Eagletac M3C4 XM-L vs. ThruNite Catapult V2 XM-L

Hey guys,



I am looking to purchase a new thrower light, and have settled on these 2, which seem to be the current top performers in the thrower category.



I think I have most of the Pro's and Con's of each light. Let me know if any of these are no longer an issue or have been resolved.



M3C4 XM-L



Pros:

- Larger hotspot (no donut)

- Multiple selectable light levels

- Whiter beam tint

- Compact



Cons:

- Parasitic drain with regular tailcap

- Plastic selector ring and tailcap

- Tailcap screws are easily stripped

- Batteries can get extremely hot when using primary cells on high mode





Catapult V2 XM-L



Pros:

- Fantastic build quality (thick walls, 7075-T6 aluminum)

- More focused hotspot/greater throw

- Able to run for longer periods on high with primary cells

- Warmer beam tint



Cons:

- Slight donut hole in beam

- Very long when using included extender

- Only 2 modes (Low and High)

- Heavy compared to others in its class





For those of you who have owned both, which do you prefer? Any other points I should be aware of with these lights?

I have been going back and forth on the M3C4 XM-L and the Catapult V3 for some time now. I finally settled on the M3C4 mostly because of the battery configuration. However, when the light arrived, I found myself disappointed in the for several reasons. The biggest disappointment was the plastic tail cap. I do a lot of hiking and camping. One drop and I'm afraid that would be the end of the tail cap. I returned the light - but not without reluctance because there were features I really liked.

Tough choice and both are truely awesome. I ended up with the M3C4 mostly because of the multiple levels and smaller & lighter size, but I believe I would have been just as happy with the Catapult. I have handled the Cat, and it felt like a tank....very nice. But, if I were to do again I still would choose the ET M3C4 for the same reasons - multiple output levels and smaller & lighter.

Calite said:

I have been going back and forth on the M3C4 XM-L and the Catapult V3 for some time now. I finally settled on the M3C4 mostly because of the battery configuration. However, when the light arrived, I found myself disappointed in the for several reasons. The biggest disappointment was the plastic tail cap. I do a lot of hiking and camping. One drop and I'm afraid that would be the end of the tail cap. I returned the light - but not without reluctance because there were features I really liked.

Click to expand...

The "plastic" tailcap is some sort of german bullet proof material. It will not break. There was a post about the material before the CPF crash but it is gone now. I wonder if somebody can dig it up again.

BTW, this post is 6 months old.

I had both and kept the M3C4. No donut hole, same throw-but brighter, versatile one-handed UI, compact form and case/diffuser were the deciding factors. But if you plan to use the light as a cudgel - go with the Catapult...

Interesting about the german bullet proof material. I'll have to look into this...

SCEMan said:

I had both and kept the M3C4. No donut hole, same throw-but brighter, versatile one-handed UI, compact form and case/diffuser were the deciding factors. But if you plan to use the light as a cudgel - go with the Catapult...

Click to expand...

My light did have quite a donut which was another disappointment. Maybe I just got a bad one??

M3C4!!!

I have the V3 Catapult which does have a low setting, V1 and V2 do not. I also have the M3C4 Triple XM-L. I like the Catapult much more. But I'm glad I have the Eagletac too. It gives you a wall of light They both have a lot to offer and are great lights, I'm just more of a throw person. Your question stated V2, if that was my only option I might go for the Eagletac because I do want a low. V2 didn't have it. And since that was one of the changes made on the V3 it made it my favorite. Let us know what you get. You also said your looking for a thrower, the M3C4 is not a thrower imo. If you want that style go for the Fenix TK-35, it's smaller than the Eagletac and easier to hold and also a much better thrower. I have that and reach for it before my Eagletac. But that smooth control ring on the Eagletac is really nice. Too bad ya can't get them all.

i think he meant the single xml m3c4 version which actually throws pretty well.

samm said:

I have the V3 the M3C4 is not a thrower imo. If you want that style go for the Fenix TK-35, it's smaller than the Eagletac and easier to hold and also a much better thrower.

Click to expand...

You must be talking about the triple XML M3C4 or triple XPG? The OP is talking about the single XML M3C4 which is a GREAT thrower - much better than the TK35. The M3C4 is every bit as good of a thrower as the Catapult V3 but is has more modes and is smaller.

samm said:

You also said your looking for a thrower, the M3C4 is not a thrower imo. If you want that style go for the Fenix TK-35, it's smaller than the Eagletac and easier to hold and also a much better thrower.

Click to expand...

Not according to selfbuilt.



M3C4 XM-L with 38,750 lux, and TK35 with 20,150 lux. M3C4 is a 400 meter light while TK35 is a 300 meter light.

enomosiki said:

M3C4 XM-L with 38,750 lux, and TK35 with 20,150 lux. M3C4 is a 400 meter light while TK35 is a 300 meter light.

Click to expand...

The difference is even more noticable in real life. The M3C4 single XML has MUCH more throw than the TK35. The TK35 is a good general purpose light but it is not a thrower.

I've got the single XM-L M3C4 and it throws superbly. And if I want a big floody light, no problems, just screw on the diffuser. Nice to be able to tailstand and light up a room. 5 Levels is a real winner too. I'm glad to hear the tailcap plastic is stronger than it looks - having a bit of plastic 'added' on the tail of the light does detract from it's appearance when comparing to Jetbeams & Olights etc. But that's an extremely minor grumble considering how good the light is.

Sorry in post #9 in the beginning I said I had the Triple XML MC34, I should have repeated that in the middle of the post and not just said the MC34 is not a thrower imo. Nice to know the single is a thrower, thanks for correcting my mistake. Also that the TK35 is not considered a thrower. Kind of makes me want a single MC34 XM-L, lol. Thanks again.

samm said:

Kind of makes me want a single MC34 XM-L, lol. Thanks again.

Click to expand...

This is how you suddenly have 30 lights and you wonder what happened.

Can these single m3c4's still be purchased? Is the triple a better "all around light"?

Disregard. Didn't realize there were different variations of this light.

'Goingprepared' has a review on his youtube site of the M3C4 - single xml, triple xml, and triple xpg (?) with beamshots of all three. Very good review and well worth a look. The triple is floodier with less throw than the single but don't forget, if you want a big soft flood, you can screw the supplied diffuser onto the single xml and have the best of both worlds.

That's for sure tre, lol.

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...hlights(including-TK70)-1-xp-g-for-comparison.
Check this out you too mate!!! I think some of the information you need is here!