ArmyTek        
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 42

Thread: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

  1. #1

    Default Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Hey guys,

    I just got the Fenix PD35. Disappointed with the build quality...

    Before buying I've been reading reviews and watching video reviews of the light and found nothing but praise for both the light itself as well as for the BUILD QUALITY. I guess different people have different standards that they consider high quality?

    So what I am trying to find out is the build quality of armytek light relative to Solarforce P1D, Fenix PD35, SF 9P, Malkoff MD2, Maglite.

    As a baseline, when I first held a Maglite, I felt quality. Then came the Surefire. I thought it was the best flashlight I've held in my hands! Then came the Malkoff MD2. Wow! It blew the Surefire experience out of the water.

    Then Solarforce P1D ... felt like a cheap piece of toy. Same goes to the fenix PD35 ...

    So would I be disappointed with an armytek, or delighted?

    Thanks guys!

    Ryan

    ps- looking at the Viking Pro

  2. #2
    *Flashaholic* kj2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    8,045

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Most of my lights are Fenix and non of them feel cheap or bad to me. But everyone looks different on that
    I also have two ArmyTek lights. A Predator Pro and Barracuda. Both feel great and holding the ArmyTek lights, I can feel the metal is thicker than other lights I have.
    The ArmyTek coating really gives you the feeling of quality.
    Last edited by kj2; 03-12-2014 at 03:21 AM.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Quote Originally Posted by kj2 View Post
    Most of my lights are Fenix and non of them feel cheap or bad to me. But everyone looks different on that
    I also have two ArmyTek lights. A Predator Pro and Barracuda. Both feel great and holding the ArmyTek lights, I can feel the metal is thicker than other lights I have.
    The ArmyTek coating really gives you the feeling of quality.
    Looks like a good sign!

    No offence at all if you feel like Fenix is great. Most of my friends felt the same way when they try my lights. For me, especially when tightening or removing the tail cap or the head, it just does not feel as solid or as smooth as SF or Malkoff, or even Maglites. There is this certain feel of roughness. It's hard to explain though :P

    With the SF and Malkoff, it's buttery smooth ...

    Thanks!
    Ryan

  4. #4

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Quote Originally Posted by ryankan1 View Post
    Looks like a good sign!

    No offence at all if you feel like Fenix is great. Most of my friends felt the same way when they try my lights. For me, especially when tightening or removing the tail cap or the head, it just does not feel as solid or as smooth as SF or Malkoff, or even Maglites. There is this certain feel of roughness. It's hard to explain though :P

    With the SF and Malkoff, it's buttery smooth ...

    Thanks!
    Ryan
    Maybe you just need to clean and lube the threads?

  5. #5

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Quote Originally Posted by UpstandingCitizen View Post
    Maybe you just need to clean and lube the threads?
    Did that.

  6. #6
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    European Union
    Posts
    1,739

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Not sure about the tailcap of the PD35 specifically but Fenix usually have pretty good build quality. As KJ2 said it's all relative: I took a couple of Surefire in the hand once and they felt like they had another quality level altogether - if you want something closer to that in terms of build quality from Fenix you'd have to look at their TK series. That doesn't mean Fenix lights are poor quality - to the contrary I find them a few notches better than other lights I have such as Klarus and Nitecore.

    Also it all needs to be considered within the same price range. What makes Fenix lights attractive is not the same build quality as Surefire but the fact that they offer 18650 compatibility, several modes, good runtimes, latest LEDs and for their price range they offer, in my opinion, very good quality and good customer service. I don't think they are on the same level as Surefire though. I'm actually waiting for my first SF - a first generation 6PX and I'm curious to do a more hands-on comparison to see the differences. I don't have an Armytek so can't say anything about their quality in relation to SF but by all accounts Armytek lights are well built.
    Last edited by Labrador72; 03-12-2014 at 04:58 AM.

  7. #7
    Flashaholic* oKtosiTe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    973

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Quote Originally Posted by ryankan1 View Post
    Did that.
    With what? For me NyoGel and standard silicone grease are worlds apart.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Quote Originally Posted by oKtosiTe View Post
    With what? For me NyoGel and standard silicone grease are worlds apart.
    Nyogel 760G, with instructions from:

    http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...nd-Lube-Thread

    Let's just say that I know how to do basic maintenance on the lights shall we? This isn't a thread for that debate. Everything is relative, so if I had crappy technique and my Fenix & Solarforce is 70% of its full potential, my Malkoff and SF are also 70% of its potential, as I use the same technique on them. Relatively, they still feel better.

    Question is, will armytek be closer to SF/ Malkoff OR Fenix/ Solarforce?


  9. #9
    Flashaholic* oKtosiTe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    973

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Quote Originally Posted by ryankan1 View Post
    Nyogel 760G, with instructions from:

    http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...nd-Lube-Thread

    Let's just say that I know how to do basic maintenance on the lights shall we? This isn't a thread for that debate. Everything is relative, so if I had crappy technique and my Fenix & Solarforce is 70% of its full potential, my Malkoff and SF are also 70% of its potential, as I use the same technique on them. Relatively, they still feel better.

    Question is, will armytek be closer to SF/ Malkoff OR Fenix/ Solarforce?

    Sure, sure. I just had to ask—some lights come pre-lubed and some don't.

  10. #10
    *Flashaholic* kj2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    8,045

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Quote Originally Posted by ryankan1 View Post
    Question is, will armytek be closer to SF/ Malkoff OR Fenix/ Solarforce?
    I'd put ArmyTek closer to SF.

  11. #11
    Flashaholic* CarpentryHero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,955

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    I have two Armytek lights, they are good, really good but they aren't in the league of Surefire/Malkoff/Elzetta/HDS

    For or me to really know how satisfied with an Armytek you'll be, I'd need to know what model of light your looking at?
    The Partner series is budget, where as the Predator Pro would be the higher end.

    i do agree with kj2 Armytek does feel better than the middle of the road lights.

    Fenix is more of the Eagletac/Jetbeam/Nitecore/Sunwayman grouping for quality and at a reasonable price.
    I like Fenix lights a lot the quality is good, modes, UI well thought out, battery options of different models are well thought out, and the output is competative.

    Wait till you start looking at McGizmo and other custom lights
    I'm glad I found CPF, I was beginning to think I was strange
    I'm a Canadian and a proud Flashaholic
    Thanks CPF, thanks Think2x

  12. #12
    Flashaholic* caddylover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Burbank, CA
    Posts
    1,144

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    I have the armytek barracuda, great light, very well built. Also, have a Fenix RC40, well built as well.
    No, I don't have enough flashlights! Do you have enough shoes?

  13. #13

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    My Armytek Predator feels just as high-quality to me as my Malkoff and HDS lights.

    The Armytek coating, in my opinion, seems to be of the highest quality out of the three manufacturers (it's very thick and grippy - it actually makes a great nail file).

    The HDS threads are probably the smoothest of the three, and I would say Armytek and Malkoff are a tie there.

    The Armytek switch also feels quite nice to me; I may prefer it over the McClicky (and it is different altogether from the electronic switch used by HDS).

    Just one person's opinion!

  14. #14

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    -edited-
    Last edited by ryankan1; 03-14-2014 at 03:05 AM.

  15. #15

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Quote Originally Posted by CarpentryHero View Post
    I have two Armytek lights, they are good, really good but they aren't in the league of Surefire/Malkoff/Elzetta/HDS

    For or me to really know how satisfied with an Armytek you'll be, I'd need to know what model of light your looking at?
    The Partner series is budget, where as the Predator Pro would be the higher end.

    i do agree with kj2 Armytek does feel better than the middle of the road lights.

    Fenix is more of the Eagletac/Jetbeam/Nitecore/Sunwayman grouping for quality and at a reasonable price.
    I like Fenix lights a lot the quality is good, modes, UI well thought out, battery options of different models are well thought out, and the output is competative.

    Wait till you start looking at McGizmo and other custom lights
    Im looking at the Viking pro.

  16. #16
    Flashaholic* CarpentryHero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,955

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    I think the Viking Pro is one of their better made lights, have you read a review from someone like Selfbuilt ? He also does YouTube videos on occasion which is almost as good as handling the light before you buy (listening to the cap being threaded)
    I'm glad I found CPF, I was beginning to think I was strange
    I'm a Canadian and a proud Flashaholic
    Thanks CPF, thanks Think2x

  17. #17
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    1,565

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Oh, come on!
    It's not even in the same galaxy with a Malkoff or HDS.

    Aside from being much better in every possible facet of construction and operation, the Malkoff and HDS actually have proper thermal design(gasp! Imagine that!) without any need for stepping down the output to avoid burning up the LED from poor design.
    It's a lot cheaper to program the chip to turn the light down lower, and slap the guts into a housing that they don't have to worry about fit and function, than it is to make a proper flashlight design with thermal pathways in the design.
    All the mass produced Chinese lights do this, so they can slap them out by the millions at low manufacturing cost, and charge a lot of money for them over here in the US.

    The whole comparison is just silly, IMO.
    There is no comparison.

    Sorry if this sounds harsh, but it's reality.
    I don't mean to offend anyone, so just call it "my opinion".
    Last edited by twl; 03-13-2014 at 06:29 AM.
    Brawndo. It's got what plants crave!

  18. #18
    Flashaholic* Wiggle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Halifax, NS
    Posts
    1,280

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    I can't speak to Malkoff or HDS but I do own a Predator Pro 2.5 and have previously owned a Surefire C2 HA. Predator has equal or better build quality than the C2 HA IMO. The threading was just as good, anodizing is similar durability and grippier. I did like the C2 grip ring better though, Armytek one is a little soft for my liking.

    Regarding the thermal design, it's just as good as any other light I've used. It overdrives the XP-G2 LED but even when running full output on flat regulation (which can be done contrary to the above post) it doesn't overheat, it spreads the heat throughout the head and body quite well. Not to mention the quality of the lens and reflector are top grade. Does the Malkoff design not use drop-ins? That doesn't seem like an ideal thermal design.

    twl, I'm curious which Armytek light did you have a bad experience with?
    Last edited by Wiggle; 03-13-2014 at 08:21 AM.

  19. #19
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Folsom, CA
    Posts
    500

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    I personally think Armytek makes the only made in China flashlights that compare to SureFire's build quality. I don't own any Malkoff flashlights, but I do own quite a few of his modules so I cannot make that comparison.

    I've had many different Chinese manufactured lights, and only Armytek and Eagletac have been consistently good in terms of build quality. After these two companies there seems to be a big drop in terms how good a light feels in my hands.
    WTB: SureFire 6PX 9/11 Edition #513.

  20. #20

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Quote Originally Posted by twl View Post
    Oh, come on!
    It's not even in the same galaxy with a Malkoff or HDS.

    Aside from being much better in every possible facet of construction and operation, the Malkoff and HDS actually have proper thermal design(gasp! Imagine that!) without any need for stepping down the output to avoid burning up the LED from poor design.
    It's a lot cheaper to program the chip to turn the light down lower, and slap the guts into a housing that they don't have to worry about fit and function, than it is to make a proper flashlight design with thermal pathways in the design.
    All the mass produced Chinese lights do this, so they can slap them out by the millions at low manufacturing cost, and charge a lot of money for them over here in the US.

    The whole comparison is just silly, IMO.
    There is no comparison.

    Sorry if this sounds harsh, but it's reality.
    I don't mean to offend anyone, so just call it "my opinion".
    Let's agree to disagree. Here are some facts to back up my viewpoint. I'll use selfbuilt's review of the Viking Pro (and I'll try to focus most of my comments on that model, if I can), as that's the light under consideration by the OP. I hope this (brief) comparison is useful to the OP. The Viking Pro review can be found here http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...ead.php?366051

    First, let's address the claim that Armytek doesn't have proper thermal design, and has a "need for stepping down the output to avoid burning up the LED from poor design." Simply check any of the regulated-runtime graphs in the review to see that this claim is plainly false. (To be fair, selfbuilt reported some strange behavior for 2 x CR123 primaries on the Viking Pro, where he observed STEP regulation when FULL regulation was selected. I'm not sure if he came up with an explanation for this, but if FULL regulation is important for use with 2 x CR123, then this light may not be a good choice. But to say that there is a "need for stepping down the output to avoid burning up the LED from poor design" is clearly false, as the light is shown to be perfectly capable of FULL regulation, with no signs of damage to the light.)

    Next, let's address the claim that Malkoff and HDS are "much better in every possible facet of construction and operation."

    Let's talk about operation first in terms of UI. The claim about operation (UI) seems silly to me, as Armytek's Pro models (including the Viking Pro) can be programmed to have a staggering range of settings. In fact, it is possible to copy exactly Malkoff's "tighten head for high, loosen head for low" UI. If the user doesn't like using head twists to change modes (not just lines - or sets of modes), simply opt for the Basic version instead of the Pro for a no-nonsense UI without any complications. If the quote refers to Malkoff's 361 UI, for example, then the Basic Armytek models offer a similar UI in the head-loosened state. As for the HDS's UI - that's another beast altogether. It's true that the Viking Pro doesn't have anything similar to the Rotary, for example. Other than the rotary, however, the Pro models are able to be customized to arguably the same extent as any other HDS (each has features the other doesn't, and both have tons of options!).

    The next part of operation - things like how a light feels in the hand, how fluidly the UI itself works for a particular user, etc. - is largely subjective; I'll just say that I have no qualms with any of these manufacturers.

    If you look at operation in terms of performance - things like output and efficiency - the Viking or Predator is going to blow many of Malkoff's offerings out of the water in terms of both total output and lumen-hours, and Malkoff simply does not offer anything with the throw of the Predator (including the Hound Dog, to my eye - though that may change if he offers an MT-G2 version in the near future!). If you further restrict yourself to the same size class, Malkoff will have trouble keeping up with the Viking in terms of both output and efficiency. See selfbuilt's review for specific comparisons between the Viking Pro and other well-known lights in a similar size class. At the other end of the spectrum, the Viking Pro claims 130 days of runtime on its lowest setting, which I believe outlasts current HDS low settings (of course, this isn't a very fair comparison - 3400mAh vs 1500mAh - but I believe the Viking's lowest setting runs for several times as long as the HDS's lowest setting) and many of Malkoff's stock options (maybe a 361 on low with a high/low ring would be in the ballpark?).

    If you include, say, durability in the discussion of performance, then all three brands are known to stand up to some pretty heavy abuse. I believe torture test videos are available online for all of these manufacturers.

    Finally, as far as construction goes, this is largely going to be subjective (as will part of the operation of the light - preferring electronic vs clicky switches, for example). Armytek offers thicker coatings on their lights, and pots the electronics (just as Malkoff and HDS do). As I said before, Armytek lights FEEL very high-quality to me when I hold them - just as much so as Malkoff and HDS lights - but this is clearly an opinion (for what it's worth, selfbuilt also comments that Armytek's lights seem to be of high build quality). There are probably too many design implementations in HDS lights to even discuss, and I would imagine that a detailed analysis would leave HDS as the clear winner in terms of thoughtfulness of the design - over both Malkoff and Armytek. (If you go to Armytek's website, navigate to the Viking Pro, and click on the Specifications tab, you'll see that Armytek really has put a lot of thought into the design - it's obvious from all the features they list.)

    The rest of the post seems to be subjective comments about the light based on its location of manufacture. I don't think there's any point in attempting to address that part of the post.

    For what it's worth, I own lights from all three of these manufacturers - and will continue to do so! But I want to make sure that the OP has accurate information in order to make an informed decision.

  21. #21
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Boden, Sweden
    Posts
    3,334

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    I have three Armyteks and just can say that they are all of a very high quality. The feeling of using them is anything else than massproduced budget. I am really doubtful about that Armyteks would have bad heatsinking. There are only two flashlight brands(in my collection) I would place in the same or a higher league than Armytek, and these are Surefire and Malkoff.
    Last edited by Swedpat; 03-13-2014 at 08:57 AM.

  22. #22
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Folsom, CA
    Posts
    500

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Quote Originally Posted by KeeblerElf View Post
    Let's agree to disagree. Here are some facts to back up my viewpoint. I'll use selfbuilt's review of the Viking Pro (and I'll try to focus most of my comments on that model, if I can), as that's the light under consideration by the OP. I hope this (brief) comparison is useful to the OP. The Viking Pro review can be found here http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...ead.php?366051

    First, let's address the claim that Armytek doesn't have proper thermal design, and has a "need for stepping down the output to avoid burning up the LED from poor design." Simply check any of the regulated-runtime graphs in the review to see that this claim is plainly false. (To be fair, selfbuilt reported some strange behavior for 2 x CR123 primaries on the Viking Pro, where he observed STEP regulation when FULL regulation was selected. I'm not sure if he came up with an explanation for this, but if FULL regulation is important for use with 2 x CR123, then this light may not be a good choice. But to say that there is a "need for stepping down the output to avoid burning up the LED from poor design" is clearly false, as the light is shown to be perfectly capable of FULL regulation, with no signs of damage to the light.)

    Next, let's address the claim that Malkoff and HDS are "much better in every possible facet of construction and operation."

    Let's talk about operation first in terms of UI. The claim about operation (UI) seems silly to me, as Armytek's Pro models (including the Viking Pro) can be programmed to have a staggering range of settings. In fact, it is possible to copy exactly Malkoff's "tighten head for high, loosen head for low" UI. If the user doesn't like using head twists to change modes (not just lines - or sets of modes), simply opt for the Basic version instead of the Pro for a no-nonsense UI without any complications. If the quote refers to Malkoff's 361 UI, for example, then the Basic Armytek models offer a similar UI in the head-loosened state. As for the HDS's UI - that's another beast altogether. It's true that the Viking Pro doesn't have anything similar to the Rotary, for example. Other than the rotary, however, the Pro models are able to be customized to arguably the same extent as any other HDS (each has features the other doesn't, and both have tons of options!).

    The next part of operation - things like how a light feels in the hand, how fluidly the UI itself works for a particular user, etc. - is largely subjective; I'll just say that I have no qualms with any of these manufacturers.

    If you look at operation in terms of performance - things like output and efficiency - the Viking or Predator is going to blow many of Malkoff's offerings out of the water in terms of both total output and lumen-hours, and Malkoff simply does not offer anything with the throw of the Predator (including the Hound Dog, to my eye - though that may change if he offers an MT-G2 version in the near future!). If you further restrict yourself to the same size class, Malkoff will have trouble keeping up with the Viking in terms of both output and efficiency. See selfbuilt's review for specific comparisons between the Viking Pro and other well-known lights in a similar size class. At the other end of the spectrum, the Viking Pro claims 130 days of runtime on its lowest setting, which I believe outlasts current HDS low settings (of course, this isn't a very fair comparison - 3400mAh vs 1500mAh - but I believe the Viking's lowest setting runs for several times as long as the HDS's lowest setting) and many of Malkoff's stock options (maybe a 361 on low with a high/low ring would be in the ballpark?).

    If you include, say, durability in the discussion of performance, then all three brands are known to stand up to some pretty heavy abuse. I believe torture test videos are available online for all of these manufacturers.

    Finally, as far as construction goes, this is largely going to be subjective (as will part of the operation of the light - preferring electronic vs clicky switches, for example). Armytek offers thicker coatings on their lights, and pots the electronics (just as Malkoff and HDS do). As I said before, Armytek lights FEEL very high-quality to me when I hold them - just as much so as Malkoff and HDS lights - but this is clearly an opinion (for what it's worth, selfbuilt also comments that Armytek's lights seem to be of high build quality). There are probably too many design implementations in HDS lights to even discuss, and I would imagine that a detailed analysis would leave HDS as the clear winner in terms of thoughtfulness of the design - over both Malkoff and Armytek. (If you go to Armytek's website, navigate to the Viking Pro, and click on the Specifications tab, you'll see that Armytek really has put a lot of thought into the design - it's obvious from all the features they list.)

    The rest of the post seems to be subjective comments about the light based on its location of manufacture. I don't think there's any point in attempting to address that part of the post.

    For what it's worth, I own lights from all three of these manufacturers - and will continue to do so! But I want to make sure that the OP has accurate information in order to make an informed decision.
    Excellent post Mr. Elf. I think this sums up the quality of Armtek's products quite nicely.
    WTB: SureFire 6PX 9/11 Edition #513.

  23. #23
    Flashaholic* HighlanderNorth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Mid Atlantic USA
    Posts
    1,593

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    I only own 1 Fenix light, a TK-41. I can say that its threads feel like very good quality threads. I can also say they feel of much higher quality than standard Maglight threads. In fact, the entire light is thicker and tougher than any Maglight I have ever handled. I dont own any Surefire lights, but as has been pointed out here a million times, it often seems that Surefire is a little behind the curve when it comes to features and brightness and interface options with many of their lights. They tend to be very expensive, considering you can buy lights with better options, equal or better electronics and significantly more brightness for significantly less money. As far as build quality and toughness they are good, but I dont know that you can say that they are necessarily any tougher than many of the lights made by Fenix, Eagletac, Jetbeam, Sunwayman, etc.

    If you were impressed by the quality of a Maglight when you first picked it up, I am surprised you thought that the Fenix light(although I have never handled a PD35).
    Some days you are the bug, some days you are the windshield.

  24. #24
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Folsom, CA
    Posts
    500

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Quote Originally Posted by HighlanderNorth View Post
    but I dont know that you can say that they are necessarily any tougher than many of the lights made by Fenix, Eagletac, Jetbeam, Sunwayman, etc.
    I'll personally vouch for SureFire being tougher than Jetbeam.

    Congrats on the 18 smoke free months by the way. $3k will buy a lot of flashlights!
    WTB: SureFire 6PX 9/11 Edition #513.

  25. #25

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    I'll take a Fenix over a Mag any day. . Quality, feel, run time, value. . .
    Bill
    Pacific NW

  26. #26
    Flashaholic* oKtosiTe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    973

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Quote Originally Posted by wjv View Post
    I'll take a Fenix over a Mag any day. . Quality, feel, run time, value. . .
    While there are few things I would pick a Mag over, I do have to say my trusty 3C Mag feels hefty and tough. That said, I can't remember the last time I used it.

  27. #27

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Thanks for all the great response guys... I might give it a go sometime, but meanwhile, after spending money twice and not getting much satisfaction (bought a Solarforce P1D and a PD35), I think I'll go the safe route and buy an Elzetta to quench my thirst for a bulletproof light!

  28. #28
    Flashaholic* 880arm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wildlands of Western Kentucky
    Posts
    1,752

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    Quote Originally Posted by ryankan1 View Post
    Thanks for all the great response guys... I might give it a go sometime, but meanwhile, after spending money twice and not getting much satisfaction (bought a Solarforce P1D and a PD35), I think I'll go the safe route and buy an Elzetta to quench my thirst for a bulletproof light!
    LOL, that takes the discussion to a whole different level! You will like the Elzetta

  29. #29
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    1,015

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    I think the Inova lights by Nite Ize are good. They are crush proof. Very thick walls with almost zero battery rattle. I have the Inova X2 (silver colored) which runs on two AA bateries with an output of 150 ANSI lumens. The output may not be great but it practical. It has a very smooth beam pattern due to its textured reflector. Only downside is the smooth barrel and feels a bit heavy due to the thick metal. You can check the T series on this Russian video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DyiXqsLpr0 (by Miroshop.com.ua). Can't understand a word but you can pretty much understand the video.

  30. #30

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,631

    Default Re: Build quality of Armytek against SF/ Malkoff ??? Picky opinion please ...

    I don't own any Surefire, but I have an Elzetta, and I like it. If I had to pick one light for durability, the Elzetta would definitely be it. But the Armytek IS definitely comparable...it feels more solid than ANY of my other lights, except the Elzetta, and as others have stated, the Armytek anodizing is literally the best out there for ANY price that I have seen. And Armytek doesn't make you take it on faith...they don't just stick to the standard ANSI 2 meter drops and IPX8 water resistance. They actually rate some of their lights for 100 foot drops, and 100 foot water resistance.

    Maybe TWL had a bad experience with an Armytek light, but I can assure you they are generally very high quality, and designed with toughness as the first, second, and third priority. When you take value into account, certainly I personally think Armytek offers a significantly better value than Surefire or HDS.

    Ryankan, I agree with you about the Fenix lights, especially the threads. The TK75 is pretty decent after you lube it, but still a little rough. And the PD32UE I own has very rough threads when compared to most of my other lights. I don't know that it is an indication of inferior build, but they definitely aren't as smooth...I think Fenix has just chosen not to focus on that.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •