Just a quick note about thinning the MCPCB, especially by hand…
It might make the bezel gap smaller, but it comes at a cost:
Worse thermal performance
Increased risk of letting water in
With less copper (and less-flat copper) for the LEDs to sink heat into, it’ll heat up faster and shed heat slower. Additionally, it’s likely to have less pressure holding the MCPCB against the shelf, which further reduces its ability to handle heat.
The reduced pressure is also likely to mess with the waterproofing at the lens, making it easier for water to get in.
There’s supposed to be a gap. It would be ideal if there wasn’t, of course, but machining needs a margin for error. With this particular type of margin, having error in one direction is fine because it only has minor cosmetic impact, while error in the other direction causes functional degredation. The gap means the error is in the right direction – it means the waterproofing is tight and pressure on the MCPCB is high.
With due respect, I think the shelf height on the fancy metals was raised unnecessarily higher than the aluminium models.
The Bezel gap in the Aluminium models is smaller than the Bezel gap on the fancy metal models
On the aluminum models, all the gaps match, iow bezel gap, body gap, tailcap gap, are all the same
On fancy metal models the bezel gap is larger than the head to body gap, and tailcap gap… its a mismatch, with no added benefit. And it costs extra… lol
YMMV, I guess. The gaps on my titanium TS10 are smaller than the gaps on my Aluminum TS10. So I get the feeling we may just be seeing random variations in an error margin. It’s unclear whether there’s any difference in the average.
If there’s a +/- 0.3mm error expected, and a negative gap causes functional problems, the correct host design would have a gap of 0.4 mm +/- 0.3mm. I.e., a gap of 0.1mm to 0.7mm. This would keep the gap as small as the process allows, without risk of going into negative numbers where non-cosmetic issues start happening.
That is a good assumption. The thing is, I have bought 2 Convoy lights with bezel gap in excess of 1mm and leaking water like crazy. There were users reporting their s21d leaked when using in jungle resulted in fogging and water damage under the lens. By inspecting their photo, their copy of light suffered similar issue or big bezel gap. The rubber gasket was not compressed at all. For my M21F before TIR mod and the S21F, I had to sand down both the reflector and the quad TIR lens to make the bezel close properly. So an overly loose bezel is not a good thing either.
Sounds like the Convoy you mentioned had other problems unrelated to the gap. Perhaps the stock o rings were too small, etc.
The gap on my titanium TS10 is fine. It is the same size as the gap on my aluminum TS10s. It doesn’t appear to be even a cosmetic issue. I agree with Toykeeper’s analysis. Great light as-is.
Thanks! That’s definitely worth noting (the pressure from the bezel pressing against the optic helps with water resistance).
I left a bit of a gap so that the bezel still pushes down against the TIR optic and holds the MCPCB down. I was a bit worried about water resistance and I didn’t want to overdo it. I guess the bezel should probably be glued because it will most likely unscrew itself over time and there won’t be much water resistance.
I probably wouldn’t attempt this with an aluminium shelf. I’m hoping that the copper shelf can help with the heat.
some people may also be interested in the Lumintop USB rechargeable 14500IF you do not use Turbo. Some people report protection will trip on Turbo, but I have not been able to duplicate that issue. Protection Did NOT trip on Turbo during my 10 second test of both a CuTi and an Aluminium TS10… using the Lumintop USB 14500 fresh of the charger.
Does that one work with stock turbo or only after you neuter it? I’ve tried the Acebeam 14500 with USB recharging and it trips the protection on stock turbo.
Edit: I haven’t been able to replicate the issue of it tripping the protection circuit on turbo. It seems I was mistaken (when I thought turbo was tripping it the voltage was probably low and I didn’t realize it). Good thing - I do like the convenience of this battery.
glad you asked for clarification… you are correct that I turn off Turbo… (I edited my post to clarify that some people report USB 14500 trips protection on Turbo)
I believe the Lumintop USB 14500 is the same battery as your Acebeam USB 14500, so I do not think you should try the Lumintop version, since you are a Turbo user.
FWIW, I just tested my USB 14500 on an Aluminium TS10, and also on my CuTi TS10 and with Turbo enabled, the protection did NOT trip. The battery is at 4.0V, so I just put it on charge and will test fresh off the charger… will update w the results in a few minutes.
Update, with the battery fresh off full charge Protection did NOT trip on Turbo. I only tested the two lights for 10 seconds. ymmv
I’ve used the Acebeam USB 14500 on and off for a year with the TS10 and it’s never tripped. I just ran it in a CuTi on Turbo for a minute and no issue, it was at 4.1V
Im glad you encouraged me to check. Also glad you were able to eliminate the concern that protection could trip with your use pattern
I thought turbo was tripping it the voltage was probably low and I didn’t realize it
Im still unclear if protection would trip on a battery that is below 3.5V, when attempting to use Turbo. I have not tested. Please share if you discover the low end of the battery charge causes protection to trip.
For now, thanks for your successful test with a full charge. Enjoy!
I don’t recommend the ones I have.
They are Kobalt from Lowes and the metal bracket on them, not only gets in the way it can and will scratch your light.
You’ll want 2 small strap wrenchs without a metal bracket.
Someone in another post, recommend Boa Constrictor and they looked good.
Harbor Freight also sells some that look good too.
But you’ll definitely want 2 small ones, the bigger ones are clumsy to work with and aren’t designed for tiny flashlights.
