Not sure whether it's really 1800LM - here's some math.
937033
Got the 4 inch spot, 6 LED version of this light - description states 1800lm output, but after hooking up my multimeter to the leads, it shows an amperage draw of 0.822 amps at 12.6V which means it uses about 10.35watts. That comes out to be a maximum of 1.725 watts per LED (certainly less after the the internal power supply/voltage conversion losses). The description states OSRAM LEDs, so I went to the Osram's website and lookup product specifications for their LED modules, their most efficient LED gives about 154 lumen per watt. So... 154 lumens x 1.725 watts x 6 lights = slight less than 1600 lumens, and this is being way generous with no power supply loss and assuming Auxbeam used the priciest and most effecient OSRAM LEDs to build the product.

If my math is wrong or I missed something, someone please correct me and I'll be happy to update this review.

With all this being said, the narrow spot lamp is BRIGHT, even if it doesn't seem to output match according to spec.
1546159
Disappointed with the intensity of the light which was advertised at 2000 lumens.
2354982
Received it . Charged the battery for 4 hour before trying. It works as it should. But it is no where near 2200 lmns. Not even close. Maybe 200lm and that is on the plus side. Would not purchase another one. Companies need to start being truthful in their advertising. But what should you expect for $15.00 dollars.
919330
I ordered two of these after reading reviews here about the inaccuracies of some of the meters. Sure enough one was correct while the other was off by half a volt which is a lot in the world of 12 volt charging.
1037933
I saw a watch like this going for 8000 not the 11,000.  Weather it is fake or not I can't say, you'd think that amazon would be able to spot something like that...
1964247
Someone else had the same problem - this was consistently inconsistent.

It would regularly (but not always) add ~5-55 mm to a reading, and I would have to re-zero it. Worse, this could happen multiple times in a row. Very frustrating, and not worth the hassle.
995666
Just a correction, AMAZON's math gets a failing grade here for the burner outputs listed for this stove:
their claim that
"17,000s total BTU in two powerful, high-performance Band-a-Blu burners"
can come from
"...one 13,500 BTU burner and one 11,000 BTU burner"
wouldn't pass 4th grade math as, last time I ran the numbers,
13,500 + 11,000 = 23,500

COLEMAN claims the following for the stove's cooking ability:
# *  17,000 BTU in two powerful, high performance Band-a-Blu(tm) burners
# *  Primary burner is 9,000 BTU, auxiliary burner is 8,000 BTU
and that is a LOT better than the regular version of this stove which checks in  running one 7,500 BTU burner and one 6,500 BTU

A great little stove, but not magic!
3433192
As of 27 December 2012, the Amazon title is inaccurate for this product. The EE6490 is indeed a 800/1200 Watt unit, not the 600/1200 advertised. I was looking for a lower power electric space heater and frankly would not have made this purchase if the title was correct.

Having said that, I am keeping this unit. The outer (silver) case appears to be some type of metal, nice touch in a plastic world. It puts out heat and is not too loud. The front panel has one knob with "Off", "Low" and "High". No other controls.

Two stars; minus two for the misleading (nobody noticed?) ad, minus one for a slightly high price.
2814994
After receiving it yesterday, I decided to test it because small home wattmeters have a reputation for not being very accurate.

So I plugged in a 60-watt light bulb (old-time incandescent) and the meter's "watts" screen read exactly 60 watts. After running the bulb for one hour, the meter's "kilowatt hours" (KWH) screen read 0.06 KWH, exactly right again.

Separately, comments by others about the LCD screen being hard to read are valid. Your head has to be at or below the screen's midpoint, and the screen is quite dark. Not a huge problem though, because you don't read it that often. And you can shine a flashlight on the screen.

Because it is new, I don't know how it will stand up over time regarding ruggedness and accuracy. But so far I am Very Pleased with this purchase.
228730
Hard to read the numbers - I question the accuracy.
1130025
This beam angle is absolutely 120 degrees.
But the temperature is absolutely NOT 2800K or even 3000K. Closer to 3500K. Giving a range of 2800-3200K is downright misleading.
2618026
I bought  this external battery  with highly positive ratings from Amazon.fr

Anker Astro E1 5200mAh...
The battery was received with 2/4 out of 4/4 LEDs on.
I charged it thoroughly up to  4/4 LEDS.
I could only charge an iPhone 5 from 56 to 79% and an iPad 2 from 82 to 99%
This casts some doubt on the real capacity.
5200 mAh, really ?

Second full charge was done with an  Aukey  USB wall charger with  AIPower ,  30W/5V 6A .
Result with my iPhone 6 (1800 to 1810 mAh battery capacity as per Wiki):
1- iPhone 6 charged from  5% up to  100%  meaning  0,95x1800 = 1710 mAh3 LEDs are "on" 4 after that.
2- iPhone 6  charged from  18% up to  100%  meaning  0,82x1800 = 1476 mAh; One blinking LED left
3- iPhone 6  charged from  2% up to  3%  meaning  18 mAh  No LED left
Total  = 3204 mAh
This is an optimistic total since I expect my iPhone capacity to be markedly less than when new.
I ran that charging cycle overnight.
The charger I use is supposed to deliver the intensity required by the device.

I'll also run a charging cycle with an Apple iphone  charger (1A )
But I would expect the Anker battery to be chargeable by a computer USB port since you Anker doesn't provide the charger.
So the 3d charge overnight allowed me to charge my iPhone 6 about less than  twice, as follows:
6% to  100%  =  0.94x1800 =  1692
15 to  100%  = 0.85x1800 =  1530
2% to  5 %  =  0. 03 x 1800 = 54
Total  3276 mAh
Very far from 5200 mAh.

I know some mAh are lost  per physics law (heat production)
Bt I'd expect more than roughly 3000 mAh delivery for 5200 advertised.
3136962
I'm fairly certain when they say it's 20,000 mah that they are lying. I can't complain about the price as it does work (but not while it charges, surprisingly). I recommend getting an EasyACC which costs more but it a much better product.

Like I said, it works and I can't really complain about the price.
678779
The Lumen output was promoted as 400lm. When the item was measure using ANSI measurement standards the actual Lumen output was 43.7 Lumen. Not happy about this! I have emailed FAVI twice and have not heard back at all from them. I informed you on your prior request for feedback!
620049
Light bar seems to work well enough for the price, but the model I received is NOT 180 Watts. It consumes 10.1A at 13.75V, or 139 Watts from the input. It took 11.3A at 12.39V attached to the truck's battery. I didn't open it up to test the driver efficiency, but likely around 80% efficient, meaning that only around 110 Watts is getting to the LEDs themselves. Output appeared to be well under 10,000 lumens - likely around 8,000, but I don't have the tools to measure. Ceiling-bounce testing and known figures of 100W LEDs would suggest that this light bar should output at least 7,500 lumens.

Since the light bar doesn't perform close to its specifications, I am sending it back for incorrect specifications. Due to the light being returned, I haven't stress tested the light bar, or checked it for weather sealing. It would be nice for someone else to do a teardown to see how well it is actually assembled. Unit looked good on the surface, but with LEDs, all the important details are hidden away in the thermal pathways and LED drivers.

The LEDs are a cool-white (rather than neutral or warm) - they are a bluish hue and the color-rendering-index (CRI) of the LEDs are pretty poor (reds and greens don't look that great - the light is poor for contrast, but I expected as much before purchase). I'd say this light bar has typical low CRI values of 60-70. Newer quality LEDs are in the 93-97% range (the sun is 100%), making things like vegetation stand out against its surroundings, rather than cast a blue-gray hue on everything.

The LEDs do retain their output until under 10 Volts, so they will provide full output whether powered from the alternator, or the battery with the vehicle's engine not running. When Voltage drops too far, the LEDs begin to flicker as different powered segments (sections powered by a shared LED driver) begin to power-off and back on. The LEDs cannot be faded to lower output by reducing the Voltage (some designs can).

With what I currently know about this product, if it also survived a few feet under water to meet its waterproof rating, I'd initially rate it 5-stars if it was actually close to its specification. As is, 3 stars for price/value.
2622495
I wanted the 2000lm for a bike headlight, night hiking, and night kayaking.  This is CLEARLY not a 2000lm flashlight.  In comparison to my 500lm flashlight it's about half as bright.  And the O rings in it wouldn't prevent any water from coming in.  The 2000lm flashlight is on the right, the 500lm on the left in the picture
4157265
I have used this for 6 months for brewing beer. The higher gravity readings seem reasonably accurate as compared to a hydrometer reading. I did not check the lower readings (not smart on my part). It turns out it is very inaccurate where a 1.010 reading on the hydrometer is giving a 1.027 (translated from brix) on the meter. It has also recently started to give errors saying there is too much background light to take a reading even though I am fully shielding the measurement well. I am not sure if the product was shipped with the measurement issue (accuracy issue) or if this has developed in the short time I have been using it.