Flashlights suffering an Identity Crisis

Flashlights suffering an identity crisis

What happens when a flashlight doesn't know what it is meant for or what role it is meant to play? What if the flashlight tries to play many different roles in an attempt to find one it is best suited for? What happens when trying to be good at everything means not being very good at anything? Read on.


Part I: The Rant

These days I'm concerned with the apparent lack of thinking that goes into the design and production of some flashlights. It seems that some manufacturers want to include every conceivable feature into their new flashlight without regard to whether or not those features are appropriate for the flashlight's intended use. This is often apparent when two opposing features are present at once. A perfect example of this is a flashlight with a tailcap shroud for tailstanding ability which also claims to be good for tactical use. Never mind that a tactical user needs a protruding button! Or how about the "HA-III" claim of many cheaper lights -- what happened to using correct terminology? I feel like some manufacturers just slap a label on it, regardless of whether the light has that feature, and call it a day! It seems like they just want to make a quick buck, the buyer be damned.

There are lots of products, not just flashlights, that will either do one thing very well or they will do many things just so-so. Take automobile tires for example. All-season tires will get you around throughout the year and provide an acceptable level of traction. But if you seek the best dry traction you need summer or competition tires. If you see lots of snow, then there is really no substitute for M&S tires. My problem is not that there are some products that try to be all-in-one, it's that those all-in-one products try to claim to be GOOD at everything. There are some exceptions to this rule but they are few and expensive.

In summary, I wish manufacturers would put more thought into the intended use of their flashlight. If the light is meant for general purpose and camping, GREAT! Give it features appropriate to that end. If the light is meant for tactical use, I'd better not see a a chrome bezel and 40 decibel clicky with a shroud. If the light claims to be an EDC, make sure it comes with either a lanyard or a clip or both. These are all obvious things. Why can't some manufacturers figure them out?

On the other hand, some manufacturers are great at producing a flashlight that is purpose built. These companies produce a flashlight that doesn't try to be something it is not. The quintessential example in my mind is the Surefire 6P. It has a silent and exposed rear switch, good knurling for grip, is the right diameter, has a dead simple UI, doesn't have any chrome or shiny parts, and is the proper brightness and beam pattern. Why there are so many 6P clones that totally miss the mark is beyond me. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.


Part II: The Concept of Intended Use, Requirements, Reasonable Expectations, and Examples

Section A. The Concept of Intended Use (IU)

• Beam profile should be appropriate for the light's intended use: floody, intermediate, or thrower
• The level of friction provided by hand grip, i.e. "aggressiveness" of knurling, should be appropriate for the light's intended use
• Rear switch should only be recessed to allow tailstanding if it does not interfere with the light's intended use
• Crenelated bezel should be present only if suitable for the light's intended use
• User Interface (number and arrangement of modes, process of switching between modes) should be appropriate for the light's intended use

Section B. Flashlight REQUIREMENTS. All flashlights must meet this minimum set of requirements.

• Must have beam free of significant artifacts (I'm looking at you, incandescent Maglite)
• Must be sealed against dust, dirt, mud, water, ice, etc.
• Must have completely silent driver. No buzzing or hissing!
• Must not have visible PWM
• Must not suddenly shut off when cell(s) are depleted; there should be a period of diminishing output to alert the user to change the cell(s) (I'm looking at you, Lux III MiniMagLED)


Section C. Reasonable Expectations of Ruggedness and Quality

• Should be able to withstand shallow water submersion for at least a brief period of time
• Should have good machining, this means threads with a positive feel, knurling only where it is supposed to be, and no erroneous machine marks that interfere with ergonomics
• Should have anodizing that is consistent in color throughout with no blotches or spots missing (corners and edges)
• All laser printed text should be properly aligned
• O-rings should be lubed
• If UI provides multiple modes, switching should be intuitive and fast


Section D. Examples

Tactical: the following conditions must ALL be met:
- Exposed rear switch that is silent during activation to facilitate use with a pistol
- Exterior surface that provides friction (grip) that is not compromised if wet. This usually means knurling.
- Exterior surface that is not reflective. This usually means a dark color of flat or satin reflectivity
- Should be single mode, or if multiple modes then a UI that doesn't "get in the way"
If these conditions are not met, DON'T LABEL IT TACTICAL! I don't even want to see the word "tactical" anywhere near it!

EDC:
- accepts rechargeable cells
- multiple modes
- Rugged enough to survive drops, bangs, and some abuse
- pocket clip and/or lanyard ring

Headlamp:
-multiple modes with simple UI, preferably operable with one hand
-small and lightweight
-floody beam


Automobile/glovebox:
- LED for ruggedness
- lithium primaries for cold weather operation
- bright (~100 lm)
- 1+ hour runtime

Loaner:
- Simple on/off switch
- Cheap (if broken or borrowed indefinitely )


This thread is not meant to be another Tactical Vs. Tacticool thread, nor is it meant to pro Surefire or anti- any other brand. You may not agree with some of my ideas about what a flashlight should be. Let me know what you think!

Good ranting, I think you really hit the nail on the head. I think this is why so many arguments about "world's best flashlight" get started, I personally have several lights with very different uses, and I use each one for each situation. (I also have M+S tires on my car....)

I'm just thinking about some things:

1. you don't consider a Fenix TK11 or an Olight M20 Warrior as a tactical? Well, I wouldn't be happy if someone banged my head with it :sick2:

2. MUST an incandescent light be free of beam-artifacts to be a useful light? Think of how many people still can live with the (sometimes indeed poor) beam quality of eg a Mag 3D...

3. for the rest: I fully agree, your first part of the thread I simply fully, totally agree with! Manufacturers simply state what they want, and think is useful. How many times do you come across a product that is labeled "professional"?

More often than not, products labeled "professional" are NOT professional indeed! No, these are 95% cheap Chinese products! Do they realize there, what the word PROFESSIONAL means??
A Sound Devices field recorder, YES, that's what I would call a PROFESSIONAL device, that is: suitable for someone, who earns his money making recordings!
And a professional flashlight? Well, I surely wouldn't trust my life to a WF-501B.... I would take a Wolf Eyes at the very least, better still a Surefire :twothumbs

Grrrreat thread!! Go on like this, I'll read it with utmost attention!


Timmo.

I just buy Surefire from now on -- none of these issues seem to crop up since Surefire markets their products to my profession as an end user, and seems to ignore the "niche" markets. This pleases me. And likely angers others, but I don't care.

Everyone has different preferences and intended uses. Trying to semantically define what makes one product this or that makes no sense because it boils down to the intended use and personal preferences of the individual.

To a certain extent, what you are ranting against is the fundamental principle of a free business market. Product developers are at liberty to market their products however they want (within reason). For example, Many switch caps have raised ridges around the edge not only to provide tail standing, but also to serve as a blunt strike weapon. By your definition these can't be marketed as "tactical".

Your assumption that "tactical user needs a protruding button!"? I think is very wrong. Surefire themselves have realized this and have many products with recessed switch buttons.

The "HA-III" thing is something I had some confusion on too. Its not something very clearly defined, hence the confusion.

I think if you know what you want, how you intend to use it, your rant will become less of one.

If people know what they're looking for, there isn't a problem. If someone wants a light with 30 different modes which tail-stands but is advertised as 'Tactical', that's not really a problem either. If it does what I want and I like it, I don't really care what it claims to be. It's down to researching before you buy, rather than falling for the marketing. That's how I came to be here. :twothumbs

So, I agree with the gist of your post really, but me being so cynical about marketing in general, it just washes over me.

I just sent an email to Jim Jones about the very thing! No WOW lights for me. I stopped building at the 5761 or 64430 because beyond that for Torch lumens you give up practical burn time. My lights need to be in the light rechargeable, 20 minutes or more burn time, fast recharge and bright. I figured out how I was going to power a '58 for 30+ minutes but my experience with high out put for more than WOW burns the aluminum off the reflectors. My ideal light must have a practical purpose which translates to a run time to match my activities.

Good thread.

Good rant.

It is like, almost all flashlight makers are claiming theirs as tactical, while almost all customers do not work in tactical situation.

Some "copy" makers seem only care about brightness or production cost of their lights without proper understanding of why the "original" makers made theirs in that way. It is not very uncommon to see a copy of copy of the copy in these days. Tiny assault crowish bezel at EDC, or reverse clicky at what they called tactical light doesn't really make sense. But, hey, that's what's happening.

It surely adds lots of confusion to the market. Serious buyers will have to figure gems out of the flood of craps. People could get lost somewhere in there. But, that does not always mean a bad thing when those craps are cool enough for ordinary people at cheap price. Not all people need well thought out products. Too bad, if all you bought was cheap crap.

Thus, information and customer education is more important than ever. Otherwise, people may ends up buying lots of craps to find few good lights. People, we need to think hard before making purchase. LOL.

If ever the old adage applied it's here... "Jack of all trades... master of none!"

Compromise means specific performance sacrifice

Personally, I don't care what label someone sticks on their product, as long as the basic details, such as runtime, output, and accepted battery types is correct.
I figure someone who doesn't take the time to properly research a product deserves what he/she gets. (This has been me several times, and I'm sure several more to come )

I guess the bulk of my post can be summed up by saying I am frustrated by manufacturer's false advertising. But there is also a large component that I will call, for lack of a better word, greed. I call it greed because it's like MFgr's don't care if the light fulfills a certain duty or role for the end user, instead they only care how many units they sell. And they mistakenly believe that a good way to sell lots of lights is by stuffing them full of features that sometimes don't go together or by outright lies (lights marked as HA that only have type-2 anodizing).

@Kramer:
I agree -- of course product developers are at liberty to market their products however they want, but they must realize that if they apply labels like "tactical" to products where it doesn't apply, this will lead to dissatisfied customers and a poor reputation for being misleading. That's how it's supposed to work in the ideal free market, anyway. I doesn't always play out like that in real life.

@Seaside:
You hit the nail on the head and summed up what I was trying to say very succinctly: "Some 'copy' makers seem only care about brightness or production cost of their lights without proper understanding of why the 'original' makers made theirs in that way." They go through the trouble of copying a great design, then they muck it up by changing it!

That said, I'm certainly not on the bash-ultrafire (and similar companies) bandwagon. They make very inexpensive lights that are for the most part acceptable and sometimes quite reliable. Do they come with a great warranty, customer service, and hours upon hours of research, design, and testing? NO! But as long as they remain cheap, myself and others will continue to buy them. I love my Surefires and I'll probably always have some. But I also love my cheap chinese lights from DX and KD too. I just love flashlights!

A flashlight should not try to be everything to everyone, it should just fill one role and do it well.

copperfox said:

A flashlight should not try to be everything to everyone, it should just fill one role and do it well.

Click to expand...

I have to disagree with this statement. There is space in the market for specialized flashlights and there is space in the market for a general use flashlight that can be a jack-of-all-trades even if it is a master of none.

Hmmm, EagleTac: Chrome bezels, noisy clickie and tailcap shroud!!:laughing:

I do not consider ANY item, tool, flashlight,firearm, knife etc to be "tactical". It is a tool, flashlight, firearm, knife, or whatever it may be.

It is the use the item is put to which may or may not be tactical. Therefore almost any item can be used in a tactical situation, some items happen to be designed to work better than others in said situations.

copperfox said:

@Kramer:
I agree -- of course product developers are at liberty to market their products however they want, but they must realize that if they apply labels like "tactical" to products where it doesn't apply, this will lead to dissatisfied customers and a poor reputation for being misleading. That's how it's supposed to work in the ideal free market, anyway. I doesn't always play out like that in real life.

Click to expand...

I think we all agree that blatant false advertising is wrong. But without any governing body to maintain the integrity of advertisers its pointless to try and enforce. In a nutshell advertisers are caught in a lumen war (and other marketing battles with which to try and lure customers).

Are there really consumers out there, purchasing these products based purely on marketed hype alone? Without researching? A simple google search ("Surefire 6P review" for example) often times is more than sufficient, and may even lead one here.

copperfox said:

A flashlight should not try to be everything to everyone, it should just fill one role and do it well.

Click to expand...

disagree. Technology and quality manufacturing is readily available to make products that excel in a variety of areas.

Surefire C2/6P + malkoff M30 for example. Great flood, far reaching hot spot, serviceably long run times with 17670 cells. Bomb-proof reliability yet easily activated momentary switch for instant-on light. Add a SF flip-diffuser and you have a great area flood light in a pinch. With a belt holster its easily very EDC-able.

*edit*

I for one certainly hope manufacturers do not adopt a "one trick pony" mentality for every product they develop.

scottaw said:

Good ranting, I think you really hit the nail on the head. I think this is why so many arguments about "world's best flashlight" get started, I personally have several lights with very different uses, and I use each one for each situation. (I also have M+S tires on my car....)

Click to expand...

I don't think the arguments start because of the actual specs of the flashlight; that affects which flashlight will be each person's favorite, instead, and the specs are objective -- there's nothing to argue about. The arguments start because people don't comprehend that their personal requirements aren't valid for everyone.

Anyway, I assume it's been mentioned already that the primary purpose of every flashlight is to attract the attention of potential buyers, but I'll throw it out there just in case. To that end, the more buzzwords the better, but it sounds like everyone here knows what to really look for, so let the fools and their money be parted -- they'll learn their lesson if they want to, and that's what keeps the economy running, anyway. I hate to say it, but if every flashlight were perfectly designed for its target audience, and if everyone knew exactly what they needed in a flashlight, then everyone would buy one flashlight (or one of each) that would last the rest of their lives, and there would be no more market for flashlights. You could say that manufacturers could just innovate more, but innovation is bloody expensive. You have to sell a lot of cheap widgets to finance the R&D on the good widgets, or else you have to convince everyone the good widgets are worth paying for. Good luck with that.

I don't think its an "identity crisis" for flashlights, as much as its the consumer unsure of their personal preferences or intended use.

I smell what your cooking:laughing:

I didn't say a light should do only one thing, I said it should fill one role. There is a difference. Let me modify that now by saying *at least* one role. I'm not suggesting every light should be a simple on/off, one mode light. For example, "EDC" is a role that requires it to be small, efficient, rugged, and in some cases multi-mode.

Kramer, your C2/6P example where you said "With a belt holster its easily very EDC-able" falls outside of my size preference for EDC. I work in an office so I won't EDC anything larger than 1xAAA, 1xAA, 1xCR123, or on rare occasions a SF E2E. Certainly nothing that requires a holster, though. It's ok that we disagree on what size light is EDC-able, but at what point can a manufacturer no longer advertise a light as EDC? You're right, there is no governing body, and I don't think there should be. The market should determine what companies do well and which do not. We vote with our wallets. But it is still unfortunate that us flashaholics have to wade through hundreds of posts to separate the BS claims from the truth.

Oh, and some lights can fill two roles. I think plenty of real "tactial" lights can be used as EDC if you really want to, but very few EDC specific lights can be used in a tactical situation (I think NT120-T would probably work). This is a kind-of one-way role adoption.

The identity crisis comes when the manufacturer can't decide what kind of light to make, so they make a light with a bunch of features. What comes to mind is my old Lumapower M1-R. It claimed to have a tactical momentary only switch (i.e. 6P) and it did, but tailcap protrusions got in the way of my thumb. For that reason I'd never use it in conjunction with a firearm. It also had a very narrow beam, too narrow (IMHO) to fulfill the "general purpose" criteria that they also advertised it for. Also it was head-heavy and lacked any real knurling (two more reasons not to use with a pistol). Lastly, it was $90 new, so quite a bit out of the "general purpose" price range for me. All of this is unfortunate because the build quality was really great. But that doesn't do it any good if the design team killed it before it was even born! It looked great on paper (Rebel 100, HA, AR glass, long runtime, two switches, two reflectors, tailstandable, CB, rugged) but it didn't really do anything well IMHO.

Just watch, someone is gonna go "Hey! I have a M1-R and it's perfectly fine. Thank-You-Very-Much." :nana: