Is this a Surefire tailcap?

flip

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 18, 2006
Messages
474
Location
Cherryville, NC
I recently picked up a black Surefire C2 flashlight. The tailcap looks unlike any that I have ever seen before. It is a non-lockout twisty. There is a band of checkering around the body of it. It has a large hole and button like some of the old 6Z tailcaps but there is no writing anywhere on the tailcap and the switch button is hard and has a black, glossy finish. The button and spring falls out when the tailcap is removed just like the other, old style tailcaps I have seen. The finish seems to match that of the black C2 it came on. What is this?



http://img12.imageshack.us/i/dsc02618d.jpg/
http://img268.imageshack.us/i/dsc02616v.jpg/


http://img38.imageshack.us/i/dsc02610eh.jpg/

http://img12.imageshack.us/i/dsc02613j.jpg/

http://img38.imageshack.us/i/dsc02610eh.jpg/
 

Sgt. LED

Flashaholic
Joined
Sep 4, 2007
Messages
7,486
Location
Chesapeake, Ohio
Doesn't look familiar to me but Surefire has been around for a while now so it might be genuine.

At first glance I'd say no.
 
Last edited:

flip

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 18, 2006
Messages
474
Location
Cherryville, NC
Thanks Sarge. I am curious as to what the heck I have here. The finish matches very well but I have just never seen a tailcap like this.
 

kramer5150

Flashaholic
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
6,328
Location
Palo Alto, CA
Correct me if I am wrong but Surefire switch pattent has always had lock-out capabilities... that element of the design has always remained constant. No LOTC = Not a Surefire (AFIAK)

FWIW, T.O.P. stryker non-LOTCs are similar to yours, with just a metal plunger and spring, and they are Surefire compatible.

dscn5811.jpg


dscn5813.jpg


dscn5814.jpg


dscn5815.jpg
 

Size15's

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 29, 2000
Messages
18,415
Location
Kettering, England
If it were that simple to describe a Patented invention then we wouldn't have a whole industry devoted to arguing over infringement!

As a result I'm not sure its possible to accurately describe in general terms what SureFire's LockOut TailCap Patent covers but for the sake of sanity and the fact we have better things to do such as lives to live I consider SureFire's LockOut TailCap Patent to cover a removable TailCap assembly that features a push button switch that can be disabled by unscrewing the TailCap from the body past the point at which pressing the push button no longer activates the light.

In most cases SureFire's preferred embodiment of their Patent involves limiting the travel of the push button switch assembly. This is the case for the momentary push button pressure switches.
Another method they use is with a switch contact fixed inside the TailCap that is normally in contact with the body when being able to make use of the switch button, but can be disconnected by unscrewing the TailCap from the body.

This may sound like almost any flashlight that uses a tailcap and herein is the issue. It is normal in business for companies to arrange licences to use patented inventions. Where two companies have a variety of patents each of which could potentially be used to claim infringement it is normal for a cross-licensing agreement to be made.
This system tends to be easier for established companies in the same market sector and cause 'problems' for new companies trying to join the party.

Just because we don't hear about the dialog between businesses does not necessarily mean they aren't communicating. I believe that courts/judges require companies to show they have made reasonable efforts to resolve their differences before taking formal actions for infringement.

Al :tinfoil:
 

JimmyB

Enlightened
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
201
Location
Eastern Washington
Correct me if I am wrong but Surefire switch pattent has always had lock-out capabilities... that element of the design has always remained constant. No LOTC = Not a Surefire (AFIAK)

I think I'm just misunderstanding you (you're just referring to the patent?) but plenty of the early Surefire tailcaps did not have lockout capability.
 

dano

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 11, 2000
Messages
3,884
Location
East Bay, Cali.
Older SF tailcaps had plungers that would fall out, before the LOTC was intro'd into the product line. The pics look like a copy of an old style SF tailcap,
 

kosPap

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
2,909
Location
Naoussa Greece
If it were that simple to describe a Patented invention then we wouldn't have a whole industry devoted to arguing over infringement!

As a result I'm not sure its possible to accurately describe in general terms what SureFire's LockOut TailCap Patent covers but for the sake of sanity and the fact we have better things to do such as lives to live I consider SureFire's LockOut TailCap Patent to cover a removable TailCap assembly that features a push button switch that can be disabled by unscrewing the TailCap from the body past the point at which pressing the push button no longer activates the light.

In most cases SureFire's preferred embodiment of their Patent involves limiting the travel of the push button switch assembly. This is the case for the momentary push button pressure switches.
Another method they use is with a switch contact fixed inside the TailCap that is normally in contact with the body when being able to make use of the switch button, but can be disconnected by unscrewing the TailCap from the body.

This may sound like almost any flashlight that uses a tailcap and herein is the issue. It is normal in business for companies to arrange licences to use patented inventions. Where two companies have a variety of patents each of which could potentially be used to claim infringement it is normal for a cross-licensing agreement to be made.
This system tends to be easier for established companies in the same market sector and cause 'problems' for new companies trying to join the party.

Just because we don't hear about the dialog between businesses does not necessarily mean they aren't communicating. I believe that courts/judges require companies to show they have made reasonable efforts to resolve their differences before taking formal actions for infringement.

Al :tinfoil:

just to add something more (taken form my studying guns patents)
NOTHING came from nothing...(there must be a latin legal term for this). All patents come in a form that FIRST the similar concepts are described (with reference to the aplicapbe patent number) then the grounds are made on patending the new product by describing the variations or Improvements of the original concept...

More to the point, Size15 what are the LOC tailcap patent number? (if easy) It would be interesting to know
 

Size15's

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 29, 2000
Messages
18,415
Location
Kettering, England
More to the point, Size15 what are the LOC tailcap patent number? (if easy) It would be interesting to know
Currently "RE40125" (filed Jan. 3, 2003, issued Mar. 04, 2008) which is the reissued version of "6046572" which was applied for in Dec. 5, 1997 and issued Apr. 4, 2000.
 
Top