EDIT: Pic Added--Returned E1L, Got E2L, Now Anodizing Mismatched

Well, I decided after having my E1L (from Cabelas near me in Fort Worth), for a few days that I wished I had gotten the E2L instead. Just feel like I'll probably not EDC it--it's a nightstand light-might as well have longer runtime on the low that will be used most. So, I exchanged the unit for the E2L. I looked at 6-7 of them they had, and all the bodies' HA tended more toward olive, but the heads, and even a couple of the tailcaps were GREY!

Of course I bought it fully aware. It just gripes me that my $42 L0D, my E01, arcs, etc. all match beautifully, but the $128 SF does not. It almost looks as though they retrofitted the heads on older E2L bodies.

Ultimately my lights are tools--rarely used, but nevertheless tools.., --just a minor gripe.

Here's a pic. FWIW, the E1L matched perfectly:

Re: Returned E1L, Got E2L, Now Anodizing Mismatched

It's very possible that they are older E2L bodies retrofitted with the new KX2 head. I think the only way to get the head, body and tailcap all the exact same color would be to anodize them all in the same batch at the same time.

Re: Returned E1L, Got E2L, Now Anodizing Mismatched

Exactly. I dont think any SF have ever matched in the anodizing. Different parts done at different times .I actually like the mismatch for some odd personal reason it adds character to the lights for me . For me the "quality " of the HA is a bigger factor also. The greenish HAIII on SF seems to be very thick and pretty darn tuff as compared to some others. Plus SF puts their efforts into other areas more than cosmetic ones. Matching parts would just increase costs for no fucntional reasonsbut just MHO which is worth NADA

Edited to add pic. I agree that none of my other SFs really match either, but I think they tend to be shades of grey. This one seems tan or brown and grey! The KX2 will probably see more time on an FB-2 anyway, so no big deal...

Glad you're taking it in stride. The difference is pretty noticeable...

LED-holic said:

Glad you're taking it in stride. The difference is pretty noticeable...

Click to expand...

Yes, and even though I'm pretty happy with my point and shoot's macro capabilities (Nikon S4), the difference is actually more to the eye IMO. Must be a lighting thing. Or an anal thing:green:


What the heck, I'm having fun posting pics

I don't think you're anal. You're paying a premium for a premium light. Granted anodizing is not going to affect performance, but at the higher dollars it does come into a bit of play.

Unfortunately there is nothing you can do about this, so you have to accept it. Being mad about it won't help your sanity much.

PseudoFed said:

...It just gripes me that my $42 L0D, my E01, arcs, etc. all match beautifully, but the $128 SF does not. It almost looks as though they retrofitted the heads on older E2L bodies.

Click to expand...

If you're ok with it that's all that matters, but personally I find that mismatch pretty extreme and it would bother me. You have a right to expect more from a $129 flashlight. It disappoints me to see that Surefire would consider that acceptable and package it for resale. That's my opinion.

I disagree that there's nothing you can do about it. If you're unhappy, I would contact SF and explain. Ultimately, they could replace it with a new one.

Hmmm, I usually don't care about the looks of my lights as they are bound to get all banged up anyway but IMO that kind of thing should go into the discount bin. That's not mismatched ano, that's just different colors. I think you nailed it that they are using old bodies with the newer heads but still.........................

I guess it all comes down to the light working right but I would have tried to get a few $$ off Superb light though!

It looks just fine to me.

SureFire have not always managed to get the anodisation so closely matched as your photo. Check out Shelby Chan's photo from yesteryear!