I made my drawing, I took the maximum possible 14.3mm tail diameter 2mm hole right in the middle, for fitting I took an existing and appropiate looking ring that I had, it was 10mm inner diameter. The grid is 1.25mm/square.
Still like the trit slot idea, personally if the light is nice enough I would put one in and it still looks nice without a trit, and the front end will collect debris just as well.
But the poll may get us a ‘BLF-preference’, and after all that, I would not be surprised if Sofirn has ideas of their own as well.
1. Magnet seems to be very popular so far- far overwhelming those who don’t want one. My concerns when it comes to a magnet or attachment point for one is that it will add to the overall length of the light, which is detrimental for carrying on a keychain, or that the extra material/machining will add to the cost of the light (even if the magnet is not included).
2. The number of people who absolutely want a trit slot is about equal to the number of people who don’t want one. Really, that vote is overall a dead heat and could go either way at this point.
3. The Manker E02 tailcap leads the ranking despite its late entry. The i3s type tailcap and Lumintop Ant are #2 and #3 in the current rankings. Everything else trails off significantly.
I’d wait for more data to make any definite conclusions, but I don’t think central mounting is a strict priority. Personally I wouldn’t use a magnet, and I’d prefer it be optional or not come with the light at all. I’ve had better luck sourcing my own magnets for projects anyway. What do other members think of this?
As far as Noir’s design, I’d think the magnet would have to be pretty strong considering the small size and off center nature. I really don’t want that in my pocket with my USB drive/keys/credit cards/etc, thus having the magnet be optional would be important. Assuming this design doesn’t add much length, I do like the idea as a middle ground.
Edit: Looking at Djozz’s drawing, why not have the trit side curve out a bit more following the split ring? That should help a bit with tailstanding.
Edit #2: Come to think of it, Noir’s design is a lot like a blend of the current top three tailcaps in the rankings.
That is not possible, because of the hole in the middle (the drill goes vertically).
Edit:
Yes, my design (the second one with magnet and trit) has (at least in theory) everything: standard split ring, tailstand, central hang, magnet & trit slot. The only thing that needs to be verified/tested is if a magnet of that size (4 x 3 mm) is really strong enough.
I never want magnets on my stuff, it’s too easy to damage things.
Anything from a demagnetised credit card in your pocket to a damaged computer hard disk because you put your light in the wrong place for a moment whilst working inside the computer.
I’m fine with a hole or an internal spring clip for people to add an optional magnet, I just don’t want the light to come with a permanently-attached magnet as standard.
I would probably use a magnet if it had one, but for a keychain light with only ~8lm output, it’s not a big deal if it doesn’t include one. I like the idea of putting it inside the tail-cap instead of outside. Then, those who don’t want their light to be magnetic can remove the magnet (if it’s clipped in and not glued) and not have a huge hole in the back of their tail-cap where the “missing” magnet would be.
The issue is the twisting action will move the led to different focal points in the parabolic reflector. This will cause all sorts of artifacts to show in the beam. Everyone remembers their old maglites and the various focusing beam patterns. I really hate those patterns.
There are a few solutions if Sofirn wants to use a parabolic reflector and address the beam pattern issue:
diffuse lens
really orange peal reflector
smooth reflector with a flat white paint to diffuse.
A 5 mm magnet does indeed fit (just). I rechecked the dimensions with the help of a drawing. A 5 x 3 mm magnet should most definitely be strong enough.
Some notes on my drawing:
I've been cautious and used 14 mm diameter, if it is actually 14,3 mm all the better.
The magnet circle is a touch too far to the left (to the outside).
The trit slot is probably a bit too big.
The split ring is the same size you'll find on medium sized Swiss Army knives.
The total height of all this is 3 mm, the hole is 2 mm plus 1 mm of material on top of that (this is the same as on an Olight i3E, the central lug of that has a total height of 3 mm and a 2 mm hole). Or in other words: non of this adds length to the light, the 3 mm are needed either way.
There is a slight concern that there might not be enough material left either side of the 5 mm magnet, but I'm sure Sofirn is able to figure out if that is the case or not (not forgetting the chamfered edges of course).
I just realize that this light must be a 3 piece host in order to accommodate a removable magnet. I hope sofirn can test the structural integrity of the tailcap since we wanted a robust flashlight.
I think it is best if the light does not come with a pre-installed magnet (to make the most amount of people happy).
There are two sensible options:
A: The light does not come with a magnet at all (but with a cavity for one). If the user wants a magnet they need to buy and install one themselves (same as with the trit).
B: The light does come with a magnet, but the magnet is not pre-installed into the light. If the user wants a magnet they just need to install the one that is in the package.
I prefer option B, because it is easier for the user.
No one is even bringing up a permanent magnet. The removable magnet is optional.
We are just brainstorming a tail cap to accommodate the requested features.
I believe the biggest priorities are cost and robustness.
Magnet cavity, tritium slot, centering ring hole and etc are secondary.
However, if we can incorporate many of the requested secondary features in the design, then why not?
If you don’t want the magnet, then leave it in the bag and don’t install it.
I have to say, I really like the tailcap design that Djozz and Noir are converging on. Definitely a step up from any other AAA tailcap I’ve seen :+1:
I think it would be a good design for a 1×AA light as well. The only potential snag there is whether the magnet would still be strong enough, even with the opportunity to scale it up to (I presume) 7×3mm in the larger tailcap.