Would a new spring spec necessitate another whole round of samples? Any thoughts?
But wouldn’t thicker springs also mean that they no longer work as makeshift fuses?
The springs are a major component of this light for maximum performance that we all waited for, therefore l am willing to wait some more just to make it worth all the waiting.
And, if the travel is already enough then the right solution is to shorten the tube and let the springs do their job.
That sounds like the proper solution, according to the figures there should be ample space for protected cells anyway.
when baking it the tube literally burned a bit (or well some burn spots can be seen)
Did not like it at first, yet now it is very handy to be able to tell the spots of cells in the tube thus what springs are carrying the power.
I have put two 30Q bt cells in and will run them down, as fast as possible without letting the Q8 get too hot. So on turbo till stepdown, cool down and rinse and repeat.
When done, the other two 30Qs also. Let’s see how the springs react to this.
Baking went different, my experiences with:
type II, place them on flames and within minutes see color change
HA3, place on flames, waiting for a looooong time to see a change to olive drab
Q8 it took ages before the color change started, much longer as on the Konos X5, I was really bummed about it, fearing for olive drab.
But slowly and slowly it changed, I wanted to see how far it would go.
After 20 minutes the colors starting changing good, specially on the tailcap
Then the storm hit and I had other things on my mind, one of the things was that the Q8 parts were wet from leaking.
When I had protected the young olive tree, got the stuff away from the leaking indoor waterfall 
and placed containers to catch the water still dripping like crazy I returned to the stove
Now after about 30 minutes the tailcap was nice grey, the head brownish and the tube a bit coppery.
Did not go further then these colors, let it cool, cleaned the parts and put it back, only to see it working, relief.
For now I leave it, for the point is made, nice colors are possible, but use the oven for it takes a long time and flames just don’t cut it and deliver the heat at too small a point on the big head.
And for those who love the flats to align, my Q8 works with the flats of the tube aligned with the head.
Neat I must say, and it gives a twisty interface for a fraction tighter (the normal max tightening) bumps the output (so it can be sued aligned but loses some output, it is just before the physical lockout point)
Yeah seem like there are plenty of flex in current springs to accommodate any length of 18650 batteries, so it would seem the fix would be to shorten the tube a little.
We would want both springs to be engaged no matter what battery is used .
I’m still unsure about why so many people consider using less than 4 batteries.
What is the point of leaving empty slots?
Regarding the springs, I agree with the idea of making the tube shorter over modifying the springs, specially since springs tend to shorten over time, which could lead to only some of the 4 batteries making contact all the time, which could lead to reverse charging at times.
While talking about batteries and springs, if only 1 battery is used to power the light, that passes a lot of current through the springs for that slot, which will heat it up and degrade it. Those springs are not fit to pass the amount of amps needed to power the Q8 without sharing the load amongst all of them.
Boggles my mind too. It just makes sense to me to allow the cells to share the load and stress all components less. While the light will run with fewer cells I view that as being for emergency use only. Want a lighter light or less max’ output? Get another light.
Unlike some of the people above I do think that bigger springs made of of thicker wire is the way to go (it will still act as a fuse alright), now that I took a closer look at the shortest spring it does show signs of collapse: part of the spring is discolored and deformed assymmetrically.
You may simply state that this light is not meant to be used with one cell only, but it should not loose its springs if you happen to try that.
It seems like we are slowly discovering how a 20+ amps flashlight should be build. And thusfar we are doing well at it, but still adjustments need to be made.
Yeah, seems light a good characterization of what is going on here. And now that I see the tail PCB again close up, I think thicker springs would be good whether longer (to fix the tube length issue) or not.
Carry on folks! You’re doing fine!
Who didn’t expect some teething problems? Now is the time to find them.
We hoped to find them all a few prototypes earlier actually, but better late than that all 1500 run into problems.
Oh well, regardless of how it gets fixed, the important thing is that we found the issue, and honestly, it does not seem all that hard to fix. Either thicker springs or shorter tube are both simple modifications, from a manufacturing perspective.
I just realised that the PCB has holes right beneath the springs. Are those there to facilitate spring bypasses? Nice touch.
how about the big tail spring of the S70S?
13.76mm
4.69mm compressed max, no grinding of metal it just becomes a nice dome with spiral looks
An argument could be made that changing the springs messes with the BOM, and if the other springs have already been bought, they’re now wasted (unless they can be used for another product). Shortening the tube is the really easy change from a manufacturing perspective, and saves material as well, which might add up to being able to squeeze more lights out of the same amount of stock.
EDIT: Note to the Q8 Team. Don’t take me any more seriously than you want to. I’m (mostly) just yappin’. Whatever decisions are made, I’m sure will be the right choice.
Shortening the tube does sound like a very practical option assuming they have not locked down the CAD design, but I see no reason they would have at this point.
That spring looks about perfect, Miller! With its length and 9mm travel, with the current tube-length it compensates for the shorter batteries while still enabling longer ones. And it handles more current before collapsing.
Am I the only one who thinks that it is easier to change a type of spring (which is available at Thorfire) than to change a battery tube design?