- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- E10 2.0 vs PD32R
Acebeam E10 2.0 vs Fenix PD32R
What E10 2.0 does better (2) and where PD32R wins (3) — every spec side by side.
Dimensions
Size comparison
E10 2.0PD32R
| E10 2.0 | PD32R | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length / height | 88 mm | 135 mm | −47 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 40 mm | 26.5 mm | +13.5 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 24.5 mm | 23.6 mm | +0.9 mm |
| Weight | 106 g | 136 g | −30 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is E10 2.0 better than PD32R?
- Maximum runtime120 h vs 70 h+71%
- Weight106 g vs 136 g+28%
Why is PD32R better than E10 2.0?
- Peak beam intensity14,520 cd vs 29,580 cd2×
- Beam distance (ANSI FL1)241 m vs 344 m+43%
- Maximum output1,200 lm vs 1,400 lm+17%
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 1,200 lm | 1,400 lm |
| Peak beam intensity | 14,520 cd | 29,580 cd |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | 241 m | 344 m |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| LED & beam | ||
| LED emitter | — | Luminus SFT-40 |
| LED maker | Cree | Luminus |
| Colour temperature | — | 6,500K |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | 16340 / RCR123A Li-ion, CR123A | 18650 Li-ion, CR123A |
| Maximum runtime | 120 h | 70 h |
| Rechargeable | Yes | Yes |
| USB-C charging | Yes | Yes |
| Battery level indicator | — | Yes |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | IP68 | IP68 |
| Water protection (IPx) | IPx8 | IPx8 |
| Impact resistance (drop) | 1.5 m | — |
| Body material | Aluminium | — |
| Magnetic tail / base | Yes | — |
| Size & weight | ||
| Length / height | 88 mm | 135 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 40 mm | 26.5 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 24.5 mm | 23.6 mm |
| Weight | 106 g | 136 g |
| Modes & features | ||
| Switch | Side switch | Tail switch |
| Tactical tail switch (momentary on) | — | Yes |
| Strobe | Yes | Yes |
| Mode memory | — | Yes |
