Zebralight SC64c LE with LH351D NOT high CRI

Bob_Mcbob got several of these bad lights half a year ago: bob_mcbob comments on Just got a sc64LE with a great tint but not great cri?

Zebralight went downwards after the MkIII generation.

Very interesting Rayoui. Have you contacted ZebraLight about it yet? Curious to know their response.

Mine is absolutely high-CRI (have numerous other confirmed 90+ Ra LH351Ds to compare to) but was purchased used and not sure of the original purchase date. Shiny anodizing on mine, while some batches of the SC64 have been more matte/satin.

I sent them a message with a detailed explanation of my findings and I got a generic automated RMA message instructing me to return the lights with a note describing the problem.

I’m going to send both lights back to them but I’m mostly expecting to receive replacements with the same issue.

any updates?

I somehow missed this thread when it was originally posted. Like SammysHP mentioned, both batches of LEs I ordered in November and December arrived with CRI 70 LEDs. I separately ordered an LE from a US dealer at the end of March, and it also had a CRI 70 LED. Someone from Reddit emailed Zebralight to ask about this and was told my lights were intentionally shipped with CRI 70 LEDs because they ran low on the correct ones and knew I would be swapping them; they also “don’t think” they were installed in any other lights unless something was “somehow mixed up during the production process”.

They certainly never informed me they were sending me CRI 70 lights, and now we have three confirmed cases of other CRI 70 lights in the wild including a completely separate model, plus multiple likely suspects. Not good Zebralight, not good. Were you able to get a satisfactory resolution, OP?

I contacted them and received a generic reply instructing me to send the defective lights back along with a note describing the issue and that it would be a 8-12 week turnaround time. I sent both lights (the LE and an H503c with the same problem) along with a detailed report including my spectrometer measurements.

I love my Zebralights but this kind of puts a bad taste in my mouth. Seems like someone might have ordered the wrong LEDs and now they’re trying to get rid of them by distributing them to unsuspecting customers. If they are doing it purposely, it may actually be a crime.

I’ll update again once I receive replacements or any communication from Zebralight.

zebralightclassaction2021.com

They should turn them around faster than that for you.

ZebraLight needs to get in front of this.

Zebralight does seem to have gone downhill.

Also I don’t think they have released any new lights in 2 or 3 years. That’s not the sign of a healthy manufacturer. I wonder if they’re on the way out.

Zebra is not the only light with an unexpected
Low CRI LH351D 4000k 70 CRI substitution

Jetbeam RRT-01 219c 4000k is 70 CRI

Lumintop FWAA 219c 5000k is also 70 CRI

we are lucky to have people sharing spectrometer tests

imo, Zebralights are a dying breed, catch one while you can….
get a McBob in High CRI.

I don’t have a spectrometer, so all I can do is compare my lights to each other.
I have a recently bought Sofirn D25L with twin LH351D 5000K emitters.
I bought my Zebralight SC64c LE with LH351D 4000K emitter back in 2019.
Side-by-side, the D25L shows a clean neutral tint, while the SC64c LE reflects warmer, though definitely not as warm as the 219B R9080 sw35 emitter in my TH20. So, comparatively it feels right.

I get the design mantra of Zebralight. They hone a design over time and try not to change it much. What works should keep working, especially for a relatively simple tool like a flashlight. But Zebralight has been been notoriously slow on the emitter front. And what more of a nod-wink to that than by their provision of the newer Samsung LH351D emitter as a “limited edition.” (it has been for sale going on nearly 3 years now). You definitely get “less bang for the buck” with Zebralight, when it comes to technology. But you pay more for the carefully cultivated designs of their lights. Their recessed rubber switches with brushed steel bezel surround are legendary. And they’re RUGGED. Many years back I’d seen photos of user lights that were heavily scratched and with much anodizing missing… but working perfectly. The potted electronics means they’re going to hold up better to repeated knocks.

But frankly, with this kind of business mantra (slow but careful evolution), a company like Zebralight should be nitpicky as all hell about their emitter bin quality. Any deviations set aside for “scrap” or “one-off” applications. If a flashlight is being sold as high-CRI, it sure better be just that. It’s sad to see people now finding Zebralight slipping up in this dept. If this keeps up, I don’t see Zebralight surviving. There’s too many other companies out now making VERY competitive flashlights. The once coveted unique Zebralight programming interface is now ancient history when compared against something like Anduril. Would Zebralight ever go so far as to put out an Anduril light? I doubt it…

Not true.

The key word here is “substitution”.

  • The 219c Jetbeam RRT-01 and the Lumintop 5000K FWAA 219c indeed both use low CRI leds … but technically, those are not substitutions. This is because those lights were never advertised or sold as having high CRI leds. The purchaser might have hoped the manufacturer would use high CRI, but the manufacturer never claimed they did so.
  • In contrast, the Zebralight SC64 LE was originally sold with a 90 CRI led. And more importantly, it is advertised to this day on Zebralight’s website as having “Color Rendering Index: 90+” But what Zebralight is now selling is actually only CRI 70. The Zebralight is a true bait and switch. They substituted an inferior LED and are not selling what they say they are.

It’s even worse than that. From a modder’s perspective, changing the LED in a RRT-01 or FWAA is much easier than changing the LED in a Zebralight.

I understand Zebralight had supply issues and weren’t able to acquire sufficient stock of 90 CRI LH351D. That happens. Especially with COVID supply issues. But what Zebralight should have done when they changed the LED is stop advertising the LE as having 90+ CRI on their website. A company like Zebralight should at least have accurate information on their website.

Yes, the potted electronics of the Zebralight models means it’s a major bear to replace an LED. I know it’s a cost cutting measure to just pack it all up in potting material and leave it up to “send us your light if your LED ever fails, and we’ll replace it for a nominal fee.” Last I heard, it costs almost as much as a new light for that service, so… yeah. Not good.

mistake or not, it's wrong to give customers something other than what they paid for.

really?

can you please name another company (and a specific model if possible) that competes with ZL overall in build quality, driver efficiency, programmability, UX, and price? genuinely asking because i'd like some flashlight variety in my life, but i haven't found something i like more despite looking pretty hard.

i "almost" bought these but didn't:

  • emisar (e.g. DS4V2): i love the variety of emitter options, but perhaps most importantly, the driver efficiency isn't there. this is the main overall reason why i believe it's not competitive with ZL. build quality isn't as good, either. not potted and not unibody are also issues, but i understand why some wouldn't want that for ease of modding. i think anduril is worthy of consideration, but i think i would prefer ZL's firmware more because i only want to use my own preset output levels that give predictable runtime. not interested in ramping or "fun" features. still, i would have to use it to know for sure, and i've never used it.
  • overready boss: not exactly sure how build quality compares. for the price, i hope it's better than ZL. the driver should be pretty efficient, but no clue about overall reliability since there are fewer of them in the wild. as far as i'm concerned, it has by far the most advanced firmware out there. the only issue for me is price.
  • Lux-RC (various models): they make the drivers for overready boss, and their lights are even more exotic and impressive. the price is way worse, however. i could never justify buying one of these, but i would love to have one.

Of course, such a consideration is always subjective. ZL does fulfill a very specific niche. Does everyone need every single element of that niche to be precisely their way? Not necessarily.

These days, Nitecore, Fenix and Olight are making seriously solid, rugged tactical flashlights that can give Zebralight a run for its money in terms of build quality, materials, and emitter choice. Of course, it depends upon the model, because Nitecore, Fenix and Olight offer cheapies too.

Emisar and Oveready Boss are smaller niche / custom flashlight builders. So, I don’t think they’re fair to compare.

By the competition, it doesn’t mean the entire brand has to be better. But take a look at something like the Lumintop FW1A. A single emitter reflector flashlight with Anduril UI. Very solid light, overall. Superior UI to ZL. Pretty much half the cost of an SC64, with discounts applied. ZL is never discounted, BTW.

I haven’t yet tried emitter swapping in a Zebra, but I’ve read about it. From what I’ve read:

  • The first challenge is the lens retaining ring. It’s press fit and flush with the glass. To remove, you have to press the lens inwards as much as possible while inserting the edge of a knife or thin screwdriver so you can lever up the ring. This risks damaging or destroying the lens, and if it shatters while working on it, possibly damaging the reflector. Additionally, press-fit rings like this really aren’t meant to be removed. There is a chance it might erode the socket in the aluminum head. If that happens, it might not stay in place if the light is dropped.
  • The second challenge is the single board containing driver and emitter. In order to make for the most compact possible light, All Zebra flashlights since the SC600 II do not use a separate star. Instead, they have a single board that contains both the driver and emitter. Heating up the entire board uniformly risks other components falling off when you try to loosen the solder on the emitter. This rules out many common reflow methods. The best way to reflow the emitter on these lights is probably a heat gun on a solder reflow station with a small tip that just covers the emitter. Withe driver out of the light, put the nozzle right over the emitter and turn it on until the solder loosens. Then use tweezers to life off the emitter. This minimizes the chance other parts will come off the driver.
  • Also note that because there is no separate star, you’re pretty much limited to the same size and voltage emitter as the light came with. Forget about swapping an XM footprint emitter onto an LE with XP emitter footprint.
  • The potting compound. From what I’ve read, the potting compound used on Zebras is a soft silicone that can be easily removed without damaging the underlying components. I don’t expect this to be a big roadblock to changing the emitter. And in any event, the silicone can probably be ignored since it isn’t on the part you’re trying to reflow (the emitter). As long as you can get to the screws to remove the driver you should be fine.

I’ve successfully swapped the emitter on a DQG Tiny IV, a light that also used a single board with no separate star. Based on that experience I might give it a try on one of my broken Zebras. I don’t think I want to send a broken Zebra back to the manufacturer for service, because I’m not confident they’ll still be around for the long haul.

However, maybe 10 years ago I did send back a defective Zebra for repair. They did repair it and I received the fully functioning light back 3 months later. So I know their service used to be good. I do not know if it still is.

I bought mine from Nkon in May of 2020, it was cheaper that way but took forever. I’ll compare it to my YLP. Now I’m curious lol.matte finish, I prefer my shiny 64w hi lol.