How we scoreBlogAdvertise
html›body›main#compare791 models · updated Oct 21, 2026
  1. compoundsemi.com
  2. Compare
  3. WF11E Intrinsically Safe vs E52C

Fenix WF11E Intrinsically Safe vs Nextorch E52C

What WF11E Intrinsically Safe does better (1) and where E52C wins (5) — every spec side by side.

Fenix WF11E Intrinsically Safe
4.0Score
1 advantage≈ $60
vs
Nextorch E52C
Nextorch · 2022E52C
6.5Score
5 advantages≈ $65
Higher score
2.9Brightness & throw5.0
3.6Build & durability7.1
5.9Features5.9
Dimensions

Size comparison

WF11E Intrinsically SafeE52C
49 × 167.52430 × 153
WF11E Intrinsically SafeE52CDifference
Length / height167.5 mm153 mm+14.5 mm
Head diameter / width49 mm30 mm+19 mm
Weight159 g130 g+29 g

Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).

Why is WF11E Intrinsically Safe better than E52C?

  1. Maximum runtime70 h vs 65 h+8%

Why is E52C better than WF11E Intrinsically Safe?

  1. Maximum output200 lm vs 3,000 lm15×
  2. Beam distance (ANSI FL1)185 m vs 210 m+14%
  3. Peak beam intensity8,560 cd vs 11,025 cd+29%
  4. Weight159 g vs 130 g+22%
  5. Water protection (IPx)IPx7 vs IPx8+14%
Specifications

Side by side

Nextorch E52CNextorch E52C≈ $656.5
Light output
Maximum output200 lm3,000 lm
Peak beam intensity8,560 cd11,025 cd
Beam distance (ANSI FL1)185 m210 m
Light sourceLEDLED
LED & beam
LED emitterCree XP-G2—
LED makerCree—
Battery & charging
BatteryAA21700 Li-ion
Maximum runtime70 h65 h
Rechargeable—Yes
USB-C charging—Yes
Build & durability
Protection ratingIP67IPX8
Water protection (IPx)IPx7IPx8
Impact resistance (drop)1 m—
Body material—Aluminium
Magnetic tail / baseYes—
Pocket clipYesYes
Size & weight
Length / height167.5 mm153 mm
Head diameter / width49 mm30 mm
Body diameter / depth24 mm—
Weight159 g130 g
Modes & features
Brightness levels3—
To compare: 0up to 4 models
Compare