4Sevens Quark AA^2 Turbo Head w/ AA Body + 14500 cell = EDC-capable thrower?

Hello guys,

I was considering the Quark AA^2 Turbo Head with an AA-body running a 14500 battery, have any of you tried this configuration as a EDC thrower? I wanted something to top my Lumintop L1C and i think this is it. What do you guys think?

I know there are better pocket throwers like the DEFT EDC from OMGLumens and the Dereelight Javelin head with C2H body (actually my 2nd option).

I was thinking about the Quark Turbo head for the following reasons:

1. I already have an AA tube.
2. I already own lots of 14500 cells.
3. The Turbo Head sports an R5 emitter and a relatively large,deep reflector.
4. 4Sevens quality and 10-year warranty.
5. Cheaper solution than having to invest in a new light (Javelin head + C2H body) (DEFT at 300 dollars, nevermind! haha)

Enough reasons to pull the trigger or waste of money?

Suggestions, feedback, comments are welcome.

Ya, it works nice. I used to run the same setup except with the Turbo 123x2 head. It was tiny and powerful.

Sound good to me but Idk how it will compare to others.

Is the AA head different from the 123 head?

Tommygun45 said:

Ya, it works nice. I used to run the same setup except with the Turbo 123x2 head. It was tiny and powerful.

Click to expand...

Nice setup, Bro! But how did you deal with the voltage? Coz the 123^2 head would require much more power to maximize it's output, right?

ScaryFatKidGT said:

Sound good to me but Idk how it will compare to others.

Is the AA head different from the 123 head?

Click to expand...

yeah, the voltage requirements of the 123^2 head is between 3v to 9v, while the AA^2 head needs .9v to 4.2v. So technically, the AA head will be driven harder than a 123 head given the same single 14500 format.

I've tried running the Turbo X on a single 14500, it does not have enough juice to run it on Turbo, but when I put the Quark Turbo X with an AA^2 body and popped in two 14500's... WOW's the word! hahaha

^
nice! how is the runtime on that setup?

2 RCR's would do the same wouldn't it?

If you use the head from AA² Turbo, you can definitely run it on 1x14500 configuration, and even a single 1.5V AA if you need to, since its input voltage ranges from 0.9V to 4.2V. Do realize that the low-voltage head will drain unprotected cells beyond their threshold, so it's best if you use protected 14500 cells.

If you want to use unprotected 14500, you want to go with 123² Turbo head, since its minimum working voltage is 3V--safe to use with unprotected cells since it will not drain the cell if the voltage drops below 3V. If you do go with this route, you will lose the ability to use 1.5V AA cells.

Another thing that I want to mention is that XP-G 123² Turbo will get around 8,000 lux at full power, or approximately 179 meters of throw.

On the other hand, Javelin "Shorty" with XP-E R4 and Ultrafire 3-mode XM-L reflector will get nearly 14,000 lux at maximum power for about 237 meters of throw--almost twice the throw of Quark Turbo.

Here are some photos to compare it with TN11, which has ~19,000 lux and 276 meters of throw;


Top: TN11
Bottom: Javelin Shorty

I wrote a quick review of the Shorty here, and it appears to throw just as much as Maelstrom G5 when running on either CR123A or RCR123A. You can get the AA extender for C2H body and stick 14500 or, if you have the low-voltage drop-in, 1.5V AA in it. 14500 will get you full power. AA will approximately halve the output, but even at reduced power we are still talking about ~7,000 lux. Same rule applies with unprotected cells here--if you are going to use unprotected cells, you need to go with the drop-in with 2.8V to 4.2V input range, which will prevent you from using 1.5V AA.

Size-wise, both lights should have similar length and width, and have about the same output as well. I don't know exactly how hard the emitters on Quarks are driven, but 4Sevens generally do not drive their lights hard and prefers to have them run cool and stable. Javelin's drop-in, on the other hand, is slightly overdriven at 1.2A, but this is nothing to be worried about if proper heatsinking measures are taken. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Shorty has higher output at max than Quark, since Quark's OTF output is stated as 205 lumens, while Javelin drop-in used by Shorty is driven at 1.2A thus reaching approximately 350 lumens at the emitter, resulting in around 262 lumens OTF after accounting for reflector and lens efficiency-loss.

Out of the box, Quark cannot tailstand because its tailswitch is protruding and a separate tailcap is required for it to tailstand, whereas C2H's switch is recessed and easily allows for it. Quark has better UI, with ability to program different outputs, while the drop-ins offered by Dereelight can either be single-mode (100% only) or three-mode (100% -> 50% -> 5%) that has to be cycled. Quark also offers moonlight mode, which is awesome if you are trying to navigate or read something without blinding yourself in complete darkness.

In the end, the decision's up to you. If you want a no-hassle light with excellent flexibility, go with Quark. If you are not afraid of customizing with different parts and want to really punch through the darkness, go with Javelin Shorty.

Or, you can be crazy like me and EDC five different lights. (TN11, Javelin Shorty, Quark Tactical XM-L, Ultrafire A3, Arc-AAA UV)

ScaryFatKidGT said:

2 RCR's would do the same wouldn't it?

Click to expand...

Yup! Same voltage!

arjay said:

^
nice! how is the runtime on that setup?

Click to expand...

I havent really tested how long it'd go on two 14500's but based on users feedback here, they mentioned that runtimes on 14500's are better than RCR123's.

enomosiki said:

In the end, the decision's up to you. If you want a no-hassle light with excellent flexibility, go with Quark. If you are not afraid of customizing with different parts and want to really punch through the darkness, go with Javelin Shorty.

Or, you can be crazy like me and EDC five different lights. (TN11, Javelin Shorty, Quark Tactical XM-L, Ultrafire A3, Arc-AAA UV)

Click to expand...

Thanks so much for sharing! It was very informative! Just some points though, Quark's advertised lumen output are under-rated, because their aim is to over-deliver. Case in point, their Turbo X (rated at 450) is about the same in brightness as my Jetbeam BC25 which is rated at 600+ lumens. But in saying that, yes, they don't drive their emitters to almost the burnout point. XML's can be driven much higher as seen in the big XML throwers with 800 or more lumens.

Now on to my Javelin query: What if I just get a Javelin Head with the XPE-R4 emitter and the C2H body, would that be similar to the Javelin Shorty you put together? I mean in terms of lux, because if its close to the 14k lux, im sold right there.

roadkill1109 said:

Thanks so much for sharing! It was very informative! Just some points though, Quark's advertised lumen output are under-rated, because their aim is to over-deliver. Case in point, their Turbo X (rated at 450) is about the same in brightness as my Jetbeam BC25 which is rated at 600+ lumens. But in saying that, yes, they don't drive their emitters to almost the burnout point. XML's can be driven much higher as seen in the big XML throwers with 800 or more lumens.

Click to expand...

The thing is that 4Sevens used to rate their lights with out-the-front output. Now, this isn't necessarily a bad thing, since they used to do this when just about everyone else rate their lights at the emitter. The problem is that just about everyone has moved to ANSI, and while 4Sevens does rate their newer models using ANSI standards, they didn't re-measure their older line-ups using it.

Now on to my Javelin query: What if I just get a Javelin Head with the XPE-R4 emitter and the C2H body, would that be similar to the Javelin Shorty you put together? I mean in terms of lux, because if its close to the 14k lux, im sold right there.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's basically what I did. The only additional steps I have taken is to swap out the stock Dereelight reflector with a specific type of Ultrafire reflector, and then apply heatsinking measures to the drop-in to keep the light cool.

Anyways, I'd assume around 10,000 lux using stock smooth reflector, and that's what it even says according to Flashlight Connection. I can't give you an exact figure since I don't have a light meter and the modification to my Shorty is rather semi-permanent, so I can't swap the reflector back.

If you want, I can teach you the steps to making one. Or, to make it simpler, I can build my setup of Shorty for you, since I have some more of the Ultrafire reflectors that I have used coming in through the mail soon, perhaps by next week. The problem is that Dereelight's US dealer, Flashlight Connection, is currently out of 3-mode XP-E R4 Javelin, so if you need it in a hurry, I can only make it a single mode. But, if I do it, you can be assured that I will be doing everything I can to beef up the heatsinking, like I did for mine with copper tape and Arctic Silver.

Or, you can buy the complete Shorty set on Flashlight Connection. Be advised that their setup is also single mode, and most likely uses XR-E, which will give you a Cree ring artifact in the beam profile if you use smooth reflector. You can get rid of the artifact using the orange peel reflector, but that significantly reduces the throw.

PM me if you are interested.

Here's the look i was going for:


w/ the flat tailcap for tailstand:


And just to compare it with the regular head:


and


just right there, you can already see the throw potential the Quark Turbo head has over the regular-sized head.

Does anybody have the lux figures for the Quark AA2 Turbo head?

Thank you.

roadkill1109 said:

Does anybody have the lux figures for the Quark AA2 Turbo head?

Thank you.

Click to expand...

According to a review of Quark 123² Turbo over at Light-Reviews, 123² Turbo reaches 8120 lux at 250 lumens.

(205/250)*8120=6658.4

Quark AA² Turbo should get around 6658 lux.

enomosiki said:

According to a review of Quark 123² Turbo over at Light-Reviews, 123² Turbo reaches 8120 lux at 250 lumens.

(205/250)*8120=6658.4

Quark AA² Turbo should get around 6658 lux.

Click to expand...

I see, so if we equate that to figures of other 4Sevens lights like the Turbo X, which is rated at 450 (conservatively) we get:

(450/250)*8120= 9216 lux.

But of course the difference in reflector could offer a boost in lux intensity.

roadkill1109 said:

I see, so if we equate that to figures of other 4Sevens lights like the Turbo X, which is rated at 450 (conservatively) we get:

(450/250)*8120= 9216 lux.

But of course the difference in reflector could offer a boost in lux intensity.

Click to expand...

You can't apply the exact same equation to Turbo X, because it uses different emitter and reflector than the regular Turbo.

But it supposedly does about 500 lumens and 10,000 lux.