[BLF Joint-Development] WildTrail BLF Tactical Flashlight

I talked to Jacky this morning. It seems it will be best to run a poll to find out which design will be most wanted. Maybe we should vote between following versions:

Model A - The fullsize tacticool flashlight (most features, purged Andúril firmware or alternative firmware and updated 21700 battery format, like Klarus XT21X)

► 21700 size, USB-C port, simple but configurable UI (stepped modes + ramping)

Model B - The essential tacticool flashlight (ultracompact size with design reference to Streamlight Protac L1 or Utorch SF01 but with 18650 size and dual switch)

► 18650 size, no USB-port, dual switch, as compact as it gets (YLP Unicorn size with dual switch design), as lightweight as it gets, simple but configurable UI (stepped modes + ramping)

Model C - the "no frills" tactical flashlight (ultra-sturdy, heavyweight, made rocksolid like Jetbeam TH20 or Surefire 6P)

► 18650 size, no USB-port, no dual switch design, tailclicky only, not as compact as Model B but more sturdy, ultra-easy UI (2 modes, 2 mode groups only: high - low, low - high)

Errmm…I vote for model A. I own xt21x, btw I’m interested on how tactical works with anduril….

Yes, model A for me, but I hope that “full-size” refers to the features and not the actual size, which I like to be compact. I dislike carrying more than needed: material thickness should at every spot be optimal but not thicker than that, same for length: as long as needed for an optimal flashlight but no mm longer.
The example pictures distract me from the choices btw, i.e. that Klarus is ugly.

I guess it’s difficult to make a design that will please everyone

I realy love “tacticool” flashlights and this is what I’d really love in a new flashlight

–140mm max length
–34mm head
-Rear rubber cigar ring
-support for 21700 cells
-USB C charging with powerbank function
-Rear raised forward switch (no ability to tailstand, but we can make threads in the tailcap so you can put some ring that will allow the light to tailstand and hide the switch)
-Easily findable side switch
-More than 1500lm and 400m in turbo)
-Double tube design to allow both switchs to work
-Side switch to control a very simplified ramping UI (click to last used mode, long click from off for moonlight)
-Rear switch will only turn on turbo, no matter if it’s ON or OFF. Depressing again the rear switch will return to the previous mode after pressing it (off or on)
-Simple and good 3v potted driver, very reliable

That is what I really miss now in tactical lights, but I’d also love something very strong and reliable while being small (option B)

As far as I have read und understood somewhere elso on BLF, Andúril is actually capable to work with a dual switch design. Sofirn's new SP70 update is meant to work with Andúril, i.e. tail clicky for momentary on and physical on/off while the e-switch is doing everything else. The remaining question will be: Is ToyKeeper interested in providing a "tactically purged" version of Andúril for a whole series of tactical/tacticool flashlights?

@ Djozz: It sounds like you want to have the best of both worlds (Model A + Model B) in one flashlight. That might lead us back close to the current design I have posted in the OP. It seems that covering the USB-C port effectively can make costs get out of hand. I talked about it with Sofirn as well and they told me costs would significantly increase with a "hidden" USB port.

I do agree about the rather ugly design of the XT21X. I prefer using an efficient single TIR optic to keep the head diameter as small as possible without too many trade offs with the beam profile. I don't want the head to be twice as big as the tube. If the head will be only slightly bigger than the tube we should better be aiming for reasonable lumen numbers around 1000 - 1.500lm and not just another heating rod, shouldn't we?

In some way we need to find a compromise between: size vs. sturdiness vs. thermal design vs. weight vs. extra features.

Before starting the poll I hope to make sure that all three concepts will differ enough from each other. However, my assumption is that the end will look like 33%, 33%, 33%. :-D In other words: It might be worthwhile to build all three models.

Thank you Anthon. I will try to consider your suggestions with the next design update. ;-)

Do we really need potted drivers if these have components only that are likely to resist multiple drops? It seems the inductor of boost drivers is a very sensitive component but with a usual AMC driven circuit risks of a broken driver may become rather insignificant.

USB charging if it does at least 2A. Otherwise drop it.
Thumbs up for the good UI.

My vote goes to The essential tacticool flashlight.

Model A +21700 for me without USB for more compact and better water resistance, Andúril with forward tail SW ,lighted E-SW.

If it’s aimed to be a tactical flashlight, I think the internal charging feature should be removed to decrease the complexity of the product. More features = more point of failures.

Also would like to see FW3A style clip to assure the steadiness of the clip.

Just my two cents.

Okay, I will try to draw a concept with rubber cigar ring and full circle ring clip mount like FW3A uses. Is bidirectional really important? Maybe it's useful to have another groove close to the head section to use the unidirectional clip in the reverse direction?

Regarding the preferences of Sofirn:

I have some history in negotiating designs with Sofirn, and despite them being one of the more innovative flashlight companies, they have a very strong preference for what technology they already have in-house. You can not blame them because developing new things is high risk for a small company. But a very important part is that Sofirn does not have a real clue what features are valuable and which are unimportant, they are afraid to develop stuff that may not sell. Unlike Emisar that has a flashoholic overseeing the designs (Hank), and I expect Nightwatch to get feedback from Neal, Sofirn does not have an inhouse flashlight fanatic that sees the value of design decisions.

But they did build the lantern which has many completely new concepts for Sofirn. This has worked because the long-term determination of DBSAR and a huge interest list convinced them to do so. Now that they have acquired the new technology they will use it elsewhere, so afterwards they do see the advantage of development.

Now about the hidden USB port: I bugged them about that before for use in a “grandma light” (18650, both USB-C-charging and a magnetic ring UI), and I got the same message: difficult and expensive. What they do not know is that if they manage to design it in a proper way (robust, elegant and convenient), they have a winner in house: very useful and flashoholics will love it.
(same goes for magnetic ring control of small flashlights, they use it on their diving lights but it needs to be made smaller for use on EDC’s, infinite variable is not even needed to make it very popular. Sofirn is very hesitant to go that way)

So my advice is not to always listen to what Sofirn thinks is feasable, if as a flashoholic you (and BLF) are sure that a feature is a very good idea, keep convincing them that it is the right thing to do; they will not have the knowledge to judge how important the design features are, you will have to point that out for them: which feature is an unimportant wish, which one is desirable but negotiable, and which features are essential no matter what. And maybe they need time and a long interest list to be pushed over the edge.

If Sofirn gets their way too much, a compromise flashlight will result (the SP70) that is in between pretty nice and meh. But if they get constant feedback and redirection by someone or a skilled team that knows what they are doing, you get very good new products.

Does Acrbeam use a dual_tube design in the L16 and L30 or another method? What about Klarus for their lights that can work from off with tail or side switch?

Thanks a lot for sharing your thoughts about Sofirn and the often long and sometimes even tedious way to convince flashlight manufacturers. Regardless of any specific brand I will not give up convincing them to invest some extra efforts in driver development, well-chosen emitters and comprehensible and sophisticated user interfaces and not only following the war on lumens. Sofirn and WildTrail are two of those brands who strive to become better by listening to our suggestions but as you said, it sometimes takes more than a just a good advice to guide them into the right direction.

Concerning this very project:

I told Jacky to please avoid using FET drivers with a tactical/tacticool flashlight like the one we're talking about here. FET is nice for posing high lumen numbers with ugly-tintshift emitters like XHP50.2 3V 5.000K (3B). Instead, I would like him to use a boost driver with a 6V SST-70 but that might increase both efforts and costs for development at least by factor 2. So, this option has been ruled out, at least for this project. That's why we have to stick with 3V emitters. In a tactical flashlight I expect something more reliable than FET, something with constant output, preferably with the option to use 2x CR123A for emergencies or the always imminent zombie apocalypse. If I was lost deep down in a cavern and my life was at stake, I wouldn't want to rely on something that comes with unstable output und unpredictable runtimes. I don't know how much extra efforts it will take to use a suitable buck driver that will work both with 1x 18650 and 2x CR123A. It cannot be that difficult as Sofirn can also offer a cheap flashlight with a good buck driver, see SP31 V2.0. I also like the UI the SP31 V2.0 uses even though I still see lots of room for improvement.

Still, it's totally uncertain where we will end up with the driver as Jacky is still looking for semi-professional / professional support in driver development. Maybe we don't have to reinvent the wheel and can use something that is tried and tested.

UI-wise there's the question if we need Andúril (preferably stripped to the essential functions incl. thermal calibration/configuration). If the answer is yes, it will take additional time and testing including the involvement of ToyKeeper. Eventually, it could be worth it as this has some potential for selling a whole new generation of (tactical) dual switch flashlights, regardless of any specific brand. I try to think ahead both for BLF joint-collaborations and the future of flashlights and their manufacturers. If the answer is no, we could do a shortcut and use something proven which should be easy to implement.

Last but not least, there's the decision about the emitter. Osram's White Flats seem to be out of the question (too much throw, too coldwhite) and require very exact focussing (see Fireflies E01 issue with Osram LED). If we aim for about 1.400 - 2.000lm there are several options:

3535:

SST-20: cheapest option but highest risk of tintshifts between green (low current) and blue (high current), small die size could result in a too small hot spot

XP-L HI / HD: might be a safe option to use

XP-L2: most efficient in terms of lumens but looks awful in a reflector but might be useful underneath a TIR lens that eliminates the "rainbow-effect" of a flip-chip design

LH351D: probably less efficient and with a high risk of green tintshift, HighCRI version will not reach the target lumen range

5050:

XM-L3: not yet available, pending further testing

SST-40: might be a safe option to use and works fine with a CC driver, 4.800K tint was reported to look well on beamshots

XHP50.2 3V: only available in 6.500K and 5.000K while the latter one is subject to heavy tintshifts in green and yellow

Regarding the “FW3A style clip”, the FW3A has the worst clip (for me) of any I’ve used. No matter what, it would not stay securely in my pocket, so I will never EDC that light. I’m guessing it’s the fault of the taper, but I’m not 100% sure. Regardless, please no taper.

I would only be interested if it had usb-c and 21700.

I think you confuse a few things here.
In my experience lineair FET drivers of the BLF-A6 type are extremely reliable: they are simple, I had never heard one fail (except some that were sloppily produced), and only having small shallow components they are extreme impact-resistent. The output is not instable, it is a very predictable slow decline in output warning you in advance of battery depletion. Give me a light with lineair FET driver any day in that cave :slight_smile: . The most reliable tactical lights even do not have any regulation, just one or two current limiting resistors, so again a steady decline of output but ultra-simple/reliable.

For an emergency I rather carry an extra 18650, and CR123 cells are only abundant in the US, and after the zombies here in Europe you are more likely to run into a 18650 battery pack than into a stash of CR123’s.

...or I was just using the wrong words to express what I really meant to say. :FACEPALM: I'm afraid I need to take some more English lessons. ^:) Instead of "reliability" I meant "sustainability" or "permanence" of the flashlight's output. I agree that FET driven lights are very reliable with regard to possible failure.

This is exactly the situation I don't want to face when being lost in a cave. I want to have a steady output as long as possible. :-P

You mean it’s ok if your light to suddenly just trigger its LVP, in a cave? Haha…

My point was about the clip is being secured by the tail cap, not detachable like pictured on first post. I should have wrote more detail.

I’d be interested in Model C.

A 21700 tactical light would be interesting, and has not been done.

Dual springs + foam/rubber washers to protect cell from impacts/recoil in line with the tube.

Momentary switch, 500-800 lumens (whatever will run for at least an hour without thermal problems or dimming)

Preferred UI would have no mode memory, and a hard-to-access very low mode as well. A generic streamlight momentary switch UI that goes H-H-H-L with no memory would work and be difficult to accidentally activate low mode.