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

1219 posts / 0 new
Last post
SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 28 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3479
Location: US

I bought two of the D80 and love the host feel, deep heat fins for good heat dissipation, and very round perfect hotspot. I would like to see it be able to tail stand with Bistro UI. An Oslon White Flat version with 140kcd would suit this host and reflector very well. A 21700 version with a scaled up head (D1S size) producing 300kcd would allow this to sell like hot cakes.

TheOnlyDocc
TheOnlyDocc's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 06/26/2015 - 05:17
Posts: 949
Location: Mönchengladbach /Germany

I personaly like e-switch lights (a lot!!!!). But this would require a lot of changes. And it would not be a D80 anymore. Also i do not think that they would go for it.
And i do not think that something like usb charging will be implemented. Lets try to keep it simple, good quality and as cheap as possible.

Improving the thermal capabilities sounds good. But how would you do that?
The head is already 50% finns. I could think of a little thicker ledshelf. But appart from that i am clueless how to improve something here (without going for a bigger head).
Making the head compatible to 4x optics sounds like a good idea (what diameter would be required?) But you would still need a spacer if i am not totally wrong. The reflector is to deep to replace it only with a 4x optic assembly.
Changing the tailcap so the light can Tailstand will be added to the list Thumbs Up (should not require much changing).
If people with knowledge about reflectors could give hints how to improve the D80 please speak up!

If they are willing to give us a really improved D80 version i will try to get a initial GB for us.
If it is for a complete light or a host will have to be discussed. But for now lets see what most people want to see in a new D80 and what LuckySun is willing to do.
But i am happy that there are still enough people interested in this light!

New WildTrail (former LuckySun) D80v2 Sale has Started http://budgetlightforum.com/node/66255

Tom Tom
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 1 week ago
Joined: 09/10/2017 - 08:30
Posts: 1163

The Blf D80 has been my only disappointment with BLF designs.

As I recall it was commissioned by Dale with high hopes, basically just a minor UI change. But the fundamentals and the important details were unchanged, from the poor original.

So many detailed things wrong. The driver was complete rubbish.

The tubes were too short (corrected later by slightly longer ones, but you had to pay again for them).

Lock rings that came loose, they needed opposite threading on head and tail.

Odd sized driver, dimensions even changed during the run, Non standard diameter.

Poor aluminium MCPCB meaning a change required for any pepping up (I melted the locating ring and the solder on the LED trying)

I don’t think the thermal path is much good.

The reflector has interesting performance for such a shallow thing, but is limited compared to a deeper design. The mix of hotspot and spill doesn’t suit me.

Superficially pleasing, nice surface finish and aesthetics, but as an out-of-the box “BLF special” it was a huge disappointment.

To change this would require a major effort, in fact a completely new torch. But much better ones already exist from several other manufacturers.

Some things are best forgotten.

Streamer
Streamer's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 days ago
Joined: 12/01/2011 - 21:06
Posts: 3792
Location: TX

All considered, that BLFD80 shocked us all with it’s debut. I know it did me.


I mean, with that German M24 Stick Grenade profile and such a Fantastic THROW…whoda thunk it could ever be out-classed with todays lineup..


IMHO, The BLF D80 resides in the Hall Of Flame. : A throw KING for its size, in its very own time. Beer Beer

johnkey68
Online
Last seen: 2 min 2 sec ago
Joined: 10/12/2017 - 06:29
Posts: 154
Location: Russia
KawiBoy1428 wrote:
How about more visually appealing to start with…

Spartan
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 7 hours ago
Joined: 01/12/2019 - 20:50
Posts: 626
johnkey68 wrote:
KawiBoy1428 wrote:
How about more visually appealing to start with…

!https://i.imgur.com/7Wgfm0K.jpg!

Wow, I bet you got one heck of an interesting beam. Do you have any pictures of it?

Moses came from the mountaintop carrying a tablet. The Words were....WITH GREAT LUMENS COMES GREAT REPONSIBILITY.

Tom Tom
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 1 week ago
Joined: 09/10/2017 - 08:30
Posts: 1163

To be more positive, the D80 is a pleasing looking handy thing with unique characteristics, and could be brought up to date with a decent FET+n driver, e.g. a BLF/Lexar/Texas Ace, running whatever modern firmware that can still operate with a tail clickie, rather than an e-switch. 7135, or dual bank 7135 for efficiency and steady output at modest levels.

Preferably a straightforward simple intuitive UI that doesn’t require a crib sheet to comprehend. Perhaps a couple of programming options, but no more.

The original driver was very poor, it even had an incorrect value resistor that prevented the very weak FET from turning on fully, restricting tailcap current to 1A or less. DEL discovered this, and showed us how to improve it. However it still suffered from objectionable PWM, inefficiency at the lower levels and poorly spaced modes. It must be binned.

That short reflector and head is rather unique, and the concept should be retained.

Keep the tail clickie, don’t be seduced by side e-switches.

Together with a DTP copper MCPCB and a modern smaller LED (original was XML-2) with higher surface brightness for better throw. As supplied, with non-DTP Al MCPCB it was thermally challenged as soon as you tried to pep it up. Though the basics were there, integral shelf and twin screws to clamp down the MCPCB solidly.

However IIRC some who tried smaller LEDs at the time found that it was difficult to get the reflector/LED focussed satisfactorily and without artefacts in the beam, it is very sensitive to e.g. the thickness of the locating piece, and the large reflector hole, sized for the XML-2 doesn’t seem to work so well with smaller LEDs.

Perhaps the reflector could be re-tooled, just by reducing the size of the hole to suit smaller LEDs. Or it might require re profiling of the flatter part.

The beauty of the D80, to my mind, is the neat compact design, and it feels good in the hand. The workmanship and surface finish was great.

It makes a C8 feel crude and unwieldy.

However for an enthusiast it was no good, basically just a host to spend the same again on as a modding project. Not a well rounded BLF design that could be used as-is.

So, my list of essential changes would include:

1) New driver, in a standard size (e.g. 17mm)

2) DT|P copper MCPCB

3) Updated LED with reflector modified and tuned to it.

4) Body tube length optimised to take flat top, button top and even protected 18650 cells. Sadly this may require changing the stud contact on the driver (which I like very much, much better conductivity than any springs) for a spring.

5) Spring(s) to be good BeCu, e.g. Blue type. The days of faffing about with spring bypasses should be over, at least for BLF designs.

6) Short 18350 tube also to be available, with liner to also take 16340, CR123 etc. Some have cut down the 18650 one to make a very neat and handy package, it would be great to have this option.

7) Forget the latest fad for 21-70 cells, that would bulk it up and lose the neat compact nature of this, and further complicate use with 18650, spring lengths etc. And I’m pretty sure they will continue to be a fad, as well as the dimensions not being well standardised, making tolerancing of the tube and selection of compatible cells a guessing game. Having a 1” OD tube is important for some applications, it is the standard for many mounts. Yes, it might be possible to fit a 21-70 into a 1” tube, but I think you would lose the chunky grippy nubs and stout wall thickness that make the D80 so tactile.

8) Change the thread of the switch retaining ring to LH, so it doesn’t keep coming loose when you change cells. Convoy knew this years ago.

9) Optional FET remote tailswitch assembly for hunters, curly lead and pressure switch, with UI option to lock into turbo-only output. Maybe in a package with some flip on colour filters.

Give me 1-8, at a BLF price and I would buy a couple. But overall that would be a lot of re-tooling to get to the product that it should have been originally.

everydaysurvivalgear
everydaysurvivalgear's picture
Offline
Last seen: 13 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/31/2015 - 10:25
Posts: 3516
Location: sydney australia (GMT+10)

Tom Tom wrote:
To be more positive, the D80 is a pleasing looking handy thing with unique characteristics, and could be brought up to date with a decent FET+n driver, e.g. a BLF/Lexar/Texas Ace, running whatever modern firmware that can still operate with a tail clickie, rather than an e-switch. 7135, or dual bank 7135 for efficiency and steady output at modest levels.

Preferably a straightforward simple intuitive UI that doesn’t require a crib sheet to comprehend. Perhaps a couple of programming options, but no more.

The original driver was very poor, it even had an incorrect value resistor that prevented the very weak FET from turning on fully, restricting tailcap current to 1A or less. DEL discovered this, and showed us how to improve it. However it still suffered from objectionable PWM, inefficiency at the lower levels and poorly spaced modes. It must be binned.

That short reflector and head is rather unique, and the concept should be retained.

Keep the tail clickie, don’t be seduced by side e-switches.

Together with a DTP copper MCPCB and a modern smaller LED (original was XML-2) with higher surface brightness for better throw. As supplied, with non-DTP Al MCPCB it was thermally challenged as soon as you tried to pep it up. Though the basics were there, integral shelf and twin screws to clamp down the MCPCB solidly.

However IIRC some who tried smaller LEDs at the time found that it was difficult to get the reflector/LED focussed satisfactorily and without artefacts in the beam, it is very sensitive to e.g. the thickness of the locating piece, and the large reflector hole, sized for the XML-2 doesn’t seem to work so well with smaller LEDs.

Perhaps the reflector could be re-tooled, just by reducing the size of the hole to suit smaller LEDs. Or it might require re profiling of the flatter part.

The beauty of the D80, to my mind, is the neat compact design, and it feels good in the hand. The workmanship and surface finish was great.

It makes a C8 feel crude and unwieldy.

However for an enthusiast it was no good, basically just a host to spend the same again on as a modding project. Not a well rounded BLF design that could be used as-is.

So, my list of essential changes would include:

1) New driver, in a standard size (e.g. 17mm)

2) DT|P copper MCPCB

3) Updated LED with reflector modified and tuned to it.

4) Body tube length optimised to take flat top, button top and even protected 18650 cells. Sadly this may require changing the stud contact on the driver (which I like very much, much better conductivity than any springs) for a spring.

5) Spring(s) to be good BeCu, e.g. Blue type. The days of faffing about with spring bypasses should be over, at least for BLF designs.

6) Short 18350 tube also to be available, with liner to also take 16340, CR123 etc. Some have cut down the 18650 one to make a very neat and handy package, it would be great to have this option.

7) Forget the latest fad for 21-70 cells, that would bulk it up and lose the neat compact nature of this, and further complicate use with 18650, spring lengths etc. And I’m pretty sure they will continue to be a fad, as well as the dimensions not being well standardised, making tolerancing of the tube and selection of compatible cells a guessing game. Having a 1” OD tube is important for some applications, it is the standard for many mounts. Yes, it might be possible to fit a 21-70 into a 1” tube, but I think you would lose the chunky grippy nubs and stout wall thickness that make the D80 so tactile.

8) Change the thread of the switch retaining ring to LH, so it doesn’t keep coming loose when you change cells. Convoy knew this years ago.

9) Optional FET remote tailswitch assembly for hunters, curly lead and pressure switch, with UI option to lock into turbo-only output. Maybe in a package with some flip on colour filters.

Give me 1-8, at a BLF price and I would buy a couple. But overall that would be a lot of re-tooling to get to the product that it should have been originally.

The actual BLF D80 was around before you where a member so i don’t know what model you got? It had a worked driver doing 4.5amps and a DTP MCPCB its a proper Noctigon board with specialized XML2 tints. The driver is fairly standard its a 20mm driver but you can make a BLF driver fit in with no mods. Maybe you bought the normal D80? Does yours have a Noctigon board?

contactcr
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 1 min ago
Joined: 05/19/2017 - 18:52
Posts: 2915
Location: US

another vote for tail standing in big bold letters in your list to Lucky Sun

Tom Tom
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 1 week ago
Joined: 09/10/2017 - 08:30
Posts: 1163

everydaysurvivalgear wrote:
Tom Tom wrote:
To be more positive, the D80 is a pleasing looking handy thing with unique characteristics, and could be brought up to date with a decent FET+n driver, e.g. a BLF/Lexar/Texas Ace, running whatever modern firmware that can still operate with a tail clickie, rather than an e-switch. 7135, or dual bank 7135 for efficiency and steady output at modest levels.

Preferably a straightforward simple intuitive UI that doesn’t require a crib sheet to comprehend. Perhaps a couple of programming options, but no more.

The original driver was very poor, it even had an incorrect value resistor that prevented the very weak FET from turning on fully, restricting tailcap current to 1A or less. DEL discovered this, and showed us how to improve it. However it still suffered from objectionable PWM, inefficiency at the lower levels and poorly spaced modes. It must be binned.

That short reflector and head is rather unique, and the concept should be retained.

Keep the tail clickie, don’t be seduced by side e-switches.

Together with a DTP copper MCPCB and a modern smaller LED (original was XML-2) with higher surface brightness for better throw. As supplied, with non-DTP Al MCPCB it was thermally challenged as soon as you tried to pep it up. Though the basics were there, integral shelf and twin screws to clamp down the MCPCB solidly.

However IIRC some who tried smaller LEDs at the time found that it was difficult to get the reflector/LED focussed satisfactorily and without artefacts in the beam, it is very sensitive to e.g. the thickness of the locating piece, and the large reflector hole, sized for the XML-2 doesn’t seem to work so well with smaller LEDs.

Perhaps the reflector could be re-tooled, just by reducing the size of the hole to suit smaller LEDs. Or it might require re profiling of the flatter part.

The beauty of the D80, to my mind, is the neat compact design, and it feels good in the hand. The workmanship and surface finish was great.

It makes a C8 feel crude and unwieldy.

However for an enthusiast it was no good, basically just a host to spend the same again on as a modding project. Not a well rounded BLF design that could be used as-is.

So, my list of essential changes would include:

1) New driver, in a standard size (e.g. 17mm)

2) DT|P copper MCPCB

3) Updated LED with reflector modified and tuned to it.

4) Body tube length optimised to take flat top, button top and even protected 18650 cells. Sadly this may require changing the stud contact on the driver (which I like very much, much better conductivity than any springs) for a spring.

5) Spring(s) to be good BeCu, e.g. Blue type. The days of faffing about with spring bypasses should be over, at least for BLF designs.

6) Short 18350 tube also to be available, with liner to also take 16340, CR123 etc. Some have cut down the 18650 one to make a very neat and handy package, it would be great to have this option.

7) Forget the latest fad for 21-70 cells, that would bulk it up and lose the neat compact nature of this, and further complicate use with 18650, spring lengths etc. And I’m pretty sure they will continue to be a fad, as well as the dimensions not being well standardised, making tolerancing of the tube and selection of compatible cells a guessing game. Having a 1” OD tube is important for some applications, it is the standard for many mounts. Yes, it might be possible to fit a 21-70 into a 1” tube, but I think you would lose the chunky grippy nubs and stout wall thickness that make the D80 so tactile.

8) Change the thread of the switch retaining ring to LH, so it doesn’t keep coming loose when you change cells. Convoy knew this years ago.

9) Optional FET remote tailswitch assembly for hunters, curly lead and pressure switch, with UI option to lock into turbo-only output. Maybe in a package with some flip on colour filters.

Give me 1-8, at a BLF price and I would buy a couple. But overall that would be a lot of re-tooling to get to the product that it should have been originally.

The actual BLF D80 was around before you where a member so i don’t know what model you got? It had a worked driver doing 4.5amps and a DTP MCPCB its a proper Noctigon board with specialized XML2 tints. The driver is fairly standard its a 20mm driver but you can make a BLF driver fit in with no mods. Maybe you bought the normal D80? Does yours have a Noctigon board?

I have been a member here far longer than the existence of the BLF D80, , but ducked out for a little while and re-joined under this new name. Fresh start.

I bought the BLF D80 as soon as it came out, one of the first delivered, and my description of mine is correct. No it did not have a Noctigon. No it did not have “specialised tints”, just a choice of tint with no binning specified.

It should have had a Noctigon, but mine did not, I guess it was a mongrel using a standard D80 part instead of the BLF component. I was unlucky.

The driver, as for many, did not perform properly, due to an incorrect resistor fitted. Even when corrected, the two SOT 23 FETs are weak. Works ok with a full cell at 4.2V, but as the voltage drops the on-resistance becomes the limiting factor.

You could refresh your memory at the original thread. Things started unravelling about 2000 posts in.

http://budgetlightforum.com/node/36983

I’ve remembered that mine did not have MCPCB securing screws either, that was a mod I did, because I was doubtful that pressure from the reflector was adequate, having suffered thermal issues with my Al mcpcb.

It would be good if they could be included on a new design.

Sorry for any confusion.

DEL discovered that the FET gate drive resistor was far too high a value, meaning that, in combination with the gate pulldown resistor, the FET gate was only being driven with half cell voltage, not enough to turn it on fully particularly at lower cell voltages, i.e real life. Testing torches only with fully charged cells is unrealistic. Though it seems to be the norm, ie. topped off strong cell in perfect condition, straight to turbo, peak lumen/candela/tail current readings for a few seconds, job done. As for real-world performance …

Perhaps that was corrected in later builds. Otherwise fixable with a solder splash, or a much lower value resistor.

But the driver was crude and the two paralleled FETs poor. Poorly spaced modes, objectionable visible PWM in lower modes, no low voltage protection.

First thing to replace. I think we are agreed on that.

I could not get a 17mm FET+1 to fit, except with an adapter PCB, the cavity on mine was more like 21mm. I think that reduced to 20mm later in the run.

I suppose the basic driver being so under-developed and cheaply made helped in hitting the selling price. The firmware tailoring for BLF was half-hearted, PWM could have been made higher frequency, modes could have been better spaced, and somehow the original LVP disappeared. This should have been picked up during prototype evaluation.

All this is fixable for V2.

I am not trying to knock the original, it was what it was, and is history. It could be brought up to date, this time with much more attention to detail, and more rigorous evaluation of prototypes.

When looking to refresh this, it is wise to also understand some of the history of the original, it was far from perfect.

everydaysurvivalgear
everydaysurvivalgear's picture
Offline
Last seen: 13 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/31/2015 - 10:25
Posts: 3516
Location: sydney australia (GMT+10)

Tom Tom wrote:
everydaysurvivalgear wrote:
Tom Tom wrote:
To be more positive, the D80 is a pleasing looking handy thing with unique characteristics, and could be brought up to date with a decent FET+n driver, e.g. a BLF/Lexar/Texas Ace, running whatever modern firmware that can still operate with a tail clickie, rather than an e-switch. 7135, or dual bank 7135 for efficiency and steady output at modest levels.

Preferably a straightforward simple intuitive UI that doesn’t require a crib sheet to comprehend. Perhaps a couple of programming options, but no more.

The original driver was very poor, it even had an incorrect value resistor that prevented the very weak FET from turning on fully, restricting tailcap current to 1A or less. DEL discovered this, and showed us how to improve it. However it still suffered from objectionable PWM, inefficiency at the lower levels and poorly spaced modes. It must be binned.

That short reflector and head is rather unique, and the concept should be retained.

Keep the tail clickie, don’t be seduced by side e-switches.

Together with a DTP copper MCPCB and a modern smaller LED (original was XML-2) with higher surface brightness for better throw. As supplied, with non-DTP Al MCPCB it was thermally challenged as soon as you tried to pep it up. Though the basics were there, integral shelf and twin screws to clamp down the MCPCB solidly.

However IIRC some who tried smaller LEDs at the time found that it was difficult to get the reflector/LED focussed satisfactorily and without artefacts in the beam, it is very sensitive to e.g. the thickness of the locating piece, and the large reflector hole, sized for the XML-2 doesn’t seem to work so well with smaller LEDs.

Perhaps the reflector could be re-tooled, just by reducing the size of the hole to suit smaller LEDs. Or it might require re profiling of the flatter part.

The beauty of the D80, to my mind, is the neat compact design, and it feels good in the hand. The workmanship and surface finish was great.

It makes a C8 feel crude and unwieldy.

However for an enthusiast it was no good, basically just a host to spend the same again on as a modding project. Not a well rounded BLF design that could be used as-is.

So, my list of essential changes would include:

1) New driver, in a standard size (e.g. 17mm)

2) DT|P copper MCPCB

3) Updated LED with reflector modified and tuned to it.

4) Body tube length optimised to take flat top, button top and even protected 18650 cells. Sadly this may require changing the stud contact on the driver (which I like very much, much better conductivity than any springs) for a spring.

5) Spring(s) to be good BeCu, e.g. Blue type. The days of faffing about with spring bypasses should be over, at least for BLF designs.

6) Short 18350 tube also to be available, with liner to also take 16340, CR123 etc. Some have cut down the 18650 one to make a very neat and handy package, it would be great to have this option.

7) Forget the latest fad for 21-70 cells, that would bulk it up and lose the neat compact nature of this, and further complicate use with 18650, spring lengths etc. And I’m pretty sure they will continue to be a fad, as well as the dimensions not being well standardised, making tolerancing of the tube and selection of compatible cells a guessing game. Having a 1” OD tube is important for some applications, it is the standard for many mounts. Yes, it might be possible to fit a 21-70 into a 1” tube, but I think you would lose the chunky grippy nubs and stout wall thickness that make the D80 so tactile.

8) Change the thread of the switch retaining ring to LH, so it doesn’t keep coming loose when you change cells. Convoy knew this years ago.

9) Optional FET remote tailswitch assembly for hunters, curly lead and pressure switch, with UI option to lock into turbo-only output. Maybe in a package with some flip on colour filters.

Give me 1-8, at a BLF price and I would buy a couple. But overall that would be a lot of re-tooling to get to the product that it should have been originally.

The actual BLF D80 was around before you where a member so i don’t know what model you got? It had a worked driver doing 4.5amps and a DTP MCPCB its a proper Noctigon board with specialized XML2 tints. The driver is fairly standard its a 20mm driver but you can make a BLF driver fit in with no mods. Maybe you bought the normal D80? Does yours have a Noctigon board?

I have been a member here far longer than the existence of the BLF D80, , but ducked out for a little while and re-joined under this new name. Fresh start.

I bought the BLF D80 as soon as it came out, one of the first delivered, and my description of mine is correct. No it did not have a Noctigon. No it did not have “specialised tints”, just a choice of tint with no binning specified.

It should have had a Noctigon, but mine did not, I guess it was a mongrel using a standard D80 part instead of the BLF component. I was unlucky.

The driver, as for many, did not perform properly, due to an incorrect resistor fitted. Even when corrected, the two SOT 23 FETs are weak. Works ok with a full cell at 4.2V, but as the voltage drops the on-resistance becomes the limiting factor.

You could refresh your memory at the original thread. Things started unravelling about 2000 posts in.

http://budgetlightforum.com/node/36983

I’ve remembered that mine did not have MCPCB securing screws either, that was a mod I did, because I was doubtful that pressure from the reflector was adequate, having suffered thermal issues with my Al mcpcb.

It would be good if they could be included on a new design.

Sorry for any confusion.

DEL discovered that the FET gate drive resistor was far too high a value, meaning that, in combination with the gate pulldown resistor, the FET gate was only being driven with half cell voltage, not enough to turn it on fully particularly at lower cell voltages, i.e real life. Testing torches only with fully charged cells is unrealistic. Though it seems to be the norm, ie. topped off strong cell in perfect condition, straight to turbo, peak lumen/candela/tail current readings for a few seconds, job done. As for real-world performance …

Perhaps that was corrected in later builds. Otherwise fixable with a solder splash, or a much lower value resistor.

But the driver was crude and the two paralleled FETs poor. Poorly spaced modes, objectionable visible PWM in lower modes, no low voltage protection.

First thing to replace. I think we are agreed on that.

I could not get a 17mm FET+1 to fit, except with an adapter PCB, the cavity on mine was more like 21mm. I think that reduced to 20mm later in the run.

I suppose the basic driver being so under-developed and cheaply made helped in hitting the selling price. The firmware tailoring for BLF was half-hearted, PWM could have been made higher frequency, modes could have been better spaced, and somehow the original LVP disappeared. This should have been picked up during prototype evaluation.

All this is fixable for V2.

I am not trying to knock the original, it was what it was, and is history. It could be brought up to date, this time with much more attention to detail, and more rigorous evaluation of prototypes.

When looking to refresh this, it is wise to also understand some of the history of the original, it was far from perfect.

My first one had the short tube could only use unprotected cells in it and none of mine had screws to hold the MCPCB in place but i don’t think the Noctigon boards have space for that.

Muto
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 31 min ago
Joined: 09/04/2012 - 16:42
Posts: 2181
Location: Southeast, PA

Post 2410 in that thread shows the resistor mod that DEL did and why he did it;
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/36983?page=80

After the Apocalypse there will be only 2 things left alive, Cockroaches and Keith Richards
..

Big Sky Country
..

No matter where you go, there you are.

RobertB
RobertB's picture
Offline
Last seen: 20 min 18 sec ago
Joined: 12/18/2015 - 17:49
Posts: 3415
Location: USA, Michigan

Mine has the Noctigon, but the shorter tube, which I don’t care about since I don’t use protected batteries anyway. An updated 17mm driver should be easy enough for them to do. Other than that, this seems like a well made host, and very comfortable in the hand.

DavidEF
DavidEF's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 8 hours ago
Joined: 06/05/2014 - 06:00
Posts: 7698
Location: Salisbury, North Carolina, USA

I’d rather have a Osram “White Flat” emitter (or the new Boost HX, if available) and a decent linear driver with max output tuned to best performance of the emitter. Make the head a tiny bit longer, so the reflector can be a bit deeper. Get the focus right for best throw (obviously). Don’t change the battery size. Keep the 18650. Good idea to use the Blue™ springs. Wink

The Cycle of Goodness: “No one prospers without rendering benefit to others”
- The YKK Philosophy

Tom Tom
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 1 week ago
Joined: 09/10/2017 - 08:30
Posts: 1163

Some background to the driver problems, and how DEL improved it with a simple mod.:

http://budgetlightforum.com/comment/880325#comment-880325

Nevertheless these FETs were poor, even with the gate driven with a full cell (4.2V minus Schottky diode drop, and sag/internal resistance) after DEL’s mod. At real world cell voltages they are far higher resistance.

See DEL’s graphs at http://budgetlightforum.com/comment/880334#comment-880334 and http://budgetlightforum.com/comment/880454#comment-880454

As supplied, getting only half cell voltage, minus Schottky drop, with say a cell at 3.7 or even 3.5V, sagging further under load, they were barely operating. That’s ignoring the poor tail spring used.

For comparison, a decent FET as used in a good BLF FET+1 is in the 5 milliohm class, at all cell voltages.

I suspect that prototype evaluation was only ever done with full cells. Also by others here. Not realistic.

Then there was the suspicion that the prototypes supplied to Dale etc. had superior emitters, production units from lower bins. He could never reproduce the results with production units. Even then, they never took the current that would be expected with a good FET.

The PWM was about 150 Hz. Horrid. And maxed. at 98% on turbo, yet another loss.

Then there was the nonsense with the tailcap switch retaining ring. Originally it had a shoulder on it to contact the tube, but they were sloppy, forever coming loose, and even failing to hold together at-all. My early one suffered this. So instead of doing it properly and going to a LH thread and making the threads fit properly they removed the shoulder and cranked them in super-tight, nearly to the point of stripping. But in removing the shoulder they forgot to lengthen the tube to compensate. Hence all the short-tube problems, and the need to make longer replacement ones, at extra cost. Famously Kronological “totally missed this”.

I just glued mine together with threadlock, which probably makes the switch unmaintainable.

Like I said, attention to detail is everything, as the FW3A team have found. Sometimes it seems like one step forward, two back.

If Lucky Sun can step their game, this would be a nice refresh. The original team sometimes expressed frustration at communication difficulties and un-discussed changes, for what should have been a straightforward tweak of an existing product, basically LED, MCPCB, driver UI changes, new logo, job done.

For this to be good, I see it needing a lot more work, but worthwhile.

Tom Tom
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 1 week ago
Joined: 09/10/2017 - 08:30
Posts: 1163
DavidEF wrote:
I’d rather have a Osram “White Flat” emitter (or the new Boost HX, if available) and a decent linear driver with max output tuned to best performance of the emitter. Make the head a tiny bit longer, so the reflector can be a bit deeper. Get the focus right for best throw (obviously). Don’t change the battery size. Keep the 18650. Good idea to use the Blue™ springs. Wink

Yes, a modern emitter with a lower Vf (seems to be the trend), together with a linear driver, even just an inexpensive stack of 7135s, would be better.

Lower Vf. meaning more consistent and efficient performance as the cell droops in real-world use, efficiency actually improving as the cell discharges and the LED Vf. vs cell Voltage transfer characteristic reaches optimum. Unlike FET drivers.

Reflector redesign and fine tuning essential to match emitters. This one is very finnicky to get right if you try a different LED, without obvious beam artefacts. It is already struggling to achieve balance of throw vs. spill, being so shallow.

Remember throw comes only from the reflector and the sideways projection of the LED. The spill is what shoots out of the front of the LED, missing the reflector entirely. Therefore precise LED characteristics will be very important.

A deeper wide reflector makes this much easier. And better. But that would not be a D80.

AguassissiM
AguassissiM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 35 min ago
Joined: 12/04/2018 - 19:20
Posts: 193
Location: Canada

I`m way too green to have any useful suggestions however put me on the list for one whenever they are ready.

johnkey68 that is a very nicely composed picture.

***Rofis MR70***TurnRaise***Catapult V6***BLF Q8***BLF Mini***BLF Micro***Haikelite MT09R*** Convoy C8 ***BLF D80v2 SST40***MatemincoX6S***AstroluxFT03-xhp50.2&sst40***BLF-LT1***

DavidEF
DavidEF's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 8 hours ago
Joined: 06/05/2014 - 06:00
Posts: 7698
Location: Salisbury, North Carolina, USA
Tom Tom wrote:
DavidEF wrote:
I’d rather have a Osram “White Flat” emitter (or the new Boost HX, if available) and a decent linear driver with max output tuned to best performance of the emitter. Make the head a tiny bit longer, so the reflector can be a bit deeper. Get the focus right for best throw (obviously). Don’t change the battery size. Keep the 18650. Good idea to use the Blue™ springs. Wink

Yes, a modern emitter with a lower Vf (seems to be the trend), together with a linear driver, even just an inexpensive stack of 7135s, would be better.

Lower Vf. meaning more consistent and efficient performance as the cell droops in real-world use, efficiency actually improving as the cell discharges and the LED Vf. vs cell Voltage transfer characteristic reaches optimum. Unlike FET drivers.

Reflector redesign and fine tuning essential to match emitters. This one is very finnicky to get right if you try a different LED, without obvious beam artefacts. It is already struggling to achieve balance of throw vs. spill, being so shallow.

Remember throw comes only from the reflector and the sideways projection of the LED. The spill is what shoots out of the front of the LED, missing the reflector entirely. Therefore precise LED characteristics will be very important.

A deeper wide reflector makes this much easier. And better. But that would not be a D80.


Well, I was just asking for it to be a bit deeper. Don’t change the aesthetic too much, as others have said. I was never a fan of the Aesthetic of the D80, but I will probably buy it if they end up using the “White Flat” or the Boost HX emitters. I want a super-throwy hand-size light just to impress people with. I’m considering getting a GT Mini and/or Micro, but I’d be happier with one of these Osram emitters, perfectly focused in a well-designed reflector. Cash

The Cycle of Goodness: “No one prospers without rendering benefit to others”
- The YKK Philosophy

Tom Tom
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 1 week ago
Joined: 09/10/2017 - 08:30
Posts: 1163

The white flat could do it I think. Along with the other flat surfaced emitters that shoot light out sideways in a Lambertian manner.

Once they have a dome on, it changes for the worse (for throw). Hence all the de-doming discussions.

Of course there is far more to it than that.

But, fundamentally, the shallow reflector is unlikely to be the best for throw. Plenty of other, better, already available options for that, you have mentioned some.

It is a compromise, not really a great thrower despite what some would have you believe, more flood than I need. But that’s inevitable considering the dimensions.

If you have not held a D80 you may not appreciate the aesthetic. In the hand it is very nice (I think). Don’t be put off just by photos.

cabfrank
Offline
Last seen: 24 min 42 sec ago
Joined: 11/19/2010 - 17:25
Posts: 2977
Location: healdsburg, california usa earth

It is great in hand. The reflector is great too. I have one with Bistro and a MTN-17DDm driver. It works wonderfully. No need to reinvent the wheel here.

hank
hank's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 28 sec ago
Joined: 09/04/2011 - 21:52
Posts: 8549
Location: Berkeley, California

Get the battery tube length right. I recall I had to buy a longer one separately to use my button top cells.
And I haven’t figured out what to do with the old slightly short battery tube.

Streamer
Streamer's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 days ago
Joined: 12/01/2011 - 21:06
Posts: 3792
Location: TX

Well heck, I must be the lucky one. Added DD driver and can’t complain about it at all. But then, I’m not a perfectionist.
The fault finders will find fault, even while in Paradise. But, that is what it’s all about here at BLF. Thumbs Up

Tom Tom
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 1 week ago
Joined: 09/10/2017 - 08:30
Posts: 1163
Streamer wrote:
Added DD driver and can’t complain about it at all.:THUMBS-UP:

There you have it. It just needed a decent driver, the other niggles could be fixed up, with patience and perseverance, and some frustration.

Should not have been necessary for a BLF special, these are supposed to be well developed and good as-is, not the beginnings of a modding project, unless that’s your interest.

But it was a 2015 tweak of an earlier design, and things have moved on a lot since then, so a proper refresh could bring it up to date nicely and make it relevant again, rather than just a warm over of the original. Working properly it is a nice torch.

Several other BLF designs were right first time, live on still, have more than repaid their manufacturers’ faith in BLF engineering input and rigorousness, in continuing sales, and are still highly recommendable.

This V2 could do the same. Worth the effort.

I’ll duck out now, I’ve said more than enough. If the OP wants to pursue this I’d be glad to help where I can, behind the scenes. I’d like to see it succeed.

Muto
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 31 min ago
Joined: 09/04/2012 - 16:42
Posts: 2181
Location: Southeast, PA

If they want to use a deeper reflector for some of the small die emitters on the market now they could just design a taller bezel and extend the new reflector into the bezel.
This way a new casting of the head would not need to be made.

Speaking of bezels, how about optional Foy bezels? Stainless of course.
Just a thought.
Also if they are rebooting the concept, how about some new colors?
That Olive drab that Klarus has might be nice and maybe some Reds, Blues.

Laterrrr
Keith

After the Apocalypse there will be only 2 things left alive, Cockroaches and Keith Richards
..

Big Sky Country
..

No matter where you go, there you are.

TheOnlyDocc
TheOnlyDocc's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 06/26/2015 - 05:17
Posts: 949
Location: Mönchengladbach /Germany

I could not sleep so i wrote with my LS contact. Like it was said in other projects language is a huge barrier. And LS is not a huge company. So i do not think it would work out well to go with a Osram throw led + getting a reflector made (with prototypes a lot of testing . . . . . .).
If we had a contact there that could explain everything in their language i would go for it.
The D80 is having good throw and it would fit nice. But as it is i see way to much potential for a crash and burn.
After this short time i would say most people like the light and would be happy if they could get a fixed up version (tailstand, tube length, springs,driver,reflector quality increased and led hole size reduced. . . .) with new internals, UI. . .

New WildTrail (former LuckySun) D80v2 Sale has Started http://budgetlightforum.com/node/66255

JaredM
JaredM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 23 min 41 sec ago
Joined: 10/31/2011 - 13:33
Posts: 692
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

To me, this type of question is a slippery slope. How much of the original can you change before it becomes something entirely new? (like an old old rock band that has none of the original members but still carries the same name Facepalm )

I’d say refine details only if this is a D80.2 think-tank

Things like:

Improved reflector geometry/finish
Better springs
Double o-rings
Thermal management
New anodizing
Latest firmware/driver
LED options (for the non-modders)

pirate joe 22
Offline
Last seen: 9 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 08/26/2015 - 01:23
Posts: 138

blf d 80 is one of the very best special editions ever….
it looks great and has a great beam
improve it to what it should have been the first time
new driver, new led, dtp and good springs

at the same time, start working on a 21700 model with new xhp led

djozz
djozz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 56 min 45 sec ago
Joined: 09/07/2012 - 17:04
Posts: 16440
Location: Amsterdam

pirate joe 22 wrote:
blf d 80 is one of the very best special editions ever….
it looks great and has a great beam
improve it to what it should have been the first time
new driver, new led, dtp and good springs

at the same time, start working on a 21700 model with new xhp led

Thumbs Up
Satan@103TFS
Offline
Last seen: 10 hours 46 min ago
Joined: 09/04/2017 - 12:51
Posts: 564

Prefer 21700 too for me.

TheOnlyDocc
TheOnlyDocc's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 06/26/2015 - 05:17
Posts: 949
Location: Mönchengladbach /Germany

I think i found a way to improve heat dissipation (without changing the look). But i only have my tablet with me in hospital. So i search for someone that can help me to make a pic or 3d model to show BLF (and LuckySun if most people think its a good idea) what i have in mind.
If you want to help please PM me.

New WildTrail (former LuckySun) D80v2 Sale has Started http://budgetlightforum.com/node/66255

Pages