JasonWW wrote:

That sounds very corny. Are you guys playing Dungeons and Dragons or something?

You did read about this in the development threads didn’t you?

Lazy-R-us wrote:

JasonWW wrote:

That sounds very corny. Are you guys playing Dungeons and Dragons or something?

That’s it, turn in your nerd card on the way out!

You did read about this in the development threads didn’t you?

If I did read the development threads, I’ve definitely forgot that bit of information. I forget a lot of stuff. My brain is weird like that.

Toykeeper about the differences of the two swords / firmwares:
http://budgetlightforum.com/comment/1220219#comment-1220219

They are correct in that there needs to be a change to the tailcap end. Bevel it for grip

Could you put me on the interest list?

joechina wrote:

Toykeeper about the differences of the two swords / firmwares: http://budgetlightforum.com/comment/1220219#comment-1220219

That covers differences in basic usage, but there are changes beyond that too. Here’s a more complete summary of its modes (from an “off” state):

• Basics:
  • 1 click: On (at memorized level).
  • Hold: On (at moon), then ramp up.
  • 2 clicks: On (at ceiling level).
  • 2 clicks, but hold the last click: On (at ceiling level), then ramp down.
• Extras:
  • 3 clicks: First blinky group (battcheck, sunset, adjustable beacon at last-ramped level, tempcheck).
  • 3 clicks, but hold the last click: Second blinky group (adjustable bike flasher, adjustable party strobe, adjustable tactical strobe, lightning storm, adjustable candle flicker). Remembers which was used last.
  • 4 clicks: Soft lockout mode. Doubles as a momentary moon mode. 4 clicks to exit.
  • 5 clicks: Momentary / signalling mode at last-ramped brightness. Disconnect power to exit.
  • 6 clicks: Muggle mode. Disconnect power to exit.

People may notice other little differences too… like when turning on the response is faster, but when shutting off the response is slower (it waits to see if you’re doing one click or more than one).

More information is in the FSM thread: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/56105

If it seems complicated, just remember that basic usage can be described in only eight words: Click for on/off, hold to change brightness.

do you (themiller) have any new hard or soft data on what the price will be?

initially, was it $30?

wle

also how long will it be?
just wondering if that will be changing
wle

It certainly will not be more expensive than 30 USD. It will also be unlikely that it’ll be cheaper though. So I think the 30 USD are pretty much set.

30,00 $ + PayPal

And, paraphrasing The Miller, it will be done when it’s done. 

whoa!
I am spoilt by the sideswitch. I can’t abide twisties anymore.
The only tailies in my goto’s are the cuTools and only ‘cause of their fantastic patinas.
Don’t think I’ll be in for one after all, sorry.

i meant length- which i think is 94mm, right?

wle

I’m in

Interested please.

chinooker wrote:

whoa! I am spoilt by the sideswitch. I can’t abide twisties anymore. The only tailies in my goto’s are the cuTools and only ‘cause of their fantastic patinas. Don’t think I’ll be in for one after all, sorry.

It’s not a twisty but has a tail switch

fritz15 wrote:

chinooker wrote:

whoa! I am spoilt by the sideswitch. I can’t abide twisties anymore. The only tailies in my goto’s are the cuTools and only ‘cause of their fantastic patinas. Don’t think I’ll be in for one after all, sorry.

It’s not a twisty but has a tail switch

Anyway, this light has a rear mounted e-switch with Narsil ramping firmware. It’s quite unique.

Please add me for 1.

Please add me to the list. Thank you.

ToyKeeper wrote:

The ledge at the back end is a functional part of the design, and shouldn’t be a smooth slope. That’s where the fingers catch to provide something to push against when pushing the tail button — cigar-style grip.

Louis Sullivan wrote:

It is the pervading law of all things organic and inorganic, of all things physical and metaphysical, of all things human and all things superhuman, of all true manifestations of the head, of the heart, of the soul, that the life is recognizable in its expression, that form ever follows function. This is the law.

At the end of the day, this light will be in our hands. And it’s best to accommodate what our hands desire. So I’m a fan of the prototype.

If I understand correctly, the button location is probably the single biggest difference between the FW3A and the Emisar D4. Also one of the most sensitive to personal taste. Side switch or rear switch may be enough to determine which one a person chooses.

I think the FW3A has several nice advantages though… things which aren’t really a matter of taste:

• Three-channel driver with regulated modes up to about 3 Amps (instead of 350 mA).
• Less tint shift and higher efficiency between ~150 lm and ~1500 lm.
• Clip nicely integrated into the design and included by default.
• Rounder beam (no pinwheel pattern).
• More flexible / powerful interface.
• Button somewhat easier to find in the dark, and easier to press when hot.
• Lower price, probably.

Meanwhile, the D4 has some advantages too:

• 4 emitters instead of 3, so higher maximum brightness.
• Bigger heat sink for higher sustainable output level.
• More tint/emitter choices available.
• More host colors available.
• Works with 18650, 18500, or 18350. (possibly also 14500 and 16340 with a spacer)
• Choice of two optics.
• Is already possible to acquire.

Between the two, I suspect I’ll probably like the FW3A a bit more, but it’s a close call. For me, I think the FW3A’s clip and 3-channel driver and tail switch may outweigh the D4’s higher brightness and bigger variety. Won’t know until I try one though.

You can only hold a tailswitch in dagger or cigar/ette mode
I quit smoking in 1995 and don’t want memories of that experience
and Psycho scared the shite out of me

at least you understood tailie

TK, I’d add that D4 is available with 18350 and 18500 tubes.

Agro wrote:

TK, I’d add that D4 is available with 18350 and 18500 tubes.

Good point. I completely forgot about the swappable tube, and added it to the list.

JasonWW wrote:

ToyKeeper wrote:

There seems to be an imbalance now that one side has a gradual slope and the other side has an abrupt edge. Maybe both ends of the inner tube should have matching slopes? That would give it more of a coke bottle shape or woman’s shape, which is sexy of course! Lol

That clip is for me unusable, I have to replace it.
I need a clip parallel to to the tube and it had to be straight not pointy.
It is completely rubbish to add a magnet on.

Maukka tested another light with the XPG3 LED. Fingers crossed the FW3A does better.
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/57623#comment-1231031

joechina wrote:

Maukka tested another light with the XPG3 LED. Fingers crossed the FW3A does better.
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/57623#comment-1231031

Single TIR clear frosted vs triple TIR clear.
Edit: Your are right not compareable

But unknown angles in both lights
And it is not Olight’s first light.

Frosted optics and another LEDs where suggested right at the begining because of XPG3.

But we need first prototypes and then I hope they switch optics and LEDS and do propper beamshoots.

The Olight XP-G3 has a frosted TIR.