Yes. It would be impossible to change a triple with 9v boost driver to a single emitter light because there are no 9v emitters (at least to my knowledge).
A boost driver can have a output voltage range wide enough to work with 6V and 9V configurations.
6 Thanks
I didn’t know that. How is the output voltage adjusted?
i mean like in ts10. not side button.
1 Thank
Well if you mean a type of clip that fits around the body of the light, I agree. If you mean a two way clip, then I don’t. You could still have the shape or style of the #2 clip that clips around the body of the light. But your illustration shows the clip with a very wide band that attaches it to the light. I think this part could be reduced by about 70% to make it more like attachment for the clip on the current TS10.
1 Thank
I rarely get into lights that draw few enough amps to get by with a 10A cell, especially not since voltage sag hits hard enough that I would never run them past 6A; a level many lights with boost drivers will exceed. Less voltage sag means more voltage, which means lower amps required for the same wattage. Lower amp draw at the same mAh means more runtime, and higher CDR generally means less sag.
Put another way, a P45B and M50B both have 13.1 Wh at 5A/15W, but at 10A/30W it’s 13.0Wh vs 11.3 Wh which gives the 4500 mAh cell a 15% advantage over the 5000 mAh cell. I haven’t seen the tests on the N40 that show how it responds to amp draws much above what an alkleak can handle. I might be more inclined to agree with you if I never ran above 100 lumens, but looking at which one of these hits LVP first…
… I think I’ve said enough to give you an idea of why I don’t trust the negligible-draw levels and mAh ratings to determine runtime without more info.
A fair bit depends on how you use your lights, of course, but there are reasons I stick with 3000 mAh 18650’s and P45B’s in my lights.
2 Thanks
It looks great, hopefully the bezel won’t be glued in.
I would prefer the first style clip, because the other style does not go deeply enough into my pocket. Alternatively, just make the captive clip deep carry, like on the Noctigon KR4.
I prefer the first style tailcap too.
Hopefully there is no glue on the light, other than the very minimum.
I would like it to have an optic compatible with the Carclo 105xx series of 3-up optics too, for more beam profile customization.
And obviously, flashing pads and Anduril 2.
1 Thank
As many, I love the form factor and profile of the original TS10. Smooth texture on the tailcap. Offer the same options of single color Aux (including Orange). Keep it simple. No interest in a short tube. It’s either an 18650 light or it’s not. No USB charging. If you have to, include a cheap single station flex charger with the kit. Must accept flat top cells. Buck/Boost+FET driver. Copper option.
3 Thanks
this should be a better ts10, not a worse kr4 and so far it looks to be purely the latter
you can’t compete with kr4 in performance, all you can do in that segment is a more convenient product or move out of that segment
-
make it a smaller 16650 instead for numerous practical and competitive reasons
-
high efficiency 2A boost driver is all it needs to get 1800lm at 100lm/w from that 3 x 519a setup
-
two way clip is best
-
its criminal for an EDC to lack usb-c charging port which allows people for simpler living, traveling and makes the product more giftable
the ts10max should be an improvement of ts10 and the things improved with the 16650 design are:
- 2X battery capacity (vapcell 16650)
- +30% max output
- more convenient recharging
- all at cost of just a bit bigger and heavier product
what the 18650 design is rn:
- 25% lower output than kr4 at the same size
- way way lower power to size and weight ratio than ts10 which totally breaks its hot rod legacy
why should anyone buy a worse kr4?
unless it costs half the money… (which it won’t as kr4 is already pretty cheap itself)
the whole idea of ts10max should go back to the drawing board because so far its far from an exciting product
3 Thanks
I already have 14500, 18650 and 21700 batteries I have no desire to add a fourth size.
16 Thanks
would you buy a worse kr4 because you have an 18650 already or rather an exciting unique new product that can be bought including the battery you don’t yet have yet?
i can see making a flashlight with a not so fully conventional battery type might be tightening the clientele range a bit but making a flashlight in a segment with load of better competition is a way worse option from the business perspective
its always better to excel in a niche market than be a loser in a mainstream one
after all most of us will always edc a ts10 over something of kr4 size and weight… so why should the ts10max reach so far into the full size flashlight category?
id say a 16650 segment is the perfect crossover betwen the two and having the option to buy flashlight including the cell kinda makes me not care if that cell is mainstream or not
I can get 18650 over-the-counter many places, and 14500 is not hard, but 16650 is a scavenger hunt. I couldn’t find any at most of the usual suspects (LiionWholesale, 18650BatteryStore,IMRBatteries…), only at Illumn. And their low CDR means that they can only support a light that has a lower output than a TS10; even a Vapcell H10 beats them.
Pushing for a very uncommon and underperforming battery makes no sense to me.
Awful bold to assume that driving three 519a’s at 2A will get more output per emitter than driving four 519a’s at 2A.
It’s criminal to force people who have zero use for a feature to pay extra for something they will never use, won’t do nearly as good a job as a bay charger, and tends to break. USB-C ports are not very durable. Especially not a TS10 or spiritual cousin.
People who want a motorcycle with four wheels, five seats, a trunk, and a roof don’t really want a motorcycle, and you don’t want anything remotely like a TS10.
And yet, you push for USB-C to appeal to the mainstream while also pushing for a driver that is the opposite of what a TS10 is. People buy sportscars for their performance, not their MPG.
So you want a mainstream niche light with an uncommon battery most people can’t find, and that underperforms? Or are you simply pushing for things that get that because you don’t realize the consequences of your requests?
8 Thanks
I would buy a cheaper, slightly smaller KR4 that supported 18650 which is only slightly bigger than 16650 but has higher capacity, is easier to buy and I already own a few of them.
3 Thanks
Yes. I mentioned this in a post above. The 16340 cell has no redeeming qualities other than size. It makes no sense to sacrifice so much just to marginally reduce the size of the light.
Well no one is forcing anyone, but I agree that the proposed light has no need for USB charging. There are some valid reasons that people like USB recharging, but that doesn’t mean that every light need it. Apparently the many, many people that have purchased TS10s support that idea. I suggest that the new light should stay true to the concepts that make the TS10 such a great light. Which would mean that it has no reason to have USB charging.
Considering the success of the TS10, I think there is little reason to believe that they will be a loser. Seems a bit closed minded to maintain that very many people share your “niche” views on this.
3 Thanks
the proposed design is the same size as kr4
The TS10 is very close to the same size as the FWAA. I wonder which one has sold more units? The FWAA has been discontinued. The TS10 is still going strong with new models being released regularly.
So what is the point?
1 Thank
No it isn’t. 26.6mm head vs 29mm for the KR4, 92.5mm length vs 98mm for the KR4.
Edit - assuming a cylinder because it makes the maths easier the new TS10 has 30ml less volume than the KR4. Or 15.7% smaller.
7 Thanks
The HD10 is pretty much a TS10 that has USB on the light at no size increase as the port is in a space that would’ve otherwise been volume wasted by making it an angle-light. Same output, same emitters, no tripping protection on Turbo like TS10’s running Acebeam cells tend to, and the added length isn’t much more than what it’d take to add USB-C to a TS10 the way so many people insist. And hey, tail magnet!
The first batch had some teething pains, but I think just putting flashing pads in and shipping with more current firmware would make it the tiny USB-rechargeable pocket-rocket that many want. Sure, some people are put off by angle-lights, but I find any light I can hold and aim easily without hurting my wrists and that can be aimed better when slapping the tail magnet against something worth trying angle-lights.
If people want a TS10 that isn’t a TS10, the HD10 is a great option.
1 Thank
If people want a headlight the HD10 is worth looking at. It is a considerably larger and heavier light than the TS10. That extra head volume allows the USB port. But it can’t replace a TS10 for the things that I use that light for.
I wouldn’t avoid the MAX just because it has a USB port, but I am just not in the group that requires it to make it something that I want. As it would make it (potentially) smaller, lighter, less complex and less prone to failure, I would simply prefer that it doesn’t have one. But then, I have so many lights now with USB charging that I have plenty of options if I am a situation where I need it. So, I can afford to get a light like the Max that doesn’t have the feature.
first of all:
- 2000mah
- 8A cdr
- 5 bucks
- mainstream brand accessible world wide to buy…
- and again, wurkkos will have no problem either reselling these or sourcing equally as good ones themselves to sell them to you both included in the flashlight and as a separate product!
- end of the cell debate.
second of all:
-
80% of my argument is about the category within which the flashlight wants to fight based on its size and weight - the category of the well established kr4 - which it won’t beat with anything else than convenience - the only thing anyone could add to their product is the charging port, no other ways to improve upon the kr4 and if you are so much against the on board charging, there is no way for this product to be anything else than a worse kr4…
-
im holding both the kr4 and ts10 in my hand rn and 26.5 mm width of ts10max is basically the same as kr4 when comparing the three diameters, the small 5% length difference is negligible too, i can’t imagine people avoiding the comparison of the two just because one is ever so slightly smaller on paper
-
if the flashlight is as big and heavy as kr4 while it won’t really cost much less with worse performance? is this a description of an exciting product? a best seller fully worth its name even? no! it’s a blatant exploit of the legacy to sell a mediocre product - this is my main problem with the proposed design so far, there is nothing exciting about it compared to the already existing direct competition in that size, no to say compared to the original ts10, in fact the competition is way more exciting
-
the only thing exciting about this product is its name - which doesn’t even live up to its legacy of brutal ratio of power to size and weight - i’ve seen jerv calling the kr4 a big brother to the ts10 and it really is way closer to being that than the proposed ts10max
-
trying to argue with the ts10 beating the fwaa is pointless as those two were pretty much the same thing with ever so slightly worse overall execution on the lumintop side with worse pricing - tipping the whole demand towards the ts10 while the ts10max and kr4 are further apart in specs with all the advantages on kr4 side (again, a single digit % difference in width and length between two pretty much full size flashlights is just unmentionable as an argument, not to say a marketing point especially when its at the cost of double digit % loss in performance)
third of all:
-
the driver requirements i counted with single 519’s output of 600lm at 2A - so if reality is slightly more towards the 2.5A with all the losses then im sure it will be no bigger problem to source/design a driver for that either
-
ts10 is max 1400lm at 100lm/w efficacy so i don’t see it wrong to count with 519s max output to be set at the same efficacy too - for which a high efficiency boost driver is plenty but i’m not really that stubborn on this matter as it’s not my main argument
fourth:
-
the charging port initiative is the businessman in me talking knowing this feature is very profitable even tho hardcore enthusiasts don’t have use for it but as i’m a part of this forum it’s hart do call me a normie and i know for fact after using my ts10 DAILY for almost two years straight now, that i would welcome a charging port for sure as it’s lack is the only reason i don’t travel with it nor did i give it to any noob friend as a gift because their initial hype always end after they find out they would need external charger for it
-
the motorcycle analogy is just trash on its own, the ts10 is my favorite flashlight mainly because of its amazing size to performance ratio and its a conversation starter for the very same reason, but that doesn’t mean it’s perfect and a presence of a charging port on it wouldn’t make it anything else nor less than it already is… seems to me like you have some personal thing going on that makes u so overly triggered about it
-
i mentioned a niche market based on bettery size categories and you know it very well so trying to bash me for using the most prominent convenience parameter being the usb c charging to up the value provided by the product within that niche category just clearly says you want me to be more wrong about everything than you would desire to be objective yourself and help wurkkos design another killer product… why? self analyse a bit there
-
for example (forgot to fill this point, hence the second edit): the ts21/25/26s held their own on the market mostly because they were similar to hanklights in their categories but with the convenient usb-c port… there was nothing else excitinng about them except a slightly better pricing
-
just because something is in niche market due to one key parameter doesn’t mean it doesn’t require the same mentality to build a best seller when it comes to all the other parameters and i bet that majority, if not all the people who are against usb-c will still buy those usb-c products anyway while thanks to the usb-c those products are appealing to a way broader consumer-base
last one (the key takaway):
- i can survive having just a bigger ts10 with the same approach to internals with the fet turbo and without the charging port (it’s not like i wasn’t surviving with the ts10 daily last two years lol) but we already have that - it’s called kr4 (i belive i have it in the same exact custom emitter spec as jerv) and it’s amazing but what the proposed ts10max is so far just a worse copy of it that i see no reason to buy
for this reason i find it necessary to transform the concept of ts10max into either:
- something with at least equal performance as kr4
and/or
- make it a usb-c rechargeable kr4 just like the ts21/ts25/ts26s was/is for people who want a usb-c rechargeable D4K - again, that’s why it held its own demand on market against the D4 series from hank - by having something extra
or
- make it smaller flashlight to not directly compete with it at all while increasing the performance to size ratio to match the key selling point of ts10 - hot rod
so if wurkkos isn’t interested in making it a quad 519 and at the same time people here don’t like the idea of usb-c port on it, the only option left on the table to make this into an exciting standalone product to hold its own demand on the market long term against the competition (past the quickly disappearing hype of its legacy name) is to enter an obscure category and make it a thinner 16650 flashlight and that’s pure facts noone can rationally argue against as the curernt form is really just a worse kr4 without a single advantage unless it costs half the kr4 (unlikely) and only inexperienced/overhyped people will buy it over an actual kr4 (aliexpress/amazon wanderers not knowing of hank’s existence behind the walls of the platform they are on - which speaks more to the mainstream marketing advantage of wurkkos than to having a worthy product against the kr4)
kr4 is closer to the ts10 legacy than the ts10max in its current form and i will laugh at everyone trying to prove me wrong on that