Overall quality: LED, build, customer service: Fenix, Eagletac or Nitecore ?

Fenix, Eagletac or Nitecore ?

  • Fenix

    Votes: 36 61.0%
  • Eagletac

    Votes: 19 32.2%
  • Nitecore

    Votes: 4 6.8%

  • Total voters
    59

hemdale

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
176
Location
Paris
Hi dear CPF'ers,

Reading all topics pertaining to these respective brands, I wanted to know if there was ONE brand out of these three I should really consider based on overall build quality, LED quality, fit and finish and customer service (because we never know).

I've been quite happy with Fenix but don't really know if they are still as good as they used to be ? Never tried Nitecore before...and EagleTac seems damn sexy (thanks to :wave: BlueLed)

No flame, no hard feelings, no controversy, just you plain and simple "if you had to pick one and one only" opinion.

Cheers,

B
 
Last edited:

Norm

Retired Administrator
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
9,512
Location
Australia
I'm just popping in to say the General Flashlight forum is for cross over post where we could be talking about incan or LED lights, the LED forum is for the discussion of topics related to LED flashlight, The incan forum is for the discussion of incan flashlights. I'm constantly moving threads out of the General Flashlight forum into either incan or LED. This isn't aimed at the OP, it's a reminder for all members. - Norm
 

shelm

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 8, 2011
Messages
2,047
I've been reading lately much good positive news and info on ArmyTek :)
 

Vortus

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 24, 2010
Messages
1,203
Location
TN
I like ET lights, though the problem is that nowadays, they are all very good. More than brand, I think it just comes down to the UI you prefer, a dealer you like, and the looks of the light that suit you.
 

Labrador72

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
1,851
Location
European Union
All three of them are good brands. I voted Fenix because by now that's what I mostly have.
I have a Nitecore Infinity Defender R2 which was my first LED flashlight. I never owned any Eagletac.

Eagletac seem to be making extremely good lights and they ship them with higher quality accessories compared to many other brands, including Fenix.
Nitecore seem to be trying very hard to be innovative but I don't like their newer lights. My own personal preference though.


[...]
I've been quite happy with Fenix but don't really know if they are still as good as they used to be ? Never tried Nitecore before...and EagleTac seems damn sexy (thanks to :wave: BlueLed)
B
I think in terms of quality Fenix lights are still as good as they used to be but I find myself avoiding their newer lights like a plague: I just really liked the UI on their older models and don't like the UI and design of their more recent lights. Again, it's a personal preference.
From my own experience Fenix customer service is very good.

Hope that helps.
 

EsthetiX

Enlightened
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
453
Location
Hawaii
Eagletac makes lights that have plastic on them. Nightcore's higher end lights are some of the best build quality I have ever seen, fenix is pretty pretty good ranging from inexpensive models to higher up ones.
 

GordoJones88

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
1,157
Location
Tennessee
I don't think it's necessary to worry too much about quality issues with these good reliable brands.

Unrelated, but Eagletac and Nitecore have been innovating like crazy the last year.
 

creyc

Enlightened
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Messages
365
Location
Tampa, Florida
Eagletac makes lights that have plastic on them. Nightcore's higher end lights are some of the best build quality I have ever seen, fenix is pretty pretty good ranging from inexpensive models to higher up ones.

..And Surefire makes all-plastic lights, too (Well Nitrolon) so I don't think that should be held as a negative against EagleTac.

I'm very happy with the build quality of my ET, and my Fenix and Nitecore lights. Some are better than others, but not universally.

The biggest difference in my opinion is really in the UI offerings, since these tend to vary greatly between these mentioned brands. Build quality wise, I don't think any of these brands will let you down.
 

LEDburn

Enlightened
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
265
Eagletac makes lights that have plastic on them. Nightcore's higher end lights are some of the best build quality I have ever seen, fenix is pretty pretty good ranging from inexpensive models to higher up ones.

Fenix also make lights with 'plastic' components, Nitecore too..

There's been several documented cases of switch cover failures (they melt!) on Nitecore EA4's recently. Overall, I have read about what seems like design/manufacturing flaws with more Nitecore flashlights than I have either of the other two brands.

I haven't owned a Nitecore and probably never will due to how I perceive the brand.

Can't go wrong with Fenix or EagleTac.

Considered Four Sevens at all? I have more of their lights than any other brand (mainly due to limited edition runs) and find them to be very decent quality with excellent customer service.
Annodizing is the only thing that lets them down, the overal quality otherwise is still very close to Fenix IMO. I also prefer the tactical interface Four Sevens offer.
 

pchapman86

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
10
I'm going to throw Klarus into the mix. I've got a few that I use regularly (P1C, XT1C and XT11 until it was left in london a few weeks back) and I've always found them to be great build quality and damn tough - still reliable after some pretty heavy drops (I climb). (With the exception of the plastic cigar grip.. what's that about!? Keep it metal like Olight!).

Never needed to contact customer support so can't comment on that.

My Nitecore SRT7 also feels amazing, the control is definitive without being stiff and reading through other threads this seems to be employed throughout the range.

Olight.. I have had some trouble with the twist head method of changing modes (M20) but That light has been used and abused like no other and still technically works so it's a mixed bag, I'd buy Olight again, but I'm firmly off any twist-head mode change (with the exception of the P1C).

- Also the UI on the Klarus XT is brilliant.
 

reppans

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 25, 2007
Messages
4,873
Considered Four Sevens at all? I have more of their lights than any other brand (mainly due to limited edition runs) and find them to be very decent quality with excellent customer service.
Annodizing is the only thing that lets them down, the overal quality otherwise is still very close to Fenix IMO.
+1. I think Fenix has the best quality of your three, and put 47s just behind it (although I like the patina effect). Also own the most 47 lights since their versatility (battery voltage, lumen range, configurability) most closely matches my light needs. I think all four manufacturers are in a similar price/quality range and should give you good service, but there will be bad eggs, and that's where warranty and customer service will great differ... and much more than build quality (btw, I was disappointed to recently learn that ET's "10yr flashlight" warranty does not include its "electronic" driver). One other thing that worries me is the trend towards electronic switches - they allow for some very nice UIs and features like battery meters, but they also seem like another point of failure (read enough posts) and are not field serviceable, by-passable, or part swappable.
 

Labrador72

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
1,851
Location
European Union
One other thing that worries me is the trend towards electronic switches - they allow for some very nice UIs and features like battery meters, but they also seem like another point of failure (read enough posts) and are not field serviceable, by-passable, or part swappable.
+1
Side switches seem also to make the light less impact resistance. If we look at the Fenix lights:
LD10 / LD20: 1.5m impact resistance
LD12/ LD22: 1m impact resistance

PD30 / PD31: 1.5m impact resistance
PD32: 1m impact resistance

TK12: 1.5m impact resistance
TK22: 1m impact resistance

FourSevens seem to have focused on quickly upgrading emitters rather than just introducing fancy new features that make lights less reliable.
 

parametrek

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 3, 2013
Messages
578
Just to bring a slightly different perspective, but I really like Fenix for how they measure and report the performance of their flashlights. In a nutshell, Fenix is the most honest of the bunch.

One of the disapointing trends in flashlights is "turbo" modes. Where the flashlight will step down after a period of time and continue running at reduced output. A large part of this is how the ANSI FL1 tests are performed. Turn on flashlight, wait two minutes. Measure output. That is the output you can claim. Now wait for the light to drop to 10% output. That is the runtime you can claim.

A sneaky manufacture could make a light turn on at 1000 lumens, wait two minutes, then drop to 101 lumens. Hold that 101 lumens for 30 hours. Now they can claim 1000 lumen runtime for 30 hours. This is the most extreme situation and anyone would agree that 1000 lumens for 30 hours is at the very least misleading.

Plenty of companies do this to a smaller extent. Most Eagletac flashlights will drop 20% after three minutes of power on. Now 20% is not too noticable and Eagletac has the decency to tell you what is going on. But why not just hold the higher output level? 20% is not going to make a huge difference thermally, maybe it'll shorten the LED's life by a month. 20% does give an edge in runtime numbers.

Nitecore uses a substancial turbo mode on their midrange products. They also don't mention it. It causes some head-scratching if you look at the specs. For example, consider the MT2C. It claims 360 lumens for 3 hours on high and 180 lumens for 4.25 hours on medium. You'd think the medium mode should run for at least 6 hours with that sort of performance on high. Instead the high drops 33% after three minutes.

Even Surefire has started doing this, with the latest updates to the Outdoorsman. They do not mention output drops 15% after two minutes.

So, Fenix. Fenix is outstandingly honest. Almost none of their products use turbo modes. A handful do. For example, the HL30. It has a turbo, and Fenix does not mention this. But that is okay! First, because the stepdown takes five minutes instead of two minutes. And more importantly because Fenix only claims 200 lumens for 1 hour 40 minutes. This is the runtime you would get if every five minutes you bumped the light back up to 100% output. No part of FL1 requires you go to these lengths and most companies would simply let the output drop and claim a three hour runtime instead.

Armytek deserves some kudos as well. Some of their lights step down (and they don't tell us how much) but the step down does not happen for 20 minutes. This is long enough to be useful and ten times longer than simple FL1-abuse would dictate. (It is linked to battery voltage instead of time and could be even longer.) Streamlight and Olight frequently provide runtime graphs in their manuals that clearly show any loose regulation or turbo stepdown.

Hopefully more companies will see the light and stop exagerating their performance. Icon was notorious for having extremely aggressive stepdown, and look where they ended up.

As an aside, it would be nice if companies (or FL2) provided runtimes for 90%, 50% and 10% output. This is enough information to have a good idea what sort of regulation is being used.

And of course much thanks to Selfbuilt, Subwoofer, Bigmac and all the other reviewers who do runtime plots.
 

reppans

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 25, 2007
Messages
4,873
FourSevens seem to have focused on quickly upgrading emitters rather than just introducing fancy new features that make lights less reliable.

Well, I think they are losing sales for it, at least from the real enthusiast markets, as flashaholics go for the instant gratification of the cool UIs. It will be very interesting to see how they move forward - on one hand, I think they will be forced to offer (more??) e-switches to compete.... but on the other hand, I think they know the cost will kill them to keep the warranty/customer service policies they currently have.

Very interesting data point on impact resistance Labrador - I also notice how dedicated manufacturers of e-switches (eg, ZL and Spark) tend to offer industry's shortest warranties.
 

Patrik

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Nov 26, 2005
Messages
114
Location
Sweden
I would rate them Fenix first, then EagleTac and last NiteCore. However I would put 47`s first or alongside Fenix. The reasons are, the excellent clip, the UI and the simplicity of design, the quark tactical are great lights (dont like the preflash though), the Fenix TK series are great, however more when they didnt had the sideswitch. About NiteCore, is it only me but I Think they had some quality issues lately?
 

Al Thumbs

Newly Enlightened
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
89
Of your three choices, I own only Fenix, so I can't make a direct comparison. I will say the three Fenixes I have owned (E01, E05, LD01) are well built and haven't failed me. I have gifted several Fenix lights and have not heard of a problem.

Others are mentioning FourSevens. I have just one, a Preon P0 SS, and I think it is very well made. I have not required customer service from that company, but when I ordered it from its web site, it was shipped within an hour. I was impressed.

Al Thumbs reporting
 

the.Mtn.Man

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
2,516
Personally, I'd say FourSevens tops them all. They sell a good quality product, and their customer service is exemplary.
 

Labrador72

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
1,851
Location
European Union
Just to bring a slightly different perspective, but I really like Fenix for how they measure and report the performance of their flashlights. In a nutshell, Fenix is the most honest of the bunch.
[...]
So, Fenix. Fenix is outstandingly honest. Almost none of their products use turbo modes. A handful do. For example, the HL30. It has a turbo, and Fenix does not mention this. But that is okay! First, because the stepdown takes five minutes instead of two minutes. And more importantly because Fenix only claims 200 lumens for 1 hour 40 minutes. This is the runtime you would get if every five minutes you bumped the light back up to 100% output. No part of FL1 requires you go to these lengths and most companies would simply let the output drop and claim a three hour runtime instead.
bunch.
[...]
That's true, Fenix went for transparency when it came to reporting runtimes with stepdown and provided cumulative runtimes instead of laughable unrealistic runtimes - which I think would have been Ansi compliant anyway. The TK15 S2 and TK22 also had stepdowns but after some 40 and 20 minutes respectively.
I wish the ANSI standard would be upgraded to be stricter. Runtimes especially as many manufacturers do not release information on batteries they used for the test, making it even harder to compare.

Well, I think they are losing sales for it, at least from the real enthusiast markets, as flashaholics go for the instant gratification of the cool UIs. It will be very interesting to see how they move forward - on one hand, I think they will be forced to offer (more??) e-switches to compete.... but on the other hand, I think they know the cost will kill them to keep the warranty/customer service policies they currently have.
I'm curious too. Maybe they'll come up with tailcap mode switch: much easier and probably cheaper to replace or service than a head mode switch. Besides there are not that many lights out there with a mode switch on the tailcap/tail-end of the light. But even if they shortened their warrantee to 5 years, they would still have one of the longer warranties on the flashlight markets.

Very interesting data point on impact resistance Labrador - I also notice how dedicated manufacturers of e-switches (eg, ZL and Spark) tend to offer industry's shortest warranties.
There was another "casualty" to the side switch for several lights: throw!
LD10 vs LD12 XP-G R5: 87m (1892 cd) vs 80m (1612 cd)
LD12 vs LD22 XP-G R5: 110m (3013 cd) vs 100 (2521 cd)
PD31 vs PD32 XP-G R5: 140m (4918 cd) vs 141m (5000 cd)
PD31 vs PD32 XP-G2 R5: 170m (7300 cd) vs 154m (5950 cd)
TK12 vs TK15 XP-G R5: 179m (7965 cd) vs 215 (11592 cd) This was an exception: they made the TK15 one inch longer to add the side switch and possibly also use a deeper reflector. It was also driven
harder to be brighter.
Now the differences are not big at all but another downside of side switches is that they take up space: manufacturers either have to design a longer light or shorten something else - e.g.: a shorter the reflector.

Personally, I'd say FourSevens tops them all. They sell a good quality product, and their customer service is exemplary.
They offer some very nice features t from the nice clips, they also have moonlight (with extremely wrong runtimes) and a voltage range that allows using Li-ions in the 1xAA and 1xCR123 configurations without losing any modes.
Whenever I think I had Quark tactical in an electronic cart ready to press buy and ended up buying the Jetbeam PA/PC series instead I feel like standing in front of a mirror and slapping myself in the face!
 
Top