Tried to cancel the order but apparently it shipped out 2 days ago...they just never bothered sending me the notice and tracking number. Now, I guess we all just wait a few weeks and see what arrives.
I too have both a CW and NW DQG II to compare to the new NW III's that are coming. Only real complaint I had on the II's is how they chew up O-rings. Sounds like they took one step forward and two steps back with this final "improved" model.
Usually the wait for a new light is filled with excitement and eager anticipation...not this time.
Oh dear.. So far the first reports are of one DQG iii being DOA: https://budgetlightforum.com/t/-/7627?page=1#comment-161130, and 10 at once being of disappointing quality.
Perhaps it's a bit too soon to start worrying, but fair to say we're off to a bad start..
The threads are machined about as smooth/rough as my II, its more a matter of, there being an extra 0.1-0.2mm space each side so the threads do no mesh together as tightly, and therefore have less contact surface area - giving more slop and accordingly less contact area --> feels rougher.
Warmer tint is not too bad, its something that by-itself you will not notice, but actually feels like it gives a slightly increased colour perception. It is still a lot cooler than my mag 3D and 4D Incan.
No problems with the threads. My dqgII head fits easily on the dqgIII and works better. Got spare o rings. NB the ones that Ric sells for dqgII do not fit they are too large.
My R4 arrived this morning, out of the blue - it was still packing yesterday! Nice little light. I can't believe the supplied O rings will fit - they are 6mm outside diameter. Still, threads smooth, head not loose at all.
I can understand the concern about the DQG ll attachment point - even this one seems weak, so the previous version must have been very thin.
Mine arrived today, very disappointing. 'NW' is the yellowest tint I've seen with any LED torch. Ok, as Vectrex suggests, this could be an acquired taste issue, but the threads are the roughest/nastiest on any flashlight I've so far purchased (as far as I recall).
I've taken some pics, not sure if they'll do justice to the issue.
Not sure how these will appear to a more expert eye, but take my word, they feel horrible. One O ring is already destroyed.
Lensman inacceptable i would say. Remember that i had returned the worm after 3.0months of ownership to HKE solely for the simple argument that "i didnt pay that much money to get a greenish tint" and i got a FREE replacement copy. Even after 3 f***ing months they would agree to replace my copy because of dissatisfaction re the tint. That's great service by HKE!!
imho for 30$ the threads look inacceptably machined.
Have a look at the inside of the torch body, the design pushes thickness to such a thin level that the threads barely fit in (awesome IMO and well executed on the II) but in the newer ones (III) the threads are cut that little bit deeper they start displacing metal into the tube and you can see the bending of the metal. This contributes to problem of the slacker threads.
@ okwchin: I'm sure you're right but it's not the slackness that's the main problem here but the roughness. It's hard to fully show it in the pics, but trust me, those threads are seriously rough. Some of them have part missing. This might not matter on, say, a tailcap that will only be unscrewed to replace a battery, but on a torch that relies on constant rubbing of threads against each other to turn on/off and change modes, it's a real problem. Not looking forward to it, but kreisler's right, I'll have to contact the seller.
kreisler: "imho for 30$ the threads look inacceptably machined."
You've nailed it. On a $10 light I'd be disappointed but resigned. The whole point for me to spend this amount ($34 inc.$2 tracking) on a keychain light was that once and for all I'd get what I paid for and tick the keychain light box. I can't think of any other light where the threads are so important as on a twisty..
I've emailed CNQ and sent the same pics to them, just have to wait and see what they say. I've had a close look at some of my budget lights and, to be fair, a few of them have similarly rough threads. The difference is that they are all much cheaper, and none of them are twisties, which makes the issue far less troublesome.
Can you get a camera angle and light on the _inside_ of the tube, to see if there's an impression of the threads showing on the inner wall? That'd be a "too thin" clue.
