The short version I am hoping we can now confirm that both options below are approved/tested options.
1) swap tail cap assemblies with (Alu, Cu, SS) cap
2) swap tail light switch assemblies with out (Alu, Cu, SS) cap (just the guts)
and/or the long version:
It seems that TK (Thank god for her great work) has provided an electrical spec able to interchange tail caps.
I assumed that the lighted tail assembly (switch pcb, I think) assembly was able to be swapped with a standard switch non lit tail assembly (so we can keep the tail light assembly intact, just in a drawer to be used when we want).
Can someone from the brain trust confirm or deny that the lighted switch assembly (not the whole tail cap assembly, but the stuff inside exclusive of metal cap) (for those of us who do not have extra X5’s and X’6’s complete tail caps assemblies available) can or can not be swapped out with “stock”parts?
Common sense says yes of course but I wanted to be clear and not make assumptions.
Electrically we know the driver works fine with out the tail light installed (from TK’s recent validation work).
I don’t answer questions I don’t know the answers to.
There are many aspects I’m not involved in, like the details about clips, extra switches, gift boxes, accessories, etc… I mostly just want to make sure the driver works correctly.
The output seems to be near the bottom of Zebralight’s firefly modes… I’d guess around 0.03 lumens on a full cell (and lower for a low cell) but it’s difficult to measure anything that low. Also, the runtime seems to be about on par with Zebralight’s lowest firefly modes.
So, while it’s a little brighter than you described, it’s not really far off.
Here’s how it looks compared to some other glowy lights, including a L3 L10 at 0.08 lm and a ZL SC52 at 0.10 lm. Note that these pictures used two resistors in the tailcaps, so the actual product should be about half as bright.
The side effect of disabling the tailcap LEDs is … the button timing will be exactly the same as the BLF A6.
The side effect of enabling the tailcap LEDs is … a “long” press will take a bit longer than usual, depending on the battery voltage. So, instead of 1.5s it might be 2.0s or 2.5s or possibly even as long as 4.0s. The more current flowing through while “off”, the longer it takes the off-time capacitor to drain. But short and medium presses still stay pretty consistent, so most usage is unaffected.
Before too many people jump on this, I just want to nip it in the bud.
This idea is something I might work into the DIY lighted tailcap boards in the future, but not really related to this groupbuy other than the possibility of a mod users could do themselves down the road. Why?
1. It would delay everything too much
2. That’s not my call to make.
I know I have a big post count, but anything I say here is pure speculation, I have no position of knowledge or power in this groupbuy
Is this actually proven? You know, we count the lumen very precisely.
At least it should be more difficult to do a spring bypass in a double spring (never tried it, but there should be less room for the braid/wire).
Any info about the spring material (e.g. beryllium copper, gold plated)?
I think the double spring will remove the risk of melting/collapsing the spring under fet power (as has happened in the past) and raise output at the same time, but for best performance you might still want a traditional spring bypass.
It’s definitely a good upgrade in my eyes, especially for people who don’t do bypasses. Extra performance and reliability right out of the box.
The original A6 spring was pretty good. The later A6 units switched to a terrible spring which cost about 130 lumens and doesn’t hold up well at all under load.
The T01 double spring should be even better than the original A6 spring. I haven’t gotten a chance to test it personally though.
I’m convinced you are very thoroughly, but please let me ask: Is there a noteworthy influence of the charge status (cell voltage) or temperature on the timing?
The lighted tail cap utilizes two small leds and a resistor, one on each side of the small switch. This is the area that I normally use to drill a hole through the pcb for a through-board wire bypass that goes from the switch itself to the top of the spring in one piece of silicone coated copper wire.
So, Where does the bypass go now? Is one of the 2 LED’s more important than the other? Can one be sacrified to make room for the current flowing wire? Will the tail cap then only show light from one side? Do green grasshoppers have green a**holes?
Yes, a full cell has a longer “long press” than an empty cell, but only when the tailcap is lit. And the overall temperature is known to affect the timing too, but I still need to measure it for these lights. I’ve been harping on Manker to use X7R-class capacitors to reduce this effect. Results are pending…
However, getting too hot shouldn’t be much of an issue regardless. These have thermal regulation and much bigger heat sinks, so they simply don’t get as hot as the A6.
I personally don’t think you gain much (if anything) by doing the pcb-bypass vs a spring-only bypass on this pcb because there aren’t any “traces” per-se in the power path, just big copper pours.
If you did want to drill, drill a resistor pad. They’re redundant. There are Eagle screenshots in my thread that show exactly where the traces are too.
The Al lights don’t need a clear coat and it’s the economy model. If the price/cost of the SS/Cu goes up $5, the Al should go up $4, or something like that. Am I wrong here?
that would take the concept to another level.
