as it has a 2S/4P battery compartment the active heat path at the base of the shelf has at least a diameter of 45mm, this is well enough to conduct 1000W of heat, the fins are really thick, no need to widen the head as you show
the LEDs wont be sittingh at the edge of the light like the X80, head is bigger and less LEDs, so they more more to center
How are you supposed to turn it on with an overhand or reverse grip with the light by your shoulder? This is how I use my L6, but this light has a weird finger cutout preventing this.
The ugly grenade style battery tube. The 4 ugly flat cutouts on the battery tube. The big, diagonal slices on the head. The screws holding the switch cover in place.
What happened to the sexy looks of the earlier MF01 and MF02? Did they hire the designer that Haikelite fired after he designed their MT03 and MT07? I see a lot of similarities.
I know they are trying to save weight by cutting a lot of material out, but geez, don’t turn it into a ugly monstrosity only a few will want to buy. So far these teaser pics make the Imalent it’s competing against look like a beauty queen.
Let’s discuss how much is too much for kcd? Do we want to use binocular to see so far. The answer is yes, please make it shoot the farthest as possible.
When I play with 450kcd, I am worried I shine on people at distance unknowingly because I can’t see clearly anymore. So everyone please use our big toy responsibly. I am thinking to bring my binoculars to be safe.
I’m sorry that I do not I understand that calculation, especially why the battery configuration matters, I just see 200W of heat that is generated at the front part of the head, that either stays where it is or it goes somewhere else and thus keeps the head temperature a bit cooler for a bit longer time. And the little practical experience that I have with these power levels is that to funnel 200W to elsewhere it needs a large aluminium cross-section, a tube in the center with common wall thickness will not do that sufficiently.
(btw, always I’m all for keeping material thickness as low as possible, don’t like big chunks of material where it is not needed, but here I see a very good reason to add that material)
I see, so the idea is that that central shaft is close to massive then, with a small hole for the wires? (in that case I still think that a higher cross-section would matter))
Rather see 3-XHP70’s with 3 big deep reflectors at 8-9000lm Turbo like a huge BTU shocker and 5-70’s at 8-9000lms Turbo like a Ace beam X60. Not one for mixed emitter, multi-emitter lights. Rather have them all the same, but this is still very interesting… :+1:
I agree. It doesn’t really make sense to have such a bottleneck directly under the heat source even though that (hopefully) thick tube is large. Trying to funnel 100% of the heat into 50% of the heat conducting area isn’t ideal.
Still looks like a very cool light though. Interested to see more details.
I’m sure that with its clunky build it will do much better than those tiny monsters, but with my simple suggested correction in the design that hardly costs extra (if any) I’m pretty sure it will still perform noticably better.
djozz, is it you are suggesting to have more thermal mass under leds mcpcb seating by reducing the length of fin? Those deep section of fin don’t have much airflow anyway, might as well make the fins shallower?
It is not the thermal mass I want it for (although it does add a bit that will help lengthening the turbotime somewhat just because of that), but I want it for a large enough cross-section to help the heat getting through to the rest of the body of the flashlight.
(and with 200W power the fins are mostly cosmetic, they will do a certain job at lower powers)