Quark vs Fenix run time accuracy?

Hi Guys,

I'm shopping for a new light to use for EMS work. I know I want something with multi modes as I use the low setting a lot, but having an option to search with high is important too.

I am all but sold on a new Quark (I own a 1x AA Quark currently), but the higher lumen and run time ratings of the Fenix seem enticing.

I know not all ratings are created equal. Is the Fenix really that much more efficient than the Quark?

I'm still trying to decide on battery type, quantity, and primary vs rechargeable. Given the same batteries the Fenix advertises much higher lumens and run time. I'm just curious if this is apples to apples.

Thanks!

I actually don't know about the difference between Fenix and Quark. But unfortunately even several highly respected brands use NEMA/ANSI standard, which can be very misleading. This because they can claim that the light is regulated and with a certain runtime, still the claimed runtime is until the brightness is 10% of initial.
The best is to always, when it's possible, read some of the great reviews here at this forum.

Fenix is know for their efficient drivers. This is also sometimes a negative because they get that efficiency by not making allowance for Li-ion batteries in a lot of their lights. By limiting the batteries to a very specific voltage rang the drivers can be made much more efficient.

As to the exact differences between these two lights, you would have to read one of our good reviewers such a Selfbuilt.

TFin04 said:

Given the same batteries the Fenix advertises much higher lumens and run time.

Click to expand...

FourSevens tends to understate the output of their lights (see various reviews by Selfbuilt). My Quark QB2A is rated at 205 lumens but (based on Selfbuilt's review) probably actually outputs 300 lumens. Thus the runtime is shorter than you would expect at 205 lumens.

I've looking into this a bit, and also recommended in your other thread that you be careful when comparing ANSI specs, and to use Selfbuilt's output/runtime graphs instead.

Let's take one example which is close to the lights we were talking, and at the lumen level you like (~100) ... A Quark AAX vs an LD12 which Selfbuilt has tested (the QAAX is a "custom" build, so we have to extrapolate from his review of the QAA2X).

QAAX 115 lms for 1.25 hrs (half 2.5 spec) = 144 lumen hrs
LD12 125 lms for 2.33 hrs = 291 lumen hrs (or DOUBLE the efficiency)

Now take a look at Selfbuilt's output/runtime graphs for the QAA2X and LD12 at these levels on standard Eneloops.... they both run stone flat at ~70 on SBs scale - the Quark 3.5 hrs and LD12 for 1.5 hrs. So for the heck of it, knock 0.5 hrs off the Quark of higher voltage efficiency (3v is less work from the boost driver) and divided by 2 for single cell, and they're about even, eh? Technically speaking, 47s must spec with included batts (Alks) and the Fenix is using a 2500 mah NiMh (or at least they used to) and it doesn't even seem that the extra 25% batt capacity, can make up for the 0.75 hr shortfall in runtime.

However, as a general rule, a narrower voltage light should be more efficient than a wider voltage light, and CPF member, Hiuintahs, has done some efficiency testing to reflect that. IIRC, he thought the '12 ET D25A clicky, was one of the most efficient 1xAAs (better than the LD12)... well ET seems as conservative as 47 spec sheet wise (in the 150-200 lm-hrs range), and I've tested both the '12 D25AX and QAAX side-by-side with a light meter and stopwatch and didn't find a significant difference, but will admit my tools are cruder.

According to Foursevens own data the QTA2-X gets 2.5hrs on high mode (not max). According to Selfbuilt's review it gets closer to 3.5hrs running eneloops. That's 115 otf lumens from 2xAA for a lengthy walk in the dark.

As has been mentioned Fenix has incredible run times due I their very narrow voltage range. You can't even run L91's in many of their multiple AA lights without losing low and sometimes medium until the voltage of each cell drops to around 1.5v.

I'd trade a little efficiency to be able to have all modes work with L91's. And Fenix would sell a few more lights if their single cell CR123 lights could take 4.2v and retain all modes.

Both brands have their strengths an weaknesses. I enjoy using both, but if push came to shove I'd go with the Quarks for battery choice. If Fenix could take more voltage then there'd be no contest. I recently purchased a QTA2-X to standardise my EDC gear as having to have both AA and CR123 cells seems a little pointless.