The Ultimate EagleTac M2*** TRIPLE REVIEW!

[Mike@PTS]

Hey Wattnot
Thanks for the great review as always! :twothumbs
Wow, this thread has grown pretty fast in less than 24 hours!

 

[Dizos]

Excellent review, thank you. I'm glad I ordered a M2. But on the thrower side, I wonder how the M1X and M2X compare?

However, I'm disappointed in the waterproofing. For such an innovative light, you would think they could squeeze in a little more innovation and forget o-rings in a non-circular seal.

A gasket would work better.

 

[richardcpf]

Great review!

It is just me or these lights have one of the smoothest beam I've ever seen?? I'm glad i ordered the M2X cool... Maybe getting the warm version as well, looks pretty similar in brightness.

 

[Splunk_Au]

Judging from the beamshots, the M2XC4 cool throws a brighter spot and spill beam than the M2C4 which makes it redundant to have the M2C4 other than to show that they have an MC-E offering.

 

[richardcpf]

As for my opinion on the levels, they're great. The only two that might be too close are high and turbo. It's almost difficult to tell.

M2XC4
Low - 42ma
Med -210ma
High -600ma
Turbo - 1.6A

If the output difference is minimal between high and turbo, then i think there is some kind of inefficiency with the driving board... turbo is almost drawing triple the power than high, should be noticeably brighter. And also as stated in the spec turbo should be at least 250 lumens more than high.

Lets wait for some readings anyways.

 

[1dash1]

Judging from the beamshots, the M2XC4 cool throws a brighter spot and spill beam than the M2C4 which makes it redundant to have the M2C4 other than to show that they have an MC-E offering.

I think you meant P7, not MC-E. 😉

BTW, I think the brighter, smoother beamed M2C4 would be the more useful light for anything under 100 feet - which would comprise the majority of tasks for the average user. It's the better general purpose light. The M2XC4, on the other hand, is the better thrower.

I bought the M2XC4 to augment my M30. If I had to use only one - as a stand-alone - I'd have picked the M2C4.

EDIT: Well, at least that's the one that I would have picked based on spec's. However, after looking at Wattnot's beamshots, I'd be sorely tempted by the tint of the tri-Q3 version. Simply marvelous! :naughty:

 

[Patriot]

Fantastic review with some excellent beamshots! I'm still taking it all in but wanted to express my appreciation now.

 

[ntalbot]

I think you meant P7, not MC-E. 😉

BTW, I think the brighter, smoother beamed M2C4 would be the more useful light for anything under 100 feet - which would comprise the majority of tasks for the average user. It's the better general purpose light. The M2XC4, on the other hand, is the better thrower.

I bought the M2XC4 to augment my M30. If I had to use only one - as a stand-alone - I'd have picked the M2C4.

EDIT: Well, at least that's the one that I would have picked based on spec's. However, after looking at Wattnot's beamshots, I'd be sorely tempted by the tint of the tri-Q3 version. Simply marvelous! :naughty:

I think of the 3, I would go for the M2C4 also for a stand-alone also. But here at CPF there is no such thing as a stand-alone flashlight!

 

[Wattnot]

Perfect! How would you say the P7 M2 compares to the A9?

This would be an odd comparison as the A9 throws a 2 inch beam for miles and the M2C4 is a flooder. They are complete opposites. Did you mean the M2XC4 and the A9?

Hey Wattnot, can we get more of your subjective impression of these lights vs. the TK40? The beamshots with the TK40 were all directly compared to the M2 series, so it was harder for me to appreciate the difference.

How did the TK40 stack up?

All 3 lights start with "M2" so I'm guessing you mean the M2C4 with the quad emitter? I started to include the TK40 in the shots but at the longer distances, it just seemed like I was adding confusion. Things changed for each of the lights at each distance. The TK40 stacks up okay but it's different. It seemed to fit between the M2C4 and the M2XC4s since the M2C4 is a flooder and the M2XC4s are throwers. If you want a light in-between the M2C4 and M2XC4 then the TK40 is it. Again, depending on the distance, the TK40 has a brighter hotspot but less spill. The M2C4 has a lot of spill and the hotspot fades right into it. The farther away you aim, the less hotspot you get. At 300 feet the M2C4 is pure flood where the TK40 was brighter in the hotspot only. Then at 300 feet the M2CX4s beat the TK40 but with a slightly smaller hotspot.

Let me put this another way . . . If throw is most important to you, get the M2XC4. If flood is most important to you, get the M2C4. If you want a compromise between flood and throw then maybe the TK40 is for you.

Excellent review, thanx ! :thumbsup:

The waterproofing really sucks though 🙁
This is a serious flaw IMHO.

Can you spot how the ring works? IIRC the claim is it would be a magnetic switch like the U2 ...

bernie

I'm not exactly sure what you are asking here. By ring I guess you mean O-ring or are you talking about the tailcap switch cover? The switch is a simple on/off click just like a table lamp. The boot that covers the switch is held down securely but threaded washer.

I can't tell where the air is leaking from but if Mike doesn't mind, I'll try blowing through it while it's dunked in water. I'll have a family member watch and we'll see if we can get this figured out. I wouldn't give up on the light over this. Maybe a smear of something or a gasket will fix it right up.

Judging from the beamshots, the M2XC4 cool throws a brighter spot and spill beam than the M2C4 which makes it redundant to have the M2C4 other than to show that they have an MC-E offering.

Like I said above, they are very different lights. Choosing one over the other should be more about your needs. Me thinks they just want you to buy two or three! 😱

M2XC4
Low - 42ma
Med -210ma
High -600ma
Turbo - 1.6A

If the output difference is minimal between high and turbo, then i think there is some kind of inefficiency with the driving board... turbo is almost drawing triple the power than high, should be noticeably brighter. And also as stated in the spec turbo should be at least 250 lumens more than high.

Lets wait for some readings anyways.

Well as many threads here have disucssed, it takes double the lumens to look only noticably brighter and over four times the lumens to maybe look twice as bright. I imagine the higher these numbers get the more this is true. I believe it's like that on the decible scale too. It's like that with transmitter power output as well (that has a name . . . inverse square law?). Also, I said "until you get used to it" so I'm sure after a while it will be easier to tell.

 

[qip]

All 3 lights start with "M2" so I'm guessing you mean the M2C4 with the quad emitter? I started to include the TK40 in the shots but at the longer distances, it just seemed like I was adding confusion. Things changed for each of the lights at each distance. The TK40 stacks up okay but it's different. It seemed to fit between the M2C4 and the M2XC4s since the M2C4 is a flooder and the M2XC4s are throwers. If you want a light in-between the M2C4 and M2XC4 then the TK40 is it. Again, depending on the distance, the TK40 has a brighter hotspot but less spill. The M2C4 has a lot of spill and the hotspot fades right into it. The farther away you aim, the less hotspot you get. At 300 feet the M2C4 is pure flood where the TK40 was brighter in the hotspot only. Then at 300 feet the M2CX4s beat the TK40 but with a slightly smaller hotspot.

Let me put this another way . . . If throw is most important to you, get the M2XC4. If flood is most important to you, get the M2C4. If you want a compromise between flood and throw then maybe the TK40 is for you.

so what your saying is buy them all:laughing: :mecry:

 

[1dash1]

so what your saying is buy them all:laughing: :mecry:

And use them all at the same time!

It's hard to argue with the results.

 

[Burgess]

Thank you, Wattnot, for your time and effort
in this very informative review !


:goodjob::kewlpics::thanks:



BTW, i'd imagine the automobiles in the distance
were wondering about the Aircraft Landing Lights
coming from your direction.


😱 +





Oh yes, that non-water-proofness really sux.

:shakehead

_

 

[DM51]

That is a very good review indeed, giving a clear insight into these lights.

They're quite unusual looking, but they seem pretty good performers and I like the compact design. It's an unusual shaped handle/body, but so what? It works well, by the look of it.

Your photos are excellent, and the camera settings you have used give a very interesting comparison of the tints. The warm looks bad on a white wall, but it works very well on the trees.

Thanks for your work - it's a fine review, and I'm sure members will find it extremely useful.

 

[5.0Trunk]

5.0Trunk:

To avoid any misunderstanding, that picture that you quoted is not of the M2C4 at 300 feet. It's a picture of all three lights turned on at the same time at 300 feet.

Thanks for pointing that out. I guess I should have read it a little better. Still, excellent output.

 

[BirdofPrey]

Posted this in Marketplace but was meant for here before the outage.


The first reviewer stated that it wasn't much good after 300 feet in the standard M2 P7 model. I heartily disagree.

I just came back in from testing in a location that unfortunately has some ambient light to my side and found that according to Google Earth I'm seeing perfectly usable light out to 253 yards (the furthest I can get away from me without hopping in the car and going for a drive). Up close at 300 feet (what the reviewer used as his preferred max range, the amount of light is devastating. I'm HIGHLY impressed with this and will likely use this in place of my HID just on the principle of being easier to carry and instant light.

If you get this light and are disappointed, you are seriously hard to please.

BTW, to clarify, at the range I was speaking of above, it isn't as bright as my A8 Aspherical but I could easily see if someone was walking at that range. This was clearly visible on damp dark green grass and trees so anything with lighter colors would most definitely stand out.

I was worried when I first read the 300 foot comment but now I'm elated!

New camping/hiking light indeed.

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=2307492

 

[BirdofPrey]

Ok. First things first. While not technically useable per se, there was a very obvious tint of light on the trees across a field from the train tracks I was standing on. That, according to google, is 466 yards. Even though it would have taken something fluorescent or at least very white for me to have been able to truely pick it iout, just the fact that I could see the light on the trees that far away impresses me.

Low... while walking along the very dark tracks my lady and I preferred the light on low and it lit the path quite well. Considering the run time on that setting, this would indeed make one excellent camping/hiking light.

High is nearly too bright up close and personal.

The grip turned out to be quite comfortable for the 30 or so minutes we walked. I don't forsee it getting any less comfortable on a longer walk. On Turbo the head does start to get warm but I'm going to say thats not a bad thing because that means its doing its job of radiating the heat off. I assume that its ok to run it constant at that level.

Weight is just enough to feel "confident" but not so high as to be a negative issue. Even my lady friend agreed that it was "surprisingly" light all else considered.

My only complaint is similar to others. I wish that there was a small "detent" at each level or at a minimum, before the strobe mode. I hit strobe multiple times. Not anything that would run me off but somewhat aggravating.

Overall, I'm very happy with it and glad I spent the money.

 

[Wattnot]

I finally got to show the lights to my neighbor Joe so I updated post one with the addition of my "in the hands of babes" section.

I also wanted to mention I did that quick, 12 minutes heat test with the M2XC4 cool. Because the M2C4s head is a little larger, I imagine they're anticipating more heat with that one but with the mass of these things, I doubt heat will be an issue with any of them.

While I was over at Joe's just now, he helped me with a dunk test. I did not do anything with the head . . . only the empty battery tube with the stock tailcap. No water entered the tailcap when I pushed it almost all the way into the large glass of water. I got two tiny, reluctant bubbles from the tailcap area while blowing hard into the opening. Joe and I agreed that it was holding up well enough because I was putting significant pressure in there that would not be present in a shallow dunk. Not a dive light but at this point we felt confident dunking this for a short time would not result in any water coming in. Then I tested the other end of the tube, the one that goes toward the head. I inverted in and pushed it halfway into the glass which trapped the air inside and generated pressure. Now some fast bubbles started from each side. I removed the round top piece to make sure the gasket was seated correctly and it was. I flipped it over and carefully tightened all of the screws in a manner similar to the proper way of tightening a wheel on a car (alternating back and forth and making multiple passes). It still leaked. Joe then said he thought a little smear of silicone would fix it right up but he was a little disappointed someone should have to do this to a new light.

So it appears that the leaking can be easily corrected by either the factory or the end user. Again, I wouldn't make this a deal-breaker.

One last thing . . . I got a message from my picture hosting site that I was approaching the 25 GIG monthly limit! Don't be surprised if the pictures drop off suddenly! You guys are sucking these off their server like mad with all of these views!! 😗

 

[dudu84]

Thanks for doing further testing with the water-proof-ness of these torch, Wattnot.

It's good to know that the problem is fixable but still, I think eagletac should quickly design some gaskets or whatever they deem necessary, send to the dealers so the end-users can do a quick fix on their expensive lights. Surely posting a short instruction on their website would help . Such a bright and hefty light are probably used mainly outdoor so rain-proof is a must IMHO :sigh:

 

[Trekmeister]

Another question for the reviewer, what is the inside diameter of the battery tube(s)? Do you foresee any problem with thicker protected cells?

 

[applevision]

All 3 lights start with "M2" so I'm guessing you mean the M2C4 with the quad emitter? I started to include the TK40 in the shots but at the longer distances, it just seemed like I was adding confusion. Things changed for each of the lights at each distance. The TK40 stacks up okay but it's different. It seemed to fit between the M2C4 and the M2XC4s since the M2C4 is a flooder and the M2XC4s are throwers. If you want a light in-between the M2C4 and M2XC4 then the TK40 is it. Again, depending on the distance, the TK40 has a brighter hotspot but less spill. The M2C4 has a lot of spill and the hotspot fades right into it. The farther away you aim, the less hotspot you get. At 300 feet the M2C4 is pure flood where the TK40 was brighter in the hotspot only. Then at 300 feet the M2CX4s beat the TK40 but with a slightly smaller hotspot.

Let me put this another way . . . If throw is most important to you, get the M2XC4. If flood is most important to you, get the M2C4. If you want a compromise between flood and throw then maybe the TK40 is for you.

Wattnot! :bow::bow::bow:
Thank you sooo much! This is just what the doctor ordered! Impressions like this one are SO helpful to me in sorting out this rapidly burgeoning area of lights!

Okay, I'm starting to put it together in my head...

Throw--->Flood
[Crazy aspherics]...
M2XC4 cool
M2XC4 warm
TK40
M2C4
[Crazy mules]

Okay... I just want to figure out where the Legion II fits in (in the bigger sense, of course, not just necessarily in terms of throw/flood) and the Olight M30...

Part of the problem for me is that I am a bit of a poseur--I love these high powered "tactical" lights but, in truth I don't have much of a use for these beyond occasional bump in the night and for the sheer joy of power and efficiency and light! So it's kinda hard when folks say "...depending on your needs..." hee hee... since a Mag Solitaire can help me find the quarter I dropped under the couch...

That said, like a sports car connoisseur who does not race them but, like Cameron Frye's dad (from Ferris Bueller) simply rubs them with a diaper, I like to see which ones are superlative in various categories, and, most importantly, I search for lights that just find that magic spot of design/performance/ideas/function that fills you with wonder.

The Fenix TK11 is a light that is just so--how do the young people call it these days?--"tight!" And the Fenix LD01 is such a brilliant little light that does what it does so well and gives me such pleasure. I also have a fetish for the littlest lights (like the FireFli and the Lummi Wee and Drake, etc) and these have a dash of magic each!

So I'm looking for a big dog, a monstrous light with throw and flood (something beyond the LED projectors... hee hee), and thinking about these lights: the M2 series, the Legion II, the M30 and the TK40. It's so much fun!

lovecpf