Carclo is a UK based company.
Have you tried Farnell and RS in the UK?
If they don’t have them currently, international:
Arrow.com
(stock changes frequently)
I tried a 10507 in my FW3A and I didn’t like the results, tint is worse, with many artifacts and a yellow dot in the hotspot. 3D tint. Got back to the stock lens
the throw is very similar, a few meters more, like 20 or less, impossible to notice
I’m running the 10507 in mine and don’t see any peculiar tint shift, artifacts, or hotspot issues. Did you make sure to clean your optic, just in case?
Yeah, should have mentioned in my case I’m talking about green GITD. That orange GITD going totally dark in about an hour… that’s way under expectations for this stuff. I wonder if there was an issue in creating the mix.
It’s not likely a dirty optic. The issues Anthon described are a normal result of the 10507 optic, and it’s the reason why the FW3A uses 10511 instead of 10507. For more info, maukka measured these optics in great detail here.
That looks really good!! :+1:
Are those 1.5mm x 6mm trits?
Are they under the optic or on top? It looks like the top in a recess… but I can’t tell for sure.
Under the optic, tilted back away from center, against the 3 optic legs resting on the flow gates, then glued in with the optic glue. Bam …with the UV light and done.Yes 1.5x6trits I think 2x6 will fit and should be a bit easier centering…
/\ … Ok… Thanks KB, nice work. 
Thanks for the link — I hadn’t seen that post. Really interesting and I can see why 10511 was picked. When I white-wall my FW3A with 10507, I don’t notice any artifacts… until I rotate the beam. Then I notice a few asymmetrical “notches” in the hot spot edge. Really subtle. They disappear when the beam is fixed, but then show up when rotated. Of course, won’t even notice them outside of a plain wall. I do observe a little tint shift, but to my eye it doesn’t look prominent. Not nearly as bad as I’ve seen on something like an Olight M20 Warrior (worst flashlight in my collection). It does make me wonder if there are some production variances in the Carclo optics.
There is nothing inherently off with the optic. It’s the combination of LED and Optic. For example, a LH351D and 219C look much better than XP-L HI in the same optic.
The differences you are looking for are much more subtle than something you would see from a reflector that has a mediocre LED or issues with the focus/reflector itself. (ie; M20 Warrior)
I’m probably in the minority, and I do like them both, but I prefer the 10507.
I prefer 10507 in my triples.
Tried the 10511, but the difference in throw is quite significant and noticeable. Especially outdoors. Personally, I don’t notice any significant artifacts or tint shift in the spot of my 10507 with XPL HI. The petals are mildly noticeable, but not significant enough to be an issue.
10507 
I prefer 10507 also. Great spot, bit less spill.
About the optic type, we might potentially have bigger issues than 10507 vs 10511 soon. I heard they might be trying to replace the optic with a cheaper one. I have no idea what it’ll be like, and I should wait until I’ve seen it to make any conclusions, but I’m … concerned.
In the worst case though, it should at least be drop-in compatible with the Carclo optics, so it’d be easy to replace if it’s bad.
That is…… Disappointing… 
… To say the least.
If it is crap & it does actually turn out a Carclo is interchangeable…. not nearly as disappointing…. 
They’ll probably be going with the same manufacturer as Astrolux’s optics.
Which probably means we’ll also lose lumens.
Strange that this would be enough of a worthwhile cost cutting measure. Because they’re available in the USA market from a vendor who charges as low as $1.50 per optic (normally $1.75 each), it must mean the wholesale cost is a good bit less. I know consumer prices elsewhere end up significantly higher due to shipping costs, but if a manufacturer buys them in bulk it shouldn’t be that much. Unless Lumintop is finding a source in China that’s seriously cheaper… enough that they see thousands in savings over time, based on projected sales.
I absolutely agree that if they are going to go that route, I really hope they either find a Carclo compatible optic or make sure to do what it takes to accommodate optional Carclo optics. In fact, maybe even a store like Neal’s Gadgets could stock those as options.
My only experience with Astrolux multi-emitters is with the S43, a quad optic. I searched and don’t see their selling a triple optic, only quad… And, when sold as a separate part, BG is charging over $2. So either they must have quite a markup or the wholesale cost isn’t appreciably different from Carclo.
No Trits this time… I Modified a Q8 lighted e-switch board to 4 green led’s with resistor for my FW4A Quad…
I was bored last night… 