Any real reason to get a U2?

I have a McGizmo Haiku and a Ra Clicky Prototype. Would the U2 compliment these or is it redundant to the two lights?

Nothing wrong with a Haiku/Sundrop/Ti PD-S ... I have one of each. The U2 is at least as cool as any of those lights, even though is isn't Ti. The U2 is as much a classic as the PD-S.

I don't know if it would complement or not, but my U2 (modded with warm XP-G) is a great light. Leef body makes it even better..........................

I have a couple of the U2A's and they are lights that I just generally love... do they not add anything that you don't already have in the lights that you mentioned. I don't know of a 2 x CR123 light that I love more even though it is considerably behind other 2 x CR123 in output / runtime... this is, however the only area that it is behind and it remains ahead of most other 2 x CR123 lights in all other areas IMHO of course.

One important note... there is a high correlation between output and runtime and these are very significant attributes for me when purchasing a light. I am pretty sure that all Surefire would need to do to put the U2 back on top is to update the light to work with an XM-L or possibly even an XP-G (If it wouldn't tighten up the beam even more). IT IS THAT GOOD OF A LIGHT. Continuous variability vs. 6 Pre-determined levels is not a big deal if the levels are set right but it is a nice option so long as runtime is not affected for the continuous variability.

I got a one month old U2 Ultra yesterday (to use in developing a boring program for that model). First place it went was the shop built integrating sphere where it showed a surprising 161 lumens. My last U2 (about 3 years ago) registered 114 lumens in the same sphere. Maybe I got the best binned U2 that SF has ever made, maybe not, but 161L isn't bad, and it far exceeds the specs that SF puts out.

FWIW, every SF that's gone into my sphere has read at least as good as the published specs, often more.

Double post.