Flashlight misinformation perpetrated by "reputable" companies

I am starting to be really bothered by the practice of many otherwise reputable companies of exaggerating flashlight specifications. Here is just one example:

"SPECIFICATIONS" ?

This, of course, is the Uke 2L. The paper catalog claims "4,500 CP", but the online site claims 10,000. Since the much brighter Scorpion rarely claims more than 6,000 or 7,000 CP
the question arises: who is telling these untruths (lies) and what is their motivation?The site goes on to claim a 4 1/2hr runtime for the 2L when in reality you can count on about 3 hours of steady runtime.

It's true that you can fudge candlepower and other figures, but to do so with such a cavalier disregard for the truth, not to mention the safty of LEO's and emergency personnel who might be depending on these lights and assuming accurate specs is reprehensible.

A few months ago I gave a negative review to Galls' highly touted H.A.L.O. tactical light in which I claimed that certain characteristics of the light could cause problems for an officer in the field. A respected senior CPF member with extensive professional experience with flashlights and weapons purchased the light, analysed and tested it and not only came to a similar conclusion, but also discovered a dangerous aspect of the light that could put an officer in real jeopardy.

Exaggerated, untruthful claims for light performance are not simply an annoyance.
They can have serious consequences.

Brightnorm

Misleading consumers is not just a flashlight thing, I see it all over and noone is doing much about it. It seems profit is more comonly more important than the truth. Isn't our government (U.S.) suposed to make sure manufactures and retailers are not misleading consumers about their products.

The name of the people advertising this light says it all ("...inclined to take liberties"). Maybe they should change their name to b---s, because that's what it takes...

How about the case of a certain well known company that states in their current catalog that 2002 models of some lights have lenses made from a silicone based substance, but appear to be still shipping products with lenses made from a synthetic substance. Appearantly thet don't think it's a big deal, but having recently purchased two of the allegedly newer versions to replace slightly beat up old lights of the same model, I'm a little bit ticked about having shelled out a couple of hunderd bucks for something that really isn't any better than what I already had, particularly since one of the new ones arrived with a "pre-scratched" lens (yeah, I know I could have ordered still more lens kits, but...). The dealer I bought them from claimed these lights came from recent 2002 shippments from the manufacturer, not old stock that had been sitting on their shelves for a while. I tend to believe them because they were out of stock on both models for a while.

I wonder how many people bought a certain "special edition" light recently offered on a munufacturers website thinking that they were going to get a light with an anti roll bezel and a pyrex lens, because that's what it said on the site for two days (until they changed the description).

I suspect that a lot of these cases are not really attempts at outright deception, but rather inattention to detail or just plain sloppiness. Many will serve as good examples of bad management as the post mortum analysis of some of these companies will probably reveal that they failed because they repeatedly misled and therefore lost the trust (as in REPEAT sales) of their customer base. I personally don't like being misled, it makes very little difference as to whether it was done by a con artist OR a well meaning whatever.

End of rant.

John

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR> How about the case of a certain well known company that states in their current catalog that 2002 models of some lights have lenses made from a silicone based substance, but appear to be still shipping products with lenses made from a synthetic substance. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you are referring to Surefire, I assure you that they are never trying to intentionally mislead anybody. What lens are you referring to? The non-HA bezel of E2e is the "old style", while the HA bezel is anti-roll and the lens is pyrex. Is that the problem you are having?

If you sincerely beleive that your problem results from an error made by Surefire, but not the dealer, I suggest you contact their customer service. They never let me down (or anybody for that matter AFAIK)

How about the many unregulated LED lights that claim "X amount of hours at full brightness" when we know it will start to dim right away.

What a thread...

This is not the only area (by far)-as others have pointed out-that we have misleading advertising.

I checked the UKE Web site and they rate the 2L as 3-4 hours (not 4-1/2). They also say it's a 2.1W lamp and don't give a CP rating. But one doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to know that with a 3-4 hour run time it's not going to be as bright as a light with the same power pack and a one-hour run time.

And, since (depending on measurement techniques) you get 3500 or so candela (candlepower) from a Brinkmann LX you know you won't get 10,000 candela from the UKE product. The LX is about a 5-6W lamp, as well. I would expect 1/3 the brightness both based on lamp power and run time.

BUT THIS IS NO EXCUSE--all of us here would probably figure this out--what about the Mr/Ms average consumer who wants a flashlight or as (or more) importantly the LEO or rescue worker who wants a specific level of light. It's good that a place like this exists...but we are 2000 members and how many millions buy flashlights?

I think marketeers dislike me as much as I dislike them. I had one salesman when I was asking him all sorts of questions about the reliability and maintainability of his multiple-hundred-thousand dollar audio product tell me in response both "oh, you just press a button" or "our product is more musical."

Geepondy--your question about LED lights was why I ranted about BUY REGULATED. Both brightness and and life are suspect. When I ran the real costs of the Inova X5 it came to something like $14 per 1000 candela-hours (my new probably bogus "worth" rating). The E2e was somewhere around $4.

JMM/Jim, I don't THINK Surefire intentionally misled us and they did correct their error as soon as it was pointed out. However if the 6P special edition had a LOTC I would have considered it at $50 but partly being suspicious based on the photo bought an E2e instead--and also partially because it was smaller and cheaper to relamp.

I'd like to thank Craig at www.theledmuseum.com, Brock, and the others who have published flashlight ratings. None of them -- and that certainly includes my attempt at measurements -- are perfect and it's very hard to compare lights across different test pages.

For example, when looking at LED lights, the folks from Singapore (I think) have a great shootout, but it gives some preference to the TechAss PR2 replacement--but there was a case where we have many candela and few lumens--but I like it well enough for certain applications.

Maybe we should start a proposed rating standard--Craig's work goes a real long way. I'm working with him to try and understand some discrepancies between his measurements and mine--but it's a subtle technical problem and neither of us is sure of what's up.

Of course, all measurements and reviews are subject to some error.

I doubt the federal government will be concerned about this issue. But we did have the FTC regulate how to measure audio amplifier power output ratings in the 1970s.

Cheers,

Richard

most 'regulated' lights dim right away also...the only step-up flashlight that i'm aware of to have a flat discharge curve (and i don't know this first hand) is the optioelectric thing for the mini-mag...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>The non-HA bezel of E2e is the "old style", while the HA bezel is anti-roll and the lens is pyrex. Is that the problem you are having?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, I know about that difference. The 2002 catalog says that the new Z2 and Z3s have pyrex lenses. The ones I then ordered came without them (but did have anti-roll bezels and tailcap index notches). Has anyone received a Z2 or a Z3 with a pyrex lens in it yet this year?

My latest M6 came with a tailcap with no index notches, even though it was 500 S/Ns higher than one with the notches pictured on a CPF post which led one to believe that long awaited change had been cut into production (burning off mixed old inventory?). So I spot drilled the new one, just like I had done the old one.

It seems that lately, no matter how hard I try to research current specifications and change cutins in advance (and resorting to tricks such as ordering from dealers that are "out of stock", so that I should be receiving the latest lights), I never know what is really going to be in the box until it arrives.

As for calling customer service, why should I have to on everything I've bought recently, I didn't used to have to.

John

There's an advertising "Defense" that has gone all the way to the supreme court, called "Puffery".

But, in no way does it allow you to sell Silver as Gold.

(But, the silver could be from a rare cache of German Silver, refined in the legendary furnace of the famed silversmith, Bubba, and his faithful dog, Hiho)

If you are looking for the BEST puffery, that would be the jpeterman company, at jpeterman.com

I think that some of the "misrepresentations" found in printed materials can be attributed to sloppy proof-reading. This is probably especially true of companies that "farm out" their advertising, brochures etc. to agencies. The people actually putting together the material have limited knowledge of the product, and thus do not readily spot errors. For example, a few months ago, I was looking through the then-new SureFire website, and noticed that the high output lamp for the M6 was an amazing 250 lumens! And I believe there were a number of other errors on the site that were caught by SFDB members...

I think that SureFire's tpyos and mistakes are compounded by the fact that their product line is continously evolving.
A change that is phased in may mean taking thousands of units before the first one leaves the factory. An example of this is the Millennium TurboHead, and it's change from Lexan to Pyrex. That took many months, and I bet there is stock still at Dealers of Lexan lenses...

I can see how it's difficult for them being so busy, and with such a huge product range, but I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I see some of the mistakes.

Al

Wasn't it Henry Ford that coined the phrase, "your mileage may vary?"

Look at all the carpetbaggers (not Hillary, in this particular case) selling patent medicines many years ago. "This magical elixer will cure all your maladies and rejuvenate your soul!"

I've given up on marketing and advertising to ever really get the straight truth out. It's an increasing sign of the times that every ad and blurb needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

As for lights, especially the "bright" ones, unless I see a common figure for brightness from at least two different sources, I've become really skeptical of printed ratings.

It's sad, but a lot of sales people are just in the market to sell things and not have to know almost anything about it. Since we here knows a bit more about flashlights, we need to stick together to share information and move forward. We need to refer fellow members to merchants who share the same love of lights, to know if they sell many of us right and honest, we will be coming back for more. I try to direct people to good merchants and not try to uncover bad ones. I think that they are just too many bad ones out there and it just wastes my time to place an issue with...

If you find someone who is not honest, this information needs to be forwarded to the manufacturer or distributor. They need to take action, many times being in a costly legal way. If they don't take action, then there's nothing the public can do. The same goes for getting a "US Patten" for your product design. If you don't plan police the market and place legal action against anyone trying to copy you, it does no good. Your interest is your own action...