Your interest is much appreciated. I've got long term plans for various parts of it as I'm quite attached to it for various reasons. It's not really viable in it's current design. It's so crazy front heavy that it would take a real hoss to yield for any length of time. Plus, what emitter and current can really fully utilize 3" of LED Shelf that is 5" in diameter. I really have no idea what I was thinking at the time.
OP updated
and PMMING 5ar with:
OK 5ar, lots of input:
5ar could you make one with the more and thinner fins? (As I so crudely drawn see below, for fins, height, size and general idea pics from several GT posts)
Now there are 8 anti roll cutouts, please widen them but make it 7 (yes uneven for alignment reasons so not 6)
Then while your are at it, get rid if the ledge Thijsco speaks of.
Finally make transition from the widest part to narrow smooth (see my crude insult of a drawing 
)
I strongly think it will all come together and by smoothen the anti roll section also much closer to Jerommels design. All happy and even better cooling, can’t have enough of that.
Also design less L6 or TN42 so more own, important down the road
Please indulge me
Just a quick question on the side:
If Acebeam K70 has no “magic touch” on the led and driver, what theoretical output in lumen and candela could that flashlight have made??
Maybe a new led perhaps, dedoming, and tweaked up the amp’s would really make that flashlight to “shine”…I belive.
Or not??
(It has already 427.5kcd and a reach of 1300 meters…)
Made an design myself, based on the original render of 5ar but cleaner and more fins.
Has only 6 cut outs on the head. fins are 3mm thick, 4 deep and 2mm apart.
Nice work.
A little plain for my tastes but I could live with it if I had to.
I do much prefer the shape of the GT head. The strong taper to the handle isn’t doing it for me. It just seems like it needs something in all that empty space, all I can think when looking at it is, “something is missing” but I can’t quite put my finger on what it is…
Could just be me though.
One thing that is “missing” is the lanyard/strap attachment point.
Other than that it is nice and clean.
Not sure how I feel about it yet, still sipping coffee as I think about it; but nice work ‘thijsco19’. :+1:
The TN31 used to be the throw king when fully modded, highest throw about 590 kcd, maybe 610 kcd, and it has a 79 mm head diam, but that was with a dedomed XM-L2 U2. The K70VN did 570 kcd max, though bigger head diam at 88 mm, but only using the stock XHP35 HI LED. I did some searching and can't find any mods to the K70 to really push it's limits - maybe it's not an easy light to fully mod, like the TN31 was, or maybe the reflector design is not the best for max throw - dunno.
The Fenix TK61 when fully modded gets up there, as high as 770 kcd, here: http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?417181-TK61vn-NOW-AND-THEN, but with vinh, he cherry picks LED's and we modders really don't know all that much about what he is doing. I don't think anyone else achieved those results, or even close with a TK61. The TK61 has a 96 mm head diam, close to the TN42 @100 mm.
Of course today, the TN42 is "the" thrower to use as a mod platform to experiment with because of it's size (head diam), but we don't really know how it will perform with a dedomed XPL for example.
Yeah, I caught that, I figured he just have not got around to that yet.
Still, it is too much flat empty space, my brain says something should be there.
People do not experiment with the TN42 because it is too expensive. First of all not many pieces are sold, and people that have dedicated 200$ for a light don’t really want to gamble on ruining it. That is why we need a good host with a decent size reflector. Like this BLF project. If TN42 was sold as a host it should cost 35-45$ and you would have seen much better projects with XPL dedome, and ultimately with XPG2 dedomed and a MNT 5.5A driver. But at 200$… Not so much.
If we succeed in this project the mods will be a lot more numerous, I assure you.
Thanks for the answer Tom E! Much Appreciated 
Indeed, havent got around to make it. Also, there is no bezel on it now, haven’t made it yet.
I agree, it’s very clean and smooth. It looks like it missing something. Though, I really wouldn’t know what you can add in between. Maybe when tweaking the dimensions/proportions it will look better.
Just don’t understand…IMHO
Is the 5ar/first design so crappy that some of us want to sit hours in front of a pc and work with a completely “new” design, that still needs much more input than the first/original design??
I don’t get it……
Most of us (as I can see it) think that just tiny-tiny changes on 5ar’s first render is what we want/need…and our work really needs to be done on other things. (Reflector/manufacturer)
By all means, it’s awsome to see other peoples design skills/propositions, but then we have to go to post #4, to have a closer look.
Bechause what is wrong with that render (except for small changes that is mentioned in post #1307)?? 
What is not to get about folks wanting a product to look good?
Also, the topic title at the moment indicates it is now about just that.
So frankly, what i don’t get is why people seem to want to stick to 5ar’s design, which i.m.o. should be considered preliminary as well.
There are definitely some design (aesthetic) issues between the battery tube and the bezel in 5ar’s design, so we try to solve this.
Either by proposing new looks or adapted looks.
I think that’s a good thing.
It’s how cars, furniture, you name it, are produced too.
You make some designs that look good, and then you figure out how to manufacture it and / or adapt it to specific needs.
5ar’s renders on left, both top & bottom photos… thijsco19’s on the right.
I thought it would be easier to compare if they were side by side. It is for me anyway.
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Take a new look at post #1307 !
seem to be a forgotten post…….
I like 5ar’s original design, it works for me in every aspect.
I would like to think that having had close to 200 lights of my own, this gives me some experience in these matters. Having modified over 400 flashlights, I’m pretty sure that qualifies me. All the check points are there in 5ar’s design. It’s unique, it’s functional, it’s pleasing to the eye and the hand. It has style cues on a popular flashlight but doesn’t look like it for the most part (hold up your L6 and look at em side by side, plenty of differences and then figure in the sheer size factor.)
This is what’s wrong with taking a popular vote on a design, the choices get split and there’s no clear winner. I would venture a guess that for those people that would actually put a light like this to use, on a regular basis, the 5ar render is the go-to choice. The head style gives a rugged nature that wouldn’t allow it to get banged up easily, and at the same time it could do some banging if that’s what was needed of it. As a user’s tool, the design we currently have is an excellent choice.
Kawi got several TN42’s for $161 ea. I got mine for $179. He’s modifying two of his, I’ve bumped power in mine and am seeing just over 710Kcd. I was cautious, not knowing how much the driver could stand as this whole 12V thing is pretty new to me. I may try again and give it a little more… if I end up frying the driver I’m not against using a ramping FET driver and going whole hog.
Well, for me it’s simple.
I just love it to design a light.
Made a small mistake but the outcome is surprisingly good looking. 
Left picture it has 6 flat side. It even looks good having 4 flat sides.
Those flat sides lose a tremendous amount of surface area for cooling and serve no real purpose. Sure, it looks neat. But it’s function that establishes form, not the other way around.
Could the fins be “cut” the same depth on a circular profile such that they’d be thinner on the flats and deeper on the corners? The 6 flat sides has a neat look, perhaps it could be 5 flats and 5 indentions in the bezel/head? They’d match and the 5 on the bezel or head portion would give an anti-roll property.
Maybe you could draw it up this way for fun and see how it looks?
(My thought on the 5 flats is that you’d have a corner opposing the flat where the switch resides, helping to locate the switch by feel.)
One worry I have had for awhile is that the switch is too “tall” compared to the handle. What is the size of the area where the switch is compared to the handle?
I agree with Dale, the flat sides do have a neat look but also loose a lot of cooling ability.I would really like the fins cut as deep as possible without making them weak.
Indeed, you’ll lose a lot of surface area so I dont think its a good idea.
Not sure what you mean? You want to make the fins the same depth as they are thick?
The only problem with 5 sides is that you’ll lose the tripod mount. You dont have 2 opposing sides anymore for a side switch and tripod mount.
Also, those flats on the head wont contribute to the anti roll function. They wont touch the table when you have the battery tube installed.
Hmm. Just tried it with 5 flats and 5 cut outs on the head but they wont line up… Not sure why. Though It had 6 cut outs on the head so with 6 flats they line up on the high spots.