FW3A, a TLF/BLF EDC flashlight - SST-20 available, coupon codes public

They will do just fine with the optic is the way I see it. But each has a preference of our own.

It’s 3 emitters, but it’s not throwy. It’s expected to be in the range of about 2 to 4 cd / lm, which puts it solidly in the “floody” category. Generally 5 to 15 cd / lm is the common range for EDC-style lights, under 5 is really floody, and over 15 is typically considered more of a thrower.

The main point of XP-L HI in this light is to get as close as possible to a common EDC-style beam without sacrificing overall output.

OTOH, I’d probably also be happy if it was a FW1A, with a single LH351D 5000K 90CRI in an OP reflector. It would make the light a bit longer, but I think it would still be bright enough.

I think that would be great for a second version also.

:+1: /\

ToyKeeper,

Since the opinions offered so far on the finish are all over the map, do you think it would be wise to start another Condorcet poll for the finish? I know some specifically said they’d rather not draw this out, but it seems the opinions differ wildly even among the few who have answered here so far.

With the surface treatment you have to differentiate between the mechanical finish and the chemical finish.

For the mechanical finish I think the major options are:

  • No finish. The light is taken "as is" from the CNC machine, this means it will potentially have some slight machine marks (groves and such). This should be the cheapest option, because no extra manufacturing steps are required. I believe this option was intended from the start.
  • Beadblasted or sandblasted. This will hide machine marks. Depending on how it is done (how severe and if sand or beads are used), the light will feel relatively smooth, slightly velvety or even a bit like sandpaper (like ArmyTek lights). The prototypes have such a finish, but I'm not sure how smooth or rough the surface is, maybe someone who has handled the prototypes can tell us.
  • Polished. This will hide machine marks and makes the light shiny. As far as I know this option is better in terms of durability (of the anodization) compared to bead-/sandblasting.

For the chemical finish the major options are:

  • No treatment, i.e. bare aluminium. This should be the cheapest option, but the surface won't have any protective layer. Not sure about the durability and potential staining (maybe someone with a non-anodized BLF A6 can chime in).
  • Anodized. Here it is a question of color. With all colors other than black there is a risk of color mismatches between different parts of the light (e.g. body and tailcap), but black is very boring, thousands of lights are black. To minimize the risk of color mismatches it is probably best to anodize all parts of one particular light simultaneously (not sure if Lumintop is able/willing to do this). Natural color (a light or medium grey, sometimes leaning towards olive green) is, as far as I know, the most durable color.
  • Any other surface treatment, like ceramic coating, DLC, a coating using PVD method (TiN, TiCN, TiAlN, CrN, CrVN, CrAlN...), chrome plating, electroless nickel plating and probably many more. These are seldomly used on flashlights and would therefore make the light more unique, but most of these are probably not feasible because they either can't be done in house by Lumintop and/or they are too costly (but it is IMO at least worth asking if they are feasible). Electroless nickel plating is IMO most the interesting, it is used by Prometheus Lights (Darksucks). The first run of Preon P 1 Mk III was made with 4 different finishes and the pictures are great to compare surface treatments.

My first choice would be no mechanical finish (slight machine marks add character and I believe it was intended this way from the start) with electroless nickel plating (has a very nice "metal" look and is better than bare aluminium and probably also better/more durable than clear anodization).

My second choice (in case electroless nickel plating is not feasible) would be no mechanical finish plus anodization in any color other than black, preferably natural color (or maybe dark grey).

post #1 says:

post #2 says:

@jon:

From the top of the first post:

As far as finish goes, the original idea was no finishing other than clear ano. If that doesn’t work, I’d rather have the mechanical finish be as minimal as possible and the chemical finish be as close to a natural colour as possible, such as a medium grey. Overall I think I’d be happy enough with !=raw && !=black.

The reason I asked informally was to give Fritz more data about whether to go for grey, silver, bare, or another vote. While opinions so far are varied, it sounds like a lot of people are okay with Fritz deciding what the finish is.

As far as I can tell, the most common preference is dark grey / natural, followed by bare. Perhaps it can be made in a natural ano finish by default, with a batch of bare aluminum made for those who want one? That seemed to work fairly well for the BLF-A6. It’s up to Fritz to decide what to do though, and to negotiate the details with Lumintop. Every new option we ask for makes things harder for them.

It looks like more updates are needed, to make the information consistent.

It’d be nice to have the first few posts in a text file and a revision control system, to make changes more consistent, convenient, and transparent… but that isn’t how it’s handled right now. A text box in a browser leaves a lot to be desired, compared to a full-featured text editor.

And now…. a brief musical interlude. :wink:
.

U2 - I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For (Official Music Video) - YouTube]

Gordon Lightfoot - Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald - YouTube]

Nice interlude choices. Its terrifying that these songs are now considered “oldies” by a lot of people.

Not sure if I had already stated that I require TWO …. thanks

Thanks Frank. :wink: And yep, there has been a lot of ‘water under the bridge & spilt milk’ since those were released. :+1:

Oops…. better go take my nap, I’m feeling my age just talking about it. :person_facepalming: … :smiley: . :smiley: . :smiley:

Hell yeah, sweet tunes, better than today’s garbage

My feelings too…… :wink:

To be fair, there was just as much garbage in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s too. It’s a matter of separating the wheat from the chaff. :stuck_out_tongue:

/\… :+1: … That’s probably true.

N. 1313 and 1314 , See Interest list by pepinfaxera

New requests: See #Post duplicate , Page 111

At one point, people were complaining that 90% of science fiction is crap. A sci-fi author responded, admitting this is true… but meaningless. Because, as he said, 90% of everything is crap. Sci-fi is no different. And thus was formed Sturgeon’s Law.

I’d argue, though, that many things actually have gotten better over time, and are still doing so. There was certainly very good music made 50 years ago, lots of awesome songs. But looking at recent music, the amount of good songs is an order of magnitude more, and the production techniques have evolved to improve the quality and sophistication of the result. In both cases, it may be that only a 10% slice of the pie isn’t crap… but the entire pie has gotten bigger and fancier over time.

Flashlights are probably a more relatable example of this happening though. Again, most are junk. But today there are a lot more good ones than there used to be, even if there are also a lot more bad ones. And in some ways, even today’s junk out-performs top-of-the-line models from 20 years ago.

Absolutely! It’s why I don’t freak out if something doesn’t put out 5000 lumens, have a perfect tint, or any number of other parameters.
When I started there were purple tints and blue tints, 120 lumens was AWESOME, and it was mostly AA and CR123a lights.
The FW3A is science fiction come true. Seriously.

Thought of the FW3A when I looked at a horizontal mill at work today: