Please add me to the interest list
311 new posts. Could you possibly date new info in the op and thread title so we know when to check and for what?
Yes, anything all should see is put in OP, with a CAPS title change and usually a link to rge post where discussion starts about it. (And least I plan on keep on doing it like the LED decision, head design, bezel discussion, Toms first ramping video (now new videos of Narsil have post 2))
After thinking more about it, I could see the 4x18650 and single 26650 compatibility working the best of what has been discussed. For me the 26650 would be nice as I currently don’t have any 18650 lights and really don’t plan to get any. I am planning to get the Convoy L2, L6, and BD06 which are all 26650 based lights. While I understand I would not get as good of performance on a single 26650 as I would 4x18650, I still think it would be sufficient for my uses.
I also feel like the 26650 cell is starting to gain more ground and becoming an increasingly popular cell resulting in better performing cells. How many amps will this light be pulling?
Could a nylon X be created on a plastic printer that would hold the 18650’s in place and still allow for a 26650 when not using 18650’s? Just a though…
I like the poll idea about the batteries setting:
5x18650 (pentastar) or 1x26650! But maybe difficult for modding (to xhp, 2s2p,…)
If we have anything to say here and things are to be changed from the 4 18650 holding tubes, It has to be withn the same outer diameter.
Sorry, a space for 26650/32650 could fit, but 5 or 7 18650s not, we do not need a poll for that
(though I like the nice placement of 7, it changes the light completely 
)
Sorry no pentastar - 5 around!
I was thinking about 4+1 in the middle
So you are right it will increase the diameter for some millimeter but the 5. spring has more-double- meaning. If the CAD is finished, its not worth talking about it.
Please put me down for 2 more, so that’d be 3 in total.
Thanks!
@ Sharpie : I’ts nice of you thinking safety concerns. I myself would think that if it’s used that way, there are more points to take care of before that. I would only use quality protected cells in parallel. Also they would have to be button top’s to make contact. And if there would be cell wrong way around, I don’t think it could made contact. Maybe in some case you could fry your driver with overvoltage. And every light as well as every car, that uses these type of cells will have possibility of potential catastrophic failure. It would be matter of user’s decision whether to use light like that or not. But safety should always be considered.
@ djozz : You are correct. I did use “nominal” dimensions instead of oversize. Thanks for saying it out. I did draft one more sketch. That would have been taken care of that. I’ll drop it end of this message.
@ Tac Gunner : Thanks for you support.
@ mattlward : Nice idea that could probably do it. I think that in my latest sketch I have overcome this obstacle. But that sure could be an option too if it wouldn’t work.
@ Jesjes : Sure a poll would be appropriate if more people like it different. But I think there has only spoken so few lately that, I don’t think it should be changed after all (or at least kept in similar dimensions). Since others have “signed in” with the earlier design.
@ The Miller : Yea the few that has spoken, would like it to be same diameter and I agree on that. I liked that 7 cells could fit nice and tight, but seems this ain’t the light for it.
@ Jesjes : I’m sorry to say, but there was no plan of using 5 cells. Apologizes if i mislead you. That drawing where was one middle was only as a possible solution for able to use light with 1x 18650 cell as in illustration purpose. If the cells would not have space, that could hold them despite number of cells used (It’s a feature of this light being able to operate 1-4 cells). With in 26650’s place using a 26650-18650 sleeve. If there would be 5 cells with one being center that would take same space than my drawing showing 7x 18650. So it would not be worth it.
But if you were thinking of 5 round revolver style that would be somewhat between of those 2, SRK style being smallest ~50mm diameter. Followed by 5 cell revolver 55-60mm and last would be that 7x design 60-65mm depending on wall thicknesses.
—
Here is my last sketch about tube roughly SRK size tube.
19mm for 18650 and 27mm for 26650, now there should be margin to fit.
50mm diameter of tube.
2mm wall thickness at lowest (The Miller measured that SRK style light had lowest wall thickness of 1.55mm) - Thanks for measuring for me. *
Blue line is 17,63mm at lowest, so it should hold 18650 in place.
- I would have measured my own SRK if it would be in my hands, but unfortunately I had lended it earlier to my brother.
So I just leave it here, if enough likes it. Then I think that a poll about it would be appropriate. But for now I think that it should be original one, and not to decide on behalf of others.
It was fun sketching thought and you guys had nice opinions. Thanks.
Feel free to point out if there is any flaws or have some ideas about it. Whether it would stay as a sketch or possible in a product someday. I still would like to overcome any obstacles about it. It’s just the way I am.
-Phoenix_FIN
Phoenix - I'd love to see these ideas applied to the BOSS1 - it's currently a 4P 26650 config, so potentially has lots of options, but it's a big carry being so wide. Also the BOSS1 has a Batt+ contact in the center of the driver. As The Miller said, though, we can't do a change like this - just too much impact, all good ideas though.
Phoenix_FIN, nice diagram. As this light is to be mod friendly, could we at least fill the center of the driver’s positive pad (unless there’s a good reason not to) and make the bottom of the light ready to receive an extra center spring? If someone wants to file the holding tabs down by 1mm or so to fit a 26650, I say let them. This seems like a case of “zero cost change for the better”.
@ Tom E : Why not, if you had something in mind just shoot a PM. Only problem being I don’t own that light (at least for now).
Yea I did understand, just wanted to see whether any of them could be adopted. A good idea are not that good idea, if it’s just in the bank (head) instead of trying to make it work. I’d like to think that even the best can get better.
Anyhow this light will be awesome, no matter what cells it will take!
Thanks, I appreciate you’r output.
@ fixed it : Thanks. I think Q team can answer that better. That’s great idea, preparing for it and leaving it in hands of user.
-Phoenix_FIN
It's listed here at GearBest, group buy attempt here, and big thread info here . Just an interesting thought. PALIGHT is an unknown - we couldn't even get a group buy going for it.
Hhmm, that will put a wrinkle on PD68's sexy design pattern he has there. Could ask, see what The Miller says. Dunno if there's just solder mask over a batt+ plane, or other issues.
Maybe I am missing something but wouldn’t it be easy enough to just solder a copper disc over the middle instead of changing the driver?
As before this flow if ideas is a great joy!
And well I am sure that somebody capable of modding the center of the driver to accept a + side of a cell is also capable of modding the tail PCB to accept a -side right?
I’d hate to see that (quote Tom) “sexy driver” lose some of its sexyness 
on production lights (if Thorfire is going to use our design 1 on 1)
when will this be available for purchase? what’s the estimated lumens and distance? whats the runtime on 4 3400mah cells? I didn’t see it on the first page. are there actual sample pictures in the thread?
What is with the name of the flashlight. Should Q8 only be the working name, shouldnt it? Because if we will name it Q6 for production, this name should be on the driver, marked with the contact wholes.
Not sure, probably a long time
4000+
Don’t know
Weeks to months on low modes, much less on highest
Not yet we will post new info when it comes and of course post pics of samples when they come
We have not reached the step where there are samples available.
We do have driver prototypes, see post 2 for video of the ramping mode.
In the OP you see head design V5
This with some clarification pics is send to Thorfire.
We have slightly adapted V2/3 of the driver board design and it is planned to order 3 of those do Tom can make new Q8 Narsil driver prototypes and send one to Thorfire.
The OP is where you can find what we have.
If something new comes, a milestone is reached, a discussion about something can take place etc, I update the OP, add the topic in CAPS in the title (and if needed link to the post in the thread where it can be found high in the OP)
We have no idea how fast this will go, as you can see we basically design a completely new light and previous BLF specials based on existing lights took long, we probably need a little longer since every part, trace, corner, size etc is to be designed/implemented and bounced back and forth through the team, BLF community and Thorfire.
We do know that the LEDs and FET driver combo should give at least 4000 lumens.
The distance is depending on the reflector as well but that should look about the same as a Quad SRK reflector seen from above (the underside is a different design) and this type of light it more floody then throwy but a basic nodded SRK will get at least 150m so we expect this to reach that with no problem.
We and Thorfire are still in the design phase,so there isn’t a sample yet. We know the requirements, we have many design suggestions, we have a proposed driver, and all will be incorporated into a flashlight.
We aim for over 4000 lumens, but on 3400mAh cells, which are not high-drain, it will be somewhat less. A runtime on 3400mAh cells with flashlight on highest setting would be in the order of 1 hour, with high drain 3000mAh cells more near 40 minutes.
It is a flood light, so the distance will not be great, but illuminates everything near you.
edit: The Miller beat me with his answer