[PART 1] Official BLF GT Group Buy thread. Group buy officially closed! Lights shipping.

[Wennn]

@DENGOH

@tatasal

Well, I don’t know with you gentlemen, but to me I was offered in the gb a price that they set, I paid for it, so I would expect, as I previously posted elsewhere in this thread, not a perfect mirror finish but just a decent mirror-like finish and not the finish (slight op) that are the subject of the other members complaints.

In other words, Lumintop can put in a so much better reflector than the ones they are shipping.

A lot of those pictures of reflector are not considered slight op at all. Wennn’s one need to further confirm though.

Honestly, the slight orange peel doesn’t bother me that much if it has been shown to not affect throw. If the current blurry triangular hotspot is due to an off centered/misadjusted LED, it will be solved when I get my strap wrenches and break into this light, which in my personal opinion should not have been tightened to this extent to begin with. If the hotspot is still large and fuzzy and/or non-circular in shape, then I would suspect there is an issue with my reflector which I will then raise officially. If the centered LED fixes this two issues I have now, then the slight OP reflector is of no real concern to me.

[DENGOH]

Ya, so many very tight GT, I wonder is it to push led closer to reflector to get best focus.

[DENGOH]

@tatasal

Anyway guys, this reflector issue all boils down to the individual’s personal taste.

Regardless of many percent will it affect its throw, I don’t really care, all I want is to have my GT’s reflector look ‘decently’ good, even if I don’t use it.

Those mirror like reflector might not have best reflection. Smoother surface might make one think it’s more reflective. But we need to consider the coating material too.

[Buzzing_Bulb]

17K!!!

[djozz]

A little consideration, as more and more throw numbers are posted in this thread, which is what this flashlight is about:
The cheap (I considering up to $150 as cheap) luxmeters that we use show a considerable variation, brand to brand, type to type, even piece to piece. A variation in reading of a same light source of over 10% is very normal, even over 20% is nothing rare.
So despite the desire for accuracy (as seen expressed in throw numbers posted with 4 or more significant digits :party: :party: ),take any number posted here as loose ballpark figures.

[teacher]

@Pöbel

Does it state somewhere that we were buying a light equipped with a mirror finish reflector, or does it state are buy a light throwing over 1MCD?

I do agree though, that in general long trow is mostly associated to lights with very shiny reflectors.

Here ya’ go… :+1:

@MichielSanders

@Team-Giggles

“Original OP Archive

Specifications

• Emitter:
  12 V Cree XHP35 High Intensity, neutral white 4000k, mounted on copper 44.5mm DTP MCPCB
  Flux: >2000 lm
• Intensity:
  .>1 Mcd (ANSI throw >2000 m)

The specs say .>1 Mcd (ANSI throw >2000 m)

everything more than 1 Mcd is luck in my eyes, this is how it was designed and advertised. cheers to the team :+1:

[Umcookies]

@djozz

A little consideration, as more and more throw numbers are posted in this thread, which is what this flashlight is about:
The cheap (I considering up to $150 as cheap) luxmeters that we use show a considerable variation, brand to brand, type to type, even piece to piece. A variation in reading of a same light source of over 10% is very normal, even over 20% is nothing rare.
So despite the desire for accuracy (as seen expressed in throw numbers posted with 4 or more significant digits :party: :party: ),take any number posted here as loose ballpark figures.

I’d consider the people doing multiple test runs and getting similar lower numbers fairly accurate.

[species8472]

It is sad to see this group buy for a great light coming down to a rough ending. I seriously believe the team members put their all into it and many of them ended up doing much more than they signed on for. Of course there are legit complaints as happens in any ventures of this type. Imagine how hard the team worked not only dealing with the design/build phase but doing this all with major language and cultural differences as well as time zones being totally opposites. We all take the internet and instantaneous communications for granted. I remember what doesn't seem that long ago if an item wasn't in the local store you had to order it by sending a check through the mail and if you were very lucky you might get your item in 6-8 weeks and most times longer. There was no such thing as tracking so you were left totally in the dark for a couple of months. At least here we can see what the problems are and whether or not they are being addressed. It has to give anyone hope that when they do have a problem it will be sorted out with the help of the fine BLF community. This should make the BLF'ers proud that they can disagree at times but still come together to help fellow members.

For the record - I did luckily receive my light in the first batch even though I was about #907 and paid within an hour of the PM. My reflector could be better and it could be worse. My understanding was this was a place for BUDGET lights so I sure didn't expect perfection but I sure wouldn't complain if I did receive it. Even if it isn't perfect it is still a fantastic light for the GB price.

Thank you all, team member and regular members, you are all part of the famous BLF GT.

[Yokiamy]

@Umcookies

@djozz

A little consideration, as more and more throw numbers are posted in this thread, which is what this flashlight is about:
The cheap (I considering up to $150 as cheap) luxmeters that we use show a considerable variation, brand to brand, type to type, even piece to piece. A variation in reading of a same light source of over 10% is very normal, even over 20% is nothing rare.
So despite the desire for accuracy (as seen expressed in throw numbers posted with 4 or more significant digits :party: :party: ),take any number posted here as loose ballpark figures.

I’d consider the people doing multiple test runs and getting similar lower numbers fairly accurate.

Please define your definition of accurate

TA stated earlier that the 4000K tint of the GT gives different numbers then his prototype with the CW, but in real life it looks so much better.

[Umcookies]

@Yokiamy

@Umcookies

@djozz

A little consideration, as more and more throw numbers are posted in this thread, which is what this flashlight is about:
The cheap (I considering up to $150 as cheap) luxmeters that we use show a considerable variation, brand to brand, type to type, even piece to piece. A variation in reading of a same light source of over 10% is very normal, even over 20% is nothing rare.
So despite the desire for accuracy (as seen expressed in throw numbers posted with 4 or more significant digits :party: :party: ),take any number posted here as loose ballpark figures.

I’d consider the people doing multiple test runs and getting similar lower numbers fairly accurate.

Please define your definition of accurate

TA stated earlier that the 4000K tint of the GT gives different numbers then his prototype with the CW, but in real life it looks so much better.

I’m not referring to color or look or feel of the light, DJozz mentioned inaccurate lux readings and brushed them off as the reason people were getting lower lux numbers, yet only a dozen or so posts before his a member tested 3 separate GT’s 5 times each on a lux meter. Again I don’t believe their numbers are super accurate but if all tests are 20% lower than spec (or at least the other two lights the member has) then I’d consider that accurate evidence of under performing lights.

[JasonWW]

@DENGOH

Ya, so many very tight GT, I wonder is it to push led closer to reflector to get best focus.

No, because the black plastic piece does not compress.

Part of the reason the bezel is so hard to loosen is right here.

This big o-ring on top of the glass is pressed down by the bezel and is completely dry. It creates a tremendous amount of friction, plus Lumintop wants to make sure it’s compressed well enough to make it water tight.

I’m guessing they kept it dry to prevent grease from getting on the glass. I added a little grease on top of my o-ring and it really helps to make it easier to turn.

Now as far as the head being so tight, I don’t know. I guess they don’t expect anyone to need to loosen it.

[kntx]

Wow 17k posts is tough to keep up for everybody

[DENGOH]

Umcookies means those comparison using one same lux meter at same distance like what Bruno28 did.

To me, those are valid comparison but not necessarily absolute accurate measurements.

djozz is talking about absolute accurate measurements is quite not possible with all the cheap lux meter, that’s right point to me.

[DENGOH]

Let’s say all these cheap or old lux meters have +/-20% inaccuracies.
1000kcd will be measured from 800kcd to 1200kcd.
So we can’t really say all low measurements are low nor all high measurements are high.
Some reviewers always have high number though.

[yclongthrow]

@DENGOH

Let’s say all these cheap or old lux meters have +/-20% inaccuracies.
1000kcd will be measured from 800kcd to 1200kcd.
So we can’t really say all low measurements are low nor all high measurements are high.
Some reviewers always have high number though.

The 200k variation between lights still remains.

[DENGOH]

@yclongthrow

@DENGOH

Let’s say all these cheap or old lux meters have +/-20% inaccuracies.
1000kcd will be measured from 800kcd to 1200kcd.
So we can’t really say all low measurements are low nor all high measurements are high.
Some reviewers always have high number though.

The 200k variation between lights still remains.

Sure. If they are measured using one lux meter at same distance like what Bruno28 did. We can put aside linearity of his meter, might not affect much.

[MichielSanders]

@DENGOH

@yclongthrow

@DENGOH

Let’s say all these cheap or old lux meters have +/-20% inaccuracies.
1000kcd will be measured from 800kcd to 1200kcd.
So we can’t really say all low measurements are low nor all high measurements are high.
Some reviewers always have high number though.

The 200k variation between lights still remains.

Sure. If they are measured using one lux meter at same distance like what Bruno28 did. We can put aside linearity of his meter, might not affect much.

But the 200k could also be between 160k and 240k at +/-20% inaccuracy

[tatasal]

@yclongthrow

@DENGOH

Let’s say all these cheap or old lux meters have +/-20% inaccuracies.
1000kcd will be measured from 800kcd to 1200kcd.
So we can’t really say all low measurements are low nor all high measurements are high.
Some reviewers always have high number though.

The 200k variation between lights still remains.

The 200k variation between lights still remains. — very true, because the same meter was used on ALL 3 lights of Bruno28.

[DENGOH]

@MichielSanders

@DENGOH

@yclongthrow

@DENGOH

Let’s say all these cheap or old lux meters have +/-20% inaccuracies.
1000kcd will be measured from 800kcd to 1200kcd.
So we can’t really say all low measurements are low nor all high measurements are high.
Some reviewers always have high number though.

The 200k variation between lights still remains.

Sure. If they are measured using one lux meter at same distance like what Bruno28 did. We can put aside linearity of his meter, might not affect much.

But the 200k could also be between 160k and 240k at +/-20% inaccuracy

No, the +/-20% is for all meters. If your meter is –5% at certain range, it will always be –5% unless it ages over time.

[tatasal]

Oh well, I don’t really mind how much of a factor is the current reflector’s finish affect the throw, I just don’t like my GT to have a reflector that looks like this:
(Wennn’s photo) Wrinkle finish, anyone? I just remembered we used to spray our modded cars’ Headers with VHT’s wrinkle-finish spray paints, the hottest thing during those years.