- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- P16 2.0 vs E52D
Acebeam P16 2.0 vs Nextorch E52D
What P16 2.0 does better (2) and where E52D wins (5) — every spec side by side.
Dimensions
Size comparison
P16 2.0E52D
| P16 2.0 | E52D | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length / height | 136.3 mm | 153 mm | −16.7 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 32 mm | 30 mm | +2 mm |
| Weight | 169 g | 130 g | +39 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is P16 2.0 better than E52D?
- Beam distance (ANSI FL1)543 m vs 280 m+94%
- Peak beam intensity73,712 cd vs 19,600 cd3.8×
Why is E52D better than P16 2.0?
- Maximum runtime30 h vs 60 h2×
- Maximum output3,000 lm vs 3,700 lm+23%
- Battery capacity3,000 mAh vs 4,800 mAh+60%
- Weight169 g vs 130 g+30%
- Impact resistance (drop)1.5 m vs 2 m+33%
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 3,000 lm | 3,700 lm |
| Peak beam intensity | 73,712 cd | 19,600 cd |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | 543 m | 280 m |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| LED & beam | ||
| LED emitter | Luminus SFT-42R | — |
| LED maker | Luminus | — |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | 18650 Li-ion | 21700 Li-ion |
| Battery capacity | 3,000 mAh | 4,800 mAh |
| Maximum runtime | 30 h | 60 h |
| Rechargeable | Yes | Yes |
| USB-C charging | Yes | Yes |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | IP68 | IPX8 |
| Water protection (IPx) | IPx8 | IPx8 |
| Impact resistance (drop) | 1.5 m | 2 m |
| Body material | Aluminium | Aluminium |
| Pocket clip | Yes | — |
| Size & weight | ||
| Length / height | 136.3 mm | 153 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 32 mm | 30 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 25 mm | — |
| Weight | 169 g | 130 g |
| Modes & features | ||
| Switch | Dual switches | — |
| Strobe | Yes | Yes |
| SOS / beacon | Yes | — |
