There are many ways to Rome. I wouldn’t call a design leaving out so many batteries a good one even if it works good with button tops… Don’t get me wrong… The light seems great but that part was a huge bummer to me. Especially when it’s so easy to make lights that work with both kinds. I’m just hoping they fix this issue for a later version. Looking forward to getting this even if I have to mod some batteries to make it work properly.
Battery contact rings are a design flaw in kind of the same way that shoelaces are a design flaw. It requires a little bit of care because, if operated incorrectly, people can trip over it. There are plenty of ways to design shoes so that they don’t need laces, but those ways aren’t unambiguously better — they all involve tradeoffs.
There are even companies which started out with other designs and then upgraded to a contact ring to avoid the problems inherent in the other designs. It’s a pretty attractive solution with some nice benefits and only minimal downsides.
Multicell lights that work with flattops are always more complicated, either a battery carrier must be used, or an extra rotating disk in the tail, or a loose battery cap (like the newest Convoy). More parts means that more can fail. This ring design is cheap, has very low resistance and never fails. You are a solder blob away from any flat top battery to work in this light.
Some ways to Rome are better 
The car that can use all the ways to Rome is best if the roads for button tops are closed 
A light like this is neat for emergency use with whatever cell I got lying around. When it’s only accepting one kind it’s a limit. In 2019 we manage to design something that works with both kinds. It’s not that complex c’mon. It’s a great light like I said but why isn’t it allowed to call this design issue out? Clearly something running all kinds of 18650 would be better and if it’s done right it’s just as reliable as this solution.
yes, more codes will be sent our for those wanting more than one light. At the moment they are giving 1 code per person on the list of 3000, so everyone can get a at least 1 light, then they will go over the list from the start again, to send out more codes to those on the list for more than one.
Just add solder buttons to your flat top cells. I did that with all my flat tops batteries i use in flashlights & lanterns.
I agree. There will always be a couple or a few who will never be satisfied, and the same ones never understand what goes on developing projects like this on a volunteer basis, with language barriers, communication barriers, time-zone barriers, etc. The last week or so i been becoming really frustrated with those who bark, complain & whine about nearly everything they can find wrong, and been sort of staying away from this thread because of it. If it keeps getting out of hand with the CPF-style abrasiveness & negativity from some i will ask SB to step in.
I’ll do that. But it is a workaround 
The ligth you designed is great but I hope that if it’s upgraded in the future a more versatile battery holder is considered.
There is no real alternative design to a 4P type cell light other than using a separate battery carrier/holder, which will raise cost, complexity, and body size. Even the removable base-cap spinning spring board styles add cost and can be less reliable.
This lantern is based from the common reliable ring-type contact & carrier-less battery bodies like the BLF Q8 has, also the SRK lights, and many others, but their one issue is they need to use button-tops (or soldered blobs on flat tops) same as the Q8 requires.
I think mine’s broke. I’ve been using it every night for two weeks and can’t seem to be able to run the batteries down. What is this “charging” thing you speak of? 
Ah yes - that’s what I was referring to, thanks!
I don’t plan to use the light with anything other than the supplied Sofirn cells. But if the pot bothers me (or anyone else), I (or we) know what to do!
Hang in there DBSAR, I can see why you’re frustrated. I’m frustrated too and all I do is read the thread, again, I READ THE THREAD! Amazed at the number of people who keep asking the same questions over and over that have been answered over and over. The people who bitch, just for the sake of bitching (can I say bitch?)
The design “flaws” (decisions) that were made clear in the thread (if people would read it) USB-C was about the connector the way I remember it, not the charging standard. Now needing button top batteries is a flaw…REALLY?!? What next, too tall, too short, too round?
My point is…sometimes people just suck, but there are a lot more of us here that support and appreciate what you and the rest of the team have done, and the great product all of you and Sofirn have created.
Don’t let the b@#*!rds wear you down!
Do we have any idea whatsoever if Batch 3 will be able to be purchased under the Group Buy or is that still unclear?
The workaround is for the batteries, not for the light. If you build a diesel engine car, it’s not a design flaw that it doesn’t run on gasoline. The versatility you are whining about comes with added size, complexity and cost. I’m very glad they designed it like they did, I much prefer a light without a battery carrier or rotating ring.
DBSAR, just remember that for every one person that whines there are twenty more that appreciate the work that has been done and love the final product as is.
I would say it might be more like 100 more that love it. 3000 LT1’s were spoken for and 2970 of them will be THOROUGHLY enjoyed including the 5 I’m getting for me and my neighbors!
I’m 2832 on the list and received my code for amazon, so I’m sure that the folks who want multiple lights will soon start getting their extra codes.
All these cryers, whiners, and complainers should design and build there own lantern then. You know who you are so lets see your design . PM me and I’ll give you my email so you can send me your CAD files. Lets see um! DBSAR and the whole LT1 team- thanks for such an awesome light! It is my favorite, and I’ve got some bad-ass lights HA!