As long as USB charging is limited to little key chain lights, some headlamps, & options on a few ‘novice friendly’ lights; I don’ mind at all as long as the USB port is in the threads… hidden & protected by a tail or some other threaded cap.
Rubber plugs, no matter how good they seem at first are not a good long term solution.
I could care less if it be USB Micro or C. Seems to me Micro makes more sense in a small light
I am totally & completely against USB charging in High power Li Ion lights be they single cell or multi cell. The reasons for this are many, ranging from safety, to unwanted size increase, and anything in between. A high powered Li Ion light does not need USB charging.
As far as a “built in battery”, proprietary most likely; in a High Powered light: Absolutely NOT. I will not even go into my reasoning on this one, it would take to long. :person_facepalming:
But I personally would never own one. The only exception being very small keychain lights.
Why would cylindrical have more capacity ?
It does not seem logical too me and also you need stronger protection shell. I do not care of what form the battery have, it should have the same as the body of the flashlight if its cylindrical then you have cylindrical battery, but internal battery would mean you do need as strong protective shell because its protected by the flashlight body just like with smartphone batteries, they have no metallic protection layer anymore as they had before when you could replace them, similiar principle should work with flashlights.
Why tesla use regular batteries I do not know, cost is one for sure, probably higher yields on smaller batteries rather then bigger maybe…But to be honest I have no idea
That’s precisely because of the shell and the shape.
1. The cylindrical shape and fitting allows to fit more active material in, meaning higher energy density.
2. The steel casing allows for a much safer design compared to pouch cells.
Try puncturing a steel cased 18650/aluminium cased 21700. Not easy. A pouch cell can easily be penetrated by almost anything.
I never mentioned “big bomb”. Is that what you consider your ‘smart phone’ to be?
If so how do you deal with that? Looks like it would be tough mentally to carry it <span class=“bomb” big “a”> around with you… if you do carry it that is.
The FW3A team rejected support for protected cells because they decided that the extra 5 mm would be too much. And with this the rejected cells that have built-in chargers or powerbanks. So…5 mm clearly matters to some. That said for larger lights the size increase could be as low as 0. F.e. D4 could easily go with a larger diameter driver, that may be enough to add a charger. If not - going to double sided driver would be enough for sure. So I’m pretty confident that Emisar could pull it off with 0 size increase.
For me those are the main drawbacks and an absolute no go for built-in.
You are seeing this with a end-user point of view. Why would a manufacturer do this ?
Did you ever compare prices for proprietary replaceable rectangular battery for GoPro, Panasonic compact camera, etc ? They are way overpriced.
They are not built-in yet but you have to recharge it with the device’s built-in charger. You can buy an optionnal external charger but generally it is also overpriced.
All manufacturers know that it is better to have a proprietary format because people will have to buy it from them. Exclusivity = higher prices.
They also know that changing format regularly (but not to often) will force people to renew their stuff.
I’m using flashlights that are 10 years old.
I would hate to have to consider sending back a flashlight to china or usa for a built-in battery replacement and to hear that they no longer manufacturing this particular format.
They are running businesses and the general business plan have changed, durability is dead since long. They won’t make choices favorable to the end-user. Modularity isn’t in their plan. Proprietary is, and also forcing people to renew their stuff by a way or another.
If you want to be tightened to a manufacturer wills, built-in is the future, the jam on their bread and butter.
Well I would of course prefer a open standard so it works cross-brands so I can use nitecore battery module together with a astrolux flashlight for instance.
Even if it goes proprietary you might save money anyway since you only need to buy a new “head” when you upgrade flashlight.
Well I guess we will have to wait and see… of this will become a thing yet, so far nitecore TM10K is the only flashlight with non replaceable battery that I know of .But I read now it has a normal 21700 cell. anyway They claim they get more power out of it of having it irreplaceable.
@Ekstasis, what Nitecore is saying is absolute crap.
Not only is the Samsung 48G 21700 a 10A cell in a 30A light, meaning they cut costs, but the 30mOhm contact thing is quite crap.
There have been sub 10mOhm springs for a while now. They just wanted to justify putting a non replaceable incapable cell inside of a flashlight for cost-cutting and profit making.
The 40T wasn’t out yet when they made they made the TM10T. This is the problem with irreplaceable cells. The P42A cell that was recently released would have been perfect for this light.
People are not dumb and don’t mind built-in battery for devices below 40$ but when they are seeking durability for devices that are above 100$, generally people are thinking twice before buying it. For someone who is following the e-cigarettes trend, it’s all the more obvious. Things/trends are moving faster than on the flashlight market. There is a bunch of small and med size devices with built-in battery but most generally with a much lower price than bigger, more powerfull devices with built-in batteries, which are rarer.
Removable 18650/21700 battery’s devices are plethoric.
Nitecore could have weld (tab) this new battery in a sealed flashlight. Why didn’t they ? Probably because of complains from enthousiasts about the previous version or because they know that a built-in battery for devices with a significant price is still “shooting a bullet in the foot” when competitors don’t generalize it also.
EDIT : Sorry, I pictured it differently in my mind and thought you were saying that the new one will work with a removable battery.
Trying to push 30A through springs is a very, very difficult task.
Honestly, I have to say Nitecore was both lazy, greedy, and impatient in this regard.
Why? While they are right in regards that the springs would oxidize, they didn’t tell why…
Well, at 30A, any normal spring would melt pretty much instantly.
Here’s the thought process Nitecore probably had:
1. Let’s use gold plated steel springs. Oh no, they failed at 6A.
2. Let’s use gold plated dual steel springs. Oh no, they failed at 9A.
2. Let’s use dual phosphor bronze springs. Oh no again, they failed at 18A of continuous use.
4. Well, nothing on the market actually exists that can handle the load of a 100-120W light running off of a single cell.
Let’s put a 10A cell in a 30A flashlight and weld nickel plated copper strips instead.
If the engineers, or rather, Nitecore, actually put in effort into designing adequate contacts, they should’ve just looked at BLF and see what members cooked up in spring design.
They could’ve used dual gold plated BeCu C17500 springs, and they would’ve worked quite well if they had waited for a 25-30A cell.
Why do people always think conventional? You just need not the spring to conduct the current!
just use the spring to push the contact against the battery, you could use the same sort of contact like for spotwelding just with a bit raised button
