Elzetta has a go at Surefire

I thought this was a very interesting link:

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/06/23/calling-surefire-elzetta-looks-fl1-standard/

I am not an expert on flashlights and still a newbie so any comments from the old pros would be much appreciated.

Regards, Martin.

Have seen the video too, and there is indeed space for improvement of the guidelines.
Would be nice if manufacturers HAVE to include a runtime/lumen chart on the outside of the packaging.

It's a pretty factual assessment of the runtime testing method used with the FL 1 Standard. I agree with kj2 that requiring manufacturers to provide a chart of output over time would give a better indication. However, even the charts won't always reflect "real world" performance.

880arm said:

It's a pretty factual assessment of the runtime testing method used with the FL 1 Standard. I agree with kj2 that requiring manufacturers to provide a chart of output over time would give a better indication. However, even the charts won't always reflect "real world" performance.

Click to expand...

But it would give a better idea on the runtime/lumen output. With some lights, a chart is included in the manual but normally then you've already bought the light.
Think a update of the standard/guidelines is needed and more manufacturers should join around the table.

kj2 said:

But it would give a better idea on the runtime/lumen output . . .

Click to expand...

I agree 100%. Like any other data, the key is applying it properly. Most consumers would be able to draw a more accurate conclusion from a chart than they can from the current X hours @ Y lumens metric on the packaging.

Streamlight is one company that makes runtime charts for most of their lights available on their website. I respect them for doing that.

I also see makers advertise run time based on moonlight modes, and lumens and throw based upon that 30 second burst....and turbo runtimes being the short burst at max COMBINED with the REMAINING runtime on high, etc.


If the standard was going to have a shot at being representative, as the great unwashed out there don't know a lumen from a lux from a cp, etc, a run time chart might be a bit of a reach, conceptually. Adding a simple set of MATCHED values, for example lumens at the 30 second, mid point and end point of the run times claimed, would be reasonably easy to understand, and reasonably easy to obtain.

They are already measuring the run time, and, the lumens to see when they have dropped to 10% anyway. All that would be needed is to publish the lumens and throw at those three points in the claimed run time. So, sure, its 10% of the initial claimed lumen burst, but, most people don't know that...and showing that they'd have a 1/3 to a 1/10 of the max out put will be enlightening for most users.

(I'd also like the ANSI throw #'s revised to reflect reality relative to the ridiculous 0.25 lux)


The run time is a big deal to guys on patrol for example, especially if using disposable cells. If they NEED a certian output, which of course means a proportional throw distance...they want to KNOW that after 30 seconds, the light can't hit that distance anymore.