Surefire X300 Turbo: The King Reclaims the Throne?

Overview

For years, the Surefire X300 Ultra has been the king of the pistol lights. However, we recently declared the X300U was overthrown.

Now Surefire has released the X300 Turbo, and it appears to be a powerhouse. At 66k candela, it should be competitive with some of the best lights on the market. I’m going to take a look at 4 of the lights, see how they perform, then compare a medium performer X300T to the X300U, as well as the Modlite PL-350 with both the OKW and PLHv2 heads. Let’s see if the newest Surefire can beat the top pistol light from Modlite.

Key Light Specs

Surefire X300 Turbo Spec	Value
Lumens	650
Candela	66,000
Color Temperature	Not Specified
Runtime	90 Minutes
Liquid / Dust	IPX7
Battery	2x CR123A
MSRP	$369

Candela

As usual, we measure candela on our test fixture, and we have standardized on testing both instantaneous max (right when you turn on the light), and on testing after 30 seconds of runtime, which approximates the ANSI/PLATO FL-1 spec.

From this data, it appears that the X300T requires time to warm up, giving higher numbers after it’s been running for 30 seconds. While I have verified our test equipment is fairly consistent with the test equipment from Underwriters Laboratories (an official test house for ANSI / PLATO FL-1), I only had one measurement over the rated 66k candela. While disappointing, this is not unusual. For these high end lights, they tend to fall short of the manufacturer rating. The best way to compare apples-to-apples is to use an independent test house with the same test equipment and fixturing, such as LowLightDefense. More regarding comparison coming up…

As for the ratings themselves, they’re quite good, both at time zero, and even better at 30 seconds of runtime.

Lumen

Sometimes it’s better to concentrate on the first 10 minutes only.

Color Temperature, CRI

My personal preference is temperature in the 5500k range. 3 of these lights were 6300k+, and one was about 5900k, which is (in my opinion) better. It’s interesting that this is light No 3, which had the highest candela rating and was among the top in the lumen chart.

All of these lights were below 70 CRI Ra. CRI measures how well the light puts out -all- the spectrum of light. If the light doesn’t put the color onto the target, your eyes won’t see that color.

X300T Summary

Sample	No 1 X300T-B		No 2 X300T-A		No 3 X300T-B		No 4 X300T-A
Spec	Instant Max	30s Max (ANSI / PLATO)	Instant Max	30s Max (ANSI / PLATO)	Instant Max	30s Max (ANSI / PLATO)	Instant Max	30s Max (ANSI / PLATO)
Lumens	740	602	765	607	789	617	755	578
Candela	56,190	62,900	47,530	55,120	58,410	67,340	51,050	59,920
Color Temperature	6490k	NA	6311k	NA	5886k	NA	6654k	NA
CRI Ra	67.9	NA	64.6	NA	67.3	NA	67.8	NA

The Competition

Ok, so all the geeky data above is great, but what I really want to know is how does the light compare? First, let’s select the competition.

1. The first obvious point of comparison is the X300U. Most people want to know whether they should upgrade their “U-Boat” to this new light (“T-Boat?”)
2. The next comparison is the Modlite PL-350. The PL-350 is the current king of the hill in pistol lights, putting out huge candela numbers.
   1. The OKW head is the highest candela head you can pair on the PL-350, so that head should definitely be compared
   2. The PLHv2 is also an extremely popular head, so that should also be compared.

For the X300T, I chose unit No 1 which was a middle performer. However, I also include No. 2 for one data set… more below.

Max Candela

We start by comparing candela of the 4 sample lights:

If I want candela, and I do, then the X300U is out of the race here. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t have its uses (see below), but in the modern era of high candela lights, the X300T, the OKW, and the PLHv2 are the better performers.

The OKW starts off as the highest candela light, but it’s dropping immediately. The Turbo on the other hand ramps up, and by 30 second in, it is the highest candela light. For this test, I think the Turbo and the OKW are about equal, and that’s an astonishing thing to say.

Candela At Angle: Compared

For this test, I opened up a brand new, recently delivered X300U-B. This light has been reserved for this testing. The PL350 body and heads have been previously tested, but not exactly this way, so I reran tests to ensure everything was consistent.

For this test, I utilize a gonimeter and jig that allows me to measure candela and precise angles away from the center of the hotspot. The data provided shows the intensity of the light at multiple angles, giving you a way to visualize the balance between hotspot and flood. Some lights produce a flat graph; these lights are the flood style. Some lights tend to have a huge peak at zero, then drop off rapidly; those lights are the throwers. From the data I have above, I expect the Turbo to be competitive with the PL350-OKW, but we need data to see exactly how competitive.

Here is my first major surprise of the testing. The Turbo has nearly the output of the PL-350 OKW, and it has more candela than the PL-350 PLHv2. I’m surprised that 2x of the CR123A batteries can provide the current necessary. Additionally, the shape of the hotspot and flood is very similar. Based on this chart, I would say that the X300T may have been built in response to the Modlite OKW.

At the other end of the spectrum is the flat-performing flood from our X300U sample. I will say that max candela output is disappointing. On the other hand, if you feel you need a lot of flood, the Ultra may be the best light for you.

Lumen Output Over Time

Ok, pulling the data from the lights over about a 1:45 period results in this chart. I’m also including No. 2 X300T because for some reason No. 1 doesn’t run as long as the rest.

Again, if we want to focus only on ten minutes:

Here are some of my observations from the data:

• If I’m looking for raw output, then the X300U is still a good choice.
• The X300T compares most closely to the PL350-OKW. When comparing those two, they trade off the lead up until 4 minutes, then the Turbo stays ahead and runs longer. The OKW gives up after about 50 minutes, putting out sub-10 lumens after that time. Of our Turbo set, No. 1 has the worst runtime and it still runs longer than the OKW. No. 2 is still putting out 46 lumens after just under 2 hours. Yes, you’ll never need your light for that long. Hopefully.
• The PLHv2 performs under the Ultra but better than the Turbo and OKW until about 5 minutes in, where output matches the X300T then drops under the Turbo after about 15 minutes.

Here is the calculated data:

Lumen Data	No. 1 X300T-B	No. 2 X300T-A	X300U-B	PL350-OKW	PL350-PLHv2
Max Lumens	734	765	1,244	717	1,021
ANSI / PLATO Lumens	612	607	1,078	693	965
ANSI / PLATO Runtime	0:51:51	1:37:44	1:13:02	0:45:42	0:35:10

Out of this data, the thing that catches my eye is the runtime on our No. 2 sample of the Turbo… it is better than the other lights. I’m assuming that sample No. 1 is defective, with the inability to meet the runtime ratings. I may end up returning it.

One final comment here… I separately calculate area under the curve… this is the total lumens of light output integrated over time. In other words, this calculates how many lumens are output out of the light until the battery runs dead… or I run into time constraints and turn it off. Light No. 2 was still going at almost 2 hours, so I cut it short. Even so, it came a close second to the X300U. Both of the Modlites were less than half of the output of the X300U, and less than half of the total output of the Turbo sample 2. In my opinion, total output might be a more interesting measurement than runtime, which has an arbitrary cutoff based upon light ratings.

Light Output Consistency

Sometimes the light will be cycled on, then off repeatedly. I want a light that can perform consistently, and to test for consistency, I cycle a light on for 15 seconds, then off for 45 seconds, allowing the light to cool a little and not need the continuous draw that the lumen testing requires. I then take the max measurement from that time, and compare the high & low of those outputs to get a consistency percentage. Here is the raw data for each of these lights:

Note that each of the X300 units are closer to a straight line. Note that both of the Modlites have pronounced dips and peaks. In short, the X300s are more consistent. How consistent? Here are the results:

	X300T-B	X300U-B	PL350-OKW	PL350-PLHv2
Consistency	96.38%	96.44%	86.89%	85.55%

In short, the X300s are quite consistent. This could be owed to circuitry, batteries, thermal throttling strategies, or a myriad of other reasons.

CRI & Color Temperature

I’m writing this late at night, wondering why I went so overboard with data. CRI and color temperature are really nitpicky items to include, but I’m doing it anyway.

After looking more closely at the data here, I’m thinking there isn’t much to see. All the lights are on the cool end of the spectrum, and except for the U-Boat, none of them even has a CRI over 70.

Data Comparison Summary

Measured Data	No. 1 X300T-B	X300U-B	PL350-OKW	PL350-PLHv2
Candela 0s	56190	9124	64130	54340
Candela 30s	62900	8958	61490	51540
Max Lumens	734	1,244	717	1,021
ANSI / PLATO Lumens	612	1,078	693	965
ANSI / PLATO Runtime	0:51:51	1:13:02	0:45:42	0:35:10
Consistency	96.38%	96.44%	86.89%	85.55%
Color Temperature	6490k	6073k	6227k	6166k
CRI Ra	67.9	71.2	64.8	66.6
Battery	2x CR123A	2x CR123A	18350	18350
Street Price	$332	$309	$329	$329

Conclusion

For me, the competition is between the PL350-OKW and the X300T-B. To be honest, they’re very close to each other in terms of size, price, and performance. If you like the switches and rechargeable battery of the PL350, then stick with that. If you’re running a X300U, and want more candela and want to reuse y our gear, then it’s a no brainer — pick the X300T.

For me, I prefer prime batteries, the ability to have momentary activation, and long runtime. In addition, I was able to find a sample with 5900k color temperature and higher candela output after 30 seconds of runtime than the OKW puts out (ever) means that I’m now running the X300T (sample No. 3).

Good choice? Bad choice? Leave your comments below!