- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- P16 2.0 vs TK17
Acebeam P16 2.0 vs Fenix TK17
What P16 2.0 does better (3) and where TK17 wins (3) — every spec side by side.
Dimensions
Size comparison
P16 2.0TK17
| P16 2.0 | TK17 | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length / height | 136.3 mm | 148.5 mm | −12.2 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 32 mm | 36 mm | −4 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 25 mm | 25.4 mm | −0.4 mm |
| Weight | 169 g | 197 g | −28 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is P16 2.0 better than TK17?
- Peak beam intensity73,712 cd vs 27,220 cd2.7×
- Beam distance (ANSI FL1)543 m vs 330 m+65%
- Weight169 g vs 197 g+17%
Why is TK17 better than P16 2.0?
- Battery capacity3,000 mAh vs 6,000 mAh2×
- Maximum runtime30 h vs 60 h2×
- Maximum output3,000 lm vs 3,600 lm+20%
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 3,000 lm | 3,600 lm |
| Peak beam intensity | 73,712 cd | 27,220 cd |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | 543 m | 330 m |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| LED & beam | ||
| LED emitter | Luminus SFT-42R | Cree XHP50 |
| LED maker | Luminus | Cree |
| Colour temperature | — | 5,700K |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | 18650 Li-ion | 21700 Li-ion |
| Battery capacity | 3,000 mAh | 6,000 mAh |
| Maximum runtime | 30 h | 60 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 | Aluminium |
| Pocket clip | Yes | — |
| Size & weight | ||
| Length / height | 136.3 mm | 148.5 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 32 mm | 36 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 25 mm | 25.4 mm |
| Weight | 169 g | 197 g |
| Modes & features | ||
| Switch | Dual switches | Dual switches |
| Tactical tail switch (momentary on) | — | Yes |
| Strobe | Yes | Yes |
| SOS / beacon | Yes | — |
| Mode memory | — | Yes |
