BTW, is it possible to get a cross section shot of your GT render? (it cut in half?).
A blend between the 2 deigns could be just what we need. Personally I LOVE the 5AR design, with a few minor revisions, like the changes miller posted above.
Possibly the area by the switch/tripod mount could be reduced a little to make pressing the button a bit easier while gripping the light and a few fins added at the base of the head to improve cooling. Then make the rest of the head smooth (remove the anti-roll cutouts and fins since that is apparently what people want).
I personally MUCH prefer the overall shape of the GT vs the TN42.
I think we need to forget this “TN42 look alike copy knockoff” and get back on track.
(No offense meant ’Jerommel’, that is just how I see it. )
The renders ‘5ar’ did have been, and still are; perfectly acceptable. They look very good, excellent in fact. IF they need to be tweaked a bit here and there so be it, but the platform is sound & solid.
Soooo, “if it ain’t broke”, why are we all of a sudden trying to “fix it” ? :question:
I think that is a legitimate question, because 5ar’s renders are certainly “not broke”.
Hopefully we will stay mostly on track and see this become a reality. :+1:
As The Miller stated earlier, the reflector choice will significantly impact the appearance. For example, this light (never finished) was for a reflector that was about 120mm deep and 130mm wide. The finned area should be ignored because it is a solid 3". The battery tube was sized for 4 18650 cells side by side. Iirc, 4 cells deep (4P4S). The pic, excluding the finned area, gives some sense of proportion. It's hard to see the final about inch that is covered by the black ABS. That is not the bezel. The bezel would have mounted to that. So the head would have been even longer when finished.
EDIT: That is 6" vent pipe coming out of that wood stove. The bricks are standard sized bricks.
I think it’s good to have some different designs and design features to choose from / to discuss / to consider.
And:
I’m still working on it and i consider everything you guys say.
Please also read what i write along with the pictures.
But maybe i was to soon posting pictures.
That’s just enthusiasm and the drive to make it look ‘less Chinese’.
(no offense to the Chinese)
Then IF it is not ready yet, might I humbly suggest you stop posting a photo shopped “TN42 Frankensteined picture of a light” and wait until you have the real deal before you post it. :+1:
To do different simply “muddies the water” as far as I am concerned.
You don’t have anything to be “sorry” about Jerommel. That is “your opinion”, just as my thoughts are “my opinion”. There is no right or wrong in that, just personal preference.
And my personal preference is for the renders ‘5ar’ has done.
I think they have been well thought out and presented. I also thing his renders represent a very solid platform for this light.
IF they need to be tweaked a bit, no problem. But the ‘platform’ is sound and solid. (to me anyway)
That would definitely look better. Good point.
And in stead of those vertical slots in the head above that maybe 6 flat sections against rolling, would possibly solve my problems with the looks.
I think that is where the head screws on, I would actually like the fins as miller presented them above but extended up a little high into that empty space you pointed out myself before transitioning into the smooth head.
I assume people can read too, so…
But i get the feeling you’re not looking at the design but at the rendering of it.
I just wanted to present alternatives to the head and the ‘pill’ section of 5ar’s rendering.
Sure, he can do the best job rendering designs here obviously.
I can’t do that.
Well, it’s no fun to feel like having to change people’s minds and ‘dissing’ the 5ar design.
I edited mypost a bit, by the way.
Yes, they are nice renders, but the design is ambiguous (i.m. (not so) h.o.)
I would appreciateitif folks would just have a little patience and see if there will actually be something better in stead of just sticking with the first preliminary renderings.
I mean, it has to look good to most of us, otherwise people won’t want to buy it.
And now i’ll stop preaching and will get back with something new later.
I’m with Teacher and Texas_Ace. I really do like the design, can live with the fins as they are already presented, love the accents and anti-roll on the bezel and would just as soon see it stay as it is right now. I would like to see the tactical ring somewhat thicker and contoured, looks almost like it could cut being so thin but it may be a perspective thing with the tube being larger than the eye perceives due to the large diameter of the head.
We’ve been seeing the renders from 5ar enough that they’ve really grown on me. To the point that I’m really pretty convinced it’s just about right as is.
Source a reflector, get solid dimensions, see if 5ar needs to tweak design any to fit the actual in-hand reflector, and move forward.
Some design style is necessary to a degree when the light is parked, but in use the focus will be a mile downrange, behind the light will be dark so it won’t be seen, only felt. If the ergonomics are true, the beam goal is met, then we’ll be golden.
Jerommel, I am not going to re-quote all that has been written
This is nothing personal against you. I am looking at the basic design of 5ar’s renderings…… I like the design, for multiple reasons I have already mentioned.
IF you or anyone else comes up with something I personally like better, so be it. But at this point I am totally sold on the design that the renderings of ‘5ar’ shows. If it gets tweaked a bit no problem, but I am sold on the basic design.
Again, let me be crystal clear; my opinion is based on the design not just the cool renderings.
I also fixed the quote you edited while I was typing.
“So be it” sounds like you (like others) seem reluctant to consider something else, which i find strange and a little frustrating.
This explains my temper in this matter, and / but i apologize for that.
I’ll be back here with something to show to you all.
I’m with Teacher, Texas_Ace and DB Custom. I like the 5ar’s design a lot!
And the idea to extend the finns a little bit up gets a :+1: from me!
Hope that we can extend it up to the green line without adding wheight. Maybee 5ar can make a new design with the tweeks.
And like i posted before. Could you please try it with ~1,8-2,2mm thick finns (so they are not to fragile) and with a distance between the finns of ~2,5-3mm.
It is not that we are unwilling to consider anything else as we don’t see the need for a change or that it could be improved in any major way (besides minor details).
As long as the base format and function remain unaffected I can go with whatever is most popular.
That said I STRONGLY desire an aggressive and powerful looking light to match the performance. Something bland and wimpy is not the image I want to see this light project.
Cost mostly, the heat is a massive hunk of metal already, by swapping to a smaller bar stock size for the smaller areas it saves cost.
It also opens the possibility of a quad version of this light later with only a head change needed. Which is part of why I want some nice fins around the shelf/button area to prepare for that.
)
