New WildTrail (former LuckSun) BLF-D80v2 Sale is open.

Please do not bash on LS when it is not justified! They are hearing us and they are asking about things we discuss here.
The max driver size now is 19,2mm limited by the tube diameter. So it would be possible to go with 17-19,2mm for the driver (nothing is set in stone for now).
But they asked what people want and what makes sense. And to change the driver to 20mm they would have to make a new tube (slightly bigger).
We are talking about it and they check if it is possible and what it would cost. Also i asked if we could upgrade the threads.
Now they use a very fine one. Like most newer and better flashlights it would be nice to go with square threads. Less wear and less prone to damage if something like dirt comes on the threads.

The fine thread on the tail does not help with the loosening of the RH threaded switch PCB retaining ring, too easy to apply a great deal of pressure/friction at this interface. A coarser square-cut thread would be great. An LH threaded ring is also desirable, so that it tightens instead of loosening when the tail cap is removed.

This problem can happen straight away, or after a period of actual use. Never knowing whether the tail assembly is going to come apart, or just come loose and intermittent, each time you change the cell is not confidence-inspiring. My bodge was to thread-lock it together.

Masses of discussion on the original thread, maybe read it completely, in case there are some lessons to be learned there that may have been forgotten or never addressed.

Not bashing LS, but I have struggled with the non-standard driver cavity on mine. having had to file down an adapter PCB, and the driver, just to fit a 17mm one to replace the original. Tedious. Just saying.

One of these:

https://www.fasttech.com/products/1138202

Alternative would have been to solder copper wire around the edge of the driver to expand it, but that would have been mechanically and electrically poor.

Also be aware that the driver cavity is fully anodised, in fact everything is, except for the faces of the tube. There is no current path to the driver or tube, it is reliant on contact through the driver retaining ring. No problem, it works well as long as the retaining ring makes a good contact with the driver ground ring. But there are quite a few such critical interfaces in series in this torch, relying on perfect contact at each.

Other torches do things differently, e.g. masking off anodising to ensure solid contact through the tail/tube/head for the important -ve cell current path.

They are still in the design process, so dont overshoot if something is not right

Almost every light depends on the retaining ring for proper contact to the battery tube,
even if threads and driver resting ring are not anodized on the head the contact is not very reliable if retaining ring gets loose

using the head and tailcap retaining ring as direct contact needs for sure threads that are not in the same clockwise direction,
of course other lights have the tube always rest on an aluminum rim not the retaining rings itself are better because it eliminates the loosening problem

I never realized before that the tailcap of the D80 has the retaining ring contact the tube when it is tightened down, even though I have one. :+1: I had a look and sure enough it does. Several other lights I looked inside have the tube contact a machined face in the cap. The retaining ring is smaller and does not contact the tube body at all.

It seems to me that if they really want to make an improved version of the D80 they should redesign the tailcap retaining ring. No wonder some manufacturers like to glue parts together. :frowning:

Then while thay are at it redesign the head to use a 17mm driver.

I like the feel and appearance of the D80, but the lights I use most have side switches which has moved my two D80’s to the closet queen shelf. Appearance was what made me desire the D80 in the first place.

One question.
If we go for max throw in a new D80, would it be interesting to check also for very narrow TIR optics?

I think the 20mm driver is a good option. Yes i mostly use 17mm drivers but the BLF driver fit in the old D80 fine because the retaining design is so wide it holds it good. I found the Sofirn drivers dont fit they are to small they are supposed to be 17mm but more like 16.4mm i think. When you are talking about a few mm difference for a driver it shouldn’t really matter. If its to big you can sand it down a few mm most times and if its to small use an adapter ring?

So fare the light looks awesome keep up the work!

Are you back at home TheOnlyDocc? Started modding the X6?

No not jet. Today they did another CT scan. If the results are ok i can go home on Sunday. If not i have to stay another week. But i can not wait to sleeb in my own bed again (allone ) without anybody snoring the complete night :+1:
The nurses think i am not right in my head :smiley: . I have my Vernier Caliper in my side cabinet and also the old D80.
And 2 times the week my neighbour visits and brings me all the nice things that arrived for me. 80% flashlight related stuff

So next week they will have a talk with the factory engineer.
There is a lot on the list

- Tailcap change so it can Tailstand

- Threads change to square more corse threads (and if possible double o-rings for better sealing)

- Changes to make space for 20mm driver (slightly bigger tube)

- Changes at the retaining rings to make sure they do not come loose (at the head possible LH threads or removing the outer lipp so the Aluminium makes contact)

- Internal changes of the head to help with heatpath and dissipation (thicker shelf, walls, deeper finns)

- New driver designt by Lexel with Bistro UI

- Upgraded reflector to get best throw

- Small adjustments on the front to get better sealing

- New springs (similar to the blue springs)

  • Making sure unprotected and long protected batterys fit (tube length)

Have i forgotten anything?

Sounds like a brand new flashlight

If the tube needs to be bigger for 20mm driver, why not just make it 21700 or 20700 compatible.

Agree for 21700

Discussion of LED choices and interaction with reflector fine-tuning. Important to get optimum results.

Double o-rings not needed, a single one seals well, done properly. This is not a dive torch.

Retaining ring in head should remain clockwise. The tube is rarely removed from the head, and when tightened up also tightens the ring, if somehow is a little loose.

It is the tailcap that needs a left-handed ring, and/or redesign so the tube bottoms on the metal of the cap, rather than the ring. This is the piece that is unscrewed every time the cell is changed, and tends to loosen. Un-anodised Al to Al contact works here, the constant use keeps the surfaces clean.

Better thread engagement between tube and head, for mechanical and thermal reasons. Square coarser thread not actually necessary here, it should rarely be touched. In fact undesirable, the head should be on tighter than the tail, so if you grasp the head rather than the tube whilst unscrewing the tail, it is the tail that loosens.

Consider masking off anodising from these threads, and inside the head where the driver rests, for an additional current path.

20mm driver is good. If Lexel’s is good I won’t want to change it. It was the original poor one that had to go, and at that time the obvious swap was to a 17mm one, at best a marginal fit, in my case I chose to use a 20mm adapter and file things down to fit.

Short (18350, 16340 etc.) tube option.

Its sounding good.

Hope all goes well for your scan.

19.6 to 20mm increase is only 0.4mm in diameter. Personally I don’t see why the tube needs to increase in OD, it is chunky, hardly thin-walled. And the only bit that might need to be slightly larger is where it threads into the head, to allow a larger driver retaining ring to be fitted. But there are also other ways to do that without change.

To take a 21700 that’s requires at least 3mm increase in diameter and 5mm in length, knocking-on to every other dimension. Becoming a quite different much larger torch.

The 21700 cell dimensions are not well standardised, it’s can still be a lottery as to what fits with what, choices and availability are limited, and prices higher.

Then those wanting to keep using 18650s, like me, have to figure out how to adapt them to fit into something 3mm wider and 5mm longer, without rattling or running out of spring length, or adding a magnet. For no practical benefit. If I anticipate needing more run time I just carry a spare cell in my pocket. Which I usually do anyway, saves topping off the cell in the torch every outing “just in case”.

I’ve standardised on 18650, 26650 and 18350/16340 for all my torches, and don’t intend to buy any new cells for a while. A 26650 torch does everything 21700 can, and takes an 18650 with a simple sleeve. And fits my hand better, when I want a chunky torch. Usually I don’t.

Further: provide, or make provision for, a clip.

That’s something that attracts strong opinions here, by those who want one.

So i got answere from LuckySun.

  1. 20mm driver is OK, we will make new tube.
  2. Threads change to square, maybe more threads. (i sended a pic i found on the net showing a square thread but it only showed a few turns. It was only to show the kind of thread.)
    3.thicker shelf, deeper finns like the pic (They send a drawing. But they used almost all mass we added to make the finns deeper and add bottlenecks again. I corrected the drawings to show them that we woud like a better heatpath. The lower finns are still a bit deeper. But now there is enough material to get a good heat transfer inside the head)
  3. bigger Beryllium Copper Spring (CU-BE) ,maybe 0.8-1mm. (I do not know if they contacted BlueSwordM for the specs. I will contact him to ask)
    5.reflector maybe little change, not decided, still at design (The 7mm LED hole is on the plan. And they try to get more throw out of the limited space)
  4. 18650 battery from 65mm to 70mm is OK. (I made it a special point. This should be really work out and they will test it so no thing like the last time should happen)
  5. As to the driver or UI, will send the DXF to lexel when design is finished.

Tailcap change for Tailstand is also on the list but not mentioned again (no big change)
They looked into the retaining rings. At the tail everything is ok (the last D80 i bought had no problems with the retaining ring. The tube did not make contact to the brass ring in the tailcap. So no need for a change there (only make it fit the slightly bigger tube. At the head they will make a change. First ideas are inn but they are checking if its working like we want. Please give them time. They are working on it.

Here the original drawing

And here with my changes

Doing a good job Docc! :+1:

Little status update.
I got the message that the factory is very busy these days. But they hope and try to get the Host design ready next week. I do not know how far they are with the driver and the springs but when i get news i will post updates here.
And i got a drawing of the tail. The tube should only make contact on the outer rim. So the retaining ring will not come loose. No need for a LH thread.

And a small side notice. I am writing these finaly lying in my own bed at home. :partying_face:
This feels sooooo much better. And without anybody snoring i hope to sleep like a baby wrapped in huge fluffy cotton ball!
I still need surgery in the near future because the internal scaring is making big problems (can not sit to long without pain and other more serious effects). But that is not happening today or tomorrow!

I’m glad you’re home. Best wishes for recovery!

Home is always so much better than the hospital… Glad to hear!!!

The DXF files for the new 20mm driver are on the way to Lexel. The Host design is in the making.
The factory is still very busy with customer orders (titanium lights).
I try to get a few more background information about the company (i find it very interesting to get a bit more information about the structure, size. . .). Things like Do they only produce under the LuckySun brand or do they produce things for other companys. . .
If people are interested in this stuff i will let you know (if i get a peek behind the curtain).

And they will also look into TIRs. Maybe the right TIR could give better throw or at least a better more uniform looking beam (less artifacts).