Yup, it will save us a bit on separate shipping cost for the optics.
I think I recall reading that the ‘well’ the emitter is cut a bit shallower on the hosts and/or the stock lights than on the BLF-Special lights (cut deeper on the BLF-Specials to hold the copper board)? Might want to check the stock/non-BLF lights and host lights to be sure.
here is a pic of what im thinking your talking about ? (in green)
I don’t think that there’s been any indication that a dedomed quad XP-L (with a 24mm Carclo optic) will outperform a domed triple XP-L (with a 35mm Ledil Cute optic). We know the 32mm MCPCB + 35mm optic works well, that’s what I’d target… EDIT: and I don’t see much point in putting the 24mm quad stuff in a 35mm host light. Why not just go do that in one of the plethora of slightly slimmer hosts which work with 24mm stuff? Please see RaceR86’s thread: Suitable hosts for 24mm quad optics.
Isn’t RMM also working on this exact same heatsink project? For him to send out as kits w/ MCPCB+heatsink+optic? With reasonable international shipping? I’m not trying to be a party pooper, I just want to make sure we’re all on the same page here. Reference post #3177 in RMM’s sales thread.
Tks Wight, thats the kind of info I was looking for. If it doesn’t really outperform a triple then I wouldn’t want to go to quad, no.
Quad optics are much much smaller than the triple optics, so by the very design the Quad isn’t going to throw or have the beam profile of the larger optics. The Quad individual TIR’s are ~10mm x 5.8mm approx, while the triple CUTE-3 SS has TIR’s at 17.4mm x 13.7mm. Much larger.
For me, the very size of the X6 is the reason to use a quad in it, potential for massive heat sinking to handle the heat of 4 emitters. The quad deal is a limited thing anyway, with less than 40 quad boards still available from Richard. Without those boards, it’s DIW.
I talked Hank at Intl-Outdoor into producing more of the 32mm Noctigons, he was out of stock and wasn’t planning on re-stocking. As of last night he had 168 in stock. So that too might be a limited deal, just with more available at the moment.
Richards plan is being held up at the moment by some odd dealings with his host supplier. Since there’s no good idea of when that might be rectified…
Yes, I’m doing what I can to help Richard get set up and running with this same kind of deal. The machinist we’re working with is behind and the hosts are temporarily shelved. With the Group Buy being over 800 lights, and not knowing how many of those might want a modification, there’s more than likely plenty of room for more than one to be working on this. Richard will have the complete set-up, with host, emitters, proper boards and optics as well as the spacers in the triple category. So those will be available to all that are interested and the Special Edition lights won’t have anything to do with it, they can be left as they shipped in their pretty little SE boxes. 
Yes, but can you make your quad make significantly more light, and can it run significantly more efficiently with the same light output, thats what I’m primarily interested in 
I like the X6 for bigger head and better fins/heat dissipation as well, and I thought the “advantage” to the quad was that we wouldn’t have to run as much current to get the same light, it would be more efficient and max lumens would be perceptibly a bit brighter…but is that the case?
Nitro, yes, your picture
is what I think I read someone describe, in one of the other topics.
I hope someone who knows will speak up, if there are any important variations in the actual flashlight body
i have both and i think they are the same, i dont want to take measurements from the non BLF x6 BC the head does not screw all the way down.
I was thinking along those lines myself, that a quad could make the same light more efficiently but I’m not finding that to be the case. I built a quad in a different light and it’s full blown all out pedal to the metal at 15.10A. It’ll do 4416 at start, 3743 at 30 seconds. And makes a great heater!
In my Triple X6 with aluminum sink, I’m seeing a current draw of 12.57A and output at 3788 at start from the next bin down…XP-L V5 2D. So the output is comparable with significantly less current draw in the Triple. The larger optics are making the difference and I’m thinking the better thermal path keeps it cooler for the long run. Might pan out to be similar with the big quad heat sink, don’t know yet.
So far, my measurements on the Eagle Eye X6 internally match the Special Edition light. I’ve had about 15 of these lights in hand and the only difference I’m aware of is the tail cap is stretched to allow the boot to be inside the dimensions for tail standing. Internally they’re the same in my findings.
just posting to check to see if everyone likes the design and if they would change anything or any additional ideas ? if not its going to be machined as the 2 pics i posted :)
Great to see this is going forward
few machinist i had talked to said would it be ok to use C145 Tellurium Copper besides C110 what do u guys think on that ?
Given the smaller size of the quad board it would be more likely to benefit from copper than the larger board but not sure if it’s worth the extra weight. I’m just getting the lower piece in aluminum anyway so don’t count this as a vote, just my .02.
As long as we’re talking about cutting back… To me it seems that disks would be fine. Eliminate the post coming out of the bottom and you eliminate another machining operation = lower cost…
Thermal conductivity seen here. How do you convert to W/(m K) in order to compare with Engineering Toolbox? I’d like to see how this Tellurium Copper compares to “regular” Copper and Aluminum.
Edit: I found this to convert. W/(m K) of Tellurium Copper is 354.8 and Engineering Toolbox has Copper at 401 and Aluminum at 205.
I was thinking of having the quad done in aluminum and the triple in copper, i hate to remove the bottom post of the triple because that would be loosing a place to reduce heat transfer through the host
i no the Quad is around $10 each and i have to get a quote on some copper rod should be around the same price or just a hair more due to being more $$$ than aluminum but will find out ASAP...........Edit: The price also reflects on quantity more interest the better and should be cheaper
Please don’t make any compromises for the sake of a few dollars. If it doesn’t get done correctly there is no point doing it at all in my opinion. I always go by the motto “do it once do it right”.
Your current design in copper looks spot on to me.
I agree with LSX. We got the lights at such a heck of a price. No need to skimp here! lol Nothing like buying a $20 light and dropping $75 in mods! :money_mouth_face: :davie:
How about some slots for Tritium while your at it??
I like the idea of a copper 2 piece on this build. But a one piece would be nice as well. Thanks for the handy work guys. I am looking forward to some sample pics so I can wrap my peabrain around it. :Sp This light is the perfect platform.
Ricflair i wish there was room for Tritium slots :) but if u wanted u can cut slots into the optic for them ?