Who would buy a BLF GT mini with a 21700 or 26650 battery capability, along with SST-40 same size head

20 posts / 0 new
Last post
4492011
Offline
Last seen: 22 hours 33 min ago
Joined: 01/23/2019 - 19:39
Posts: 131
Location: USA Michigan
Who would buy a BLF GT mini with a 21700 or 26650 battery capability, along with SST-40 same size head
21700 Battery
67% (36 votes)
26650 Battery
7% (4 votes)
Capable of both 21700 and 26650 batteries, 26650 size battery tube
15% (8 votes)
Head design for 26650 with an option for an insert for 21700 battery tube
11% (6 votes)
Total votes: 54
Edited by: 4492011 on 06/09/2019 - 11:22
JordanZHP
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 54 min ago
Joined: 03/25/2017 - 04:37
Posts: 280
Location: Petaluma, CA

Neat idea. I already own an Astrolux FT03 so a new GT mini would require Anduril UI and more lumens/throw for me to consider a purchase.

Agro
Agro's picture
Online
Last seen: 4 min 36 sec ago
Joined: 05/14/2017 - 11:16
Posts: 4139
Location: Ślōnsk

Put a Boost HX or White 2 in it and I’m in for 21700. Smile
But make sure to retain the shorty tube.

DavidEF
DavidEF's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 11 min ago
Joined: 06/05/2014 - 06:00
Posts: 7116
Location: Salisbury, North Carolina, USA

A BLF GT Mini 21700 would be great!

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

TrueRMS
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 17 min ago
Joined: 08/09/2013 - 13:24
Posts: 167
Location: Marysville OH

I don’t care about the led it comes with, just make it 21700 and I’ll be happy! A GT mini powered by a 50E would be my ideal all night long fishing trip light!

80T
80T's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 01/24/2019 - 18:11
Posts: 65
Location: Romania/Ireland

I would love to see/have both 21700 and 26650 battery sized tubes and these emitter choices: XHP35 HI/HD and SST-40

And as the choice of tint, my preference would be something between 4500 and 5000 Kelvin.

Also I would love to see a Tail Switch, Lumintop.. pretty please and thank you very much. Eg:

 

my.. "GT Mini.. Plus(?)" ^ ^

Of course, in addition to that tail switch, a memory for the last state the light was in would be great. Or at least the driver should always start in the On state whenever it's being powered.

At the moment, when the driver it's powered, it'll only give two blinks as a notification of power being present.

 

But to cut the story short, if the choice was just the vote, my vote did go to the 21700.

BlueSwordM
BlueSwordM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 7 min ago
Joined: 11/29/2017 - 12:34
Posts: 4528
Location: Canada

Tailswitch would actually limit the lumen a bit, unless it would be an electronic tail switch.

Here are my recommendations for a 21700 GT Mini:

1. Dual BeCu springs in the tail, so no more need for bypassing springs.
2. XP-L HI 4000k/SST-20 5000k for max throw/SST-40 for max lumens
3. Simplified Anduril without muggle mode.
4. Support for 21700 cells obviously.

My very own high current Beryllium Copper springs Gen 3:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/67401
Liitokala Aliexpress Stores Battery Fraud: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60547

80T
80T's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 01/24/2019 - 18:11
Posts: 65
Location: Romania/Ireland

If we're talking brightness, I for one would take "a bit" of a hit in Lumens for the tail switch functionality, especially given how the brighter the output, the less relative brightness your eyes perceive Smile

I would say a good quality switch shouldn't limit the current to such extent to noticeably decrease brightness output and to have a considerable impact on the runtime due to the energy losses in the contacts.

I guess I would take that in consideration for a monster flooder with multiple powerful emitters though and even then, I would still consider the tail switch functionality benefits regardless.

I'm looking at the Sofirn C8F with the bypassed springs and the triple XP-L HD emitters for ex. - it takes quite a lot of Amps through the tail switch and it's still perfectly fine with it.

I would compare the C8F's triple XP-L setup with an SST-40 and even a tad more than that. In fact I wouldn't probably even live without that tail switch on the C8F - Hard to un-see it after you've once seen it LOL

But, then again, I guess that's just my preference, I'd take more features/options over sheer power and efficiency. It's not like I don't love high efficacy wherever possible, but, I guess.. slightly different priorities.

 

EDIT:

Ah, and I forgot to mention that like the added length of the grip area with the added tail switch - the standard Lumintop body always felt too short and a bit too thin for my hands.. Flat Stare

Also I like the extra width of the tail cap of the Convoy C8+, it just adds another layer of comfort to the grip, it just feels a bit more secure in the hand, overall, it just feels natural to my hand.

I guess a 21700 would be a nearly perfect size for me at least. Still wouldn't drop the tail switch over brightness and a bit of losses, even with the 21700 body regardless, given the choice.

Oh but if the tail switch would be an e-Switch, then I'd rather drop it. That would be just at the edge, under my threshold of Pros VS Cons a tail switch would add to the full package.

4492011
Offline
Last seen: 22 hours 33 min ago
Joined: 01/23/2019 - 19:39
Posts: 131
Location: USA Michigan

The tail switch could be an option, but what I don’t like is the way the Sofirn C8G is, where the tail switch is a must to turn on the light. And I think that there should be more options for emitter. XHP-35 limits all other led’s because it requires a 12 volt driver. But with 3 volt many options including white flat, new 3v XHP 50.2. I really like the size , depth performance from this reflector

80T
80T's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 01/24/2019 - 18:11
Posts: 65
Location: Romania/Ireland

I'm not really out for the XHP35's especially, as there's pro's and cons about them and I wouldn't really mind a 3V only driver and limited emitter compatibility, there's enough good stuff covered by the 3V alone, e.g. the 3V XHP50.2 When I was saying XHPXX & SST-40 I was also thinking about 2 driver versions as well, to accommodate both classes of emitters, 3V & 6/12V (boost) alike. That was just a stretch of the imagination, to cover all possible options there could be there to my tastes, given there wouldn't be any limitations to choices. I'm rathe more interested in the features, functionality, choice, practical usage "comfort" overall, that being UI included (not really all that fond of every little detail of the current Narsil UI that's on the GT Mini)

 

With that said, I do want my tail clicky, if not for anything else, at least for the simple fact the I can "Lock" the light and forget about it in a drawer for a few good months. As for the tail switch being a must for turning on the light, well, yeah, on the C8G indeed, that's a must and I hate it as much as anybody else if not more.. and that's because they've decided to drop the Stand-By functionality from the side (function) switch (compared at least with the previews dual switch C8 model, the C8F) That shouldn't be an issue with the GT Micro though, as by design, it's initially an e-Switch /side switch design, thus it has to have the Stand-By functionality on the side switch in the first place and the tail cap would be an "after thought addition", not to say now that it shouldn't also be implemented the best way possible - hence why I was mentioning the power off memory mode, or the driver should at least always start in the On state should a tail switch be in place on the host, not starting with the dual blink power available notification.

 

And since the Stand-By functionality is there on the e-Switch in the first place, on the GT Mini that is, then the tail switch could stay "On" for as long as you'd like and not interfere with anything at all (well, anything than a few lost Lumens and a bit of losses of energy in the switches contacts at high brightness levels - I would argue nothing to write home about) Thing with the tail switch being there it's that it'll let you quickly lock/unlock the light, cutting out any parasitic drain as well (this would compensate for the small losses while using high brightness levels having the mechanical switch in place, so it pays off) and also having a quick momentary action impossible to miss even in pitch dark.

mortuus
mortuus's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 58 min ago
Joined: 12/16/2014 - 09:33
Posts: 1814
Location: Sweden

Wouldnt it be better make a GT bigger then mini but smaller then big brother instead? so that it has slightly bigger head then mini..

...where Frugal meets with Flashlight!

Lothar
Lothar's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 33 min ago
Joined: 10/26/2011 - 11:22
Posts: 484
Location: Stellenbosch, South Africa

My vote goes to GT mini with the same dimensions, but with 21700 battery, same firmware as GT70, SST-40 or XHP50.2 LED, tint in the 5000K range.

80T
80T's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 01/24/2019 - 18:11
Posts: 65
Location: Romania/Ireland

Imo, there's enough options out there, the likes of the ODL20C, or the Astrolux FT03, or Thrunite Catapult V6, etc. That is if you are not talking about something even bigger  but just smaller than the Giggles, like somewhere in between. Myself  I'm not interested in such big lights in general, the ones that I've mentioned above would pretty much be my upper size limit, given that I'm mostly collecting rather than using them. I guess one big thrower might be joining my collection maybe some time in the future  but given how much practical usage I'd have for it, probably that future would be quite distant. So, instead, I would likely take a number of compact lights based on variety options and features before that. And a GT Mini 21700 or even 26650 would probably take precedence as long as it doesn't deviate too much from the current format and if possible also bringing up some more option to the full package, like for ex. a tail switch and maybe an updated UI.

4492011
Offline
Last seen: 22 hours 33 min ago
Joined: 01/23/2019 - 19:39
Posts: 131
Location: USA Michigan

With several good battery options in the 21700 and 26650 battery size I really like the concept of the Amutorch VG10 head to battery tube look at the last picture here . I dont know why more manufacturers are not utilizing this concept, utilizing this concept would make the transition between tubes seamless, not only would they sell the light but accessories also, usually more profit on accessories. So far only the Night watch NS22 seeker offers two different battery tubes , optional 21700 tube. This would I believe make many customers happy. If someone did not like the fatter 26650 tube they could just purchase with 21700 and utilize a sleeve for 18650 if that is what they want to run, if some one did not mind the 26650 but also wanted to utilize 21700 it would just need a sleeve or for that matter an 18650 sleeve.

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 48 min ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 19882
Location: Heart of Texas

To make changes like these would warrant a new name, the GT mini is a version of a known large light, change it’s style you’ll have to change it’s name or it no longer applies and the appeal dies.

mortuus
mortuus's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 58 min ago
Joined: 12/16/2014 - 09:33
Posts: 1814
Location: Sweden
Lothar wrote:
My vote goes to GT mini with the same dimensions, but with 21700 battery, same firmware as GT70, SST-40 or XHP50.2 LED, tint in the 5000K range.

this is imo pointless -as with 21700 they must make a thicker battery tube so they might aswell bump up the diameter on the reflector since it will take bigger battery it should have a slightly bigger reflector overall, i dont see how this would be a bad thing.

so yea name change should also been made to avoid confusion with existing models…

...where Frugal meets with Flashlight!

4492011
Offline
Last seen: 22 hours 33 min ago
Joined: 01/23/2019 - 19:39
Posts: 131
Location: USA Michigan

I would not want to change the style, just change the separation line position between head and battery tube connection. The area of the head where the switch is located measres 32 mm then just below that 26 mm in diameter for a distance of about 6 mm, I am saying eliminate that area and incorporate it into the battery tube of two different sizes internally, but with the same size flare for both. I like the size of the head just the way it is.

80T
80T's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 01/24/2019 - 18:11
Posts: 65
Location: Romania/Ireland

Fair points. I guess I do like the GT mini, but I'd take something similar with the features that I like from it. Even under a different name. So I do like the head design, the reflector shape and size, the ramping curve, but I would take a similarly designed light with a 21700 and/or a 26650 body, even if that would change the body to head proportions/ratio and also with some additional features, like a tail switch and slightly different UI to accommodate that additional switch.

4492011
Offline
Last seen: 22 hours 33 min ago
Joined: 01/23/2019 - 19:39
Posts: 131
Location: USA Michigan

That is what I like about it the reflector seems to be very well thought out, just a little bigger than the conventional C8 but a lot smaller than just about all of the other respectable throwers.

flightless22
flightless22's picture
Offline
Last seen: 21 hours 10 min ago
Joined: 11/19/2018 - 12:07
Posts: 96
Location: California

I’d go for 26650 body for max cell compatibility and best fit in hand. I would be up for it if Lumintop made a ‘BLF Medium’ that sits between the BLF GT and BLF Mini size wise.