This new flashlight at DX looks very similar to Nitecore EA4,

Nitecore was enforcing their Minimum Advertised Price policy with certain vendors, which I believe is perfectly legal, but which some members don’t agree with.

From my point of view, Nitecore is perfectly within their right to do this since it’s not illegal (I believe) and presumably the vendors they contacted agreed to the terms in the first place.

I don’t see purchasing from Nitecore is any worse ethically etc etc than purchasing from a company known to copy other companies designs and list overly inflated specs. But hey, different strokes for different folks.

I feel the same way, Chloe. MAP is a common issue with most things electronic, including flashlights. I shop all the time for hardware as a network admin and think nothing of having to "click here" to view the price in the cart. Most companies have MAP, it's really no biggie and a standard practice. Fasttech can still save you money with a simple code at checkout to give you the lower unadvertised price. A good light is a good light. I couldn't care less about MAP practices. They have to do it to keep their retailers happy. Without them they'd have nothing.

I have to say I dislike minimum selling price policies but it is common in some industries like the hifi industry for example. If the manufacturer thinks they have a premium product they often dont want to see it heavily discounted. I dont agree with it though.

I don’t like nitecore because of the ea4/8 issues and my own i4 experience.

Quality battery chargers should not charge two cells then shock the user through the negative terminal and then promptly blow up……The thought occurs, what would have happened if it had reverse charged an 18650 to the point of vent with flame?

Then you have the map debacle, nitecore can go whistle as far as I’m concerned.

Sounds like the i4 got confused during its self-test. “Am I a charger, or an IED?!! I don’t know!!”

Seemed to me it was not just the use of MAP, which is legal, but how Nitecore handled it/enforced it with some vendors and forum members. All technically probably legal, but ethically not very reassuring.

There is also the cluster-eff with Jetbeam and the questionable nature of their relationship. There is blatant “sharing” of designs between them.

Add in the EA8 teardown findings, and many have been pretty turned off by the brand in general. Overpriced with fancy branding, but really not that well built for the price.

Take it all how you want. Vote with your wallet. Talk is cheap.

I was really hopping for a clone of the ea4 to use it as a host, and in fact yesterday I was searching all over for one…

So is the switch really a clicky (I don’t like electronic switches so much on flashlights)…???

I hope for a review and tear down soon enough and I also hope fasttech will carry this light at a lower price…

Lets see…

link is dead

No more so than the millions of laptops, netbooks, and cordless drills that use the same setup. I’d certainly suggest protected cells just to error on the side of caution, but its far from being a scary setup.


OK, then I’m buying it and sending it to you.Wink

Actually I just bought an EA4W and this Tr-A9, so I can do a comparison. The TR-A9 is coming from DX, so maybe in three months (if I am lucky), I will actually get it. The EA4W is coming from IS, so it probably will be here on Wed. I do not know if I can hold out till the TR-A9 comes, before hacking the EA4W. Patience is not one of my virtues.YellSurprised

Anyhow, I will document the EA4 well, just in case, so I can compare beam shots and the guts, sometime in the future.

Oh that would be awesome. Would love to see the EA4 guts. (Hopefully a bit better than the EA8.)

i imagine they are the same. i want to see the guts of this trustfire. i hope its got an actual pill, and a clicky not a electronic switch

I will go ahead and review both, although I'm not a good reviewer. I just made a ticket with DX about the fact that I will be reviewing the A9 and if they manage to get on the stick and ship it out quickly, I might say something good about them as well. Don't know if it will mean anything to them though.

From the limited info, it looks like the A9 has a clicky, not an smd switch, but time will tell. It will be interesting to do a side by side comparison.

I just made a ticket with DX about the fact that I will be reviewing the A9 and if they manage to get on the stick and ship it out quickly, I might say something good about them as well.

This coming from a bloke that has just said in another thread salesmen hate me. This sounds like the biggest threat I’ve heard off for awhile. Nothing like a good laugh first thing in the morning. Thanks.

I’m hoping they don’t read the other thread.Tongue Out

I don’t agree. Commercial products have proper Li-Ion battery protection that monitors all the cells individually. A flashlight that has a 2S/2P config like this one does no such thing. So, if you’re using unprotected cells you’re definitely less safe than the millions of laptops, netbooks, and cordless drills that use the “same setup”.

You’re free to agree, or not… However, the facts are:

Cordless Drills/Netbook and Laptops do in fact have a BMS, however, in almost all cases, this only monitors the CHARGING of the cells - not the discharge. It will balance charge them, but usually do nothing to prevent them from discharging at an uneven rate.

Since we charge our cells outside the host, I stand by my previous comment.


That’s still more than this light has…. :stuck_out_tongue:

Think both your points are valid.

This is both disconcerting and reassuring! Thank you. A laptop or drill wouldn’t discharge as rapidly as a flashlight though, under normal use?