** BLF LT1M-Mini Project - The little Lantern! **

1260 posts / 0 new
Last post
SIGShooter
SIGShooter's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 17 min ago
Joined: 07/14/2013 - 02:10
Posts: 2264
Location: northern california

Barry0892 wrote:
It’s just a prototype now. The body size can be changed but different people have different opinions. How about a poll?

It’s not easy to wait such a long time for the LT1-mini, I hope most people like it.

If there is a poll then I’d argue for a short one. Say a week at most?

One of the things I’m concerned about is a never ending serious of comments on what changes should be made to the design. If you recall on the LT project the final design was held up for months because various people were arguing for things they just had to have (USB C springs to mind).

My preference is that we accept a design and go-forward with it, and if people are happy with it then they’ll buy it.

Excellence is the enemy of good enough.

BVH
BVH's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 5 hours ago
Joined: 07/28/2017 - 18:43
Posts: 144

Could there be multiple sized bodies available, chosen at time of purchase?

WWII 60" Carbon Arc (Sold), 1.6KW NightSun, 1KW VSS-3A, .8KW TrakkaBeam, 600W M-134 Light, PolarLi 500 Watt 114MCP Custom, 500W X-500-14s, 500W Starburst, 500W A120b, 450 Watt AEG German Leopard 1 Tank Light, Enderman CFT-90 Syniosbeam, 300W Locators, Megaray, 150W Communicator, Maxabeam Gen3, Pichel 75W Mini-Novas

SIGShooter
SIGShooter's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 17 min ago
Joined: 07/14/2013 - 02:10
Posts: 2264
Location: northern california

BVH wrote:
Could there be multiple sized bodies available, chosen at time of purchase?
That’s certainly up to Sofirn but I think that would needlessly complicate things for them as well as their supply chain. But that’s up to them of course.
xxo
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 2 min ago
Joined: 03/22/2019 - 14:35
Posts: 308
DBSAR wrote:
Lux-Perpetua wrote:

Update [2021-09-27]


Courtesy by Sofirn, some actual pictures of the new LT1M mini prototype. So far, LT1M mini will be using LH351D 2700K 90CRI and LH351D 5000K 90CRI, same as LT1. The idea to have red light included needs to be postponed as Andúril 2 is not yet capable of tint ramping with three channels (NW + WW + RED). LT1M mini works with 26650, 18650 (via adapter) and unprotected 21700 batteries.


 



Great photos Lux! While its taller than some super compact lanterns, its still a lot smaller & lighter than the full-size LT1.

Looks good! Will there be springs at both ends for flat top cells? What about low Voltage cut off and reverse polarity protection?

Thanks for all of your efforts on these lanterns!

mr_magoo
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 08/31/2018 - 14:01
Posts: 172
Location: Colorado

Barry0892 wrote:
It’s just a prototype now. The body size can be changed but different people have different opinions. How about a poll?

It’s not easy to wait such a long time for the LT1-mini, I hope most people like it.


Yes, make a poll. I’d vote for a 21700 body. I have a number of aa lights that I have bought for emergency purposes, but I just don’t use them after all. To be honest I always have extra 18650 cells and a suoer compact charger with me wherever I go, so the idea of being able to find aa batteries anywhere is a moot point. I’ll gladly buy some 21700 cells to go with this light, and possibly a 21700 pocket flashlight too.

Even though i have a few 26650 cells too, i wouldnt neccesarily want my mini lantern to use those. Too heavy and large in diameter.

I think the idea of the base that screws off of the head to be able to reinstall on the base is a GREAT idea. I also thought of 3 thin legs that fold down from the handle to form a tripod of sorts.

Helios azimuth
Offline
Last seen: 16 min 49 sec ago
Joined: 04/08/2019 - 22:23
Posts: 348
Location: Sierra Nevada Mountains

The 26650 is not a problem for me, in fact I like it. But if it is skinnied up, that is fine too. Either way I want this lantern!

TexasToasted
TexasToasted's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 3 min ago
Joined: 10/25/2012 - 08:48
Posts: 1343
Location: Texas Gulf Coast

One of the things that I really like about the IF25 is the symmetry of the design, The wide, flared tailcap balances the wide head on the narrower tube.
Making the battery tube wider does not enhance a light’s tail standing stability. Making the tailcap wider is what enhances the tail standing stability. Just flare the tailcap out wider and make it a bit thicker so you can install a magnet strong enough to really hold the light against ferrous surfaces so it doesn’t slide down, or fall off.

xevious
xevious's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 02/27/2013 - 21:55
Posts: 2564
Location: Hoboken, NJ USA

Lux-Perpetua wrote:
Both the LT1-team on BLF and Sofirn agreed upon a wider tube for following reasons:
  • 26650 tube width adds more stability against tip over; the size ratio of length and width is more appropriate
  • 26650 tube width adds more flexibility for battery standard sizes (21700, 18650 and 26650)
  • 26650 tube width allows to use common 3xAAA battery carriers for emergency use
Sounds very sensible. Having that 3xAAA battery carrier option is a terrific fall-back, so you can have at least some light if somehow your primary lithium cell became damaged or lost. AAA is so ubiquitous! Will a good 21700 to 18650 adapter tube be available for purchase with it? It's a real pain having to track down ones from other companies and most are junk. Fireflies came up with a good one with a removable contact button for protected cell support.
agent80
Offline
Last seen: 22 hours 6 min ago
Joined: 01/06/2013 - 02:28
Posts: 471

I expected the tube to be a 18650 so that it’s easy to carry. More like the sofirn Pro. The LT1 uses 18650 batteries. I thought the mini would use the same battery type. I find it easier to maintain 18650 batteries. Plus it’s easier to gift. The idea of a mini is that its smaller. An adapter is wasting space.

jmoots
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 14 hours ago
Joined: 11/14/2015 - 10:24
Posts: 56
Location: KS, USA

Any chance we can see the mini prototype next to the LT1?

-joel

Funzel67
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 23 min ago
Joined: 02/07/2017 - 17:18
Posts: 62
Location: Germany

For me the width of the prototype looks OK. What surprises me is more the length. It looks very long and having a smaller diameter with cells smaller than 26650 should make it more unstable. An alternative short tube for a 26350 cell would make it looks more like the little brother of LT1.

story
Offline
Last seen: 17 hours 42 min ago
Joined: 06/19/2021 - 18:22
Posts: 61
Location: Canada

Just make 2 bodies increase the price by $5.

LSX
LSX's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 23 hours ago
Joined: 04/23/2013 - 08:38
Posts: 1456
Location: Perth, Australia

SIGShooter wrote:
Barry0892 wrote:
It’s just a prototype now. The body size can be changed but different people have different opinions. How about a poll?

It’s not easy to wait such a long time for the LT1-mini, I hope most people like it.

If there is a poll then I’d argue for a short one. Say a week at most?

One of the things I’m concerned about is a never ending serious of comments on what changes should be made to the design. If you recall on the LT project the final design was held up for months because various people were arguing for things they just had to have (USB C springs to mind).

My preference is that we accept a design and go-forward with it, and if people are happy with it then they’ll buy it.

Excellence is the enemy of good enough.

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. It will never meet absolutely everyone’s requirements and will just draw out an already 2 year old project.

xevious
xevious's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 02/27/2013 - 21:55
Posts: 2564
Location: Hoboken, NJ USA

LSX wrote:
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. It will never meet absolutely everyone’s requirements and will just draw out an already 2 year old project.
I agree. Amazing all the nitpicking. An 18650 tube would be way too narrow. Heck if someone wants a single 18650 lantern, just get a frigging diffuser to put over the head of a tail standing 18650 flashlight with the head diameter of choice.

This is a mini. LT1 compared to the LT1M shows a huge drop in diameter. Camping means out in the rough, with limited options. So having a light that can take 21700, 18650, 26650 or a 3x AAA carrier… is terrific.

Question is, if 3xAAA cell presence is detected by the charging firmware will it know not to charge?

Bonham
Bonham's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 weeks 6 days ago
Joined: 01/11/2012 - 16:00
Posts: 362
Location: Bulgaria

Interested in 2.
Thanks!

mr_magoo
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 08/31/2018 - 14:01
Posts: 172
Location: Colorado

Quote:
Heck if someone wants a single 18650 lantern, just get a frigging diffuser to put over the head of a tail standing 18650 flashlight with the head diameter of choice.
Pretty much the same could be said for any lantern if you want to take that stance. Why even *have a lantern with that philosophy?

The core reason for wanting this was that we were all thinking this was going to be a pocket sized ‘lantern’ based on the IF25. I dont need a 26650 lantern. Going 26650 size in the tube means the head also needs to be increased appropriatley so that it’s bigger than the body. That means a MUCH bigger lantern than we originally thought.

Quote:
This is a mini. LT1 compared to the LT1M shows a huge drop in diameter. Camping means out in the rough, with limited options. So having a light that can take 21700, 18650, 26650 or a 3x AAA carrier… is terrific.

This is why cars, and everything else, keep getting bigger and bigger until manufacurers completley completely abandon whole size classes, only to alienate those who liked the minimalist approach to things.

I had a ’95 nissan pickup that got 28 to 30 mpg in the city. 6’ bed, ok tow capacity for what it was. Used it for everything. Good luck getting 30 mpg with any pickup made today. Even new toyotas barly get 18.

Just my modest opinion that theres nothing wrong with minimalist simple goods that do one job very well.

Satan@103TFS
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 09/04/2017 - 12:51
Posts: 571

It look too tall for a lantern make it shorter and use 26650/18650/3xAAA not 21700 should help

Perception
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 14 hours ago
Joined: 10/01/2019 - 20:11
Posts: 136

xevious wrote:
LSX wrote:
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. It will never meet absolutely everyone’s requirements and will just draw out an already 2 year old project.
I agree. Amazing all the nitpicking. An 18650 tube would be way too narrow. Heck if someone wants a single 18650 lantern, just get a frigging diffuser to put over the head of a tail standing 18650 flashlight with the head diameter of choice.

This is a mini. LT1 compared to the LT1M shows a huge drop in diameter. Camping means out in the rough, with limited options. So having a light that can take 21700, 18650, 26650 or a 3x AAA carrier… is terrific.

Question is, if 3xAAA cell presence is detected by the charging firmware will it know not to charge?

Camping and backpacking are totally different use cases. For camping, the LT1 is already amazing. For backpacking, the LT1 Mini looks like it just got a lot less appealing. For backpacking, nobody is going to need the additional battery options, they aren’t going to carry multiple battery types for one light and space is at a premium. Mini is what we were looking forward to, this last minute switch away from the original concept to 26650 is a step in the wrong direction. I’m sure it will be a decent light and there may be design pressure to move to 26650 because they think it will sell better, but it sure wasn’t what I envisioned when I first saw the project and I think with this change it misses it’s originally stated purpose.

xevious
xevious's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 02/27/2013 - 21:55
Posts: 2564
Location: Hoboken, NJ USA

Perception wrote:
Camping and backpacking are totally different use cases. For camping, the LT1 is already amazing. For backpacking, the LT1 Mini looks like it just got a lot less appealing. For backpacking, nobody is going to need the additional battery options, they aren’t going to carry multiple battery types for one light and space is at a premium. Mini is what we were looking forward to, this last minute switch away from the original concept to 26650 is a step in the wrong direction. I’m sure it will be a decent light and there may be design pressure to move to 26650 because they think it will sell better, but it sure wasn’t what I envisioned when I first saw the project and I think with this change it misses it’s originally stated purpose.

Camping, Backpacking… there’s many shades of gray. Some people do both.

The LT1M is mini relative to the original. If someone needs something smaller, just for a short while when taking a break during a backpacking trip on the evening leg back, then I don’t think an elaborate multi-tint emitter lantern is necessary. Again, any flashlight can be made into a temporary lantern, with a tall diffuser for it. The LT1M is beefy enough to take higher capacity cells for a more extensive backpacking/camping trip, where space is enough of a premium to make the big LT1 too much to carry.

TexasToasted
TexasToasted's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 3 min ago
Joined: 10/25/2012 - 08:48
Posts: 1343
Location: Texas Gulf Coast
Satan@103TFS wrote:
It look too tall for a lantern make it shorter and use 26650/18650/3xAAA not 21700 should help

The IF25, on the right, is the light that this project started with. The other two are some of my shortest 26650 lights. I don’t see any advantage to starting over with a larger cell.

Forsythe P. Jones
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 56 min ago
Joined: 08/15/2021 - 00:40
Posts: 413
Location: California
  • Certainly any unilateral battery change should free anyone on the preorder list of any commitment they may have made. They can decide again whether they want the new version.
  • I don’t think I’d take either version of this light backpacking. I’d just use a flashlight or headlamp with a diffuser. When backpacking I don’t go ultralight-berserk, but I do try to keep weight down.
  • Re tail standing: how about a tripod hole on the tailcap? That would allow screwing in an anti-tipover disc, that could be included on top of the light. It could be made of plastic or PCB material for light weight.
  • A magnet for the above would be useless, I think, unless you’re also going to bring along a chunk of iron (perhaps an anvil) to stick it to.
  • If you want to run on commodity batteries in an emergency, why mess with 3aaa and a bigger tube? Include a boost converter on the driver, that can use 1aa at lower brightness. 50 lumens maximum is fine, it’s an emergency after all. Actually it could be based on the in-progress SP10 Pro driver which already supports dual fuel.
  • In fact if there is talk of separate battery tubes, how about an 18500 tube? That would allow use of 18500, 14500, and maybe AA with no length extenders. There would have to be some kind of widening thing for 14500/AA, like a simple and light plastic cylinder or just a friction fit spacer ring.
  • I also find 26650 to be a weird choice of size. It has some attractions for very high current but that doesn’t apply to this light. 21700 at least has higher capacity compared to 18650.

If this project were starting from scratch and holding a vote on battery size, I’d probably pick 21700 and then 18650 in that order, but I can understand preferring 18650 over 21700 for those prioritizing small size. I wouldn’t pick 26650 either way. I’d support making the 18650 tube long enough for “18700”, i.e. those protected 18650s with built in USB charging. As it is, I would say just stick with whatever was originally agreed on, and perhaps offer alternate versions for other audiences if they seem to want them.

Thanks for all the work on this light, by the way.

story
Offline
Last seen: 17 hours 42 min ago
Joined: 06/19/2021 - 18:22
Posts: 61
Location: Canada

I DIY this with a Oomomo flashlight.
I do not think a 22650 design will hinder anything when comparing it with the WK30.



Barry0892
Barry0892's picture
Offline
Last seen: 58 min 24 sec ago
Joined: 09/20/2014 - 03:45
Posts: 559

thanks for all the ideas. But how to make a poll?

There should be 3 options

1. keep the current design, thicker tube that eats 21700(unprotected), 18650, 26650 battery. Because there are springs on both sides.

2. thinner and shorter tube, it accepts 18650 only, keep the wide base. (some say use diffuser on 18650 flashlight is a better choice)

3. long tube, accepts 21700, keep the wide base, but with adaptor for 18650. (engineer told it won’t be thinner)

I will talk with engineers, he told 21700 can be used in LT1-mini without adaptor, because the dual springs keep it stable.

I will send more pictures later

WhatsApp: +8615773183209 

My new Facebook account: https://www.facebook.com/barry.dong.9250

SIGShooter
SIGShooter's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 17 min ago
Joined: 07/14/2013 - 02:10
Posts: 2264
Location: northern california

Forsythe P. Jones wrote:
* Certainly any unilateral battery change should free anyone on the preorder list of any commitment they may have made. They can decide again whether they want the new version.
  • I don’t think I’d take either version of this light backpacking. I’d just use a flashlight or headlamp with a diffuser. When backpacking I don’t go ultralight-berserk, but I do try to keep weight down.
  • Re tail standing: how about a tripod hole on the tailcap? That would allow screwing in an anti-tipover disc, that could be included on top of the light. It could be made of plastic or PCB material for light weight.
  • A magnet for the above would be useless, I think, unless you’re also going to bring along a chunk of iron (perhaps an anvil) to stick it to.
  • If you want to run on commodity batteries in an emergency, why mess with 3aaa and a bigger tube? Include a boost converter on the driver, that can use 1aa at lower brightness. 50 lumens maximum is fine, it’s an emergency after all. Actually it could be based on the in-progress SP10 Pro driver which already supports dual fuel.
  • In fact if there is talk of separate battery tubes, how about an 18500 tube? That would allow use of 18500, 14500, and maybe AA with no length extenders. There would have to be some kind of widening thing for 14500/AA, like a simple and light plastic cylinder or just a friction fit spacer ring.
  • I also find 26650 to be a weird choice of size. It has some attractions for very high current but that doesn’t apply to this light. 21700 at least has higher capacity compared to 18650.

If this project were starting from scratch and holding a vote on battery size, I’d probably pick 21700 and then 18650 in that order, but I can understand preferring 18650 over 21700 for those prioritizing small size. I wouldn’t pick 26650 either way. I’d support making the 18650 tube long enough for “18700”, i.e. those protected 18650s with built in USB charging. As it is, I would say just stick with whatever was originally agreed on, and perhaps offer alternate versions for other audiences if they seem to want them.

Thanks for all the work on this light, by the way.

The interest list is just that…nobody should feel any obligation to purchase the mini just because they’re on it Smile

Based on messages with Barry there will be a standard tripod mount on the tail cap.

No magnet as far as I know.

The biggest con against the 26650 is that it makes the tube wider. I doubt that there’s a noticeable difference in weight and it’s 5mm shorter than a 21700 so there’s no effect on height (for those who suggested that a 26650 will make the mini taller).

SIGShooter
SIGShooter's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 17 min ago
Joined: 07/14/2013 - 02:10
Posts: 2264
Location: northern california

Barry0892 wrote:
thanks for all the ideas. But how to make a poll?

There should be 3 options

1. keep the current design, thicker tube that eats 21700(unprotected), 18650, 26650 battery. Because there are springs on both sides.

2. thinner and shorter tube, it accepts 18650 only, keep the wide base. (some say use diffuser on 18650 flashlight is a better choice)

3. long tube, accepts 21700, keep the wide base, but with adaptor for 18650. (engineer told it won’t be thinner)

I will talk with engineers, he told 21700 can be used in LT1-mini without adaptor, because the dual springs keep it stable.

I will send more pictures later

Polled created. Comments can be added here

I set the poll to be active for 2 weeks which I think is way more than enough time for people to make their vote.

Barry0892
Barry0892's picture
Offline
Last seen: 58 min 24 sec ago
Joined: 09/20/2014 - 03:45
Posts: 559

 

when standing with LT1, LT1-mini is not that long. How do you think? 

 

 

 

You can see the dual springs.

WhatsApp: +8615773183209 

My new Facebook account: https://www.facebook.com/barry.dong.9250

SIGShooter
SIGShooter's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 17 min ago
Joined: 07/14/2013 - 02:10
Posts: 2264
Location: northern california

Barry0892 wrote:

 


when standing with LT1, LT1-mini is not that long. How do you think? 


 




 


 


You can see the dual springs.


I think it looks good Smile
JoeH12.81
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 03/13/2019 - 14:12
Posts: 77
Location: Portland, OR

I like it too! albeit my eyes are drawn to its tube being a fraction taller than LT1. Perhaps 26350 tube option as well?

I do like it though. I’ve not logged in for some time; if I’m not on the list, please include me.

Ledhead
Ledhead's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 5 min ago
Joined: 12/09/2020 - 16:39
Posts: 247
Location: Near the Willamette

It does seem to be long in the body and short in the head… but it is very small compared to the LT1. I’m still in. How would it compare to the Lumintop CL2

Phlogiston
Phlogiston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: 10/27/2016 - 16:57
Posts: 988
Location: Scotland
SIGShooter wrote:
Based on messages with Barry there will be a standard tripod mount on the tail cap.

Thanks, SIGShooter, I was just about to ask Smile

I’d find a 1/4” tripod mount useful to increase my mounting options when using the LT1M as a work light.

Pages