SureFire Torchlights
-
shears marketing.Originally posted by Panerai:Hi Friends....
can anyone enlighten me if the above torchlight is available for sale is Singapore? if yes, where can i get them....
thanks...
chris -
is it? i've known jason and william since they were based at WTC... they aren't like that are they?Originally posted by storywolf:Sheares , very expensive and salepeople very yar yar papaya !!!
Go to China town - Sng Arms , they seem desperate to sell, can give you discount. -
ok hands up all the surefire owners?
what do u guys own? proud owner of a E2 Excecutive here.
-
hmm their old shop in WTC ??Originally posted by HENG@:is it? i've known jason and william since they were based at WTC... they aren't like that are they? -
yup. b4 the exhibition hall was demolished, their old shop was there. I bought my 1st knife, a CRKT Crawford Kasper Tac Folder, from them there, thats how i got to know them.Originally posted by one-niner:hmm their old shop in WTC ?? -
ic ic ..hmm ..well i feel that their business picked up after 9-11, and due to the heigtened interest in mission specific gear ...Originally posted by HENG@:yup. b4 the exhibition hall was demolished, their old shop was there. I bought my 1st knife, a CRKT Crawford Kasper Tac Folder, from them there, thats how i got to know them. -
maybe... but when they were at WTC, they mostly sold knives on a smaller scale. It was after they moved to beach rd that they started selling other gear as well.Originally posted by one-niner:ic ic ..hmm ..well i feel that their business picked up after 9-11, and due to the heigtened interest in mission specific gear ... -
I personally found the Sheares people quite nice and welcoming. The Sng Arms people were snobbish and ignorant, and dont really know their stuff
Well I didnt get Surefire stuff. Too ex. I got PrincetonTec and Streamlight stuff instead..seemed like better value to me
Any lobang to get these tactical stuff at lower prices?hehe 
-
couldn't agree more on that,Originally posted by nympho:I personally found the Sheares people quite nice and welcoming. The Sng Arms people were snobbish and ignorant, and dont really know their stuff
Well I didnt get Surefire stuff. Too ex. I got PrincetonTec and Streamlight stuff instead..seemed like better value to me Any lobang to get these tactical stuff at lower prices?hehe 
-
agree.Originally posted by nympho:I personally found the Sheares people quite nice and welcoming. The Sng Arms people were snobbish and ignorant, and dont really know their stuff
Well I didnt get Surefire stuff. Too ex. I got PrincetonTec and Streamlight stuff instead..seemed like better value to me Any lobang to get these tactical stuff at lower prices?hehe -
M2 Millenium with p-60 bulb.. intend to get another one though... =POriginally posted by HENG@:ok hands up all the surefire owners?
what do u guys own? proud owner of a E2 Excecutive here. -
WAHHHHHH!!!Originally posted by palmerised:M2 Millenium with p-60 bulb.. intend to get another one though... =P
M2 Millenium, the dua dua kee one?
*kneels down n pray to u* -
I really think Rumsfeld should step down if the current mistakes keep on piling up.To have National Guard soldiers weld armor to their prrmary mission vehicles from their neighbourhood is something close to the absurd and the US Army should never have descended to this level of scraps.Come on, imagine sending our ADF to Timor Leste without any body armour or adequate spres for the LSV.Tragedy tragedy.Let's hope the boys come home safely for Christmas, whatever flag they fight under or enemy they face in whichever hotspot around the world.God bless the troopers.Originally posted by John Ching:No fault here, I fully agreed with you that if you've got no use for the product then is there a need to buy it?
But as a man, we tend to buy things we don't really need till one dark & moonless night. just like I've got alot of workman tools at home but still have yet to figure out what to use with them.
Its good that your army & police will provide you with the items as & when you need it. As you probably already know, in the U.S military at this moment, its having a short-fall of logistic items to supply to it troops in the frontline. Most of the troops are getting their supplies from their families & supporting organisations. So it actually isn't a problem to have your own stuff then to depend on others for it.
-
what's dua dua kee?Originally posted by HENG@:WAHHHHHH!!!
M2 Millenium, the dua dua kee one?
*kneels down n pray to u* -
"wah liao!"## so many tua miah watches names.
Me only use SAF give free swiss army watch (10 years NS service) with nama and NRIC numbor blakan. Cannot afford surelite, lolex or eben G-siok watches.
## bastardization of a hokkien swear phrase - please remind any lady that uses this phrases that this is a male sex organ they 'are swearing by' which my bio teacher assures me only guys have (well most, not all). -
the big big one.Originally posted by palmerised:what's dua dua kee? -
Interesting point - do you have a reference? I've looked at military specifications, but the closest thing I found was that the American MIL-W-46374 spec for plastic casings on account of cost (as opposed to the Air Force's MIL-W-46374B spec).Originally posted by one-niner:yeah ...MILSPEC watches required the crystal to be acrylic for the safety purpose that a acrylic crystal will crack, where by the sapphire crystal glass will shatter hence even more hazard.even the Omega Speedmaster which was worn to the moon, was a acrylic crystal...
One thing doesn't quite add up, though. The amount of force required to shatter a sapphire crystal would probably be enough to severely damage the movement at the same time, making the shatterproof requirement a moot point. On top of that, Rolex found that using sapphire increased the water resistance of the casing, and that's when the Sub's rating went from 660 to 1000 feet.
Anyway, it would be good if you could point me to a relevant military specification - I'd be interested to see the argument of acrylic in favour of sapphire. -
like to really help u out, but i haven't got the necesary references regardin the exact MILSPEC numbers, i can provide thislinks to a Sinn website (unoffical sites) that Sinn lovers actually compare different watches made for the various Airforces in Europe,Originally posted by Gedanken:Interesting point - do you have a reference? I've looked at military specifications, but the closest thing I found was that the American MIL-W-46374 spec for plastic casings on account of cost (as opposed to the Air Force's MIL-W-46374B spec).
One thing doesn't quite add up, though. The amount of force required to shatter a sapphire crystal would probably be enough to severely damage the movement at the same time, making the shatterproof requirement a moot point. On top of that, Rolex found that using sapphire increased the water resistance of the casing, and that's when the Sub's rating went from 660 to 1000 feet.
Anyway, it would be good if you could point me to a relevant military specification - I'd be interested to see the argument of acrylic in favour of sapphire.
http://www.lemania5100.net/
click on the above URL and u can click on the "Review" link on the left side for an introduction to military watches issued to military airforces and the "Sinn 156" watch that was issued to the german armed forces.as the Heuer 1550
was issued to the miliary services.
But i understand 3 of the watches in review has sapphaire crystal inplace of a acrylic crystal.Like i said earlier, the Omega Speedmaster was too acrylic crystal to allow the space travel, u may want to visit the Omeage watches website to read abt its history, even watch brands like the IWC Mark 12 are still plastic encased.
Maybe i didn't state my point clearly, most of the plastic crystal watches are for the airforces and land armies, sorry if i created a certain confusion.. -
Much as alot of opposition political party & anti-war groups want to see Rumsfeld fired, Bush won't be agreeing to it. There are reasons for which Bush won't fire Rumsfeld, 1st being the fact that by firing Rumsfeld, Bush would be indirectly admitting that the war in Iraq has been wrong & this would enable others, including other world leaders, to undermine future policies.Originally posted by LazerLordz:I really think Rumsfeld should step down if the current mistakes keep on piling up.To have National Guard soldiers weld armor to their prrmary mission vehicles from their neighbourhood is something close to the absurd and the US Army should never have descended to this level of scraps.Come on, imagine sending our ADF to Timor Leste without any body armour or adequate spres for the LSV.Tragedy tragedy.Let's hope the boys come home safely for Christmas, whatever flag they fight under or enemy they face in whichever hotspot around the world.God bless the troopers.
2nd, troops morale would also indirectly be affected by it even though some soldiers might not agree with Rumsfeld, seeing him go would cause their morale to drop further.
3rdly, who hasn't made a mistake in life? Its how that person learns from his mistake & make up for it. Bush allowing Rumsfeld to stay on shows that he has faith that Rumsfeld will learn from the mistakes & do a better job. It also shows that he is a Commander in chief who stands by his men.
of course, there are other reasons but I think the above 3 are the more important reasons for Bush decision to retain Rumsfeld.
-
this thread is dame interesting ...from the intial topic of seemly short thread of where to buy surefire torch lights, and it ended up talking abt the Mr RumSPew and the MILSPEC abt military watches..haha...hmm does it get any better ? keep it goin guys !!Originally posted by John Ching:Much as alot of opposition political party & anti-war groups want to see Rumsfeld fired, Bush won't be agreeing to it. There are reasons for which Bush won't fire Rumsfeld, 1st being the fact that by firing Rumsfeld, Bush would be indirectly admitting that the war in Iraq has been wrong & this would enable others, including other world leaders, to undermine future policies.
2nd, troops morale would also indirectly be affected by it even though some soldiers might not agree with Rumsfeld, seeing him go would cause their morale to drop further.
3rdly, who hasn't made a mistake in life? Its how that person learns from his mistake & make up for it. Bush allowing Rumsfeld to stay on shows that he has faith that Rumsfeld will learn from the mistakes & do a better job. It also shows that he is a Commander in chief who stands by his men.
of course, there are other reasons but I think the above 3 are the more important reasons for Bush decision to retain Rumsfeld.
well with regards to Mr Bush and his cronies, i think they are just playing Wag the Dog ....and since when GWB stood by his country ? its more like his personnal econoimic interests ..u ppl watched Farenheit 9/11 yet ? -
Get the CR123A battery from Sheares Technology as it is the cheapest in town.
The guys at ST are gtg and the people at Sng Arms do not really know their stuff.
HTH. -
ermm wats gtg ?? cannot be Got To Go right ??Originally posted by Temujin:Get the CR123A battery from Sheares Technology as it is the cheapest in town.
The guys at ST are gtg and the people at Sng Arms do not really know their stuff.
HTH. -
Gtg - good to go.
HTH. -
not that big lah..Originally posted by HENG@:the big big one. -
On what bases can you provide that GWB did not stand by his country?Originally posted by one-niner:well with regards to Mr Bush and his cronies, i think they are just playing Wag the Dog ....and since when GWB stood by his country ? its more like his personnal econoimic interests ..u ppl watched Farenheit 9/11 yet ?
Its Bill Clinton that didn't stand by his troops or his country thats why Bin Ladin is still alive. Its Bill Clinton thats why Bill Gates is the riches & powerful man.
When Bill Clinton became 42nd President of United States of America, one of his imediate task was the down sizing of the U.S military & its spendings. If he hadn't done that, today the U.S military could've clear Iraq's militants in a blink of an eye.
CIA had no resources in areas that matter most is because when Bill Clinton was President, CIA resources were diverted to focus on economic espionage thats why it had to rely on the Brits intel to sell its war on Iraq.
43rd President GWB, as you've name him, didn't even blame Clinton & his administration for the mess instead he accepted the mess & set about working on it.
If watching Farenheit 9/11 is how you derive your opinion of BUSH then its very sad.