FW3A, a TLF/BLF EDC flashlight - SST-20 available, coupon codes public

13162 posts / 0 new
Last post
BurningPlayd0h
BurningPlayd0h's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 21 min ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 02:16
Posts: 621
Location: MN
wyatt1209 wrote:
Quote:
I find all the bickering and “threatening” to not purchase hilarious. It’s got a well-loved open-source firmware, a good range of fully-regulated power, a standardized LED layout and optics, a novel rear e-switch, and it still manages to be basically the second-smallest 18650 light in current production. At $30, I’d buy it if they painted it plaid; we’re lucky it doesn’t cost three times that much.

Obviously no one is entitled to this light, it’s being designed by volunteers and I appreciate the work they’ve done. I do however see the point that these people are making. This is the looks category of the main post as of right now:

Quote:
The original plan was clear anodized aluminum complete with the original machining marks, but after three rounds of prototypes this did not happen. The attempts did not turn out as desired. So, based on forum feedback, the plan is to do dark grey anodizing instead. It is also possible that a bare unanodized version could be made later, but this remains to be determined.

No marking/logo for a clean look

Custom-designed stainless steel clip

Machined steel button on the tail

Bearing this in mind, I don’t think it’s that unreasonable for people to be upset and say that they may have lost interest in the light because of this.

Literally only one of those things has changed though.

JaredM
JaredM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 18 hours ago
Joined: 10/31/2011 - 13:33
Posts: 578
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

ANYWAAAYY

Can’t wait for these.. Modding them will still be fun ,too, it turns out Smile

Are we there yet??

Silent_Star
Silent_Star's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 20 hours ago
Joined: 06/09/2016 - 14:52
Posts: 211
Location: Tel-Aviv

I want to buy this flashlight.
Please, add me to the list.
Thank you.

 Genesis 1:3 "And God said, "Let there be light,"  and there was light."

lionheart_2281
lionheart_2281's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 18 hours ago
Joined: 10/25/2012 - 18:32
Posts: 2935
Location: Brisbane, Australia

This light is turning 2 next month Big Smile

CRX
CRX's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 52 sec ago
Joined: 04/02/2013 - 15:27
Posts: 3706
Location: Scotland

Still looks like new Smile

Dobtruckers
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 21 hours ago
Joined: 08/13/2016 - 03:03
Posts: 35
CRX wrote:
Still looks like new Smile

Timeless design!

cabfrank
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 7 min ago
Joined: 11/19/2010 - 17:25
Posts: 2887
Location: healdsburg, california usa earth

Two years is hard to believe, and I’ve read all 8350 posts in this thread. I’m not the only one, either. I guess we sure do like our lights.

I’m fearlessly predicting now that this will be done by Christmas. Wink

raccoon city
raccoon city's picture
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 52 min ago
Joined: 10/06/2010 - 02:35
Posts: 12852
Location: रॅकून सिटी Palm Desert CA USA

cabfrank wrote:

I’m fearlessly predicting now that this will be done by Christmas. Wink

Yep, it should be here by Christmas 2020!  :O  :P

loki993
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 1 day ago
Joined: 07/27/2017 - 12:38
Posts: 4
Location: United States

Call me what you will but I think I like the revised grey version better than the original…

Should I be interested in the LH351D version at all? What will it do differently than the XP-L? I’m thinking about adding a second one to my request and I’m wondering if I should get one of each.

iamlucky13
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 29 min ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 09:18
Posts: 518
Location: USA

loki993 wrote:
Call me what you will but I think I like the revised grey version better than the original…

Should I be interested in the LH351D version at all? What will it do differently than the XP-L? I’m thinking about adding a second one to my request and I’m wondering if I should get one of each.

The first post has not been completely updated, but it looks like the second option will likely be the Luminus SST-20, not the LH351D.

The main difference is those two options would 4000K color temperature (warmer appearance) and high CRI, which will be most noticeable when viewing objects with lots of red tons in them, like skin and wood tones.

The SST-20 also would have similar or perhaps a slightly tighter beam than the XP-L HI, and lower output. The LH351D, should the last reported plan change and that emitter be offered, will have a floody beam best for close-up use, and have output nearly as high as the XP-L HI.

Both will likely have a slight greenish-tint at lower power levels that may or may not bother you – different people care different amounts about this – where as the XP-L HI should have a very neutral or perhaps even slightly rosy appearance.

Melez
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 10/03/2016 - 17:58
Posts: 31
Location: Colorado

Looking at all these last minute changes, I guess I’ll just hope we get some good emitters.

And I think I’ll be getting the ol’ lathe set up if logos on the button and up the only option. Last time I did a group buy was the 348 and thankfully they sold it with or without markings.

WarHawk-AVG
WarHawk-AVG's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 01/04/2014 - 06:47
Posts: 5065
Location: H-Town

Put me down for one!

ridepacker
Offline
Last seen: 22 hours 41 min ago
Joined: 03/31/2019 - 08:40
Posts: 12

please add me to the list, i want one. thanks

Hugh Johnson
Hugh Johnson's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 10 hours ago
Joined: 01/16/2017 - 19:03
Posts: 292
Location: New Brighton

Melez wrote:
Looking at all these last minute changes, I guess I’ll just hope we get some good emitters.

And I think I’ll be getting the ol’ lathe set up if logos on the button and up the only option. Last time I did a group buy was the 348 and thankfully they sold it with or without markings.

Three posts and looking at your second group buy. You’re all action.

xray291
xray291's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/24/2015 - 02:47
Posts: 49
Location: United States

ill just be happy to see this come to life…flashlight people designing flashlights

Melez
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 10/03/2016 - 17:58
Posts: 31
Location: Colorado

Oh I mostly lurk. I’m not the most active I know… But hey plenty of people sign up just for group buys right?

iamlucky13
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 29 min ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 09:18
Posts: 518
Location: USA
Melez wrote:
Oh I mostly lurk. I’m not the most active I know… But hey plenty of people sign up just for group buys right?

A group buy is what got me to join. I was also a lurker (active elsewhere, but avoiding BLF because I didn’t need more temptation to buy lights) until the Sofirn C01 started to take shape.

And then once I signed up for the C01, I very shortly afterwards gave in and signed up for the FW3A, too.

trakcon
trakcon's picture
Online
Last seen: 12 min 20 sec ago
Joined: 01/23/2019 - 15:50
Posts: 158
zak.wilson wrote:
The FET can be disabled in firmware without having to modify the driver.

I’m hoping to swap some sw45k’s into one of my FW3A’s. When the time comes, how would I go about disabling the FET in firmware? Am I correct that this would require a coding change and then recompiling?

ToyKeeper
ToyKeeper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 51 min 49 sec ago
Joined: 01/12/2013 - 14:40
Posts: 9745
Location: (469219) 2016 HO3
trakcon wrote:
zak.wilson wrote:
The FET can be disabled in firmware without having to modify the driver.

I’m hoping to swap some sw45k’s into one of my FW3A’s. When the time comes, how would I go about disabling the FET in firmware? Am I correct that this would require a coding change and then recompiling?

This has come up a few times, so I’ll probably make a config specifically for it. I just need to remember to actually do it…

trakcon
trakcon's picture
Online
Last seen: 12 min 20 sec ago
Joined: 01/23/2019 - 15:50
Posts: 158

That would be much appreciated!

zak.wilson
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 5 hours ago
Joined: 09/29/2014 - 14:27
Posts: 823

I think setting PWM_CHANNELS to 2 in hwdef-FW3A.h would do it. You could also redo the PWM levels in cfg-FW3A.h to use the FET, but only at a low duty cycle.

Ceilingbounce – flashlight testing and runtime graphs for Android

Bob_McBob
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 51 sec ago
Joined: 08/14/2016 - 04:53
Posts: 488
Location: Canada
trakcon wrote:
zak.wilson wrote:
The FET can be disabled in firmware without having to modify the driver.

I’m hoping to swap some sw45k’s into one of my FW3A’s. When the time comes, how would I go about disabling the FET in firmware? Am I correct that this would require a coding change and then recompiling?

FWIW Maukka tested his review sample with sw40s and the output was acceptable with a GA. I suspect the LEDs wouldn’t fare as well with high drain cells, so it comes down to either only using the light with GAs or limiting the FET output in firmware or disabling it completely. It’s quite doable but the level you limit it to will depend on what cells you want to use.

beastlykings
beastlykings's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 57 min ago
Joined: 12/29/2017 - 17:06
Posts: 183
Location: Michigan, USA

Ok, I give up. Please put me on the list for 2 of these.

Also, as far as not using the FET is concerned, couldn’t you just set the top of the ramp to the highest regulated level? Then it would never use the FET, correct? I guess unless you double clicked for turbo.. hmm..

So how would the ramp look if you didn’t use the FET? Top of ramp at 75% regulated, then fully regulated for turbo?

Interesting. I just can’t imagine not wanting the option of more lumens if you really needed them.

Boaz
Boaz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 48 min ago
Joined: 11/07/2010 - 09:31
Posts: 7070
Location: Birthplace of Aviation

 

 

 

...

       καὶ τὸ φῶς ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ φαίνει καὶ ἡ σκοτία αὐτὸ οὐ κατέλαβεν

                                  https://www.gty.org/

 

    Still selling diffuser film  >…  http://budgetlightforum.com/node/42208

CRX
CRX's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 52 sec ago
Joined: 04/02/2013 - 15:27
Posts: 3706
Location: Scotland
Big Smile
zak.wilson
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 5 hours ago
Joined: 09/29/2014 - 14:27
Posts: 823

beastlykings wrote:
Also, as far as not using the FET is concerned, couldn’t you just set the top of the ramp to the highest regulated level? Then it would never use the FET, correct? I guess unless you double clicked for turbo.. hmm..

So how would the ramp look if you didn’t use the FET? Top of ramp at 75% regulated, then fully regulated for turbo?

Interesting. I just can’t imagine not wanting the option of more lumens if you really needed them.

Once you start rewriting the firmware, you can specify any behavior the hardware is capable of. I’ll play with it a bit and may end up with something like a 25% duty cycle with the FET for the one I put 219Bs in. I probably want the behavior of the light to feel the same, just with a max level that’s safe for the emitters.

I don’t want to give up output I can actually have with the LEDs I’m going to use. 219Bs given too much power will turn blue and output will decrease. The emitters might potentially be permanently damaged in the process. That’s technically true of the emitters the FW3A will actually come with as well, but the hardware will not be capable of delivering that much power.

Ceilingbounce – flashlight testing and runtime graphs for Android

beastlykings
beastlykings's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 57 min ago
Joined: 12/29/2017 - 17:06
Posts: 183
Location: Michigan, USA

zak.wilson wrote:
beastlykings wrote:
Also, as far as not using the FET is concerned, couldn’t you just set the top of the ramp to the highest regulated level? Then it would never use the FET, correct? I guess unless you double clicked for turbo.. hmm..

So how would the ramp look if you didn’t use the FET? Top of ramp at 75% regulated, then fully regulated for turbo?

Interesting. I just can’t imagine not wanting the option of more lumens if you really needed them.

Once you start rewriting the firmware, you can specify any behavior the hardware is capable of. I’ll play with it a bit and may end up with something like a 25% duty cycle with the FET for the one I put 219Bs in. I probably want the behavior of the light to feel the same, just with a max level that’s safe for the emitters.

I don’t want to give up output I can actually have with the LEDs I’m going to use. 219Bs given too much power will turn blue and output will decrease. The emitters might potentially be permanently damaged in the process. That’s technically true of the emitters the FW3A will actually come with as well, but the hardware will not be capable of delivering that much power.

Oh! That’s what I get for not paying close enough attention. I was under the impression that this was being done for battery life/heat management. What you say makes sense though. Even Anduril on the D4 and D4S has the FET limited on the 219c version if I remember correctly, for that reason.

I didn’t realize the 219b was that sensitive.

Thanks!

BurningPlayd0h
BurningPlayd0h's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 21 min ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 02:16
Posts: 621
Location: MN

beastlykings wrote:
zak.wilson wrote:
beastlykings wrote:
Also, as far as not using the FET is concerned, couldn’t you just set the top of the ramp to the highest regulated level? Then it would never use the FET, correct? I guess unless you double clicked for turbo.. hmm..

So how would the ramp look if you didn’t use the FET? Top of ramp at 75% regulated, then fully regulated for turbo?

Interesting. I just can’t imagine not wanting the option of more lumens if you really needed them.

Once you start rewriting the firmware, you can specify any behavior the hardware is capable of. I’ll play with it a bit and may end up with something like a 25% duty cycle with the FET for the one I put 219Bs in. I probably want the behavior of the light to feel the same, just with a max level that’s safe for the emitters.

I don’t want to give up output I can actually have with the LEDs I’m going to use. 219Bs given too much power will turn blue and output will decrease. The emitters might potentially be permanently damaged in the process. That’s technically true of the emitters the FW3A will actually come with as well, but the hardware will not be capable of delivering that much power.

Oh! That’s what I get for not paying close enough attention. I was under the impression that this was being done for battery life/heat management. What you say makes sense though. Even Anduril on the D4 and D4S has the FET limited on the 219c version if I remember correctly, for that reason.

I didn’t realize the 219b was that sensitive.

Thanks!


Yep, 219Bs shouldn’t be driven at >2.5A for more than very short bursts if I’m remembering right. That’s VERY easy to exceed with even lower-drain cells, they can put out higher current than even the rated burst drain in a FET-driven light.
trakcon
trakcon's picture
Online
Last seen: 12 min 20 sec ago
Joined: 01/23/2019 - 15:50
Posts: 158

I just want to make sure there’s no chance of damaging the emitters. It seemed to me that disabling the FET was the safest option.

iamlucky13
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 29 min ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 09:18
Posts: 518
Location: USA

beastlykings wrote:

Oh! That’s what I get for not paying close enough attention. I was under the impression that this was being done for battery life/heat management. What you say makes sense though. Even Anduril on the D4 and D4S has the FET limited on the 219c version if I remember correctly, for that reason.

I didn’t realize the 219b was that sensitive.

Thanks!

The 219B is rated at 1.5A, compared to 1.8A for the 219C, so nominally they don’t look much different, especially since the newer V1 219b’s have similar voltage curves to the 219C. However, the 219C is already known to be working very hard on the D4, so the concern is increased when the current your battery can supply is shared between one less emitter, and that emitter has even a slightly lower current capacity.

So dialing back the current for a 219B mod is very likely prudent.

A benefit to modifying the firmware rather than just setting the ramp at a safe level is you retain the short-cut to the firmware max level. Shortcuts are a great feature of firmwares like Anduril.

A firmware modified for the 219B might also be well-suited for the E21A, and Clemence is planning an E21A triple board. However, Carclo says the 219B should have more throw in the 10511 optic than an E21A.

Pages