Sofirn SP70 Alone $50, PM for AMZ US CODE(LIMITED)

Since it is the first 2 day 26650 the range of the power supply then it should be within the scope of the ideal, if using a CREE XHP70.2 have 4500 lm is a long range, but also I want to have at least 800 meters that is just good. In addition, I expect it to have a low brightness light at its tail for emergency use, which can be easily found in the dark

Sounds great to me! But I don’t know how 26650 and 21700 will be manageable in the same battery tube even with adapters. 21700 cells will have a length of at least 70mm each. Those 26650 cells have a shorter length of approx. 65mm and may need magnets or soldered buttons on their pole to fit in a tube designed for 2x 21700. That means one needs to calculate a spring deflection of additional 10mm (5mm per cell) apart from the usual compression of the springs when inserting batteries into the tube.

It would be great if there were interchangeable flashlight heads for individual illumination needs:

  • one deep SMO reflector with XHP70.2 (comparable to the Convoy L6)
  • a triple SMO reflector with 3x XHP35 Hi (comparable to the C8F but bigger)
  • a flood optic array of carclo lenses like the Meteor M43 uses, e.g. 3x 10507 Carclo lenses each with 3 XP-L2 or LH351D emitter

So, in the end one could choose of three different flashlights with only one battery tube needed. Development costs might be a bit lower if all versions use the same battery tube. Constant output is something a lot of flash’oholics would appreciate, i.e. a very efficient boost driver or buck driver would be great even though costs may rise a bit. Moreover, ramping as e.g. in NarsilM will be a great advantage over fixed modes.

Let me throw in a suggestion as well. How about a design similar to Thrunite TN40S? 4x XHP35 HI, large head with 4 reflectors, running of 4x18650 with great heatsinking and UI, backlit metal side switch only. High output thrower with a lot of usable spill.

I wish Sofirn would develop a nice alternative allround thrower like the Acebeam X65 for a reasonable price:

  • 5x XHP35 Hi Quintuple Reflector
  • 8.000 - 12.000 lumens, depending on LED binning and current regulation
  • 8x 18650 or 6x 21700 (no built-in battery pack!)
  • Optional short tube (4x 18650 or 3x 21700)
  • Ramping OS like NarsilM, Andùril, etc.

I’m really curious if such a flashlight would be feasable for far less than $ 450,00 with the big advantage not being dependent on an expensive proprietary battery pack like with an Acebeam X65. Such a light would be far more interesting to me than any Acebeam X70 or Olight X9R.

So far, there is nothing that really compares to the Acebeam X65 when both flood and throw are combined in a best way, except for the Fenix RC40 maybe. So, there is a good chance to fill a gap in the market. If such a flashlight became available for $ 150 - $ 250 it certainly would find a lot of prospective buyers.

Triple 21700 is less space-efficient than quad 18650.

Use xhp35 and make a real budget thrower. I’m sure I’m not alone in wanting an affordable long range light.

The recent blf GT and mf04 are far from budget.

I would also welcome a pimped-out, budget friendlier alternative to Acebeam K65 or Mateminco MT70 type of lights. Large, 8-9cm almost smooth reflector, hard driven single XHP70.2 with great tint. Metal side switch only, 4x18650 tube, with alternative extension tube for 8x18650. Good heatsinking and quality boosting driver to let batteries drain almost flat. Great configurable UI.

THIS. I believe that many of us like long range, HIGH OUTPUT lights, thats why i suggested XHP70.2. The GT and MF04 are not only too expensive, but for many they are too big for practical use.

I like the 9cm smooth reflector with XHP70.2 idea! Great output and throw (7500 lumen, 320 kcd) but better handling than the BLF GT, only slightly larger than the K70. With 2x26650 in series a simple lineair driver can be used (XHP70.2 in 6V configuration) and high enough current achieved (8-9A). Modders can slice the dome and improve the throw to perhaps close to 600 kcd.

Why not give it a shave in factory?

Good point.

Wow settle down lads. We are going to scare them away lol. So many big ideas at once.

[quote=How about battery tube for 2* 26650 and coming 2 sleeves for 21700?
Same big head for two kinds reflector, one XHP70.2 or three XHP35 HI emitters[/quote]

One XHP70.2 and one XHP35 HI to keep the price low should be fine ,to make the tube fit both 26650/21700 just make a spacer to add the length and also make flat top 26650 can connect in serie.

+1 my vote

This sounds good to me.

Yeah, the MF03 never got off the ground, I was wanting that to be my first real monster light beyond the Q8. This would be an opportunity to leapfrog the market on that concept, perhaps with a more budget friendly version, 3x XHP70 but not all reflectors the same, and selectable between them or all 3 at once, to give flood, throw, general purpose beam, or all 3 at once for raw power, run on 26650 series tube instead of multi-cell carriers.

I’m sorry but what’s your point?

21700 will be the future. Why go back to 18650? There are already enough 18650 lights available.

21700 will be the future. But so will be 18650. It’s not going anywhere, there are no signs of it becoming obsolete.
Quads use less empty space in a circle than triples do, so they are more space-efficient in general.
I actually did some calculations of it, but I have lost the spreadsheet. Anyway the result was that quad 18650 simply offers more mAh/mm³ than triple 21700. And that’s my point.

What about 3x21700 in series instead of 4x18650? I wonder if that would make the battery tube slightly smaller in diameter for a more easy carry? As it stands I think tubes that hold 4x18650 are slightly too large to be considered comfortable to hold.

1x26650 tubes are very comfortable to hold, and I find 1x18650 tubes slightly too small to hold.

A Ring of xhp70.2 like acebeam XT80 and Direct drive all the LEDs :disguised_face: :smiling_imp: