Wennn, welcome to BLF!
And what a first post you made
Though I cannot see the images it ia clear what they show
It is understood that a reflector has some downsides as the single lens setup of most zoomies has that too. However the GT will not have a hybrid system just the simpler way of 1 reflector
A double lensed or collimator lens /reflector hybrid or dual lens setup sounds really interesting and I have this plan in the back of my mind to do a project with it later down the path (using the first design of Fritz but a bit smaller then a 130mm wide head)
First the Q8 GT and possible Q4 if the Q8 is going great and is done though
Whelp, didnt think about how the hemispherical bit would affect output this way. Finally understand why there are two kinds of graphs being thrown around for the spatial distribution of light from an LED.
Well, thanks for the explanation, time to make my way through the 80+ pages of this thread I skipped
Right now 1 e switch
Narsil (the software) is very clever and offers lots of smart features (as a software lock out) and low parasitic drain. A tail clicker is not needed when Narsil is used
If you aren’t familiar with Narsil, you should check out this post in the thread about the BLF Q8, another brainchild of TheMiller that will use this awesome UI developed by TomE.
TomE has a couple of videos demo’ing Narsil as well.
I’m not sure it will behave exactly as it does for the Q8, but I assume most information will apply.
You might as well get on the list for the Q8 while you’re over there reading!
Miller, I consider you a friend and mean no disrespect but I fear I may scream and wake the kids if I hear one more time that a tail switch is “not needed” or “not necessary”.
If you choose not to make the GT with a tail switch then so be it, but what is needed or necessary in a light at this level is opinion…not fact.
I don’t even have a light with Narsil yet but I’ve read a lot about it and it sounds absolutely awesome. Based on everything I’ve read, I totally agree with this:
Yet, I respectfully disagree that there is “no need for a tail switch”. I have several lights of side switch only design and several that have dual switches. Regardless of manufacturer or UI, I have yet to find a side switch only light that I can do more than just tolerate and none of them are in my rotation of regularly used lights. That includes the few Convoy side switch only lights I have. Will Narsil change my mind? It certainly seems to have the best chance of any UI I’ve ever read about but I simply can’t ignore my love for the practicality and beautiful marriage of form and function that the dual switch setup brings to the table. Tail-switch lockout is awesome. This of course is just my opinion and I don’t mean to imply that it is more than opinion.
It’s been a rough week so that may be tempering my temperament but this (BLF) is the place to express our strong flashlight feelings right? :zipper_mouth_face: K, I’m done now…
Hmm J-Dub74 I know what you mean buddy.
It is indeed an opinion.
And somewhere in the early phase of the GT bootup there were people stressing to get a tail clicker
Facts:
Narsil has extremely low parasitic drain
We strive for a very low price for this kind of monster
No tail clicker means machining a tail with threading, assemble an oring and screw it on
A tail clicker means machining more on the tailcap, assemble booth, switch, PCB, spring, ring, do adds parts and time thus costs
When using a driver with narsil there is really no ‘need’ for a tailswitch.
With that I mean, that narsil is (also) optimized for e-switch only operation and has a very low parasitic drain. It can use a dual switch design but the only advantage is that it allows for a total lockout.
But, lets forget the above.
Do you have a L6? (of course you do, right? )
I love that the L6 has a dual switch setup, you can hold it using the ‘cigar’ grip and switch the light on and off.
And that is the problem, that is just not possible with the GT. The GT is way too big and heavy to hold it in one hand using the ‘cigar’ grip. If there would be a tail switch you would need 2 hands to operate it.
The only advantage I see for a tail switch is that you can do a lockout. Though that is useful it’s not really needed with narsil.
(my 0.02€)
It has software lock-out, which is actually better than just “turning it off” with a tail switch, as far as accidental activation is concerned. So, we’re still left with the only advantage for a tail clicky being a complete cut-off of power. Usually, that’s significant. But Narsil even makes that unnecessary, since the parasitic drain is so low that even the cell’s internal self discharge is higher.
Of course when not using a hard lockout, like a partially unscrewed tailcap or tube, there is always a chance of accidental turn on. That is the same with every other flashlight on the market that uses a side switch or tail switch, electronic or mechanical.
Because this light is going to be big and heavy there is not really a likely scenario where the light could be accidentally turned on. When storing or transporting this light the battery’s should be removed (as usual).
I’m not saying that we definitely wont be doing a tailswitch, I’m just expressing my opinion.
Well said David.
Excellent point KB. As far as I personally am concerned it only makes sense to have an on/off tail switch, if for no other reason than safety.
To me it is akin to having a “battery disconnect switch” in a high output vehicle or a boat. It is always a good idea. :+1:
Hardly any chance of accidental turn on (oops typo edited from off to on )
1 lock out via a press sequence not imitated by bumps in bag
2 if not locked out and the button is pressed for if I remember correct 10 seconds it will turn of with lock out enabled
So those not doing a software lockout or slight unscrew AND have it in a bag AND the switch gets pressed will have 10 second light in the bag and will find it locked out when taking it out.
As if a tail switch cannot be accidentally be pressed
