Q8, PMS SEND TO THOSE WITH ISSUES BLF soda can light

17432 posts / 0 new
Last post
DavidEF
DavidEF's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 6 days ago
Joined: 06/05/2014 - 06:00
Posts: 7699
Location: Salisbury, North Carolina, USA

DB Custom wrote:
Shortening the tube only addresses the shorter cell, lengthening the spring allows the longer cells to still be used albeit at a higher compression ratio. Shortening the tube also messes with design parameters of spacing, knurling, grooves, and so forth, as well as changing the key design goal of matching the size and shape of existing SRK lights.

Okay, here’s where my ignorance has got me. I thought the measurements from The Miller and djozz showed there was still room for longer cells, even with tube shortening and using the same springs as the prototype. I also thought that the tube shortening only required some easy changes in the machining program(s), and since this isn’t a production light (yet) it would be no big deal. Lastly, the design goals have changed throughout this process already a few times. I don’t know why keeping it longer so to match existing lights should be such a sacred thing. Even so, it’s already a tiny bit shorter than standard SRK clones, and subtracting a millimeter or two won’t make that much difference anyway.

But, thanks for the explanation. I’m good now. Thumbs Up

The Cycle of Goodness: “No one prospers without rendering benefit to others”
- The YKK Philosophy

djozz
djozz's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 8 sec ago
Joined: 09/07/2012 - 17:04
Posts: 18145
Location: Amsterdam

DavidEF wrote:
Okay, I hate to be a bother, but I also hate not understanding something. So, I gotta ask: What advantage has lengthening the springs vs. shortening the tube? Why is it just so obvious to everyone that lengthening the springs is the best way to fix the issue? I just don’t get it! What am I missing? Facepalm

A spring just one step beefier (length, wire thickness) will solve many things: it is longer and stiffer so it applies more pressure on the shortest cells, while still accomodating long cells, and it can handle a bit more current before collapsing so it will probably still work with just one cell in the Q8.

A shorter tube solves just: further compression on shortest cells so more force applied but not as much as stiffer springs, but protected GA’s will be squeezed to the max (but will still fit). Extra current handling requires the second spring.

martytown
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: 02/06/2017 - 13:53
Posts: 16
Location: Richmond, VA

Why were button tops chosen as the battery? Do they have a specific advantage in this application? I am getting more batteries with this needing 4 anyway so NBD, but I use flat tops for everything else. I bought flat tops previously because they seemed to be more universally compatible, but hey, I may be wrong on that as well.

djozz
djozz's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 8 sec ago
Joined: 09/07/2012 - 17:04
Posts: 18145
Location: Amsterdam

DavidEF wrote:
I also thought that the tube shortening only required some easy changes in the machining program(s), and since this isn’t a production light (yet) it would be no big deal. Lastly, the design goals have changed throughout this process already a few times.

Proto3 was supposed to be production sample, only a last check and then approvement for producing followed. As it turns out some issues are still to be solved, but it helps if the solution for those issues are easy and certain enough that we do not need yet another prototype for testing. A somewhat larger spring is a solution that I’m confident needs no further tesing, a shorter tube I would be less secure about.

I’m already a bit nervous about the last minute changes in Narsil (which were needed, so it was unavoidable) that is being tested by Tom and others in the latest prototype, but perhaps the time is quite short to extensively evaluate it before the light goes into production.

djozz
djozz's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 8 sec ago
Joined: 09/07/2012 - 17:04
Posts: 18145
Location: Amsterdam

martytown wrote:
Why were button tops chosen as the battery? Do they have a specific advantage in this application? I am getting more batteries with this needing 4 anyway so NBD, but I use flat tops for everything else. I bought flat tops previously because they seemed to be more universally compatible, but hey, I may be wrong on that as well.

It has to do with the simple design of the battery compartment: 4 bateries parallel in a tube, with the head screwed down on top of them. The tops of the batteries therefore rotate against a brass ring while the head screws down and end up in a random place somewhere on that ring. A flat top requires a spring at that spot or at least a button connection, both interfere with the rotation movement.
martytown
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: 02/06/2017 - 13:53
Posts: 16
Location: Richmond, VA

Thanks. So is this a typical/isolated issue with parallel multi-cell lights or did I just not notice a ton of lights that require BTs?

djozz
djozz's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 8 sec ago
Joined: 09/07/2012 - 17:04
Posts: 18145
Location: Amsterdam

martytown wrote:
Thanks. So is this a typical/isolated issue with parallel multi-cell lights or did I just not notice a ton of lights that require BTs?

It is typical for the ‘SRK’ type of lights, a whole range of cheap 4-cell lights in soda-can format that were all copied from an original budget light named Sky Ray King. Many other flashlight brands have 4-cell soda-can-style flashlights that use a different construction: batteries are loaded from the rear (with proper springs so flat tops can be used) with inside the tailcap a rotating battery contact board that is held in place aligned correctly with the batteries while the cap is screwed tight. This construction is somewhat less simple but has, apart from allowing flat tops, the added advantage that batteries can be arrangement in series if that is part of the design.
DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20733
Location: Heart of Texas

There are quite a few of those like djozz mentions that don’t use electronic polarity protection, instead they use a mechanical measure at the positive end that requires a button top cell. Nitecore loves doing this, as does Sunwayman. They put 2 little brass bars on either side of the contact such that a flat top won’t make contact, so if you put the cell in backwards it won’t touch the positive contact pad at the driver end. (A flat top won’t touch either, as the blocking bars hit the shoulder of the cell.)

The SupFire M6 is or has been a popular light, it also uses the brass ring style. I’ve had to repair some lights that an absent minded friend of mine loaded flat tops in these style lights (brass positive contact ring) and shorted out the carrier collapsing springs or frying the driver. He’s done this more than a few times. The SP03 can short fairly easily by using flat tops. As can a great many of the SRK clones.

hank
hank's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 14 hours ago
Joined: 09/04/2011 - 21:52
Posts: 9634
Location: Berkeley, California
Quote:
why not run a vote?

I for one am entirely happy with whatever’s decided by our benevolent overlords
and any improvements suggested by djozz

khas
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 5 days ago
Joined: 08/08/2014 - 07:20
Posts: 937
Location: Denmark
hank wrote:
Quote:
why not run a vote?

I for one am entirely happy with whatever’s decided by our benevolent overlords
and any improvements suggested by djozz

+1

Different springs seems like good solution to me, but whatever the Team decides is fine by me.

Yokiamy
Yokiamy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 22 min ago
Joined: 10/18/2016 - 15:47
Posts: 3127
Location: Netherlands

Agree

There is no need to change the Q8 in any way since proto 3 was designed as last sample before going into production. Everything on the Q8 is tested and found ok except when running 20A on one cell over one spring (duh!) What has a negative effect on the spring, since the inner spring does not contact the battery, so what else would you expect?
Bigger springs therefore are the best solution to do that!

Just my 2 cents…

teacher
teacher's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 02/23/2016 - 19:04
Posts: 9596
Location: NE & SW Alabama

djozz wrote:
DavidEF wrote:
Okay, I hate to be a bother, but I also hate not understanding something. So, I gotta ask: What advantage has lengthening the springs vs. shortening the tube? Why is it just so obvious to everyone that lengthening the springs is the best way to fix the issue? I just don’t get it! What am I missing? Facepalm
A spring just one step beefier (length, wire thickness) will solve many things: it is longer and stiffer so it applies more pressure on the shortest cells, while still accomodating long cells, and it can handle a bit more current before collapsing so it will probably still work with just one cell in the Q8.

A shorter tube solves just: further compression on shortest cells so more force applied but not as much as stiffer springs, but protected GA’s will be squeezed to the max (but will still fit). Extra current handling requires the second spring.

djozz wrote:
DavidEF wrote:
I also thought that the tube shortening only required some easy changes in the machining program(s), and since this isn’t a production light (yet) it would be no big deal. Lastly, the design goals have changed throughout this process already a few times.
Proto3 was supposed to be production sample, only a last check and then approvement for producing followed. As it turns out some issues are still to be solved, but it helps if the solution for those issues are easy and certain enough that we do not need yet another prototype for testing. A somewhat larger spring is a solution that I’m confident needs no further tesing, a shorter tube I would be less secure about.

I’m already a bit nervous about the last minute changes in Narsil (which were needed, so it was unavoidable) that is being tested by Tom and others in the latest prototype, but perhaps the time is quite short to extensively evaluate it before the light goes into production.

khas wrote:
hank wrote:
Quote:
why not run a vote?

I for one am entirely happy with whatever’s decided by our benevolent overlords and any improvements suggested by djozz

+1

Different springs seems like good solution to me, but whatever the Team decides is fine by me.

+2…. and a lot more, to what hank & kahs said…………

An older gentleman gave me some words of wisdom almost 40 years ago that stuck with me……. “If it ain’t broke, don’t “fix” it.”
Well, as far as I can tell (by what ‘team members’, who actually have Proto #3 Q8 in their hands have written); the host design of the Q8 certainly “ain’t broke”… by a long shot.

All this talk of shortening tube length, changing this. possibly changing that, etc., etc. is nothing more than unwarranted rhetoric.

  • Djozz has said from the start of this that a different spring will solve the “problem”^.

I, and obviously at least a few more people; think he has enough sense to know what he is talking about. A different spring will fix the “problem”, ^ (if we can even call it a “problem”… it is just a discovery that warrants a minor change).

  • As far as running the Q8 on one battery. It was never designed to run full tilt safely on one battery in the first place. IF it happens to, fine. BUT if it has to be run on a lower output level to be operated on one battery……… so what?
  • And as far as battery length. Tom E has done extensive testing with a number of different batteries. He has listed the results in several different posts here in this thread. All the ones he tested fit and worked in the Q8 (adjustments are being made to insure this with the 30Q length cell) Thumbs Up

So………. IF you want to make sure your batteries are going to fit…….. get something he has tested. That is a nobrainer.

IF you come up with some odd ball or experimental cell that was left by an alien when he visited this planet and it does not fit…. that is just to bad……….. don’t complain. Smile

You never know how a horse will pull until you hook him up to a heavy load./"Bear" Bryant 

 .................................. "Slow is Smooth, Smooth is Fast" ...................................

       Texas Lumens Flashlights / M4D M4X Deals : sign up - save $$$$  

         Rudeness Level _ mΩ _ {width:70%} _ LightWiki _ LED Tint Chart  

      Xlamp size chart _ BatteryU _ Flashaholic? Need Professional Help???            TheOriginal _ TAB _ LightSearch _ BatterySearch _ 14500's _ DiCal 

 

                                             

BrianK
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 5 months ago
Joined: 06/23/2016 - 08:14
Posts: 1087
Location: Central Maine, USA

teacher wrote:

I, and obviously at least a few more people; think he has enough sense to know what he is talking about. A different spring will fix the “problem”, ^ (if we can even call it a “problem”… it is just a discovery that warrants a minor change).

  • As far as running the Q8 on one battery. It was never designed to run full tilt safely on one battery in the first place. IF it happens to, fine. BUT if it has to be run on a lower output level to be operated on one battery……… so what?

Exactly. IMO the only change that might need to be done is to remove the useless secondary spring and put a note in with the light to not run it full bore with fewer than 4 cells. As someone previously wrote, if it’s an emergency, one probably isn’t going to run it on the highest output anyway with just one cell. IMO, there are much smaller lights that will do that better anyway. But if someone does need to run it that way for an emergency are they really going to give a rats rear end about the light? At that point it’s sacrificial to my way of thinking. A $40 light is a fairly inexpensive payment to save a life. Yes, that’s what I call an emergency.

If the required cells can’t be used in it, then why are folks buying the light? It’s not as though it’s a secret as to what to use. Everyone has been right up front about that many times.

But whatever the design team decides, I’m good with it. The change to Narsil, that was required; the springs? Just polishing the apple before taking the first big bite. Polish it or not, I’m good either way. If I don’t have 4 charged cells I have other lights I can use and a few that just use one cell, and the knowledge to not turn the Q8 up to mega turbo with one cell in it. Folks, some people can’t be saved from themselves no matter how much we try. At some point we need to understand that some people can’t be trusted with matches. Maybe design a safe match… one that can’t be lit? Anyway, I’m good with what the team decides, but I wouldn’t agonize over it or hurt the light as designed.

Personally, I’ve never bypassed a spring but I have a few lights that have spring bypasses in them. I think I can do it with my meager soldering skill. The light was designed to be modded, right?

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20733
Location: Heart of Texas

If it it known that a situation might arise where a single cell could be required, do a relatively simple spring bypass and that will save the spring. Really only takes seconds to do. One could prolong the joy of modding the Q8 by taking some time with it and maybe drilling a hole through the pcb for the bypass wire to come through and contact the heavier trace on the back side, but that might be stretching it. (I’ll go further than that, of course, just because I love modding.)

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 9 hours ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 12911
Location: Houston Texas

SawMaster][quote=JasonWW wrote:
Sawmaster and Nil, do you realize the most amps this light can pull is 5 amps per cell when used with 4 cells. This is well within the range of protected cells.

SawMaster wrote:
Yes, I do understand that fully. As I noted, no one design accommodates all cells,

This is not quite true. By going to a longer spring we can accommodate all cell lengths due to it’s greater compression range.
SawMaster wrote:
and the problem being discussed here happens only when too few cells are used

Not true again. One or more springs can sag just over time. It’s normal for a spring to loose a little of it’s free height after being compressed for long periods. So only using 4 unprotected cells over time may cause 1 or more springs to sag and eventually you will get some batteries not making contact or intermittent contact. This is the dangerous situation that I mentioned. You could have 3 cells with very light spring pressure against them and one cell that is not making contact. Three cells drain down while one stays charged fully. Then it may make contact and then the fully charged cell will start feeding the lower charged cells and it makes for a very bad situation. This is why we want to increase the spring tension on the very shortest cells. To give them some leeway to account for sag and still have decent spring pressure.
SawMaster wrote:
I just think it more important the we do not lose any usability with shorter recommended cells. If both goals can be accommodated then good.

This whole issue with adjusting the springs/battery tube length has only to do with very short cells. This is what we want to get corrected. On the other end of things, we are hoping to not loose use of long cells. Long cell limitations, like 70.2mm max, may come into play, but it is a secondary goal to getting the short cells working just right.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube and JoshK Sphere calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links. I'm still around, just not reading many new threads.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 9 hours ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 12911
Location: Houston Texas

DB Custom wrote:
I’m still somewhat baffled Jason, at the dimensions you provide for the theoretical longer spring. Where did you come up with the max compression number? I’ve looked at spring companies a lot in the past and they typically have quite a selection of flat max compression springs that collapse into themselves, limited only by the thickness of the wire used.

And losing one spring isn’t a dangerous situation even if using one cell, simply drop the cell in the next bay and carry on, it’s weaker now and won’t compress the spring due to heat like it did the first time, emergency situation still lighted. Wink


I believe The Miller suggested a longer spring and gave dimensions for it. I was using his information. Here it is, the spring from the Thorfire S70.

One or more springs can sag just over time. It’s normal for a spring to loose a little of it’s free height after being compressed for long periods. So only using 4 unprotected cells over time may cause 1 or more springs to sag and eventually you will get some batteries not making contact or intermittent contact. This is the dangerous situation that I mentioned. You could have 3 cells with very light spring pressure against them and one cell that is not making contact. Three cells drain down while one stays charged fully. Then it may make contact and then the fully charged cell will start feeding the lower charged cells and it makes for a very bad situation. This is why we want to increase the spring tension on the very shortest cells. To give them some leeway to account for sag and still have decent spring pressure.

Certain small wire springs that are very cone shaped can collapse all the way flat, but most do not. If the cone is not tapered enough it will coil bind. If the coil wire is too thick it will coil bind. The springs we are talking about here are pretty big and long and do not compress fully flat.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube and JoshK Sphere calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links. I'm still around, just not reading many new threads.

The Miller
The Miller's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: 12/14/2015 - 12:08
Posts: 9908
Location: Charente France

Yes well we just wait on Thorfire to respond now

Funny all this talk of long cells, I just turned on the Nitecore TM06S on high, then inserted 1 protected Brinyte Panasonic with build in charging in the Q8, stepped outside, and ramped up till the output of the Q8 lighted as far as the TM06S (with its CW tint)
Now that was just plain awesome, the Nitecore became hotter and hotter and the Q8 just did not go beyond warm. And well despite it not doing max output, I really got a kick seeing so much light coming from a single cell that has not be designed for high drain applications.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 9 hours ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 12911
Location: Houston Texas

DavidEF wrote:
Okay, I hate to be a bother, but I also hate not understanding something. So, I gotta ask: What advantage has lengthening the springs vs. shortening the tube? Why is it just so obvious to everyone that lengthening the springs is the best way to fix the issue? I just don’t get it! What am I missing? Facepalm

A longer spring will have more range of travel from it’s fully extended height down to it’s fully compressed height. This longer range of travel has many benefits if the battery tube is also adjusted in length just right. We get more spring pressure on the shortest cells (which we need, as currently they don’t have enough pressure on them to account for future spring sag) as well as still being able to use long protected cells.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube and JoshK Sphere calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links. I'm still around, just not reading many new threads.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 9 hours ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 12911
Location: Houston Texas

The Miller wrote:

Tube is big design change, spring not
Shorter tube means losing cell compatibility, longer single spring not

DB Custom wrote:
Shortening the tube only addresses the shorter cell, lengthening the spring allows the longer cells to still be used albeit at a higher compression ratio. Shortening the tube also messes with design parameters of spacing, knurling, grooves, and so forth, as well as changing the key design goal of matching the size and shape of existing SRK lights.

On the other hand, it may be cheaper for Thorfire to adjust the battery tube length than to buy a lot of new springs. – I’m just throwing this idea out there. I think longer springs, with a longer range of travel, is the better idea. It’s just that Thorfire may look at the money side of things more than the computer typing side of things.

I was thinking that if longer springs were used, the battery tube might need to be extended maybe 1mm to allow for longer cells (or reduced tension on longer cells) while still giving extra pressure against the shortest cells. Then again, the battery tube length may be fine as is.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube and JoshK Sphere calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links. I'm still around, just not reading many new threads.

The Miller
The Miller's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: 12/14/2015 - 12:08
Posts: 9908
Location: Charente France

well we have to wait what Thorfire will respond right Wink

Yokiamy
Yokiamy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 22 min ago
Joined: 10/18/2016 - 15:47
Posts: 3127
Location: Netherlands

Jason, we see your point Wink

djozz
djozz's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 8 sec ago
Joined: 09/07/2012 - 17:04
Posts: 18145
Location: Amsterdam

Going camping tomorrow, the Q8 goes with me, but just for show, it is more hanging around with a few families, lots of children and a camp fire than exploring the wild.

And although no rain is forecasted for the coming days, tonight I tried a very mild submersion test on the proto3. I know that the design goal was no more than that the Q8 could withstand some wet weather without actual water pressure, we had the switch redesigned with a silicon cover for that, I reckoned that it should survive a bit more than that.

So I lubed the three o-rings of proto3, and filled a bucket with 12cm (as it turned out) of water.

Switched the light on and dunked it in the water for a minute.

As you can see there’s just one air bubble popping out of the light, right in the beginning, and I believe it was just some trapped air from outside the o-ring, after that first bubble, nothing came out. Afterwards I inspected all entrances of the light, and there were some droplets in the threading that may or may not have passed the o-rings, but the opening of light after the test could as easily have done that. The inside of the light was completely dry everywhere. The switch design is very waterproof, nothing happened there. I mostly feared for the o-ring at the reflector but that one I’m certain of that it stayed dry, no droplets at all could be seen that passed the o-ring.

So I’m pretty happy with that, I will not hesitate to use the Q8 in heavy rain. Would I trust it for 10 minutes submerged instead of 1, or in deeper water? No, the way the Q8 is built, not really.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 9 hours ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 12911
Location: Houston Texas

teacher wrote:
An older gentleman gave me some words of wisdom almost 40 years ago that stuck with me……. “If it ain’t broke, don’t “fix” it.”
Well, as far as I can tell (by what ‘team members’, who actually have Proto #3 Q8 in their hands have written); the host design of the Q8 certainly “ain’t broke”… by a long shot.

All this talk of shortening tube length, changing this. possibly changing that, etc., etc. is nothing more than unwarranted rhetoric.

  • Djozz has said from the start of this that a different spring will solve the “problem”^.

I, and obviously at least a few more people; think he has enough sense to know what he is talking about. A different spring will fix the “problem”, ^ (if we can even call it a “problem”… it is just a discovery that warrants a minor change).

  • As far as running the Q8 on one battery. It was never designed to run full tilt safely on one battery in the first place. IF it happens to, fine. BUT if it has to be run on a lower output level to be operated on one battery……… so what?
  • And as far as battery length. Tom E has done extensive testing with a number of different batteries. He has listed the results in several different posts here in this thread. All the ones he tested fit and worked in the Q8 (adjustments are being made to insure this with the 30Q length cell) Thumbs Up

So………. IF you want to make sure your batteries are going to fit…….. get something he has tested. That is a nobrainer.


Teacher, your forgetting one very important thing. Springs sag over time. The fact that the shortest cells have very little spring pressure on them is in fact, a problem. No one measured the spring compression on all the previous prototypes, which was a slight oversight. This hidden problem only came to light when Djozz “accelerated” the sag in a spring and found that they don’t have much compression on them in the first place. We now need to address this and a slightly longer spring seems like a good solution.

Read what I posted earlier:

Quote:
One or more springs can sag just over time. It’s normal for a spring to loose a little of it’s free height after being compressed for long periods. So only using 4 unprotected cells over time may cause 1 or more springs to sag and eventually you will get some batteries not making contact or intermittent contact. This is the dangerous situation that I mentioned. You could have 3 cells with very light spring pressure against them and one cell that is not making contact. Three cells drain down while one stays charged fully. Then it may make contact and then the fully charged cell will start feeding the lower charged cells and it makes for a very bad situation. This is why we want to increase the spring tension on the very shortest cells. To give them some leeway to account for sag and still have decent spring pressure.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube and JoshK Sphere calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links. I'm still around, just not reading many new threads.

MRsDNF
MRsDNF's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 1 week ago
Joined: 12/22/2011 - 21:18
Posts: 13473
Location: A light beam away from the missus in the land of Aus.

Nice test djozz.

I could see no reason on my light why the light would leak water at the lens as the oring sits proud of the reflector which would allow a good seal in this area.

What other lights are you taking camping? I couldn’t think of a better light in my arsenal that would do a better job than the Q8. Have fun and dont miss us to much. Smile

 

djozz quotes, "it came with chinese lettering that is chinese to me".

                      "My man mousehole needs one too"

old4570 said "I'm not an expert , so don't suffer from any such technical restrictions".

Old-Lumens. Highly admired and cherished member of Budget Light Forum. 11.5.2011 - 20.12.16. RIP.

 

The Miller
The Miller's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
Joined: 12/14/2015 - 12:08
Posts: 9908
Location: Charente France

Ha nice bold test Djozz!
That reminds me to tighten the switch thing, I have the LEDs there now at 12 and 6 o’clock position which I like (it comes at 9 and 3)
Please use a plastic cup as diffuser to see how it fares Wink

djozz
djozz's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 8 sec ago
Joined: 09/07/2012 - 17:04
Posts: 18145
Location: Amsterdam

MRsDNF wrote:
Nice test djozz.

I could see no reason on my light why the light would leak water at the lens as the oring sits proud of the reflector which would allow a good seal in this area.

What other lights are you taking camping? I couldn’t think of a better light in my arsenal that would do a better job than the Q8. Have fun and dont miss us to much. Smile

Thanks, I will have fun Smile

And since you asked Innocent :
Apart from proto3, I will take the driver-less Mitko thrower with Black Flat led, and my Jetbeam E10R that I swapped a 219B V1 sw45 R9080 led in. And as a general light my KD 18650 host with A6 driver and 90CRI 3000K XM-L2 led.

BrianK
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 5 months ago
Joined: 06/23/2016 - 08:14
Posts: 1087
Location: Central Maine, USA

Well, that answers my question, pages back, if it would tolerate rain! I don’t intend to swim with it! If I’m swimming we have far more problems on this planet than me swimming with a light. Thanks!

Enjoy your camping!

teacher
teacher's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 02/23/2016 - 19:04
Posts: 9596
Location: NE & SW Alabama

Great video djozz…. thanks for sharing it. Thumbs Up
Have fun on your trip…… Smile

You never know how a horse will pull until you hook him up to a heavy load./"Bear" Bryant 

 .................................. "Slow is Smooth, Smooth is Fast" ...................................

       Texas Lumens Flashlights / M4D M4X Deals : sign up - save $$$$  

         Rudeness Level _ mΩ _ {width:70%} _ LightWiki _ LED Tint Chart  

      Xlamp size chart _ BatteryU _ Flashaholic? Need Professional Help???            TheOriginal _ TAB _ LightSearch _ BatterySearch _ 14500's _ DiCal 

 

                                             

ToyKeeper
ToyKeeper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 9 hours ago
Joined: 01/12/2013 - 14:40
Posts: 10827
Location: (469219) 2016 HO3 // I get way more privmsgs than I can respond to, so please ask in a public thread if possible, for a faster answer.

DB Custom wrote:
technique is everything… stacking 7135 chips … I’ve only done a couple hundred Qlite style lights so I’m probably still on the learning curve.

LOL, only a couple hundred, such a noob.

You should try my advanced technique… First I start with a soldering iron, but nothing goes where I want it, so then I put away the iron and zap the thing with my eye lasers. It damages the driver beyond repair, so I toss it and order one pre-built from RMM.

That counts as “technique”, right?

ToyKeeper
ToyKeeper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 9 hours ago
Joined: 01/12/2013 - 14:40
Posts: 10827
Location: (469219) 2016 HO3 // I get way more privmsgs than I can respond to, so please ask in a public thread if possible, for a faster answer.

whitecitadel wrote:
Last time I checked this is a quad cell light that is designed to be used with four cells, I think your design concerns should be focused on the requirements of a 4 cell light running on 4 cells…

LOL, BLF has a thing with going beyond spec. Smile

Pages