Yeah sooo can we put this to bed and get back to the question at hand for this topic?
I was gonna say yes but... not quite yet.
Absolutely, that's a serious safety concern and one would expect a recall on that and you should have been notified if you registered it with Springfield. This however, doesn't relate to the topic at hand here and I never said anyone was injured or killed because of the issue with the lights. I don't even think anyone has been left stranded on the side of the road because of the lights (crazy, I know). I also don't expect a recall of the lights, but who knows. What I would like though, is more transparency and honesty from a company that stopped selling lights with a known issue approx a month ago. When spending around 1,000 bucks on a lightning set up for a specific use case, then I expect them to perform, as advertised, in those cases.
Hold up homey.
same situation. S/A knew of the problem and halted shipments to distributors, but everything already on shelves they had no control over. Way more serious than some extra glare from some aux lighting.
hopefully you get that I agree with the basic premise of your assertions within this thread; that if in fact there is a defective beam pattern on the B/D SAE lights and they’ve stopped shipping them, then they should rectify the situation.
That said.
1) Proportionality
2) Acting like an agent provocateur
3) Not really asking for what you type
4) spending so much time defending your position in this thread, you’re missing the forest through the trees.
5) Nobody is trolling you here.
Your dedicated advocacy herein has the appearance of politically feigned outrage. First off, just because you, some Taco owner or friend of a friend of a Taco owner puts up a post on the internet, not matter how well or thoughtfully pointed out, doesn’t make the post true, no matter how many times it’s referenced. Google “limp wristing”. My range partner and I have taken multiple handguns reported as ‘vulnerable to limp wrist induced malfunctions’ to the range. affixed them loosely using zip ties and a bench rest jig - so they are suspended with only enough tension pull the trigger. Fired these guns with literally zero support and they chamber the subsequent rounds all the time, every time. Even using handloads, loaded to lower and lower powder charges, there’s only about a .2 grain difference between a 9mm chambering a follow up round held in the hand or completely unsupported. But
people who are dead set in their narrative are not going to hear it.
I can video it, answer internet questions / challenges and post results and there’s always at least one person who simply will not acquiesce to their understanding not being correct even in the face of evidence to the contrary.
Here, you’ve posted about an online report and it would appear that most give the allegations fair credit as possibly being true, but at this point it’s only an allegation, whether or not B/D has accepted it as possibly true or not is another discussion. No business can take every, single complaint as 100% factual without at least some level of investigation first and remain in business. I’d also think it would be exceedingly time consuming and counterproductive to chase down every internet forum they’re on, and post up data on it. Again, the time investment there is significant and we don’t even know if the internet post has been validated independently. Additionally, we’re not talking about SAE lights shipping with the existing wide corner lenses, which throw light everywhere, we’re talking about lenses that are way, way, way less out of compliance, IF they are, in fact, out of compliance.
2) There’s posting about the issue and defending your position and then there’s this thread. Reiterating, I get your point and agree, as a purchaser, I can definitely understand the financial and difficulty outlay. Not to mention, one of us could end up with a citation that we’d end up having to pay which we shouldn’t all things being equal. But, this thread reminds me of a kid we all knew in elementary school who always wanted to start a fight between other people. he would circle back and forth between 2 people ‘did you hear what Adam said about you? he said you have a small p@cker!’ and then carry back to Adam some incendiary accusation and repeat this until the 2 were so angry at each other, they couldn’t see they’d been played.
Is that what you’re doing here, because that’s what it looks like.
3) What is it you really want?
I also don't expect a recall of the lights, but who knows. What I would like though, is more transparency and honesty from a company that stopped selling lights with a known issue approx a month ago.
Really? Or is it something else? Because if it’s the former, it would seem to me that there are better venues to raise your issues than this thread. Ask yourself this, if you want to get action out of a vendor, is an internet thread argument buried in a slightly related topic the optimal venue for your objective? Or, would dealing with the vendor directly and / or having a dedicated online discussion be a better venue or venues?
Remember, I agree with your premise, and I have the affected product here. So I’m asking, what is it you really want here? If you want a statement from B/D, I’d suggest you ask them directly. There are a few ways you can do that effectively.
4) Related; you’re spending so much time in this thread, unproductive time at that, and could be better focusing your efforts to get the issue addressed by BD.
5) You are obviously passionately advocating your position here and there is nothing wrong with that position. My overarching point here is that it’s wasted effort to have this discussion buried in a ‘what’s the best lighting combo thread’. Pick up the phone, start a new internet discussion or discussions, post on social media or worst case, take to Fusion GPS to make up an anti-Baja Designs dossier and publicize it.
