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

I must agree. I’m excited for the triple FW3A, but I have a preference for more usable outdoor beams and would be all over a more throwy version of this flashlight. A FW1A with a narrow-ish TIR and a single emitter (hopefully something like an SST-20 or XP-L HI) would be divine.
Of course, this is just a pipe dream and we need to get the actual FW3A released first!

Yes, this one first! I do think when and if it is a huge success, there will be a single emitter down the road though. I say this largely because, if I remember right, TK mentioned she would like one as well.

I'm # 1033 on list and had originally requested one, then asked to add another (2 total) a couple of weeks ago, looking at the 2nd "people" column I just see a 1 next to my name. So sorry to be a PITA, just getting excited for this one and want to make sure I'm down for two. :)

Thank you so much to whoever is keeping the list updated, that can't be a fun job. I'm drinking a beer in your honor as we speak.

You asked for your second light on Jan 29th. The last update to the list was on Jan 28th.

i dont really see why a single emitter would be anything interesting ? more fun a tripple emitter frosted optic for nice flood imo.

A single emitter often delivers nicer tint at low levels, and it generally gives a very different beam pattern with more throw. It’s also generally cheaper, easier to mod, and less prone to heat issues. However, it may end up longer due to a deeper reflector, and the maximum output would be lower.

With triples and quads being so popular lately, I kind of miss single-emitter lights. Both are good, but in different ways.

I personally have always had a preference for single emitter flashlights. I can appreciate that flood is nice indoors, but I like my EDC to be capable of throwing a bit when I’m outdoors too. I love my Emisar D4, but in order to see a decent distance ahead of me outside I need to crank the output up to the point where battery life is terrible and it’s uncomfortably warm to hold. I’ve actually taken to carrying a Convoy S2+ recently due to how much more throwy it is at reasonable output levels. The best balance I have ever found before is probably the TIR on the Olight batons. Wide enough for indoor use, but throwy enough for some basic outdoor use.

If the FW had to be made longer to accomodate a reflector, I’d be fine with that too. Narrow width is everything in an EDC light, and the FW3A is already very short in length. Even if the head couldn’t get any thinner with a single emiter, I don’t think a slightly longer head would have much of an impact on pocketability.

I don’t want to get ahead of ourselves, but given the number of GT variations we’ve seen lumintop may be the most likely manufacturer to turn this into a single emitter light. They may also make a 14500 version, an 18350, a 21700 with triple XHP35, and a 2*18650 one of the GT spin-offs are any indication… But I hope at least the single emitter one happens at some point down the road.

Edit: I would love to see an 18350 version with a single emitter that allowed swapping of the heads/bodies.

All of those things sound sweeeeeeeet!

For me the smaller/throwier emitters are almost a necessity in a triple or quad TIR light. That’s why I plan to swap some SST-20s into my FW3A as soon as I get it unless I end up really liking the LH351Ds with a 10507 or even the stock frosted. X-PL HI would be nice but its hard for me to justtify give up high CRI AND pay more when these new high CRI emitters can be had for so cheap and are constantly closing the efficiency gap with 70-CRI, high output bin options.

With a very floody beam like on a Nichia D4 for example the output needed to have any reach is just too high. The heat production and battery drain make it far less practical for any outdoor use IMO.

A single-emitter light can have decent throw with a large emitter like the LH351D. A triple of the same size needs something smaller though, to avoid being extremely floody.

However, that said… I still think the compact-triple beam looks very nice with XP-L HI. And, comparing it to a 95CRI SST-20, I still prefer the XP-L HI because the rosy 70 CRI tint looks better to me than the SST-20’s 95 CRI greenish tint. I reserve the right to change my mind though, if we ever get any rosy-tinted SST-20 emitters.

I’m interested in one with the Samsung emitter.

Yes, I’m using the awful quote button!
I’m reading through threads, so if this has been answered later, sorry.
I’m totally up for an all copper FW3C. Charge me. I’m happy to pay for at least two (assuming 100ish ea).
Add me to the list!

They don’t exist, and there is no list for them. The only list is for the original aluminum, and even that doesn’t exist yet.

I’m not a huge fan of all copper lights. I only own one: A prototype Sinner Cypreus 18650 triple. My impressions:

  • Copper is HEAVY. The all-copper Cypreus looks great but is way too heavy for pocket EDC in my opinion. This is the biggest negative of using copper for an EDC light
  • Copper conducts heat sometimes a little too well. I found that with the Sinner Cypreus triple the body would get extremely hot extremely fast. So much so that I would have to rapidly ramp output down just to protect my hand. Not much point in using a lot of copper if the end result is you get even less time at max power.
  • The copper looks great when freshly polished, but tarnishes rapidly. This can be fixed by putting a finish on the copper during manufacturer like was done with the Emisar D4’s copper heads on the Titanium-copper version of that light.

Copper lights stink and make you hands smell . About as much fun as using an old sponge in the kitchen.

I'm looking forward to the FW3S Stainless although I'll probably take one and strip it to make a FW3N-> naked

How about swappable /extra heads with different emitter combos

Typically speaking, if you have two identical lights with one made of aluminum and one made of copper, you will get MORE time at max power with the copper. It’s been proven over and over again.

Just recently I remember someone (maybe Maukka?) measuring the Turbo temps on an Astrolux S43 (aluminum head) and S43S (copper head). Both lights draw a lot of amps. The S43 held Turbo for about 30 seconds and the S43S held Turbo for about 40 seconds. So copper does have its advantages, but it’s up to each person to decide if they want it.

I agree that the weight and tarnishing of copper tends to make me want to avoid those lights, but that’s just me. Aluminum has the advantage on weight and cost and still handles heat pretty well.

Still, some people like these more unusual materials, even if they cost more, weigh more and maybe don’t conduct heat well. They are definitely nice for collecting. :smiley:

Ps, I’ve never had a titanium light. If they do a titanium FW3 I’ll be curious about it.

My biggest problem with stainless steel is it’s even heavier than copper. I don’t think I’d want an FW3A in my pocket that weighs nearly a pound.

Frankly, from a practical perspective in terms of weight, heat, and cost nothing beats aluminum. But if I want a bit more bling without making the light too heavy, I’d accept Titanium.

I like the appearance of copper a lot. They make wonderful shelf queens, but are not great EDC lights because of the weight. My opinion.

Well yeah.

You’re correct if you’re tailstanding the light over an integrating sphere. Copper can hold more heat than aluminum and also conducts it better than aluminum. A copper light in that situation will absolutely run longer at higher power than an aluminum light.

However, that test isn’t necessarily accurate for real-world usage, because it fails to take into account that most of the time when you use your light you will hold it in your hand. :smiling_imp:

Surprisingly, your hand can take a lot LESS heat than both copper and aluminum. It isn’t necessarily helpful to have a light that take take a lot more heat if it is being held in your hand, which cannot. Unless you don’t mind your hand looking like a baked chicken after using your light.

Upgrading your hand to be able to withstand more heat from an all-copper light is not easy and may require gloves … or cybernetic technology that doesn’t exist yet. :confounded: