Nice!
Will update the pic in the OP
So cool.
The tail PCB is nice!
And Now we need an aditional/optional pcb for 2S2P and 4S1P on the Driver side and an idea to place it in the flashlight without the risk of rotation.
Wholes for 3 screws in the body and PCB or similar for example.
Yes TA made a driver just like that!
And a smart driver that is too.
Using 2,7-4,2V for the MCU even when using 2S2P or 4S the MCU is fed the lower voltage so no zener or LDO needed, very nice.
If only I understood how it would work with 4P I think it would do it GE exact same thing as the Pilotdog68 Q8 board and we could ask Thorfire engineers to choose between the two board designs and maybe get a Q8 with
Tail driver and ledboard ready for conversion to higher voltage LEDs.
But I don’t know if the 4P can be done with the TA 46mm design.
(this stuff is beyond me and the topic Texas Ace made is going just to fast to keep up 
)
Yeah, the driver I am working on will handle 2s2p and 4s as a drop in replacement for sure.
Making it work with 4P is possible but the tail cap would need to be designed to always have the batteries inserted from the rear. Which would be great anyways but I think it is too late for a change like that.
I do have one possible idea that would allow it to work as it is setup now but I don’t think there will be enough room to do it.
Only 15 amp tail cap pull ya heads in 
Sorry TA you probably want to knock me for my stupid comments lol!
So we are looking at 5500 lumen max?
Right now i think we have to many inputs. Yous just need a simple flashlight and maybe add extras after?
I am drinking so take what i say with a grain of salt! Maybe give me a slap lol!
Hahaha
Problem is we are waiting for Thorfire
Seeing things develop here helps at least me a great deal to cope with the waiting
And what has come up like that tail PCB may not be used in the Q8, it has however materialized to an actual part we can order.
This is awesome because just looking at this new tail PCB I really like it and see myself using it in SRKs.
And I think all giving input now understand it could not make it to production of the Q8 yet adds to ever growing possibilities the community creates for the community.
True it might be rejected but we can hope and pray REALLY hard that it makes it in. 
Even if they just used 0 ohm resistors it would cost no extra for the PCB itself and adding the resistors while soldering the springs anyways would add a few cents at the very most but add a massive amount of potential moldability later. Sadly those size PCB’s are not as cheap as the normal 17mm drivers to buy from OSHpark so it would be very nice if it came with it.
Would it be possible to place an extra PCB on top of the batteries that doesn’t turn so that it can be made for different battery configurations but then has the rings in to to connect to the driver to allow the driver/top to be screwed on top?
I know that this probably World be an extra and not included in the standard light but it might make it easy to allow different battery configs.
Well there is not a lot of space for an extra PCB there.
I would say order the Texas Ace 46mm driver board since that allows 2S2P and 4S using the exact same parts of the V5 Q8 Narsil PD68 driver.
It just requires the driver to be placed exactly right so the cells contact the correct pads.
Since the driver of TA needs this exact placement we cannot ask Thorfire to use it as is.
I was trying to think of a way to fix the requirement of having to place the driver board exactly in the right spot
I would think you could get apcb made that is about 1mm thick. But it was just an idea. All good if it doesn’t fit
Correct, this light really should have used a battery carrier IMHO, it is just the better way of doing it (only cheap lights do it like the SRK).
It is too late for that change so the tail PCB design is about as good as we can do now. At least that means we only need to buy a single driver to convert it instead of 2 (assuming they accept the tail design). Seeing as each one is about $15, 2 would quickly enter the cost of the whole light!
I wouldn’t call the Noctigon M43 Meteor a “cheap” light.
Battery carriers comes with their own set of problems (that I gladly can do without).
It was also at the very core a SRK knock off (be it a very very good one), so they used what existed in the SRK design already.
I have never seen a fenix, surefire, streamlite….(thats all the “brand names” that come to mind, I could really care less about brands lol), that use the same design as the SRK.
There is also the option of inserting the batteies from the rear that would work fine as well and also not cause wear.
+1 And let's add the Nitecore TM26 to that "cheap" light list. 
Battery carriers are a pain in the a%#
Yes a bored out tube like SRKs uf1401, meteor, tm26 is neat holding the cells nicely.
Thorfire is going to send me the S1 light that has a cell carrier and I am really curious how this is working
I can imagine that later down the path with this latest tail PCB a calculation can be made:
Tail PCB, fuses, manufacturing steps to assemble it, thick walled tube with machining steps
VS
Thin walled cell tube and a holder.
If a carrier is costing less to make so this would mean staying within budget we will do a topic title and discus it here.
But itf course for now we keep it simple as planned so this post is just a personal theoretical thingy not to be seen as a plan 
Well, you have to look at the reason - why a carrier? A carrier is not in an SRK. A 4P carrier? If a 2S2P or 4S, then we need a different driver, and maybe different LED's. So if we go with a 4P carrier, what's it doing for us besides adding resistance and more things to go wrong? If we are committed to the XPL LED's, then a 4P carrier is the only choice.
So a, 4P carrier will have the advantage of eliminating the contact ring - could use a central contact pad that will get less wear and tear. It will probably add a spring - single spring in the tail, besides 4 or 8 springs in the carrier itself. Will it require a longer battery tube? Yes, most likely. Will it result in a thinner battery tube? Yes in order to keep the diameter increase to a minimum. Will it add cost? Probably. Will it add risk (manufacturing/quality issues)? Probably.
If this project had a true mission statement, it would be something like this:
- a better quality SRK light, with LED's, thermal mgt, finish improved
- high powered to get the most out of today's LED's
- budget, affordable, within reasonable margin of current day SRK offerings
- a powerful but easy to use UI
- ensure quality in the design and manufacturing
I don't think the pros are worth the cons on a 4P carrier. I would regret even the loss of mass in the body tube area - not sure what the impact would be to the overall balance. The light is probably going to be somewhat front heavy with all the materials we've added already.
please put me on the list for 1
You are right Tom, and personally I love the way rks hold the cells
L-I, will update OP later
I wasn’t following the thread for a while.
Will it have a tail switch ? Or only the new pcb (ready to install switch) ?
Yep, that^. Don’t forget a contact plate of some type for the cells to rub against in the SRK setup, without it wearing out the driver is surely going to happen sooner or later.
From a modding standpoint I would basically like anything BUT the normal SRK setup. The same goes from a performance standpoint. Oh and longevity standpoint as well.
That said it is not a deal breaker regardless. Just personal preference at this point.