The intellectual dishonesty required to defend the product speaks volumes. You had to inflate the price of the SF under the guise of making it a comparable form factor, and then criticized the shortcoming of that hyper specific set up. If you want the product to mimmick the OWL in every way, of course it's going to fail the test of being the OWL, because it is not the OWL.

Not accounted for in this analysis is the extreme modularity in how the Surefire can be mounted given the large amount of after market parts. Not accounted for is any sort of qualitative cost analysis of how the OWL limits your ability to run any sort of laser especially the MAWL which is the cream of the crop, so that might bleed over elsewhere since you now have to work around your light. Not accounted for is the fact the Surefire can interface with dual pressure pads, like Surefires own pad or the TNVC TAPS, that give you the ability to control both your light and laser from a single location which is something the OWL cannot do. Not accounted is lack of ability to take either/or batteries since the OWL only takes one.

But I mean, sure, it's only a few dollars less but has exposed wires and is a terrible light. That's all. Surefire BTFO.

I will reserve my judgement until they are in the hands of end users.  A couple of observations though.  The throw is very good, the light color is meh (at least to me) the beam pattern for anything other than throw looks um...not so good.  It's large and I don't think I am a fan of the mounting system.  I like the flexibility of being able to run the light in an arisaka inline mount with a remote switch.  The video and pics of the OWL just make it look bulky and cumbersome.

Intellectual dishonesty? How about all these 'tons' of people that use DFs in their stock form. I'd love to see pictures of everyone rifle with a DF in complete stock form. With the OEM rail grabber and clicky tail cap.

It's been said multiple times, it's a dedicated white light only not intended to be used in conjuction with LAMs. CD even said it before- if youre using a laser you want to be using the DF or HLX.

Yes, because under the guise of doing an "apples to apples comparison" you use OWL as the criteria for what another item must live up to. You require the light to be offset and, as a result, the activation switch must be left in line. Using the stock clicky cap you can achieve the momentary / constant on functionality, but by requiring the pad to be left in line despite the light offset you require a an added cost to achieve this. In simple terms, you have demanded both lights be the OWL, and only one light can be the OWL, since only one light is the OWL.

Let us reverse the meme - let us say the standard to meet is the Surefire. I want to compare equal functions. I demand the light be left in line with the rail, so 12/3/6/9 mounting position, which is stock Surefire. Well, achieving this with the OWL is incredibly hard, and would require some weird amalgamation of offset mounts and adapters to frankenstein it. But that is all added cost on the 380 dollar light, and this is a cost that is not present on the out of the box Surefire. So now we're over 400 dollars and a completely janked frankenstein mounting... for something I can achieve at 200 dollars. The light is already out of the running, before we have got to anything else.

This second comparison sounds rediculous, and that's because it is. But the first comparison is also rediculous because it is doing exactly the same thing. Any feature that gives the edge to the OWL has value and must be met: but any feature that gives the edge to Surefire is ignored and left out.

In this post you even continue to defend it demanding photos of high speed guys using the stock light to defend this comparison since, I guess no professionals would use a stock Surefire? Okay thats a fine statement on it's own. But then you also state how CD themselves says anyone using IR lasers shouldn't use the OWL at all. So your comparison of a tricked out Surefire is fair because the OWL is the standard we must meet, but anyone using all those accessories you say are necessary on the Surefire to match the OWL wouldn't use the OWL itself. You want to have your cake and eat it too here - you want to condemn the Surefire for requiring an extra mount but ascribe no positive value to the fact that mount will give you a fully customized position exactly where you want it to be so it does not interfere with other systems you may have.

The defense of the OWL is actually incredibly simple: Do you want a light that does exactly what the OWL does, or can accept the compromise(s)? If so, get the OWL, since it's the best at the specific thing it does. If not, there are better solutions out there. Any defense of the OWL to try and make it look like the objectively better deal (feature or cost) on the whole requires mental gymnastics.

You are making this utterly ridiculous.

Here is my HD rifle. I don't intend to use one of my lasers on it so my light is in my 'standard' configuration. It's a DF at the 1 o'clock in an offset mount and a 12 o'clock pressure switch mount position. Previously I had an HLX in the same position.

The reason my light and switch are in these positions is because I've made how I grip my rifle the priority and have moved accessories around that to match up. Not the other way around, why would you purposely use something less ergonomic?
20181010_105800-1 by B A, on Flickr

But it's mental gymnastics to demand my lights be configured for my setup. Do you see how a DF in stock form could possibly be mounted and achieve the same ergonomics? No, you can't. Not without mounting and switch pieces.

Nevermind the performance and run time claims of the OWL surpassing the DF and HLX. I try and stay away from such claims because with the exception of the Practical Tactical video, we only have CD to go off of. Once there are more OWLs in hands we can really argue the merits of its performance. I'll be posting comparisons of all 3 once I have my OWL.

I'm reading over his comments about the Surefire and don't see anywhere that he claimed you can't use the Surefire out of the box.

I don't have to justify a $389 price tag as I was used to over $500 price tags with the old Surefire M900 VFG integrated weapon light.

I also know what the components cost to have a quality protected rail-grabber tape switch and tailcap with a light that has 1200 lumens or more.

The issue is you are making your set up, the set up. When you state you quote unquote you also have to buy X Y Z accessories, then when challenged on this you start making claims that cool guys need X Y Z as well and you need photos of anyone running anything different - the very direct implication is that you need these or you are just wrong.

The picture of your HD Rifle is a nice touch because I'm gonna take a guess you have posted it in the various threads, so I'm sure you've also seen the numerous rifles there with all the various lights mounted at 1 w/ standard push/click tailcaps.

If you came into this thread going "Hey, well I need my weapon light to do A, B and C, and it seems like the OWL is the perfect light for me. This is my personal preference and you might require a different solution if you require it to do something else" then we'd be all gravy. But you didn't, you came in here with "have to buy" and "exposed wiring."

A - lot bigger / thicker than I expected, but not too bad (I imagine the lens geometry and the assembly method play into that).

B - I heard 50K candela and the beam hot spot shots look good

C - Thats a much warmer color light than I had expected

D - Don't have any rifles I would mount this on currently, would need one with a longer rail first

Overall though, not sure I'd choose an OWL over a DF myself, mostly due to cost, secondly due to placement limits.  But it looks like it may work well for a lot of folks, hope they continue to do well.

Uh, thousands and thousands of end users. Go look at pic threads on this very sight.

To suggest people run switches over clicky  tail caps by some large amount is not based in any kind of factual basis.

It comes down to mission and personal preference. But even then it still is irrelevant and a distraction type argument event.

The Surefire operates just fine out of the box for $199. The end. There is no disputing that.

And by function I’m speaking theoretically of course. Unless you get two pos’s like me. Fuckin suckfire.

No you see something you like and are trying to defend it in the face of logic.

And yes, my SF is in the same exact spot as yours and I don’t run any switches at all. C clamp grip, large hands.

Like he said, the owl may very well be perfect for you. And that’s great

But guys are running around trying to justify the cost by making irrational comparisons and those of us who are looking at this logically are left scratching our heads.

As admitting by CD, this is a very specific light for a very specific setup and does not work well or at all with fairly common other setups.

Therefore buyers will pay for top dollar for it.

And I’m cool with that. Again, I just don’t get the illogical fascination with justifying the price. Just admit it. It’s expensive. And especially don’t tell me my light can’t accomplish what this can without add on X, Y, and Z when I’m accomplishing that very function with those add ons and so are many others.

I don’t get why this is so hard. Stop saying we “need” to add on an extra tail cap and switch to the Surefire for a fair comparison. No. No we don’t.

They both mount to rail out of the box, yes?
The both can be activated, out of the box, once mounted, yes?

One has significantly more candela, yes?
One has a very specific mounting solution which could very fucking sweet with the right setup, yes?

One is $199, yes?
One is being advertised at $389, yes?

That’s it. Facts. Nothing more. Nothing less.

edited

Really weird how you can make the claim OWL's are the Surefire successor and less prone to breakage before they are even out.

But yeah I guess the guy being critically honest about how he is dissatisfied with Surefire's customer service to the point where he is willing to just buy different lights is the Surefire fanboy willing to defend them at all costs.

So what does the "to compete" phrase mean to you exactly?

Notice I did not claim that the OWL was the SF successor and made no comment on the OWL's resistance to breakage. However, given some really basic research you can see that Cloud, thinks their light is pretty damn tough. I know, without a doubt, that none of my Surefires would survive what they have been doing to their test OWLs.

edited

edited

I have the same set up HLX with the cloud switch mount on 3 rifles.  Never had any issue with them at all.

Lights are already all so cheap I don't see how people get so hung up on costs.

Especially once I got the heads up on the 199 M600DFs.  Felt dumb paying abut 40 more for my initial one after that was revealed.

If the OWL lives up to the hype it will be worth it too although the original 299 price seemed much more of a bargain.

I like that it comes with a charger, batteries and a case. Though the case is kind of a eh since the light will stay on the rifle once it’s mounted.  Good to see competition and innovation regardless.  The price point probably reflects their time in R&D and that they have a one off.  Market will dictate.

My light setup is similar in functionality. Individual parts add up quick and with the above included, I’d probably break even.

edited

edited

Actually I think the niche light thing is sort of intrinsic to the design. Whether people defending it realize it or have to come to the conclusion after being challenged on it, I don’t think anyone could ever really defend it as the best light overall in its price range. The very first time I saw it I immediately realized there is no running a laser with this (without working everything around the light of course) - and while the future for weapon lights may very well be 18650 right now everything is running on 123s so it’s just an extra battery to carry around. That’s a huge pain if you want to carry as few types of batteries as possible.

It seems very much like a No NVG LEO and casual shooter sort of light, and anything else is a stretch. To CD’s defense I don’t think I ever saw them claim otherwise, and all they would have had to do is design a tail cap for a SF or insight plug and suddenly the light has more utility as an all around light. Come to think of it I don’t know why they didn’t do that. Even allowing it to run on 2 123s like the DF would have been very helpful in many ways.

Dish out warnings as deemed necessary. Don't let individuals ruin threads.

I've personally had more issues with Surefire lights than my Streamlights. I now use exclusively Streamlight products with zero issues

I've broken several Surefire lights.  Anything mechanical will break.  Sometimes i'm not surprised when I break things.  Not so with the Surefire lights I broke.  Should not have happened.  It was just a junk product that they had to fix.  Other Surefire lights I own are tanks and i've yet to break them.  I guess any company can make a dud.

I’ve been following the OWL for the last couple of months and so far it looks like a solid choice. The biggest concern that I have is not being able to use CR123 cells.

For those of us complaining about the price, Cloud Defensive is now running a trade in program, you send them ANY weapon light and they'll give you 25% off of a new OWL.

https://clouddefensive.com/trade-in/

I see they released the ratings now.  I thought they said the lumens would be higher?

It’s just lumens. Professionals don’t care about lumens, they care about candela. *per clouds website

Just seems way to heavy to me. I’ll be paying attention to what they bring out though.

I want both.  Good hotspot with good spill.

I do too. I like the warm color the OWL provides. I’ll probably end up with one but it does seem heavy for the money. I like my lights to be sub 7 Oz with the mount.  But then again, I am a big fan of single cell scout lights on most things

The newer version is way bigger than I thought it would be, but that size comes with performance advantages for sure.

I like the size of the earlier models I've seen.

I can't stand excessive protrusions from the handguard getting in and out of vehicles, working in and out of rooms, tight spaces, carrying, etc.

Some candela comparisons:

Where are all the reviews?

Still hasn't shipped. Likely going out within the next few weeks.

The warmer LED may or may not have a noticable impact, but it's a 1200 lumen light that is optimized for range. There is no space magic fueling the light. In fact it feels like it's sort of the opposite - when they talked so much about needing 18650 to fuel it and the high candella everyone thought we might be pushing 2,000 lumens here. For a 1,200 lumen light it still confuses me why it can't take 123's just like it's Streamlight and Surefire brothers.

I would have no proble getting the OWL if it was going to be used only on an 11.5 or the MK18 upper. Having an integrated switch limits where you can put the light and have comfortable access to it. just my 2 cents

Inforce doing something similar...?

Seems smaller and maybe less expensive than the OWL. 1500 lumens, $229 MSRP, Q2 2019 predicted availability.

http://soldiersystems.net/2019/02/04/inforce-launches-new-rifle-mounted-light/

Have these even shipped yet?

This has my interest...

I’d never buy an OWL.

1) completely unproven, dubious, outlandish claims.
2) crowd sourced R&D and T&E doesn’t inspire confidence.
3) over a year later and they still haven’t shipped. Well, they claim they started shipping a month ago but nobody has seen theirs.
4) openly douchey to impatient customers on social media- even blocking many who post inquiring about wait times and criticizing them for repeatedly breaking promises.
5) ergonomics look questionable to say the least.
6) touted as a serious use light but is incompatible with 100% of IR lasers unless you’re willing to accept excessively cumbersome ergonomics.
7) light is enormous, in a world where people are increasingly seeking solutions for streamlined, lightweight setups.
8) high CRI tint is questionable, there’s nothing about warmer tints that “penetrates photonic barriers better”. All it does is bring out the green and magenta, and mutes the blue and yellow in the spectrum which can actually cause problems with image contrast.
9) still no official published stats, and again, any claims can’t be proven.
10) picatinny only in 2019...wtf?
11) 18650 only... generally a bad choice since it’s more difficult to carry spares and you obviously won’t be toting a charger around.
12) “bUt MuH tOoLlEsS mOuNt!” ...nobody cares, nobody asked for that, and it solves a problem that never existed.

Overall, there’s more that looks bad about this product than good.

It’s an all around no for me. Just my .02

Question from the peanut gallery: Is there not a standard measurement for candela?

Cloud Defensive is claiming 1500 lumens and 16,000 candela

Compare that with M600DF and HL-X (per their websites)
M600: 5800
HL-X: 27,000

Those numbers seem really far apart.

All Candella does is imply the beam divergence. There is no magic here.  CD states the OWL outputs 1200 lumens, and has a really high Candella vs the 1500 lumen Surefire. In the simplest of terms, it's a tighter beam with less flood. Watching their video closely shows this as well. They just built a really tight beam whereas both Surefire and Streamlight feel content to throw some of those lumens around to the side.

Throwing a 5mw green laser pointer with a 1.5 MRAD beam divergence into a calculator returns 2 million candella. Steiner lasers are rectangular, at 0.5 width and 1.5 length, so it would be brighter than that.

I was the biggest critic of it here until you. I don't think you are giving it a whole lot of credit, but yeah it's a really niche product. Seems odd they decided not to let it run off 123's. Seems odd it had no pressure pad compatibility (I would trade out toolless tail cap for a ported tailcap instantly). Seems REALLY odd they would design a light they outright say is designed not to be used with lasers at all. But really if you got an SBR and need a light that will throw really, really far, this seems like an okay option.

There is a lot of downsides to it and this light pretty much exists as the "You don't have NODS and you want to build the rifle around using me" light. It's like the light itself is arrogant.

The numbers initially listed for the M600DF were wrong, here’s the numbers from the manual.

Attached File


Performance between the DF and OWL should be very similar.

You can’t be a “niche product” (read: one trick pony) and be the best all around light like they tout it to be

Looks interesting but the fact that the switch is one unit causes a logistical problem. Maybe I want the light further forward or back so that I can activate the switch with both hands. Maybe the spot that the mount fits on my top rail makes it so that the light doesn't clear the front of the rail. What happens when the switch or the light goes bad? With a traditional tapeswitch, you pop your clicky tailcap back on and you're back in business. With this, you're out a light.

This isn't a proven product and I'm not an early adopter of many things, so this isn't really for me. Not to mention, I can resell a SF light down the line for a significant percentage of what I paid new. Probably not going to be the case with this one just because it's not a SF or SL. Cool product though - I'm sure that it checks some boxes for a lot of people and it's always good to have quality competition in any market.

Surefires are expensive, but they are still basically the only name in town for IR/white light heads that have pressure switches to work with laser devices.

Paul Kim's IR and White light is in the wild now so this isn't exactly true. Even then if you have a half decent illuminator in your laser box you don't really need an IR head these days.

This is off topic to the OWL discussion so I'm going to keep it brief. Check @pk_designlab on the 'Gram cause he's been posting it there.

That's my go to setup. HL-X with a Cloud Defensive tape switch mount and some means to offset and tuck the light into handguard. For white light I prefer this to a Surefire. Not that SureFire is bad, but this setup is economical and still performs. I dont run NV yet, but on my clone rifle I do run an IR capable SureFire. Some day... but that's really the only time I've felt the need to venture into Surefire land.

To the best of my knowledge, PK has a one year warranty. While I probably won’t need said warranty, because PK knows his stuff, I’ve had a Surefire M952V (flickering) and Streamlight TLR-1 HL (broken tail cap) fail within days of each other. It was rare. It was odd.

But to me, it changed lots of things.

I’m curious about the OWL and would like to give it a shot. It’s not perfect but it looks damn durable.