I'm not counting bars that started out as one thing and then got new guts.... so the various bars Federal filled with different LEDs aren't being considered. Bars with multiple versions launch are fair game. I'm going to say the strobe version of the Vista was one of, if not the worst, "modern" lightbar. The poor strobe output was always obvious but even more so once the lower deck came with cuda LEDs. The shape of the top strobe reflectors essentially scooped sunlight in from the top to completely wash them out. On top of that fact, the power supply was supposed to be a breakthrough in pattern setup, with ricochet being hailed as the best of synchronized and random. In reality it was probably the worst of both, and almost looked like it was misfiring. The strobe version of the MX7000 was not good, but the strobe version of the Vista was somehow worse. I am however only talking about the strobe version. The Vista bar with halogen rotators was a good MX7000 competitor and in some ways better, but the strobe version was just awful.
The later independent rotator version of the jetsonic/stream was also pretty terrible. The chain drive version was arguably one of the best light bars of its era, and way ahead of its time with both a 12 volt and a multiplex smart version. For some reason the individual halogen rotators just didn't show up. I'm sure it was more noticeable because of how good the previous version was, but at one point the jet/steam rotators were almost invisible next to the flashers.That really began/continued a legacy of filling the jet with things that just didn't work, including LEDs. The jet strobe was pretty terrible too, but was made to look even worse by the fact that Tomar licensed the frame and put their strobes in it which showed off how good a strobe bar it could be.
The Code 3 intensity or XS was a big swing and a miss. At the time it was arguable that code 3 made the best rotator bars. It was probably not even debatable that they also made the worst strobe bars. The intensity was trying to compete with Whelen Edge, but basically added nothing and didn't pull off what it copied. The strobes were absolutely terrible output wise and they utilized a proprietary design where the capacitors were on the strobe heads. That idea never made sense to me because the capacitors are not a major failure point. I understand the idea of making the whole reflector and bulb replaceable, Whelen eventually did that rather than putting new bulbs into faded reflectors. But why put the capacitors on the disposable reflectors? I'm not sure if it wasn't attempt to compensate for different sized strobes while firing them off the same supply and not having to regulate output? It made for a really strange design that was incompatible with the rest of the world and seemed incredibly prone to failure. The outer domes did not hold up well and because they were complete domes vs lenses like the edge they let light in from the top and they faded. The internal colored filter system was not very robust and the tiny little plastic mounting feet tended to break. Add to that the fact that the patterns weren't anything special and the overall output wasn't good either and you are left with a bar that didn't offer anything that couldn't be gotten elsewhere, and screwed up the features it copied.The flush mount version of this bar when equipped with oscillating lights was actually pretty decent, but that's not really the same design.
I have over 20 Advantedge bars in my collection, I love the idea of what could be done with them. However.....The Whelen Advantedge was an example of missed potential. The bar allowed lots of options and could be customized into a really compelling system, on paper. In reality the lack of a reliable rotator really brought this bar down. The first two generations of rotators used brushes and the bulb rotated with the reflector which proved problematic. The third generation of rotator fixed that problem with a stationary bulb but lost a lot of the brightness and speed that the previous versions had. The oscillating options that were offered were plagued with snapped wires because the bulb remained on the reflector and the wires simply ran down through the assembly and twisted. It's not that this is a bad lightbar, I love customizing them and I have many in my collection. The Advantedge just represents a lot of missed potential IMHO. Theoretically, it was an edge bar with the ability to add external lower level lights and combine strobes with rotators. In practice it just had a lot of problems with reliability.
The later independent rotator version of the jetsonic/stream was also pretty terrible. The chain drive version was arguably one of the best light bars of its era, and way ahead of its time with both a 12 volt and a multiplex smart version. For some reason the individual halogen rotators just didn't show up. I'm sure it was more noticeable because of how good the previous version was, but at one point the jet/steam rotators were almost invisible next to the flashers.That really began/continued a legacy of filling the jet with things that just didn't work, including LEDs. The jet strobe was pretty terrible too, but was made to look even worse by the fact that Tomar licensed the frame and put their strobes in it which showed off how good a strobe bar it could be.
The Code 3 intensity or XS was a big swing and a miss. At the time it was arguable that code 3 made the best rotator bars. It was probably not even debatable that they also made the worst strobe bars. The intensity was trying to compete with Whelen Edge, but basically added nothing and didn't pull off what it copied. The strobes were absolutely terrible output wise and they utilized a proprietary design where the capacitors were on the strobe heads. That idea never made sense to me because the capacitors are not a major failure point. I understand the idea of making the whole reflector and bulb replaceable, Whelen eventually did that rather than putting new bulbs into faded reflectors. But why put the capacitors on the disposable reflectors? I'm not sure if it wasn't attempt to compensate for different sized strobes while firing them off the same supply and not having to regulate output? It made for a really strange design that was incompatible with the rest of the world and seemed incredibly prone to failure. The outer domes did not hold up well and because they were complete domes vs lenses like the edge they let light in from the top and they faded. The internal colored filter system was not very robust and the tiny little plastic mounting feet tended to break. Add to that the fact that the patterns weren't anything special and the overall output wasn't good either and you are left with a bar that didn't offer anything that couldn't be gotten elsewhere, and screwed up the features it copied.The flush mount version of this bar when equipped with oscillating lights was actually pretty decent, but that's not really the same design.
I have over 20 Advantedge bars in my collection, I love the idea of what could be done with them. However.....The Whelen Advantedge was an example of missed potential. The bar allowed lots of options and could be customized into a really compelling system, on paper. In reality the lack of a reliable rotator really brought this bar down. The first two generations of rotators used brushes and the bulb rotated with the reflector which proved problematic. The third generation of rotator fixed that problem with a stationary bulb but lost a lot of the brightness and speed that the previous versions had. The oscillating options that were offered were plagued with snapped wires because the bulb remained on the reflector and the wires simply ran down through the assembly and twisted. It's not that this is a bad lightbar, I love customizing them and I have many in my collection. The Advantedge just represents a lot of missed potential IMHO. Theoretically, it was an edge bar with the ability to add external lower level lights and combine strobes with rotators. In practice it just had a lot of problems with reliability.
