Thoughts on Quark Tactical vs Eagle Tac?

Time to make a choice!

For me, it's come down to 2 choices that are the same price. For EDC and personal preference, both are what I desire. However, the *features listed below have me in turmoil!

Quark 123^2 R5 Tactical

http://www.pinnacleflashlights.com/products/EagleTac-P20C2-MKII.html

* 2 modes instantly available on knob (no cycling through set patterns)
* Runtime a 30 hour moonlight mode is killer! I usually hang a low power flash from the top of my tent pointed down. (personally don't think candle mode has much application)
* shorter and lighter than second choice

or

Eagle Tac P20C2 MKII with Cree XP-G R5 Cool LED

*OMG 300 lumens END OF STORY lol

http://www.pinnacleflashlights.com/p...Tac-P20C2-MKII



Both have comparable accessories (straps, cases) though I really would use a red light filter.

Side note: I like a wider flood, which from what I've seen the Quark has, but the 300 OTF has me second guessing because I am afraid I will keep wishing I did something brighter when I need to signal the space shuttle

What are your thoughts on these two?

Optional

4sevens has a neutral-white with an xp-g, in R4 bin no less.

Eagletac uses an xp-e?, only Q4 bin.

The EagleTac UI is similar in practice to the Quark, so you will have "2 modes instantly available on knob (no cycling through set patterns)" but as I'm sure you are aware, the Quark is programmable, so you have more choices for those 2 modes.

The EagleTac has SOS and Beacon which are easily accessed by head twisting.

The EagleTac low isn't low enough for my taste, but you said you don't need that anyway.

The Quark is "lego-able", so in the future, you could buy other bodies and heads to assemble a different setup.

In practice, 230 OTF Quark Lumens (4Sevens tends to be a bit conservative relative to other brands) vs 300 OTF EagleTac lumens (fairly honest estimates), won't be that noticeable I think.

I tested a Quark AA (206L) vs an EagleTac P20A2 (230L) and there wasn't much difference in terms of usable light. The 70 lumen difference in your choices may be much more noticeable though.

Essentially, I'd lean towards the Quark because of it's versatility and size. Might not be as tough as the EagleTac, but unless you are hard on your stuff, I doubt it will matter.

Try about 260 OTF for the Quark 123-2 XP-G R5 Tactical .






Also, see the "Calling all Quarks" thread that I started for more Quark OTF numbers, and plenty of pictures.

entoptics said:

The EagleTac UI is similar in practice to the Quark, so you will have "2 modes instantly available on knob (no cycling through set patterns)" but as I'm sure you are aware, the Quark is programmable, so you have more choices for those 2 modes.

The EagleTac has SOS and Beacon which are easily accessed by head twisting.

The EagleTac low isn't low enough for my taste, but you said you don't need that anyway.

Click to expand...

The tactical Quark UI is fantastic, probably second to the Photon Freedom UI in my book. However I find that I'm constantly reprogramming... not a bad thing just how it is. ET will probably have more throw than the Quark.

The Quark is "lego-able", so in the future, you could buy other bodies and heads to assemble a different setup.

Click to expand...

The bodies might be fun to mess around with for a few days, but I think that you should just choose 1 battery choice since its probably the one you'll end up sticking to any way.

In practice, 230 OTF Quark Lumens (4Sevens tends to be a bit conservative relative to other brands) vs 300 OTF EagleTac lumens (fairly honest estimates), won't be that noticeable I think.

I tested a Quark AA (206L) vs an EagleTac P20A2 (230L) and there wasn't much difference in terms of usable light. The 70 lumen difference in your choices may be much more noticeable though.

Click to expand...

Very true, its difficult enough to tell between the 70 and 180?lms of the XPE Quark.

I think these 2 lights are so close, you might as well toss a coin or order them both and return the one you don't like.

red02 said:

its difficult enough to tell between the 70 and 180?lms of the XPE Quark.

Click to expand...

I can easily tell the difference between 70 and 180 lumens. I will add that it's easier to notice a difference if you shine something further away when comparing, but still, 70 vs 180 is a big difference to my eyes.

ti-force said:

I can easily tell the difference between 70 and 180 lumens. I will add that it's easier to notice a difference if you shine something further away when comparing, but still, 70 vs 180 is a big difference to my eyes.

Click to expand...

Its not a large difference IMO, everytime I'm reprogramming for max I always have to count the modes to make sure its max. Its a step up, but not enough to make a large difference unless you ceiling bounce. I guess I should stop playing with it in the daytime...

red02 said:

Its not a large difference IMO, everytime I'm reprogramming for max I always have to count the modes to make sure its max. Its a step up, but not enough to make a large difference unless you ceiling bounce. I guess I should stop playing with it in the daytime...

Click to expand...

Yeah, and eat more carrots . Take it outside (at night ) and shine it on a target 50 to 75 yards away, then switch back and forth and see if you notice more of a difference. I mean, the difference won't be like lighting trees on fire or anything, but it should be a noticeable difference at a greater distance. I think our eyes don't try to adjust as much when the light is further away. If you shine the light on a white wall and stare at the hot spot, it'll look like the light is noticeably dimming, but it's your eyes adjusting.

ti-force said:

Yeah, and eat more carrots . Take it outside (at night ) and shine it on a target 50 to 75 yards away, then switch back and forth and see if you notice more of a difference. I mean, the difference won't be like lighting trees on fire or anything, but it should be a noticeable difference at a greater distance. I think our eyes don't try to adjust as much when the light is further away. If you shine the light on a white wall, it will look like the light is noticeably dimming, but it's your eyes adjusting.

Click to expand...

I have to agree. A difference of 110lums is definitely noticable to my eyes. Infact, 30, or in some cases, even 20 lumens difference is noticable to my eyes, all depending on the lights and enviroment.

bigc also tested the Eagletac P20C2 MKII and it clocked in at 330 lumens, look on his thread. I like my Quark but the P20 is much brighter to me, it throws further and although the spill is wider on the Quark it's brighter on the P20. The drop-in can also be changed out for the Q4 or any other future drop-ins Eagletac releases.

The P20 is slightly bigger though so you may want to take that into consideration, you probably won't notice it if you carry it in a holster but the Quark slides in a pocket much more comfortably.

Their both nice light's and I don't hesitate to pick up either but the P20 MKII stays with me most of the time.

I go for brightness and beam color. Eagletac wins in both counts IMO

Re: Optional

MichaelW said:

4sevens has a neutral-white with an xp-g, in R4 bin no less.

Eagletac uses an xp-e?, only Q4 bin.

Click to expand...

The P20C2 MKII uses an XP-G R5 just like the quark. Eagletac's web page is horribly out of date.

The EagleTac is brighter and it is noticable but the quark interface is better. You can program the quark to start on low (or any other mode). You can not start the EagleTac on low - ever. You can only start in Turbo mode or "general" (medium) mode. You can only get to low by turning the head one way and then the other. That is their one big downfall. Other then that it is a great light. You will get better customer service with a 4sevens light though. I can't even get EagleTac to answer an email. If it were me, I would get both.

Re: Optional

tre said:

The P20C2 MKII uses an XP-G R5 just like the quark. Eagletac's web page is horribly out of date.

The EagleTac is brighter and it is noticable but the quark interface is better. You can program the quark to start on low (or any other mode). You can not start the EagleTac on low - ever. You can only start in Turbo mode or "general" (medium) mode. You can only get to low by turning the head one way and then the other. That is their one big downfall. Other then that it is a great light. You will get better customer service with a 4sevens light though. I can't even get EagleTac to answer an email. If it were me, I would get both.

Click to expand...

Classic advice from a true flashaholic, just get both, LOL.

Re: Optional

I have both torches and as far as I'm concerned the Eagletac p20c2 blows the quark out of the water for brightness (easily noticeable to my naked eye out here in the bush), build quality, beam shape and UI. On the other hand, the Quark wins in terms of pocketability and lego-ability.

The spill zone on the quark as far as i'm concerned is too wide which wastes light in my particular outdoor useage environment.

I know it's a bit of statistical heresy to state this but I reckon the chances of a hideously green tinted R5 Quark are much higher and many don't like that.

The Eagletac has three very useable brightness levels available at a moment's notice, each accessed by a distinctly different hand action. It also offers hidden modes as well as the user settable option of whether or not to have strobe available at a single tailclick.

The eagletac has replaceable/updateable led modules.

An Eagletac supplied by IlluminationGear is backed by a level of support and service that has been demonstrably at least the equal of that provided by 4sevens but my personal experiences with IlluminationGear has made me think they're even better.

Re: Optional

tre said:

You can only start in Turbo mode or "general" (medium) mode. You can only get to low by turning the head one way and then the other. That is their one big downfall.

Click to expand...

funny how your downfall is my very major plus. I would never want this two handed style of torch to start in the very lowest mode, especially accidently.

When I want light from one of these style torches I want it to light up properly so I can see everything I need to see and I want it to do it at my command without the need to manipulate it with a second hand which may be engaged in doing something else important. Lowest mode start is for tailcap press style torches, not this one, so as far as I'm concerned lack of that feature is a long way from being this torch's downfall.

Re: Optional

One thing I've mentioned before about the P20 and t20 is if you don't loosen the head to far you can simply pull the head towards the body with one hand to change modes to low/strobe/beacon.

Re: Optional

true but in my MkII model it's got to be loosened no more than about three or four degrees from fully tight and there's no way I'd ever manage to keep it at that level of accuracy.

Perhaps some of the replies illuminate the "problem" of choosing between the two lights.

Not quite apples and oranges, but these two lights are quite different in terms of features.

If I was the one buying, I'd seriously evaluate my needs/wants, and choose the UI/feature that was important to me.

EagleTac = "Simple" and bright
Quark = "Complicated" and customizable/upgradeable

Both lights have excellent reputations in their niche. Decide your niche.

Re: Optional

tre said:

The P20C2 MKII uses an XP-G R5 just like the quark. Eagletac's web page is horribly out of date.

Click to expand...

He's talking about the neutral white head, not the cool white one. The new run of NW Quarks is XP-G, while ET's NW heads are XP-E. The original run of Quark NWs were XP-E also. Personally, in a throwy light like an ET, I'd think the XP-E is a better choice (Or XR-Es like the older ETs). YMMV.

entoptics said:

Perhaps some of the replies illuminate the "problem" of choosing between the two lights.

Click to expand...

Good point.

I think it's a fair call and it's the reason why a potential buyer's critical reading of the responses in threads like this can really help him make a decision in ways that aren't always apparent simply from reading the usual product specific reviews.

The art, as you allude to with your "niche" comment, is in the potential buyer trying to sift out the particular responses that match the usage pattern he envisages applying to himself. That system works well as long as we write out our reasoning rather than just say "xyz is best".

We none of us agree on which torch is best but as long as we write the reasons why we think one may be better than the other, our thoughts can be valuable to someone.