Re: What is SF\'s Brightest Led light?
For starters I would ignore the lumen ratings on Surefire's site. Ironically, considering that SF prides itself on properly rating its output, they've been determined by various CPF members to be woefully inadequate. But in a way that's good, because SF under-promises and over-delivers. This would be good for them too if they applied the ratings consistently.
For example, the L2 and the L4 have vastly different max output ratings, 100 vs 65, vs the U2's 80 lumen rating. Yet all of them use the Luxeon V at similar drive levels. Knowing what we do about binning, does this mean the better bins go to the L2? Unlikely. So why the huge disparity? Either all the lights are capable of reaching 100 lumens OR 100 for the L2 is overstated (which SF isn't known to do).
I'm mentioning it because I don't really want to see a repeat of the "but the L2 is rated for 100 WHYY#*(#@!(*!(@(!!*@" threads again.
The general consensus is that the LuxV lights (L2/L4/U2) are roughly equal, the difference is in the beam shape.
Best flood goes to the L2 and L4. It's as close to perfect as you can ask for. If you need OPTICALLY perfect performance, use the F04 beamshaper. Yes, occasionally I do need an optically perfect completely even flood with zero hotspot because I use the L4 as a light for closeup photography. But for all-around flood, those two are unbeatable.
Best throw probably goes to their 4th-gen KL1 or L6 with the deepest reflector although I wouldn't say these throw very far in comparison with some third party modifications. They have reasonable medium throw, but if you are looking for crazy long reach throw you're best served by the custom jobs.
Best MIX of both is the U2/L5 which possibly share an identical reflector; barring that the reflector is at least very similar. It'll launch a solid wall of light out to 50 yards, in quality dark with a little bit of moisture in the air you can almost FEEL the solid cone of light.
If I could only take one it would be the U2.