I dont think a 5s2p would be any harder than 4s2p. Basically each carrier would just be its own battery at 18.5v, then when you add another carrier you are adding it in parallel. It is done with lipo all the time in the RC world with 3s2p
I think the bigger problem would be you now need to change the carrier, tail cap, battery tube, and head. Basically all new parts…
Will lg mj1 unprotected button top ok on the GT light???
Maybe we can feed it 4.35v Li-ions, Are there any good capacity and amperage ones we can use?
Upon further thought I believe you are correct. 5S shouldn't be more much more complex than 4S. The difference that I was thinking about is that an odd number in series would require current to flow through one (or more) of the carrier rods (single holder) since the terminating electrodes would be on opposite ends of the tube. So the front holder would see 2n current and the rear 1n ,when using odd numbers of cells, while even number configurations would be 1n and 0, respectively.
5S carrier means fatter tube, better make it 7S for optimal filing of the tube 
Well it would make it not nice to hold anymore.
So we will have to do with 4S and reduce voltage loss wherever possible 
7S Haha. Yes!! Hexagonal packing FTW ^:)
I want to repeat that I am not suggesting we change something so drastic this late in development. I was just thinking out loud about carrier circuit design given a +1 cell overhead to the XHP35.
It’s too big . I have not thought about what to do with it
Oh but this is the easy part, name it “giggles” and enjoy using it
Can one still be on the list for a GT, a BLF special Giga Thrower, please? Thanks.
Yeah now that it is a two stage groupbuy one must be able to get one. It is just not clear how much you’ll have to pay for it, either way it is gonna be less then after the groupbuy.
There are not going to be any major design changes to the cell carriers or flashlight body.
This was discussed several thousand posts ago and two cell carriers that could work with only one filled was decided on, in order to shift weight to the rear of the flashlight when using only 4 cells.
The price does not matter. Please add me with a lamp. Thank you.
I just noticed my name is on the list twice. I apologize (The Miller), my comment above was just my way of showing how impressed I am. I don’t actually need two of these. Sorry for that confusion… I’ll be more careful in the future.
And thanks again, sir!
Hey, I might have an extra I could sell you. LMAO
Personally (don’t kill me here please), I don’t like lights using cell carriers. I feel they always add cost, complexity, and reduce performance. Designs like this https://img.fasttechcdn.com/174/1742503/1742503-4.jpg is what I prefer. I am not suggesting though that any huge design changes occur with GT at this stage. Just my $0.02
[/quote]
I agree about the battery holders. I much prefer the battery tube style of the Q8. This is especially true when swapping batteries in the field. I would think that fewer springs and contact issues would be better as well.
Heheh right on!
Will correct itat some point
True carriers are not ideal bit for a light like this carriers are better IMHO
It is 4 series, the obvious springs thus + and - while loading are good.
Some better pics about ringy beams. I think the UT02 has the smoothest reflector of this three. The rings can only be seen good in the Palight picture. I think the bigger the reflector the more obvious this artifact.
Convoy C8 XP-L HI:
Utorch UT02 XHP35 HI:
Palight Boss1 XHP35 HI:
I’m interested!
If not to late, I’d like to sign up for one GT please :+1:
So GT team what are plans right now? What changes you will suggest to Lumintop?
Somehow I got a feeling that prototypes testing going a little bit slow compared to production of them. Are we good for now or you guys preparing some big changes behind the scene??
Lots of tests, notes, comparisons, etc. I swear these guys don't sleep 
