- compoundsemi.com
- Compare
- TK17 vs E52D
Fenix TK17 vs Nextorch E52D
What TK17 does better (3) and where E52D wins (2) — every spec side by side.
Dimensions
Size comparison
TK17E52D
| TK17 | E52D | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Length / height | 148.5 mm | 153 mm | −4.5 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 36 mm | 30 mm | +6 mm |
| Weight | 197 g | 130 g | +67 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is TK17 better than E52D?
- Beam distance (ANSI FL1)330 m vs 280 m+18%
- Peak beam intensity27,220 cd vs 19,600 cd+39%
- Battery capacity6,000 mAh vs 4,800 mAh+25%
Why is E52D better than TK17?
- Weight197 g vs 130 g+52%
- Maximum output3,600 lm vs 3,700 lm+3%
Specifications
Side by side
| Light output | ||
| Maximum output | 3,600 lm | 3,700 lm |
| Peak beam intensity | 27,220 cd | 19,600 cd |
| Beam distance (ANSI FL1) | 330 m | 280 m |
| Light source | LED | LED |
| LED & beam | ||
| LED emitter | Cree XHP50 | — |
| LED maker | Cree | — |
| Colour temperature | 5,700K | — |
| Battery & charging | ||
| Battery | 21700 Li-ion | 21700 Li-ion |
| Battery capacity | 6,000 mAh | 4,800 mAh |
| Maximum runtime | 60 h | 60 h |
| Rechargeable | Yes | Yes |
| USB-C charging | Yes | Yes |
| Battery level indicator | Yes | — |
| Build & durability | ||
| Protection rating | IP68 | IPX8 |
| Water protection (IPx) | IPx8 | IPx8 |
| Impact resistance (drop) | — | 2 m |
| Body material | Aluminium | Aluminium |
| Size & weight | ||
| Length / height | 148.5 mm | 153 mm |
| Head diameter / width | 36 mm | 30 mm |
| Body diameter / depth | 25.4 mm | — |
| Weight | 197 g | 130 g |
| Modes & features | ||
| Switch | Dual switches | — |
| Tactical tail switch (momentary on) | Yes | — |
| Strobe | Yes | Yes |
| Mode memory | Yes | — |
