brightnorm
Flashaholic
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2001
- Messages
- 7,160
The Pelican M6 wins its place with ASP TACLITE & TACM III as one of the 3 brightest, longest-throwing 2x123 lights
Initial comments and observations
The Pelican M6 has been generally well reviewed and rated an inexpensive, excellent if somewhat unrefined well-performing light. I believe that it is more than that.
Based on my observations the Pelican is it as least as bright and far-throwing as the TACMIII and ASP TACLITE, significantly brighter than SureFire's P60 lamp, and much brighter than the E2E with MN03,
This is saying a great deal, because it puts the Pelican in a small, elite group of ultra long-throwing 2x123 lights. One could accurately say that these are the world's brightest very small non-regulated, non-rechargeable lights. The Pelican is also able to maintain its brightness very well over time, and dims surprisingly slowly. I would agree with Kogatana's description of this light's brightness being "between a P60 and P61", but the beam pattern is quite different from those lamps.
Physical aspects
The M6 is very solid and robustly built. It is not as refined as the Surefires and needs a little more work in certain areas. The tailcap operates like Surefire's, but lock-out position begins to expose the o-ring as jtivat has previously mentioned. Tailcap design needs to be altered so that it can be screwed further in to the body before activation. Also, as Kogatana has noted, the flattened portion of the body that contains the name (an apparent nod to Surefire's design) has very sharp edges that could cause damage, although on one of my two M6's the edges are level with the body and pose no threat to clothing or person. .Also, there is a subtle beam difference between the two lights, but this is quite common with other fine lights, including Surefires and I don't consider it a major issue.
At 5.5"long and 5.8oz the light is really bigger and heavier than one would like. I don't care for focusable lights for reasons I have mentioned in the past, but if you must have one, it's important that the bezel/body connection be firm enough to prevent inadvertent de-focusing. One of my M6's has this problem along with a hard-to-turn tailcap, a bad combination. The other has a fairly stiff bezel and relaxed tailcap: much better and more dependable. The lens appears to be no better or worse than any plastic lens. I will eventually replace it with Pyrex or Boroflote.
Though owners have given this light a good rating, I think it is actually better than it may appear, based on my indoor and outdoor runtime and throw tests compared with other lights.
Observation, outdoor testing:
As in the past, due to crowded urban conditions I have developed my so-called "Vertical throw tests".
I pace off a specific distance from a building as measured by pedometer, with compensation factored in for turns and corners. Then I select an aim point on a tall building and count the number of floors, conservatively assigning 10 feet per floor. I may sometime reverse this procedure, counting floors first. When I have my distance and height, I use Pythagoras to derive the hypotenuse which equals the total distance of the test. Accuracy can't be exact but is pretty close because I measure very carefully.
This outdoor test included the two longest-throwing 2x123 lights thus far documented: the ASP TACLITE and the TACM III. There was one observer beside myself and the observations were made in haste because of high pedestrian density.
OUTDOOR TEST #1
Lights tested: TACM III, ASP TACLITE (TRIAD LAMP), PELICAN M6
Height: 140' (14 floors)
Distance: 40'
Total distance: 146'
All three lights brightly illuminated the wall and several windows of the 14th floor. Since the test was necessarily brief, clear observations of beam pattern and details were not made but will be made in test #2. The Pelican M6 appeared at least as bright as the others, possibly brighter.
NOTE: All tests were performed with new SureFire batteries tested at 3.24v-3.27v. INDOOR TESTS were neither photographed nor instrumented because of lack of equipment. I believe that instrumented measurements, although valuable, are different from human perception in a particular environment.
INDOOR TEST #1
Pelican M6, TACM III, TACLITE, SUREFIRE 6P with P60, E2E with MN03.
These tests combined the much derided "white wall test" with other indoor tests. Lights were beamed into darkened corners and at specific objects, both light and dark, including reflective and
light-absorbent surfaces. White wall test was conducted at 25' onto a 5' wide white window shade, Tests into other areas were between 20' and 32 feet. One observer present.
NOTE: The TACLITE, TACM III, 6P and E2E were turned off after the initial observation and were later briefly activated only at specific measuring times in order to compare their fresh beams with the M6's constantly burning one.
START: 11:30 PM STOP: 11:55PM (Sun 3/2/03)
START: White Wall Test at 25': the M6's beam appeared slighter "whiter" than the TACLITE and TACM, its hotspot was approximately half the size of the TACM's and smaller than the TACLITE's. The M6's hotspot blended smoothly into a very bright surround so that the amount and intensity of the light seemed greater than either of its competitors. The light had a "dense", almost "thick" quality. All three lights were significantly brighter than the 6P and much brighter than the E2E.
Non-white wall tests confirmed the order and quality of brightness, though beam diameter was less apparent.
25 MINUTES: The M6 was somewhat dimmer but still unexpectedly bright and white. It was less bright than the fresh TACLITE and TACM III, but its dense hotspot could still superimpose itself upon those beams. It was more penetrating than the 6P and significantly brighter than the fresh E2.
INDOOR TEST #2 START: 5:20PM STOP: 6:07PM (Mon 3/3/03)]
40 MINUTES: Significantly dimmed, and noticeably overmatched by the fresh TACM and TACLITE, but still brighter in its hotspot than fresh P60 or fresh MN03 although it produced less overall light than either. Beam yellowed but whiter than expected.
44-47 MINUTES: Dimmer but hotspot still cuts weakly through P60 and MN03 beams.
NOTE: Although the M6's hotspot retains surprising power even as it dims and becomes less white, the formerly very bright surround fades disproportionately quickly and is much less useful by the 40+ minute mark.
INDOOR TEST #3 START 10:08AM STOP 11AM (Wed 3/5/03)
25 MINUTES: As in the previous test, the M6 was dimmer but remained surprisingly white and bright and was again able to cut through the beams of the fresh P60 and fresh MN03, while holding up relatively well with the fresh TACLITE and TACM III. At this point, as in the previous test the M6 had become quite hot, but could still be held, if somewhat gingerly, and the lens could be touched. At no point in these tests did the lens display melting, bending, or any negative effects whatsoever.
41 MINUTES: Noticeably dimmed, significantly dimmer than fresh TACM and TACLITE, with considerably less overall light than P60 and MN03 but brighter in its hotspot than both of them, and able to "punch" through both beams. Again I had the impression of density and "weight" in the M6's beam.
47 MINUTES: Still able to weakly cut through the hotspots of the fresh P60 and MN03, although putting out much less overall light than either one.
52 MINUTES: Despite being quite dim, the 6M's hotspot still manages to superimpose itself very weakly upon the fresh P60 and MN03 beams. However, the total output was very low appearing significantly less than a fresh 2L in a brief comparison.
At this point I considered my testing finished and was starting to write this review when I remembered that I had done only one hasty outdoor throw test, so I decided to do one more using the Pelican M6, TACLITE and TACM III. I was able to find a location that afforded slightly more privacy, enabling me to test a little more thoroughly than in the first throw test. The building I used was only 10 floors tall but I was able to get 120 feet away from it:
OUTDOOR (THROW) TEST #2 (3/5/03 Wed eve.)
Height: 100' (10 floors)
Distance: 120'
Total distance: 156'
All three lights illuminated the un-windowed upper corner of this building brightly, but not quite as impressively as in Test #1, possibly because the wall was a light concrete or travertine-like color.
I tested two lights at a time starting with the TACLITE and TACM. I was surprised to see that the TACM was slightly but distinctly brighter, possibly because the TACLITE's beam diameter was somewhat greater. Since there is some variation from one lamp to another even among identical models, that may have accounted for the difference. At any rate it was small but unequivocal. Next I tested the M6 against the TACM, but first I let the M6 run for the approximate time of the other light's previous burn to level the playing field. The two lights proved to be so close in brightness that I couldn't make a reliable decision, so I aimed the lights at another building that was really too far for a meaningful test. Both lights were faint but the TACM seemed to have slightly more "presence" than the M6. I hadn't tested the TACLITE against the M6, so, after equalizing burntime I aimed them at the original spot. The M6 was slightly but definitely brighter than the TACLITE. Test over.
When I returned home I decided there was yet one more test that had to be done: a burn test between the TACM III and the M6. I wanted to see if the M6 really could burn longer and brighter than the TACM, otherwise I would much rather carry that lighter and smaller light. At only 4 5/8" length and 3.8oz the TACM III is probably the lightest and shortest 2x123 "Superbright" currently produced. Compare this to (according to my measurements) the TACLITE's 5" & 5.3oz and the M6's relatively gargantuan 5.5" & 5.8oz.
INDOOR TEST #4: START 11:46PM STOP 12:22 AM (3-5-03 Wed)
TACM III AND M6
20 MINUTES: TACM & M6 roughly equal
25 MINUTES: M6 slightly brighter
36 MINUTES: M6 moderately brighter
NOTE: I had not replaced batteries since the last outdoor test, where the lights had been used a total of about five minutes.
Here is BROCK's runtime chart comparing the PM6 to other lights:
Unusual reflector
The pelican has broken ground in another area. It is the only one of the three longest throwing 2x123's that has a textured reflector. Some of us, myself included, had assumed that smooth reflectors were necessary to attain this level of performance. This no longer appears to be true, though there is the possibility that the M6's lamp is simply brighter than the others. I don't have the instruments to confirm or disprove that, although Kogatana's initial appraisal of brightness (between P90 & P91) may be right on target. It would be useful to see some instrumented run tests.
Along with reflector geometry, the type of "texturizing" is so critical in determining beam characteristics that I've taken a close look at the reflectors of the following eight lights, which are arrayed on the table in front of me: SureFire M6, Pelican M6, SureFire D3 with SRTH, Surefire 6P, UltraStinger, PolyStinger, E2E and the original E2. It appears that reflectors that have a more "etched" or "pebbly" and less reflective surface tend to produce a more dispersed and therefore somewhat lower candlepower beam. For instance, the original E2 reflector surface has the least reflective (shiny), deepest etched appearance of all the observed lights. Few people have mentioned the distinct change in "faceting" that occurred when Surefire brought out the E2E. The E2E reflector surface is shinier and less deeply etched than the E2 and noticeably brighter. It would be impossible to describe all the extremely subtle differences in texture styles. Only properly illuminated photo close-ups could plainly reveal these elements. The main characteristics seem to be the number, size, depth, shape, angle, and degree of reflectivity of the individual facets, though the latter is most likely a function of the former five aspects.
Of the lights mentioned, the Pelican M6's faceting is among the most subtle.
A word about the SureFire 2x123's and the ASP TACLITE:
At short/medium ranges, the Surefires are still among the best illuminators in terms of beam quality, diameter and brightness. Even though the TACM III and Pelican M6 apparently edged out the ASP in throw tests, I must emphasize that the differences were slight, most likely within production line differences. Of the three lights, the TACLITE was by far the best engineered, smoothly functioning and aesthetically pleasing.
Holstering the M6
Using a standard SureFire 6P holster, a perfect fit can be achieved by cutting the stitches at the holster bottom, thus enlarging the aperture enough to accommodate theM6's tail button.
Another option uses Streamlight's Scorpion holster. Create a hole in the holster bottom large enough to allow the tail button and approx. 1/8th inch of the tail bottom to protrude. This will permit full flap closure. For extra security tuck in several stitches at the top right or left corner of the holster front, where it joins the holster back. You can easily custom-adjust degree of tightness. Slight tail protrusion in either holster should pose no problems, though it would be preferable if Pelican would address the tailcap issue described earlier.
Summing up
The Pelican M6 has proven itself to be an unexpectedly strong performer. Not only was it at least as bright as the two brightest 2x123's, but it was able to retain much of its brightness longer than expected. My hat is off to Pelican. They have come up with an extremely bright light with an efficient lamp, ensconced it in a cleverly designed reflector and put it to excellent use in a solid, very inexpensive little light. There can always be room for improvement, but Pelican is on an exciting and promising track.
Thanks to any who waded through this unexpectedly long review!
Brightnorm
Initial comments and observations
The Pelican M6 has been generally well reviewed and rated an inexpensive, excellent if somewhat unrefined well-performing light. I believe that it is more than that.
Based on my observations the Pelican is it as least as bright and far-throwing as the TACMIII and ASP TACLITE, significantly brighter than SureFire's P60 lamp, and much brighter than the E2E with MN03,
This is saying a great deal, because it puts the Pelican in a small, elite group of ultra long-throwing 2x123 lights. One could accurately say that these are the world's brightest very small non-regulated, non-rechargeable lights. The Pelican is also able to maintain its brightness very well over time, and dims surprisingly slowly. I would agree with Kogatana's description of this light's brightness being "between a P60 and P61", but the beam pattern is quite different from those lamps.
Physical aspects
The M6 is very solid and robustly built. It is not as refined as the Surefires and needs a little more work in certain areas. The tailcap operates like Surefire's, but lock-out position begins to expose the o-ring as jtivat has previously mentioned. Tailcap design needs to be altered so that it can be screwed further in to the body before activation. Also, as Kogatana has noted, the flattened portion of the body that contains the name (an apparent nod to Surefire's design) has very sharp edges that could cause damage, although on one of my two M6's the edges are level with the body and pose no threat to clothing or person. .Also, there is a subtle beam difference between the two lights, but this is quite common with other fine lights, including Surefires and I don't consider it a major issue.
At 5.5"long and 5.8oz the light is really bigger and heavier than one would like. I don't care for focusable lights for reasons I have mentioned in the past, but if you must have one, it's important that the bezel/body connection be firm enough to prevent inadvertent de-focusing. One of my M6's has this problem along with a hard-to-turn tailcap, a bad combination. The other has a fairly stiff bezel and relaxed tailcap: much better and more dependable. The lens appears to be no better or worse than any plastic lens. I will eventually replace it with Pyrex or Boroflote.
Though owners have given this light a good rating, I think it is actually better than it may appear, based on my indoor and outdoor runtime and throw tests compared with other lights.
Observation, outdoor testing:
As in the past, due to crowded urban conditions I have developed my so-called "Vertical throw tests".
I pace off a specific distance from a building as measured by pedometer, with compensation factored in for turns and corners. Then I select an aim point on a tall building and count the number of floors, conservatively assigning 10 feet per floor. I may sometime reverse this procedure, counting floors first. When I have my distance and height, I use Pythagoras to derive the hypotenuse which equals the total distance of the test. Accuracy can't be exact but is pretty close because I measure very carefully.
This outdoor test included the two longest-throwing 2x123 lights thus far documented: the ASP TACLITE and the TACM III. There was one observer beside myself and the observations were made in haste because of high pedestrian density.
OUTDOOR TEST #1
Lights tested: TACM III, ASP TACLITE (TRIAD LAMP), PELICAN M6
Height: 140' (14 floors)
Distance: 40'
Total distance: 146'
All three lights brightly illuminated the wall and several windows of the 14th floor. Since the test was necessarily brief, clear observations of beam pattern and details were not made but will be made in test #2. The Pelican M6 appeared at least as bright as the others, possibly brighter.
NOTE: All tests were performed with new SureFire batteries tested at 3.24v-3.27v. INDOOR TESTS were neither photographed nor instrumented because of lack of equipment. I believe that instrumented measurements, although valuable, are different from human perception in a particular environment.
INDOOR TEST #1
Pelican M6, TACM III, TACLITE, SUREFIRE 6P with P60, E2E with MN03.
These tests combined the much derided "white wall test" with other indoor tests. Lights were beamed into darkened corners and at specific objects, both light and dark, including reflective and
light-absorbent surfaces. White wall test was conducted at 25' onto a 5' wide white window shade, Tests into other areas were between 20' and 32 feet. One observer present.
NOTE: The TACLITE, TACM III, 6P and E2E were turned off after the initial observation and were later briefly activated only at specific measuring times in order to compare their fresh beams with the M6's constantly burning one.
START: 11:30 PM STOP: 11:55PM (Sun 3/2/03)
START: White Wall Test at 25': the M6's beam appeared slighter "whiter" than the TACLITE and TACM, its hotspot was approximately half the size of the TACM's and smaller than the TACLITE's. The M6's hotspot blended smoothly into a very bright surround so that the amount and intensity of the light seemed greater than either of its competitors. The light had a "dense", almost "thick" quality. All three lights were significantly brighter than the 6P and much brighter than the E2E.
Non-white wall tests confirmed the order and quality of brightness, though beam diameter was less apparent.
25 MINUTES: The M6 was somewhat dimmer but still unexpectedly bright and white. It was less bright than the fresh TACLITE and TACM III, but its dense hotspot could still superimpose itself upon those beams. It was more penetrating than the 6P and significantly brighter than the fresh E2.
INDOOR TEST #2 START: 5:20PM STOP: 6:07PM (Mon 3/3/03)]
40 MINUTES: Significantly dimmed, and noticeably overmatched by the fresh TACM and TACLITE, but still brighter in its hotspot than fresh P60 or fresh MN03 although it produced less overall light than either. Beam yellowed but whiter than expected.
44-47 MINUTES: Dimmer but hotspot still cuts weakly through P60 and MN03 beams.
NOTE: Although the M6's hotspot retains surprising power even as it dims and becomes less white, the formerly very bright surround fades disproportionately quickly and is much less useful by the 40+ minute mark.
INDOOR TEST #3 START 10:08AM STOP 11AM (Wed 3/5/03)
25 MINUTES: As in the previous test, the M6 was dimmer but remained surprisingly white and bright and was again able to cut through the beams of the fresh P60 and fresh MN03, while holding up relatively well with the fresh TACLITE and TACM III. At this point, as in the previous test the M6 had become quite hot, but could still be held, if somewhat gingerly, and the lens could be touched. At no point in these tests did the lens display melting, bending, or any negative effects whatsoever.
41 MINUTES: Noticeably dimmed, significantly dimmer than fresh TACM and TACLITE, with considerably less overall light than P60 and MN03 but brighter in its hotspot than both of them, and able to "punch" through both beams. Again I had the impression of density and "weight" in the M6's beam.
47 MINUTES: Still able to weakly cut through the hotspots of the fresh P60 and MN03, although putting out much less overall light than either one.
52 MINUTES: Despite being quite dim, the 6M's hotspot still manages to superimpose itself very weakly upon the fresh P60 and MN03 beams. However, the total output was very low appearing significantly less than a fresh 2L in a brief comparison.
At this point I considered my testing finished and was starting to write this review when I remembered that I had done only one hasty outdoor throw test, so I decided to do one more using the Pelican M6, TACLITE and TACM III. I was able to find a location that afforded slightly more privacy, enabling me to test a little more thoroughly than in the first throw test. The building I used was only 10 floors tall but I was able to get 120 feet away from it:
OUTDOOR (THROW) TEST #2 (3/5/03 Wed eve.)
Height: 100' (10 floors)
Distance: 120'
Total distance: 156'
All three lights illuminated the un-windowed upper corner of this building brightly, but not quite as impressively as in Test #1, possibly because the wall was a light concrete or travertine-like color.
I tested two lights at a time starting with the TACLITE and TACM. I was surprised to see that the TACM was slightly but distinctly brighter, possibly because the TACLITE's beam diameter was somewhat greater. Since there is some variation from one lamp to another even among identical models, that may have accounted for the difference. At any rate it was small but unequivocal. Next I tested the M6 against the TACM, but first I let the M6 run for the approximate time of the other light's previous burn to level the playing field. The two lights proved to be so close in brightness that I couldn't make a reliable decision, so I aimed the lights at another building that was really too far for a meaningful test. Both lights were faint but the TACM seemed to have slightly more "presence" than the M6. I hadn't tested the TACLITE against the M6, so, after equalizing burntime I aimed them at the original spot. The M6 was slightly but definitely brighter than the TACLITE. Test over.
When I returned home I decided there was yet one more test that had to be done: a burn test between the TACM III and the M6. I wanted to see if the M6 really could burn longer and brighter than the TACM, otherwise I would much rather carry that lighter and smaller light. At only 4 5/8" length and 3.8oz the TACM III is probably the lightest and shortest 2x123 "Superbright" currently produced. Compare this to (according to my measurements) the TACLITE's 5" & 5.3oz and the M6's relatively gargantuan 5.5" & 5.8oz.
INDOOR TEST #4: START 11:46PM STOP 12:22 AM (3-5-03 Wed)
TACM III AND M6
20 MINUTES: TACM & M6 roughly equal
25 MINUTES: M6 slightly brighter
36 MINUTES: M6 moderately brighter
NOTE: I had not replaced batteries since the last outdoor test, where the lights had been used a total of about five minutes.
Here is BROCK's runtime chart comparing the PM6 to other lights:
Unusual reflector
The pelican has broken ground in another area. It is the only one of the three longest throwing 2x123's that has a textured reflector. Some of us, myself included, had assumed that smooth reflectors were necessary to attain this level of performance. This no longer appears to be true, though there is the possibility that the M6's lamp is simply brighter than the others. I don't have the instruments to confirm or disprove that, although Kogatana's initial appraisal of brightness (between P90 & P91) may be right on target. It would be useful to see some instrumented run tests.
Along with reflector geometry, the type of "texturizing" is so critical in determining beam characteristics that I've taken a close look at the reflectors of the following eight lights, which are arrayed on the table in front of me: SureFire M6, Pelican M6, SureFire D3 with SRTH, Surefire 6P, UltraStinger, PolyStinger, E2E and the original E2. It appears that reflectors that have a more "etched" or "pebbly" and less reflective surface tend to produce a more dispersed and therefore somewhat lower candlepower beam. For instance, the original E2 reflector surface has the least reflective (shiny), deepest etched appearance of all the observed lights. Few people have mentioned the distinct change in "faceting" that occurred when Surefire brought out the E2E. The E2E reflector surface is shinier and less deeply etched than the E2 and noticeably brighter. It would be impossible to describe all the extremely subtle differences in texture styles. Only properly illuminated photo close-ups could plainly reveal these elements. The main characteristics seem to be the number, size, depth, shape, angle, and degree of reflectivity of the individual facets, though the latter is most likely a function of the former five aspects.
Of the lights mentioned, the Pelican M6's faceting is among the most subtle.
A word about the SureFire 2x123's and the ASP TACLITE:
At short/medium ranges, the Surefires are still among the best illuminators in terms of beam quality, diameter and brightness. Even though the TACM III and Pelican M6 apparently edged out the ASP in throw tests, I must emphasize that the differences were slight, most likely within production line differences. Of the three lights, the TACLITE was by far the best engineered, smoothly functioning and aesthetically pleasing.
Holstering the M6
Using a standard SureFire 6P holster, a perfect fit can be achieved by cutting the stitches at the holster bottom, thus enlarging the aperture enough to accommodate theM6's tail button.
Another option uses Streamlight's Scorpion holster. Create a hole in the holster bottom large enough to allow the tail button and approx. 1/8th inch of the tail bottom to protrude. This will permit full flap closure. For extra security tuck in several stitches at the top right or left corner of the holster front, where it joins the holster back. You can easily custom-adjust degree of tightness. Slight tail protrusion in either holster should pose no problems, though it would be preferable if Pelican would address the tailcap issue described earlier.
Summing up
The Pelican M6 has proven itself to be an unexpectedly strong performer. Not only was it at least as bright as the two brightest 2x123's, but it was able to retain much of its brightness longer than expected. My hat is off to Pelican. They have come up with an extremely bright light with an efficient lamp, ensconced it in a cleverly designed reflector and put it to excellent use in a solid, very inexpensive little light. There can always be room for improvement, but Pelican is on an exciting and promising track.
Thanks to any who waded through this unexpectedly long review!
Brightnorm
