Ok, so is USB waterproof itself and rubber cover just keeps dirt out?
Anyway I prefer no USB at all rather than rubber covered one.

O-ring is easy to replace, it is not used more than taking battery out and charging externally.
Rubber cover is usually almost impossible to replace.

For me light must be waterproof.

Is it really that hard to design? I see it is probably more expensive to manufacture.
Can it be done by plugging the end of the tube from head side and moving driver with charger there?
Tube would be longer but head would be shorter.

Post #18 looks good... really liking the reflector suggestion.

  • Just don't make it longer.
  • I still like to have the 26650 option.
  • USB-C with PD would be nice but I have reservation about this being a charger for other devices.
  • I really like how Zanflare covered the charging port but at the least, make the port waterproof, even without the flap.
  • double and triple click to be a bit slower.

AFAIK, Sofirn is always very open to new, innovative ideas. However, until now they have been reluctant to implement some kind of an "embedded" USB-C port into any of their (third party) products. I have Zanflare's F1, too. I gave it to my parents for it can be driven with 2x CR123A, i.e. they can leave it somewhere lost for years in case a flashlight is ever needed but if they need it it will still work reliably. I do not know how good Zanflare's protection ring is regarding 'wear'n tear' if being moved back and forth many times but with two o-rings in place it should be fine.

So far, Sofirn and Wurkkos have been very successful selling their rechargeable lights with the classic charging design on the outside and I have never heard of defects that result from water ingress underneath the rubber boot. Don't get me wrong - I also favor the integrated design. The most important question they will certainly ask is: What is the benefit of an embedded USB port and will those extra costs for development, material and assembly time ever pay off?

Anyway, I will ask Mark to discuss the two options shown below with the manufacturer.

Edit: OP is updated with the latest design changes.

This is the UI of WK30 - not the new UI I want to draft for "WK30S":


  • WK30S deserves a second mode group for infinte ramping of WHITE and RED light. UV modes should be kept as is for the sake of radiation safety (365nm is invisible to the human eye).
  • I wonder if anyone really needs / uses the RED strobe modes (see yellow highlighted line items). Personally, I would rather have a red-white "police strobe" (yes, blue would be missing for that) mode for the fun of it but would a series of red strobe modes make much sense?
  • As many of us prefer "click = on/off" and "hold = cycle modes" in the UI, will everyone agree that WK30S would adopt this kind of operation, too?
  • Eco WHITE mode should be turned into a real moonlight/firefly mode (0.5lm).
  • In order to not overcomplicate the UI I think it's best to keep "High" or "Turbo" mode in the regular mode order as is.
  • Direct access to High/Turbo WHITE mode from OFF should be part of the new UI.
  • Battery status should be blinked out or made visible by the switch indicator light.
  • The switch indicator light should also be configurable (on/off) to use as a locator light if desired.

oh wow, what a surprise here :+1: :+1:

Major design change:

In conjunction with the multi-emitter flashlight concept that is being discussed here, I have revised the WK30S concept to work with a magnetic control ring and a mechanical tail switch. This will probably make the rather complex UI much more easier to handle.

User Interface:

Magnetic Control Ring (MCR)

  • controls brightness from moonlight to high steplessly for the selected LED
  • infinite turning into either direction is yet to be decided - a limited turning angle of 160° could maybe suffice to regulate brightness conveniently

Tail Switch (option A - forward clicky)

  • Tap to preselect the mode (WHITE / RED / UV)
  • Fully press to turn ON/OFF
  • Half press to use momentary mode
  • Keep fully pressed for 2s to activate strobe, then tap to cycle strobe modes (SOS / Beacon)

Tail Switch (option B - reverse clicky)

  • Fully press to turn ON/OFF
  • Tap to cycle through modes (WHITE / RED / UV)
  • Keep fully pressed for 2s to activate strobe, then tap to cycle strobe modes (SOS / Beacon)

At the risk of getting dogpiled on, I gotta confess, the more “improvements” I see to the original WK30, the less appealing to me it gets.

21700, lighted switch ring, thats it. That would fix its two glaring faults, its chunkyness and that sweetch is a beech to find in the dark. Agree with Lightbringer!

That's fine with me. I did not expect to receive nothing but positive feedback. The more criticism I get, the better it will be to find out what's best concerning improvements. So, go ahead ... ;-)

I just picked up a WK30, and it’s pretty great already. Personally, the most important things I’d change would be adding USBC, a (removable) magnetic tailcap, 21700, slightly longer times for double/triple click (I’ve accidentally entered strobe when trying to enter UV a few times now), and press for off instead of hold for off. There’s a couple of other minor changes that have been discussed, like an always-on button, knurling on the tailcap, asymmetric reflector, or a diffuser, but much more than that seems like it’s getting to be too much of an entirely different design. A three color rotary light would be cool, and it might even share a lot of parts with an improved WK30, but that’s a pretty major change from what the WK30 is.

Honestly, it’s more like turning one light into a whole other light, vs just improving any shortcomings on the original.

365nm vs 395nm, okay, I can see that. (Well, figuratively.)

Photo-red vs “regular” red… yeah, okay, but as long as people realise that photo-red will not be as bright as regular-red at the same power levels (unless you can see into the infrared, that is).

Lighted switchcap, that’d be a hoot, so sure, I’m in.

I’m perfectly fine with using a 26 as-is, vs a 21, as you can always drop a 21 into a tube bored for a 26, but not v/v. Plus, that just makes the tube skinnier vs on-par with the head, making it more like a stubby plunger light vs a chunky tubelight.

The UI, honestly, I’d leave as-is. For the ’30, it’s nigh perfect. 1/2/3 clicks to get into white/red/UV, then diddle with brightness, etc. And nomem on red/UV, always start on low. (To this day, I still can’t replicate the white+red both glowing bug.)

So yah, if anyone wants a different light based on the WK30 concept, great. But I wouldn’t molester the original ’30 and call it a WK30S :confounded: or WK30A, or WK30v2, or anything like that.

And definitely don’t discontinue the original. I think they pretty much nailed it on the first try.

OK, I'll pitch in. Nothing to argue with the added ring, except two issues:

  • great as long as it's a one handed operation
  • added cost? Guess we won't know yet

Swapping the e-switch for a power tail switch? Seems like we are going backwards there. I'd prefer 2 e-switches or dual e-switch - easy to do on the newer Atmel's we are using. I'd be out, specially if the tail switch is the only way to turn the light OFF, and not by the ring. Again, feels like a step backwards.

Would have to be, ’cause mag sensors are generally pretty power-hungry. 10mA parasitic, each one, in the ones I measured. Without physical cutoff, you’d drain the cell in 2-3 weeks.

I don’t recall testing the Wurkkos/Sofirn diving lights that use ’em, just other lights (DV-S9, etc.). But even the discrete Hall-effect sensors I played with suck down that much.

Hhmm... That explains the drain the old dive lights I got. So bad, could not sell them, got stuck with them. The RRT01's, etc. have the same issue? I modded one years ago but thought you had full OFF control on the ring?

The Niteye Eye10 has no power switch with a ring:


Okay, I see combining a mag-ring with a mechanical switch is not really fancy even though it might work. A dual e-switch design is probably the best idea at all. I try to revise the design accordingly. UI-wise one button could work for ramping/stepping up and down brightness and the other button would trigger mode changes etc.. With two illuminated buttons there will be more nice options for status indications (locator light, beacon light, battery status, ...).

Slightly off-topic here: If I got ToyKeeper right, she even said something like Andúril was dualswitch-ready as long as both switches work the same way.

Sorry, brutally honest, but I'm only one opinion. Would be nice though to leverage all the dev that went into Anduril, for sure.

:+1: :+1:

I like especially that UV is seperated. Removed this LED from the Fitorch K3 Lite because it works the opposite way: You likely have to cycle through all LEDs including UV to reach the desired LED, headaches included (I’m very sensitive to reflected UV light).

The magnetic control ring would be a big plus, much more so if it would allow continuous adjustment of brightness.

Not a customer yet, but this light as proposed by Thomas would be my first Wurkkos.

I agree that the mag ring plus a mechanical switch was not my best attempt so far. Thanks to your helpful and brutally honest input - really appreciated - I now stand corrected with another new concept. :-D

I am still thinking of a rather simplified UI for this one here but as you (Tom E) already said, it would be great to finally leverage all that work that went into Andúril into an actual dual e-switch flashlight. Anyway, with two e-switches we get the chance to enhance the UI in its complexity without giving up simple basic operation of mode switching and brightness control.