[Available again! - BLF special edition light] new Sofirn AAA twisty high CRI 5mm LED

If it ain’t broke…don’t fix it. Let the new released torch cut its teeth without interference. It needs to be seen what it is not what it can be made to be. So far, it’s chasing the ghost of the Fenix E01. I ordered C01’s just like everybody else in thread did. Give it a chance as is from Sofirn.

Received mine today. Great light but not much people mention that it has a tunnel vision beam, no spills. Like a zoomie profile.

Maybe everyone knows but me. Lol

edit:

BTW…I wan’t calling it a POS (less than adequate)…I was asking if it was turning out to be a POS (less than adequate)….all directly from your input djozz.

Let’s hope not so. :+1:

my two C01’s arrived … :+1:

Not even a single speck of worries here… Excluding the 4 submitted in the interest list, so far I’ve ordered another 8 because this specfic model is the perfect startup high CRI light for my loved ones as coming festive gifts…:slight_smile: It’s within my budget.Using this to educate and get them started with. Many thanks for those and Sofirn who made this happen…:slight_smile: High CRI ftw!

no, no, send it to me instead of tossing it, if you’re not kidding.

Like I said, “moose turd pie” is better than what I could make myself. So I like it.

If anything, this should be a learning experience for Sofirn about meeting specs, not changing specs, and checking every piece they get from subcontractors for qa/qc.

And making sure to have a qa/qc program, of course. Those are defined terms and if Sofirn learns to adopt a quality production process they will stand out markedly different from the average manufacturer in industries around them.

I ranted about this in an earlier thread:

That’s why I asked who owns Sofirn, a while back. If the workers own it, well, pride’s something that develops.
If outsiders own it, that’s less likely.

Ordered on the 28th, 10 days later and this update:
December 8, 2018
Processed Through Facility
GUANGZHOU EMS, CHINA

Im a bit lost
was unable to find the photo of the fenix contact area, I know its here somewhere…

found these…
but still dont know what that last pic is, and what the production contacts look like, before being sanded and soldered over…

not sure if this is just art:

can someone give me a pictorial sequence… Fenix contacts, and Sofirn current production contacts, unmodified?

When I look down the battery tube past the threads, I see a shiny metal shelf — I assume that’s what the contacts on the head are supposed to reach. Maybe a dab of conductive lube would keep the contacts from wearing out.

An interesting parallel — one design problem of the Arc AAA was that the circuit board was held to the head by a metal collar just crimped tight that eventually loosened up or flaked off due to metal fatigue. Arc covered that under warranty for the owner’s lifetime; I’ve had several fixed over the years.

But ya know, there’s an argument in favor of using a threaded retaining ring to hold the bits in place.

I received mine yesterday and this is how it looks like -

thanks
here is my Fenix E01

now, what is the problem?

Good question. I’m kinda lost myself… :question:

Streamer had a legitimate question too about it being a dud from the beginning.

But, from reading it all several times… :person_facepalming: …. my take is this:

“I think” djozz was identifying/speculating what ’might’ be a weak spot in the unit and could possibly cause problems sometime in the future.

He then illustrated a ’fix’ that would correct the problem ‘should’ it occur.
The same ’fix’ would prevent it from happening in the first place.

Anyway…. that is my take on it. There is no problem at this point. … :smiley:

This issue needs a good pic I see now.

Left my Fenix E01. You can see that the copper is extending to the edge and that the contact area is ok, not great IMO but this light has proven over the years that it is adequate.

Middle is one of the C01 prototypes. I see now that the copper here also does not extend to the side, but that the contact area is only good because the circuitry is not overly well centered on the board, so that one side makes for a very good contact area, the other side much less. Btw, at the time of the prototype I did warn Barry to pay attention to good contact points.

Right is the production C01. The circuitry is even a bit further from the edge of the board compared to the prototype, not much of a contact area leftover.

But it works and maybe for a very long time, again mind that there is no hard data at all at this moment that this is a failure point at all, we are speculating based on what we see. It will not help for this production run but I will confront Barry with this picture.


(in the picture not all boards seem the same size, this is distortion of my phone camera, in reality the boards are all the same size)

Great picture djozz, that clearly illustrates the issue.

I was wondering if there is a simple, cheap alteration to the head design Sofirn could implement in production in order to make the contact areas between PCB and body tube more robust and reliable?

Would just moving the contact pads more outside or enlarging them outwards be enough, or would an alternative design be a better fix (e.g. solder on a thin brass ring on the PCB)?

I like to have one of this in my collection :slight_smile:

Am I correct that the red encircled areas are the contact areas?

It would be great if we could come up with a design for the contact areas that would make the C01 as reliable as an HDS, without its complexity or high price tag.

Picture shows a vintage HDS EDC Ultimate 60 (2004-2006).

Thank for explaining THIS further djozz. :+1:

Glad you cautioned them about this in advance, a shame they apparently ignored you.

The Fenix E01 design is cheap and works, there is no need to do better than that, provided that it is copied well enough.

OK… hopefully this has been much ado about nothing then.

Thanks for sharing your illustrated ‘fix’ however…. just in case. :+1: