1 orange and 1 ti-cu
Thank you
Linear: 100 - (100 / V_batt * (V_batt - V_f))
FET: should be the same as above, but heat is generated more in the battery (internal resistance), and ofc in the FET. Also in the LED because it is overdriven way past the efficient point even at low brightness.
Buck/boost: depends on the internal resistance of chip and inductor. Can be up to 98%, should be between 90 and 95% for most modes apart from the very low ones.
1 Thank
In a linear driver the efficiency is Vout/Vin.
With a 1x7135+ FET that wurkos usually use, the max linear channel current is 350mA, in a triple that’s ~120mA per LEDs and for 519A that’s Vf=2.65V.
So with a full cell 2.65/4.2=63%, and in average 2.65/3.7=72%
For 50% efficiency you would need a lower Vf, technically the 519A does get close to 2.1V but only at a few micro amps of current so that’s a bit irrelevant, with red LEDs though you would have such low efficiency.
With a 1+7+FET driver like the fw3a initially used, max linear current is 2.8A, with a Vf of 2.9V per 519As, average Vin might be lower due to voltage sag so average efficiency would be ~2.9/3.6=81%.
Calculating efficiency in other modes is complicated due to the PWM dimming, which affect the efficacy of the LEDs.
4 Thanks
Thanks for the explanation guys. If i understand correctly all drivers are less efficient in low modes. Some are more inefficient than others. However in high modes all drivers have much better efficiency with less gap between good and bad.
If i apply my numbers to this formula -
Linear: `100 - (100 / V_batt * (V_batt - V_f))
100 - (100/ 4.2v * (4.2v - 3.7v)
= 88% efficiency (not factoring voltage droop)
Tailcap: I prefer this last design! 
Pocket clip: I would just prefer a deep carry clip, either “slip-on” or between tailcap and tube! 
Built-in charger: I don’t care that much, I normally charge my batteries in a separate charger! If I travel, I carry an Olight UC charger. I am not being selfish, just explaining what I do.
LEDs: as long as it has an 5000-5700K option, without tint shifts, I am good with it! (4 x 5800K CSP2323 leds as the ones from the TS10 would also be nice, but I understand that they are more difficult to match with regular optics)
Battery: 18650 it is ok! If it comes with 18350 tube, even better! 16650 and 16340 would be OK for me, as well! I would use this light as EDC, so…the smaller, the better!
UI: Anduril 2 with flashing pads, like the TS10 
Host colour and material: I am good with black aluminum 
And that’s it! 
1 Thank
3.7V is unrealistic for most LEDs, for the 519A koef3 measured less than 3.5V just before it burned around 9A.
Mainly older designs have such high V_f (and for those the high V_f just means a higher ohmic resistance inside the LED, which has the same effect on efficiency as adding a resistor between LED and driver).
Oh, okay. I must’ve been looking at the wrong graph 
damn, didn’t know they ended half of the range of their products… that’s sad but it means the ts10max will have it easier to establish without required effort to make a better product
but
this is one of the two strong reasons i call for a thinner body to be more in between the ts10 and kr4 so it’s more edc-able as not many people edc’d the fw3a over ts10 and even less do the kr4 so the ts10max being even a bit closer to kr4 won’t be edc’d much either
the other reason i mentioned many times over that this should bear its hot rod legacy of ts10 that is more about how small it is than it’s about how powerful it is (as the eyes percieve the light volume logarithmically and comparing a 1400lm ts10 to 3800lm kr4 makes kr4 look weak for its size)
so size of the flashlight being the most important factor in keeping the hot rod reciepe in the dna of this bigger product and at the same time increasing its edc-ability means we should focus on making it as small as possible while keeping it as powerful as fw3a
i see this as an exciting product fully worthy of its name, with unbeatable position on the market just like ts10
double the battery capacity with the vapcell m20 16650 compared to the lishen 14500 (i belive) still means that people like me who use the ts10 a lot and constantly recharge it and call for the charging port will at least have more runtime and lower frequency of unscrewing and screwing back the head and also more trust to travel with it so we will be partially satisfied and buy it as our new edc and upgrade over the ts10 while with 18650 model many won’t even buy it beacuse it’s already too big to edc and at the same time its less powerful and less efficient at the same output levels than kr4 for those non-edc purposes
i believe the arguments and logic behind the 16650 idea are just too strong to overlook
…either 16650 host or quad emitter 18650
7 Thanks
I like the design… as others have said, the clip could use some work. But dropping the 2 way clip is a great idea . I would still vote for a deeper carry ability.
1 Thank
I don’t own a TS10 for one reason: FWAA. I love my FWAA (sst20 4000K 95 cri) ,but it’s not practical at all for anything but a tiny, barely-there pocket light. Its also cool to show it to non enthusiasts who are surprised at the brightness.
18650 or 18350 is the sweet spot for EDC lights. Not too big, but blows away the 14500 in all parameters. I didn’t get a FW3A in time before it discontinued, and none of my other 100 flashlights really fit the slot a FW3A would occupy so if Wurkkos makes this with a nicely regulated driver a.d good LEDs id be all over it.
Wurkkos: Please make this with the regulated driver! 3100 Lumens turbo, sustained high mode 600-700 Lumens.
8 Thanks
If you want to end by citing two stats that suck, an outright lie, and speculation that they will dedicate additional warehouse space and SKU-bloat simply to fill your fetish, then sure, end from a position of weakness. I tire of your doubling down anyways.
And yet, you think 4-6mm smaller is somehow larger? And call for adding components that add mass? If you really dont’ notice then that’s on you. I definitely notice the smaller difference between the KR4 and D4V2, and I think that a market segment that considers the TS10 too fat would have no interest in anything other than 10440/AAA anyways.
The price is a large part of the TS10’s appeal. It would not be nearly as popular at $30. And with the KR4 coming in at almost $50, the TS10 max will be competitive. However you showing a battery vendor citing prices in Euros implies that you don’t know a thing about the US market; a pretty major one.
And I counted it at closer to 5-6A in order to remain a spiritual successor to the TS10; an amp load that 16650 would have a little trouble with one of, and definitely could not handle three.
I might agree if the math worked out. If a light draws 0.5A at 130 lumens, that means either a 2.6V battery or the 100lm/w is a lot higher than reality. I use those numbers because those amp and output figures I cite are the actual numbers for a TS10.
That’s a lot of words for “I missed the point”. Also, self-contradicting. Someone who complains about size and weight calling so hard for increases to both seems weird to me.
While I would find the size and weight an issue if it were a straight-light, being able to use it easier with arthritis compensates for that. So it pretty much has replaced the TS10 for me.
A lot of onboard charging is at rates I’m not comfortable with.
Raw or OTF? I forget the exact number, but IIRC, a boosted 519a D4V2/KR4 is far enough under 2,400 lumens to guesstimate losing an emitter will put a 3*519a light closer to 1,600 lumens which is barely above a TS10.
Right near the end is where I’m coming from; cheaper.
I often get that whenever I say something based on experience, and often take that as, “I don’t want to believe information that may change my views”. I too have had quite a few USB-C ports survive years of daily use, but I’m not so heavily invested in Survivorship Bias to ignore having also busted enough with less use on items with otherwise good build quality to stand by what I said. Are you saying that my life didn’t happen, or simply that you have a different life experience than I do? Hopefully the latter.
In actual use, the less efficient driver often operate at a lower, less amp-hungry output after the first couple of minutes. The boost driver will last longer at any level a linear or FET+X driver can hold though, but it’s closer to 25%.
4 Thanks
There is something around 5000 PCBs I designed out there, all with the same mid-range priced USB-C connector, and not a single customer reported back with a connector failure in years.
I am in contact with multiple hardware designers who mostly use the same part as I am, and not one of them had a return for a failed port. It costs 16ct a piece if you buy 5, less if you buy more.
I tried a single 20 PCB batch with <10ct a piece connectors a few years back (same shape, footprint compatible) and 15 of those PCBs failed within a year.
Reliability of USB (as any other connector) hugely depends on which model you source. Not buying bottom-of-the-barrel is pretty much already a guarantee for the connectors to outlive the PCB they are placed on, with very few outliers that fail earlier.
Having tens of thousands of PCBs of collected experience to rely on, between me and my colleagues/friends, heavily skews my opinion towards discarding most premature port failures as either the company using garbage parts, or the users being very rough. Or incredibly unlucky.
1 Thank
The new render looks great!
All I think it’s missing is a deep-carry clip.
Also, look at the FW3A’s success, it relied on the light being easy to modify and using no glue.
You could swap the optics with standardized Carclo 3-up optics (10507, 10508, 10511) to tune the beam. I would heavily recommend using an optic with a compatible footprint.
4 Thanks
OK… but if you don’t use the USB C connector or charging circuit, you can eliminate any possibility of a problem… And eliminate to possibility of water ingress through a penetration that will not be there. And further eliminate potential problems with a cover that you will not need.
I agree, user replaceable optics are a must for this light. And the only triples we can easily and realiably source are the carclo 15s, especially after the FW3A and the D3AA really boosted their popularity.
I think Simon and Yajiamei sell some triples as well, but I can’t remember if they were small enough for a light of this class.
2 Thanks
1 Thank
And it also happens that those carclo 105xx series triples make for a great optic for converting other flashlights to triples.
2 Thanks
I’m still contemplating doing the dumb and sanding one down to 17mm to fit it into a FWAA 
No real gain from doing so (so much lost reflection area) but you might be able to use the optic and MCPCB of a TS10 if you managed to lose the original optic.