So which Quark hits the Sweet Spot ?

OK, so the Quarks have been out for a couple of weeks now, and I'm wondering which to choose. It seems 4Sevens have done exactly the right thing by taking the same basic concept, and offering a range of permutations - 123 or AA, single or double cell.

Often, when there a variety of options like this, there is one particular combination that stands out - where everything comes together perfectly, and the whole thing just feels right.

So I was wondering if there was one particular Quark that stands out from the others - that hits that 'sweet spot' where everything just clicks. It could be efficiency and runtime, or weight in hand, balance, or just looks. Whatever, that makes you think "that's the one!"

For my money, the 123^2 looks good - to me, the single 123 looks a little too short, and the AA models are a bit thin around the middle. But that's just from looking at the photos, and I know that things can look and feel quite different in the flesh, so to speak.

Of course once the tacticals come out, there will be another dimension - but for now, those of you who've had a chance to handle the different models - is there one that stands out from the crowd ? . . . or maybe they're all good ?

I'm thinking about the same thing. I'm stuck between the Tactical 123 or 123-2 version.

I'm thinking the 123-2 is better because its smaller than the 2xAA version and is 190 lumens. The 123 single cells sounds nice, but the 170 lumen max mode only runs for 40 min or so.

I don't see why I shouldn't buy the 123-2 version right now dangit!

Oh, and I like how you can program 2 modes with the tactical version. don't think I need the less bright warmer tint version either. Watch, right after I decide to buy one, a newer version will come out.

I'm about to order a 123 no clip tactical natural white. Perhaps I should take a 2 x 123 tactical natural white along with the short version?

I just wonder why the natural white are limited versions. OK, they don't reach the power of the R2, but those who order them, know why they want to have them!

Mugrunty said:

I'm thinking about the same thing. I'm stuck between the Tactical 123 or 123-2 version.

I'm thinking the 123-2 is better because its smaller than the 2xAA version and is 190 lumens. The 123 single cells sounds nice, but the 170 lumen max mode only runs for 40 min or so.

I don't see why I shouldn't buy the 123-2 version right now dangit!

Oh, and I like how you can program 2 modes with the tactical version. don't think I need the less bright warmer tint version either. Watch, right after I decide to buy one, a newer version will come out.

Click to expand...

123

I was thinking of the 123-1 version for my wife's purse and the 123-2 version for her car. I have to go buy another Simon Visa card first (I always use them for Internet purchases) but all she wants for the anniversary is a fancy dinner out...but I thought giving her something to make her safer would be a nice add-on. My sister was horrified by the idea but I think it's nice. My wife still gets the dinner at the Capitol Grill that she really wants but also has something that lasts.

I pre-purchased a 123-2 warm tint. One important factor for me is the ability to tail stand. Several months back our power went out for a week and the lights that would tail stand made our life much easier. Second, after seeing all of my friend's warm tint lights, I have decided that this is the direction I want to go now. The output of the warm tint vs the cool tint will not be the same. For me, it comes down to how much detail I can see of the object I am shining on. In many cases my cool tint lights would shine farther, but I was not able to clearly see the object I was looking at.

I think it's a shame the the 123-2 body doesn't seem to be available on its own, I'd be tempted to buy a single AA and use the 123-2 body with a 17670.
If I was to buy the 123-2 and a 1 AA body the voltage range of the head is too high. My preference is for the warm version.
Norm

I wonder if we could perhaps have a separate thread to debate the merits or otherwise of warm tints.

It's really the different configurations (123 vs AA, single vs. double cell) that I was interested in . . .

Have you seen the runtime graphs for the 2xCR123 on a 17670?



Are you a Terrorist? Are you a Veteran?
http://www.prisonplanet.com/homeland...terrorism.html

LightWalker said:

Have you seen the runtime graphs for the 2xCR123 on a 17670?
[/URL]

Click to expand...

What about it? Is it that bad?

I'm really interested in the Quark AA cause you can use a 14500 battery, keep the size small, and have the same output as the Quark AAx2.

SilentK said:

What about it? Is it that bad?

Click to expand...

It's Fantastic!!!

In my view the Quark single AA (with a 123 body on the side) is THE sweet spot for Quark. First of all, a AA size light powered by a 14500 li-ion cell puts out an amazing amount of light... far more potent than the same light powered by NiMH or primaries. And because I am hooked on the awesome output available when using li-ion chemistry, my default power source of choice is always Li-Ion when possible, so I avoid two-cell lights for two reasons: 1) I don't like having to consider/worry about cell mismatch issues (can be very dangerous with lithium and li-ion) and 2) I generally much prefer the smaller size of a single cell light. In my case, if I need a larger light with longer runtime or greater output potential, I have a number of other lights (18650 size) which offer that... so I will just use those on occasions where that is needed. Remarkably, the Quark AA with a 14500 cell is so potent that I don't tend to find the need to reach for other lights that may be just ever so slightly brighter. The output on 14500 and beam quality with the XP-E R2 of the Quark AA is fantastic... a total home run for 4Sevens.

The Quark single-AA sings sweetly to me because I run mine on a 14500 li-ion, which as I already mentioned, gives amazing output... output equal to the RCR123, yet even one-ups the RCR123 option by offering a somewhat longer (perhaps 15%-25%) runtime than the RCR123 light.

Beyond that, and no less significantly, if desired, the Quark AA can be powered with a AA L91 lithium primary, a AA Eneloop NiMH, or a AA alkaline (as a last resort). The Quark AA model offers versatility on steroids! Plus, with the single 123 body tube available, I can power the light with any of the numerous RCR123 and CR123 primaries I also have on hand for other lights I own - if I want the smaller 123 form factor, or if I just want to/need to use that format of power source.

That's why my vote is for the Quark AA as the sweet spot among Quarks. In fact, I would go so far as to say that single AA size flashlights that can be powered with li-ion chemistry are, in general, perhaps the absolute IDEAL configuration when it comes to balancing compact size, intensely bright output, and wide powering versatility... they are the ROCK STARS of my flashlight world!

i own a clipless 123 quark and it carries perfectly in my pocket, with the 123x2 id expect it to hold up against other 2x123's which i dont think it does (not from personal experience), im basing that on posted outputs and the small head.

also, people need to stop comparing the rcr123 to the 14500's. compare primaries to primares. a primary 123 will allways beat out a AA, and in my opinion a primary 123 is equal to a 14500. its a single cell light, most people who own a single cell is not going to have a battery charger or the cells for their one edc single cell light.

Norm said:

I think it's a shame the the 123-2 body doesn't seem to be available on its own, I'd be tempted to buy a single AA and use the 123-2 body with a 17670.
If I was to buy the 123-2 and a 1 AA body the voltage range of the head is too high. My preference is for the warm version.
Norm

Click to expand...

What do you mean? I thought all the heads and bodyparts were interchangeable. Can't you put a head from a Q123-2 onto a QAA or Q123 and vise versa?

Tab... I hope you don't mind me for addressing these points, but there are some statements of misinformation in your post.

tab665 said:

also, people need to stop comparing the rcr123 to the 14500's. compare primaries to primares.

Click to expand...

Not sure what "people" you are referring to, however, you may not be aware of this... RCR123 (aka 16340) and 14500 are both 4.2v (3.7v nominal) rechargeable lithium-ion cells. They are identical in terms of chemistry and voltage, and somewhat close in terms of capacity. CR123 is a non-rechargeable 3v lithium primary.

tab665 said:

a primary 123 will allways beat out a AA

Click to expand...

And when you say "AA" cell, it would be much more meaningful to specify whether you mean a AA lithium primary, AA alkaline, AA-size NiMH, or AA-size 14500 li-ion... because without being specific, it's sort of meaningless. A lithium primary CR123 at 3v does offer greater output options than AA lithium primary or AA alkaline primary.

tab665 said:

and in my opinion a primary 123 is equal to a 14500.

Click to expand...

A primary 123 is a 3.0v lithium cell that is not rechargeable. A 14500 is a 4.2v (3.7v nominal) lithium-ion rechargeable. These cells are anything but equal. Their voltage and capacities are quite different.

tab665 said:

most people who own a single cell is not going to have a battery charger or the cells for their one edc single cell light.

Click to expand...

There is no truth to this statement. And it really has no bearing. You may not choose to use rechargeables of any chemistry, but you can't presume that anyone else is operating just as you do.

Xak said:

What do you mean? I thought all the heads and bodyparts were interchangeable. Can't you put a head from a Q123-2 onto a QAA or Q123 and vise versa?

Click to expand...

There are two different heads "Power: One AA Battery (0.9V~4.2V)" and "Power: Two CR123A Batteries (3.0V~9.0V)" all are physically interchangeable. But I want to run the lower voltage head with one 17670 in the two X 123 battery tube and the tube doesn't seem to be available as an accessory.
Norm

OK, I took the 123 no clip neutral white tactical along with the 2 x 123 neutral white tactical and of course 50 cells to feed them!

The only neutral white I have is the TK20 and that one rocks in the forest, but onfortunately it lacks of spill. I also hope the Quarks will be a little bit brighter. I'm curious about the tactical UI, two programmable modes sound nice, I don't need more.

The question now is : When will I get that order? After 20th july they are being produced, so I probably can't xpect to get them before end of august. Well, I'll find another light meanwhile!

Norm said:

There are two different heads "Power: One AA Battery (0.9V~4.2V)" and "Power: Two CR123A Batteries (3.0V~9.0V)" all are physically interchangeable. But I want to run the lower voltage head with one 17670 in the two X 123 battery tube and the tube doesn't seem to be available as an accessory.
Norm

Click to expand...

Hey Norm,

Check out Selfbuilt's review on the Quarks. My question is, what battery will you be running in the Quark AA?

If you're gonna run a 14500 and 17670 all the time, I'd say get a Q123^2 and a AA body. Your light won't be regulated BUT it WILL be brighter for most of the life of the battery AND it WILL have a longer run-time.

The buck circuit seems to be far more efficient than the buck-boost circuit. And the 17670 on the 123^2 head starts out brighter and STAYS brighter for most of the battery life compared to the AA head. Only at the end ~85-90% onwards is the AA head brighter. And it will go off abruptly if you use a protected battery.

If you're gonna use NiMH or Alkalines, please ignore my reply. =)

I`m happy with my AA Quark. I only run it on 14500 power. And recharge often. I simply like the size over 123, and runtime advantage. If there was a 18650 batt tube option I would add that.

Waiting to see what 47`s 18650 Mce offering will be. An MC-e light will probably do it for the rest of the year...for me. Don`t think I will be interested in the 47`s AAA.