So I decided to test "Reverse Polarity Protection" today on the Spark SG3-CW

Guess how it went? Yesterday I received two lights for review in the mail- really out of the blue. I had no idea they were coming. They were really nice and feverishly I began testing them out. In the manual I noticed it said reverse polarity protection (in so many words) on both of the lights. So I decided to take the manufacturer up on it- and test it out on one light. I only had it enabled for half a second but the light ran really bright. I took it out and flipped the battery back to normal. Anyway instead of a 5 mode light, now it’s a two mode light. I’ve tried 4 batteries and the light behaves the same with all of them.

Oh well.

i’m guessing you could make a paypal claim, doesn’t work as advertised or whatever the legal jargon is, though the fact it lit up is very surprising to me

These are both review samples of fairly new lights. I am out Zero dollars.

Shouldn't test procedure be to test w/ correct polarity first? How do you know reversing polarity caused it to only have 2 modes? It may have come that way.

Umm… why would you assume I put the battery backwards, on purpose, the very first time I turned on the light? Of course, I tested it very thoroughly (correctly) ALL day yesterday before deciding on a whim to try this today. I used it for hours yesterday without a single hiccup. This problem came up after I decided to test it. I thought it was quite strange that the light lit up. The light has an electronic switch, and the bizarre thing was it came on as I was tightening the tailcap. On electronic switches I’ve tested after you lock it out, it reverts to the off mode, once you unlock (tighten) back the cap.

that leads to my second suggestion, replace the driver

Not on this light. This ain’t a budget light xxx/fire clone.

Well at least you can put this data in your review about the samples to save any buyer from making the mistake! It’s a pity it doesn’t work as manufacturer states but this is one of the things I hope a reviewer tests when reviewing samples. It would be a different matter if you bought them.

Sorry, that's what it sounded like in the OP. Received FLs>started testing>noted polarity protection in manual>inserted battery reversed

I’m not going to test the other one. The problem is, now I can’t do any runtime tests on the second light. So I’m not sure how I am going to give it a full review. Oh well. I will definitely note this in the review. Anyway, I’ve contacted the manufacturer.

Ahh, how annoying! >.< Hopefully they’ll take note of this and also send you a replacement for review.

I’m not going to hold my breath.

Your review can reflect that the light doesn’t have an important feature so should not be used by non flashaholics and that the manufacturer may have mislabeled it, its defective or a design flaw

Yep. It’s definitely not a gift for non-flashaholics or even absent minded ones. It sucks that a light can be damaged so easily.

Well if it’s lost the blinkies then it’s an improvement. :slight_smile:

It didn’t have any! I know, that sounds hard to believe. 5 modes and no blinky!

Looking forward to the review, it will have real data

I know it’s your thing, so Thanks! At least I didn’t pay for it.

Hope its not- Fenix PD35-. I screwed my PD32 once while unknowingly inserting the battery the wrong way round the last time.

It’s a 14500/AA light with 5 modes. But since it’s a headlamp, I figure runtimes are very important. Especially since the manufacturer doesn’t say whether or not the runtimes are for 14500, Nimh, or alkalines.