# The new Arc-LS



## Gransee (Jul 25, 2006)

As you know, I have already announced that I am working on a new version of the Arc-LS. This thread will hopefully organize information that formally was spread among several threads. 

*The History * 

The CPF has changed a lot since I originally joined. So, for the really new people:

I designed the Arc product line and started the Arc company. I came up with the name, "Arc" because its short and the hue of early white LEDs reminded me of an electric arc welder. 

Like all natural things, there have been easy/hard times in the history of this endeavor. You can read more about the company from the FAQ, wiki, this forum, etc.

*Arc Design * 

As should be evident from our various products, Arc designs tend to favor:

- Utility first
- Minimalist aesthetics
- Mission driven features (types of cell, size, brightness class, etc)
- Utility, customer service, price. Pick two.
- Niche market only

*The new Arc-LS * 

The Arc-LS series was the first flashlight on the market to use a, "high power" LED. First introduced in 2001, it has evolved over several years through various names, features, etc. Each time, getting brighter and most of the time- more useful. You can read about previous generations in the FAQ.

The latest version currently in development will continue this trend. Brighter, smaller, longer run times, easier to upgrade with the latest LEDs, easier to use, more durable, etc.

I do not plan on announcing the price, delivery and other specifications until the development is done. When will that be? Well, research is not always an orderly thing. It is the nature of discovery for it to be somewhat surprising. The project may be done next year, it may not.

I realize some people may not know what a typical (newer) LS series looks like:

- 1x123 cell is the primary power source
- high power LED of some sort
- designed for "EDC Pocket" mission
- usually quite expensive
- durable construction
- multiple output levels

--

Here's the latest progress:

btw, I wrote this with the assumption that our competitors read my posts the most closely. 

The prototypes are in their 6th revision. Although the prototypes may look like production lights, there is still a lot to be done. The LED I want to use has been delayed by the manufacturer. In the meantime, I have been working on refining the driver and mechanicals. 

You have heard the saying, "you don't plan for the last war, you plan for the next war." 

The driver electronics have exceeded the original project goals. Refinements left to do include smoothing out some of the functions, finishing the user interface and automatic functions firmware, adding features to the windows application, etc. This driver is designed to work with a wide variety of LEDs: both those presently available and those yet to come. This is an important feature to me since I believe that the rate of LED improvements will increase. We might see LEDs doubling in brightness every 12 months. I would love to be able to provide an LED upgrade for less than $50. Making upgrades easier would cost us sales only if everyone only bought from us. But that is not how a real market works. This strategy, if it works, will increase our sales while reducing the cost to the consumer and most importantly, take advantage of the latest technologies.

The mechanicals are mostly done but there are a few rough edges. I also am not done making changes to the optical section, the new LED has a lot to do with that tweaking. It currently works with LEDs available now. I have been using those to test the other functions. I can say true 60 lumen is not a problem with the currently available LEDs.

Full power is temperature protected of course. That keeps the LED from being "over driven". The driver can be programmed to protect new LED types if needed. Even though a new led comes out that is x brighter, if you are like me, there is no such thing as a bright enough max power setting. Oh sure, there is such a thing as a, "prudent" level of illumination for a given task, but never arbitrarily cap the maximum power available to the user. We will still want to drive it at the highest possible power while safeguarding its temperature. The battery is usually the weak link, of course those are getting more powerfull as well. 

Btw, since this is a single cell Lithium light, it requires less babysiting than multi-cell lights. 

The windows interface application is stable and I am glad I have it. I find it very useful for testing the light. If time permits, it would be nice to add more features to the application and make it available to the mod community. I have been cautioned that this would make us more of a software company than a flashlight company with tech support issues and all. Since this interface is sufficiently low level enough to enable a modder to make changes that could damage the hardware, if we did offer it, it would be done with a disclaimer of any resulting damages. 

The irony is, this light is more sophisticated than any previous LS but as easy or easier to use.

Yesterday, I invited a small group of local CPF'ers to preview the LS prototypes. I also gave them a quick tour of the windows app and some of the accessories. I had a lot of fun. They can tell you the light is small, bright and easy to use. Easier to use, brighter and smaller than the previous LS (Arc4). 


That's it for now. This thread should be used for future discussions of the new LS so as to keep things more organized. Thank you.

Peter

edit: typos


----------



## powernoodle (Jul 25, 2006)

We Arc nuts appreciate the update.

Any price range guestimate?

cheers


----------



## diggdug13 (Jul 25, 2006)

Peter,

sweet!!! I can't wait to see the updates and release date, my bank account is gonna hate you!

doug


----------



## greenLED (Jul 25, 2006)

:twothumbs


----------



## mosport (Jul 25, 2006)

Thanks for the update Peter,

The original ARC LS series was before my time here on CPF, so I'm anxious to see what else the future holds!

Derek


----------



## cy (Jul 25, 2006)

good news!


----------



## ouchmyfinger (Jul 25, 2006)

awesome awesome news.

About the software, please consider making it unsupported and open source, or at least document the protocol it uses to control the light. A community like CPF has plenty of people with the skills to help maintain it, and you may be surprised how many people who have never heard of CPF will be interested in helping out.

So a new mystery LED, exciting. I'm going to guess its a Luxeon since you are using the moniker 'Arc LS' still.


----------



## simbad (Jul 25, 2006)

Good news Peter, thanks for the update :goodjob:


----------



## carrot (Jul 25, 2006)

I hope you consider that some of us don't use Windows... will the new Arc LS be fully usable out of the box without needing to connect to the computer? And do you plan to add support for OSX/Linux?


----------



## ledvador (Jul 25, 2006)

That's a great news Peter, hope to see some pict or CAD drawing soon.
For sure, i'm in for this light.
I wonder if this new LS will be able to drive a K2 emiter and how mutch easy it will be to swap the LED?


----------



## Nyctophiliac (Jul 25, 2006)

Way cool, Peter. As I collect more ARCs I have come to appreciate what a pioneer they were in all fields. I have no doubt the new ARC LS (I get such a buzz out of typing that!!) will exceed all that have gone before and all other flashlights that are available currently.

All power to your elbow.

I'm up for two! (Any plans on a cyan version??)


Be lucky...


----------



## dtsoll (Jul 25, 2006)

Okay, will the real "local cpfers please stand up". Can't wait to hear what they have to say!! Thanks for the update!!! Doug


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Jul 25, 2006)

"Local CPF'ers" have probably been sworn to secrecy.

Bill


----------



## Sigman (Jul 25, 2006)

ALWAYS APPRECIATE the updates & "current happenings"! :thumbsup:

Patiently waiting!


----------



## ruledpaper (Jul 25, 2006)

carrot said:


> I hope you consider that some of us don't use Windows... will the new Arc LS be fully usable out of the box without needing to connect to the computer? And do you plan to add support for OSX/Linux?



I second that motion.


----------



## pianoman (Jul 25, 2006)

It doesnt get alot more exciting than this....He's back........


----------



## karlthev (Jul 25, 2006)

A new LS.......     


Karl


----------



## CM (Jul 25, 2006)

pianoman said:


> It doesnt get alot more exciting than this....He's back........



He was never gone, he just took a short breather


----------



## Penguin (Jul 25, 2006)

I'm in


----------



## Ritch (Jul 25, 2006)

Maybe :santa: will have it in stock?


----------



## Gransee (Jul 25, 2006)

powernoodle, I kind of hinted at the price range in my post: "expensive". Price is one of the last things to crystalize with a new design. You usually have to wait until it is in actual production to get an accurate number. Some companies quote too soon and end with problems. This being said, I won't be suprised if it is more expensive than any other LS in total price and less than any other LS in dollars per lumen.

ouchmyfinger, good point about "LS" standing for "Luxeon Star". We were the first to use the luxeon and the name made a point of that. However, and as you know, the latest LS is specifically designed to work with a large number of power LEDs not just Lumileds. This light's pedigree is about being the first in power LEDs. And with that beachead, it can capitalize on even more power LEDs. 

Another good point about the windows app. I want to keep the firmware a trade secret but I may open source the windows app. It is written in visual C so it could conceivably be ported to other OS's. 

Carrot, one big point I can't stress enough: The new Arc-LS is easy to use. Of course you don't need your PC or any other accessory to use it as a flashlight. It is easier to use than the Arc4 (ok, that's not saying much). The new LS is not designed to be a pretty boy. It is a tool. To turn it on, you press the button. Ok, I am deliberately being vague because its interface is one of the secrets right now. Like I said to the guys yesterday, the brighter LEDs make having multiple levels more useful, having more levels makes having a x interface more important. And No, I am not talking about the whole, "stand on one foot while touching your nose three time and then twice and then turn around, etc". 

ledvador, the prototypes have already been tested with the K2 and works well. Swapping the LED could consist of loosening a bolt, unsoldering 2 wires, pulling out the LED module. Reverse steps to insert new module. You may also have to deal with some heat managment filler, grease, etc. The module could be sold with the LED already soldered/epoxied to it or your could attach it yourself. This came up at the meeting. One of the gentlemen said, " but I don't have a soldering iron". I said something to the effect of, "well you can also benefit from this easy to mod design because it lowers the cost of the mod when you have someone else do it." Mods in the past were a lot more complicated and therfore more expensive. No chipping through an inch of hard epoxy, nitrogen freezing, destroying retaining rings, etc.

Nyctophiliac, cyan version. I don't plan on selling a finished cyan flashlight but you could possibly buy a compatible module, cyan led and have a modder swap out the white LED in one of your new LS lights. 

Btw, the module design and many of the other mechanicals are designed by McGizmo under contract. He's done a bunch of contract work on the new LS mechanicals. If you are familiar with Don's flavor in design, you will see them all through the new LS mechanicals. The final design is a mix of the my classic LS style and Don's style. 

And gosh, he's expensive too! 

Peter


----------



## IsaacHayes (Jul 25, 2006)

Heheh cool stuff!!! Good to see the classic is back! Brings back memories (even if I never owned one!)


----------



## MorpheusT1 (Jul 25, 2006)

Sounds like a lot of my money will be going your way 
When can we expect this light to become a reality?
Months,years,weeks 




Cant wait to own one or two 




Benny


----------



## Grox (Jul 26, 2006)

Peter,

All I can say is that I am sure looking forward to this light.

Arc LS with McGizmo input? Sounds incredible. Can't wait to see it. 

Reserve me one of the first units!


----------



## glockboy (Jul 26, 2006)

:thumbsup:


----------



## marcspar (Jul 26, 2006)

Yippee!

Marc


----------



## sld (Jul 26, 2006)

A new ARC, that rocks!


----------



## Christoph (Jul 26, 2006)

I guess I should start saving  An ARC with Dons Design and Peters electronics  I am .C


----------



## Toons (Jul 26, 2006)

PTI  
Are you saying if you have seen
the PD you have seen the new LS?
Realizing you don't see electronics.


----------



## ouchmyfinger (Jul 26, 2006)

Gransee said:


> Btw, the module design and many of the other mechanicals are designed by McGizmo under contract. He's done a bunch of contract work on the new LS mechanicals. If you are familiar with Don's flavor in design, you will see them all through the new LS mechanicals. The final design is a mix of the my classic LS style and Don's style.
> 
> And gosh, he's expensive too!
> 
> Peter



This is the most interesting new (to me anyway) piece of information you've doled out to us yet, Peter. And about the third time you've let us know that the new LS won't be cheap :lolsign:. Can't wait to see what it looks like, and eventually hold one in my hand.

Paypal ready for the Ti LS! double :lolsign:


----------



## zoomin (Jul 26, 2006)

I will love gietting back into the Arc fold. Thanks Peter.


----------



## pianoman (Jul 26, 2006)

In for a Ti LS.....


----------



## skalomax (Jul 26, 2006)

This light is going to be pretty awesome. Will it be here by the next few months? Is the look going to be different than what are we used to?


----------



## mridude (Jul 26, 2006)

...............I'm wondering what movies this new LS will pop up in as a "Product placement".

The next James Bond?

An Alien movie?

An action flick about the CandlePower Forums?......(Ha, Ha)


----------



## Interlude (Jul 27, 2006)

I'm looking forward to adding this to my Arc collection. Seriously. I gave Arc-AAA's as groomsmen gifts at my wedding


----------



## 270winchester (Jul 27, 2006)

if the Arc LS is gonna be as promising as the AAA I'm excited...

what I would like to see is to retain the option to use optics. I know many people like reflectors and I certainly wouldn't mind a reflectored light, but have the choice of a good optics would be mighty nice...


----------



## raythompson (Jul 28, 2006)

Where do I send my money? Paypal OK?


----------



## BentHeadTX (Jul 28, 2006)

:thumbsup:
Don and Peter getting together to form the new LS. Upgradable for new LED technology for around $50 as it is a tool, not a shelf queen. Programmable through Windows to meets specific needs... It does not run on 2xAA but I have li-ion cells laying around and the LiFePO4 safe cells are rolling out so it is not a concern. 
All this comes at a price but performance, upgradability and usability always does. With Don involved, I can see a few larger li-ion options and AA bodies that might appear. Very good news, my Arc AAA and AA are lonely for their big brother. Better start saving my nickles.


----------



## Lebkuecher (Jul 28, 2006)

I’m really looking forward to the release of this light; I don’t think there will be anything like it for a while. Peter is once again showing the innovation and forethought that put Arc out as a leading edge manufacture. Great Job!!


----------



## bmstrong (Jul 30, 2006)

>>Btw, the module design and many of the other mechanicals are designed by McGizmo under contract. He's done a bunch of contract work on the new LS mechanicals. If you are familiar with Don's flavor in design, you will see them all through the new LS mechanicals. The final design is a mix of the my classic LS style and Don's style. 

My interest in this project just went way, way up! With Don on board I'm very, very, very interested to see what's going to happen. Bring on the Titanium LS!


----------



## Longbow (Jul 30, 2006)

Hopefully it won't cost too much more than the compareable Fenix??


----------



## CM (Jul 31, 2006)

Longbow said:


> Hopefully it won't cost too much more than the compareable Fenix??



You're kidding, right? Arc does not play on the same playground as Fenix does, or for that matter, many of the other come lately manufacturers. This is a high end light, with most likely a high end price, but as they say, you get what you pay for.


----------



## Longbow (Jul 31, 2006)

If indeed it were true, "You get what you pay for.", what a perfect world it would be.


----------



## Isak Hawk (Jul 31, 2006)

With Arc flashlights it is IMO. You pay top dollar but you get the best (quality and reliability-wise, not necessarily brightness-wise although in this case I think it will be brighter than the competition aswell). Second best has never been good enough for me; I don't mind paying alot more for something that is better but to each his own :shrug:


----------



## McGizmo (Jul 31, 2006)

Longbow said:


> Hopefully it won't cost too much more than the compareable Fenix??



This bait is just too tempting to ignore. With the new Arc-LS yet to be specified in any significant terms, on what grounds or basis can one presume that Fenix has a _comparable_ model? I suspect the basis is one of price and price alone. Well, there is the shared presumption of a bright LED, battery and aluminium flashlight body as well. At this level, a Fenix is 2x to 3x the price of a light comparable to it. :shrug:

I have no idea of what the the final form or functions/ features the new light will entail but unless Peter scraps all that he has been working on, his design set of goals is so far from those apparent in a light like the Fenix and its target market that I suspect that if price is the primary consideration a decision will be easy for the potential buyer to make. There will be others who evaluate the new light on a much more comprehensive level. It will be those people who will determine the level of success or failure the new light will enjoy on the market. Those who are justifibly satisfied with the Fenix likely need not waste their time or the time of others in discussion or comparisons. A diverse market has room for diversity in product. A market driven only on price and price reductions does not support such diversity. 

A perfect world would presumably satisfy all inhabitants and unless it precludes humans as they now are, it would have to support diversity as well. Some would enjoy a good whine resulting from sour grapes and others would enjoy a good wine from a stellar vinyard.

In either the world we live in or some utopian model of a perfect world, I have no idea how Peter or his still in the design stages light, would fare. In the former, only time will tell.


----------



## this_is_nascar (Jul 31, 2006)

Longbow said:


> Hopefully it won't cost too much more than the compareable Fenix??



You've got to be kidding. How can you state the Fenix is "comparable" to a light that has not even been publicly spec'ed yet?


----------



## carrot (Jul 31, 2006)

Longbow said:


> Hopefully it won't cost too much more than the compareable Fenix??


lol??

Fenix doesn't even offer a microprocessor-controlled light yet...


----------



## mahoney (Jul 31, 2006)

Don't forget that "you get what you pay for" is not a linear function. The cost difference between "good" and "the best" is frequently much greater than the cost difference between "adequate" and "good", which in turn is usually greater than the cost difference between "crap" and "adequate".


----------



## ViReN (Jul 31, 2006)

Gransee said:


> As you know, I have already announced that I am working on a new version of the Arc-LS. This thread will hopefully organize information that formally was spread among several threads.
> 
> *The History *
> 
> ...



Dear Peter,

Nice to hear the update, I havent read through the all the replies, but To me, it seems like a near 'copy' of JSB's IndiumSmart....

How would this light differ from JSB's IndiumSmart??? Please correct me if I am wrong but isnt the *Indium Smart* is the First light to have a Windows Based Interface

Arc LS... perhaps the second one....

it would be highly appreciated if you could clarify the doubt...

ViReN


----------



## greenLED (Jul 31, 2006)

Longbow said:


> Hopefully it won't cost too much more than the compareable Fenix??


Sorry, but that's like saying a Jaguar and a Mitsubishi Lancer are comparable.


----------



## Penguin (Jul 31, 2006)

Lancer Evolution maybe. haha, just joking. Arc products have always been top notch with amazing attention to detail. My LSH-P was built like a TANK and so are the current Arc AAA's. The new LS will be considerably more than a Fenix, but the price reflects the quality you're getting.


----------



## MorpheusT1 (Jul 31, 2006)

ViReN said:


> Dear Peter,
> 
> Nice to hear the update, I havent read through the all the replies, but To me, it seems like a near 'copy' of JSB's IndiumSmart....
> 
> ...




Copy...Doubt it.
*Edited:Speculative comment removed!*

And The abilty of changing the settings through Windows,is not copyrighted as far as i know.
Neat feature,but not groundbreaking.


As for the Fenix VS Arc comparison...
I`ll take an Arc over a Chinese light any day!

I own many Fenixes,but would not trust my life with one.
Fenix has a long way to go still...
Great for modding purposes and gifts but not a user light.

BUT,
They are getting close,the JET-I by our very own Emilion is very close to a American Quality light and in many areas kicks the snot out of the competiton.


Go Arc!!!




My 2 cents ¤%&#!
Benny


----------



## McGizmo (Jul 31, 2006)

I predict that the new Arc light will have little grounds for comparison with the current Fenix line. If the new Arc is well received, there may be cause down the road for comparison of new Fenix offerings with the Arc light. Right or wrong, successful or not, the Peter I have met will never follow a company like Fenix. If he is on a good track, I would not be surprised to see others follow him. 

That this thread, at this point, is polluted with discussion relating an unknown future light with an existing light of another manufacture is credit to good bait. It is also makes me look forward to time away from CPF. 

I suppose in terms of market awareness, just having this thread stay alive could be argued as a good thing for Peter and Arc. Hype and speculation, fans and detractors are part of the landscape. To bad, IMHO but I guess it's cool if you have the time and interest for it. :wave:

[Bait rejected]


----------



## [email protected] Messenger (Jul 31, 2006)

Blargh! You've done it again and stopped me from reaching for my wallet and getting another light, can't wait to see how this turns out


----------



## Lebkuecher (Jul 31, 2006)

McGizmo said:


> [Bait rejected]



Don

In all fairness to longbow this might not be bait but a post from someone who truly doesn’t know the difference between cheap china light and a quality tool. Seems like half the forums activity now days is over these cheap uni-level lights. Could be that he spends most of the time in the café reading and posting and never visits the manufactures forums. 

Just a thought but maybe this would be the time for some education on the differences between the lights so that all the china lovers can get a better understanding of the differences.


----------



## javafool (Jul 31, 2006)

I'm not sure that I will shell out big $$$ for another flashlight. But I still use my Arc-LSP on a regular basis and no matter how hard I try to replace the Arc-AAA(P) in my pocket, it still goes with me everywhere.

Okay, I really need a change. I think I will dig out my red Arc-AAA CPF special and carry it again for a while. Keep going Peter, you still have a lot of fans and support in the flashlight world.

Terry


----------



## greenLED (Jul 31, 2006)

ViReN said:


> Dear Peter,
> 
> Nice to hear the update, I havent read through the all the replies, but To me, it seems like a near 'copy' of JSB's IndiumSmart....
> 
> ...


I hadn't thought about that... and the Smart has patents, AFAIK.


----------



## Gransee (Jul 31, 2006)

I get the impression the windows interface is one of the Indium's top features that makes it different. And that interface is very refined. For the LS, it is just a minor feature and the interface is basic. It was added to help me with my tests. If people want it, we might make it available in some limited form. It is not presented as the first light with such a feature nor should people think that the feature is a big reason to buy the light. 

The reason I spent more time talking about it compared to some of the other aspects of the light, is *because* the feature is so minor. That makes it a safe subject. The more important features would give too much information away to competitors.

I enjoy a professional relationship with Jon. Since we talk about a lot of things, he has known about the new LS much longer than most people. Of course, he knows it has a basic windows interface. If he had a problem with it, he would have told me a long time ago. 

Peter


----------



## Longbow (Jul 31, 2006)

carrot said:


> lol??
> 
> Fenix doesn't even offer a microprocessor-controlled light yet...




Thank God!! But hey, different strokes for different folks.


----------



## Gransee (Jul 31, 2006)

On another topic...

Besides McGizmo, I enlisted the help of several other CPF experts when designing the new LS:

Dat2zip
Newbie
CM
Lebkuecher

I also have presented various iterations to people like greenLED to get their opinion. This type of research is nothing new for me. Although I have *definate* opinions on what the finished product should do, I have no problem with bouncing various implimentations off people I trust.

Peter


----------



## 270winchester (Jul 31, 2006)

Gransee said:


> On another topic...
> 
> Besides McGizmo, I enlisted the help of several other CPF experts when designing the new LS:
> 
> ...



now that's a short but definitely impressive list of consultants.....


----------



## Gransee (Jul 31, 2006)

I agree.

These gentlemen will probably remind you that although they have helped in various capacities, they can also tell you I have my own specific vision for this product. History will prove my goals to either be wise or foolish.

They certainly don't guarantee the final product will be a success. Some have disagreed with me on aspects of my specific vision. Something to the effect of, "although I wouldn't include this or that design element in my flashlight, I will help you develop it". I prefer a working enviroment where people can voice their opinions. 

In fact, if the product fails, it may fail because I ignored a particular warning of one of the experts or some other indicator. Ultimately however, I do need to make a decision and live with it. 

Peter


----------



## LifeNRA (Jul 31, 2006)

Gransee said:


> I get the impression the windows interface is one of the Indium's top features that makes it different. And that interface is very refined. For the LS, it is just a minor feature and the interface is basic. It was added to help me with my tests. If people want it, we might make it available in some limited form. It is not presented as the first light with such a feature nor should people think that the feature is a big reason to buy the light.
> 
> The reason I spent more time talking about it compared to some of the other aspects of the light, is *because* the feature is so minor. That makes it a safe subject. The more important features would give too much information away to competitors.
> 
> ...


Hi Peter,
"If people want it, we might make it available in some limited form." 
Are you saying that, as it stands now, the owner will not be able to reprogram the light using Windows, unlike the Indium Smart?
I am not sure that I phrased the question correctly or not. 
Thanks,
Jeff


----------



## greenLED (Jul 31, 2006)

270winchester said:


> now that's a short but definitely impressive list of consultants.....


Thank you, but I wouldn't call myself a consultant in this project. I don't feel comfortable receiving credit when I don't think I deserve it. Yes, I had the privilege of *briefly* using a proto LS at SHOT and I am, to this day, most greatful for Peter's trust. However, the circumstances weren't ideal at the moment, and I didn't get a chance to study the light thoroughly and provide Peter with any real feedback on the LS. I would've loved to be a beta tester. Anyway, Peter asked me not to divulge details of what I saw, so I won't say more. 

I was puzzled by the mention of a computer interface on the LS, and that's why I posted. Especially after re-reading Viren's post, when I realized this latest iteration of the LS shared some of the Smart's features, namely easy LED upgrades and a computer interface. However, I think Peter's explained that already, when he referred to the computer interface:



Gransee said:


> The reason I spent more time talking about it compared to some of the other aspects of the light, is *because* the feature is so minor. That makes it a safe subject. The more important features would give too much information away to competitors.



With some custom products (like knives) it's customary for fellow makers to "consult" with other makers as to not step over each other's toes. I'm sure there are significant differences between the Smart and the LS, and that the similarities I was perceiving were because of the repeated mentions of a computer interface.

To quote McGizmo:


----------



## ViReN (Jul 31, 2006)

Good to hear the clarifications Peter  .. I m Impressed


----------



## Grox (Aug 1, 2006)

ViReN,

I have my personal opinion on what the price will be, but I don't think that guessing prices will contribute to the discussion about the upcoming light. The full feature set has not been announced, and regardless of our speculation, Peter will no doubt have a price point that he will set. Guessing will not alter it.

I hope this thread will remain focussed upon the features of the new Arc-LS rather than its price.


----------



## Rothrandir (Aug 1, 2006)

it should be noted, that the new ls and the indium smart are two very different lights. there is no way one is "copying" the either, any more than fenix is copying surefire for using a tailswitch...

i'd like people to remember the old flashlight saying "buy both!", because having felt and played with both, i can say that they are each excellent lights, and serve their individual purposes quite well!


----------



## Ray_of_Light (Aug 1, 2006)

I'm very impresssed. 

I don't want to say more until I have the new LS in my hand, but... I'm happy that you Peter are back with a new product, co-designed with some of the most knowledgeable CPFers.

Regards

Anthony


----------



## Casual Flashlight User (Aug 1, 2006)

As somebody who missed out on the first series of LS lights I'm really looking forward to this new incarnation of a flashlight that's become a cult classic.








CFU


----------



## ViReN (Aug 2, 2006)

EDIT: Thanks for clarifications 

Questions/Requests for Peter

1) How would the Light Engine drive the LED ?
---a) is it going to be a Constant 'Power' (like HDS) or
---b) Constant 'Current'
---c) Is it going to be a trade secret (way of driving LED)

2) If the PC Programmable feature is a 'minor', what are the 'major' features of the new Arc LS (if they are secret at this moment, atleast give us some hints)

3) Pictures would be helpful (if i am asking for way too much... just forget it )

4) How does the Temprature 'Control' work?
---a) is it like HDS or (abrupt Step down)
---b) is it like magLED (smooth step down)

5) How does it Look?
---a) like Old arc LS (but more refined)
---b) like one of McGizmo's work of art
---c) like HDS / Old Arc 4

(well those who have seen it... atleast they could reply)... I am very curious u know...


----------



## Casual Flashlight User (Aug 2, 2006)

Hi ViReN,

you have misread my post...or maybe I could have phrased it better...here goes.


I said that I hoped that this *new* incarnation of the LS would be as good as the *old* one and achieve the same status and good reputation...I didn't claim that the new one would be (or already is) a cult classic.


For what it's worth, I was lurking around bladeforums.com when the original Arc LS/H came out, lot's of folk there really liked it back then...I join this forum several years later and 'lo and behold'...many folks are *still* talking about this tidy little light in glowing terms.


CFU


----------



## NewBie (Aug 2, 2006)

ViReN said:


> *cult classic *you mean .. this is going to be a *cult classic ??? ... *being a copy of JSB's Indium Smart? Please clarify CFU... I donno why, but even if the PC Programmable feature is a 'minor' ... and perhaps my mindset is 'fixed'... at this moment and I donno what's 'major' feature of the new Arc LS



Why do you keep saying this is a Indium Smart copy?

The two lights are quite different, in a great many respects.

This makes as much sense to me as saying a child's wagon is the same as a Ford F350 because they both have wheels.

If it is because of programmable, duh, if you want to program something, it is quite likely it will be done from windows, as it is easily the most common operating system found in end-user's computers.

Would that make the FluPic the same as the Indium Smart, since they are both programmed from a computer? Tell me, which was first to market (or even in existance), the FluPic or the Indium Smart?


----------



## ViReN (Aug 2, 2006)

Newbie post edited ... the post from CFU was missread by me..


----------



## Mr. Blue (Aug 2, 2006)

ummm, I am barely literate (computer wise), but will it be Apple/Mac compatible?


----------



## mridude (Aug 2, 2006)

I too am looking forward to the new LS. I had purchased, and returned (Arc's return policy was quite fair) an Arc4 from the original Arc company. I believe that light cost about $185.00 at the time, 2004. 
Neat little light...but....
The clicking programing feature was ...' Challenging '. ...and tough on the thumb joints...maybe it's just my age.
The.....everybody knows about this who owned one...switch itself was balky, even after it was sent back the first time. I know from reading these threads over the last few years that Peter freely admits this faux pas.

So, acknowledging that Arc puts alot of thought and research into its products, I can only hope that THESE feature sets have been...refined.

Good luck with the new LS Peter!


----------



## kq2h (Aug 2, 2006)

A new LS... I still have old ones that don't work right or work at all!!


----------



## robk (Aug 2, 2006)

One suggestion, thin down the wall thickness. My biggest complaint on the original ARC-LS was the weight - felt like I had half a roll of nickels in my pocket. I don't think anyone is going to run it over with their Hummer!
Good luck, waiting for more news on the project!
Rob


----------



## mahoney (Aug 2, 2006)

Intermitently functioning LSs are usually not that hard to fix. Even old unworking LSs still have considerable value on BST. Check out the prices that are being asked for empty LS assemblies.


----------



## CM (Aug 2, 2006)

kq2h said:


> A new LS... I still have old ones that don't work right or work at all!!



Please don't thrash this thread. email me so I can help you troubleshoot to see if it's something that can be easily fixed. Most problems can be attributable to a narrow list of issues.


----------



## Gransee (Aug 3, 2006)

RE: Minor/major features

What constitutes a "major" feature or specification for me may be a minor feature or unimpressive specification for another. Since the LS is first a tool, its major points are things such as its size, mechanical construction, switch/UI design, lm/w efficiency, beam/power envelope, etc. Since there are other mfgs that recognize at least some of those as important as well, details on those features would be more helpful to them than us talking about a minor feature.

To some extent, the only really significant thing I have to say about the LS at this point is that I am working on it. That doesn't mean that some of you, and me as well, can enjoy talking about some of the minor details. We love flashlights. And some point, I will be posting more information about the flashlight to this thread.

Peter


----------



## Gransee (Aug 3, 2006)

Viren, 

I copied your questions in post #70

1) How would the Light Engine drive the LED ?
---a) is it going to be a Constant 'Power' (like HDS) or
---b) Constant 'Current'
---c) Is it going to be a trade secret (way of driving LED)

my answer: C

Btw, merely maintaining a steady power to the LED would not produce a constant lumen output during all conditions. There are many ways to regulate in relation to an LED: current, voltage, power, temperature, light output, etc.

2) If the PC Programmable feature is a 'minor', what are the 'major' features of the new Arc LS (if they are secret at this moment, atleast give us some hints)

previous post

3) Pictures would be helpful (if i am asking for way too much... just forget it )

I have anodized prototypes that may *look* production ready. Since I know they are not and I know pictures might communicate that program is further along than it is, I would like to wait. 

I realize there is a fine line between providing some indication of what I am working on and hype.

4) How does the Temprature 'Control' work?
---a) is it like HDS or (abrupt Step down)
---b) is it like magLED (smooth step down)

clear step down in brightness.

5) How does it Look?
---a) like Old arc LS (but more refined)
---b) like one of McGizmo's work of art
---c) like HDS / Old Arc 4

Cosmetics... bah humbug!

OK, take b and add a little a.

Peter


----------



## ViReN (Aug 3, 2006)

Gransee said:


> RE: Minor/major features
> 
> What constitutes a "major" feature or specification for me may be a minor feature or unimpressive specification for another. Since the LS is first a tool, *its major points are things such as its size, mechanical construction, switch/UI design, lm/w efficiency, beam/power envelope, etc. *Since there are other mfgs that recognize at least some of those as important as well, details on those features would be more helpful to them than us talking about a minor feature.
> 
> ...



Peter, I agree with you when it comes to defining 'major' features, what people consider as a 'major' feature will certainly differ from person to person.

OK  now looking at the New Arc LS flashlight as a *Tool* .... 

*Size*  I believe it will definately between HDS and FireFlyIII But is anyway near to either? How does it compare with Fenix P1 in terms of size .. Personaly I would prefer "Smaller the Better".. and YES "Size Does Matter" 

I am sure it would have a *good construction *and solid built quality (similar to Arc AAA) .... perhaps more like solid built Civictor V1

*Switch:* this is the area where I belive most improvemets could have taken place, considering 40% failure rate that of Arc 4+ (i read this some where here) and the previous Arc 4+ Designers(HDS) still haviing their 'rev's and issues getting sorted out (they even have a 'CONtest' conversion of B42 to U42.. just to prove tat thumbs and switches are strong & reliable ). Switch is definately one of the MAJOR improvements / Feature that I would look forward to (*yes* i have started saving to get this light....)

*UI Design: *since this is a more advanced light, I still doubt if it is going to simple as simple to operate as Photon Freedom... man I love Photon Freedom UI.. its simple... yet complete  .. I even had my own version of UI (posted at Photon Forums)... wonder if I would be able to implement this with the 'minor' PC Programming Feature... oh by the way, will you be offering a very 'minor' feature of allowing users to program their own UI the way they want to?
*
lm/w efficiency: *to get better Lm/w is it going to undertrive LED's or use T bin Lux I like *TWOH Lux I*???? or we will have a typical Luxeon Lumen/Watt ... the New LS perhaps may have surprises here... in the New LS.... may be Nichia / Cree???... well... let the suspense (Apprehension about what is going to happen) begin 

*beam/power envelope: *I believe, this wont be a good thrower, but will have a good balance of throw, flood and sidespill. If some one is going to expect LS as a thrower, they will be dissapointed... but one should understand that Throw is directly proportional to the size of reflector ... I also believe that the LS will have a UUCL Clear Double Coated 99.8% transmissive AR Lens at the frontend...

I know Peter, you have many more people who praise, but I want to be one of the Critic and want to contribute Positively towards LS development, some of my points may be totaly baseless and naive...


----------



## Isak Hawk (Aug 3, 2006)

ViReN said:


> I also believe that the LS will have a UUCL Clear Double Coated 99.8% transmissive AR Lens at the frontend...



Hmmm, personally I think I would prefer a sapphire lens. A little less output but much more scratch resistant (so better for EDC imo), or am I wrong here?


----------



## greenLED (Aug 3, 2006)

I love the suspense.


----------



## Gransee (Aug 3, 2006)

viren, 

I am not ready to go into more detail at this time. Sorry.

please understand that this means that although I have read your questions, I am not responding with a "yes" or "no" to any question. 

I want to get closer to completion before revealing more details. 

Peter


----------



## wmirag (Aug 3, 2006)

For what it's worth, I'd like to emphasize the importance of size.

Like most of you, I love lights and have quite a few excellent ones. But only a few of my lights are candidates for EDC because size is so important to me. Most of my larger lights get used only for particular tasks - like when I know I'll need a light for a task like a night walk or a trip to the attic. I guess the one exception to that is when I take my E2D to the city - for fear I'll need to crawl out of a smoke-filled disaster.

When I don't know I'll need a light, I take the smallest one with the most features. For a long time, that was my ArcLS, then my HDS, and nowadays my CR2-Ion. 

Though I really liked the HDS and EDC'd it for a year, the addition of 1/16 inch in diameter and a half inch in length over the Arc LS made its presence in my pocket a small but constant annoyance whereas I almost never noticed my ArcLS and I *never* notice my CR2-Ion.

So, for my money, the ideal light would be ArcLS-Twisty sized with HDS features, button interface, AND whatever other goodies Peter can think up!

W.


----------



## ViReN (Aug 3, 2006)

Gransee said:


> viren,
> 
> I am not ready to go into more detail at this time. Sorry.
> 
> ...



agreed  ... lets hear from you when you are ready  ...


----------



## icecube (Aug 4, 2006)

What about price?

I feel the burn a little for a EDC light. 3W or so, 3 hour life...I'm thinking Peak Caribbean...

I like Arc. I honestly think that the AAA-P rev.4 is one of the best lights out there. I use it almost everyday. The light output is stunning. Top quality. Top firepower. Top everything. Top price too. 40 bucks for that? Sure. 

Plus, it's Made-in-USA. (Excepting LED and electronics) But any figures on the price?


----------



## Miciobigio (Aug 4, 2006)

It is a great joy to hear that a new Arc LS will born !!!
I'm in ( unless is comparable to a Fenix :lolsign: )

What i'd like :

1) The Look = KISS , just one/some milled slots for tritium vials ( a tritium vial is really usefull in the dark when you have to find your torch )

2) Multilevel = more then 2 level please ( better if rot. switch SFU2, Spy05, Gatlight2 )

3) Color = HA3-NAT .


----------



## Gransee (Aug 4, 2006)

Some answers to questions on minor features.

1. yes, there is at least 1 slot for a tritium vial. We have no plans to sell the vials ourselves. It would be a user mod and it takes less than 2 minutes of labor. All you need is some glue and the vial color of your choice. I understand there are several places a person can buy the vials, I think they come in different colors and they are not too expensive.

3. clear (natural) Hard Anodize, Type III of course! The parts will usually be anodized at different times so expect normal variations from part to part. 

already answered the price question, twice. Not a great answer by some standards, but the best answer for now, considering all factors. 

Peter


----------



## ViReN (Aug 4, 2006)

I hope Threads will be Anodized too, to reduce wear and tear on threads


----------



## teststrips (Aug 4, 2006)

I'll definately be watching for news on this... hopefully something better than a confirmation that you're working on it. I did gleam some info through reading your posts, but I don't blame you for keeping design + most details to yourself


----------



## icecube (Aug 5, 2006)

I really do hope this new creation by Peter rocks the flashlight world again like he did with the orginial LS. 

But, I must take my dollars elsewhere. >120 bucks for a good flashlight is too much for someone with very little income. I already have planned swapping out my E30 for another one. But I am very excitied about having a small flashlight that could be truely EDC capable without fuss and work well with a compact firearm. 

I thought I had a "real" flashlight when I bought a Mag 2D for my car. A Peak Carribean could replace it in a couple of months. 

However, I do have a lot of faith in your products Peter, if it wasn't for the Arc AAA-P I would still be using an ancient 2xAAA bulb flashlight that eats the batteries within 1 week of decent use. The Arc has lasted a month between changes. A true triumph indeed.


----------



## Archangel (Aug 5, 2006)

Does it use a reflector? Will there be a first- or third-party diffuser available?


----------



## eipioz (Aug 6, 2006)

Peter,

Of course I (we) don't know what to expect, but I would love to see a modular "turbo head". Just take off the "normal" reflector/optics and screw on a turbo head....

Of course a turbohead is to large to edc but in case you know in advance that you will need it for a particular activity you can just take it with you and use it...

eipioz


----------



## Gransee (Aug 6, 2006)

Archangel, it can conceivably use either a TIR or a reflector. Third-party diffusers should fit. 

I prefer a reflector to a TIR personally. Smoother beam.

eipioz, one of the modders may make a turbo head. I don't have plans for one in production. 

An all-titanium unit is possible. Just no immedate plans for production. I've planned for a conservative roll-out. When the stock unit is proven stable, then we can add more options. 

Peter


----------



## ViReN (Aug 6, 2006)

Peter.. Just one more question 

Are the threads Anodized?

ViReN


----------



## Gransee (Aug 6, 2006)

Yes, the threads are anodized. There is a dedicated electrical path seperate from the threads. The threads were designed to be smooth and resistant to fouling.

Peter


----------



## nakahoshi (Aug 6, 2006)

> There is a dedicated electrical path seperate from the threads.


Arc-LS PD :naughty:


----------



## Isak Hawk (Aug 6, 2006)

nakahoshi said:


> Arc-LS PD :naughty:



That's exactly what I was thinking!

Sounds like the stuff of flashoholic dreams to me 

And anodized threads, it just keeps getting better and better.


----------



## ViReN (Aug 6, 2006)

Gransee said:


> Yes, the threads are anodized. There is a dedicated electrical path seperate from the threads. The threads were designed to be smooth and resistant to fouling.
> 
> Peter



:rock: :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock:Now This is Interesting :rock: :rock: :rock: :rock::rock:


----------



## TheMadHungarian (Aug 7, 2006)

I'll be lookin' forwarsd for more info.


----------



## yaesumofo (Aug 7, 2006)

Peter Very exiciting!! Can't wait.
All of my ARC flashlights are waiting for a new member of the family.
Yaesumofo


----------



## LED Zeppelin (Aug 7, 2006)

I'd be happy with a reissue of the original LS, they still hold their own after all these years.

I'm looking forward to the unveiling of Peter's new Arc, if his objectives are met it will be another timeless classic.

It better cost $200 or I've paid way too much for my other lights of similar pedigree.

Peter, it seems from your design criteria that you are trying to create the one light that does it all, the perfect EDC, for the present and the future. Honorable intentions, but give it up. This is CPF; even if it is a single task we need a light for, we will seek out and aquire as many lights as possible to accomplish that task. In that vein, I'll need two, one to carry and a backup.

And if I may make a request, bezel-down clip please.


----------



## Robocop (Aug 7, 2006)

I do hope to see a few new products from ARC as I still have several of my original LS series lights and they still have that classic allure to them each time I handle one.

I am happy to see that you say this new style is much more complicated yet the most easy to use. I may be alone here however to me EDC means simply click and point for light. With each click it always works and makes very bright light...simple and effective. Once again I may be alone in my feelings however I feel some makers tend to go overboard with fancy features that add size,cost and complexity to an already perfect package.

I would suggest offering a full blown fancy version for those who wish to purchase it and a more simple version for those who just want plain old one level of light when they need it. There are several small lights out now that are simple and cost effective...not to mention they sale like crazy with no added features. I am sure any ARC product will surely be worth owning however an old lesson I have learned is that you can over develope anything. A lot of us simply want a nice light with good old reliable twisty activation and simple on-off operation.

Regardless I will wait in line for any new ARC offering as I do like the lights as well as the thought that goes into each one. I also like the fact these lights are designed for true EDC and I believe they should remain in this catagory. I do not feel I am alone in saying that the older LS would have been the perfect light with the simple addition of a quality reflector,little more current and maybe the ability to use Li-Ion rechargeables. Most of the people who bought them had the current bumped and added a reflector....simple and still effective with almost no complaints.

Good luck and I am sure we will all be waiting in line for this new creation.


----------



## kelmo (Aug 7, 2006)

The anticipation is killing me!!!


----------



## NeonLights (Aug 7, 2006)

Robocop said:


> I am happy to see that you say this new style is much more complicated yet the most easy to use. I may be alone here however to me EDC means simply click and point for light. With each click it always works and makes very bright light...simple and effective. Once again I may be alone in my feelings however I feel some makers tend to go overboard with fancy features that add size,cost and complexity to an already perfect package.
> 
> I would suggest offering a full blown fancy version for those who wish to purchase it and a more simple version for those who just want plain old one level of light when they need it. There are several small lights out now that are simple and cost effective...not to mention they sale like crazy with no added features. I am sure any ARC product will surely be worth owning however an old lesson I have learned is that you can over develope anything. A lot of us simply want a nice light with good old reliable twisty activation and simple on-off operation.


Well, you're not alone Robocop, you expressed a lot of the same sentiments that I am feeling towards the new LS from ARC. I loved my old LSH-P, and was sorry to see it go when I sold it. I've since replaced it with a Fenix P1 in my EDC rig, but I would gladly replace the Fenix with a new ARC LS, even if it was 2x to 3x the price of the Fenix, if was similar to the old LS series, no multi-stage complexity, just one single bright level with a twisty switch that would complement the ARC AAA-P that I carry. I don't want or need the added complexity or cost of a programmable light with multiple stages of light output, just a small, durable, bright package that will come on every time I turn the twisty switch.

-Keith


----------



## ouchmyfinger (Aug 7, 2006)

NeonLights said:


> Well, you're not alone Robocop, you expressed a lot of the same sentiments that I am feeling towards the new LS from ARC. I loved my old LSH-P, and was sorry to see it go when I sold it. I've since replaced it with a Fenix P1 in my EDC rig, but I would gladly replace the Fenix with a new ARC LS, even if it was 2x to 3x the price of the Fenix, if was similar to the old LS series, no multi-stage complexity, just one single bright level with a twisty switch that would complement the ARC AAA-P that I carry. I don't want or need the added complexity or cost of a programmable light with multiple stages of light output, just a small, durable, bright package that will come on every time I turn the twisty switch.
> 
> -Keith



I'm going to guess that there is some kind of button (clicky) based interface, given how fiddly using something like a flupic style interface is with a twisty.

A hybrid clicky/twisty/piston type interface would not surprise me, given that we know now about the 'dedicated electrical path' and that McGizmo has been involved in the mechanical design. Time will tell; this light will rock regardless. I trust Peter - after all he designed one of the best (not to mention first) CR123 / luxeon based lights. I really like the classic LS with both the twisty and the kroll - I have a hard time deciding which is better.

My biggest hope is that one of the things Peter is being intentionally vague about for competitive reasons is the availability date. Maybe one day soon he'll surprise everyone by letting us know the product is available! (i can hope, right?)


----------



## greenLED (Aug 7, 2006)

I share robocops opion. In fact, I made a similar comment in this thread, when Peter first mentioned the computer interface, etc. My post:



greenLED said:


> Add more bells and whistles to the LS and I wouldn't be as interested. I've loved my Arcs because they are (seemingly) simple devices that work every time (except after I mod them, but that's another story). Keep it simple (or, at least transparent to the user) is my humble suggestion.


----------



## karlthev (Aug 7, 2006)

"I'd be happy with a reissue of the original LS, they still hold their own after all these years."
----Led Zepplin

I agree! Great then....and now!


Karl


----------



## Robocop (Aug 7, 2006)

Once again it is simply my opinion however for me the computer interface and multiple features are more of a novelty type use and have little use for a true EDC light. I would suggest the LS would be perfect with a simple reflector set up and a 3 watt with an increase in current from the older versions. It would be my idea to also allow the new LS to use standard 123 cells as well as the higher power Li-Ion version rechargeables

Multiple levels of light are nice to play with and even nicer for power consumption and runtime however with todays advances in batteries and the many makers of quality rechargeables this is not really an issue for me.

Morse mode or strobe is ok however after several years of playing with lights and also using them nightly on patrol I have never really needed any other function other than plain old light out the front of my torch. I will surely purchase one of the new LS lights regardless of how they turn out however to really use and carry one it will have to be simple and effective for its use.


----------



## russtang (Aug 7, 2006)

Robocop,

A modded LS from Litfuse like I have is just the light you described.
A TXOH, Mcr18 reflector,and running at 610mah is a Very nice light.

Where do you live/work in Bham? I'm in McCalla.


----------



## Robocop (Aug 8, 2006)

Russtang I work in Birmingham at South Precinct on evening shift (3-11pm)

The light I described is the light that many here have made with the help of a few aftermarket parts. The original LS was, and still is, a classic however the first thing many did when they bought one was to mod it...myself included.

I truly enjoy my LitFuse modded LS as well as my 3 other LS models all modded by myself with reflectors,UCL, and T Bin 3 watters with 700mA....perfect combo of size and function for EDC as a back up on duty.

I like the idea of being able to again purchase the LS series from Arc. I do remember years past when the Arc4 was coming to the table and I had bought several other models both in firsts and seconds however I did not purchase the Arc4. I did really want one simply as it looked nice and it was made by Arc however in actual use all the fancy stuff was useless to me. I did hope that Arc would offer the Arc4 housing with a simple twisty and 3watt one stage circuit however it never became a reality.

I am thinking that the more fancy features built into a light the more chance for future trouble. It may mean much longer wait times as surely it will be more time consuming to build each one and more areas to malfunction or simpy confuse the user. I am not trying to be negative here however Arc does seem to have trouble keeping up with the huge demand for their products and with the addition of a model that has so much more to get right with the build it may take much longer to crank out enough numbers to make a profit.

There is much competition in this size light and many others keep it simple and their lights sale out like crazy. I can think of many 3 watt single cell lights that are now very common and can be turned out in high quantities due to their simple make up. I do like the idea of the new LS being more modular and easier to swap parts around. I am sure Mr Gransee will make a fine product as his way is to do nothing half way. That beind said even with all of the pre-cautions taken to ensure a quality light is produced it may be over built. Maybe a simple 2 stage model with multiple battery configurations however again I feel that most of us will ever really use half of the features on a fancy LS.


----------



## europium (Aug 8, 2006)

_T-bins? Single-stage? Like the old Arc-LS only slightly improved? _ 


I would hope that Mr. Gransee is not living in the past, dreaming of incremental improvements to outdated designs just to please nostalgic CPF dinosaurs. :touche::nana:

EDIT: My good-humored criticism is not intended for Mr. Gransee nor for what will be the new Arc-LS, but is directed at those fans of the old Arc-LS who posted just above me making curiously retro 'suggestions' for the new Arc-LS.


----------



## JoeBob (Aug 8, 2006)

I'll add another vote to the less complicated, fewer features contingent.
Dinosaur or not, there is a lot to be said for a simple, robust design.
Peter has that formula nailed with his previous products, excluding the Arc 4.


----------



## THE_dAY (Aug 8, 2006)

an estimate on release date and a picture would be greatly appreciated!

thanks!


----------



## LedSled (Aug 8, 2006)

Peter, I bought one of your LSHF-P's in March '04. Lovely little light! Still, I put it on the shelf for one of Henry's U60XRGT's ... lots brighter and uses unprotected RCR123's safely ... I like his switch better than the Kroll ... 4 level is nice, but 2 level would be adequate. Henry is a class act on support, but so were you wayback when. Still, it's amazing how compact the old LS lights are. They really are a better pocket partner.

I've hunted far and wide for a mod strategy to give buck-boost regulation for the LS to use CR123A's as well as Li-ion RCR123's. I like 3.7v RCR123's for EDC, 3.0v CR123A's cached for emergencies. GreenLED's under-development heatsink with a Wizard2 converter looks good, but it lacks 2-level operation and won't over-discharge protect RCR123's. With the right Lux III bin, it might produce >80 lumens out the front.

The specs on the Wizard2x2 converter look better, but I haven't found it for sale, and the 2.5v shutdown is wrong for RCR123's.

I'm going to sell the LSHF-P rather than mod it. It's in mint condition, and it seems to be a collector's item. If I do a mod, it will probably be using one of cy's empty LS shells.

Do let us all know how your project is getting along, won't you? I'm putting some pennies aside for something similar to what this thread is discussing. If the ideas I've thrown out are useful, please accept them with my compliments.


----------



## 270winchester (Aug 9, 2006)

but will the new LS be brighter AND cheaper than the Civictor or the Jetbeam?










---sorry, couldn't resist being a baffoon.


----------



## karlthev (Aug 9, 2006)

"I would hope that Mr. Gransee is not living in the past, dreaming of incremental improvements to outdated designs just to please nostalgic CPF dinosaurs."
------europium

Well, I'm not gonna mince words with ya but, I "cut my teeth" on the old Arc LS series a couple years back--they were the first "high-end" lights with which I became familiar. I have a number in my collection to this day and give serious consideration to buying each one I see come up on BST. Nostalgic? Sure I am! A "dinosaur"? I think not. 

Just as we have seen revitalization of classic cars albeit with updates in the technonogy and design lines, the "flavor" of these classics has been retained.
The new cars of today will outperform those of yesterday just as todays "racecars of the flashlight world" will beat the tried and proven LS. That's to be expected. I've got many of these flashlight racecars and I can tell you that they do. I won't tell you that every idea has been explored and tested, that would be rather nieve on my part. What I will say is that the LS and Arc 4+ achieved classic status in anyone's book and despite their weaknesses (certainly far fewer for the venerable LS), that classic status will never fade. 

I would like an an LS Type II with a few more lumens, the same pocketability and reliability, maybe some updated "lines" but (and here is the big one folks!!!) variable intensity control through Vulcan Mind Meld!!!! You got it, Vulcan Mind Meld!!! For you head scratchers out there, Star Trek (an old space-oriented TV series???) was my base for this stellar (get it, "Stellar"---yuk, yuk! :laughing: ) idea. When I hold the new LS I wanna just THINK of what intensity I want and then, SCHAZAM!!!----there it'll be!!! Oh boy, what an idea!! Any of you designers out there need any more ideas, give me a call---1-800-wadaya-nuts?. 

Seriously, I would like a bit of the "dino", classic--want my LS to look familiar and yet have a bit of Star Trek--a bit more performance. Hey Peter, are ya listening?

Karl


----------



## Lunal_Tic (Aug 9, 2006)

Man I must be getting old, I like my old Arc LSs and am content to wait and see what comes about. Speculation and recommending dream lists of add on features just doesn't do much for me. Put a hard copy in my hand then I can get the endorphins flowing. 

I'll be interested to see if it can slide into my current EDC rotation, that might take some doing.

Good luck, I look forward to the results.
-LT


----------



## CM (Aug 9, 2006)

europium said:


> _T-bins? Single-stage? Like the old Arc-LS only slightly improved? _
> 
> 
> I would hope that Mr. Gransee is not living in the past, dreaming of incremental improvements to outdated designs just to please nostalgic CPF dinosaurs. :touche::nana:



Where did you get that these use T-bins? This is not an "incremental improvement" and the design is far from outdated. (--reply edited to resist the bait from mr. europium...)


----------



## Robocop (Aug 10, 2006)

I have seen a few makers add some features that I consider to be useful and a few examples are tritium inserts,interchangeable bezel units for better throw and something like the Piston Drive switching. These are actually real use items and most often attatched to a simple yet effective light.

Yes it is very cool to have a super fast strobe or 15 levels of light and even auto cut off protection from heat as well as a user adjustable interface by way of computer program. In my opinion while being very cool to play with I have never needed any features such as that in EDC situations or even on duty.

I have noticed very many makers coming out with simple designs and few actual features. I am not trying to be rude here but rather to provide maybe one more line of thinking from a fello ARC lover as I do hope all new products will do well simply as I am a huge ARC fan. 

Lets take ORB for example....you just do not get much more simple than that little NS but man has it sold like crazy. He changed the design a little and added a few small things that made a huge difference. Good business sense I feel and I have several of these simply as I like the basic design and cool factor. Look at Fenix now also with their quick offerings of just about any ideas we can come up with. Most of their stuff is simple yet does make good light in a nice looking package....and they sale like wildfire. All that seems to matter is that it works in a reliable manner and makes bright light in a small package with a smooth beam pattern....and we will line up by the hundreds to have one of whatever maker it is. I see a few who get caught up in all the gizmos they can add to an already beautifully working light.

I like the idea of the wild options of many lights and circuits however simply do not desire to have a light so very complicated. I am simply suggesting that ARC keep the basic design available with a few key changes for those of us who desire a basic light. Make the new version however they wish and if it does well then great and I would stock it alongside its lesser complicated models......I was not suprised to learn that many people did not purchase the ARC4 for the same reasons as myself....way too complicated and had features I would never really use.

I really believe all of the testing and development is not necessary as ARC already has the potential for a winner in a time proven package. Add a few small changes and if it has to have 2 levels then so be it however all the fancy stuff could go. I can only imagine if ARC announced tomorrow that their was a new LS available and had s few changes such as adding a reflector, more current, UCL, and maybe all having U bins and ability to use Li-Ion 123 cells......we would all be running like crazy to buy it. Stick with what really works and works well. When you can afford to experiment a little then try to slip in a new model with all kinds of options and see if it sales better.

Hope to have a new LS soon regardless of how the final design turns out....good luck with all this Peter


----------



## Miciobigio (Aug 10, 2006)




----------



## Gransee (Aug 10, 2006)

Robocop,

I started out the new LS project with the original LSH-P as the baseline. I then added a minimum set of improvements based on what I felt were necessary and from those people had emailed us about. Some of the improvements were:

Switch current
The kroll is easy to service and has a nice click but in certain climates the contacts can foul in a matter of months. I know this because we provided the service. Fouling will increase as the amperage through the switch is increased. The LSH only drew about 450mA from the battery, but the new LS was expected to draw much more than that. This makes the contact arcing more pronounced which would reduce service life for the kroll significantly. The Kroll was the most common item that needed service in the original LSH. We looked at ways to increase the current carrying capacity of the Kroll. It became obvious due to this and other factors that a new switch design was needed. 

Brighter Output
The original LSH produced about 25 lumens. LED technology has really improved since the original LSH was manufactured with the then hottest LED: the Luxeon I. New LEDs combined with a more powerful supply can enable much brighter outputs. Higher currents means lower runtimes at those currents, but even so, it is nice to at least have the option of higher current if the customer needs it. 

Even at moderate power levels (say 600mA), the LED can still be damaged by overheating. The choice was then to either limit power, allow damage or monitor the heat. The option that gave the customer the most power range was to monitor the heat. This works by backing the power down when the LED gets hot. This way the LED is never overdriven. This extends LED life while providing the customer the maximum LED output possible. Not many flashlights have electronic temperature protection. Since we are shooting for the widest possible power range, active temperature protection is essential. 

More than one brightness level
With the brighter output and the reduced runtime at that brighter output, the value of having a second brightness level becomes more apparent. The customer could then chose between maximum brightness or maximum run time. Not all tasks need full power. In fact, using full power for every task would at least waste batteries if not actually make the person more blind to the enviroment around them (tunnel vision from using excessive power at close range). 

This is different than the original LS. But the original LS didn't produce this much light. Although flashlight technlogy has advanced, the human eye is on average just as sensitive as it was back when we were using maglights. The brighter lights became, the more likely it was to produce too much light in some circumstances. So the user interface also needed to improve with the rest of the flashlight. 

User interface
With the multiple brightness levels the user interface became more complicated than simply on and off. Now there was at least: off, low and high. Although the light would be set from the factory for a particular low and high level setting, we found users wanted to be able to overide those settings and use their own values. Maybe our low was not low enough. As a result, we needed some method for people to make those changes without having to send it back to the factory for adjustment. This ability to change output without having to swap bulbs, etc was a new feature when first introduced and took some getting used to by the flashlight community.

Rechargeable batteries
The original LS was designed and shipped before the advent of rechargeable 123 cells. Now, there are many rechargeable 123 brands to choose from and the performance is good and getting better. People can now save money and reduce waste by using rechargeables. However, the flashlight must be compatible with them or damage could occur.

Since most rechargeables operate at a higher voltage, the flashlight could be damaged if it was not designed to work with rechargeables. Although there exist rechargeable 123s that produce a lower voltage, their run time and current capability suffers. The highest performance currently comes from the 3.6v (nominal) Lithium Ion/polymer cells. Therefore, lights that are designed to work with those higher voltages have an advantage. Aside from dealing with the higher voltage, rechargeable-ready lights must also properly detect the cells (or insist the user only use one type or to flip a switch when the type is changed) and begin reducing the power before the cell is overdischarged. Otherwise the cell could be damaged. 

Starting with the Arc4, the first light designed to automatically detect rechargeables and protect them, we have had a good amount of experience with designing rechargeable-ready lights. The new LS, from the initial conception, was also to have this capability. 

Upgrades
The pace of LED progress is increasing. We have seen LED efficiency double in less than 12 months. Some users may be fine with using the old LEDs while other users, for the money they are spending and the type of work they do, they want the 2x or more light the newer LEDs are producing. However, constantly upgrading not only is very expensive but it is wasteful. What if we could make the flashlight so easy to upgrade that most users would be encouraged to take that route instead of constantly buying a new light every 6 months? Although the user may not want to take the time to perform the upgrade themselves, if we make it easy enough, there will be a good supply of providers who will be able to do the upgrade for you at an affordable rate. The end result should be a light that has the latest LED technology for less than the full price that others have to pay. 

Modders have told us what they need to make the light easier to upgrade. Although we didn't meet every request (there were compromises with package size, complexity, etc), there were some things we could do. For example, new LEDs operate at different current and voltage levels. By given the modder the ability to compensate for this, new technology LEDs are more likely to be compatible with the LS system. In the old days, this compensation required performing surgery to the PCB to change the sense resistors used. With the new system, this can be changed on a PC and the saved to the flash memory. This speeds the process, which should ultimately lower the cost to you. 

Microprocessor
Many of the basic features I feel are essential to the LS such as; brighter, 2 levels, rechargeable compatibility and easy of modibility could be done with a analog solution using a lot of discrete components. This would have made a overly-complex system. By replacing all those components with a single microprocessor, the system is smaller, less expensive, more versatile, easier to upgrade and provides new functions otherwise impractical to provide. Even though there are less parts in the design, the presence of a microprocessor can be scary for some people. And with good reason. Not all designs with microprocessor have produced a net improvement. With the new LS, I have strived to emphasize and protect the core set of functions. Functions that make the LS a tool and not a toy. Although there may be some extra features on the fringes, they should not interfere with the core set in anyway. I have found however, even when the fringe features have no operational effect on the core set, just knowing they are there can bother some people. They feel they have to fiddle with everything and not just use the product as a tool. Not everything offered is meant to be fiddled with by the average user. We provide it just in case, but most of the time, you shouldn't need them and you should forget they are there. Just turn the light on and use it. 

Another concern people have with the addition of the microprocessor is that it somehow will make the light more expensive. If you agree that the light should be as bright as possible (neccesitating temp protection), have a maximum runtime (multiple levels) and work with rechargeables (cell detection and protection) and you want it to be small, have fewer components and be cost effective, then a microprocessor is what the doctor ordered. Some people may be concerned that a fringe feature (like multiple switch modes) is driving the cost up. I will tell you that for the basic production code, the core feature set is 95% of the software cost. And that software cost is spread out over quite a few units. So you actual cost of a feature like normal vs tactical mode, is quite small in the grand scheme of things. 

And no, strobe, sos, etc is not planned for the core set. The plan is to have the minimum set of features and those to what most customers will find truly useful. 
--

This is just a brief introduction to some of the LS design process. 

Peter


----------



## bombelman (Aug 10, 2006)

Miciobigio said:


>


agree


----------



## Grox (Aug 11, 2006)

Peter, your strategy here reminds me of Christmas when I was younger. Hidden presents under the tree, hidden away from sight by wrapping paper? Joy that was so close yet concealed?

I can't wait till Christmas morning!


----------



## LedSled (Aug 11, 2006)

Gransee said:


> ... I started out the new LS project with the original LSH-P as the baseline. ...


Have you changed the size? The old LS was so beautifully compact and light, not so the Arc 4. It really is a big deal to some of us.


----------



## geepondy (Aug 11, 2006)

Peter, I would think in order to maintain an absolute constant lumen output would have to be the implementation of a feedback system where the output is sampled and fed back to the input. Not sure how this could be done for a light output. A tiny photo sensor in the reflector?



Gransee said:


> Viren,
> I copied your questions in post #70
> 
> 1) How would the Light Engine drive the LED ?
> ...


----------



## 270winchester (Aug 11, 2006)

you know Peter, all this secretive talk, you are quickly raising the expectation to a level that the new LS may be hard to match....


----------



## skalomax (Aug 12, 2006)

Can we get a glimpse of anything like the body or the Bezel? Please!?


----------



## CM (Aug 12, 2006)

geepondy said:


> Peter, I would think in order to maintain an absolute constant lumen output would have to be the implementation of a feedback system where the output is sampled and fed back to the input. Not sure how this could be done for a light output. A tiny photo sensor in the reflector?



A feedback system is not necessary to maintain an absolute constant lumen output. Not only is it un-necessary, an open loop scheme is a more efficient way to drive an LED, provided you have an A/D at your disposal, in which case, a properly selected micro controller would provide  Hmmm, someone in the know would be able to find a subtle flaw in the statement above


----------



## geepondy (Aug 12, 2006)

I would say if not for a feedback system then how are you going to determine the exact amount of light the LED is producing at any given time? There are many factors that determine the light output, some of them not electrical. Each individual LEDs themselves behave differently from each other. I am not a flashlight designer so I realize I may be speaking from ignorance but does indeed monitoring and providing a constant current, combination of current and voltage (power) even with temperature compensation guarantee you a constant lumen output? I have not looked at a Luxeon data sheet (wait a minute, no guarantees a Luxeon will be used in this light) but do they perform in a predictable and linear fashion in changing voltage and or current conditions?

I'm just theorizing on a light ouput feedback system because Peter said the regulation method for this light would be different from others.



CM said:


> A feedback system is not necessary to maintain an absolute constant lumen output. Not only is it un-necessary, an open loop scheme is a more efficient way to drive an LED, provided you have an A/D at your disposal, in which case, a properly selected micro controller would provide  Hmmm, someone in the know would be able to find a subtle flaw in the statement above


----------



## CM (Aug 12, 2006)

geepondy said:


> I would say if not for a feedback system then how are you going to determine the exact amount of light the LED is producing at any given time? There are many factors that determine the light output, some of them not electrical. Each individual LEDs themselves behave differently from each other. I am not a flashlight designer so I realize I may be speaking from ignorance but does indeed monitoring and providing a constant current, combination of current and voltage (power) even with temperature compensation guarantee you a constant lumen output? I have not looked at a Luxeon data sheet (wait a minute, no guarantees a Luxeon will be used in this light) but do they perform in a predictable and linear fashion in changing voltage and or current conditions?
> 
> I'm just theorizing on a light ouput feedback system because Peter said the regulation method for this light would be different from others.



There are other ways to get constant output without "sensing" either current to the LED or output of the LED itself. If you have an A/D at your disposal, it can be done. Not saying that Arc is/is not using this method but it's being done.


----------



## Stillphoto (Aug 13, 2006)

ARC and McGizmo together? Crimeny...

And now the mass exodus of inferior flashlights must begin in order to start saving for the new ARCGIZMO...now the question is which lights are first to go hmm....


----------



## Robocop (Aug 13, 2006)

Thank you for the detailed information as to the new features and I feel sure this light will be well though out. I do agree that it is very nice to have a light that is easy to update and modular by design.

I believe some of us are simply hesitant to change and keep the old ways in our minds however the newer features are nice to have even if it takes some time to get used to them. I feel most of the new changes you spoke of are focused on a more durable and long lasting product so I can see a little better now as to why you are developing these new changes.

I feel the most important changes concern the rapid advancements in batteries and the Li-Ion rechargeables available now. It is really amazing how far batteries have came in the last year.

I remember old threads dealing with user made heat sinks for the LS however nothing much developed. I do like my old LS lights however always thought the circuit board heatsink was a weak link. Can you give any information as to how the new style will be set up as far as a heat sink? I have skimmed over all the details in this thread and may have missed this info if it has already been answered so forgive me if this is the case.

Thanks again for the reply and I look forward to the new style LS.


----------



## Gransee (Aug 14, 2006)

Btw, here's the orginal LS annoucement made back in 2001 (From the internet archive wayback machine):

http://web.archive.org/web/20010806...bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=9&t=000002

I just noticed how I keep trying to come out with a light named Arc5 or Arc-5, etc. 

if you look at the wayback machine capture for that date:

http://web.archive.org/web/20010801144050/www.candlepowerforums.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi

Interspersed throughout the cpf there were discussions about the LS. 

Arc-AAA annoucement
http://web.archive.org/web/20010624...in/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=10&t=000018

master list of CPF entries on wayback machine:

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.candlepowerforums.com

Peter


----------



## greenLED (Aug 14, 2006)

Gransee said:


> Btw, here's the orginal LS annoucement made back in 2001 (From the internet archive wayback machine):
> ...
> Arc-AAA annoucement


...and just because I like to dig through the CPF archives (it's *amazing* the stuff that's hidden in there):

The original Arc LS announcement

The original Arc AAA announcement

:wave: Peter


----------



## bombelman (Aug 14, 2006)

Gransee said:


> ..... a light named Arc5 or Arc-5, etc. ...
> if you look at the wayback machine capture for that date:



aug 1st 2001....
5 years... :goodjob: :twothumbs  :thumbsup:


----------



## teststrips (Aug 15, 2006)

All this history behind the LS... I didn't get addicted until after the fact though - looking forward to being able to purchase the "New LS"


----------



## CM (Aug 15, 2006)

The original LS was THE light that got me hooked, and Peter was the one that got me into CPF. While the LS remains a classic, the new LS is, shall I say light years ahead of it (sorry guys).


----------



## Cyclops942 (Aug 15, 2006)

Robocop said:


> Can you give any information as to how the new style will be set up as far as a heat sink? I have skimmed over all the details in this thread and may have missed this info if it has already been answered so forgive me if this is the case.



Robocop--

Oh, ho, ho, it's magic, you know Never believe it's not so. ​-- with apologies to Pilot, Jefferson Pilot, Jefferson Starship, Starship, or whatever name they were using at the time, or might be using right now...​(...and how many of you were able to sing along with that one? Don't be shy, let's see a show of hands!)


----------



## James S (Aug 15, 2006)

Hi Peter,

can't wait to hear more  (and see something!)

I am curious about the computer interface too. Are you just re-downloading altered firmware to the pic in there? or is there a real protocol for talking to it and altering features?

If there is a protocol and you document it I will implement it for both OSX and Linux. I also have the stuff to compile the same UI for windows, but you have that end wrapped up and I hate programming for windows anymore anyhow.

Just another vote for your documenting the protocol!


----------



## Peter Atwood (Aug 16, 2006)

The most important question to me.....DOES IT HAVE A POCKET CLIP?


----------



## Haz (Aug 16, 2006)

small, 2 levels of output, designed to use rechargable, easy to change led, this meets all i want for a flashlight...can't wait.


----------



## Miciobigio (Aug 16, 2006)

Some questions  :

1_ Is the head cilindrical ? 

2_ The head has a larger diameter then the body ?

3_ The tail is saparated by the body ?

4_ Are the head and/or the body and/or the tail knurled ?

5_ The beam will have a thight hot spot ( like the Arc4 ) or a larger one ( more usefull for close task) ?

6_ Is the switch guarded ? Is candlemode possible ?


----------



## ouchmyfinger (Aug 16, 2006)

Miciobigio said:


> Some questions  :
> 
> 1_ Is the head cilindrical ?
> 
> ...



you may as well ask for a picture of the light and beamshots


----------



## Miciobigio (Aug 16, 2006)

ouchmyfinger said:


> you may as well ask for a picture of the light and beamshots


 
Done in post #123 in this 3D !


----------



## Blazer (Aug 16, 2006)

Someone once told me, "You can complete a task quickly or you can complete a task properly, but you usually cannot complete it both ways." Things that are worthwhile are worth waiting for.

Sounds like you're onto a winner so far.

I can agree with Robocop's position, but mostly because I understand the necessity of simplicity and reliability in law enforcement. Sometimes there's no leeway for things to get snagged up with any of your duty tools and even the remote possibility may be too much. However, I also like the "toys" but not for on-duty use.

You guys are killing me with these new products, the anticipation is building and I don't think I'll be able to hold out when the new LS comes out.


----------



## koala (Aug 16, 2006)

This thread is worthless without pics! :laughing: Someone buy peterg a camera?

Wow, suddenly I see alot of posts from old timers .

New Arc-LS? Better start saving up. The Arc-Ls is one of the best moddable flashlight despite the lockring.. until Arc4. Please don't stuff it up with epoxy, which I had to melt it down mmmkay. Also don't spoil the HAIII beauty with full bodied knurling, too much is no good mmmkay.

I really hope that firmware update can be done through the windows thingy as sending lights across the globe for updates isn't what I prefer. I am still waiting for the mp3 capable flashlight I mention *before *the release of Arc4+  but I doubt it will happen. If it does RIAA will be upon us, flashaholic. Every flashlight sold there will be RIAA tax...

Fenix? Ya I have a few. Switch doesn't work well, rough/sharp finger cutting threads, very bright and light. Actually not much to fault but... wait until you hold an Arc-LS. Don't even need to switch it on, it kills all the other lights.


----------



## Cyclops942 (Aug 18, 2006)

Cyclops942 said:


> -- with apologies to Pilot, Jefferson Pilot, Jefferson Starship, Starship, or whatever name they were using at the time, or might be using right now...​



​Whoops! Jefferson Pilot was a financial institution, and it appears Pilot had nothing to do with Jefferson Airplane. Sorry.


----------



## skalomax (Aug 18, 2006)

Are the New Arc's going to be brighter than the HDS System Flashlights?


----------



## liqht (Aug 19, 2006)

please sir, may we have some more......knurling?


----------



## TinderBox (UK) (Aug 19, 2006)

I wonder if the new ARC-LS will use an K2 emitter. 

regards.


----------



## ViReN (Aug 19, 2006)

I dont think it uses K2, K2's are not as efficient (when it comes to Vf). ... they still have very high Vf's

K2's are good for multy battery applications though... 

I see Arc LS with *S bin Lux I *and *U bin Lux III* i may be wrong though.. but if it has to be bright and more efficient than HDS... they better be S bins and U bins


----------



## tvodrd (Aug 20, 2006)

I had the pleasure of fondling a proto last night at the Phoenix get-together.  From the first glance, it was appearant that _Don guy_ had a hand in it. :green: And unlike, my first experience with the Arc 4 at SHOT 2004,(?) I was able to turn it on and off! (I'll never let Peter forget that one!  ) IMO, Arc has the makings of a winner here!! As to any further details- Please don't ask! :tsk: 

Larry


----------



## James S (Aug 20, 2006)

> The beam will have a thight hot spot ( like the Arc4 ) or a larger one ( more usefull for close task) ?



By modulating the position of the quantum dots in the emission substrate via high frequency standing wave patterns made possible by digitally tuned dual microwave transmitters, the new ArcLS is actually able to change beam parameters and refocus with no moving parts. This also avoids any losses due to lens or reflector reflectivity imperfections. The standing waves can actually push the places where the photons are emmitted to the center of the die resulting in a small bright hotspot, or let them spread out more to the edges causing a wider beam. 

The killer feature though is the one thats holding up the release at the moment but I think that you'll agree with me that it will be worth the wait. 

It turns out that controlling the exact position of the emission quantum dots in this universe, means that we can extend the quantum wave function to a certain number of close by similar parallel universes (just how many are reachable with the power source available is proprietary information and Peter wouldn't be happy if I shared too much there with you) it is possible to make an LED die behave in much the same way as a Quantum Computer. Where a Quantum Computer uses logic in parallel universes to do computing and returns the result to our reality, the quantum collated emission die in the ArcLS allows us to bring the photons from LED's in nearby parallel universes and combine them into a single beam here in our universe!

I'm sure the implications of this will be immediately apparent, but the dangers will take a little more thinking to become obvious to you. We're working on the military version now and when thats complete and we've filled those orders we'll be making a more limited version available to regular CPF'ers. The limit is necessary to limit the number of parallel universes you can tunnel photons from in order to limit the entropic heat death of this universe. Not to mention just burning a hole right through the planet.

Interestingly enough the problem caused by the influx of so much energy (and therefore heat as the process is not 100% efficient) is also the cure of the problem. The same way that visible light photons can be brought into this universe, lower energy infrared photons can be distributed back across the same multiple universes keeping your ArcLS cool to the touch even when outputting the correlated beam of thousands of quantumly paralleled ArcLS's.

Please note that if you're purchasing an ArcLS in a parallel universe then even though your LED may be identical to the ones sold here, it may emit only in the infrared spectrum. We're sorry for the inconvenience.


----------



## skalomax (Aug 21, 2006)

Any idea when it will be released??


----------



## ViReN (Aug 21, 2006)

the last I read about the release date (though not promissed) is may be by this year end or early next year... not sure .. if memory serves me right that is...

I suggest not to exert pressure on the release date... as things may become tight


----------



## Stillphoto (Aug 21, 2006)

James S said:


> By modulating the position of the quantum dots in the emission substrate via high frequency standing wave patterns made possible by digitally tuned dual microwave transmitters, the new ArcLS is actually able to change beam parameters and refocus with no moving parts. This also avoids any losses due to lens or reflector reflectivity imperfections. The standing waves can actually push the places where the photons are emmitted to the center of the die resulting in a small bright hotspot, or let them spread out more to the edges causing a wider beam.
> 
> The killer feature though is the one thats holding up the release at the moment but I think that you'll agree with me that it will be worth the wait.
> 
> ...



Alright, I'm gonna start a group buy on some crack so we can all be on the right "wavelength" to understand that....just kidding..i think


----------



## Miciobigio (Aug 21, 2006)

tvodrd said:


> I had the pleasure of fondling a proto last night at the Phoenix get-together.  From the first glance, it was appearant that _Don guy_ had a hand in it. :green: And unlike, my first experience with the Arc 4 at SHOT 2004,(?) I was able to turn it on and off! (I'll never let Peter forget that one!  ) IMO, Arc has the makings of a winner here!! As to any further details- Please don't ask! :tsk:
> 
> Larry


 
The Mc-Arc ? :lolsign:


----------



## batman (Aug 23, 2006)

man, i'm totally in on this light. This thing is so cool it's going to replace air as that stuff we breathe to stay alive.


----------



## spideyfan (Aug 27, 2006)

late to the thread but 
cant wait Peter...you got yourself a customer for life on my end


----------



## Yooper (Aug 28, 2006)

Like many others here I feel like I missed out on the original LS, as I did not become a flashaholic until more recently. I love my AAA-P's and I'm really looking forward to this new light.


----------



## europium (Aug 29, 2006)

Well, since others have written their "letters to Santa Claus" asking for this or that feature, I'll add my invaluable opinion. 
*
I want at least 100 lumens out the front for at least 30 fully regulated minutes on a single CR123 primary without any external cooling. *That to me is the desired benchmark for an EDC. (Of course it will be multi-stage and run much longer at lower levels.)

I suspect that this is not going to be feasible until high-flux, low-Vf K2 emitters become readily available, which isn't going to happen until maybe next year. I'm willing to wait, *and I'm willing to pay*, but ... I confess _*I have no great near-term interest in a very expensive light that has but incremental design improvements over the already terrific lights like the Fire~Fly III and the HDS U85.*_


----------



## paulr (Aug 29, 2006)

As some of you know I recently got back from a long trip to what I'd call a developing country. I haven't been on CPF so much since then, partly because my tastes in flashlights have changed somewhat. I want to urge making the new LS able to run on one AA cell like the Fenix L1p.

Electronics I took on my trip: Canon A530 digicam (runs on two AA's), Fenix L1p (1AA), Arc AAA (1AAA), Sandisk M260 4 gig mp3 player (1AAA), LaCrosse BC-900 charger, NiMH batteries in everything mentioned above, plus 4 each spare NiMH AA and AAA cells in plastic holders. I also wanted to bring my Garmin Geko GPS (2AAA) but couldn't find it before leaving. Also, I brought a half dozen or so Fauxtons that I gave away (wish I'd had more), plus my Thinkpad X40 notebook computer and its charger.

The Fenix was sort of an afterthought but I used it ALL THE TIME. The outdoor lighting is just not very good over there. I ran it mostly on a cheap 1600 mAH cell that I happened to have in it but sometimes on a 2500 mAH Sanyo cell. I had to charge it a couple times a week. The mp3 player also kept me from going bonkers, but I wished it used an AA cell too.

Battery situation over there: you could buy all the crap-quality zinc-carbon AA and AAA cells you wanted for about 6 cents each. I brought home an 8-pack that I should send to Silverfox for testing. You could also fairly easily get cheap-looking AA NiMH cells (1500 mAH). I think they were 80-90 cents but I'm not sure. I have the impression they were pretty popular since most people don't like buying batteries all the time. You could also get zinc-carbon D cells, and some more power hungry devices (like our hot water heater) wanted them. Alkaline AA cells were quite hard but I did see some in a grocery/drugstore a buck or so each. I didn't see alkaline D cells available anywhere. Lithium? Forget it. You could get CR123A's at camera stores in the city but not at all out in the boonies where I was. Interestingly though, everyone had a mobile phone powered by li ion.

It was fantastic to run all my stuff (except the laptop) with just ONE charger (the Lacrosse). I've lost interest in 123-powered flashlights and see them basically as yuppie toys. I hate everything having to do with lithium ion and special chargers. I tried hard to find AA-powered mobile phones but they don't exist. The L1p was GREAT, and I didn't mind not having multiple levels since I had the Arc AAA for that. But outdoors, the L1p's extra power was important. And using non-rechargeables in the L1p would have been ridiculous cost-wise because of how much I was using it, plus RCR123A's would have been more cumbersome, expensive junk to haul along. So NiMH AA's were exactly the right solution.

The Arc got a fair amount of use, though didn't need many battery swaps because of its excellent long runtime. But a multi-level 1AA light designed to use zinc-carbon AA's at the low level would have been nice. Run on NiMH for normal use, zinc-carbon in a pinch. It occurred to me that a USB-powered NiMH charger (run from the laptop) would have saved me even more travel weight, but the Lacrosse's features were very useful, so I'm glad I had it.

Anyway, the 1AA form factor is great for EDC--the extra length compared to 1x123 didn't bother me, and the smaller thickness was a plus, but most of all the battery commonality was crucial. At minimum, the new LS should have a 2AA holder available, but I hope it can run on 1AA. It could detect zinc-carbon cells by the voltage sag in a high-powered burst, and enable high power only in momentary mode when it thinks it has that kind of cell. (I experimentaly found that the zinc-carbon cells were able to run the L1p for 5 minutes or so before dimming noticably, and that's long enough for a "turbo" mode to be useful).

As for lithium, the one true li ion form factor is the 18650 cell--RCR123A's have always struck me as silly. I think it would be nice to have an 18650 holder for the new LS with a built-in protection circuit (so you could use a raw cell) and a built-in charger powered by 5 volts, with a weather-sealed USB mini-B connector so you could charge it from a USB port with a commodity digicam cable, or from a 5v cell phone charger with a mini-B or adapter to mini-B. If necessary the connector could be under a gasketed screw thingie (twist cap or coin slotted plug) to make the light waterproof. And of course this would be the computer port for reprogramming the light. A similar thing for 1AA (maybe with an expansion sleeve for 2AA) would also be great. Me, I think I'd stick with AA. With the availability of Eneloop/Enduro cells, self-discharge is no longer a big issue at normal temperatures, so there's not much reason to use either alkaline or lithium ion any more.

I'll stop here


----------



## grift (Aug 29, 2006)

wow cant believe Peter is rolling out a new LS. 


the original Arc LS is what hooked me and made me a flashaholic. it took me a long time to finally break down and buy one. it was VERY EXPENSIVE for just a flashlight i thought. once i had my first one though i no longer thought $150-$200 for a flashlight was expensive. you REALLY did get what ya payed for. my friends were all impressed but still thought i was insane for spending that kinda cash on a flashlight. well after i let them use mine for any length of time they started thinking it might be worth the price. after a few months most of my friends had bought an LS as well or i bought them as gifts. as a matter of fact i gaurantee if you see two of my friends at anytime, anywhere, and you look at their belt loop you will find the LS i bought them hanging from a clip. 

anyways to find out that a new LS is on its way is DELIGHTFUL news to say the least.

knowing that Don has input only sweetens the deal to 10th degree.

we are all patiently awaiting your newest creation Peter..............................


----------



## xochi (Aug 29, 2006)

skalomax said:


> Are the New Arc's going to be brighter than the HDS System Flashlights?



That can't really be answered at the moment since the current HDS lights, fantastic as they are, are discontinued and new products are threatened within the next few months. Whatever happens, the next six months will be very interesting for high tech lights.


----------



## Lebkuecher (Aug 31, 2006)

I'm really getting excited about the new LS!!! I guess too excited, I was checking out the B/S/T forum and there was an old moded LSH-P with the tiger strips (Anyone remember the tiger stripes) just waiting to be purchased.  Man I need to put a lock on my PP account. 

Peter I was happy to see that you will consider different metals at some point. I think Titanium is one obvious choice but have you considered any other metals? Maybe a stainless steel model?


----------



## chrisse242 (Aug 31, 2006)

paulr said:


> I think it would be nice to have an 18650 holder for the new LS with a built-in protection circuit (so you could use a raw cell) and a built-in charger powered by 5 volts, with a weather-sealed USB mini-B connector so you could charge it from a USB port with a commodity digicam cable, or from a 5v cell phone charger with a mini-B or adapter to mini-B. If necessary the connector could be under a gasketed screw thingie (twist cap or coin slotted plug) to make the light waterproof. And of course this would be the computer port for reprogramming the light. A similar thing for 1AA (maybe with an expansion sleeve for 2AA) would also be great. Me, I think I'd stick with AA. With the availability of Eneloop/Enduro cells, self-discharge is no longer a big issue at normal temperatures, so there's not much reason to use either alkaline or lithium ion any more.
> 
> I'll stop here



Finally someone asks for that. Built-in charging capability is about the only feature that would make me buy a new small led light. Cell phones come with it as long as I can think, and I wouldn't mind if a light with it would only be splash proof, I don't take my lights with me when I go swimming.

Chrisse


----------



## James S (Sep 1, 2006)

I think the discussion here has turned to some really good thoughts. I"m just not buying any more cr123 powered lights. The quality of lights I can get running on 1 and 2 AA or 3 or 4 AAA is so good now that the tiny decrease in size for a 123 powered light is just not compelling enough anymore for me to want to stockpile a whole nother type of battery. Though the rechargeable ones are reducing the need somewhat, in a bug out situation a pocket full of primary cells is worth more than a rechargeable.

but of course, anything we discuss about options increase the cost of manufacturing and the time to market  And if Peter listens to us we may end up with a product that never ships or that is too expensive and too pointed to our niche market 

If I were designing it I'd do something similar to the previous arc with multiple battery tubes. perhaps a CR123, and a 2AA (a 1AA would be incredible) and maybe one for a bigger LiIon battery. I've got some protected LiIon cells that I use in other things and they are terrific!

Charging without removing the pack would also be fantastic. I'd also be willing to sacrifice a depth rating for this. But being able to run on non-exotic cells would be even more important to me.


----------



## jch79 (Sep 1, 2006)

+1 to the multiple battery tubes... 

Regarding 123 sized batteries: If a light as cutting-edge as the new Arc-LS, shouldn't it be able to take the smaller and larger capacity batteries? If one aspect of CPF is to promote and encourage new technologies, I believe 123 sized batteries should be in the mix, if not a newer kind of battery that has yet to be developed/explored/released... the more demand you get for the battery, the more available it will become, and the lower the prices. (at least that's what I think I learned from economics back in high school!)

Although, I do agree with James & Paul, that the easy availability of AA & AAA makes it a smart choice - at least an AA or AAA optional tube.

My 2.
john


----------



## jch79 (Sep 4, 2006)

Hi Peter :wave:
I still have not seen an answer on different operating systems other than Windows... particularly Mac OSX in my case, but Linux for the crazier folk out there :nana:...
Are there plans to make it compatible? This would sway my decision, for what it's worth!
Thanks,
john


----------



## TheFire (Sep 5, 2006)

I've been an arc fan for a long time.

I used an LSH-P for a long time, modded many lights from the LS series, carried the Arc4 for a while, but now carry a McLux III PD (and of course, a AAA). What finally tipped the scales was the way the Arc4 wouldn't stay off when belt-carried. After using both lights, I prefer bezel down carry.

I loved the multiple brightness settings on the Arc4 (in fact, that third and lowest setting is one of the things I miss most about it when compared to my PD).

I appreciate Don's designs, and I look forward eagerly to a melding of ideas.

For me personally, max brightness as compared to competitors in a similar category is not a deciding factor when purchasing a light. Reliablity, user-interface, and build quality are paramount. I prefer my less-bright PD to brighter lights as a considered and rational tradeoff between brightness and runtime.

I also advocate a light closer to the original LSH in terms of size and weight. Features like in-light charging might compromise water resistance, which is important to me, and would make the entire assemblage larger (and you'd have some non-anodized external contacts - WTF?). I prefer smaller and simpler, with options available for change in the computer software rather than a complicated user interface.

Hopefully an ideal switching solution can be realized. The Kroll had well known problems, the Arc4 switch was fiddly, I really like the PD switching, but am not as happy as I might be with the tradeoff between required tail push-force and twist rate.

To those who are calling for a 1xAA solution - what are you thinking? The design goals for this light are not consistent with the power a single AA can provide, especially a drug-store alkaline. There are other excellent 1xAA luxeon lights available, but this is not going to be one of those.

Overall though, unless something unthinkable happens, I'll be getting one when they become available. Make something to knock the current pick off my belt and I'll be a happy camper.


----------



## Yooper (Sep 12, 2006)

I am definitely planning on buying an LS, but I feel I must share my thoughts re: batteries. I would be MUCH happier with a 1-AA LS than a 123 LS. A 2-AA tube to replace the 123 tube would be my second choice.

I also strongly concur on the desirability of built in charging. Using a rechargeable 123 and having a built in recharger almost makes up for the above battery problem.


----------



## paulr (Sep 12, 2006)

Maybe there could be a totally sealed inductive charger. And long ago I think I mentioned the cockamamie idea of using the LED itself as a data transceiver. At least on the transmit side, it's obvious; but it may also be possible to receive data through it, if it acts somewhat as a photodiode. Someone like NewBie would be more conversant with that type of thing.


----------



## :)> (Sep 17, 2006)

My God man!

When will this stuff end? I haven't purchased all of the McGizmo lights yet and now I find out that there is an ARC light in the works with his input. 

Seriously, this sounds like a very special light and I am specifically interested because it is being designed to be used as a tool and as such, I would expect that reliability is a key consideration in the design. Reliability plus water resistance (read waterproof) are major factors for me on high end lights. 

I would definately also want some way for quick access to up to 3 to 4 levels of light output. I think that 2 is the minimum and is satisfactory but the ability to get a really low and a really high level along with 2 medium working levels is very satisfying to me. 

I have spent around $1,700.00 on lights since finding this wonderful sight and it looks like I am going to have to spend at least another $250.00 on this one. 

Thank you Peter because I really am anticipating this light!

-Goatee


----------



## bmstrong (Sep 18, 2006)

Any news on this? 

Apple, Windows, Palm and etc. all have made the annual fall announcements for new products in the last week. I'm hoping that P is going to make an announcement as well. I only have so much $$$ to spend and have to stick to my budget...


----------



## CM (Sep 18, 2006)

Yes, Peter, any public updates ?


----------



## pEEf (Sep 19, 2006)

geepondy said:


> Peter, I would think in order to maintain an absolute constant lumen output would have to be the implementation of a feedback system where the output is sampled and fed back to the input. Not sure how this could be done for a light output. A tiny photo sensor in the reflector?



One little-known fact is that LEDs can also be used as ad-hoc light detectors!

An LED with a Phosphor can be used as it's own feedback device.

But really, constant light output to the degree necessary to require optical feedback is overkill. Watching power and temperature you could get closer than you'd need for all real-world apps.

I just want to see a rotary brightness selector and click button. One of these days hopefully someone will do it right!

I love my Modified Arc4+ and U60, aside from the interface being non-ideal, I use one or the other ever day, and is by far the most useful tool that I wasn't born with!

Glad to see Peter is back in the game!

-Phil


----------



## Gransee (Sep 20, 2006)

Nothing to update with yet. Made some good progress today. Solved several problems that were bugging me. 

Peter


----------



## rdh226 (Sep 20, 2006)

paulr said:


> ...
> 
> As for lithium, the one true li ion form factor is the 18650 cell--RCR123A's have always struck me as silly. I think it would be nice to have an 18650 holder for the new LS with a built-in protection circuit (so you could use a raw cell) and a built-in charger powered by 5 volts, with a weather-sealed USB mini-B connector so you could charge it from a USB port with a commodity digicam cable, or from a 5v cell phone charger with a mini-B or adapter to mini-B. If necessary the connector could be under a gasketed screw thingie (twist cap or coin slotted plug) to make the light waterproof. And of course this would be the computer port for reprogramming the light. A similar thing for 1AA (maybe with an expansion sleeve for 2AA) would also be great. Me, I think I'd stick with AA. With the availability of Eneloop/Enduro cells, self-discharge is no longer a big issue at normal temperatures, so there's not much reason to use either alkaline or lithium ion any more.


What I've wanted in a "self charger" is an AA/14500/17500/17670/18500/18670 (I admit I'm a LiIon fan)
flashlight that I can just stick bassackwards (to so speak) into a car's multipurpose 12V power port
(aka "cigarette lighter"), which are truly ubiquitous. Now a smart (really smart) internal circuit could
autosense AA NiMH vs 14500 LiIon and charge appropriately. It could further autosense a 6V vs 12V
"car"...even losing .75V across a blocking diode (so power can not flow OUT of the light) still leaves
plenty of charging oomph from a 6V system, safe to short out contacts (loose change, keys in pocket,
I.e., reasonable approximation of foolproof), and so on.

Offhand, dunno if 18xxx (or, for that matter 17xxx) are too wide to fit in the 12V power ports, but the
14xxx certainly will (with a reasonable body wall thickness).

Just another thought from the peanut gallery.

-RDH


----------



## Jedi Knife (Sep 22, 2006)

I noticed the emphasis that this light will be expensive. Do you have a marketing department? Marketing consultants? Of course, there may be situations when a business or individual is not concerned about marketing a product, such as artists, or others who are not concerned about a limited (or, temporary ) presence in the marketplace.


----------



## pEEf (Sep 25, 2006)

An inductive charger would be tops on my list of desirable features.... Drop the light into a simple charger consisting only of a coil and a line cord, with no unscrewing needed and it charges! 

I was able to build this feature into a cheap Chinese "MXDL" brand light and it's pretty cool. I added a simple circuit to shut down the regulator when it senses charging voltage, so you can optionally turn the light on, then insert it into the charger and if power fails, the light comes on. If I had a micro in there, this could be a "smart" feature with programmable level, etc.

Second on the wishlist would be a nice rotary encoder ring to select brightness levels similar to what a SureFire U2 has now. We discussed this several years ago once in this thread: http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showpost.php?p=602738&postcount=31 Not the easiest thing to implement, but would really improve the human interface quite a bit! 

-Phil


----------



## dealer (Sep 25, 2006)

I personly would like ARC to stay with there current way of makeing them. Small as possible, bright as possible, very long run time. A rechargable one does not fit this, we already have this depending on the batteries. I do not think I would buy a rechargable one. I need a very long shelf life and may need a very lone run time.


----------



## pEEf (Sep 25, 2006)

Well, the beauty of the inductive method is that it can be added to the light, and simply not used if you don't wish to. Make the charger an optional unit, and if you don't want to use it, you won't even be able to tell it's there!

It shouldn't add much to the size or cost, IMHO. (As long as you use a protected cell anyway) Otherwise you'd have to add some charger electronics.

Maybe this could simply be incorporated in the tail, so that different tails could be sold. If the switch was in the tail like HDS, the charge current could be funneled down the 3rd contact (spring) sharing the button line. A diode in the engine would shunt charge current to the battery. Charge electronics and the coil would live at the bottom.

It's just a thought.... Peter will make an awesome light, charger or not!

-Phil


----------



## Gransee (Sep 25, 2006)

Early prototypes had parts for drop-in inductive charging, blue outrigger LED and LED to LED comms (using main LED as sensor), etc. Some of the extra features were found to have bulky or finicky solutions. They were eliminated to purify the design.

I understand that is dissapointing to some, it was to me. Understand however, there is no such thing as a, "compromise free" design. 

Peter


----------



## pEEf (Sep 25, 2006)

Gransee said:


> Early prototypes had parts for drop-in inductive charging, blue outrigger LED and LED to LED comms (using main LED as sensor), etc. Some of the extra features were found to have bulky or finicky solutions. They were eliminated to purify the design.
> 
> I understand that is dissapointing to some, it was to me. Understand however, there is no such thing as a, "compromise free" design.
> 
> Peter



Wow!

Did you find that the phosphor in the Luxeon slowed down the response a lot? Or did you use the "outrigger"?

since you haven't mentioned the rotary encoder, maybe this is one that you haven't yet found finicky or bulky.... ;-)

Thanks Peter!

-Phil


----------



## Gransee (Sep 25, 2006)

The capacitance of the junction has more of an effect on baud. Also, range is not very good (~6 inches). It is not a very good sensor. Too bad, I wanted to make it so that the light would automatically kick up to full power if it was shone at a distant object after being pointed at a nearby object. 

Truly, the main focus is just to produce a small, reliable light that can be depended on to get the job done without much fuss.

Btw, I wrote some thoughts on rotary encoders here in the Arc forum awhile back. 

Peter


----------



## Codeman (Sep 26, 2006)

Too bad about the sensor. That would have been both very cool and very useful, Peter.


----------



## pEEf (Sep 26, 2006)

Gransee said:


> {snip}
> Btw, I wrote some thoughts on rotary encoders here in the Arc forum awhile back.



I did a search and couldn't locate it. I'd love to read it!


----------



## skalomax (Oct 3, 2006)

Anything New? Did ARC Merge With Surefire Or something?


----------



## Gransee (Oct 3, 2006)

That would be fun...

I have allowed some limited beta testing for the past 2 weeks. We found an issue that needs to be fixed. Sometimes the light refuses to fire with a weak battery that is above the target voltage. I am putting together a plan to fix that.

Peter


----------



## DarthLumen (Oct 3, 2006)

It's dark out here.....we need lights Peter!!! 

Bring it on!!!


----------



## Perfectionist (Oct 3, 2006)

So NovaTec and Arc go head to head ...... ? !


----------



## Casual Flashlight User (Oct 3, 2006)

Perfectionist said:


> So NovaTec and Arc go head to head ...... ? !


 
And CPFers will do what they do best...






CFU


----------



## trivergata (Oct 4, 2006)

This is killing me...........Must read all posts..............


----------



## carl (Oct 9, 2006)

Glad to hear Peter and Arc are coming back toward a full product line. 

I'm hoping the new LS will have a mix of the attributes of both the PD and the Arc4:

1) Simple short press for on/off
2) Turn the head for Hi/Low
3) long press for Burst mode
4) piston type on/off button
5) nice medium size (similar to 27mm) reflector
6) not too short or small to hold for medium size hands (for tail switch lights, there comes a point where short is too short, imho).

Can't wait to watch this new project develop. Keep up the good work!


----------



## ChocolateLab33 (Oct 12, 2006)

*I'll be watching this thread closely*!


----------



## 270winchester (Oct 13, 2006)




----------



## xochi (Oct 13, 2006)

This light sounds very interesting and I will definitely be considering it as EDC ! I am worried, though, that "niche market only" and "expensive" are indications that Arc will want more of my labor than I am willing to give....

Any news on release dates? No doubt Arc is painfully aware but that thorn in their side AKA "Fenix" has realesed 4 new models in just the past month (includeing a microprocessor controlled, regulated luxeon AAA light). I'm sure that _once released_ the quality and sophistication of the new Arc LS will be in an entirely different league than anything Fenix _has_ offered. But if the L0P SE is an indication of things to come, it might be too late. 

I'm not trying to be a ****, just pointing out that purina is now offering "soylent green" flavored "MilkBones".


----------



## nightshade (Oct 13, 2006)

Soylent Green....Its the year 2022. People are still the same. They will do anything to get what they need.


----------



## AloneInTheDark (Oct 13, 2006)




----------



## Stillphoto (Oct 13, 2006)

Oh man Xochi...First I was going to say ok Fenix and Arc shouldnt even be mentioned in the same sentence. Then you had to go and redeem yourself with the Soylent green milkbone comment!

Ok back on topic!


----------



## Sean (Oct 14, 2006)

I'm glad to see things progressing on the new Arc-LS. I'm looking forward to seeing more on this light in the future.


----------



## sgtgeo (Oct 14, 2006)

WOW "Soylent Green" content!!!

What no mention of "1984"?


----------



## bmstrong (Oct 16, 2006)

>>I'm glad to see things progressing on the new Arc-LS. I'm looking forward to seeing more on this light in the future

Agreed. But it would be better to have a release date and then to hold in my hands...


----------



## teststrips (Oct 17, 2006)

Soylent Green - I had to research this to figure out what the heck you guys were talking about... seems to me it was some movie which basically talks about the future and goverment supported rationing of artificial food - eventually winding up in a plot to find out the new "flavor" - green is actually partially made up of reprocessed human body parts... yuck... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green

I still don't understand how it relates to flashlights


----------



## carl (Oct 21, 2006)

One more humble suggestion: A bezel down clip rather than the bezel up on the Arc4/HDS.


----------



## xochi (Oct 21, 2006)

teststrips said:


> Soylent Green - I had to research this to figure out what the heck you guys were talking about... seems to me it was some movie which basically talks about the future and goverment supported rationing of artificial food - eventually winding up in a plot to find out the new "flavor" - green is actually partially made up of reprocessed human body parts... yuck... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green
> 
> I still don't understand how it relates to flashlights



Sorry, just a circuitous reference to cannibalism. The led flashlight market is "dog eat dog".


----------



## teststrips (Oct 23, 2006)

ahhh... i get it now.


----------



## ledvador (Oct 26, 2006)

Hi Peter,
Any news about the new light?
I get a question
Does the new Arc LS use the new Cree XR-E led?
How about a belt clip? 
It will be so nice if it will get the same design as the Arc4 for me it was the best design to secure a light in the pocket.


----------



## ViReN (Oct 26, 2006)

Does the new Arc LS use the new Cree XR-E led?

I had a dream once recently... and it seems it does... and the new Arc LS should put out at least 160 lumen's out front.


----------



## carl (Oct 27, 2006)

ledvador said:
 

> It will be so nice if it will get the same design as the Arc4 for me it was the best design to secure a light in the pocket.



Just a question, why do you prefer bezel up for a tailcap switch?


----------



## Thujone (Oct 27, 2006)

carrot said:


> I hope you consider that some of us don't use Windows... will the new Arc LS be fully usable out of the box without needing to connect to the computer? And do you plan to add support for OSX/Linux?



At the risk of this already being answered since i havent read the entire thread I would have to suggest that a simple application like this should run no problem in WINE. Making it simple to run on your Mac or a 'nix box.


----------



## ledvador (Oct 29, 2006)

carl said:


> Just a question, why do you prefer bezel up for a tailcap switch?



I will try to explain my point of view with my poor english level...


The position bezel up allow to secure the lens against some agressive stuf that you could find in the pocket as keys, coins etc... You could see also if the light as accidently turn on in the poket.

And what in like in the general clip design is the forward loop allow to store the light deep inside the pocket. After many try with an Arc4 i noted that the light is steel well seated in place when you need to bent you to pick up some stuf in the ground. If i had the same clip mounted with my HDS i had could avoid to lost it last year.
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/104555


----------



## IsaacHayes (Oct 29, 2006)

I'm gonna throw this out in the thread as I'm surprised no one else has yet. Put the Cree XR-E into the new Arc LS. (maybe have to call it Arc-XRE?) hehe. The cree is just too nice to not consider using in a new not yet designed light.


----------



## BentHeadTX (Oct 29, 2006)

IsaacHayes said:


> I'm gonna throw this out in the thread as I'm surprised no one else has yet. Put the Cree XR-E into the new Arc LS. (maybe have to call it Arc-XRE?) hehe. The cree is just too nice to not consider using in a new not yet designed light.



I am sure Peter has been scrambling with Don to redesign the Arc XR (Don was in on the body design and "saw the lighting" before we heard the Cree thunder) The new Arc is a natural for the series with the XR-E. First to use the LS and first production light to use the XR-E. It fits Peter's demands for decent runtime so it makes a nice fit. The speculation grows


----------



## jonman007 (Oct 29, 2006)

Yeah if the new LS uses an XR-E, I think i'll 'have' to buy one.


----------



## Gransee (Oct 29, 2006)

Yes, I have done some work with the XREs including building a LS with one installed. There are many neat LEDs becoming available. There are pros and cons to each.

Peter


----------



## 270winchester (Oct 30, 2006)

Gransee said:


> There are many neat LEDs becoming available.




sounds exciting....


----------



## Miciobigio (Oct 30, 2006)

Gransee said:


> Yes, I have done some work with the XREs including building a LS with one installed. There are many neat LEDs becoming available. There are pros and cons to each.
> 
> Peter


 
Ok , now i know that the new Arc will have a XRE ...... or better


----------



## jch79 (Oct 30, 2006)

Aren't we all glad that it didn't come out a month ago with a LuxIII!?!

I'd say that now, more than ever, it'll be worth the wait!

john


----------



## carl (Oct 30, 2006)

jch79 said:


> Aren't we all glad that it didn't come out a month ago with a LuxIII!?!



Or a K2!?!

Soooo so glad its still in the design process. Just hope its not too far off from production.


----------



## jch79 (Nov 5, 2006)

:wave: Hey Peter, how's it going?


----------



## ledvador (Nov 7, 2006)

Gransee said:


> Yes, I have done some work with the XREs including building a LS with one installed. There are many neat LEDs becoming available. There are pros and cons to each.
> 
> Peter


Does it mean that we have to expect soon to see another hight power LED from Lumiled or other compagnies???
Realy interesting!

Peter, how about the belt clip?


----------



## 270winchester (Nov 8, 2006)




----------



## charlesn (Nov 8, 2006)

Gransee said:


> Yes, I have done some work with the XREs including building a LS with one installed. There are many neat LEDs becoming available. There are pros and cons to each.
> 
> Peter



Peter, given the XRE craze that's now sweeping CPF (Lux IIIs have been all but relegated to "candle" status), I have to ask: what do you see as the cons to the XRE?


----------



## Gransee (Nov 10, 2006)

To get a good flashlight beam with an XRE, the reflector has to be deeper. This makes the flashlight significantly longer. 

I would like to see the dice mounted in a k2 style package or better. Seoul Semi (a packager of Cree dice) is working on that but I don't think they are getting the best dice.

Peter


----------



## [email protected] Messenger (Nov 10, 2006)

charlesn said:


> Peter, given the XRE craze that's now sweeping CPF (Lux IIIs have been all but relegated to "candle" status), I have to ask: what do you see as the cons to the XRE?


 
That he's going to have to change the name to Arc XRE instead of LS?


----------



## xr4fun (Nov 10, 2006)

I'm only speaking for myself of course, but a little length is more than made up for with the positives of the XR-E. Unless there is some other better alternative. A smaller diameter is more important to me than length, but of course Brightness and Runtime rank at the top.

Ok, I just had to say something........the suspence is killing me.


----------



## IsaacHayes (Nov 10, 2006)

Just a thought but the light could start out with an optic much like the original. Then later progress like the LP lights and then arc4 with reflector. 

I noticed the seoul z-led lights that use reflectors work pretty good with the cree xre too btw. The reflectors are pretty deep.


----------



## 270winchester (Nov 10, 2006)

Hey PEter:

one the of things I liked about the original LS was the fact that it used optics(Fraen if I remember correctly). 

The XR-Es are shown to be decent with the TIR optic for the SUrefire KL1, thanks to CM's beamshots. Perhaps that can be a possibility?


----------



## carl (Nov 10, 2006)

xr4fun said:


> A smaller diameter is more important to me than length, but of course Brightness and Runtime rank at the top.



I agree with your priorities. 

#1: Brightness
#2: Runtime
#3: smaller diameter
#4: shorter length (last priority)

I hope we get the brightest LED currently available and change the reflector configuration as LED technology advances from year to year, similar to the McGizmo lights. 

While we're on the topic of McGizmolights, using machining flutes for grip rather than knurling seems like a nice approach IMHO.


----------



## IsaacHayes (Nov 10, 2006)

I don't like the huge knotty stuff of the mclux 27l 2x123a lights, but small grooves are ok. I like the small knurling of my arc AAA though. It's just right. Some lights are really sharp and large diamond knurling that feels like a saw blade!


----------



## jch79 (Nov 13, 2006)

Peter,
What are the chances of seeing a photo of one of these guys sometime soon to get our mouths watering?
Thanks,
john


----------



## Casual Flashlight User (Nov 13, 2006)

> Peter,
> What are the chances of seeing a photo of one of these guys sometime soon to get our mouths watering?
> Thanks,


 
+1. Or even a rough concept sketch would do for now.


CFU


----------



## cloud (Nov 13, 2006)

Casual Flashlight User said:


> +1. Or even a rough concept sketch would do for now.
> 
> 
> CFU


 
+ 1 here also the suspense is killing me


----------



## carl (Nov 13, 2006)

+1 for all of us, especially since we know its going to be good, real good.


----------



## PaveQ (Nov 15, 2006)

Nice, very interesting. I was almost ordering my AAA-P but notices this. Now I can't decide if I should just get AAA-P now or wait this. The features of new LS are very cool indeed. Few questions:

What will be price range be? I know you don't want to tell it yet, but as I'm student, there is some limit I can afford. Also shipping and tax makes it bit more in EU. EDIT: Looks like its going to be expensive, but I'm getting it anyways, sooner or later, so cool it is. 

And another question is when? This year or next?

And will it be much more powerfull than AAA-P? Least it will be bulkier than AAA because the batteries. Dunno, I almost think AAA is too small, but can't be sure. Would LS be caried easily in jeans pocket everyday?

EDIT: How does new LS compare to this?


----------



## Casual Flashlight User (Nov 15, 2006)

Pave, welcome to CPF.






First of all, you can't go wrong with a little Arc-AAA-P on your keychain...lovely little light.

Second, the new Arc light will be a fair bit bigger than the Arc-P, it will be using a CR123 cell and will doubtlessly be a lot fatter and lot more powerfull. I believe that it will also be a *lot* more expensive.

Have a look at this link and you will see the old Arc-AAA's next to the old Arc LS series of lights...it's pretty certain that the new Arcs will be around the same size as the old LS series.

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/861659&postcount=49

Hope this gives you an idea of the difference.


CFU


----------



## coontai (Nov 16, 2006)

I’m sorry but what stage is the new ARC LS in? Beta testing? And why isn’t it even mentioned on the ARC website. This makes me believe it won’t be out for a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong time.


----------



## jar3ds (Nov 16, 2006)

lord only hopes it'll have a XR-E w/ a good reflector


----------



## carl (Nov 16, 2006)

This may be a bit premature since we don't know the final configuration of the new LS but is anyone concerned about the reliability of an electronic tailswitch rather than a mechanical one (clicky)? If I recall, the Arc4 had problems with its electronic tailswitch. A mechanical clicky seems so much more straightforward, simple, and reliable although adapting it to a dimmer function may be a problem. Electronic tailswitches seem to do well in testing with thousands of cycles without failure but when in actual production, seem to have problems. Does anyone know if the HDS had any tailswitch problems?


----------



## skalomax (Nov 19, 2006)

You Hear It?

The Crickets Chirping?
Comon ARC Show Us Some Pics PLEASE!! :huh:


----------



## cave dave (Nov 21, 2006)

Gransee said:


> To get a good flashlight beam with an XRE, the reflector has to be deeper....
> 
> Peter


That sort of depends how you define a good beam. Personnaly I would love a lot of flood. I suspect a refocused MC18 would still provide some spot and just a wall of light. A distribution pattern of a nichia CS would be just fine for me. (just a heck of a lot brighter)

If you use a deeper reflector you brighten the spot but the spill angle becomes smaller. This is not ideal for some uses like bicycling and caving.

Join the cave dave chant:
"Wall of light, Wall of light, Wall of light ...."


----------



## asdalton (Nov 24, 2006)

carl said:


> This may be a bit premature since we don't know the final configuration of the new LS but is anyone concerned about the reliability of an electronic tailswitch rather than a mechanical one (clicky)? If I recall, the Arc4 had problems with its electronic tailswitch.



The Arc4 did have a switch problem, but this problem was mechanical in nature. The switching mechanism was in the head, and the operation of the tail switch depended on the battery as a mechanical connection between the tail and head. The problem was that the variation in battery lengths was larger than what the Arc4 could handle for correct operation across different brands of 123A cells. So there's no reason fear that an electronic switch itself will be a problem.


----------



## carl (Dec 1, 2006)

Andrew, thanks for your explanation. I now remember something about the variation between different brands of batteries. I was also initially thinking about the type of problem we see with worn out calculator keys, computer keyboards, etc. where you press the button and it either doesn't respond or overresponds with too many numbers/letters showing up on the screen.


----------



## Light-Eater (Dec 4, 2006)

Peter!! You announced in July, now it's December, our money are looking for your pocket! Is it here yet? :laughing: 

BTW, is there any chance we'll have an optional AA or AAA tube to attach to that head?


----------



## 270winchester (Dec 5, 2006)




----------



## Flying Turtle (Dec 5, 2006)

What do you bet there's some re-tooling going on for an Arc/Cree?

Geoff


----------



## THE_dAY (Dec 5, 2006)

how about a spy shot of the light Peter?

kinda like the "arc4 on the keyboard" pic?


----------



## chago (Dec 5, 2006)

THE_dAY said:


> how about a spy shot of the light Peter?
> 
> kinda like the "arc4 on the keyboard" pic?




that'll be good! even a "loch ness monster" quality pic will do... for now...


----------



## Gransee (Dec 6, 2006)

Sorry guys. I don't want to post pictures until I am more confident of a completion date. Otherwise I would just be teasing you. 

Peter


----------



## ViReN (Dec 6, 2006)

Gransee said:


> Sorry guys. I don't want to post pictures until I am more confident of a completion date. Otherwise I would just be teasing you.
> 
> Peter



we all love teasers.... dont we 

put em on Peter... we have very high hopes from Arc LS Cree XR-E


----------



## Light-Eater (Dec 8, 2006)

Gransee said:


> Sorry guys. I don't want to post pictures until I am more confident of a completion date. Otherwise I would just be teasing you.
> 
> Peter



So Peter, I take it completion date for the new LS won't be at least 3 months away? I need to know b/c I'm gonna buy something else in the mean time.


----------



## spideyfan (Dec 10, 2006)

Gransee said:


> Sorry guys. I don't want to post pictures until I am more confident of a completion date. Otherwise I would just be teasing you.
> 
> Peter



I'm up for a good teasin...its been way too long since I had a good teasing


----------



## parnass (Dec 25, 2006)

Add me to the list of flashlight fans who _don't_ use Microsoft Windows. I use Linux.

I am interested in any new Arc offerings, but I avoid purchasing devices which require the use of Windows to exploit their full potential.


----------



## N162E (Dec 25, 2006)

Is this project going anywhere? Almost three weeks since any response from the builder.


----------



## N162E (Dec 28, 2006)

Asking again, is anything happening here?


----------



## Gransee (Dec 28, 2006)

Yes, but nothing I should talk about right now. Sorry.

Peter


----------



## 270winchester (Dec 28, 2006)




----------



## Freedom1955 (Jan 3, 2007)

270winchester said:


>



I've got a feeling you better get a few cases of popcorn.


----------



## chago (Jan 11, 2007)

:candle: anybody out there?


----------



## Gimpy00Wang (Jan 11, 2007)

chago said:


> :candle: anybody out there?



Nope...just you. 

- Chris


----------



## jch79 (Jan 12, 2007)

I gotta say, I respect Peter's secrecy on this... and although I like how guys like Endeavour, PEU, and Data post updates quite often on their progress, getting us all "pumped up" for their lights, this is an entire different kind of exciting... the unknown!

Although, I'm not saying that it's not driving me mad with anticipation!


----------



## BentHeadTX (Jan 12, 2007)

I figure Peter would give up some information now that the SHOT show is running and Surefire is releasing information. Still a few days left of the show so I think the secrecy will break a little.


----------



## Mr. Blue (Jan 12, 2007)

he's not going tho


----------



## yaesumofo (Jan 13, 2007)

Quite frankly if the ARC LS (new) doesn't have either a Seoul or Cree emitter I for one will not be owning one.
There is just too much on the positive side to ignore these emitters. Any new lights which do not utilize this technology will not get my vote(purchase).
Yaesumofo



jar3ds said:


> lord only hopes it'll have a XR-E w/ a good reflector


----------



## ViReN (Jan 13, 2007)

U never know, there might be something else that Cree and Seoul SP4.. which would be much brighter than any of LED's available as of today


----------



## Pax et Lux (Jan 18, 2007)

Peter's either being quiet because he doesn't want news to leak out before he can market his light, or else he's being quiet because he's using some newer-than-Cree LED that's coming out and he isn't allowed to talk about it. . . either way I wouldn't want to play poker against him.

My bet is that it is Cree based, considering the McGizmo connection.


----------



## Zman (Jan 18, 2007)

What if lumileds has a new offering on the horizon and Peter is in with them? After all, the original LS was also used by the lumileds reps to show off their product with the blue bodied models.....you never know.


----------



## Gransee (Jan 24, 2007)

During the development of this light several new LEDs have come out. Some require making changes to the head housing/etc to make it work with this or that LED. I prefer not to make changes in the spec this late in the design phase but the brightness of the light is a key requirement, so making changes late in the design to work with a particular LED was expected. 

Honestly, I don't know exactly which LED will be used in production. I do have a first choice and it works in the current build. It will be our backup if a better LED comes along but has trouble shipping in time. A lot can change between now and then. The bottom line is that I have placed a very high priority on shipping the light with the best possible LED available. "Available" being an important word to keep in mind.

There is this fine line between waiting for the next led and never shipping a product. I am starting to appreciate a specification I gave to this project when I started: make it easier to swap the LED. I thought this would help the customer, but it is also helping me. 

I wrote this requirement into the spec back in 2005 because I expected LED improvements to start to occur at a more rapid rate. 2006 demostrated that quite nicely. 

2006 saw the most rapid improvement in high power LEDs I have seen in any 12 month period to date. This has created some delays as I want to qualify each led as samples become available. I have looked at the cree and others.

However, testing LEDs in our prototypes is a minor delay compared to other challenges this program has faced. Most of the time in the past year has been spent on things that were planned but delays have occured and are quite annoying but a normal part of doing something not done before. 

Peter


----------



## Codeman (Jan 24, 2007)

Sounds good to me, Gransee!


----------



## Robocop (Jan 25, 2007)

I still do highly guard my original LS lights and many of them have been modded with great frustration on my part. They remain some of my favorites to this day and even with the frustration of waiting so very long for other ARC versions I still do get excited hoping for new products.

I believe that offering future versions with the ability to be more easily modded is a great idea and honestly I feel many of us wish the originals were easier to mod. The first thing I did to mine was the usual current bump and reflector swap.....made a great light much better in my opinion.

The new LS is facing some major competition and I am truly amazed at the advance of Luxeon type emitters lately. I for one would be much more comfortable purchasing a product that could change with the competition and I very much like knowing you are planning the new LS to be easier to swap out the emitter......good luck and yes we are all still waiting for some type of photos or in the very least some type of specs or even measurements.


----------



## mobile1 (Jan 27, 2007)

Zman said:


> What if lumileds has a new offering on the horizon and Peter is in with them? After all, the original LS was also used by the lumileds reps to show off their product with the blue bodied models.....you never know.



I don't think Lumileds is still competitive. Their latest announcements are more desperate acts to maybe keep some customers before they've all switched to cree and others. Besides it shows how little they know about their competition thinking that their lab 100L/w is a record while others ship samples that are past that. Besides the K2 was a disaster. I'd be surprised if any flashlight manufacturer is sticking with them.


----------



## skalomax (Feb 15, 2007)

Sorry, but bump!!

Were there any info at the shot show?

Thanks!


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 15, 2007)

I doubt it, since Arc wasn't at SHOT...


----------



## Gransee (Feb 15, 2007)

Just a quick update. Still here of course and spending all my work time on the LS R&D. Each week brings problems and solutions all a normal part of development. 

A couple months ago I wrote a multi-page update but one of my friends saw the draft and recommended I not post it. He said it contained too much detail that competitors would benefit from. So you get unsubstantial whimpy updates.

Peter


----------



## Miciobigio (Feb 16, 2007)

Gransee said:


> Just a quick update. Still here of course and spending all my work time on the LS R&D. Each week brings problems and solutions all a normal part of development.
> 
> A couple months ago I wrote a multi-page update but one of my friends saw the draft and recommended I not post it. He said it contained too much detail that competitors would benefit from. So you get unsubstantial whimpy updates.
> 
> Peter


 
CPF user ----> :whoopin: <------- your friend.


----------



## 270winchester (Feb 16, 2007)

Good call Peter, otherwise we will have a Fenix/Lumapower/Spiderfire that would suspicious have the said features within a week.



Gransee said:


> Just a quick update. Still here of course and spending all my work time on the LS R&D. Each week brings problems and solutions all a normal part of development.
> 
> A couple months ago I wrote a multi-page update but one of my friends saw the draft and recommended I not post it. He said it contained too much detail that competitors would benefit from. So you get unsubstantial whimpy updates.
> 
> Peter


----------



## cave dave (Feb 16, 2007)

Maybe Peter will surprise everyone and come out with a *headlamp!*

- Cave "Wishful Thinking" Dave


----------



## Gransee (Feb 17, 2007)

Sorry cave dave, no headlamp.

--

I got the rev7 pcb sent out for rfq yesterday. This gives me a moment to reflect and post to the CPF. 

There are probably several different positions taken by cpf'ers on the subject of the new LS. Some just want to know when it is done, how much it costs and what the features are. Others want more information about the development, prototypes, etc. 

In the old days, I would basically blog my progress on an almost daily basis. But the times change and that doesn't work as well now. When I came out with the first LS, we were the only company that had announced a high power LED flashlight. I assumed we didn't have many competitors so there was no problem with talking about intimate details of my progress. After the first LS went to production, I was surprised by how the market responded. 

(Long explanation going all the way back to the log cabin deleted here)

At any rate... The project is taking the normal amount of time for a project and teams like this. It is also costing on the low end of the normal cost. Most problems are new problems, which is the best kind of problem you can hope for in a development project. 

I don't know when the project will be done of course, so estimates are mostly worthless. I won't bother. I can say that this is basically all I am working on right now and it has been that way for awhile. Progress is very good, there is just a lot to do. 

It would have been a lot easier if I had just went with a simple driver (basic high and low, nothing fancy) but I have my reasons. This driver is supposed to be a fairly aggressive design. This translates into high light density.

Of course, I want it to be done now and very badly so. But these things take time. Why didn't I just keep quiet about the project until it was done so you wouldn't be frustrated? I get many emails from people wanting to know if we will ever make the LS again. If I say yes, they ask questions. We have people asking for advice on what to buy in a new flashlight. People wanting to know why I haven’t updated the LS or the AAA. What in the heck am I doing with all my time, etc. At some point with all these questions I said I was working on a new LS. I guess I thought people would say, "oh. ok".

No problem. I'll post stuff when I can. The rev7 pcb for example is the latest driver iteration. I have been working on it since last year and I finally sent it out for 1:1 prototyping. This means it is moving from the breadboard to a production sized pcb complete with smds. I estimate there will be another revision after this but with each revision I design it like it is going to production. 

I also hope with each revision that the list of possible problems is being reduced. Otherwise I would be stuck in a loop of constant revision. Ugh. The original feature set from 2005 is basically the same. Each revision has been an attempt on my part to best meet that feature set. The last revision (R6) had a lot going for it but it was sensitive to weak batteries. R7 addresses that squarely while also improving efficiency with rechargeables. I figure this light will be mostly be used with rechargeables (although it can run great on regular old non-rechargeable 123s), so that is an important feature. Of course, R7 could later on suddenly have weird measles or something. Anything can happen. I can say that my testing generally is getting more and more extensive with each rev. So I like to think the trend is towards progress.

Most of you already know this but I should remind you that we are a little company and I am the R&D department. I don't poop out new variations every 2 months instead it takes years to refine a design. 

At some point, I would like to post photos of the light, specs, prices, delivery, etc. I can say that is a long way off right now. A select group of cpf'ers have seen the protos, tested them, given opinions, etc. 

Not much of an update I know.

Peter


----------



## Codeman (Feb 17, 2007)

Gransee said:


> ...
> Not much of an update I know.
> 
> Peter



:lolsign:


----------



## Gransee (Feb 17, 2007)

Looking through your posts, I see some have ask or have speculated about what LED the LS will use. The specification for the flashlight doesn't list a particular LED, I knew that this would change over time. The LS is intended to operate at the high end of the niche LED market. This means in order to be successfull it must be the brightest or one of the brightest lights in its class. This includes using the latest LED (whatever it may be) a great quality optics system and of course an aggressive driver. 

So at this point, I don't know what LED it will use, how bright it will be, beam shot at 6ft, etc. 

This I know: our competitors have access to the same LED we have. So from a design perspective the LED used isn't that important. I just assume it will be the best. What I concern myself with is the rest of the flashlight and especially the specs of the converter. And of course, those details are not public information at this point for obvious reasons. 

So P-4? Sure, why not. New K-2? Ok. 100+ lumen? Well, with 100lm/w leds in production, why not? Just not the big questions I work with right now.

Peter


----------



## TIP AND RING (Feb 17, 2007)

Thanks for the update. As a Arc fan I'm glad there is a new LS on the horizon. As a practical user I have many hopes for the light. However, I never have felt that Arc or you owe me anything. I hope its development is a true successor to the original LS.


----------



## Gransee (Feb 17, 2007)

Skimming through your posts to see if I can answer anymore questions while I have the time...

It probably doesn't hurt for me to say this again, the new LS is designed to be simple. It is a flashlight not a toy. That may make it a bit boring to some, but so be it. 

You guys have practically stormed the castle asking for 2 levels. I agree and that requirement is in the spec. These two levels are directly available with a quick twist of the pack. 

I will likely set the high to about a 2hr runtime and the low to about a 5-10 lumen level (Arc-AAA level basically). Both levels will be regulated, protected and civilized of course. 

If you want, you can change this, but only if you want. This will provide access to brighter levels with shorter runtimes of course. And I have tried to make it as easy as humanly possible without adding a row of buttons, knobs and 2x16 LCD to the side of the flashlight (eek!).

My ideal for a single 123 flashlight include:
1. small
2. tough
3. bright
4. easy to use
5. no-nonsense
6. future resistant
7. minimalist clean design
8. affordable as possible

"Future resistance" means it doesn't become obsolete as quickly. I don't know about you, but I have better things to do than shop all the time. I want to do the diligence, research my options, make a selection and get on with life. That little tool had better do its job and not whine or make a mess. It should just get better with age.

And of course, you can have it in any color or metal as long as it is TypeIII HA natural Aluminum. 

I have been working towards my ideal 1x123 ever since I produced the first LS back in 2001. This latest iteration hopefully will be the closest to the ideal yet.

Peter


----------



## paulr (Feb 17, 2007)

Gransee said:


> What I concern myself with is the rest of the flashlight and especially the specs of the converter.


There's one interesting challenge in converter design right now, and other flashlight makers aren't attempting it. That's building a 3 watt converter that runs on one AA cell (NiMH for the high current needed). That's what you have to do to beat Fenix. Another 123-powered light is a yawner. A regulated, 150+ lumen Arc LS powered by a single AA cell will conquer the world. Or at least it will conquer CPF.


----------



## GadgetTravel (Feb 17, 2007)

Gransee said:


> Skimming through your posts to see if I can answer anymore questions while I have the time...
> 
> It probably doesn't hurt for me to say this again, the new LS is designed to be simple. It is a flashlight not a toy. That may make it a bit boring to some, but so be it.
> 
> ...



Very interesting. Looking forward to it! Thanks for the update.


----------



## CM (Feb 17, 2007)

paulr said:


> There's one interesting challenge in converter design right now, and other flashlight makers aren't attempting it. That's building a 3 watt converter that runs on one AA cell (NiMH for the high current needed). That's what you have to do to beat Fenix. Another 123-powered light is a yawner. A regulated, 150+ lumen Arc LS powered by a single AA cell will conquer the world. Or at least it will conquer CPF.



Is that 150+ lumens out the business end or is that with the die held at a cozy 25C and output measured exclusive of optics/reflector/lens losses (ie, sterile laboratory conditions)? 

What kind of converter efficiency do you think this will require?


----------



## Pellidon (Feb 17, 2007)

As an owner of many Arc products from almost the onset and an engineer that is involved with new product designs I can be patient. I wish I had the comfort of being able to work on a project until it meets my satisfaction. This new light will be worth the wait. 

From my first hand experience with older Arc products It is apparent that Peter is not the "works good enough-ship it" kind of person. I have a couple of old "blemished" units. Peter may be the only person that can tell why it was considered a second. 

Besides the longer it takes, the more chance my bank account has to recover. 

P.S. Is it ready to ship yet?


----------



## paulr (Feb 17, 2007)

CM said:


> Is that 150+ lumens out the business end or is that with the die held at a cozy 25C and output measured exclusive of optics/reflector/lens losses (ie, sterile laboratory conditions)?
> 
> What kind of converter efficiency do you think this will require?


I think 150+ lumens out the front should be doable with the leds available by the time the new LS is shipped, if not with today's best LED's. The point is being able to run them at full rated power (1000 mA for the Cree XR-E, actually about 3.5 watts) which means around 4 amps from the cell at 70-75% converter effiicency (somewhat better efficiency than a Fenix L1P).

Maybe I'm wrong about beating Fenix since an Arc will necessarily be a lot more expensive (but a much more serious device). However a 2AA Arc can maybe beat Streamlight for law enforcement customers. Streamlight and Surefire both have vested interests in their proprietary battery systems (Streamlight rechargeables: $20+ for a replacement Strion pack that is really just a $3.50 18650 cell, and Surefire's even more expensive throwaway cr123's) and a NiMH AA powered system independent of proprietary battery vendors could be attractive in TCO even if the lights themselves cost more.


----------



## bhds (Feb 17, 2007)

Gransee said:


> I will likely set the high to about a 2hr runtime and the low to about a 5-10 lumen level (Arc-AAA level basically). Both levels will be regulated, protected and civilized of course.
> 
> Peter



Sounds Good!
All I want is a brighter(much brighter) version of my LS with fraen lense that has been eating 1 or 2 123 batts a week for the last 2 years:rock:


----------



## Robocop (Feb 17, 2007)

Mr.Gransee I know nothing of business so please take these suggestions as simply of a curious nature......I do believe that money coming in can only help a business and surely you could be taking advantage of your tried and true design of the old LS.......I have long said it that if you were to simply offer your old style design with reflector and maybe a Cree emitter it would surely sale like crazy.

Have you considered this as an option simply to get some sales coming in while you further develope your new LS? I have read several posts where members simply want an ARC of any style with a few updates such as emitters and reflector. I do not even know if you have any old stock left however such a classic design as the old LS would be a great competitor with a Cree and reflector.

Just a thought and I have often wanted to ask this question however did not simply because it is not my business and you have said you have your reasons.......I can only imagine the hundreds or even thousands of lights you could sale if you were to simply offer anything at all. I do understand that you do not want to simply whip up some less than average product just to have something to sale however your old design was already proven as very popular and durable.

Anyway good luck and please do not take offense to any of my comments.....I have really been wanting one of my favorites to get back into the game and will wait until whenever however time seems to make it harder on you due to so many others in the mix....Thanks again.


----------



## CM (Feb 17, 2007)

paulr said:


> I think 150+ lumens out the front should be doable with the leds available by the time the new LS is shipped, if not with today's best LED's. The point is being able to run them at full rated power (*1000 mA* for the Cree XR-E, actually about 3.5 watts) which means around 4 amps from the cell at *70-75% converter effiicency * (somewhat better efficiency than a Fenix L1P)...



Well at least your numbers are realistic. 4A is quite a load for many NiMH cells on the market (I'm talking about the ones that are most widely available, the so-called "high capacity" but anemic discharge at high current). Most high efficiency single chip controllers are optimized for Li-Ion chemistries and will go into undervoltage shut down when the input drops below around 2V. This would require a discrete solution which is probably not what's desired in this design. I'll shut up at this point and defer to Gransee if there's any further elaboration required.


----------



## bhds (Feb 18, 2007)

Robocop said:


> .......I have long said it that if you were to simply offer your old style design with reflector and maybe a Cree emitter it would surely sale like crazy.
> 
> I have read several posts where members simply want an ARC of any style with a few updates such as emitters and reflector. I do not even know if you have any old stock left however such a classic design as the old LS would be a great competitor with a Cree and reflector.


----------



## 270winchester (Feb 18, 2007)

Gransee said:


> I don't poop out new variations every 2 months instead it takes years to refine a design.



:lolsign: I hear that!!!


----------



## paulr (Feb 18, 2007)

I think there's not much point to a two hour high level if you've got a reasonable low level. High level is normally only needed for short periods so crank it up as high as you can without melting stuff.


----------



## Robocop (Feb 18, 2007)

Paulr you are so correct with your last statement as I have long thought the same way about high levels VS low levels.....I mean as much as many hate to admit it we all mostly want small and as bright as possible. I personally feel as if a super bright level is great with a second much lower level and that is all that is needed.

I have never seen a person take a brand new light out of a package and quickly compare the low level......the first thing we all do is go hide in a closet and blast away on the high level. I personally will sacrifice runtime simply to have as bright as possible of a high level.....most of this is due to the wow factor and my crazy flashlight ego however none the less most of us all really do want brighter lights with each purchase.

A true duty light or even a serious EDC light in my opinion should be as simple as possible. Two levels are ok however strobe, SOS, AM/FM radio, MP3 player, 25 levels of light, and grappling hook are really just novelty items in my opinion....hehe It is easy to over develope a product and will say it again that I believe we would all lign up for a simple,bright design coupled with those classic ARC lines we all know and loved.

If I had an old style LS body with a decent reflector and a Cree emitter getting about 700mA on high and say 150 on low I could sale it quickly here to many members. It seems as if almost any light offered now with a Cree is going fast......wether it is decent quality or not it still sales so add a classic design to the Cree and watch it go.

Of course I am saying all of this from a customers point of view as well as a true flashaholic so maybe I am just speaking for what I would like to see happen.....I do feel as if many members would quickly gobble up almost any light from ARC so I do understand how it is important for Peter to be sure his products keep his reputation going strong.

Does anyone know about how much work it would be to take the old LS and adapt it to modern reflectors and the Cree?....Maybe Peter has already thought of that and the cost to upgrade is not worth the risk who knows. It seems as if I read a thread recently where a member did just this however I do not know if the original circuit was used and do not know how the heat sink was made either.


----------



## Gransee (Feb 18, 2007)

Paulr, I wrote some thoughts on the AA cell last year and earlier. For better or worse, I want the LS to be primarily a 1x123 design. The new driver is compatible with a 2AA pack, which may be a later option.

Robocop, high could be programmed for a 20-30minute, temperature/voltage protected level and low for a 10-20lumen level. The light has hundreds of discrete levels that are accessible if you really need them. With the new pcb, I am closer to the driver I have wanted for some time. This means it has more headroom. 

Not sure if I told this story (it may have been in one of the drafts I decided not to publish), but back in nov05 I started the LS project with a classic LS and new LED. Then I identified things I wanted to improve and added them to the spec. This included switching to a reflector (smoother beam, easier centering) and replacing or fixing the Kroll. We shipped a lot of LSHs with krolls and got to experience the real Kroll. In some cases, it would fail in less than a month. It was the number one user complaint we recieved. It was like my old chevy truck; easy to service, but it needed it often. 

One of the things I wanted to do with the new LS was increase the current from 330ma to maybe 600 or more. I knew the kroll was going to just get worse with the additional current. The contacts would oxidize much quicker. I anticipated a nightmare if I produced large quantities. The kroll had to go.

I looked at other stock switches at the time and didn't find anything better. I think now there is the McLux clicky but at the time, that wasn't available. I also wanted 2 levels, which further complicated things. The switch search consumed months of time and thousands of dollars as I prototyped many variations. I finally did find a good switch design and it has been tested on the last couple of revs. 

The driver was another issue. The LSH driver (lt1618 based) didn't work well with rechargeables so a different driver was needed. There were stock drivers that could fit in the head, deliver up to a 1amp headroom and work with rechargeables. They even had hi/lo capability. One of the problems however is that they didn't protect the LED from overheating. That is important to me. I also wanted to make it easier to modify the light by changing the levels. Either because you wanted to try another level or because you swapped the LED.

I also wanted a feature where I could turn the light on with one click and have it latch. The switch design I settled on had many good feature but this wasn't one of them unfortunately so this meant using a electronic latch or looking for another switch.

Long story but suffice to say there is a fairly simple spec I started out with and the long road to satisfy it.

Peter


----------



## Ritch (Feb 18, 2007)

As a proud owner of the old ARC family members, AAA, AA, LSHF-P, I am looking forward to the new tool. I'll buy one in any case, if an 'accidental turning on clicky' will be spaced out.


----------



## paulr (Feb 18, 2007)

I didn't realize current McLux's had clickies. The original McLux TK had a Kroll, and I thought the PD has McGizmo's ingenious 2-level momentary pushbutton with a twist lock. 

I don't understand what the issue is with converters. I thought they were a solved problem, at least with 3 volts in. The McLux PD can use a wide range of input voltages (buck/boost converter) at fairly high current to the led. 

Please don't use a computerized UI with hundreds of levels and pushbutton tap dances like the Arc4+. It's ok if there's some user configurability when setting up the light (i.e. when the light is taken apart). The user should not have to think about such stuff during actual operation. They should at most just set it up once and leave it that way.


----------



## Gransee (Feb 19, 2007)

Non of the available drivers I have seen have temperature protection for the LED. There are other requirements also unmet.

The new LS driver does use a computerized user inteface. And it is definately not like the Arc4. I suspect many people won't even know it is digital because of how it operates. 

I guess some people are still skeptical after being stung by the Arc4. This is understandable. I am not ready to reveal just how the switch works but when I do it should be fairly obvious that the system is much more straightforward. 

Peter


----------



## havand (Feb 19, 2007)

Gransee said:


> Non of the available drivers I have seen have temperature protection for the LED. There are other requirements also unmet.
> 
> The new LS driver does use a computerized user inteface. And it is definately not like the Arc4. I suspect many people won't even know it is digital because of how it operates.
> 
> ...


 

I've never owned an ARC, but was fascinated when i first saw the LS 'back in the day'. It is what first got me into flashlights (and leds) and inspired me to take my first steps with an CMG infinity ultra and an Inova x5. I own lots more now , but I still click on EVERY for sale of an LS i see. I WILL be buying one of these and hopefully it sticks in my head the same as the LS for a long time to come. I thank you, my wallet does not.


----------



## ananddev (Feb 20, 2007)

All this anticipation is killing me. Is it possible to post atleast a pic of a prototype to kill the wait and give some idea of what is coming. Dev


----------



## Gransee (Feb 20, 2007)

Wouldn't a picture just cause more harm?

peter


----------



## powernoodle (Feb 20, 2007)

Peter - 

Its my belief that the more open you are now with pics, details, etc., the faster the money will jump from our pockets into yours when the LS is released. I say that not because I want to know more about the LS (though I do want to know more), but because I believe its true.

cheers


----------



## TIP AND RING (Feb 20, 2007)

Please don't post pics, I like suprises. Knowing even vaguely what it looks like isn't going to get it into production any quicker I don't believe, and starts a endless line of "I think it should be green, triangular and have a margarita blender" type posts. Please don't spoil the suprise.


----------



## MorpheusT1 (Feb 20, 2007)

Frankly,

Im tired of waiting and starting to loose interest.Im sure others are too.Posting a picure may just help with that 


Benny


----------



## havand (Feb 20, 2007)

TIP AND RING said:


> Please don't post pics, I like suprises. Knowing even vaguely what it looks like isn't going to get it into production any quicker I don't believe, and starts a endless line of "I think it should be green, triangular and have a margarita blender" type posts. Please don't spoil the suprise.



A margarita blender......They can do that? :naughty:


----------



## paulr (Feb 20, 2007)

There's nothing wrong with computers per se, they just are conducive to bad UI design in the hands of the inexperienced. The Surefire A2 has an internal microprocessor but most users probably don't realize it, and it is great. The microprocessor handles the PWM regulation and soft start for the incan bulb but the UI is not at all computer-ish.

There were two problems with the Arc4+, the flaky mechanical switch in some copies (it sounds like you've now designed a better switch--great!) and the UI itself. The UI in my opinion stunk, possibly because the Arc4+ was essentially a caving headlamp repackaged as an EDC. The requirements are quite different--a caving light is used a specific way, for hours at a time, and it's ok if the user has to fiddle with its settings now and then. It will normally be used only by its owner, or if someone else uses it, it's a specialized enough device that the owner can reasonably spend a few moments explaining its operation to the other user.

An EDC light on the other hand has to be operable and unintimidating to someone who borrows the light for a minute to look inside a computer or whatever. The Surefire A2 interface ("press for low power, press harder for high power") is about the maximum tolerable complexity and relies on the obvious visible twist tail to lock on and off. You should never have to explain multiple clicks to anyone.

It also helps usability even for the owner to make the interface completely tactile, NEVER having any "modes" relying on state in the microprocessor and repeated button pushes/twists. Changing levels has to be through a physical setting, either pressing a button harder (SF A2), bezel twist (Fenix L1T), or even turning a knob (Spy 005, SF U2). In the early days of desktop publishing, people wrote the ugliest documents you can imagine, with all kinds of font sizes and changes and rotations etc., just because the computer gave them that ability that typewriters didn't have. These microprocessor flashlight interfaces remind me of that.

Finally, there's all this concentration on adjusting brightness levels, because it's so easy to do that with an LED. But as we see in the Minimag (with its adjustable reflector) or SF A2 (with its three wideangle led's plus the directional incan) it's also important to have multiple beam angles (wide for nearby, narrow for long range). People sometimes complain that 8-10 lumens is too bright for reading, but a simple experiment should show the real problem: light up a page with an Arc4+ set at 8 lumens and measure the hotspot intensity on the page with a lightmeter. Then do the same thing under normal fluorescent office lighting, which is designed by experts to be optimal for reading. The office lighting will put far more lux on the page than the flashlight, but it's nondirectional. The problem with the flashlight isn't too many lumens, it's too much contrast between the hotspot and the spill.

Therefore the light I'd really hope to see is a 1 cell, LED version of the SF A2, with a bright powerful LED (Cree or whatever) in a 25mm-ish reflector for the long-throw high beam (i.e. the right size for Surefire bezel accessories), and three 5mm leds like the A2 for the wideangle low beam. Two brightness levels, two beam angles, tactile pushbutton interface, no built-in toaster oven. Any configuration should be done with a computer connected to the light (and puh-lease, use a normal USB mini-connector, not any proprietary weirdness) with the light opened up. It should NOT be any multi-click interface that the user needs an instruction manual for and which can lead to forgetting what state the light is in. The configuration program should be self-explanatory to use and should be released as source code in a cross-platform language, for easy porting multiple OS's.


----------



## TIP AND RING (Feb 20, 2007)

havand said:


> A margarita blender......They can do that? :naughty:


 
To be completely honest.....if they can, I'm in for three!!!!!!!!:lolsign:


----------



## kitelights (Feb 21, 2007)

paulr said:


> There's nothing wrong with computers per se, they just are conducive to bad UI design in the hands of the inexperienced. The Surefire A2 has an internal microprocessor but most users probably don't realize it, and it is great. The microprocessor handles the PWM regulation and soft start for the incan bulb but the UI is not at all computer-ish.
> 
> There were two problems with the Arc4+, the flaky mechanical switch in some copies (it sounds like you've now designed a better switch--great!) and the UI itself. The UI in my opinion stunk, possibly because the Arc4+ was essentially a caving headlamp repackaged as an EDC. The requirements are quite different--a caving light is used a specific way, for hours at a time, and it's ok if the user has to fiddle with its settings now and then. It will normally be used only by its owner, or if someone else uses it, it's a specialized enough device that the owner can reasonably spend a few moments explaining its operation to the other user.
> 
> ...


Sounds nice, Paul. How long before you have a prototype for us?


----------



## Robocop (Feb 21, 2007)

I have to agree with Morpheus as in spite of my favorites being some of my old Arc lights I am also beginning to just lose interest due to frustration. 

Myself and others are buying up other lights out there and enjoying them all. Some are good and some are average however we have them in our greedy little hands none the less......point I am trying to express is that my attention is focused on what is available now. Each time I visit this thread I see many new posts with nothing at all changing so I visit less often. I am sure many have also developed this habit as well.

I visit other threads and see a stream of constant products that members are buying up by the hundreds....it simply frustrates me to see one of my favorites so hidden in the back of the pack and the selfish part of me wishes I could just click on the Arc page and have a few options to choose from.

Yes if a photo or even a drawing at this point could help then so be it however I do understand that you are leery of others stealing your designs so I do understand that point.....I do not like it but again I understand.

Whatever you do offer I am sure will be a great product however it is my opinion that the more time goes by the harder it will be for Arc to suprise many of us anymore and some may have simply lost interest. Good luck in your products none the less and I will try to keep my interest but this thread seems to talk for hours and say very little at all. I am a devoted fan due to my past experiences but at my core I am simply a flashlight geek who needs new toys to be happy....hehe


----------



## paulr (Feb 21, 2007)

kitelights said:


> Sounds nice, Paul. How long before you have a prototype for us?


I'm not a metals fabrication guy but I could do the software. How long before you're ready to fund it?


----------



## carl (Feb 22, 2007)

Please don't post pics - it will ruin the surprise for me too. And yes, some of us may lose interest in this thread but thats no big deal really. I too am losing a bit of interest in this thread but its only a thread after all, only the build-up. All those including myself who lose interest (in this thread) will all come running back when the LS is finally released !.


----------



## paulr (Feb 22, 2007)

I don't think pics of the exterior make much difference unless there's something really radical. I expect a family resemblance to the Arc LS/Arc4 series which we're all familiar with. The new model's internals are much more interesting and wouldn't show in a picture.


----------



## jayflash (Feb 24, 2007)

I can't believe Arc is still in business. How can Arc compete with so many high value competitors that offer rapid response to market demand? I cherish my Arcs but everything has changed since 2003. Hope I'm wrong.


----------



## Casual Flashlight User (Feb 24, 2007)

> How can Arc compete with so many high value competitors that offer rapid response to market demand?


 
You answer your own question here...



> I cherish my Arcs.


 
Anyways, IMO, why buy a cheaper chinese light when you can simply have the the best, highest quality platform (Arc) modded to the specs you desire.

I've just had my Arc AA modded into a two stage by Eric Miller and I will get a "millermods" 2 stage AAA-P/Cree later on in the year.


CFU


----------



## paulr (Feb 24, 2007)

jayflash said:


> I can't believe Arc is still in business. How can Arc compete with so many high value competitors that offer rapid response to market demand? I cherish my Arcs but everything has changed since 2003. Hope I'm wrong.


Arc only has one direct competitor right now, which is Peak.


----------



## hank (Feb 24, 2007)

Be still my heart, I saw the thread pop up and thought it was Time.
Not yet,eh?


----------



## jayflash (Feb 24, 2007)

Ya but...are there enough of US around?


----------



## N162E (Feb 24, 2007)

Casual Flashlight User said:


> You answer your own question here...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Because you can get them, many are reasonably priced and a lot of those are really good right out of the box. I would love to own a brand new Arc but after this much time it is going to have to be close to perfect and cost a lot less than "Expensive"


----------



## Robocop (Feb 25, 2007)

I often wondered why so many people (myself included) bought many Arc lights and then quickly sent them to be modded. Like Casual Flashlight users post above he stated he just had his AA modded and is soon to buy a AAA Cree version Arc.

The Arc lights were great as is however very many simply wanted a few changes that were never offered thus they spent much more to mod them after purchase. I always secretely hoped Peter would offer his products out the door in the style we were all modding to make it easier to have what many of us wanted without modding them after the fact. I have many Arcs and 90 percent of them have been changed somehow. I always wondered just how many more Peter could have sold by simply adding a reflector or maybe even an UCL Lens or even bumping the current a small amount.

LitFuse made many sales by offering his services on the Arc lights and one of his most popular mods was to simply add a R15 resistor to the already existing pad and the current was doubled....to me this was a very cheap easy to do mod and would have been very easy to do before the light was assembled at the factory. Many spoke of runtime issues but when it was all said and done I saw way more people asking for the higher current mod not caring at all about runtime.

Just babbling here as always but for these lights to be so well made it sure did seem as if almost everyone wanted to change theirs after they bought them....including me as I sent LitFuse much of my money back in the day...hehe


----------



## carpdiem (Feb 25, 2007)

I just want to say that I'm really waiting on this and HDS/Novatac. Both lights seem to have their strong points, and the mechanicals by McGizmo on the Arc is definitely interesting (having handled both a McLux and an HDS before), but really, whichever company releases first will probably end up getting my money, unless there's a very solid reason to wait from the other (clearly superior light with a release date).

Anyone else out there thinking the same thing?


----------



## Gransee (Feb 25, 2007)

If you recall, I did produce a version of the LSH with a higher current resistor setting. It was a mistake made by our CM. 

One of these “brown board” units got so hot it caused a light burn on the face of a child. The burn eventually healed and the redness went away. The problem was that for the small housing, anything over about 350mA would simply overheat if left on long enough. Since I wanted more light and I feel that all of my tools should allow people to focus on the task and not the tool, I felt my next version should have temperature protection. As you recall, the next version also had a lot more current and was substantially brighter. 

--

Just a reminder, this thread was created to keep what little information there is about the new LS organized and in one place. Basically, it is supposed to save me time. 

It is not a presale thread, signup list, me asking for advice (although your advice is welcome), etc. Just a collection of basic facts to offset questions and rumors.

And I do like talking with you guys about the project. This is my baby and I am passionate about it. I really miss the good old days when we could talk about every aspect of a project. 

Peter


----------



## Casual Flashlight User (Feb 25, 2007)

carpdiem said:


> I just want to say that I'm really waiting on this and HDS/Novatac. Both lights seem to have their strong points, and the mechanicals by McGizmo on the Arc is definitely interesting (having handled both a McLux and an HDS before), but really, whichever company releases first will probably end up getting my money, unless there's a very solid reason to wait from the other (clearly superior light with a release date).
> 
> Anyone else out there thinking the same thing?


 
I'll buy both...not because it's the CPF motto, but because Arc and HDS produce rock solid, superbly finished, highly reliable lights. I see no reason not to own one of each if I can afford it...one for weekdays and one for Sunday best.







CFU


----------



## Casual Flashlight User (Feb 25, 2007)

Question for Gransee:

Will you be producing extra tailpacks for the new "LS" like you did with the old LSH's and the like?


CFU


----------



## Gransee (Feb 25, 2007)

The only pack that is planned for production is the stock 1x123 pack. I am considering the merits of other packs such as a 2xAA, 1xCR2, twisty only (w/spring) etc. The operating voltage of the new driver is 1.8-5.5v. This allows for 2AA nimh but rules out a 1xAA. That is fine though since the LS 1xAA pack was not very popular.

--

On another topic, I do understand that some people simply just want to know when the light will be done. Until then, this thread is just not going to provide the information they want and therefore it will not be interesting. Perfectly understandable.

Peter


----------



## Casual Flashlight User (Feb 25, 2007)

Thanks for the info, Peter.

Please also consider an 18650 tailpack for the new light...you are probably aware that these cells are very popular around these parts and it would be the first one I would buy.


CFU


----------



## Gransee (Feb 25, 2007)

I made a 1xA pack (18650 size) proto for the LSH but never took it to production. I am ok with making any pack as long as there is suffcient demand. 

--

The rev7 pcb should complete layout this coming week and go to fabrication. I issued a PO to have 15 units fabricated for testing. I am also having 10 of the new R2 interface boards made. Both boards are my design. I breadboarded major parts of the circuit ahead of time and wrote simple code to test the new r7 features. I really hope I didn't miss anything. Even after the boards are done and installed into the housings, there is months of testing and production prep before the first units are ready. There is a good chance it won't be ready until next year. If I find a problem with the r7, that will take several months to fix as well. 

Someone once told me it takes about a year to refine a complex driver design. That is about what it has been for this project. The driver has been the longest part of the development cycle. Its worth it though, this new driver has exceeded my program goals. 

hmm...

I did loose about 6 months last year when the project was put on hold. I didn't tell you guys about this until now. The project was put on hold to review its budget. During that time I was tasked with finding alternatives. It was frustrating because I had put all this work into the program and didn't want to see it wasted. It took many meetings, reports, etc. I do sympathize with the owners, this project is pretty aggressive and high risk. I found some ways to cut costs and they agreed to extend my funding. This decision was made in january and I immediately finalized the orders for the rev7 driver. 

People close who know me and the project have told me that part of the cost overruns are because I am picky. I agree. But I have been designing flashlights for awhile now and I didn't want to make just another variation. This light should break new ground. 

People have said to me numerous times something to the effect of , "you know this design would have been a lot easier if you had of left out this feature or that feature." Just shrinking the driver size cost a fortune. Another huge cost was researching all the switch options.

The irony is that most people will probably not see the money spent in the finished product. That's ok with me.

Peter


----------



## ZuluWhiskeyFox (Feb 25, 2007)

Rome wasn't built in a day. This new LS should be worth the wait.

I have one of the few 2x123 packs for my arc4. I use it with a 17670 Li-On. The perfect combo for me. I like the run time it offers. 

cheers,

zwf


----------



## Cyclops942 (Mar 4, 2007)

Peter,

Glad to hear the budget wars have passed another battle successfully! It's amazing how much business knowledge a tech guy needs to have in order to bring a good idea into the world, isn't it?


----------



## James S (Mar 4, 2007)

well you tell them that researching the switch is the single most important thing you listed to this potential buyer  lousy, squishy, flickery switches turn me off to a flashlight in a hurry.


----------



## chesterqw (Mar 4, 2007)

peter, you must be quick... or you will never catch up to the other manufacturers...
you will be in oblivion~!!!


----------



## Gransee (Mar 5, 2007)

R7 has gone to board fabrication. These new boards will replaced the drivers in the current prototypes. 

Cyclops942, I have wanted to be an inventor ever since I was a younger kid. I used to think people would just trust me and let me design whatever I wanted. Then I found they want you to explain how them giving me money is going to help them. Makes perfect sense of course. It also meshes with my personality well since I favor utility in everything. Therefore the best designs are the ones that are more useful. And the world still pays for useful. I welcome the opprotunity to demostrate this. It just takes time away from other things.

James S, that switch about drove me to drink. Lots of cash, months of stuff not working like it should. Fortunately McGizmo helped me with that project. His switch design was the one I eventually ended up using in fact. I could have just started out saying, I want to license Don's design. But now I can say I found a bunch of other ways that don't work. That's always nice to know... 

Peter


----------



## Clickie (Mar 5, 2007)

Peter, a few posts back you said you dont mind making any size pack as long as their is enough demand. I can tell you right now that CPF'ers have gone 18650 CRAZY!! If their is one pack you might wanna look into this is it. Wade through a lot of the threads here and you'll see a common theme....look at the B/S/T forum at ads selling SF L4's and such and you'll see the common question' " Can it run off of a 18650"


----------



## Casual Flashlight User (Mar 5, 2007)

Clickie said:


> Peter, a few posts back you said you dont mind making any size pack as long as their is enough demand. I can tell you right now that CPF'ers have gone 18650 CRAZY!! If their is one pack you might wanna look into this is it. Wade through a lot of the threads here and you'll see a common theme....look at the B/S/T forum at ads selling SF L4's and such and you'll see the common question' " Can it run off of a 18650"


 
This man speaks the truth - 18650 is the new religion around these parts...we _need_ these tailpacks!






CFU


----------



## TIP AND RING (Mar 5, 2007)

I was slow to jump on the rechargeable bandwagon, and I agree.... the 18650 is pure utility. Hope to see a battery pack for this configuration as well.:candle:


----------



## Gransee (Mar 5, 2007)

I had no idea. I don't get out to the rest of the CPF much. Is the 16850 more useful than the R123 and if so, why?

My experience with the 16850 was from several years ago. back then, it was the only lithium rechargeable available for flashlights. 

Compared to a R123, it has more current, but you pay for it: the package is larger. I imagine they also have a higher energy density since the 18650 is a very popular size in consumer products (camcorders, laptops, etc) and there is a lot of competition to make them better. 

I remember back then I could buy a 16850 for about the same price as a R123 now. I imagine they are even cheaper now. So you have higher energy density, less cost per w/hr and lots of current. Still, the package is larger. Some people will prefer this pack because it will make the light easier to hold in their hand. 

Between the 123 and a 18650, I understand the military prefers the 123 because they aren't hip to rechargeables in everything. Hopefully this is changing. Personally, I like the smaller size of the R123 and would like to go even smaller eventually. 

I could order a proto pack made after production on the standard has begun and test it out. Let me think about it. If there were enough requests, I could send a small batch to production and see how they sell. 

I would like to make just about any pack that sells well enough. It has to make back the engineering costs, production setup, etc. If it looks like it might not, I probably won't risk it. A user poll might help. No promises except that I will consider it.

So, besides energy density, cost/whr, length and current, what are the other reasons?

Peter


----------



## matrixshaman (Mar 5, 2007)

I sort of fell into the 18650 thing myself. I remember reading quite a while back that cy said they were the best thing around (I think in terms of power/cost or maybe it was size - I just tucked away the bit of info that it was the best 'something'). Then I had these Sony 18650's sitting by my desk for a couple years that I tore out of an old laptop battery. I finally got a hotwire (Wolfeyes rattlesnake) that used 4 CR123's and that just did NOT seem like a good way to go. So right about then Lumensfactory comes out with some hotter Lumen bulbs for the WE that run off about 7.2 volt and I see that the WE will easily take 2 x 18650's so I dust off the old Sony's and see if they will take a charge. They not only take a charge but seem to hold it very well and ran that hotwire for quite a while with no noticeable dimming (around 400 Lumens). So then I found a couple cheap Chinese lights with Cree's in them that look nice and they ONLY use the 18650 (1). I charged up a couple more of my old Sony's and they work great in these too. So now I notice a lot of people getting big on these and I can see why. But for a light like the Arc my first choice would still be a CR123 or RCR123 - then as an accessory the 18650 when I don't mind a little bigger size but want way more runtime.


----------



## Griz (Mar 6, 2007)

I would like to see an 18650 battery tube sold as an accessory. This would address my desire to have longer run time AT higher brightness levels.

I second what Matrixshaman said..... 

I would prefer the 1x123 tube for pocket carry & edc, but have the option for runtime for when I might need it.


----------



## yaesumofo (Mar 6, 2007)

Peter, Just a couple of questions. I have not read the entire thread. I also believe that some of these things are fluid so I ask them now so that the answers will represent the most current aspects of the design.
What emitters will you be using? In order to be a player in today's market, it appears that either a Cree or the Seoul semi derivative seem to be the most wanted emitters. That said, with these current emitters unless driven at their maximum rated power levels these emitters tend to run MUCH cooler than the equivalent Luxeon emitters. All things being equal does your requirement of temperature (protection/regulation) really come into play? Of the stock ARC LS flashlights I have they ALL run VERY HOT, there is even a heat warning on the light. The ARC LS modifications I own which run at higher current levels and are brighter and whiter and DO NOT use the LUXEON emitter in favor of "next gen" emitters, do not run hot. In fact it could be said that the run cool.
Is this an area that you are looking at?
What drive levels are you looking at running this "new" light at? will it be a "wall of light" or a "throw monster"? Are you planning to use a reflector or optics?

Somebody said earlier in this thread that they may be loosing interest. Another said "--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

peter, you must be quick... or you will never catch up to the other manufacturers...
you will be in oblivion~!!!"

Do you not feel there is any truth to this? I certainly believe that it is important to strike while the iron is hot. There is more competition in this market every day. No not all of these lights will be produced to the high ARC standard. I am sure most will not. But new lights with new drivers and new emitters are all in the pipeline at this time. Arriving to the market with a viable product is becoming more and more difficult every day.

Now for some tough questions.
If I buy one of your new ARC LS flashlights how do I know I will not be left in the cold like I was with my ARC 4 flashlights? 
This is a bit of a problem sticking point for me, as much as this has been hashed out elsewhere I still resent the fact that the very expensive arc 4 I bought for a friend of mine failed and we had nowhere to turn to have it repaired. Meanwhile ARC as a company is up and running having turned it's back on those people who bought the ARC 4. Trust is hard won. When lost as it was with the ARC 4 it is extremely difficult to get it back. What are your plans in this area? Once bitten twice shy comes to mind.
I see that you have selected Dons switch design a wise choice. Will the light be able to stand on end(in "candle mode")? Important to some not possible with the original LS design.

This project has been in the works for a long time, I am sure that a great deal has been invented in the "new" LS. What is the real world time frame for this new light, I don't mind a general answer on this 1 month? 6 months? Another year?
Have you finalized the the basic external design of the light? Can we see it? No a picture can't hurt, It can only help the LS which at this point could almost be considered VAPOR since nobody has seen it. I may be in the minority here but I would certainly like to see it, A picture or two may breath new life into the interest factor, which is important to the success (here on the CPF) of the "new" LS.
Yaesumofo


----------



## europium (Mar 6, 2007)

yaesumofo said:


> ...
> 
> This project has been in the works for a long time, I am sure that a great deal has been invented in the "new" LS. *What is the real world time frame for this new light, I don't mind a general answer on this 1 month? 6 months? Another year?*
> Have you finalized the the basic external design of the light? Can we see it? No a picture can't hurt, It can only help the LS which at this point could almost be considered VAPOR since nobody has seen it. I may be in the minority here but I would certainly like to see it, A picture or two may breath new life into the interest factor, which is important to the success (here on the CPF) of the "new" LS.
> Yaesumofo


In post #330, Peter wrote:


Gransee said:


> ...
> 
> Even after the boards are done and installed into the housings, there is *months of testing and production prep* before the first units are ready. *There is a good chance it won't be ready until next year*....


Shortly after reading this, I unsubscribed to this thread. Whatever may become of the new Arc LS, it isn't going to be current technology by the time it is released. Many here will nevertheless be quite happy with a very expensive, well-designed fancy light, (cf. *SureFire Titan*) which more-or-less sounds like what Peter is promising.

I, for one, prefer a bird in the hand to a light that only exists in CAD/CAM. If some day the new LS is actually available for sale, it won't really be 'new' any more than the current Arc AAA-P is now.


----------



## 4sevens (Mar 6, 2007)

Gransee said:


> I had no idea. I don't get out to the rest of the CPF much. Is the 16850 more useful than the R123 and if so, why?
> 
> My experience with the 16850 was from several years ago. back then, it was the only lithium rechargeable available for flashlights.
> 
> ...



Here is a little study I did about two years about of energy densities of
various battery chemistries, complete with a chart:
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=85423

I think the two main reasons is 1) rechargable, 2) highest energy among 
rechargables. (thanks to the laptop industry)


----------



## matrixshaman (Mar 6, 2007)

4sevens said:


> Here is a little study I did about two years about of energy densities of
> various battery chemistries, complete with a chart:
> http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=85423
> 
> ...


Yes - that's what I was thinking of and what I believe cy was saying - it's got the highest energy density. Considering I'm using some 18650's that are probably 7-10 years old (?) and they still seem to be working great that says something about them too.


----------



## Gransee (Mar 6, 2007)

good info 4sevens. Confirms my impressions. I will consider the production of a 16850 pack. That doesn't mean, "yes". It means I need to think about it.

Just so you know, the 123 pack takes precidence in the production order.

yaesumofo, good questions. A review of the thread would have answered them but no problem:

The new Arc-LS will use the P-4 LED. Oh and the new K2. Any while we are at it, the new Nichia and the new Cree. I have protos here with cree, p4 and k2. Since it doesn't take as long to swap the LED, it is not a big deal. Which LED would you like? I could lock yours into a P4 if you would like. When the light ships, you will probably change it to whatever the hot LED is at the time. I would. I hear the K2 is making a come back. 

I imagine myself to be more a flashlight designer than an LED dealer. I can understand the excitement over this or that LED, but it doesn't get me that excited compared to the rest of the design. I figure everyone has access to the same LEDs. If the big deal about my product is the LED, then I am just an LED dealer or LED trader.

I don't know if I am explaining this well. I can understand that a typical cpf'er reads the bigger forums and sees cree this and seoul that and begins to think all flashlight problems are solved by led solutions. Well yeah, if the rest of the flashlight is a bore, then I guess the LED is it.

The next question was how much current to the LED? How much you want? 2 amps? Because with the right battery, the driver can do it. It has a buck mode and can handle up to 5.5volts through a low ohm fet. What do you want to melt today? 

I didn't say you will get 2amp to the LED with a cheap 123 non-rechargeable. I said with the right battery. Laws of physics. And yes, the driver is has both buck and boost modes (otherwise how useful would the 1.8v range be with a white LED?)

I just ask that you let me protect the LED from overheating and other abuse since if we installed the LED, we guarantee the LED. Other than that, have at it. Again, I don't think I am explaining myself well. I think some people want me to say, this light will drive the led at 900ma and produce 120lumens. Period. That's it. But with what battery? SF123, BSR123? For how long? Held in the hand or on the table. Which LED? 

Yes, the new LEDs do run cooler. But I never seen a performance junky who would say, "oh, 1000ma is enough for me". LEDs cooler? Drive them harder! Still only getting 10 minutes of runtime out of that cheap 123 cell? Hmm. 

When I say this light will be competitve performance-wise with other lights its size I mean it can handle a decent level of current, the latest LED and it has good heatsinking for a small light. 

For people who own the Arc4. I didn't turn my back on you. I have been offering a refund for several years now to any Arc4 owner. But what if you don't want a refund? Instead you want me to put the Arc4 back into production so I can provide spare parts for people who still want to use it? What about the original LS? Why not? 

I wasn't happy with the Arc4, I don't want to make it anymore. My perogative. I care about my customers. I convinced people who had nothing to do with the Arc4 to give you money for your old lights. I have to remind people of this offer so many times it almost sounds like I am congratulating myself for doing something nice. Take the offer, use the search feature of the CPF. Email me. 

The new LS vaporware? Maybe. I could get hit by a bus tomorrow. I doubt it would be finished then. Until it is in your hands, it is nothing to you. But to say it only exists in CAD wouldn't be true. Many people have seen it. Some have taken it home with them for a couple of weeks and used it. Can't do that very easily with a cad drawing. Trying to goad me into posting a picture? Maybe. If people are zany with no picture what is going to happen if I up the dose?

Seen in a response to a post made an 1 hour earlier: "Shortly after reading this, I unsubscribed to this thread". Thanks, that was funny.

I think before this is all done, you guys are probably going to be so upset with me that none will be around to read the annoucement. 

It's going to take time guys. Until then you have my zero-information posts to look at. 

Peter


----------



## hank (Mar 6, 2007)

Will the old LS battery cases (2xAA, for example) fit the new body, if you can say? If not, neverrrmind, happy to wait.


----------



## Gransee (Mar 6, 2007)

No, sorry. The old LS packs will not fit the new head. Not trying to make you buy more stuff. The new 2-stage switch required a new pack design and therefore the head is no longer compatible with the old single stage packs.

peter


----------



## prof (Mar 6, 2007)

Gransee said:


> I think before this is all done, you guys are probably going to be so upset with me that none will be around to read the annoucement.
> 
> Peter



Personally I'll try to wait patiently...But Peter, what I really want is a light the size of a AAA-P using an HID light source, running for 5+ hours on a cheap AAA, generating 1000000+ lumens, and selling for $50 or less...(just kidding, I think?).

Actually Peter, I think your approach of not distributing lots of information is good. We have other people working on projects for long periods of time who are being criticized for missing their deadlines, etc. If you put too much information out there, or set deadlines, you just open yourself for criticism. (I know the others are being criticized for accepting prepayment, which you did NOT do--but why open yourself to criticism for no reason?). 

I think most of us are just excited. I joined AFTER the first company was gone, and read all kinds of comments about what a good light the arc AAA had been. I was excited to get one, and have been very pleased. I know the cree craze must be frustrating you--as are the other nay-sayers. Just keep plugging away and make a light so awesome that they'll all line up to buy your products. That will be the best result for all of us.


----------



## hank (Mar 6, 2007)

Thanks Peter.

I've been going with the FluPIC mods in old Arc LS shells (Mosport's work) to get colored LEDs, red and amber so far, so now I'll feel free to use all my old battery packs on those.


----------



## TIP AND RING (Mar 6, 2007)

I haven't any verbal abuse to offer  . I hope you take your time and produce another excellent LS light.


----------



## paulr (Mar 8, 2007)

Peter, I don't like the R123A, 14500, 10440, etc. among other things because they are the same size as more common batteries of different voltages. That is a basic safety hazard. Think of wiring harnesses in airplanes. You have to plug cable A into socket A, cable B into socket B, and cable C into socket C. If you get it wrong, maybe it will confuse the avionics when you least expect it and the plane crashes, not a good result.

Do they rely on labelling the cables and sockets so you get it right? Well, they do label them. They also color code the wires. But most importantly, they use physically different, incompatible connectors for the different cables, so it's IMPOSSIBLE to plug cable A into socket B and so forth--it simply will not fit. Well I suppose you could make it fit with a hammer, there always has to be some level of stupidity they can't plan ahead for, but overlooking labels or color codes is something that they DO expect and plan for, and that's even for stuff intended for use by trained technicians. It's not some tragedy caused by stupid technicians, it's just sensible, accident-averse engineering.

I have a lot of AA powered gadgets around here--flashlights, digital cameras, radios, you name it. I just bloody know that if I have EVEN ONE lithium ion 3.6 volt 14500 cell (physically same size as an AA) cell in the house, some idiot--probably me--is going to install it into a digital camera or radio or other gadget sooner or later, and blow up the gadget. Same thing with 10440's. So I refuse to allow either of those battery types onto the premises. Any 3.6 volt batteries in here should be physically impossible to install into any device that expects 1.5 volt batteries. It's the same principle as the incompatble connectors in the airplane wiring.

It's not QUITE as bad with R123A's vs CR123A's, but it's the same idea. If I stick an R123A in my BB400-powered McLux or three of them into my Streamlight TL3, it's bye bye flashlight (or anyway bye bye bulb). Same with putting an R123A in my Minolta Freedom camera (ok, I don't use that camera much any more), etc. 

Beyond that I just don't like lithium ion in general. It's a buggy and unnecessary system. There is not enough commonality between devices. The batteries catch on fire (see the front page of USA Today a couple days ago). They need special chargers. It's just more crap to screw around with. Their volumetric energy density is not really better than NiMH cells. Their energy per weight is quite a bit better, but for small 1-cell devices it doesn't matter. I've at different times EDC'd Arc LS, Arc4+, and Fenix L1p lights. There is just not much practical difference between them in terms of EDC-ability. None are ultra-tiny, all are quite pocketable. The L1P's extra length is cancelled out by its slimmer profile. But the L1p uses the exact same NiMH AA's as all my other stuff, and those AA's are cheap and easy to find anywhere, I don't have to order them over the internet or pay shipping fees or use special chargers for them. I have several 4-slot AA/AAA chargers and a 10-slot charger, all interoperable, and I have about 3 dozen AA and ten AAA NiMH cells, that I can swap around between everything. While the converter design to run a high-power led from a 1.2 volt cell is more difficult than a comparable converter with 3 volt input, from a user's perspective, 1AA is simply a superior system to CR123A or R123A.

As for 18650: at least that's sort of the AA of li ion cells, standard, interoperable, gets the most attention from manufacturers trying to maximize energy density, and won't fit in a 1.5V AA slot. Also, they can easily be scrounged out of laptop and camcorder battery packs. And the cells are large enough that the weight savings vs. a comparable capacity NiMH pack are enough to care about. So if you absolutely positively have to use lithium ion, 18650 is what makes sense.

Really though, Fenix lights have too much microprocessor bling and too little build quality, and their dc/dc converters possibly have room for improvement, but they made their battery choices exactly right. The most interesting electronic design challenge in led flashlights is not more microprocessor crap but is making a powerful, efficient, super quality 1.2 volt light.


----------



## HorizonSon (Mar 8, 2007)

i realize that I will probably be linched for this, BUT!... I'm STILL waiting (and have been for a couple of years now) for the AA version to be re-released... I won't buy anything else but AA... I can't afford NOT to standardize and AA's are cheap rather in Alkaline, NiMH rechargables or Lithium!... HELP!.....


----------



## HorizonSon (Mar 8, 2007)

paulr, I agree (mostly)!!! Thumbs up to your writ!!!...

I too, have standardized on AA's for MANY good reasons (as mentioned above)! I too have a Fenix and LOVE it for it's ability to 'maximize' the AA cell to its near full potention... I recently preorded/received one of Fenix's L2D-CE's and absolute LOVE IT! In fact, it's replace the carry of three lights down to two (because of the 'burst' mode)... I STILL am waiting for the ARC AA to resurface! IF/WHEN the ARC AA comes back for retail, I'll be dropping some serious $$$ for me, family and friends!!!... This is, of course, assuming that it is built as it was before: with a bezel and NOT a tail activation (like the ARC AAA and old ARC AA)... Of course updated chips and LEDs are to be expected, LOL!) 

<---Crossed fingers:candle:


----------



## Peter Atwood (Mar 9, 2007)

I think anyone making flashlights today has a real problem competing against the Fenix and the like. These Asian made lights are just killers as far as performance goes and the prices are nuts.

I'm interested in a new Arc light but one of the considerations for me would be if I could swap out the LED easily for an Arc produced replacement in 6 months or a year. The way these LEDs are improving on what seems like a weekly basis is crazy but I think a real selling point for Arc could be if you could offer drop in upgrades that were truly drop in. Might be a tall order but that's kinda how it is right now to my eyes. I think if you come out with an outdated light right from the start then you might as well not even bother.


----------



## sysadmn (Mar 9, 2007)

Gransee said:


> I could have just started out saying, I want to license Don's design. But now I can say I found a bunch of other ways that don't work. That's always nice to know...
> 
> Peter



And you thoroughly understand why the license costs what it does  

We have a saying at work that the customers don't understand the price until they try to make it themselves. Of course, our spare parts run from "small car" to "float a bond issue". Imagine telling someone their jet engine won't fly until they buy a $100,000 part, and there's a two year waiting list.


----------



## BentHeadTX (Mar 9, 2007)

I am in another country that is not the USA (called Turkey)

I can tell you, the lithium flashlight thing is over for me. My buddies Peak Mediterranean CR123A light was seized at customs and they left him a nice note about the battery inside. Yes, they took the flashlight along with the battery. My Mediterranean made it through customs because it was equipped with a 2AA body and NiMH cells. 

Tried to order lithium AA cells...no dice! Can't ship them. 

The lithium-ion RCR123 batteries are OK for now although the guy at the airport looks at my Fire~FlyIII rather strangely. How long will it be before my flashlight is a terrorist device? Not sure but I am going with a programmable single AAA Cree or P4 keychain light soon! (LiteFlux LF2) 

I look at all the stuff I carry with me when I bounce around the world. 100~240V NiMH charger, AAA/AA NiMH cells, shortwave/clock radio, camera, self-powered speakers, MP3 player, red/UV/white flashlights and various other things and they all run on NiMH AA or NiMH AAA cells. 

As the music plays from the MP3 player (1AAA) through the powered speakers (4AA) I am looking for scorpions with my UV flashlight (1AA) I shut off the tunes and set the shortwave alarm clock (2AA) and crawl into bed. 4 hours later I get up to go to the bathroom since I drank about 8 liters of water and fire up the 24/7 lanyard light (1AAA) 

The next day someone needs 12 volts for something or other so I take my 8AA to 2D battery adapter and connect an extra 2 AA cells to it to make it work. My multimeter/scopemeter is starting to dim so it is time for a recharge of those 6AA cells. The NiMH conditioner is running from an automobile to recharge cells again. Need to find a 110/220V outlet to charge more cells at night. 

Later in the day it is "black out" so I switch the white lanyard light (1AAA) with an Arc AAA with red LED (1AAA) Ahhhh, yes.... the NiMH cuts the light output so I can see where I am going without others seeing me. (No, you can't have my "sterile" black HA-III Arc AAA!) 

Blackout is suspended just in time for the power generators to fail.  The need is for an adjustable output white high powered light. Want a LuxeonV or (upcoming) Quad Cree XRE Mag? Yes, they run on 8AA although the LuxeonV does not get much use. Hmmm, have not charged it in 3 months but no worries, Eneloops are always ready to go. 

The chargers/conditioners are running and life goes on. It would be great to have a Arc LS with 2AA pack as EDC. Temperature control variable power ouput to balance runtime, heat and light requirements. No 2AA pack? No problem just take a few dozen CR123A batteries with you... and get siezed at customs. Backup with RCR123 charger/batteries and life is good. OK, someone might put a CR123A battery in the charger for late night fireworks but it only takes a month to get another one in the mail. 

No problem, take your pick. Mediterranean 2AA or Fenix L2D CE since everything else runs on them. After all, a flashlight is a tool and should run on common batteries. You can have the iPod lights...


----------



## greenLED (Mar 9, 2007)

Peter, I've been a hard-core Arc fan pretty much since I signed my life away on CPF years ago. I'm really glad to hear your design has evolved so much and that good things will come to those who can wait. :twothumbs


...and (another) bucket full'o


----------



## Codeman (Mar 9, 2007)

greenLED said:


> Peter, I've been a hard-core Arc fan pretty much since I signed my life away on CPF years ago. I'm really glad to hear your design has evolved so much and that good things will come to those who can wait. :twothumbs
> 
> 
> ...and (another) bucket full'o



X 2


----------



## 270winchester (Mar 9, 2007)

okay, note to self, do not go to Turkey.


----------



## Stillphoto (Mar 9, 2007)

I may just be speaking for myself, but I for one come back to the thread now and then to see whats new. As previously said, Rome was not built overnight, and last I checked my life doesn't depend on this light. I'm just as excited now about this light as I was back when the thread first started.

I like hearing of the progress / tweaks being made to drivers and whatnot...Peter could have just as easily dissapeared entirely until he had a new product to bring to market, but what fun would that be. Plus he loses the market research of talking to us.

To say that by the time it's ready it will be old news is, well I don't know. Peter isn't going to roll out a new light with yesterday's functionality to it. I think it's one long evolution however, so the stuff going into it now may be the building blocks of what it will have upon release.


I know I know back to topic...just my $.02


----------



## tvodrd (Mar 10, 2007)

:wave: sp and Peter,

There is a price to pay for doing R&D openly for "peanut gallery" discussion. I have found it to be to be too high, and I'm not a maufacturer, or even wannabee. My Hat's-off to peter for reviving the Legeandary Arc LS 4, updated to current state-of-the-art! 

I will prolly buy one!

Larry


----------



## Carpe Diem (Mar 10, 2007)

greenLED said:


> Peter, I've been a hard-core Arc fan pretty much since I signed my life away on CPF years ago. I'm really glad to hear your design has evolved so much and that good things will come to those who can wait. :twothumbs
> 
> 
> ...and (another) bucket full'o


 
X3


----------



## lanturn (Mar 11, 2007)

I still worship my Arc LS-1 that I purchased many years ago. It's still my favorite light.
Spent $75 getting it repaired 2 years ago. Do you once again plan to offer a lifetime
repair warranty and then renege on it by going out of business and then opening a new
business?


----------



## CM (Mar 11, 2007)

lanturn said:


> ... Do you once again plan to offer a lifetime
> repair warranty and then renege on it by going out of business and then opening a new
> business?



I think that was totally uncalled for :thumbsdow


----------



## Lebkuecher (Mar 11, 2007)

CM said:


> I think that was totally uncalled for :thumbsdow




I agree!!


----------



## jayflash (Mar 12, 2007)

I suspect that declaring bankruptcy was one of the LAST things Peter wanted and it wasn't used as a business-plan tactic. None of us know if we, ourselves, will be rendered useless or incapacitated tomorrow. There are many "acts of God", government, and litigation that nobody can plan for. We take each other at our word and we take our chances.


----------



## Casual Flashlight User (Mar 12, 2007)

lanturn said:


> I still worship my Arc LS-1 that I purchased many years ago. It's still my favorite light.
> Spent $75 getting it repaired 2 years ago. Do you once again plan to offer a lifetime
> repair warranty and then renege on it by going out of business and then opening a new
> business?


 







CFU


----------



## Gransee (Mar 19, 2007)

Jayflash asked (in another thread):



> I read a post indicating the LS may not be here until next year. Is that true? If so, will it even matter by that time? Hope my info is wrong.



which refers to a post I made earlier in this thread:



> The rev7 pcb should complete layout this coming week and go to fabrication. I issued a PO to have 15 units fabricated for testing. I am also having 10 of the new R2 interface boards made. Both boards are my design. I breadboarded major parts of the circuit ahead of time and wrote simple code to test the new r7 features. I really hope I didn't miss anything. Even after the boards are done and installed into the housings, there is months of testing and production prep before the first units are ready. There is a good chance it won't be ready until next year. If I find a problem with the r7, that will take several months to fix as well.



If I may explain, I don't believe R&D can be scheduled as far in advance as say production. This is because R&D involves an unknown number of steps. Otherwise it wouldn't be discovery. Each step can potentially add or subtract to the total number of steps. 

The danger for any person involved in discovery is to try to provide estimates to other people. The best answer may be, "I do not know".

Peter


----------



## Gransee (Mar 19, 2007)

btw, I should be getting the first finished r7 pcbs tomorrow. I plan on installing them in heads that have U-bin P4s mounted. Again, these are prototypes only!

And again, I don't know what the production LEDs will be. The plan is to hold off on buying them until the last minute so as to utilize the most current parts possible.

As far as the design being relevant by the time is ships, I think it will be. Otherwise I am wasting a lot of time. This doesn't mean it will be perfect or just what you wanted. It means that I feel it will be good light, by my standards, for the work I put into it. Just my opinion of course.

Peter


----------



## daveman (Mar 19, 2007)

Gransee said:


> ...As far as the design being relevant by the time is ships, I think it will be. Otherwise I am wasting a lot of time. This doesn't mean it will be perfect or just what you wanted. It means that I feel it will be good light, by my standards, for the work I put into it. Just my opinion of course.
> 
> Peter


Can't ask a man for anything more than that.


----------



## Tightgroup (Mar 20, 2007)

We are ready Peter! :rock:


----------



## greenLED (Mar 20, 2007)

Need beta testers?


----------



## MorpheusT1 (Mar 20, 2007)

Now were talking 


x my fingers for this to be the final prototype stage!



Benny


----------



## mossyoak (Mar 20, 2007)

if you make me a beta tester i will name my first child after you. and that is no joke. i dont care if its a girl the girls name will be Peter.


----------



## liteMANIAC (Mar 20, 2007)

mossyoak said:


> if you make me a beta tester i will name my first child after you. and that is no joke. i dont care if its a girl the girls name will be Peter.


 
Now that's a real flashaholic!!!


----------



## mossyoak (Mar 20, 2007)

damn straight


----------



## [email protected] Messenger (Mar 20, 2007)

mossyoak said:


> if you make me a beta tester i will name my first child after you. and that is no joke. i dont care if its a girl the girls name will be Peter.


 
Why not Petricia if a girl? lol...Or Petrice? Her nickname could be Pete, :laughing:


----------



## mossyoak (Mar 20, 2007)

maybe Peterina


----------



## :)> (Mar 20, 2007)

mossyoak said:


> if you make me a beta tester i will name my first child after you. and that is no joke. i dont care if its a girl the girls name will be Peter.



:lolsign:

-Goatee


----------



## hank (Mar 20, 2007)

Mom? Dad? Why did you name me "Arc Beta?"


----------



## mossyoak (Mar 20, 2007)

why do i have a "HA3" for a middle name?


----------



## Ritch (Mar 21, 2007)

The German female variant of Peter is Petrina. Maybe in English too?


----------



## paulr (Mar 21, 2007)

Ritch said:


> The German female variant of Peter is Petrina. Maybe in English too?


Are you serious? I always thought it was Petra (as in "The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant"). There's not really an English equivalent. We use the name Petra sometimes but it is rather uncommon.


----------



## Ritch (Mar 21, 2007)

paulr said:


> Are you serious? I always thought it was Petra (as in "The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant"). There's not really an English equivalent. We use the name Petra sometimes but it is rather uncommon.


 
You are right, Petra is more in use and strictly speaking Petrina is the female form of Petrus. But it sounds nice and I know 'several' Petrinas.


----------



## PEU (Mar 21, 2007)

mossyoak said:


> maybe Peterina



Well, she better not live here in Argentina with that name... (need to be local to understand the joke)

Good Luck Peter!!


Pablo


----------



## mossyoak (Mar 21, 2007)

ok, ill save some therapist bills later on in life and name her (if its a her) Petra.


----------



## THE_dAY (Mar 21, 2007)

Peter could you give some size estimates for your new light.

will it be bigger or smaller than the Arc4?


----------



## Gransee (Mar 21, 2007)

Thanks for the offer to beta test, already have the testers I need. Your offer does win the award though for most unusual to date. 

THE_dAY, the LSII protos are a little shorter and slimmer than the Arc4. Most of this is made possible by the smaller driver. 

Peter


----------



## Casual Flashlight User (Mar 21, 2007)

> THE_dAY, the LSII protos are a little shorter and slimmer than the Arc4. Most of this is made possible by the smaller driver.


 
Nice. Still built like tanks though Peter?


CFU


----------



## Gransee (Mar 22, 2007)

Yes. In fact, stronger than previous LS. 

Peter


----------



## nightshade (Mar 31, 2007)

Peter, will there be a CPF pre-buy op with the new light? Want to adjust my viewing schedule of this thread if so.


----------



## Phredd (Mar 31, 2007)

Maybe a discount for those of us who have been regular customers since the original Arc-LS and AAA, hmmm?

Phredd


----------



## jef144 (Apr 15, 2007)

I'm noticed that USB ports are more ubiquitous than 120V jacks -- when you consider my long commute and the amount of disconnected computing I do. So I've been buying solutions that let me charge batteries, cell phones, and iPods from the 500 ma available from a USB. 

Now, a flashlight tethered to a computer, hm. If Peter includes in a GPS receiver with generous waypoint storage, I can almost promise to connect up every day, and not just when I want to reprogram the LED driver or change my (morse-coded) pickup line.


----------



## N162E (Apr 21, 2007)

Gransee said:


> btw, I should be getting the first finished r7 pcbs tomorrow. I plan on installing them in heads that have U-bin P4s mounted. Again, these are prototypes only!
> Peter


It has been a month since the last news. Anything new?


----------



## 270winchester (Apr 21, 2007)

So Peter:


----------



## CM (Apr 21, 2007)

270winchester said:


> ...



What he said


----------



## skalomax (Apr 21, 2007)

Well I have the beta Version here and All I can say Is WOW!

Worth the wait!

huh, oh. Sorry Just woke up.


----------



## N162E (Apr 22, 2007)

skalomax said:


> Well I have the beta Version here and All I can say Is WOW!


You have a test unit and thats all you can say? How many other beta units are out there? Any other beta testers wish to elaborate?


----------



## skalomax (Apr 22, 2007)

N162E said:


> You have a test unit and thats all you can say? How many other beta units are out there? Any other beta testers wish to elaborate?


 
JK, I don't have the New Arc LS.

I was dreaming.


----------



## N162E (Apr 22, 2007)

skalomax said:


> JK, I don't have the New Arc LS.
> 
> I was dreaming.


Thank you sir. I thought it seemed too good to be true. Back where we started. Once again-Peter, anything going on?


----------



## Carpe Diem (Apr 22, 2007)

Hi Peter...:wave: 

Just so you know....

I still wear my official "Arc Field Tester" uniform (complete with appropriate badges and matching cap) whenever I shop at our local shopping mall. And it is still the "chick magnet" that it has been from the very birth of the Arc legends. 

All of the beautiful women that approach me....after I publicly sing the "Arc Alma Mater" and the "Arc Fight Song" through my bull horn to those assembled in the middle of the mall....keep asking for you. :thumbsup:

It`s a little hard to hear precisely what they`re saying about you and Arc though, for each time I`ve done the songs the security guards at the mall have very quickly ushered me outside...for my own safety.:duck: 

Anyway...

I just wanted you to know that you and Arc are the "Cat`s Pajama`s" at the mall, and I can hardly wait until the mall security guards and the local court system let me back into the mall to continue my Arc Field Testing. 

More importantly, when the time comes, what a true pleasure and giddy thrill it will be to get the new Arc LS prototype from you for field testing. I can hardly wait! :green: 

Until then, I`ll just continue to stand out on the boulevard (dressed in my "Arc Field Tester" uniform, complete with appropriate badges and matching cap) and wave at the cars going by. The all honk back at me...for they`re all "dyed-in-the-wool" Arc fans. 

Boy....! Life just doesn`t get much better than this! 

Hail Peter! And long live Arc! 

:thumbsup:  :thumbsup:


----------



## DevL (Apr 28, 2007)

Are we there yet?


----------



## N162E (Apr 28, 2007)

DevL said:


> Are we there yet?





Gransee said:


> The project may be done next year, it may not


Looks like things are right on schedule.


----------



## jayflash (May 1, 2007)

Snore...


----------



## jayflash (May 1, 2007)

Big snore...


----------



## nightshade (May 1, 2007)

Jeeezz...it seems if some of us don't get our fix on time, we become a little impatient  Be nice.


----------



## N162E (May 2, 2007)

nightshade said:


> Jeeezz...it seems if some of us don't get our fix on time, we become a little impatient  Be nice.


Us be NICE? I think the shoe is on the wrong foot.


----------



## jayflash (May 5, 2007)

I only meant to post one snore comment but the system screwed up. I was surprised to find my second snore.

Actually, I don't need a fix at this time as my original LS is still keeping me happy.

I'm real glad I opted for a cheap P1 rather than a FF3 last year at this time. I can more afford to lose a $50 light that gives almost the performance of a $150 variety. Likewise, my future purchases will be very few with the nod toward value more than getting the absolute best. 

Arc & HDS were once leaders but now seriously lag in comparison to foreign competition. This long wait make me very nervous. Even if they might be more rugged just how strong does a light have to be? I can't afford the best anymore, so for me only, $150+ lights are a thing of the past.

For those that want and can afford the best lights, I hope Arc comes through. I still admire Gransee's foresight, innovation and courage introducing a first-of-its-kind light "way back when". The rest of the world quickly caught up and the rules have changed.


----------



## BentHeadTX (May 5, 2007)

As far as the Cree/SSC LED lights go, Arc is not late (yet) to intruduce the new technology. The larger players don't have those LEDs released yet although Pelican is about to ship the LAPD light and Surefire should move product in the next month or two. Novatach has not shipped the Cree/SSC EDC lights either. 

The Chinese move very, very fast and I do use the Fenix LxP CE series for bike lights (turbo and strobe works great) The devil is in the details so delays are expected. 

Peak has overhauled their line and is running SSC LEDs so the Chinese are losing their latest LED position. Fenix is not Arc's competition but Peak/Surefire/Novatach/Pelican is so if Peter rolls out the new LS in August, that is a reasonable time frame. 

The thing that I find odd is the Arc AAA. A timeless and great design that needs the overdriven 5mm Nichia replaced with something either brighter, longer runtimes or both. If I was to guess, I would say the Arc AAA will run an underdriven Luxeon Rebel since it is 4 times smaller than a Luxeon/Cree/SSC LED and fits Peter's design criteria. 

It would be interesting to see the release of the new LS and AAA Rebel around September 21st. The nights are now getting longer than the days, what's in your pocket?


----------



## Gransee (May 5, 2007)

Oh the Chinese are very quick. There is something to be said for "good enough". And it is obsession that you pay a premium for. 

Back to the LED used (again)... Frankly I am hoping the new thin film K2 will be ready by this fall. Lumileds knows how to make a world class LED. The Crees are bright, but they lack in other areas. I expect the new K2s to be brighter than the crees while having a better optical image, phosphor consistency and package. We will see. 

I have built a few cree and seoul powered prototypes. Of course they are bright. I took them to the latest PHX GT. 

With Steve's help, I tested them up at LSI in their integrating sphere. All units tested over 100 lumens. Found out later the circuit wasn't running at full power because of a firmware glitch. Fixed that but haven't tested them again because, well... The lumen test was mostly a sanity check and I already assume its going to have the best LED so the lumen count is not a high priority right now. Where lumen testing will be important is in the production LED is selected and I need figures for the published minimum specification. Btw, I also tested some other cree and seoul lights and mods. Not meeting the figures some people think they are. 

Like with the Arc4, the new LS will have a momentary full power mode. I continue to see the utility in a mode that is as bright as possible, even if only for 10 seconds. I realize that this mode causes some confusion. And of course, this mode is not regulated; otherwise it wouldn't be "full power". 

btw, is full power a mode or a level? 

The published minimum lumen will be for a particular LED (as originally sold) and at one of the longer running power levels. This is where it can get complicated. 

What is the value of a specification from the customer's perspective? They will use this figure to compare to other lights, match to uses they have in mind, etc. 

So if you know that this light is capable of say 70 lumens for 5 minutes and uses 1 cell while this other light is capable of 70 lumens for 15 minutes with 2 cells, are these figures meaningful when you consider the average flashlight use is less than 5 minutes?

Of course, I could publish minimums for 10 seconds, 3 minutes, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, 20 minutes, etc. There are problems with this. First, the whole system because less precise the harder you drive it. So the deviation has to increase which lowers the minimum. You might even have a situation where the minimum at 10 seconds is the same as the minimum at 1 minute although the averages favor a higher typical figure. But I prefer to publish minimums rather than typical because the uncommon deviations typically consume a disproportionate amount of customer service. 

Then there is the problem of confusion. All those minimums for various durations, ambient, battery types, etc can just frustrate people. “Tell me a simple figure!”

Another problem is perception. One of our customers might tell a friend, "this light is capable of 150 lumens". The friend says, "Wow!" Then the customer says, "But only for 10 seconds". The friend is then disappointed. "Why can't they make the light last longer?"

But if you say, "this light is rated for a minimum of 60 lumens for 45 minutes". "Oh nice, that compares well with this light and that light and I know what 60 lumens looks like so I know I can use it for most of the tasks I need a light for. And then you say, "And it also has a bonus feature of 2x full power (etc)". 

That way, they see the full power mode as a bonus and not something they are going to expect to use 100% of the time. 

Of course, there is the risk of competitors choosing to market using a 1 minute figure while I am marketing with a 20 minute figure and wondering why people are not buying my product even when my tests show it to be the brightest light in its class for any duration. 

Like I said before, when you are shopping around for your next light, there is more to a light than the LED used or the claimed lumen figure. If every manufacturer in a particular class uses the same LED(bin, etc), then the differences are more how they packaged it, the current they are driving it at, extra features, etc.

So my question for you guys. If you only had ONE duration to choose from for the published minimum spec, which would you want?

10 seconds (or less)
5 minutes
20 minutes
45 minutes
2 hours

Remember that there are already lights shipping from competitors that publish lumen specs that (when they are true) are sometimes only true for a couple of minutes.

Btw, the project is continuing to make progress. It is slow going as this design is on the bleeding edge, with all the risks that entails. I still have funding and the green light from my boss. 

peter


----------



## Gransee (May 5, 2007)

Btw... If I recall, the Arc4 was rated at 33 lumens minimum at full power. Full power was about 5 minutes on the table and 25 minutes in the hand. Remember that a human hand can move more heat off the flashlight than room air.

If remember correctly, that 5 minute rating didn't cause a lot of confusion. 

One of the key differences between the Arc4 and the new unit is that the new LS is capable of sending significantly more current to the LED. Full power is basically an expensive desoldering function. 

Since, shorter/brighter runtimes are available at the user's demand, the LS can now have a publish spec at say 1 minute, if that is what was important to people. 

My preference is to continue to use a 5/25 minute figure. It would look something like this:

Arc-LS. Rated for a minimum of x lumens for 5 minutes with a fresh battery. *
* at room temp, resting on a wood surface, normal atmosphere

peter


----------



## rdh226 (May 5, 2007)

Gransee said:


> So my question for you guys. If you only had ONE duration to choose from for the published minimum spec, which would you want?
> 
> 10 seconds (or less)
> 5 minutes
> ...


For a miniature light (i.e., 1 x {CR2 | CR123A | AA | AAA}) I'd opt for 20-45 minutes range, and
probably leaning towards "20" minutes as the practical limit. (I'd go "hours" for larger lights, in the
2 x {C | D} range.)

My $0.02's worth.

-RDH


----------



## paulr (May 5, 2007)

10 second mode = "overdrive" or "redline". People understand you can't redline for too long. Maybe there could even be a red line engraved on the light somewhere, to indicate the feature's presence.


----------



## Gransee (May 5, 2007)

thanks rdh226,

I should have specified a temperature. For my question on which duration would you prefer, assume room temp on a wood table with a oxygen/nitrogen atmosphere ("air") and not in a hand or sitting on a slab of aluminum. 

Remember this is a minimum, but within reason. For example an extreme minimum would assume the light was floating in a vaccum while closely orbiting the sun. So minimums assume at least some typicals.

Heat is a large factor. If you think that you need 60 lumens for a contiguous 30 minutes while the light is not held in a hand (a very real world situation as in changing a tire or working on a warm engine), then the 30 minutes worse case could last 2 hours if held in the hand. 

If your target typical usage is less than 30 minutes and in the hand, then that power level is only to give you 5-10 minutes on the table. 

paulr, I need to be careful not to say "overdrive" since people might assume the LED is being abused. It may actually be in some situations, but we try to avoid it with the temperature limit, etc.

peter


----------



## McGizmo (May 5, 2007)

Hi Peter,

I think your choice in specification details and qualifications need to make sense to your target market as well as common in scope of measure and terms of any competition's claims. In so far as CPF is part of your target market, ultimately I expect your light will "speak for itself" and it is in your best interest to let the customers know where and when to "listen". For a casual user, I think you could easily provide too much information if you get into it to the level you are discussing here. Perhaps a KISS spec list as well as an additional comprehensive feature/ spec sheet would be an approach that would allow the customer to evaluate your light to a level they elect.






I think it will be difficult for _you_ to set some standards but it may well be the case that your light itself sets some standards.


----------



## Lebkuecher (May 5, 2007)

Peter

My thoughts are that this is a double edge sword if you trying to come up with one number to use. 

Manufactures are being dishonest when publishing lumens. Actually I should hold back a little in saying dishonest and maybe use the word clueless to refer to some. If your going to compete in a market where few are providing accurate information about there products then I think you have to use the number that best positions your product from a marketing point of view. (10 seconds (or less)) Of course, let all the information be known on the forum as you tend do to maintain credibility but use the number that will best optimize your chances for long term success. My two cents anyway.


----------



## Gransee (May 5, 2007)

Well said Don. I think sometimes my only motivation for taking a stand on a spec is to avoid being pestered. 

For example, I could just say, "its bright guys, buy it and find out yourself". The skeptics of course wait for others to buy it first. Then people who own them come on and say, "it blasted my $500 Titan, it made me popular again" etc. Then people ask me, "is it brighter than the SF Titan?" I tell them it doesn't matter, just buy the light or don't buy the light, leave me alone. 

That's perfectly reasonable, I guess I just feel a need to draw a clear line. Of course, that clear line could be, "look guys, these are LEDs not labratory-grade luminaires".

And then I may be just deluding myself trying to nail an LED down to a spec. But I have done it in the past without too much problem. 

For example when comparing CF bulbs with incan, the lumen figures on the package are almost useful. (I say almost, because the CRIs are different, etc). Btw, everyone should switch to at least Flourescent in their house to save electricity. 

It could be much worse, I could claim the new LS is capable of 5 million MCd or "can be seen over 5 miles away!" 

peter


----------



## Gransee (May 5, 2007)

Unfortunately, most specs have provisos, "at ambient, when mfg recommendations are followed, etc". My goal is to make the provisos reasonable. That is why I prefer lumen rating to milli-candela rating for example. Candela assumes things like distance to target, beam distribution, etc that are not as reasonable for the consumer to consider than a simple represenative photon number (lumens). 

I think it was Surefire that encouraged the industry to use lumens as a measurement. 

Of course, more information makes the picture more clear, but people don't always want all the extra information all at once. It is a balance. 

So lumens at how many minutes?

peter


----------



## alanagnostic (May 5, 2007)

I'm not so worried about the lumen rating, but that is obviously a factor. I'm just looking for a well-designed, high-quality, tough light with multiple modes. I have yet to own an Arc but I've heard many good things about them and I'm looking forward to trying one. It's good to hear from you to see that progress is being made.


----------



## kitelights (May 5, 2007)

I share Don's sentiments, he just says it better than I could.

I've always admired and respected manufacturers that are realistic and even conservative in their claims. It adds more overall credibility to their products.

With all the specs and discussion that'll fly here prior to its release, and I'm assuming this will be a major targeted market, I don't think what's printed will have much impact. 

For the rest of your market, I think that a good solution would be to publish two ranges. One would be a "high normal" to low, ex., 60 lumens for 2.5 hours to 1/8 lumens for 70 hours (hypothetical figures). Then a turbo, boost or whatever you want to call it mode, 120 lumens for 5 minutes to 75 lumens for 2 hours.

The major choice is where you'll draw the line at normal and boost and I think that decision is best determined by your own personal perception. That way you're able to convey both your intentions and the light's capablity.

Print the "details" (the two ranges) on the rear of the package, include a detailed chart inside with brightness and runtimes explaining the variables, and on the front of the package "variable output from 1/8 lumens to 120 lumens" and "runtime up to 70 hours". If you feel you need a disclaimer, add "see back panel for details."

Now, you've covered all your bases.


----------



## THE_dAY (May 6, 2007)

Peter, how about giving a range in lumens, for example, "New Arc LS from 2-120 lumens".


----------



## Griz (May 6, 2007)

I agree with Don, keep it simple. I also agree with kitelights about being realistic

On the front of the box how about....

'max brightness' lumens for xx min.
'minimum brightness' lumens for xx hrs.

If you feel you need more, put in on the back of the box, for the people who want to take the time to explore detailed lumen ratings and other features.


----------



## Isak Hawk (May 6, 2007)

Griz said:


> 'max brightness' lumens for xx min.
> 'minimum brightness' lumens for xx hrs.



I also agree with this approach.

High: XX lumens for say 20 minutes
Minimum: X lumens for XX hours
Burst mode: XXX lumens for 10 seconds

"user customizable brightness levels, see back for details"

something like that


----------



## ananddev (May 11, 2007)

IMHO 10 seconds of anything is worth nothing (In this context). I mean 10 seconds of show-off !! That is also worth nothing much. What lighting task can one think of justifying 10 seconds of absolute max brightness ... except a light showdown... but 10 seconds... like 10 seconds of fame. 

Any way, since I am not a flashoholic my opinion may not mean much.


----------



## ViReN (May 11, 2007)

Gransee said:


> <skip>
> So my question for you guys. If you only had ONE duration to choose from for the published minimum spec, which would you want?
> 
> 10 seconds (or less)
> ...



Peter.... 2 Hours or More, 60 + or More lumens, Single Battery if CR123.... or Optional 2 AA / 2CR123 tube would be nice too... 

that would be more usable as compared to 600 lumens for 10 seconds.... yes, one could always advertise on it as a 600 lumen.... not specifying for how long :laughing:

am i asking too much


----------



## Gransee (May 11, 2007)

ananddev said:


> IMHO 10 seconds of anything is worth nothing (In this context). I mean 10 seconds of show-off !! That is also worth nothing much. What lighting task can one think of justifying 10 seconds of absolute max brightness ... except a light showdown... but 10 seconds... like 10 seconds of fame.
> 
> Any way, since I am not a flashoholic my opinion may not mean much.



How about these scenarios? 

#1
In a cave, you eyes adjusted to a nice easy level. You come to a junction, feel a draft, see a pit in the floor extending into darkness, shine the light at full power, with seconds you can see it is quite deep. 

If you light's full power setting ran for hours but only allowed you see partway down the shaft but a full power setting that only lasted for 5 seconds (plus it has the hours setting as well) allowed you see another 50 feet, which would you rather have in this situation?

#2
Hiking down the mountain, took a little longer than you planned. Moonless night. Low setting is working fine for seeing the path. Up ahead you hear what sounds like a large animal. Not sure what it is or what direction is is heading. You would rather know sooner than later. Some trees nearby you can climb, you could run the other way. How many seconds at full power do you need to determine the best plan of action?

peter


----------



## Casual Flashlight User (May 11, 2007)

I favour this sort of spec, or something in that ball park.

Low - 30 Hours
Medium - 10 Hours
High - 1.5 Hours
Burst - 30-60 Seconds

And some sort of custom programing to alter all settings if you choose. 


CFU


----------



## JJohn (May 11, 2007)

For backpacking in the mountains, what I like is pretty similar to CFU's list:

Low - 50 Hours
Medium - 10 Hours
High - 1.5 Hours
Burst - 5 min

Note the low. In the tent at night it is nice to have a really low setting that won't disturb your spouse and yet is plenty bright to check out the topo map and plan the next days hike. 

The 5 min burst level is that on night hikes I might want to go to burst mode several times at maybe 20 seconds each time and I don't want it to really drain the battery. We all use lights differently so it is really nice to be able to adjust these levels and effectively cutomize the light to our preferences.

----------------------------------------------


Casual Flashlight User said:


> I favour this sort of spec, or something in that ball park.
> 
> Low - 30 Hours
> Medium - 10 Hours
> ...


----------



## cave dave (May 11, 2007)

Ok this a multi level light right? I say don't put runtimes on the package at all. Keep the package simple. You can post all you want on CPF or your website for those that care. maybe a graph or something. Runtime vs brightness.


----------



## mahoney (May 11, 2007)

I'd rather see at least 30-60 seconds of brightness than 10. If you have to cover a large area to look for something 10 seconds might not be enough.

Also, (opens can of worms) it's not just about brightness, it can also be about photon management. The "all the light in one tiny spot" Inova T3 was not at all usefull for my work (which is usually best done with a light having a fairly floody and even field of illumination) but it was great for looking at stuff far far away and once in a while I needed that. I don't carry 2 big EDC lights though...

With one fairly dim exception, a good adjustable focus LED light has not been made. Or even a light having a flood beam and a spot beam you could switch between, like a Kroma if the small LEDs were white.


----------



## mossyoak (May 13, 2007)

JJohn said:


> For backpacking in the mountains, what I like is pretty similar to CFU's list:
> 
> Low - 50 Hours
> Medium - 10 Hours
> ...



ive found that the default low on a HDS u60 is more than bright enough for messing around in a tent at night with maps and such and its runtime is something like 300 hours. so you could make the low level much lower than even that.


----------



## cerbie (May 13, 2007)

Or, better yet, have a decently-bright low, and a very high level computer interface to change levels, and maybe even interfaces (thumb-dancing vs. PC app: PC app wins).


----------



## ananddev (May 14, 2007)

Thanks Peter. I stand corrected. Never realized that indeed one mostly does use flashlights for couple of seconds. And, in the circumstances you described those few seconds of max distance visibility could be very valuable. I am eagerly awaiting the Arc LS.


----------



## ananddev (May 14, 2007)

Actually, remembering back from my camp days I have been in a similar situation you described when we were walking down a mountain. We were not able to see far enough to plan our descent at night even when we had climbed up and down that path a number of times before. Our problem was we were not able to find our most frequented recognizable trail for some reason that night even when we were looking in the right direction. We missed it because we could not see far enough and started doubting if we were on the right track. 3 to 4 seconds of visibility would have reassured us. But then we didn't have such lights anyways .


----------



## spideyfan (May 15, 2007)

Low - 10 Hours
Medium - 5 Hours
High - 1.5 Hours
Burst - 30 sec

Something like this would do it for me...I dont do anything outdoors (hiking/camping/...) but would like to bring the light out with me at night if i go walking which I do...the WOW factor (brightness/ease of functionality) is what would appeal to me as a customer...


----------



## this_is_nascar (May 15, 2007)

I've kept pretty quiet about this new venture for the LS, howeve my biggest fear is that the product will be out-dated by time it gets released. I'm all for doing it right the 1st time, but it seems like it takes Peter a very long time to get a product out the door. While that time is passing by, the technology is moving forward at a faster pace.


----------



## jch79 (May 15, 2007)

spideyfan said:


> Low - 10 Hours
> Medium - 5 Hours
> High - 1.5 Hours
> Burst - 30 sec


Pretty darn close to what I'd look for too. :thumbsup: Although I'd want low to last a wee longer. :shrug:


----------



## Lebkuecher (May 15, 2007)

Good to see you post Tin

Maybe you could elaborate what you mean by outdated?? The new LS will be fully programmable and ship with the latest LED technology. Upgradeability and versatility of the electronics will be second to none. From what I’ve seen there will be nothing that will compete with the new LS.


----------

