The Best Weapon Light? A Comparison and Historic Progression.

This episode was brought to you by Slate Black Industries. For M-LOK grips and accessories, visit slateblackindustries.com. Now we are going to go through some history at the beginning of this session, but as we get into the light demonstrations, what I want you to keep in mind are three core elements. The first is a balance between performance and size. That being things like concealability, weight, ease of carry, versus ability to put out performance. Secondarily, the different types of illumination that these different lights and tools are outputting. The ability of the tool to illuminate targets at distance versus the ability to illuminate targets in your immediate peripheral area. And the third element, performance versus price. Is there a point of diminishing return? That is only something that you're going to be able to answer. Consider these three main points. You can have two lights with similar on-paper statistics that perform completely different from one another. And that's what we wanted to demonstrate within the context of this test and the video that you're seeing today. Welcome to 9-0 Reviews. Alongside the development and continued evolution of small arms, such as are commonly profiled on this show, are ancillary tools and devices which have caused significant adjustment to the implementation of the firearm. One of the most impactful of which is the light. And while there remains a small fraction of end-users who don't necessarily believe there's value in utilizing a weapon light, the ability to identify, deter, engage, or otherwise interact with potential and actual threats in darkness can be exceptionally important and has thus been adapted and adopted by the wide majority, especially as technology and tactics have developed and improved over the last few decades. But this isn't a new phenomenon either. As far back as the early 19th century, there's evidence of weapon-mounted lights. Approximately 70 years before the invention of the light bulb. That's right, crude candlelight torches attached to flintlock pistols existed. When the flashlight was invented in 1898, it took less than 15 years for a patent to be filed for the first weapon light utilizing the technology. There are records of police and security forces with lights attached to their firearms as early as the late 1920s. And in the 1960s, the tunnel rat kits being developed for soldiers in Vietnam, which included various illumination tools, including weapon-mounted lights, were documented. A powerful flashlight in good condition and with fresh batteries and a probe such as a bayonet is a must and a hand weapon. But the first real moment that cultural exposure to weapon lights peaked had to have been within Operation Nimrod and the embassy siege involving the SAS who attached comically large flashlights to their MP5s in what has become an iconic cloner configuration. Following shortly thereafter in the mid-80s was SOCOM's utilization of lights, including dive lights strapped to their CAR-15s to be replaced by Surefire 6Ps in the early 1990s, immortalized during Operation Gothic Serpent, known today culturally as Blackhawk Down. From there, the standardization of 1913 rail in 1995 and the development of the Knight's Armament RIS rail provided a uniform attachment method for accessories such as lights. Further, SOCOM had initiated their Offensive Handgun Weapons System, OHWS, competition leading to the development of the HK Mark 23, sporting the Laser Aiming Module, or LAM, which included a light feature. Only a few years later in 1998, Glock released its Gen 3 pistol which included the Glock Accessory Rail for attachments of, you guessed it, lights and or lasers to the handgun. Since that time, there's been continued development of illumination technology, including smaller, lighter, more robust, and brighter lights that continue to be developed. This is happening alongside the continued improvements on energy source efficiencies, such as the use of rechargeable lithium batteries we see today. But there are countless options and products that have hit the market over the last two decades with varying levels of performance capability. So today, we're going to show you the evolution of the white light, specifically as it relates to small arms development and implementation through a test course. The course utilizes a 100 meter range with a humanoid target at 25 meters, 50 meters, 75 meters, and 100 meters. Additionally, we've staged one target approximately 7 meters to the left of the center line of the course, at 15 meters from the light source, and one mirrored to the right side of the course as well. The purpose of this course is to demonstrate how different illumination tools control their output in the categories of throw stroke distance, flood or spill, and intensity of the beam. Now, before we get into the actual product test and demonstration, we want to very clearly state what this is not going to show. First, we're not here with an exhaustive list of options. Although we've done our due diligence to curate a wide range of tools across numerous decades of manufacture from multiple manufacturing sources, your favorite light may very well be absent. This is not necessarily indicative of performance of that product, merely that it'd be prohibitive for us to try and secure every single iteration of every single meaningful option available. Second, this is not an exhaustive performance demonstration. While we've set up a stage we believe demonstrates a light's capabilities fairly well in some key areas, positive performance in this test is not necessarily reflective of the best overall option for your needs, such as if your use is likely to be purely indoors with much shorter distances. Further, lower performance in this test may neglect key factors such as size and weight, which can be decision points when selecting such an accessory. So let's get on with it. First up, we have undoubtedly the lowest performer in the test, a classic circa 1980 D-cell battery incandescent bulb mag light. It's gigantic, heavy, and has very little power compared to a modern light. Even so, the center beam is able to reach out to about 50 meters with some level of positivity, albeit with effectively zero spill, meaning the user can't see anything other than directly what the beam is pointed at. Next, we have the Surefire 6P with the incandescent bulb. This is the model launched in 1989. As we can see, a fairly dramatic improvement over the D-cell mag light with visibility out to the 100 meter berm and enough spill to see the full line of targets at once. Now, whether the light is powerful enough to positively identify what a target is doing beyond, say, 25 meters might still be a stretch, but seeing that the targets are there is an important first step. You will notice that while the spill is superior to the mag light, it is still insufficient to spot the two 15 meter targets to the left and right of the main cone of illumination. Here next is the M3 Illuminator from Insight. This is a late 1990s design that utilizes two CR123 batteries with an incandescent bulb. It's much smaller than the 6P and is more of a pistol light than a rifle light based on its design and shape. With that said, the throw seems relatively equivalent to the 6P and the spill appears to be slightly greater. Now we're back to look at the Surefire 6P with an LED upgrade. This is an aftermarket LED upgrade as purchased from HK parts in the form of a Surefire 628 MP5 handguard. Immediately, you'll notice the much cooler color of the light as we move away from incandescent to LED and a moderate improvement in throw and spill. We're able to more clearly see the full range of targets out to 100 meters but with drop-off happening rapidly between the 25 to 50 meter mark and we're still unable to see targets to the left and right of the main distance course. Let's jump now to our first modern light. This is the Streamlight TLR7, an ultra-compact concealed carry pistol light. You'll see straight away that this light struggles to punch beyond about 25 meters and in terms of that throw, it's actually worse than even some of the lights from decades prior. Spill also isn't enough to light the surrounding targets either. With that said, the TLR7 is the smallest light we have to demonstrate with today and it puts the emphasis on size and weight as opposed to the performance needed to do well in this style of test that we've constructed. Despite having decent lumen stats by today's standards, the ability to project that power downrange just appears to be lacking. Next up, we have a handheld light from Phoenix. This is the PD32 Ultimate Edition on the high setting. Note straight away the bright white targets on the back berm are visible but they are not clearly defined and you can imagine a non-white target being much harder to see or identify beyond say the 50 meter mark. That's because this light prioritizes the spill of the light over the throw or distance intensity. Note that we're able to see our two close-sighted targets quite readily even when the beam is focused in a different area. So, not fantastic distance capability but decent spill to illuminate the whole nearby area. All in line with what most of us would be looking for in terms of a handheld light. Let's contrast that against the Surefire EDCL2-T, a handheld light with an increased lumen and candela rating over that of the Phoenix. Notice that the targets at the back berm are visible as is their immediate surrounding but that the hyper intensity we can see at 25 meters is clearly being bled off by the time we reach about 75 meters or so. Further, we can still see the close peripheral targets well enough to know they are present. Now before we get into iterations of the extremely popular Scout series, let's look at another final pistol light iteration. This is the Surefire X300 Ultra. It's probably the largest in terms of physical size pistol light on the market today but has, as you can see, quite impressive capability. Very similar in performance to the EDCL2 that we just looked at. A bit more intensity than the handheld as compared to the but overall, just about as powerful in terms of reach or distance. The visible findings here align with the technical stats, whereby the lights share the same peak intensity, or candela, but the X300U has about 200 less overall lumens, meaning it's prioritizing a bit more of its output into the central beam than the handheld is. The X300 is one of the most popular pistol lights for duty use, and some users even use the X300 on their rifles via 1913 attachment. If we compare the X300 to the TLR7, you can see the massive difference in performance that comes with the significant increase in comparative size and weight. Alright, then on to the Scout series of lights. Here, we're going to look at a number of different Surefire offerings that have been introduced over time with respect to this series, and then take a look at alternatives from other companies utilizing the same or similar body patterns. First up, we'll look at the oldest Scout light we have here. This is an M300 with a KX1 Alpha head. This might remind you of the 6P with the LED conversion. They're fairly similar respective to performance, but the M300 is running off of only one battery, so it's quite a bit smaller in overall size. Notice that we're having drop-off between about 25 and 50 meter targets in terms of the illumination, and there really isn't much spill, meaning our visibility is quite focused. Next up is the KE-1H, and we'll be following that with the KE-1F. These are two newer heads that affix to the M300 body. You'll immediately see the drastic improvement over the original older head, with both better throw and better spill. Although neither the H or F head produces enough spill to readily see the peripheral targets, their silhouettes are barely visible in the corners of the screen. Further, there is a marked improvement in distance visibility. We can see out to 50 relatively well, with bleed-off happening beyond that marker. We're unsure if it's just us, but it appears that the F head is a bit cooler in coloration than the H, and for whatever reason, that seems to result in what appears to be a bit better visibility at distance, despite the statistics on these two lights being similar. Let's pivot quickly here and take a look at the Arisaka 300 pattern bodied light now. This is the same size and pattern as the M300 from Surefire, but has the most up-to-date head with the Malkov E-1HT. To us, we're getting much more punch in terms of distance, clearly able to see the back berm around the 100m targets. With that said, this is an extremely concentrated beam, and we aren't able to see any signs of the peripheral targets. So, if you're looking for a very small light with respect to footprint, and a very focused beam, this combination might prove to be the ticket, seeing how the performance does seem quite good in those areas. That'll conclude our small body, or 300 pattern lights that we tested. Now, on to their big brother, the 600 series scouts, which utilize the dual or double CR123 setups. First up, we have the M600P, which utilizes the older Fury head from Surefire. Here, we can see similar distance performance to say that of the KE-1F from the M300 series in terms of throw, but with dramatically more spill, allowing us to see the peripheral targets. Even so, this light being 5 to 10 years old still falls well short of the pistol lights we have today. Here it is against the X300 Ultra that we looked at earlier. Next up, we'll have a look at the KE-2C. This is the head for the M600, which allows us to nearly double the distance intensity of the light as compared to the Fury head. You'll see we have just a touch less spill than the Fury, but much better distance punch. In fact, this head actually matches the intensity at distance that the X300 Ultra is putting out at a much lower lumen rating. The next head we're going to be firing off here is the KE-2A, where we're picking up even more distance capability at the sacrifice of some spill. Notice the peripheral targets, while visible, are slightly less as compared to the Charlie style head, but the back berm and 100m targets have slightly improved visibility. Now compare this to the Arisaka 600 series body mounted up with the E2XT Malkov device head, and boom. This is the first real light we've looked at with just massively powerful concentration and intensity at distance. Notice though how we don't have any significant spill, so we can see less of the peripheral area than both the KE-2C and KE-2A, both of which also mount to the same body, but we have dramatically improved visibility on the illuminated targets at the 100m line. As we look at more of these modern lights, you'll see a large amount of consideration comes down to how much spill versus how much throw or central beam intensity you desire. Lastly for the 600 series lights, we're looking at an M600 Vampire with the KM2-C head, obviously firing in white light mode. This light has obviously less distance capability than the E2XT we just looked at, and even a touch less than the KE-2A. Its tradeoff also doesn't come in the form of spill either, as you can see the peripheral targets are barely silhouetted. It's sort of a mediocre performer in terms of distance, and less than stellar in terms of peripheral, compared to the other 600 series heads we've just looked at. With that said, it has the capability of outputting infrared light, which can function well with night vision. Before we transition over into the most up-to-date modern lights using the newest power sources, we need to take a stop and look at the Streamlight ProTac II. This light is the least expensive of all the scout lights we're looking at on this video, and although it has a proprietary body, meaning that the head and tail aren't interchangeable readily with Surefire series products, this light just plain works. Strong distance capability, stronger than the Surefire 600 series heads we've looked at thus far, with decent enough spill to at least begin to illuminate the peripheral targets. There are some considerations with this light, respective to the quality of the pressure pads and switches, but in terms of performance, especially at the price point, the ProTac is a solid option. Regrettably, we did not have the larger HLX to demonstrate alongside the ProTac II. And now it's time to get into the brightest and most powerful lights currently on the market. Up until this point, the scout style lights we've looked at have all been powered off of CR123 batteries, but with the advent of better energy sources, we've seen light capability increase from an output perspective recently. The following lights are all running on the newer 18650 or 18350 rechargeable sources. First, we have the Surefire M600 dual fuel. This is actually the highest rated light in terms of raw lumen output that we have here for testing. With that said, the concentration of the dual fuel beam is almost non-existent, with the DF being known as dumping its output almost completely into spill. So you'll see that downrange intensity, while all lit up, isn't very specific. But also take note that both peripheral targets are very visible. The best comparative we have to this light is the X300 Ultra. The dual fuel is basically a brighter X300 Ultra, with a bit more distance throw and similar spill capabilities. This can be a very solid option if lots of spill is the goal. Now let's contrast that against the Cloud Defensive Rain. We have the Micro Rain here, which is operating on the smaller 18350 fuel source. With that said, the light is quite large by the standard of modern weapon lights, and is larger than most of the 18650 source lights we're looking at. With that said, the Micro Rain is an extremely powerful light. You'll notice the crisp illumination on the targets out at 100 meters, in line with the same power on those targets we got out of the Arasaka-Malkoth head combination. However, the spill is much greater than on that device, allowing us to get decent visibility of the peripheral close targets. Less effective in spill compared to the dual fuel, but similar with much greater long range intensity. Anecdotally, the rain tends to throw a warmer light than most of the modern LED heads we've tested. Lastly, let's take a look at the offerings we're demoing from Modlite. Both of these lights are running on the 18650 source. First up is the PLH-V2. The performance of this light, as you can see, is also fantastic. It's right in line with the Micro Rain in terms of capability from what we can see. Similar distance illumination and spill. Our eyes pick up the PLH as maybe just a touch more intense in terms of the ability to throw light at distance, in spite of the statistics being almost identical. Perhaps this has to do with the slightly cooler nature of the light that we referenced a moment ago. The final light here is the Modlite OKW. This is the most intense light we had for demonstration purposes with respect to throw, distance, or otherwise candela rating. You can see that the light completely washes out the IPSC targets out to 75 meters with incredibly intense direct light illumination. With that said, we do still get decent spill as well. Enough to illuminate the closer targets. The trade-off with this light really is with respect to spread of light to illuminate at range. The targets to the left and right of the beam against the back berm are much harder, if not impossible, to see compared to the PLH, Rain, or Dual Fuel. And so there you have it. A look at both how illumination technology has changed and evolved over time, as well as how various modern tools operate uniquely from one another. Even when sharing similar characteristics or physical attributes. And yet, despite having had the chance to perform this test, as well as shoot in low light conditions fairly frequently, we're certainly not experts on the technology, terminology, or tactics. So we wanted to pose the question to you. Do you see value in utilizing weapon mounted lights? Based on the technology we have available today, do you have a preference on which style light or illumination output you prefer? And where do you see lights in their development heading as it relates to small arms in the future? We look forward to hearing from you in the comments below, and until next time, we'll see you on the range. Subscribe to our newsletter at slateblackindustries.com where you can get updates on 9-hole review publications and access the practical accuracy scoreboard to help you argue with people on the internet on which rifle performs better on the practical accuracy course. We maintain this newsletter to be majority gun content with 9-hole reviews updates per every email with less than 33% marketing content. Subscribe today on slateblackindustries.com