Why Surefire is so slow in updating its lights?

Hi to all,

I was just wondering why Surefire, that's by far the most reliable and authoritative manufacturer, still have in its catalog a lot of underrated old lights.

I am thinking about, e.g., the E2L AA Outdoorsman, 2AA for 85 lumen.
Or the otherwise spectacular Kroma, that pays an old Luxeon III with 50 lumens max.

I'm aware that other brands, to become market leaders using early bird technique, runs for XM-L a day after it comes out. But between xm-l and LuxIII there are been generations of leds.

I'm aware too that SF can easily sell their lights to non-flashaholics due to its reputation.

But I just dont know why I cant have top of the world manufacturing AND good leds.
Even MagLite is upgrading its lights.

Maybe, and A2 - A2L can be a proof, is SF intention not to "upgrade" the lights but to comes out with new versions with new names.

They do it because it's more profitable and they can get away with it. It's really just that simple.

but there isnt the risk of losing market quotes? There are some emerging worldwide manufacturers with good quality, aggressive policy and lower prices, like Fenix or 4sevens.

Utill when will do the "but a SF is a SF"? Back in time MagLite was the leader, now SF.
SF has the lead on exceptional design, because they have an exceptional lead engineer. So SF sturdiness, UI, no-hassle operation is superior than Fenix, but costruction is now similar.

I'm aware that most US users like more to buy domestic lights than a chinese brand, but SF and Fenix have both a worldwide market where neither are domestic.

A few reasons:

1) When a new LED comes out, SF doesn't just say "Here, let's use this"...the emitters they chose to use are tested and proven in there lights...they do EXTENSIVE testing to get a good mix of Runtime/Out-Put/LED Life. Sure, they can get more out of the M3LT with the current emitter, but how much will the life of the LED be effected?
2) Do you need anything brighter than 85 Lumens? If you do, get the M3LT...if not, appreciate the runtime of the 85 lumens, or sacrifice runtime for brightness...and brighter isn't always better (see "Things I've learned the hard way" in the Cafe).
3) Unlike Chinese brands that are Mfg'ed and sold right away to distributors/warehouses, SF Mfg's in bulk as well, but they don't necessarily get rid of all there lights right away...if they have 1000 E2L's in stock, and they have plans to update the emitter, they're going to wait for the herd to thin on current stock.

I appreciate the 60 lumens on my E2L and the 6 hours of solid, no diminishing out-put...as well as the 100 hours on low. SF's finds the right balance for the light and sticks with it.

I think people often don't realize that many Surefires are purpose-built lights. They're designed and built to fulfill one task and they do it very well.
It seems to have come to a point where if a flashlight doesn't have high-medium-low modes then their value is diminished. I understand that adding features and more modes like turbo or moonlight or SOS increases the versatility of a light but it isn't necessary for the role that some people have for flashlights.

I like my Surefires. I like my E2L. I don't think it's outdated - it out-throws many of my other lights thanks to the TIR lens and does it while having a much better runtime.

I am thinking about, e.g., the E2L AA Outdoorsman, 2AA for 85 lumen.
Or the otherwise spectacular Kroma, that pays an old Luxeon III with 50 lumens max.

I'm aware that other brands, to become market leaders using early bird technique, runs for XM-L a day after it comes out. But between xm-l and LuxIII there are been generations of leds.

Click to expand...

They do it because it's more profitable and they can get away with it. It's really just that simple.

Click to expand...

Some of the new low end SF lights finally have XP-E's. SF seems to have a lengthy (and sometimes never completed) product development cycle for their lights. As long as government contracts fill the order book, they can afford to be somewhat complacent. They are an iconic flagship American brand like Pan Am and Smith Corona.

I do appreciate the fact that SF goes for the simple, reliable user interface. SF lights are designed by geniuses to be operated by idiots, whereas some other lights I've bought recently seem to be vice versa.

Do you have any idea how long it takes a branch of the US military to qualify a product and get all the procurement systems in place? Then you want to go and start over because some new emitter provides an incremental improvement in performance? Making that kind of change is corporate masochism. Surefire's behavior is market driven. Unfortunately, a large segement of their market has motivations very different from Flashaholics.

Buon Giorno!

And welcome to CPF!!!

Why rush it when you already have an outstanding product line?

After all Rome wasn't built in a day.

Surefire updates their products often enough for me. I am still using (very frequently) the E2L Outdoorsman I bought when Cree was the new kid on the block and had just overtaken Luxeon with their double efficiency XR-E. I do appreciate cutting edge LEDs but let's face it, you don't need the latest and greatest to have a solid illumination tool. With LEDs as bright and efficient as they are nowadays I am not interested in chasing down the brightest, most efficient model of the month. When I consider buying a flashlight, I ask if it meets the requirements for my intended uses, and if it's yes then I'll buy it.

IOW: it would be nice if SF did update their models more frequently and more quickly, but for their intended audience, having the absolute cutting edge isn't necessary. Having top notch electronics, extreme dependability, and great customer service is. I don't know any flashlight company that has built as great and widespread a reputation as SureFire.

Dozens and dozens of rounds of testing. Many of their cool ideas don't survive the process.

Flip answer aside, it would be nice if they built new generations of the P60L in a timely fashion, which happily ran on reversed batteries, monitored their temperature to prevent burnout, and ran on a huge variety of battery configurations all the way up to four 3.7v RCRs.

Sorry but I don't buy this: "...the emitters they chose to use are tested and proven in there lights...they do EXTENSIVE testing to get a good mix of Runtime/Out-Put/LED Life" as a valid reason why they are slow to adopt newer technology emitters.
Brands like Surefire buy their emitters in bulk and thus don't bother to update their lights until they've exhausted there existing emitter stock. Why throw away perfectly good emitters because a new emitter gets released somewhere.

jimmy1970 said:

Sorry but I don't buy this: "...the emitters they chose to use are tested and proven in there lights...they do EXTENSIVE testing to get a good mix of Runtime/Out-Put/LED Life" as a valid reason why they are slow to adopt newer technology emitters.
Brands like Surefire buy their emitters in bulk and thus don't bother to update their lights until they've exhausted there existing emitter stock. Why throw away perfectly good emitters because a new emitter gets released somewhere.

Click to expand...

Just a few excerpts...


"A third principle is that the more perfectly shaped the reflector, the
better the light is focused into a lovely beam. Dr. Hauk designs our reflectors to create an intensely bright center spot and a soft corona of peripheral light, with minimal wasted light. He tests every lamp from every manufacturing lot in his Black Lab"

"Every SureFire LED flashlight model is laboratory tested for lumen output and runtime"

"But SureFire engineer (John Doe), an expert
climber and caver, puts his designs through the wringer with
extreme field testing"

"SureFire's new handheld illumination tools, WeaponLights, suppressors, knives, and other
products get used and abused before they go into full production."

A good example of this would be the U2...the prototypes, the "DEFCON" Models, were given to units like Marine Recon prior to consumer production, again, for field testing...

"We wring even more performance from them by electronically regulating
battery current to optimize the output, runtime, and quality of the light produced"

i.e. not just optimizing Out-Put....

Vox Clamatis in Deserto said:

They are an iconic flagship American brand like Pan Am and Smith Corona.

Click to expand...

Yeah, and they're both long gone, LOL!

A good example of this would be the U2...the prototypes, the "DEFCON" Models, were given to units like Marine Recon prior to consumer production, again, for field testing...

Click to expand...

Do you mean the DARPA lights, perhaps?: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?94497-New-Surefire-DARPA-Series-(PIC)/page4

Any light that can be operated by Marines must have a terrific user interface.:thumbsup: I can still remember my DI whispering sweet words of encouragement as I learned to march with an M1 rifle.

Looks like the DARPA lights were progenitors of both the U2 and Kroma lines. It really was cutting edge LED technology several years ago.

I've already bought five U2's, if SF upgraded the U2 again to say an XP-G or even an XP-E at 200 lumens, I'd probably buy a couple more.

"DEF" DARPA Experimental Flashlight

"DEF" DARPA Experimental Flashlight

Click to expand...

Thanks as always, Al. DEFCON has had another meaning in U.S. defense jargon for the past half century or so.

A.O.W. has great pointers...

Why change winning horse ??? By now it's a default that SF is reliable light... lot of people will buy it for it... SF offers very easy UI... some people will go for SF for that reason... SF is proudly made in USA... again, lot of people will buy SF for that reason... majority of non-junkies don't care what emitter is inside the light... I'm surrounded with them all the time... but they loved LX2 while I was using it for few months... no other light they could compare to it and say that something is better...

But a huge negative effect on SF is that they do produce a lot of flashlights and at any certain point of time, there is a LOT of G2L, 6PL and similar models with older version emitter... producing updated version as soon as new emitter is available, after enough testings would be overkill for all older versions on shelves since anyone would go for a model that makes 25% more brightness with same batteries and same runtime... to avoid this would be possible by making NEW models, variations on the theme that would be able to be produced parallely for short term of time, would cost a little bit more than older model... If SF didn't offer G2X and 6PX for really cheap prices for months before this 2011 inflation, my theory would probably be 99.9% true... only now when they got new prices and they actually cost MORE than G2L or 6PL, this might make sense.