# End of Tailcap UI's? Why so many side switches?



## SoldMyHat (Jul 28, 2014)

Hi guys,

I am looking for a 1000+ lumen 2 CR123a light with a reverse clicky UI. Basically a 4sevens QP2L that hits 1000 lumens without a "burst" mode. Everything I see in that size range has converted to a forward side switch UI like the Fenix PD35 and pretty much everything I have looked at from Eagletac, Sunwayman, Olight, and Zebralight. 

Is there something in the circuitry of the tailcap UI that limits lumens output and thus the switch to a forward side switch? A buddy just got the PD35 and is about to sell it because he can't stand the UI on it. It seems the 4sevens has the best UI, but it lacks in the lumens department for this particular wishlist item. 

I do think that the 4sevens QP2L-X has adequate lumens, but I would like a 1000 constant lumens if possible.


----------



## kbuzbee (Jul 28, 2014)

The PD35 is actually a 2 switch, modes on the side, power on the tail cap.

I can't answer your question (though I assume the answer is "no") but I will say, I'm much preferring the side switch UI on my SC62C to the tail cap switch on my D25Cvn. Just seems a more natural position (for me) So it may just be consumer preference (if not yours) and not some technical issue. Of course a lot of these things just go in cycles, so tail cap UIs may be back in vogue in a year or two.

Ken


----------



## reppans (Jul 28, 2014)

Not an expert, but I understand ~1k lms is the current limit for a single XML. Step downs will be required due to heat build up on compact lights. Get a bigger light with more mass and heat sinking capability (and more battery power) and you can run ~1k lms sustained. 

Neither electronic nor mechanical clickies should be a limitation at this Amp level, but I believe electronic switch lights can actually handle more Amps on really powerful lights since the primary electrical power path is separate from the switch electrical path. Electronic clickies also have more UI options and opportunities for stuff like battery meters. 

Personally, I prefer mechanical clickies for the simplicity and the easier user serviceability, repairability and at least field by-passability. I still read about too many electronic clicky failures and problems and the only way to fix them is to send it back.


----------



## SoldMyHat (Jul 28, 2014)

You lost me. Lol. 

So you are saying the side switch is inherently more reliable than a tail cap switch?

And that lights the size of the foursevens can't mechanically sustain the heat due to heat sinking capabilities and therefore are already pretty maxed out for the form factor?

ETA - I just reread it for the forth time. So the tail cap switch (mechanical) is more reliable but the side switch (electronic) can potentially handle higher power since it's not handling the main power as well. That said, do you think electronic switches are the trend because of more possibilities? I think the foursevens and older fenix style UI is far superior. Tight for max and strobe. Loose for all modes with a lowest setting start each time. I hate the mode memory thing in the cheap lights and now the electronic switch lights. 



reppans said:


> Not an expert, but I understand ~1k lms is the current limit for a single XML. Step downs will be required due to heat build up on compact lights. Get a bigger light with more mass and heat sinking capability (and more battery power) and you can run ~1k lms sustained.
> 
> Neither electronic nor mechanical clickies should be a limitation at this Amp level, but I believe electronic switch lights can actually handle more Amps on really powerful lights since the primary electrical power path is separate from the switch electrical path. Electronic clickies also have more UI options and opportunities for stuff like battery meters.
> 
> Personally, I prefer mechanical clickies for the simplicity and the easier user serviceability, repairability and at least field by-passability. I still read about too many electronic clicky failures and problems and the only way to fix them is to send it back.


----------



## thedoc007 (Jul 28, 2014)

SoldMyHat said:


> So you are saying the side switch is inherently more reliable than a tail cap switch?
> 
> And that lights the size of the foursevens can't mechanically sustain the heat due to heat sinking capabilities and therefore are already pretty maxed out for the form factor?



Yes to both questions.

I actually really like both types, depending on how they are implemented. There is no guarantee you won't have problems with either kind of switch...but electronic switches should be less likely to fail, if they are made properly. Clickies wear out, no matter what. Any physical switch with springs and movement WILL die eventually, it is just a matter of time. And given that physical switches have to carry the current, it does limit your options for very high-powered lights.

Might I suggest your buddy check out the Nitecore SRT7? No stepdown, not quite 1000 lumens but in the ballpark. It has a forward clicky for power, and a magnetic ring for mode switching. Out of 30 or so lights I have tried recently, I think it is my favorite interface. Can do any mode switching you want quickly, from on or off. Hard to complain about that...


----------



## reppans (Jul 28, 2014)

SoldMyHat said:


> And that lights the size of the foursevens can't mechanically sustain the heat due to heat sinking capabilities and therefore are already pretty maxed out for the form factor?
> 
> ETA - I just reread it for the forth time. So the tail cap switch (mechanical) is more reliable but the side switch (electronic) can potentially handle higher power since it's not handling the main power as well. That said, do you think electronic switches are the trend because of more possibilities? I think the foursevens and older fenix style UI is far superior. Tight for max and strobe. Loose for all modes with a lowest setting start each time. I hate the mode memory thing in the cheap lights and now the electronic switch lights.



Yup, I think the lightweight Quark-sized lights are maxed out with the current LED technology for heat dissipation. Keep in mind 47s will under drive its lights more than some manuf. are willing, because they've made a promise to fix them for a long time. There's many small lights that will go direct drive on Li-ions and simply burn up over time if you run max for extended periods. Pretty sure future technology will bring us greater LED efficiency though, (ie, more lumens at cooler temps). 

Yup, also think there will be an increasing trend toward e-clickies because you can do more with them - fancier UIs, batt. meters, indicator lights. And yup, as the Doc said, e-clickies don't have to carry the full Amp load of very powerful lights (which can lead to arcing problems) - e-switches just use a minuscule side branch of power, which brings the parasitic drain.

Just anecdotally (from reading failure posts), I believe mechanical clickies are more mature and more reliable with less complexity. I find it interesting that some of the dedicated e-switch manufacturers break from the relatively industry standard 2-yr warranty and will only stand behind their product for 1-yr. I have no data on which is more reliable, but I know I can easily and cheaply service, repair, or replace my Quark clicky... Or just by-pass it with the tinfoil I carry in my wallet. My e-clicky lights will be dead in the water. 

I'm with you on the Quark Pro UIs - they're my favorite, but for a different reason. I happen to LOVE its single-handed momentary max from ON "feature" (work-around).


----------



## SoldMyHat (Jul 29, 2014)

Thanks! I appreciate everyone's insights on the matter! 

I was reading on another thread while I was digging for answers myself, and they stated that ANSI only requires a light to be able to maintain a certain max lumen output for 30 seconds. That said, some of these 1000 lumen lights may have similar step downs such as the burst mode on the 4sevens. Seems maybe 4sevens is just trying to be honest about it, and provide a more dependable light. I can get behind that in a company. I also have a thing for sub-lumens, and they are one of the few to still keep that feature in the UI.


----------



## jorn (Jul 30, 2014)

Tailclicky often means you have to change grip to change modes while walking. Most pepole walk with the hands down, your tumbs points forwards. With a tail clicky you have to spin the light around for your tumb to hit the tail. Or walk with a overhand grip where you hold the light high next to your ear. Not a great way to carry on a long hike  With a side switch, your tumb is on the switch when you walk with your hands down. I prefer the old mecanical tailswitch and twist the head to change modes. No parasitic drain, and i can change modes while walking with my hands down. All eletronic switces got parasitic drain.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Jul 30, 2014)

jorn said:


> All eletronic switces got parasitic drain.



For most lights with electronic switches, I don't think parasitic drain is a concern. I measured the drain on my Zebralight SC52's at only 20 microamps. At that rate, it would take over 11 years to drain the AA battery. If that rate is still a concern, you can always lock-out the light by slightly loosening the tailcap.

I like both tail and side switches, depending on the application of the light. For tactical lights, a tail switch makes a lot of sense. For larger lights, a side switch is much more convenient. Mechanical switches have a nice tactile feel to them. Electronic switches allow for a greater variety of programmable options.


----------



## jorn (Jul 30, 2014)

I know about the tailcap lockout. I use it all the time on my favorite headlamp. The zebra h51fc. The drain is not my biggest consern. Some got more drain than others. But the switch is so easy to press that it can easy turn on in a stuffed backpack. But then you have a "twisty clicky". harder to use than a regular twisty


----------



## radiopej (Jul 30, 2014)

I'm mixed on which I prefer. My favourite UI so far is on the Olight M10. Momentary, high and strobe from the tailcap, but also switching from the side. Mode memory is great with a side switch, though I hate it at the moment with just a tailcap switch. 

Just got a Nailbender Nichia dropin and it's quite annoying figuring out what'll pop up next with memory.


----------



## idleprocess (Jul 30, 2014)

I have always found the UI-via-power-switch to be a tad finicky. Lights never seem to handle the timing consistently. A shame since it's otherwise a better way to do things from a usage perspective (hit one button for everything). But I don't necessarily dislike the mode switch either - its consistency mitigates the inconvenience.


----------



## reppans (Jul 30, 2014)

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> For most lights with electronic switches, I don't think parasitic drain is a concern. I measured the drain on my Zebralight SC52's at only 20 microamps. At that rate, it would take over 11 years to drain the AA battery. If that rate is still a concern, you can always lock-out the light by slightly loosening the tailcap..



Generally true, except for when they go bad. 

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?379726-ZL-H60-high-standby-draw

Also, the SC52's parasitic draw is in months on 14500s (which is a likely event for me with this light).


----------



## jorn (Jul 30, 2014)

reppans said:


> Generally true, except for when they go bad.
> 
> http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?379726-ZL-H60-high-standby-draw
> 
> Also, the SC52's parasitic draw is in months on 14500s (which is a likely event for me with this light).


And if a electronic switch fails, throw the light in the garbage. I cant fix or replace one. Most mechanical tail switches are cheap and easy to replace. I dont like the new trend with high tec ui, displays and stuff. Imo, the simpler the better.


----------



## LlF (Aug 1, 2014)

There is a limit to the easier to fix argument.. 

To me, - personal opinion - a tail click only has that tactical appear, it's something cool, like a computer tower with fancy blue LEDs.. But once I get into the lights I soon realize what I usually need is a side click, and a black PC tower so it won't blind me during the night..

Or maybe it's just a trend..


----------



## jorn (Aug 1, 2014)

LlF said:


> There is a limit to the easier to fix argument..


Pleace explain. 

I cant even find a spare electronic swich that fits a zebralight or lf2XT, or any of my lights with a electronic one. It it fails, i cant fix it. And im the type of person that love to fix my own stuff. Mod my own lights etc.


----------



## reppans (Aug 1, 2014)

Interesting... what appears to be two more electronic switch failures - a Nitecore P12 and Klarus XT11. 

I'm sure these failure posts represent a tiny minority of electronic clickies out there, but mechanical clickies must out number electronic clickies by ~ 10:1, yet I can't recall reading about many (any?) mechanical clicky failures that couldn't be fixed by simply tightening the retaining disk with needle nosed pliers. 

That said, I don't think there's any stopping the migration over to e-switches - I just think a few bugs need to be worked out first .


----------



## reppans (Aug 1, 2014)

jorn said:


> Tailclicky often means you have to change grip to change modes while walking. Most pepole walk with the hands down, your tumbs points forwards. With a tail clicky you have to spin the light around for your tumb to hit the tail. Or walk with a overhand grip where you hold the light high next to your ear. Not a great way to carry on a long hike  With a side switch, your tumb is on the switch when you walk with your hands down. I prefer the old mecanical tailswitch and twist the head to change modes. No parasitic drain, and i can change modes while walking with my hands down. All eletronic switces got parasitic drain.



A cigar grip works quite well with rear clickies for arms-down/under-handed carry for walking/hiking. Even better, if you cigar-grip between your pinkie and ring fingers, you'll have your three most important fingers completely free, call it 2/3rds hands free with still easy access to the clicky. Great for dog walking while juggling leashes and pop bags . That said, it's not going to work well with large, heavy, multi-cell lights.


----------



## mcnair55 (Aug 2, 2014)

If you go back to the early torches we grew up with(old gits like me anyway) side switch were the way they were and many children,s torches of today are still side switch.

Thinking about different things i have owned over the years from radios to everything else you can think of i have had more failures with electronic switches than mechanical.

And who remembers the slide switch on audio systems that suffered badly from noise once you had let the dust in.?


----------



## jellydonut (Aug 2, 2014)

WalkIntoTheLight said:


> For most lights with electronic switches, I don't think parasitic drain is a concern. I measured the drain on my Zebralight SC52's at only 20 microamps. At that rate, it would take over 11 years to drain the AA battery. If that rate is still a concern, you can always lock-out the light by slightly loosening the tailcap.



My Zebralight H31 will drain the battery within a week if I forget to lock out the tailcap.


----------



## Overclocker (Aug 2, 2014)

i'm still a fan of Quarks. simplicity means reliability. remember a side button can be another thing to leak (or more specifically it's more difficult to make waterproof, usually just some press fit metal rings)! just like what happened to this Nitecore EC25:







a side button also means a more complex driver board with a greater potential for failure. here's a Nitecore P12 w/ fractured solder points due to repeated pressing on the side button:


----------



## NetNathan (Aug 2, 2014)

Actually.....I do not really care for switch selectable modes. Too confusing. 
I really prefer the rotating ring for brightness and modes, with a main tail switch. 
Like my Sunnyman and Nitecore SR7. 


Sent from my iPad using Candlepowerforums


----------



## idleprocess (Aug 2, 2014)

Overclocker said:


> i'm still a fan of Quarks. simplicity means reliability. remember a side button can be another thing to leak (or more specifically it's more difficult to make waterproof, usually just some press fit metal rings)! just like what happened to this Nitecore EC25:
> [...]
> a side button also means a more complex driver board with a greater potential for failure. here's a Nitecore P12 w/ fractured solder points due to repeated pressing on the side button:


It's all a matter of implementation. A laterally-actuating switch that worked against the plane of the PCB (with soldered through-anchors) would not have failed like that.


----------



## Overclocker (Aug 3, 2014)

idleprocess said:


> It's all a matter of implementation. A laterally-actuating switch that worked against the plane of the PCB (with soldered through-anchors) would not have failed like that.









you mean like this Klarus 

but the Nitecore needed LEDs on the side button so they had to have a perpendicular PCB. so basically more bells and whistles, less reliability

can't help but notice that Klarus uses copper MCPCB and braided conduits for the leads. now that's quality, even if the end customer will never see it


----------



## reppans (Aug 4, 2014)

Overclocker said:


> can't help but notice that Klarus uses copper MCPCB and braided conduits for the leads. now that's quality, even if the end customer will never see it



Curious about your thoughts on the XT11 e-switch give a couple failure posts have recently popped up HERE's one


----------



## djozz (Aug 5, 2014)

I really like the simplicity and elegance of the tail clicky. When I bought my first tail-clicky light years ago, my thought were instantly : yes, that is the right place to put the switch. Since I do not care for fancy UI's (give me three well spaced light levels, starting on low and I'm exstatic), a tail clicky is all I want. (In contrast, I am very picky on output, colour temp. and CRI, modded most of my lights to have them meet my standard)


----------



## Overclocker (Aug 13, 2014)

reppans said:


> Curious about your thoughts on the XT11 e-switch give a couple failure posts have recently popped up HERE's one










here's the latest version XT11 w/ the metal "lever" over the mode button. again when you increase complexity you decrease reliability. it does seem like a potential failure point depending on how good the solder joint was done at the factory


----------



## idleprocess (Aug 13, 2014)

Overclocker said:


> here's the latest version XT11 w/ the metal "lever" over the mode button. again when you increase complexity you decrease reliability. it does seem like a potential failure point depending on how good the solder joint was done at the factory



Looks like a shield to prevent switch plunger overtravel and possibly to deflect force into the greater housing away from the switch housing itself.


----------



## Overclocker (Aug 13, 2014)

idleprocess said:


> Looks like a shield to prevent switch plunger overtravel and possibly to deflect force into the greater housing away from the switch housing itself.




that square silvery thing is the microswitch itself, with 3 of the 4 "legs" visible in the picture


----------



## idleprocess (Aug 13, 2014)

Overclocker said:


> that square silvery thing is the microswitch itself, with 3 of the 4 "legs" visible in the picture



Ah, I missed the over-wrap. Used to seeing those things with entirely plastic housings or a metal shield on top with a footprint smaller than the overall footprint.


----------



## Overclocker (Aug 28, 2015)

Overclocker said:


> you mean like this Klarus
> 
> but the Nitecore needed LEDs on the side button so they had to have a perpendicular PCB. so basically more bells and whistles, less reliability
> 
> can't help but notice that Klarus uses copper MCPCB and braided conduits for the leads. now that's quality, even if the end customer will never see it




ok i'm taking back what i said  the klarus design really isn't better. best practice would be to avoid putting too much force on these side buttons from *ANY* brand

the switch's metal frame is a thru-hole but the "leg" isn't soldered on the other side of the board so i relies solely on the solder pad, which broke here


----------



## WarRaven (Aug 28, 2015)

Dang, that sucks.
It does answer a suspicion I had of the mounting underneath, not strong. 

Thanks OC!


----------



## D6859 (Aug 28, 2015)

I was just wondering same thibg as OP. The new Fenix TK16 and E20 have tailswitch (or two) that change the mode. I wonder if we are going to see a new cycle of tailswitch UIs.

I often carry my flashlight with a cigar grip so I'd welcome the cycle.


----------



## markr6 (Aug 28, 2015)

I'll take a side switch (or two if close together like the Nitecore lights), a tail switch, or two on the tail. But switching a light on with the tail then regripping or using another hand to operate modes via side switch is just so annoying. I can do it on my PD32UE with one hand using my pinky finger on the side switch, but that's a pretty horrible setup for a UI.


----------



## idleprocess (Aug 28, 2015)

Overclocker said:


> ok i'm taking back what i said  the klarus design really isn't better. best practice would be to avoid putting too much force on these side buttons from *ANY* brand
> 
> the switch's metal frame is a thru-hole but the "leg" isn't soldered on the other side of the board so i relies solely on the solder pad, which broke here


Another failure of implementation as I mentioned in an earlier post 

No through- anchors on the leading edge. Those posts in what looks to be the back third of the footprint are shallow and engage overly-generous clearance holes. The housing is far shallower than it is tall, so forces against that plane will make it prone to rocking back, acting against those lame anchors on the leading edge. Footprtint of the switch is such that the housing could have been half as tall, also reducing rockback tendencies. Not sure what that loop of material on the backside does (or interfaces to), but it clearly wasn't enough.

But I'm no engineer - just an ex mechanical designer armchair-ing away.


----------



## leon2245 (Aug 29, 2015)

Tailswitch- shorter lights I can reach without scooting my hand down on (~6").

Neck switch- super long lights.


----------



## uofaengr (Aug 31, 2015)

markr6 said:


> I'll take a side switch (or two if close together like the Nitecore lights), a tail switch, or two on the tail. But switching a light on with the tail then regripping or using another hand to operate modes via side switch is just so annoying. I can do it on my PD32UE with one hand using my pinky finger on the side switch, but that's a pretty horrible setup for a UI.


I hate this as well. Very annoying on the TN12 especially with that itty-bitty button they call a side switch. I could deal with it better if it was an electronic side switch that allowed straight into turbo and straight into moonlight from off. I'd feel like it actually had a reason for being there in that case. 

I'll be very glad when my S3 EDC from Mountain Electronics gets here. Reverse clicky operation and mode changing all the way which I prefer in a light that size.


----------



## PartyPete (Aug 31, 2015)

For a general use light, a side switch is fine. However, for quick light on demand, I feel a tail switch is a bit more intuitive and instinctive.


----------



## D6859 (Sep 2, 2015)

PartyPete said:


> For a general use light, a side switch is fine. However, for quick light on demand, I feel a tail switch is a bit more intuitive and instinctive.



Many of my friends that I've borrowed my TN12 to try to turn it on by pressing the side switch. The tail switch isn't so intuitive when you have two swithces.


----------



## scs (Sep 2, 2015)

D6859 said:


> Many of my friends that I've borrowed my TN12 to try to turn it on by pressing the side switch. The tail switch isn't so intuitive when you have two swithces.



It could be that 1) some people are used to old flashlights activated by a sideswitch and/or 2) upon seeing the side switch first, some don't even notice the tail switch.


----------



## D6859 (Sep 2, 2015)

scs said:


> It could be that 1) some people are used to old flashlights activated by a sideswitch and/or 2) upon seeing the side switch first, some don't even notice the tail switch.



I think 2) in most cases. The mode switch is grey(ish) so it stands out from the black body better than the black tail switch.

uofaengr: I agree with you. I tried using the mode switch with my pinkie, but it feels really impractical.


----------

