Below is an Amazon link to a ceramic body single LED flashlight claiming 2,500,000 Lumens output and 20 watts power draw, totally incompatible claims. List price of $69.99 and offering a 30% discount so $48.99. Additionally, of course, a ceramic body is going to retain heat massively. IMO almost the most ridiculous light claim I have ever seen. None of the 4 reviews posted so far indicate that they have actually bought the light.
1 Thank
Having a little bit of insight in the percentage of female members on BLF, I find it mind blowing that the top four reviews for a 2.5 Megalumens flashlight have been written by a female (name?). A galactic Death Star in the palm of your manicured hand 
1 Thank
It’s got the “Latest XHP160.9” and it shines for “4000 meet” and is “Sturdy Soild”.
I think they forgot the decimal, it should have been 250.0000.
1 Thank
I think they used Google Translate for the text and forgot to add some Ozempic for the numbers.
1 Thank
Is it taking the world by storm?
Is everyone talking about it?
Does the government and military not want you to have one?
YouTube torch adverts are full of BS claims such as the examples above. Many adverts are plain fraudulent.
2 Thanks
I figure 2.5 million lumens would be a death ray as well as a hand grenade for the holder of the light. Even at 200 lumens per watt (unlikely) I want that battery which is good for circa 12,500 watts output at 4.2 volts. Only circa 3000 amps! Every EV maker wants that battery. Instant vaporization of the light and the user’s hand at least. Also how long to charge the battery via the listed USB C input? Every statement is a lie so far as I can tell.
1 Thank
I don’t own and will not buy the light, so instead here is my review of the Amazon listing:
Title / Description - 4 out of 5
The title is painfully long to read, as listing titles for absurdly exaggerated products should be, with good use of of misleading buzzwords like “laser,” but it makes me confused if this flashlight is suitable for camping, or for home emergencies, or for both. What if I have an emergency while camping?
The description has a reasonable number of grammar mistakes and typos - enough to be conspicuous and slightly amusing, although it falls short of class-leading.
Brand Name - 2 out of 3
Clearly made up, which I like, but they failed to follow the standard format of one word or abbreviation implying a desirable quality or metaphor (eg - Atomic) and one word or abbreviation implying function (eg - Beam). They honestly were very close - “Grentay” could have been changed to “GentRay” and I would have given them full points.
Price - 3 out of 5
Price is an important deciding factor. The list price should be higher, and there should be a percentage discount in addition to forcing the user to click multiple coupons to get the intended sales price. Having just one coupon shows lack of effort to pretend the light is worth far more than the final price, instead of the reality of a value a tiny fraction of the final price.
Specifications - 10 out of 10
The claimed performance is also highly important. 2.5 million lumens from 20 Watts is near record-setting BS, but that alone was not enough to get full points here. They also not only ripped off Cree’s LED naming format, and iterated it beyond anything Cree actually makes (XHP160), but also iteratied the sub-version (.9). I also appreciate the usual claims of IP67 sealing, and comparison to car headlights.
I almost deducted a point for failing to use the phrase “aircraft grade aluminum,” but I double-checked and found I simply had overlooked that claim.
Additionally, this is the first flashlight I have seen in its class to claim to have a ceramic coating. Note: if I later find out this is a real ceramic coating, and not a cheap white paint, I will update my review to deduct 1 point for failure to exaggerate to the maximum degree possible.
Product Photos - 8 out of 10
Good overall showing here. Most of the in-use photos are easily recognizable as being copied from the listings of numerous other, similar lights. The images of the light itself have an appropriately photoshopped vibe, as it if is an image of one of the numerous black-colored copies of this design, but simply made to look white using the brightness slider.
I did appreciate the images of people supposed to be using the flashlight that not only were clearly photoshopped (shadows didn’t match, grip is awkward), but also were absurdly large. However, product listings in this category also usually include photos where you can more easily tell the individual is holding a different product than the listing is for. Lastly, where are the AI generated images? We’re in 2025 now! Modern customers get a significant portion of their entertainment from product listings looking for common AI-generated artifacts.
Reviews - 3 out of 5
To give credit where it’s due, these are competently written fake reviews, but there are only 4 of them at the time of my review. Also, the variety is lacking. The standard formula of (a) Enthusiastic opening statement (“takes the cake”, “gem”, “go-to tool”, “amazed”) + (b) Rephrasing parts of the product listing + (c) Short story pretending to have used the product is reasonably well-executed here, but getting stale. Statistics help illustrate this: with a mean and standard deviation for review length of 101 words +/- a mere 3.9 words, it really looks like they’re relying on a review generator not much more sophisticated than Mad Libs. This is early-2010’s fake review technology! Again, AI could be useful here, giving us lengthy reviews that are bizarrely over-enthusiastic about the product mixed in with short reviews that seem to miss the point (eg - My boyfriend gave me this flashlight for Christmas, and it’s super cute and goes with any outfit").
Note: I did not deduct any points for failure to include glaring grammar mistakes or typos in the reviews, but I did find it interesting how much better the quality of writing in the reviews was compared to the listing itself.
Overall - 27 out of 33 = 4.1 stars
2 Thanks
It’s what we deserve.
Rooting for the Comet!
I alerted Amazon to problems with the listing when I first spotted it and when I just tried to do a negative review I received the following notification.
Amazon has noticed unusual reviewing activity on this product. Due to this activity, we have limited this product to verified purchase reviews.
2 Thanks
It’s so bright that there isn’t even a low mode, only medium and high!
Most of the reviews refer to the light as being made from ceramic, where in its description it’s referred to as “ceramic-white” and further down it states that it’s made from aluminium. This leads me to believe that the writers of the reviews are either dumb as rocks or they haven’t actually bought the thing.
3 Thanks
I’m going with “dumb as rocks”.
1 Thank
You need to get yourself over to AliExpress where the 100,000,000 lumen lights are…
1 Thank
Well, that looks like it’d be the perfect EDC light!
1 Thank
Gee! From only three 21700 batteries or the equivalent? The most efficient LEDs in the galaxy, imported from Krypton by Superman maybe!
1 Thank
You just insulted rocks intelligence. Also note that none of the reviews are listed as being posted by Amazon purchasers. Reviews that are from Amazon purchasers are typically marked “Verified Purchase” in red in the header.
1 Thank
The reviews are fake. Notice they are all the same length and follow the same writing structure.
3 Thanks
There’s not many people out there bothering to test lights that wildly exaggerate their specs, but Torque Test Channel periodically takes a break from testing power tools to test a group of flashlights in a calibrated integrating sphere.
Here’s one where he tests ~1 million lumen Amazon flashlights as well as the Wurkkos TS32. The results are what you would expect.
2 Thanks
Thanks. Interesting and basically about what I expected based on the below article from 1lumen. ONE tested no name light actually hit 2000+ lumens output rather than the claimed one million or so lumens. All the rest were worse. Outputs less than 1% of claimed and frequently closer to 0.1% of claimed. Ridiculous lying. Apparently their philosophy is if you are going to lie then make it a big one.
1 Thank
And here is one on Amazon with a headline that claims 10 million Lumens. Read further down in the description and it claims 5000 lumens on high with a run time of 6 hours on high or 5157 Lumens claimed listed in the photos. Also claims a 10,000 mah battery And two very different length dimensions listed, 6.7 inches and 10.7 inches! Such great consistency in one posting. Who knows what you will receive.