4sevens runtime

I have been looking at the Quark tactical and I am wanting some outside opinions on buying either the AAx2 or the 123x2 the max output on each light is:
AAx2 max-180 lumens for 43 minutes the other mode I would use most often is moonlight 0.6 lumens for 1277 hours!
123x2 max-200 lumens for 2 hours 45 minutes moonlight-0.9 lumens for 702 hours.
the 123 dominates for rum time on max but the AA has much better run time on moonlight and is also slimmer to some extent.
What is you opinion?
http://www.4sevens.com/product_info.php?cPath=297_306&products_id=2504

http://www.4sevens.com/product_info.php?cPath=297_306&products_id=2502

I have the slightly older QAA2, using the XPG R5 LED, and I routinely run it flat out on max with freshly charged LSD NiMH cells, Panasonic or Eneloop, and I get just over 1 hour before the output obviously drops. Checking the review by Selfbuilt, I see that I am agreement with his runtime plots which show almost flat output for just over 1 hour. I'm not sure why the more recent should have poor runtime.

I recall reading about a discussion here before the big CPF crash that the AA^2 S2 was tested using alkaline batteries in the lab. Alkaline batteries sucks when used in high drain device like our high powered lights but they also excel on lower light output. That explains why the R5 version provides a longer run time. I think.

I would have to ask you this, what battery do you want to invest in (or have already invested in)? You answer that and you will know what light to go with

pjandyho said:

I recall reading about a discussion here before the big CPF crash that the AA^2 S2 was tested using alkaline batteries in the lab. Alkaline batteries sucks when used in high drain device like our high powered lights but they also excel on lower light output. That explains why the R5 version provides a longer run time. I think.

Click to expand...

Aha, I think you are right. ASNI FL1 can mean values measured using the supplied batteries, or with specified batteries. I think 4Sevens are doing themselves an injustice.

I have both, and really they are almost the same light in terms of output. The difference is barely noticeable, but there is a difference. It's true what's been said regarding the runtimes & ANSI standards. The ANSI testing was done with alkalines. There is a thread on cpf Marketplace though that discusses quark runtimes on different battery types. That's definitely what you are looking for - CLICKHERE
It shows the AA2 runtimes on Energizer Lithium primaries at 101 minutes to 50% (done on the XP-E led but the XP-G should be very similar or better.) Very impressive for a 2xAA.

Since I run my lights on rechargeables it's a non issue. If you have not invested in rechargeables you should...eventually you will want to. If you already have eneloops then get the AA2. If you already have rcr123 rechargeable Li-ions then get the quark 123x2. If you have neither then read up on em.

If I were starting out with my first quark I'd get the AA2 because it is lego-able with the Quark AA, the 123, AA2 Turbo, and the 18650 body. I like getting the latest quark & putting the new head on my favorite EDC body...very versatile. All of these lights mentioned are meant for the lower voltage rating of 0.9v to 4.2v. Only the Quark 123x2 and the Quark 123x2 Turbo are rated for the higher voltage 3.0v to 9.0v, and can only be lego'd with each other. This is why I like the quarks with the lower voltage (they all lego with one another - tail, head, & body.)

Get the AA2 if you plan to buy more of these quarks; otherwise, either is great.

I like the AA2 format for my Warm Tactical because it would be used as a candle in power outages, and it can be easier to overdischarge RCR123s (unprotected or protected) at lower outputs (can't overdischarge NiMH). Nice thing about AA is that they are everywhere. I like both 18650/RCR123 and NiMH, if you go the AA route be sure to use Energizer lithium primaries or quality AA NiMH like Eneloops, stay away from alkalines.