:sunglasses:
Thank you!!!
Thank you!!! :+1:
.
.
.
BTW, for those that meet the criteria on its post#1, and didn’t “entered” yet, I’m running a GAW here for this light when it becomes available
:sunglasses:
Thank you!!!
Thank you!!! :+1:
.
.
.
BTW, for those that meet the criteria on its post#1, and didn’t “entered” yet, I’m running a GAW here for this light when it becomes available
Found 3 posts, maybe it was one of these?
Thanks!
… any week now.
…
… I hope.
Neal got what was supposed to be the final prototype, but he said something vague about having issues, and hasn’t really answered my questions about it. So if my guess is correct, he’s working out whatever-it-was with Lumintop.
Neal also sent some pictures, but they’re the same ones tatasal posted. I’ll put them up again in another comment.
That already happened, basically. Fritz designed the light and doesn’t really have any more tasks to do. I think he has just been too busy to stay involved, so I’ve been filling in. Most of what is left depends on Neal, me, and whoever is willing to help at TLF. But at the moment, every pending task depends on Neal.
Complaining about things which can be fixed is one thing. It’s arguably productive, especially when it comes in the form of a bug report with a patch. But complaining about things which can’t be fixed, or just tossing negativity into the ether, mostly just drags people down.
For example, it’s unhealthy to the community when someone spends more than a year posting an average of 2+ comments per day (and not much else) which all have more or less the same negative message:
Sir, I understand that it is your constitutional right to poop on the floor of a public forum every morning after coffee, but… could you not?
Yeah… sometimes I have to wait until I can set aside an entire afternoon. Far too often, BLF is like a job that I don’t get paid for. In the past, I’ve intentionally avoided running any projects like this, but when everyone else disappeared I kinda got stuck with it.
Well, yes. You’re completely correct. But communication has been the primary ongoing issue for this project. I would have set things up differently if it had been my project, but it’s way too late to restart the whole thing with more-communicative team members. So it’s going to continue to be difficult until the light is finally shipped. Maybe even after that too, depending on how much Neal invests into customer support services.
I understand that it’s frustrating, and it’s more frustrating for me than for most, but it’s not something which can be fixed so we all just have to deal with it until it’s over. And, unfortunately, complaining about unfixable issues only makes things worse. It makes life more unpleasant for everyone involved while adding nothing useful or insightful. Of course, that will happen anyway, but I really appreciate the people who refrain from doing so or who try to make things easier while we wait.
Thanks for clearing that up. It gets a little old fighting pessimistic speculation, unfounded claims, FUD, inflammatory posts, and other disinformation. So it’s really nice to have help.
There is no mystery. All the info is from this thread. We just need to read it.
I understand that not everyone has the time to read the thread, so I try to answer these repetitive type questions when I have time.
As above, thank you.
Perhaps future projects need to come with the following disclaimer: “No refunds on emotional investments!”
I may have to put that in the first post.
I just searched and had no luck. Someone, I think TK, mentioned different optics that could easily be switched in and out, for more throw, different beam patterns, or whatnot. Does anyone know where I can find this info?
Any standard Carclo triple optic of the right size should work, such as the ones sold at MtnElectronics. This includes 10507, 10511, 10508, 10509, and 10510. The 10507 optic makes the most throw, but also makes virtually every emitter look ugly. So the default is 10511 because it provides the most throw available without causing strong beam artifacts. It can also be polished to increase throw, while still producing a nicer-looking beam than 10507.
So, Neal sent me pictures of proto4. It was meant to be the final prototype, but he said something vague about it not working right and is presumably trying to work that out with Lumintop. I’ll probably also send another firmware update, in case there’s still time to use it… but I don’t know if it’s too late or not.
Here are the pictures Neal sent:
Sign me up!
Psyched to see this still moving forward. Thanks TK.
I just searched and had no luck. Someone, I think TK, mentioned different optics that could easily be switched in and out, for more throw, different beam patterns, or whatnot. Does anyone know where I can find this info?
From my notes:
Upgrades / Verbesserungen / Mods
• 3x Optic
http://www.carclo-optics.com/optic-10507
bzw. Toykeeper suggested
http://www.carclo-optics.com/optic-10511
• 4x Optic: The Carclo optic is most efficient with the XP-G2 emitter, so the de-domed variant gives better throw vs an HI. It’s not always about absolute lumens, but of course the XP-L2 would be the way to go there.• TK bei der FW3A: I still think Carclo 10511 is Where It’s At.
For XP-G2, the official specs are:
10507: 4.8 cd/lm
10511: 5.5 cd/lm
For XP-G3, the ratings are lower:
10507: 3.1 cd/lm
10511: 2.7 cd/lm
Nichia 219c has similar ratings:
10507: 3.3 cd/lm
10511: 2.9 cd/lm
Not sure why the relative throwiness reverses sometimes, but the 10511’s throw increases if you polish the frosted part by rubbing it on fabric or something… and afterward it still has less corona artifacts than the 10507. It’s too bad they don’t seem to come in a non-frosted 10511 variety.
Here are a few configuration estimates, taking into account the optic specs and an estimated lumen count:
219c w/ 10507: ~3000 lm, ~9.9 kcd lux
219c w/ 10511: ~2950 lm, ~8.5 kcd lux
XP-G2 w/ 10507: ~2500 lm, ~11.9 kcd lux
XP-G2 w/ 10511: ~2400 lm, ~13.2 kcd lux
XP-G3 w/ 10507: ~3600 lm, ~11.1 kcd lux
XP-G3 w/ 10511: ~3500 lm, ~9.5 kcd lux
XP-L HI w/ 10507: ~3350 lm, (no cd/lm data available, guessing ~18.7 kcd lux)
XP-L HI w/ 10511: ~3300 lm, (no cd/lm data available, guessing ~20.8 kcd lux)
These are all totally theoretical though, using numbers from Carclo’s specs and measurements of similar lights. They’re probably pretty far off from reality. Mostly I just wanted to show that there are a variety of sweet spots for different use cases. The FW3A’s specified config is one of those sweet spots, but other options might be interesting later too.
Mostly, I just think the 10511’s beam looks a lot smoother, and the difference in throw is usually small. Here’s how they compare in two of my lights… 10507 on the left, 10511 on the right:
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnWO8iN4Fzg
Q: FW3A, a TLF/BLF EDC flashlight - SST-20 available, coupon codes public - #1127 by ToyKeeper• Clear optics 1057
The 10507 has the biggest numbers on paper, but…
- It makes an ugly beam. I hear it looks okay with LH351D, but on every emitter I’ve tried in one, I end up hating the beam. It produces a rainbow effect and lots of artifacts.
- The 10511 (matt) can be polished to increase throw, if desired, and from what I hear, it can throw better than the 10507 after being polished. Afterward it has more visible artifacts, but the beam still ends up looking nicer than a 10507.
- Swapping the optic is easy and the parts are only about $1.50 each, for anyone who wants a different optic.
Q: FW3A, a TLF/BLF EDC flashlight - SST-20 available, coupon codes public - #3711 by ToyKeeper
I’ll probably also send another firmware update, in case there’s still time to use it…
Which version of Anduril does it currently have and are there any significant/noticeable differences to the latest version?
EDIT: found it…
The firmware used should be this one: http://toykeeper.net/torches/fsm/anduril.2018-12-02.FW3A.hex
Recommended fuse values are:
Low: 0xE2
High: 0xDE
Extended: 0xFF
thank you TK!
So good looking.
Can you please put me down for one more unit (2 in total), thanks.
ToyKeeper, you Rock…!!!
Please add me for another unit in addition to my previous unit (Total = 2 units).
Thanks.
Huge Thank You to tatasal and ToyKeeper for giving us an update and keeping this project alive!
I think proto4 looks fantastic!!!
On a side note, has there been any talk of a short 18350 tube for it?
Please put me down for 2 more (4 total)
I agree, loving what I see and grateful to the people keeping it moving.
I believe it was said very early on that 18350 was out of the question. I might be wrong because I can’t find any mention of it now. It is late though… Time for bed…
I believe it was said very early on that 18350 was out of the question. I might be wrong because I can’t find any mention of it now. It is late though… Time for bed…
Yes, you remember correctly and it was pretty early on. It’s in the first post in the “FAQ” section.
Thanks for the updates ToyKeeper. I’m still super stoked for this. Still have money set aside for my three.
The latest proto still looks great to me. I like bare finish look but this is very nice too!
any photos of the light actually ON
any photos of the light actually ON
That would be nice.
… but not critical. It’s a triple using a standard Carclo optic. Beam should look like any other triple with the same emitters using the same optic.
I was thinking more of proof of life
I was thinking more of proof of life
Well we know at least one of the prototypes works. Didn’t TK mention she’s been EDCing hers for the last year?