Be aware when buying Scout light M600C

[Skang]

I have been searching and searching wasting times here and there.

What I should have done in first place would be calling SureFire.

Those of you who wondering about KX2C 110 lumen or KX2C 200 lumen.

They told me, If the Serial number Below KX2C start with "A" is 110 lumen. Serial number start with "B" or "C" and above is 200 lumen.

So watch out what you are buying/biding. I have seen some Listed as "A" 200 lumen.

Good luck. Hope this will clear everything up.

[rob_s]

Good to know. Thanks.

[SmokeJumper]

Thanks for the info., that is good to know for my next purchase for my work rifle.

[Shotdown]

Sweet. Mine starts with a "C".

[kwelz]

Very good info. I went home and checked mine last night. Both start with a C.

[Mjolnir]

Thanks for the heads up. I'll direct people to this thread.

[Rezarf2]

Thanks I have been shopping for a scout lately. I appreciate it.

[arizonaranchman]

Thanks for the info. Mine is the lower powered bulb but I really like it on my guns mounted at 9 o'clock.

[Skang]

Nothing wrong with the 110 lumen.

I believe 110 lumen has little more wider spills, But with less 10-20 yard of reach.

[anto]

Surefire has always underrated their lights. A few guys on CPF did a Intergrating Sphere test and measured OTF lumens on an older "110 lumen" & newer "170 lumen" X300, both were virtually the same. The 110 lumen x300 managed to push out 210 OTF, settling to 203 OTF after 3 minutes.

Here's an older thread with the info:

https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=64819

And a quote from another user. Note the part bolded:


Originally Posted by 750.356
Don't worry, your '110 lumen' rated X400 is likely every bit of 170 lumens, maybe even more. The issue is with Surefire's old ratings. Bear with me through this long explanation:

For years, flashlight geeks (read: the hardcore dudes on candlepowerforums) have known that Surefire's lumen ratings on almost all of their lights ranged from very conservative to grossly underrated. Taking any of SF's lights and comparing the output with lights from other manaufacturers was always interesting, as it wasn't uncommon for the SF product to appear brighter than another light that boasted 50% more lumens.

The reasons for this takes a while to explain, but if you truly want to understand Surefire's rating system, and the reason for their recent bump in the specs of several lights, read on:

There are two ways to measure lumen output; emitter lumens (the total amount of light produced by the light source, in this case the actual LED), and torch lumens (the actual amount of light that is projected out the front of the flashlight, also known as 'OTF' (out the front) lumens). Since there optical losses happening when the light bounces off a reflector, and passes through the lense of a flashlight, OTF lumens are always less than the emitter lumens. Think of it like comparing the horsepower of a motor at the crankshaft, versus at the drive wheels. No drivetrain is 100% efficient, so the actual useable power put to the ground is always less than the manufacturer's HP rating.

A lot of flashlight manufacturers rate the output of their lights via emitter lumens. Less reputable manufacturers will even inflate the emitter lumens number. Take a look at all the chinese LED drop-in assemblies on eBay that replace a SF P60 bulb. You'll see lumen ratings of 290, 350, 390 etc., all of which are complete bullshit.

Surefire has always rated thier lights with 'out the front' lumens, taking measurements of their products with a calibrated integrating sphere (pretty much a chassis dyno for flashlights, the only 100% accurate way to measure OTF lumen output). On top of this, SF has always rated thier older incandescent lights as OTF lumens on half-depleted batteries. Because of this, the rated output of their incan models was always VERY conservative. For example, a '65-lumen' Surefire G2/6P has been independently tested in an integrating sphere at almost 90 OTF lumens on fresh batteries. A '50-lumen' A2 Aviator has been measured in some cases to be roughly 80 OTF lumens. The '500 lumen' lamp assembly of the M6 has been measured as pushing 900 lumens on fresh batteries.

With Surefire's reputation for underrating thier incandescent lights, they seem to have wanted to continue the tradition, for whatever reason, with their newer LED lights. Most notably, their lights using the TIR optic in conjunction with a CREE XR-E LED (the E1L, E2L, L1, E1B, E2DL, M600C, and the X300 in question).

Ever since these lights were released with the newer CREE emitters, the dudes on candlepowerforums speculated they were more than just slightly underrated. Why does a 120-lumen Surefire E2DL look as bright as a 225-lumen Fenix TK-10? Why does a 110-lumen X300 seem brighter than a 200-lumen Nightcore Extreme?

All of the speculation was put to rest when Candlepowerforum poster MrGman (who has access to a real calibrated integrating sphere) started measuring the actual OTF lumen ratings of these lights. The results were pretty interesting. Several examples of the 120-lumen rated E2DL/ M600C scout light were measured between 170 and 210 OTF lumens. One 60-lumen rated E2L was measured at 110 OTF lumens.

The repuation these CREE-based Surefire lights gained for being so underrated spread pretty fast among the flashlight savvy. It was also pretty confusing for the average consumer, who would compare Surefire's specs with that of less expensive Chinese manufacturers, and decide that Surefires were anemic and overpriced. As a result, Surefire seems to have started to rate these lights a lot more accurately.

When the 200-lumen LX2 Lumamax was released, and most examples didn't really appear much brighter than the 120-lumen E2DL (if they appeared brighter at all), flashlight geeks suspected that Surefire was finally starting to put accurate ratings on their lights that truly represented the actual output. A few months later, the E2DL and M600C Scout light now boast 200-lumen ratings, and the formerly 110-lumen X300 is now rated at 170.

The general consensus among the serious flashlight users at Candlepowerforums is that the new lights with the upgraded specs don't seem much brighter, if at all, than the lights with the older ratings. Some do claim to see a significant difference, and others don't. It's a difficult thing to quantify without actually measuring them in an integrating sphere. Personally, I have an older 120-lumen E2DL, and couldn't see any difference at all when comparing it with a newer version rated at 200 lumens. I also see barely any discernable difference between my older 110-lumen X300 and my 200-lumen E2DL.

So basically, don't feel cheated that you bought a model with an older rating, as it's likely the only thing that changed is...the rating.

.. So don't worry if you have an "A" series head, it's plenty bright.

[Rezarf2]

To the OP, I am assuming this is the small serial number on the LED head itself not serial # on the host/body?

Thanks-

[Everyday3]

To the OP, I am assuming this is the small serial number on the LED head itself not serial # on the host/body?

Thanks-


Correct the serial # on the scout body and one on the head. Mine starts with A on the body but the head Starts with a C and thats the one that matters.

[Joeyshoe]

How sure are we about the A, B, and C serial numbers determining lumens? I am thinking about getting one that is NIB. The box says 120 lumens but the KXC2 head has a "C" serial.

Thanks!

[Skang]

From what I remember, they have been using old package box for short period of time.

Call Surefire, to be sure.

[Matt Edwards]

Short cut-
All the new lights are in the new packageing. If it states 200 L on the package, you're fine.:)