Lightforce or IPF?
- Thread starter hovenator
- Start date
Co-opski
Expedition Leader
madizell said:
Next time I'm at the Tesoro station and there are rigs present I'll snap some photos of there lights. Almost every (95%) of the rigs I see have Light Force blitz 240 but the 240 HID is becoming more popular with the truckers. You are right in that identifying the light from webcam loop there is no way to tell just my general assumption from former observations. Cary on.
Call me crazy, but the composite body and no bezel design used by Lightforce just looks low quality to me with the appearance of something that was bought on the cheap at the local parts store. That said, I have never seen them in use and the performance could well be exceptional. But I am a sucker for metal and plan to put a couple of IPF HIDs (w/ metal housings) on my Jeep.
mountainpete
Spamicus Eliminatus
TCM said:
Them be fightn wurds to LF luvers!
Give a it a few minutes and I'm sure a certain video will pop up :lurk:
xcmountain80
Expedition Leader
Yep LF are the crappiest lights I've owned,,,,, though I've owned them the longest and they've endured the worst. I think everyone should sell me theirs for $5 a set and cell it even. You ask any LF owner and the testimonies will be consistent.
Aaron
Aaron
Quality is not the issue with LF units, it is the fact that they just look strange. They may have the best beam pattern, output, and build quality, but they do look like over sized cheap plastic lights.
I want to see a side by side comparo of all the HID lights? Maybe something for the next overland journal.
I want to see a side by side comparo of all the HID lights? Maybe something for the next overland journal.
mrbishi
Adventurer
When I bought mine the sales guy gave me a hammer and let me have as many smacks as I wanted on the demonstration Lightforces. Let me tell you I was sold after that 
I don't think you'll find another spotlight that will take the sheer abuse the LFs will.
Yes there is a demo video kicking around of them being beaten, shot at with a shot gun etc etc. and surviving. I haven't seen any competing manufacturer use these methods to demonstrate the durability of their lights
I agree they look a bit different to the traditional style spotlights but I think once you see the performance you'll be willing to get over the slightly different look of them.
I don't think you'll find another spotlight that will take the sheer abuse the LFs will.
Yes there is a demo video kicking around of them being beaten, shot at with a shot gun etc etc. and surviving. I haven't seen any competing manufacturer use these methods to demonstrate the durability of their lights
I agree they look a bit different to the traditional style spotlights but I think once you see the performance you'll be willing to get over the slightly different look of them.
Mumbaki1037
Observer
The way I see it, the LF looking cheap would make it less desirable to be stolen 
. Yeah I have the LF 240's in the front with combo filters of every color and never felt the need for more lights. Never owned IPF though so I wouldn't have an opinion about it. BTW never judge a book by its cover.
. Yeah I have the LF 240's in the front with combo filters of every color and never felt the need for more lights. Never owned IPF though so I wouldn't have an opinion about it. BTW never judge a book by its cover.Beowulf said:
Light output is not something that can be quantified brand for brand, and in the case of Light Force, is difficult to discuss even unit for unit because of the adjustable focus. Output is measured in the hottest part of the beam. Changing the focal point with relation to a fixed reflector alters the beam concentration. With regard to any parabola, there is only one true focal point, which is mathematically determined. Placing the light source anywhere other than at that focal point causes irregular dispersion.
Which is why most other manufacturers of lights who use a simple parabolic reflector alter the beam with a lens. This allows the reflector to produce its best light output with the highest degree of parallel light production, and then alter that light outboard of the reflector. That is, the reflector makes all the light it is capable of, then the lens redirects it according to what pattern is intended. Altering the light beam by altering the focal point degrades light output every time.
So, whether Light Force produces the highest light output is very arguable. Generally, the highest light out put will be found in the unit with the largest reflector/lens cross section. That is, an 8 inch light makes more light than a 6 inch light with the same bulb, assuming that both units have comparably engineered reflectors and have lenses with comparable light transmissivity. All other things being equal, if you want pure output, get the largest light you can mount.
None of the Light Force units I have seen have a cut or shaped lens. There are filters available that create a "spread beam" but I believe they do this refractively over the entire filter surface, like a pair of eye glasses, rather than with a discreetly sectioned lens, as you would find in a common headlight for example. As far as I can tell, Light Force can't produce what we now commonly think of as an E-code pattern because such patterns require very specific lens shapes or a computer generated and formed reflector. All of the Light Force filters that change beam shape do so in a circular or ovaloid manner. We have seen lots of photos posted showing Light Force beams. To my recollection, they are either a good tight spot, which is the strong point of a parabolic reflector with a lamp placed at the FP of the curve, or otherwise show a beam pattern with hot and cold spots and rings, exactly like the adjustable focus flashlights that were so popular years ago. This is not a build quality issue. It is a matter of mathematics.
Whether the light output and beam shape of the Light Force units suits your needs is a personal thing. But, if the argument is whether Light Force or some other brand produces a better beam, we would first have to establish guidelines for objective comparison. Whatever those guidelines are, I believe you would find that with the exception of tightly focused spot lights, Light Force won't compare well in terms of beam dispersion and uniform lighting patterns with units that have fixed focus parabolic reflectors and carefully regulated lenses, because the Light Force units are a mathematical compromise.
Last edited:
Metal and glass would not have survived.
xcmountain80
Expedition Leader
Yep thats about as close as you'll get to shooting the damn things with a shot gun.
Aaron
Aaron
Overland Hadley
on a journey
madizell said:
I absolutely hate those hot and cold spots/rings. They bug me so much. It is why I have retired all my headlamps and flash lights that are not fixed focus.
I like my IPF lights, but I have not used other brands, so I only know what I like and dislike.
Crikeymike
Adventurer
So the LF170's are about $220, but the wiring harness is an additional $50, then a combo filter (to try and make it a driving light) are $20 each ($40 the pair), which comes up to $310 give or take, plus shipping, if they're charging it.
The IPF 968CSG really shouldn't be compared because they're not really in the same category. 2 pairs of 968CSG's with the harness and the grills would be about $280 plus shipping, so 4 of those wired up would then maybe be a comparison dollar for dollar with the LF. The main objective of the LF's was most likely indestructibility, and from all of the reviews here, it looks like they do a great job. The 968CSG is considered an entry level light, but it's very powerful for its size, has some neat design features, and really great value. It doesn't look like lightforce makes an entry level light with a similar use in mind (and price), not that there's anything wrong with that.
Madizell is very right though - you can't compare these 2 lights for light output or performance since they're really very different products. It's like comparing a 4-cylinder to a 6-cylinder. They can both do a job their designed for if used for the correct application.
So, for the high price of the LF170's, start comparing these to the IPF 900XSD's (still only about $260 for a complete kit), or maybe a different brand that's offering lexan lenses and covers. IPF goes for light performance first, then the rest is add-ons after the fact. I think LF goes for durability first, then light output.
Needless to say, they're both very good lights, and it all depends on what you want to spend.
Here's a review for a guy that did a fairly good writeup of the 968's: http://www.4wdtrips.net/forum/showthread.php?t=3022
Here's another guy that converted his 968's to HID's
http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12471
The IPF 968CSG really shouldn't be compared because they're not really in the same category. 2 pairs of 968CSG's with the harness and the grills would be about $280 plus shipping, so 4 of those wired up would then maybe be a comparison dollar for dollar with the LF. The main objective of the LF's was most likely indestructibility, and from all of the reviews here, it looks like they do a great job. The 968CSG is considered an entry level light, but it's very powerful for its size, has some neat design features, and really great value. It doesn't look like lightforce makes an entry level light with a similar use in mind (and price), not that there's anything wrong with that.
Madizell is very right though - you can't compare these 2 lights for light output or performance since they're really very different products. It's like comparing a 4-cylinder to a 6-cylinder. They can both do a job their designed for if used for the correct application.
So, for the high price of the LF170's, start comparing these to the IPF 900XSD's (still only about $260 for a complete kit), or maybe a different brand that's offering lexan lenses and covers. IPF goes for light performance first, then the rest is add-ons after the fact. I think LF goes for durability first, then light output.
Needless to say, they're both very good lights, and it all depends on what you want to spend.
Here's a review for a guy that did a fairly good writeup of the 968's: http://www.4wdtrips.net/forum/showthread.php?t=3022
Here's another guy that converted his 968's to HID's
http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12471
xcmountain80
Expedition Leader
Then that begs the question what is as good as a LF, and canbe compared to one? Or are they just that good they they rival the competition? I didn't think so but lets see what we come up with. I Have had many IPF's and they are great no doubt, well I have many great lights over the years but I still like the LF's the best.
Aaron
Aaron
Similar threads
