daredevil

This arrived today. If I had known about these before, I would have purchased them instead of my Fenix L2D's. Only one mode but I only want bright anyway. I guess one disadvantage is when it goes out it goes out without warning. With the Fenix it gradually dims. Don't get me wrong, I love my L2D's too.

Anyway, for $24 it's a hell of a buy IMO.

Brett92

That's awesome! I was thinking of buying this exact same light, but I had some reservations. If you don't mind, please post your battery life results once you've run the light a few times. BTW, would you say it really puts out 230 Lumens? Are you running AAs? How's the build quality? Would 1 be bright enough for trail riding?

Thanks in advance, and congratulations on the new light.

joshandlauri

You know light bike forum rule #345 says "if you get a new light you must post beam shots and comparisons ASAP"

slvoid

It puts out 230 bulb lumens, not torch lumens.

I recall someone did a test on candlepowerforums and the surefire e2dl, which puts out 120 lumens, was actually brighter than the 230lumen DX lights.

Brett92

Hey Slvoid, do you happen to know which figure Fenix uses to measure their lights?(torch lumens vs. bulb lumens)

Litespeedlouie

I think most folks feel Fenix probably uses bulb lumen estimates, so actual output is less than stated. This isn't unusual; few manufacturers bother to measure actual output. Surefire is one.

tstartrekdude

it dose not put out 230 lumens, ultrafire over rates its stuff, but i bet that this light is brighter that the "230lumen DX lights" the drop-in's that they say are 230 lumen's are WAY under driven, but if they did as good with this light as the last one it well be driven decently hard(here is hoping for 800mah)

my guess would be about 150 to 170 lumen's, and that's hardly noticeable from 230 lumen's

i don't have this light but i do have the p4 one modded with a q5 and new driver bored, driven at 1100mah and thats about 230 lumen's, as for it being good for trail riding, well...its great for road riding somthing a little more floody would be better but it would be GREAT for a headlamp to go along with a flood type light.

anyhow get this light

daredevil

The only thing I have to compare this to are the two Fenix I have, both L2D one a Q5 model the other the premium and this light compares favorably to both of those. The Fenix seem to throw a little large beam but the hot spots are pretty darn similar.

I forgot to add that the build quality seems pretty darn similar too and I'm running Lacrosse Nimh at the moment. Ordered some Eneloops last night.

And Brett, you'll have to check with someone else on the trail riding thing as most of my stuff is commuting on roads. A lot would depend on your expected speed of course.

$40 cheaper than the Fenix.

slvoid

I'm pretty sure fenix, like most of the other manufacturers use bulb lumens. The only type of light that can put out 200+ lumens pass the lens is something with a P7 emitter.

Check out the comparison pics.




The fenix P3D is rated for 215 lumens. The fenix TK10 is rated for 225 lumens. The surefire is rated for 120 lumens. I think the results speak for themselves.

Cyclist0383

^^^^^

What's the runtime and cost on the Surefire?

degnaw

https://www.google.com/products...

it looks like around $140, and 1.9 hours on max from the first link.

daredevil

That's too much Bob!!

I'll stay with what I have.

bmorey

I can't see any worthwhile difference between the pics.

When taking photos of lights unless you use the same aperture and shutter speed for all shots you won't get a proper comparison. That may or may not be the case for these pics.

I suspect that many of the comparison shots we see here are taken with the camera set to 'auto' and are therefore useless. I'd like to see the actual exposure details given before I believe my eyes.

jjiggajouncer

couldn't agree more. auto exposures are USELESS for comparison purposes.

the three most important aspects of a given exposure are:
-aperture
-shutter speed
-iso

also important and/or potentially valuable:
-color temperature
-focal length
-subject distance from camera

please provide this info if you are posting comparison pics.

slvoid

No need to be skeptical.

I got em off a review on candlepowerforums. Those people spend more money on lights than most people here spend on bicycles. Some of them actually design the lights, custom hardware and electronic drivers. They know what they're doing.

Cyclist0383

The real question is the Surefire worth five times the money of the UltraFire for us cyclists? How about one UltraFire on the bars and one on the helmet?

bmorey

Flashlights - OK. But photography - judgment reserved. I've snooped around candlepower forums and never once seen camera settings stated or any indication that they realize these are important. Which they are - vitally. There's a lot of really dodgy photos on that site.

mechBgon

Then you haven't snooped around enough Yes, there are first-timers and novices at CPF, but there are aces there too, armed with not just camera expertise but lux meters and homemade lightboxes and so forth. I believe the pics in question are from this guy's collection: https://fred-flashlights.tacomall.com.tw/10mshot.htm I think he knows what he's doing.

In the bigger picture, whether the WF-606A is 230 lumens, or 120 lumens, or both, or neither, is sort of an academic point IMO. It appears to be a good value in a 2AA light using one of the current-generation emitters, with performance in the ballpark of the popular Fenix L2Ds, which cost more than twice the price. Looking at the price, it makes me go "hmmm, how many extra sets of rechargeable AA cells do I have... hmmm "

datlas 

I have this same light and couldn't be more pleased. I don't have a fenix to compare it to....from reading the forums I was prepared to get a poorly finished light with ratty threads etc., but it feels, looks, and works great right out of the box.

daredevil

I think that would be a pretty darn cost effective set up.

Editz

What are you using to mount these lights? Lockblocks??

datlas 

I can now comment on this light AND the fenix, as I now have one of each. There are more complete and exhaustive reviews on the forum, use the search.

The fenix, on turbo, is a bit brighter than the ultrafire. But it costs almost 3 times as much. That's the tradeoff. It would be cheaper and brighter to use two ultrafires rather than one fenix...but then factor in the extra batteries, maybe it's a wash.

To answer the above question, yes most of us use a lockblock. I also tried the "universal mount" from DX which is dirt cheap but the mount is parallel (I use it along the top of my quill stem).

Editz

So you're using the 1xCR2 battery rather than the 2xAA? It would be interesting if you did a run time test between the two.

datlas 

Nope, I am using 2 AA's...sorry for any confusion. My point is that you can save money using more of the less expensive lights, but the cost of more batteries should be factored in.

daredevil

I've been able to ride a couple times now with both the Ultrafire and the Fenix. The Fenix is brighter. Not extremely so but noticeable. Not so sure it's bright enough to justify the extra cost though.