I don’t think so, the light is on Simon’s Convoy store for over 2,5 years, i have never seen replacement parts for that particular light, but you can always ask Simon.
Can you source a specific tint range of SST-20 95CRI LEDs?
I used FB4 (4000K) in the Clear C8+, and that gives a nice tint, if I drive the LED moderately hard (3.5A). For some applications, I would like to use a bit warmer tint, but in those cases, JB4 would be too warm for me. Could you please check, if you could source tint GD2 or GD3? That would be the ideal choice, which could give a result called ‘soft white’ with being just slightly under 3500K?
Now that you mention it…I’ve seen this light long time ago.
I wonder why Simon was dissatisfied with the driver then…
I think I can find the answer to some of this questions. But without Ti version they are not very relevant for me.
Kicking myself that I didn’t pick one up. That’s just gorgeous.
It is not easy to find the specified Tc BIN
GC1 or GC4 could also work for me if you cannot find GD2 and GD3.
For me, it is better to get emitters from China than US/Canada - but I will take a look there as well.
Seems to be back in stock:
Oh god my wallet nooooooooooo
Mine is on the way so maybe will be able to answer something when it arrives.
Afaik Simon planned to do Ti variant (see #1 post) but he wrote it wasnt accepted good.
Dont know by who but lot of people wanted it (including me )
C8 in UV, comes with extension tube, so can run in 1S or 2S. Interesting that it’s 1.5A given that the S2+ LG UV is 1.75A, but whatever.
Any chance of 2 SKUs for our US friends? That with normal AR glass, and a ZWB2 filter item - vague patents are the worst.
Simon, I’d like to open a discussion about UV flashlights with filters and the supposed patent covering them in the US by Way Too Cool LLC. For those who aren’t familiar with it, Convoy doesn’t ship such flashlights to US customers due to this patent covering “wavelength transforming filters” on UV flashlights.
First, I’d like to say I appreciate your respect for intellectual property. Many companies in China, being effectively outside the reach of the US legal system would simply ignore the existence of a valid US patent. You don’t, and that’s admirable.
Unfortunately, in this case, I think this company is making dishonest claims. Wood’s glass was invented in 1903. Simply putting Wood’s glass on a flashlight over 100 years after it was invented is not an invention and does not qualify for a patent. Even if it did, that was done on commercially produced devices before the priority date of the patent (July 2006). Prior art invalidates an otherwise-valid patent. One example is the Polilight, a forensic search light developed for police in the 1980s. It can run on battery power, and has multiple spectral filters, including UV. Here’s a journal article discussing its use; it was published before the priority date of the patent.
Way Too Cool LLC is making a false patent claim to resell your product at an unfair price. I won’t ask you not to sell them lights, but I will ask you to resume shipping UV lights with filters to customers in the US. Refusing to ship these lights to the US just helps this company cheat people.
Also, anyone who ever ever ever got a leak-detection kit (Interdynamics, etc.), typically got a 50W halogen spotlight with silvered filter over the front of it, which would only let through whatever near-UV was in a halogen’s beam. I remember getting one decades ago.
Way Too Cool is Way Too Ass, if you ask me. It’s like patenting a design for a flashlight that contains a battery inside a tube. And whatever patent examiner granted that idiot patent must’ve been sniffing glue at the time.
I can understand maybe not shipping a light with filter installed for fear of retaliation, but from what I’ve heard, you can’t even get a light with matching separate filter in the same package. That’s probably an unnecessary precaution.
I’d cut off WTC entirely, not sell them so much as a switchcap. Let them go pound sand, the crooks.
WTC hasn’t even bothered suing a US-based seller they’re definitely aware of. I expect they’re aware it would be expensive to attempt and likely to result in their patent being invalidated entirely.
Let me understand, US buyers cannot buy an UV flashlight with a ZWB2 filter together without violating the law?
Workaround: buy the flashlight but don't pay. Request Simon whatever modifications, price adjustments, etc. and then pay.
I can “sort of” respect intellectual property because law enforces it in most countries I am aware of, but it is bad. Period.
How is that admirable? Someone asked Simon for their reasons to avoid shipping UV flashlights with ZWB2 filters to USA? He will likely say he is more aware than other sellers and so he prefers to avoid problems.
There will be titanium AA light, T2 style
Be as that may, if the ZWB2 filter that fits the C8 isn’t in his store, then it won’t work - other people have asked for the LG S2+ to be sent just as host and the ZWB2 filter in the same package, and have been told no - but if you buy the Nichia light and the ZWB2 filter, they can ship in the same package. It’s pedantic, but it’s Simon honouring a US patent, which, as Zak mentioned, has flimsy grounds at best.
Yeah, I know. That’s not a format I’m interested in. Too large for 14500 and I’m not a fan of clickies anyway.
But nevertheless - thank you for the suggestion.
It’s even worse than that. If I’ve read the patent correctly, the majority of it describes a selectable filter. Figure 1 does appear to describe a fixed filter, but that’s just one drawing and one paragraph. The rest of the document talks about selectable and switchable designs. The patent might indeed be valid if it only discussed these more complex designs, but the single-filter model is absolutely both obvious, and has been done prior.
I don’t think a selectable filter based on pre-exsiting technology would qualify for a patent either. These things have been used in entertainment lighting for decades.