Widths are not a problem - I measured the PanaB protected at 18.64 mm at the widest (outside strip) and there's still space to spare, even with the strip in the tightest spot. It looks like they designed the battery tube well for handling any size cell - now we just need to hope they don't change the design...
Removing anodizing with sandpaper from a built-in shelf is not going to be an easy task. I can’t believe that any but the most dedicated modders would try that. Anodize isn’t as easy to remove as paint or other coatings. It is tougher than the underlying aluminum. In fact, there is sandpaper made out of basically “anodized aluminum”. It’s that hard.
David’s right, most sandpaper’s are either aluminum oxide or silicon carbide. The whole point of the ano is to make the flashlight durable, it’s not easy to remove if it’s a well done ano in the first place. And it’s NOT a coating, its an acid etch into the surface of the metal itself, changing the structure of the metal in the first 30 microns or so, changing it into the aluminum oxide sandpaper is made of.
Re: anodizing and heat transfer…. I believe that any attempt top remove the anodizing by any means other than a lathe or a mill would result in surface unevenness that might be worse than leaving it the way it comes.
haha, well that tells you about my bargain basement lights. I knew it's not a "coating" in the sense it wasn't added on (well, the oxygen was added). Anyway, ok, I'm convinced. (although hardness and ease of removal are not necessarily related at all.)
Well there's a height problem. The clone's reflectors are shorter in height and secured by a screw. Actually, the proto's reflectors are in a better proportion of width vs. height, as Dale has posted about in the GT thread - wonder if that's why the proto's wall beam pattern is so much cleaner, but also makes the proto's beam pattern tighter, less spill width. Outdoors though, the proto puts out a wall of light, though you can notice the spill is tighter than the clone's.
Also, as requested, the height of the bezel is shorter in the proto than the clone - the reflector/glass is further out than the clone - this could be creating less artifacts because less reflection off the bezel's - maybe that's why the reflector was made deeper.
interesting
hmm, this means a SRK reflector only works if stars are used ON TOP off the Q8 proto?
hmm, hmm, uh… don really know how to react more now, but this being BLF, surely others will do giving me handles to do so myself
I've been looking at the beam shots again and I have to admit that the new reflector does have a nice even transition to the hot spot. That is just as important as wide spill in a general purpose light. So it seems that it would be best to stick with the proto reflector.