I like Jerommels last 8x18650 fin-less design best up to now. Do we really need fins with this light?
“need”? Hmmm possibly not as there will be a ton of metal to handle the heat. Although if it’s driven hard to the max it may indeed benefit.
I’m personally a huge fin-fan but of course everyone is different and I also must say I think the finless renderings look like the Courui D01 (all be it much larger) especially the head 
The 4x26650 looks well proportioned, but how wide would the carrier be? ~65mm ?? I think that would need my suggested handle 
So many good ideas coming out it feels like things are ramping up fast now.
Yeah, I have a few ideas on this, the final decision will honestly come down to price and the manufacture. It can be done easily enough, although I think that loosing the tailcap switch might be the best way to go in this case as it would make it a fair amount simpler and honestly for a light this big it could be redundant anyways (aka, people would just end up using the e-switch anyways, the tailcap is only really for lockout as it is anyways).
Plus since the carriers will be designed with adjustable cell setups in mind, not having to have 3 rings will make it a lot simpler for modding later.
I put some technical details / suggestions in the 8x 18650:
In hind sight the reflector turned out a little large in this one, should be a little smaller.
I think it’s decided that it’s gonna be 8x 18650, so i put some batteries in.
(Behind those are 4 more in the same configuration, making it 4S2P)
I think there is no need for battery carriers, the series chain is broken by the tail switch = OFF.
Not so much a disagreement, short tubes will be stacked, so people can stack and few or as many as they want. The outcry for short tubes is obvious enough to make that clear.
The light will be 18650 based though, anything larger and the box light makes way more sense and that was already rejected in favor of a plunger setup.
It is not about hiding things or anything like that behind the scene. Anyone here knows that given half a chance we at BLF will debate and pick apart ANYTHING into the ground, many projects have died early deaths due to this.
So now days group buys are open to the public for discussion but the final decisions on made either by poll or by the people running the GB. Think of them as the mangers that keep everyone pointed int he right direction so work actually gets done.
We have to be VERY clear in our communication with China, partly due to the language barrier and partly because our projects are always on the back burner over there if they prove too much of a hassle they may just drop the project all together.
We also have to think of the general public and not just us here as a manufacture will be aiming not at us but at how many they can sell after we buy our batch.
It is nothing personal against you or anyone else.
People asked for a short tube, they will get a short tube. That is the only complaint I have seen on the 5AR designs thus far.
It’s basically a blown up T42 head.
I don’t think fins are necessary for a 25 Watt light this size.
It would be closer to 72mm+, which is like holding an L6 by the bezel, I tried it, it would need a handle 100% and at that point the box light idea is far far better but that was rejected.
…yes, but with only 4x 18650 there will definitely be a balance problem, i.e. the tail will be very light.
To keep things simple and affordable, i think we should make a choice what it’s gonna be, and you have recently convinced meof the 8x 18650 set up, which can also run on 4x 18650 when you look atmy latest suggestion on battery config.
not sure why you think that it will be 8x 18650 still, I have said a few times that a short tube will be offered after the overwhelming response for it?
It also will have cell carriers in parallel. thus allowing the tubes to be stacked as long as they want.
I like the fins myself for ascetics more then anything although particularly if we did a quad reflector version later the fins would sure help.
The slots in the head are there for a reason as well, they are to keep the light from rolling if laid down. You would not want a light this heavy just rolling off the table at random. They should remain for sure IMHO.
The fins make it far sexier IMO, A plain jane boring light is just that, plain. We are not building a plain light here, we are building the ultimate thrower monster of a flashlight! I want it to look like it!
Although if others prefer plain boring looks, well I can just only show people the light in the dark I guess. lol
With the parallel cell carriers it is easy to simply leave one of them empty and not use it if someone doesn’t want the extra weight or doesn’t have the cells to put in it. By putting the full one in the rear of the light the balance will be far better then a short tube.
People still seem insistent on a short tube though so I am quite sure that will happen. It does open the possibility of 4-5x tubes stacks for ultra search and rescue setups. In which case the fins will really become important to handle the heat long term so it doesn’t have to use a thermal stepdown. More fins then 5AR’s CAD’s would be ideal but also unnecessary for 95% of users, so thus not worth it.
LOL Who are you kidding?
We agree on practically nothing.
And now you think a T42 looks boring too?
My ‘boring design’ can get some fins on the part where the switch is, and maybe on the part that contains the driver.
It was mostly about the form factor and proportions, and i think i made a 4x 18650 look good (enough) too.
The battery carrier contraptions will surely make it more expensive though, and you have more (not soldered) contacts too.
Have you seen how 5ar’s design looks with a short tube?
A (heated) discussion is fine right?
Jerommel I really like the design.
But for practical reasons it needs some fins right at or under the point where it bends straight up for the bezel
We need some sort of anti rolling and a few fins with cutouts seem smart.
Personally I go for as much heat shedding as possible, lower led temps means more light and just think, no turbo just a retina searing high :smiling_imp:
Cheers David
I don’t actually disagree with what you are saying or doing. I really mean that. I just disagree with it’s application to this light.
For a project to work out a clear goal needs to be defined from the start and then it needs to be built for that goal.
In this case that goal is a massive handheld thrower for less then $100 with a ~120mm reflector and extreme moddability on all fronts.
Cell carriers give far easier and larger modding options. Cost wise they add a little but not as much as you might think for a basic design.
I was never a fan of the TN42 looks.
Yes, that was his very first CAD drawing actually (which he was correct in doing obviously). I have been waiting to see if any other complaints came to light that could use changing to contact him about updating the design with the short tube again. It is easier to handle a few changes at once instead of constantly making small changes.
It should be, yes…
Actually i was planning to do that, but i work with simple photoshop like program, not 3D stuff (It’s Ubuntu (linux) Gimp to be exact).
Sure, and as i said, the latest drawings are mostly about proportions, not details, although PERSONALLY i like the “boring” design a lot.
I think less is more in that respect.
And also to TA, yes, the thing must be able to manage the heat from a hard driven XPH70 too.
But for a multi-reflector set up the head is not ideal. Neither my or 5ar’s design.
You would have to make a shelf in the head to put the MCPCBs on and leave a lot of room unused.
But maybe you can put a fan in there.
Canberra? I had to look it up thinking it was a typo or an inside joke. Turns out to be the capital of Australia. Geez. I blame my public education.