I don’t have a professional lumen-measuring device here, but visually, it doesn’t appear as bright as other flashlights claiming 1000 lumens
1 Thank
As a manufacturer, I would only ever state measured values that have been measured with the appropriate measuring equipment. After all, you are selling lights with these values, which are guaranteed product characteristics. And if these values are not met… that would be “unattractive” to say the least.
6 Thanks
To clarify: I’m based in a small office without professional testing equipment, but our factory does have full-scale, certified tools for measurements. I’m also unsure why the lumen specifications were inaccurately stated for this older model from several years ago. You’re absolutely right—advertised specs should always reflect tested performance, and this is non-negotiable. Rest assured, our current models undergo strict verification to avoid such issues. Truly appreciate your feedback, friend! 
1 Thank
It might be a copy/paste holdover
1 Thank
This is our responsibility. We should never display inaccurate information to consumers. We will address this issue rigorously, enforce stricter oversight, and make improvements. Thank you everyone for your oversight.
2 Thanks
For me the most needed specs are brightness, CRI, driver type, candela measurements and runtime graphs.
1 Thank
It would be super cool if manufacturers gave use that data.
I’ve created dimension diagrams of the product using line art. I’m not sure if everyone is satisfied or if there are better suggestions I can improve upon.
1 Thank
If the weight is with a battery, as it should I think, it may be worth indicating it.
Also, but this is really nitpicking, for ‘weight’ (mass) it’s probably sufficient to report it with ±1g precision.
1 Thank
Understood!
When I’m searching for a flashlight, I usually looking for this information in the spec:
Do:
- ) Type of LED, e.g: SFT-25, Nichia 519, … etc.
- ) Color of LED, e.g: 5000K, … etc.
- ) Driver used: buck, boost, FET, … etc.
- ) Max lumens and candela
- ) IPX Rating
- ) Charging possibility e.g: USB-C, powerbank
- ) Battery compatibility, e.g: 21700, 18650 or proprietary battery (some manufacturer didnt explicitely that they use proprietary battery, and that is bad)
- ) Run time table
- ) Used UI
- ) Size, weight
- ) (optional) beamshots
- ) Included accesorries.
Good websites: convoy
Don’t:
1.) Contradicting spec
2.) Not so detailed spec as above
Need to be improved websites: ultrafire 
, wurkkos / sofirn (it seems not all products follow the same spec template)
1 Thank
Thank you for the detailed specifications! I’ll note these down. Best wishes!
Yes. For those lights that you report with fraction of a gram precision (like 87.9 g) it’s probably more realistic and meaningful to round it off to the nearest gram i.e. 88 g or in a fancier notation: (88±1) g
I would advocate reporting total weight with a battery (some light can’t be reported any different as they have battery built in).
I guess the rationale behind it is that although I can always look up the weight of the battery, that takes some work and what most people would really want to know is how heavy a complete light (i.e. with a battery) is.
Got it—I’ll include both (with and without battery)! Thanks for the feedback, kind soul!