Interested, depending on price.
Interested.
No, this is a very bad choice. You will want unprotected high drain. Panny B is a very old design rated at 5A continous and has very high voltage sag. Plus this version has an unknown pcb limit that might be as low as 3A. You can sometimes find 30Q cells for 4 x $20 or buy 2 for $11. Maybe two purchases of 2 batteries each at different times will get you under the tax limit?
interested
It won’t be a lot, not 4,000. Probably closer to 2,500. I’m guessing it uses a 6v FET driver, but I really haven’t thought too much about the wattage or seen the interior of the light. Of course sustainable lumens varies on the ambient temperature and whether there is a breeze, etc… Much bigger lights can do 6,000 in a closed room with no air flow at room temp (73°F/23°C). This light is much smaller.
TA, is it a 6v FET using the stock MF01, MF04 carriers?
Interested
Yes, it is setup in 6V, 2S9P for the LED’s.
The carriers are the same basic design but are being upgraded for the higher power as I understand it with better springs and end plates but I have yet to see the final version myself.
I like it! I almost bought the MF01 when it first came out, but that had driver issues. Then they came out with the newer driver/mcpcb design and I almost bought that one with the intention of putting one of TA’s drivers in it. That’s about the time they started gluing the bezels into place. So I’ve yet to actually buy one of these. 
This new version looks like the one to get as it’s already got an upgraded driver in it. No mods needed. 
We shall see.
Good thing you didn’t get the old version, the LED’s were setup in 6s3p, so you would not of been able to upgrade the driver since it required a boost driver to work.
The new version has a new mcpcb setup and thy tell me they made the mcpcb thicker as well.
Interested.
I have done the buying 2 at the time trick and I have 4 on the way. I also bought 2 Sanyo but they don’t match well.
But being ill with muscular tension and don’t deal well with light, much use will be of limmited time and indores. It would be nice to know what the power draw on the lower modes will be.
Since it will be using Narsil with ramping you can set it to any power draw / lumen output you want pretty much.
The first mcpcb, 3 inductor driver, had the proper wiring (6v).
The second mcpcb, 4 inductor driver (21v), you can cut the traces and add jumper wires to get or back to 6v. It’s extra work, but the darn glue on the bezel is the real problem. Lexel had to build wooden clamp jigs to get it apart. :confounded:
I’m glad they went back to the 6v mcpcb.
This reminds me, does it have the gap between “top of ramp” and turbo? Like steps 1 to 140 then jumps to 150? Will it be a small or big jump?
Yes, the ramp will end short of full turbo. This has proven to be the best setup over time for a few reasons. In this light an important one is how fast it heats up on full turbo. The top of the ramp noticeably improves the heat up time.
Far as how big the jump is, something around the last 10-15 steps sounds right. Visually it looks like what you would expect the next mode to be.
Interested.
No glue, please.
Interested
Hello Texas_Ace,
I just ask, if a 2S3P or 3S2P battery compartment were considered.
That would be only as thick, as a 1S3P compartment, just twice the length. That could be good for hand holding - but the flashlight body would lose the ‘soda can’ format.
Still, it would be a nice to have for longer runtime and less strain on batteries.
I mentioned several options along these lines but they were adamant that the basic form factor must remain the same as the first version. Not sure why.
That said there is nothing keeping future lights from being developed in other form factors. Although the triple 21700 format is not something I am itching to jump behind for a few reasons. Most were stated above, there are just not many advantages over a 4x 18650 setup and 18650’s are a lot more common. A triple setup is also a very odd voltage that is hard to use as well.