(prototype) the GT Mini

Ordered 1 Mini GT with 18350/18350 Tube.

Just filled out the form, is the GB still on Martin?

About the driver: is it sure a buck driver, as mentioned in this thread? I can’t believe they went for that, the voltage difference between a 18650 cell and a XP-L Hi is so small that it will only regulate current a little in the first few minutes, I’d choose for simple cheap lineair and have that extra boost of direct drive in those minutes. I’m curious about the first pictures of the driver.

Looking at Texas Ace’s measurements, the XP-L HI has a V_f of around 3.7V @ 4.5A.

So accounting for the voltage sag under load, a high drain cell should stay in the regulated region for slightly less than half of its capacity on turbo.

The other big advantage of a regulated buck driver over a FET is improved efficiency in the intermediate modes. So it should be able to produce noticeably better runtimes at 60-80% of max than the Emisar D1S. I’ll gladly take that over an extra 100 turbo lumens that won’t be noticeable by the eye anyway.

I answer todays requests tonight

will also add a Diffusor and a surprise ;)

Regulated about half of its capacity, is this correct? A 30Q at 5A starts between 3.9 and 4 V, at 8 minutes it drops below 3.8V, at half capacity it is at 3.6V. Between cell and led there is always a voltage drop caused by body, springs and wiring, if you get a 0.2V drop (at 5A current), that is very good, in that case the springs are already bypassed. So the battery voltage comes very soon very close to the led voltage for 5A. Further from what I understand about buck drivers, they need a minimum overhead voltage, a value that I can find is a minimum 0.5V difference needed to function. So I do not see a buck driver doing a thing here.

But I must confess that my knowledge about basic calculations is better than my knowledge about drivers…

Wow. 40. If that is true then I am going to have to rethink a lot about manufactures numbers. I was under the impression (perhaps falsely) that the zebralight calibration was one of the more premuim methods. It was for that reason that I assumed Acebeam L16, X45, X80, all of my olights and many other top brands were within about a 10 margin of error from the truth. Most often with those brands I would get just under or just over the rated output.

I have ordered a set of Maukkas lights and could hardly be more excited!
.
.
.
.

About the GT MINI. I get why 18650 was the choice. That said if 20700/21700 options come available I would be crazy over that.

Absolutely! I’d love to see this light with a 21700 tube.

Are all physical ratios the same as the GT (i.e. a scale model) or does it just look roughly like the GT?

I’d love to see it with a 26650 tube. It’d be a good place to store one of my Littokala’s…… :wink:

So I’ve been on the fence with ordering this. The glued in driver is something I’ve never had to deal with. Does this make it extremely difficult to modify? I mean, if I wanted to throw a different driver in there later on… is that even possible or would I have to glue it back in?

Think we need clarification on the driver design. I can’t tell if they mean the driver retaining ring will be glued or it doesn’t use a retaining ring and the battery tube is what presses it into place.

It looks like the switch might be attached to the driver and that is why the driver has ears on it to keep it orientated in the right direction.

Then it looks like the battery tube is what pushes against the driver. If that is the case, they might be gluing the battery tube into place. It would also mean you can’t swap drivers.

This picture is what is giving me doubt in the overall design; there’s no retaining ring. Nor is there one on the tailcap

I’ve see this on cheap xxxFire flashlights mostly, it seems weird to have it on such a nice light. What holds the tailcap spring in? If this light was $20-$30, I wouldn’t mind it. But for the price, there should be retaining rings.

To me, it seems like they cut corners yet still want to charge a premium price.

Edit: Has anyone seen what the LED/MCPCB and the back side of the driver actually look like?

As there is no tail switch, the tail cap’s PCB only has to transfer ground between the battery tube and the spring, gluing the PCB into the tail cap is a fairly normal procedure and doesn’t hurt anything at all.

Many a light has had the driver held in by the battery tube, a great many have had a spot of glue on em to keep the driver from shifting about during battery changes should someone wish to pull the entire tube instead of the tail cap. Seen it a lot of times before and it’s not a testament to quality or lack there-of, just a different way of doing things. The glue that’s usually used is a sort of clear-white bonding glue something like Elmer’s. Easily defeated and I’ve never bother’ed to glue it back in when making driver or component changes. Nothing to worry about, just different is all.

Premium price this one is not. $100 and up lights are at premium’s. $300-400 are exotic, and $500 and up are just getting out of hand, usually custom with a lot of man-hours involved but not always.

To my way of thinking, a large bag of potato chips should cost $1.59-$1.79, anyone noticed the Premium they get on chips these days? Lord have mercy!

We’re spoiled to the el-cheapo lights, all there is to it…

Yeah…. I went ahead & ordered one, but those pictures gave me pause also. I don’t quite understand why they did it this way…. I guess they have their reasons…… just wish we knew what those reasons were. :smiley:
.
EDIT: I just read Dale’s post. What he said make sense.

Thanks Dale…. :beer:

Usually it’s a matter of maintaining a compact nature and probably also keeping costs down. The light was targeted to look like a smaller version of a BLF Group Buy light, hence, it was also targeted at a budget crowd. Make it a little longer here, a little bigger there, a little more complex at that junction, a few more machined pieces, the cost goes up and up, sales get iffy….

Emisar lights are made the same way. The small Thorfire TK05 has a glued in tail-cap pcb. Fenix small lights have glued in tail-cap pcb’s and nearly impossible to reach drivers. This has been going on for a long time, nothing new here.

so any pics of the final version with logo and all thats gonna ship to us?

I was mainly referring to its direct competitor, a Convoy C8. Similar size, output and build quality, and yet its twice the price.

Having not seen the emitter, mcpcb, back side of the driver, etc… I can’t justify the price without seeing what is “under the hood.”

M4D M4X, do you think we could get some pictures of the emitter, and the internals of the Mini GT?

A Fast Freddy’s burger is very similar to a McDonald’s burger, yet the price is not comparable. :wink: My cousin’s Cessna flies, but the resemblance to your ride stops pretty much right there. lol

Convoy makes a really nice light at a very attractive price, perhaps ruining the whole deal for a lot of people. Get a new C8+ if the price point is that unattractive, this GT mini is not especially adept at being an impressive light solely based on it’s performance. But for those of us that just love how much it resembles the cumbersome big daddy, it’s already on order. :smiley:

There are a lot of tricks that can be employed to talk someone out of something, similarly there are a lot of ways an addict can talk himself INTO something. Perspective rules. Me personally, I really liked the idea to minimize the GT, that got me right there as I’ve always been a sucker for a miniature version of a known larger product, especially if the miniature is well made. If they took it a step or two further and kept the full scale, so the lights look identical, but in a 10440 size light, yeah, I’d be all over that one too.

What’s wrong with this picture? A jet pilot, unable to justify a $35 price tag… I know a lot of people pay 3 times that for supper! For ONE!