it or they are not willing to pay for it.

Al had phase it in a very nice manner. see below:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Size15's
What interests me is that even though SureFire seem to be considered lower-performing and higher priced they are still highly desirable and this creates friction and often intense feelings. I guess because it provokes emotional conflict between wanting it and not being able/willing to afford it.

Not always. SureFire performance can only take you so far. It isn't always enough and it isn't always satisfactory. To go beyond that you need to either start looking at other manufacturers or start looking at some mods. For some people
beauty isn't enough, we also want performance. For us SureFire build quality is highly desirable but SureFire performance is sometimes lacking. While value is a good thing and the best value will always be compelling the bottom line is performance, not price.

 

[Federal LG]

Bashing any light manufacturers online because they did not release products with the latest technology or value feedback from online forum is uncalled for.
Product ownership does not imply the light manufacturer had an obligation to listen to you. It is very naive to expect a large manufacturer to cater to your whim or demand, just because you own a single unit from their product range.

Remember you can always vote with your wallet.

First, this is not about bashing light manufacturers at all. Maybe you didn´t understand.

Second, If I wouldn´trust SF lights, I would not use them, and I just bought a brand new silver E1B 2 weeks ago... Another thing, I don´t remember saying about any OBLIGATION of Surefire listening CPFer´s. I just said (repeating for the fifth time) that CPFers have a knowledge about lights that average people don´t, and THIS make them a valuable opinion resource, IMHO. Period. :shrug:

Third, you can disagree with my statements (about passionate reactions when someone criticize Surefire), that´s ok. But I can recognize passionate reactions when I see them. I can point you dozens of closed threads, or reactions like "Uh oh... this thread will be closed!" just because someone start writing some critics over Surefire, or comparing Surefire with another chinese brand.

When people start using hard words, offenses, irony, and so CPF Admins have to close the thread, IMHO, this means emotional reactions flowing, and things starting to get fire.

Excuse me, but do you remember about a closed thread about a comparions between Fenix and Nitecore lights? Or Fenix and EagleTac? No... neither do I.

For me, no problem at all. Like ALL manufacturers, I think Surefire has pros and cons. I can point pros and cons in EVERY light manufacturer... but, I think there are guys here that can´t point a single "cons" about Surefire.


That is the passionate reaction I was talking about.

Regards