Would you purchase a 14500 version FW1A "mini" if it existed?

But triple is more efficient than single and with the Vapcell H10 or Shockli 1000mah cells, it will be able to make use of triple emitters no problem. But I’m hoping for a 14500 version of the Manker MC13

What, uh, what do you gain with a 14500 over an 18350 in a light with a 41.7mm head diameter? Other than length.

Triples and quads have been great these past few years, but I miss single-emitter lights designed to be as small as possible. They generally had the most practical beams and were the easiest to carry. Extra lumens are neat, but on something small I carry around all the time I don’t really need more than ~100 lm or so.

So for a 14500 light I’d be pretty happy with a really thin light with a single E21A and a 500 mA buck driver or linear driver. Even just a single 7135 chip and a MCU would suffice.

But I probably wouldn’t buy a 14500 triple. It’d be wide enough that I may as well just use an 18650 light instead… and floody enough that I’d need to use twice as much light to see what it’s pointing at.

But if efficiency decreases with power, shouldn’t the consumption for a certain lumen output go down with increased number of LEDs?

This is why multiple emitters are used instead of one, to increase
efficiency at high currents.
Problem the head size of 14500 host for put a triple, Don’t know if there are lens/mcpcb smaller than 20mm
If you use this lens size and also need to increase head diameter,yes there is no reason for do that.
I just launch idea

Efficiency, as measured in lumens per Watt, is usually higher with more LEDs. Like, at a given power level it may produce 5% more lumens or 10% or even 50%… and the greatest gains happen at the highest power levels. At low power, there’s very little difference.

Efficiency, as measured in candelas per Watt, is usually higher with just one LED. That is, assuming the overall diameter of the host remains the same. Take the FW3A vs FW1A as an example. The single-emitter version is about 500% as efficient, illuminating its target about 5X as bright at the same power level.

So you’re both right… you’re just talking about different things.

In the case of a 14500 version of the FW3A or FW1A, the topic of efficiency boils down to this: At a given power level, would you rather have a ~10% increase in lumens or a ~500% increase in candelas?

Basically, do you want an extreme flooder at ~2 cd/lm or a balanced beam at ~10 cd/lm?

Thanks for confirming and extra thoughts about this!

Great explain ToyKeeper thanks.
Anyway yes I’m interested on mini FW1A if will be relase with AA compatibily, High CRI very warm option,small size and price.
Also an Headlamp version with these specs and ramping ui would be great…


can someone post a photo of the beams of an fw3a and fw1a demonstrating the difference in hotspot size?:slight_smile:

here is another example of less lumens from a single, having more throw than a triple

Here my friend :wink:
Left is FW3A and right FW1A

(edited photo to add labels)…
very helpful :+1:

the difference is due to the size of the hotspot:

I hope CRX won’t kill me posting his recent mod...

Tool AA Anduril

I’m pretty sure it throws farther than 92.5 millimeters. :stuck_out_tongue:

(that’s the length of the light)

Anyway, the FW3A XP-L HI gets about 4.4 cd/lm, and the FW1A XP-L HI gets about 23 cd/lm. Roughly 5X as many candelas at the same power level.

However, the FW3A can make about 2.3 or 2.5 times as many lumens. So on turbo, the difference in candelas is a factor of 2 (ish) instead of a factor of 5. But it uses like three times as much power to get half as many candelas.

There’s no question that throwy lights are more efficient at producing a bright hotspot. That’s the whole point of a thrower.

For me though, it’s not about efficiency… it’s about having the right balance. And I think the optimal balance for a small EDC-style light is roughly 5 to 15 cd/lm. This provides a useful mix of flood and throw for common daily tasks.

A 14500 compact triple would end up with like… 2 cd/lm. And a single-emitter version would be closer to 10 or 12 cd/lm. So I’ll take the single-emitter version.

If it were the other way around though, like if we were using a really tiny LED which produced a ridiculous amount of throw, and the numbers were 10 cd/lm for a triple or 50 cd/lm for a single, I’d choose the triple. Because it hits the balance I’m looking for.

Probably not.
Does that answer help at all?

oops! :partying_face:

extremely helpful comments
thank you
I agree there needs to be a balance

thanks for introducing me to the concept of cd/lm

the data for the unmodified AA Tool is
max output 650
so about 5 cd/lm

I find the hotspot larger than necessary and that helps me to know that higher candela per lumen would move into a higher cd/lm

I think modding to a smaller LED, in my case 219b, would raise cd/lm, making the light a bit throwier, still in within a 5-15 cd/lm

Link to CRXs original post?

He will post edited mod

With a single sst20 2700K. Ready, aim, throw.

Seems to me it should get closer to 25mm shorter. The depth of the reflector would be shorter. Although the ability to take a button top might be better. And the inner sleeve should not be carried over so,?