FW3A, a TLF/BLF EDC flashlight - SST-20 available, coupon codes public



The ONLY downside? A TINY bit? It's a solid 120% of the starting price; in fact it's more than the d4 now costs. It may be only $6, but it's still a big percentage. And what about color rendering? Not only does the XPL have a mere 70+ cri, the lh351d's test (https://budgetlightforum.com/t/-/49771/13) as having an even higher r9 value (79) than the regular 219c (rated at 50), to say nothing of the xpl which would be something like -28 (that's negative!). Maukka also says the lh351d would get about 2.25cd/lm in a triple clear tir, which means my previous comment was actually underestimating it. I should expect then more like 165m, or more than my personal copy of the d4 219c (would still be mildly less than other people's, but not unimpressive for 3 emitters vs 4).

The other thing is that these samsung ones would be very efficient indeed, and make little heat, because the Vf is higher and the flux is pretty comparable. That's with about 9% less lumens than xpl, but equal lumens to the xp-g3 we all know and despise. I believe they may even make less heat than the xpl's given the Vf and flux difference, but I haven't tested that. They have a VERY consistent beam according to the beamshots I've seen; please refer to maukka's tests for this as well. Inconsistent beams are mostly a cree thing :P.

These reasons are why once I took a closer look at the samsung's, I changed my preference from 219c. I don't know about you, but to me they seem like a much better all around choice. Sure, the xpl's will flood less, but then take a look at the same tests done with an xpl hi. https://budgetlightforum.com/t/-/47683

Just not very impressive, right?

Tom E wrote this about his DQG TinyIII 26650:
“I’ve done some further run testing. Also modded mine with replacing the CW XP-G2’s with XP-G3 S5 5000K’s. I got a slight bump in output, possible slight drop in amps drawn (not sure of this). Actually the CW stock LED’s had a pretty decent tint - nice white, no blue at all. The XP-G3’s look really good in this light - no yellow, or any rings, etc. Tint is as good as the good XP-G2 CW stock LED’s. I’m happy with the upgrade, though no big impact.
• With the XP-G3 S5 5000k on a BASEN at 4.23V, got 6.1A tail (clamp meter):
turbo: 2,820 start, 2,680 30 secs, lo: 5.8 lumens, mid: 327 lumens, hi: 962 lumens

• CW Stock, on a BASEN at 4.20V, got 6.4A tail (clamp meter):
turbo: 2,650 start, 2,520 30 secs”

That sounds good to me. I personally want my EDC FW3A to have Throw & Flood.

I don’t know if it’ll be possible to get Lumintop to make more than one flavor, but if so, it sounds like it’d be a good idea to do a throwy(ish) flavor with XP-L HI and an extra-floody flavor with LH351D.

I’ll let the poll run first though, along with a poll about color temperature. There are several communities interested now, and hopefully it’ll help to have more quantified preference data.

I suppose there is no way we would know how much less throwy the Samsungs would be?

Sorry for the off topic comment, but are those samsung LEDs available on triple boards anywhere?

Yeah I’m also confused as to why the XP-L HI is mentioned as having a smooth beam when it isn’t really meant for these optics and anything I’ve seen didn’t look good.

As Agro noted, LH351D 70 CRI would probably have the most lumens, similar to XP-L2. Probably also less heat than the 90 CRI version. Should that be an option? Usually flood and CRI preferences tend to cluster together, so I only listed the high CRI option.

Using a Carclo 10507 optic, even XP-G2 has kind of an ugly beam with obvious artifacts and rainbow effects. The 10511 optic mostly fixes that, and it can be reasonably throwy, especially after polishing the top surface a bit. However, it’ll likely still display a little bit of rainbow on XP-G3, and twelve very faint corona petals with some emitters… even 219b. Nothing like the original D4’s pinwheel pattern though.

Here’s XP-G2 in a 10507 optic, showing the rainbow effect:

It looks like the range here is very approximately 2 to 4 cd / lm. Maybe 1.5 to 4.5. The entire range is toward the floody end of the spectrum, but LH351D is the floodiest of the bunch and XP-L HI is the throwiest. Basically, at a distance of ~5 meters or more, the Samsung emitter would need to put out about twice as many lumens to light up objects as well as the Cree emitter.

Yup
Some people seem perfectly happy with negative R9, that makes Red look Brown.

Others prefer High CRI w High R9, that makes Red look Red

The poll will help sort out which group is larger, and for the others, an LED swap should be an option.

Because I’ve tried a variety of emitters in Carclo triple optics, and have found XP-L HI plus 10511 to be a good combination. Its domeless design mostly eliminates any rainbow effects. It has a significantly smoother beam than 219b + 10507, for example, though not quite as smooth as 219b + 10511. To completely eliminate artifacts though, a floodier optic is needed — like 10508 or 10509.

Feedback (like the past two pages or so) is why I put a poll preview online though, to make sure the data is accurate. Here’s the preview again:

http://toykeeper.net/torches/fw3a/emitter-poll.html

Thanks, TK. That makes it very easy to understand. I was waffling, but now, I know I’d prefer XPL-HI’s.

I am simply going by THIS
At the time I said this the XPL HI was the only one with 5 stars in the “Beam” column. Now it seems to have dropped to 4.

OTOH, Samsung lights up a wider area, and reviews for it have been very positive. It’d be a great option indoors.

I agree, it sounds intriguing, which was causing the waffling. I think it may make for too much of an indoor use light though, and be a bit underwhelming as an indoor/outdoor edc.

Yep… the ONLY downside to me. And $6 is TINY in the big scheme of things, to me anyway; to get what I prefer.

And CRI means just about ZERO to me in this discussion.

XPL HI is my preference ATM, I like it. If it is not yours that is fine with me. :+1:

I feel the same way about the $6. This light is a screaming deal at that price. I also prefer a bit more throw. It really makes a difference on a dark night.

Agreed. Not a good choice for best “all around”…… for my money anyway.

I am sold on the XPL HI also cabfrank. :+1:

Some people are signed up for a bunch of lights, and an extra $6 for each adds up. People come from a wide variety of financial backgrounds. Some plan to buy the light as sort of a host and swap the emitters and/or optics, which would make any extra cost counterproductive.

Increasing the price isn’t a trivial matter.

I care about the $6 because I’m not just buying one of these, and it is a 20% difference in price. I’ll definitely be doing some emitter swaps in those no matter what the production emitter is.

I care quite a bit about CRI as well. It’s not the kind of difference that smacks you in the face like the XP-G3 rainbow or a few thousand K difference in CCT, but being used to it, I notice when it’s absent. It’s to the point that I’m rarely tempted to use my one light with an MT-G2 because its poor rendering of reds and browns annoys me. Object recognition is slower. My perception of fatigue is higher.

My first choice will be the 219C. It works well in FET triples even if it does throttle a bit sooner than the other options. My second choice will be the LH351D, because it’s the only other 90 CRI option. I don’t think giving up throw for heat/output relative to the 219C the right trade here, but it is worth it to me to gain CRI over the Cree options. Also, I wouldn’t mind having a bunch of them after swapping a two or three of the lights for 219Cs).

:+1: . :+1: . :+1:
I have emisar D4 Nicha 219C
Too hot … Fire
Vote for XP-L