Noctigon Meteor M43

[Giocomo]

There are areas that can improved to make it lighter (just some ideas):

2) I suspect the copper endplate of the battery carrier can also be thinned and trimmed since there is more than enough copper material to conduct current - unless the endplate is also acting as a heatsink.

The input current is up 30A for down to 3.7V while boosting 8A at 10V (basically 2A per LED), there is never enough material for such amperage at such low voltage. The end copper plate is absolutely the best feature could be used, not some traces on a FR4 board, besides the low voltage basically ask for low resistance conductors, unlike the most flashlights which work in series and with lower current dues to high voltage.

 

[Giocomo]

A few questions:


2) What is the parasitic drain for this light?

21uA, no other feature turned on in OFF.

 

[carl]

Ok, so this measurement was with the illuminated power button feature turned off. 21 microAmps is pretty low. How did you measure it?

Thank you for measuring it for the rest of us!

 

[Giocomo]

Ok, so this measurement was with the illuminated power button feature turned off. 21 microAmps is pretty low. How did you measure it?

Thank you for measuring it for the rest of us!

Yes, no illumination, (beacon, or fixed color). Take the head, connect a cell to the positive ring using the Fluke 289 in series with the cell in uA mode, negative lead on the battery negative, positive lead on the Ground of the driver.
21uA is extremely low.

 

[carl]

On more question: In their own opinion, does anyone think its too heavy and bulky for daily use around the house?

I just wanted other's thoughts on this since I don't want buyer's remorse by having it be a 'shelf queen' after the initial novelty wears off, lol!

 

[Canuke]

It looks like the price at the source (International Outdoor) has gone up. $178.68 now.

I was thinking of picking one up at Mountain Electronics along with the cells it will need, I wonder if Richard can keep the original price by the time he reopens Monday.

 

[dc38]

On more question: In their own opinion, does anyone think its too heavy and bulky for daily use around the house?

I just wanted other's thoughts on this since I don't want buyer's remorse by having it be a 'shelf queen' after the initial novelty wears off, lol!

Redefine heavy as "hefty" and you wont have a problem carrying it. An average smartphone has an msrp of ober 500$, yet we drop those all the time. Worse comes to worse, ill offer to buy yours from you.

 

[tonkem]

Anyone have any pics of the M43 with a Zebralight S6330?

 

[carl]

Speaking of the S6330 (and also the MM15), I wonder why the M43 design didn't incorporate a built-in battery carrier. That design seemed like the way to go for a more direct current flow to the head rather than relying on the aluminum battery cover to bottom onto the head for bare aluminum to bare aluminum contact, like the M43.

 

[Fireclaw18]

Speaking of the S6330 (and also the MM15), I wonder why the M43 design didn't incorporate a built-in battery carrier. That design seemed like the way to go for a more direct current flow to the head rather than relying on the aluminum battery cover to bottom onto the head for bare aluminum to bare aluminum contact, like the M43.

The metal of the body tube is thicker than any wire. It should give a better connection and is simpler and more durable than a battery carrier. This system is fine for lights like the M43 that have the batteries in parallel. This carrier-free battery tube is also probably shorter since there isn't a need to accomodate the carrier.

The main benefit of an internal battery carrier like in the S6630 is that the cells aren't being dragged sideways across a single positive contact. This is excellent for a light like the S6330 where the cells are not in parallel. Instead each battery is on a separate circuit powering a single emitter.

 

[dc38]

Also allows lockout

 

[Giocomo]

I suspect the copper endplate of the battery carrier can also be thinned and trimmed since there is more than enough copper material to conduct current - unless the endplate is also acting as a heatsink.

Since the voltage is 3.7V and the light will draw up to 30A (to boost the voltage) there is never enough resistance for such combination, there is no such things as acceptable loss at such low voltage and such higher current, Ohm's Law is fundamental to understanding such notions. Also there is always resistance in something else, all is cumulative.
All manufacturers use a FR4 board with a typical think copper trace, I don't prefer that instead of pure copper.

 

[Giocomo]

Speaking of the S6330 (and also the MM15), I wonder why the M43 design didn't incorporate a built-in battery carrier. That design seemed like the way to go for a more direct current flow to the head rather than relying on the aluminum battery cover to bottom onto the head for bare aluminum to bare aluminum contact, like the M43.

You got a 1mm thick copper board that is gold plated in contact with the battery tube, nothing goes in the tail cover. The battery tube makes contact with the ground of the driver and it is very thick. This system is simple and effective for full parallel electrical configuration of the cells, the MM15 is a series electrical configuration, not parallel. (read Selfbuilt's review, the circuitry makes the connection in series even if all cells are inserted in the same direction), or
S6330 first of all has quite a weak power by today's standards, and secondly the battery carrier is used for the purpose to individualize cells, not have them in sort of electrical configuration.

It is too easy to make suggestions without understanding fundamental electronics.

 

[fatsteve0]

I am itching so bad tomorrow is Monday! I hope it arrives

 

[carl]

You got a 1mm thick copper board that is gold plated in contact with the battery tube, nothing goes in the tail cover. The battery tube makes contact with the ground of the driver and it is very thick. This system is simple and effective for full parallel electrical configuration of the cells, the MM15 is a series electrical configuration, not parallel. (read Selfbuilt's review, the circuitry makes the connection in series even if all cells are inserted in the same direction), or
S6330 first of all has quite a weak power by today's standards, and secondly the battery carrier is used for the purpose to individualize cells, not have them in sort of electrical configuration.

It is too easy to make suggestions without understanding fundamental electronics.

Thank you very much for your explanations - great info! You're right, it is too easy to make suggestions in ignorance - that's why I made them, LOL! But that's why I'm on this forum, to learn from others.

Just a few more questions:
1) Why design the light's power system with batteries in-parallel since the higher current can result in a circuit with more losses? Wouldn't in-series have been more efficient with higher voltage and lower current? Of course, the in-parallel configuration gives us more flexibility in using less than 4 batteries (in an emergency) but this advantage is a secondary benefit.

2) Would it be correct to assume a built-in carrier with an unbroken copper path between the head and tail end is still a better design? The battery carrier posts could be made of copper (more expensive too). Right now, there are multiple physical breaks in the current path between the head and tail which I assume have the affect of increasing resistance. This must be alleviated by screwing all the components down tightly, and even then, there is probably some residual resistance remaining.

Thank you for your answers!

 

[carl]

Asking for more opinions here: Does the M43 decrease your desire for Zebralight to resurrect the S6330? In other words, does the M43 make the S6330 redundant or superfluous/unnecessary for you? Just wondering...

 

[tonkem]

I will let you know when I get the M43 :) I am interested in the small size and good throw of the m43 versus the Zebralight. I love my 6330, as it was and still is quite an achievement in size and power, IMHO. But I also have the Lupine Betty TL-S that is lighter and slightly more powerful then the 6330, hence my interest in the M43.... :)

I would still like to see the 6330 brought back, as Zebralights are small and powerful, and have great circuits, once again my opinion.

Asking for more opinions here: Does the M43 decrease your desire for Zebralight to resurrect the S6330? In other words, does the M43 make the S6330 redundant or superfluous/unnecessary for you? Just wondering...

 

[Giocomo]

Thank you very much for your explanations - great info! You're right, it is too easy to make suggestions in ignorance - that's why I made them, LOL! But that's why I'm on this forum, to learn from others.

Just a few more questions:
1) Why design the light's power system with batteries in-parallel since the higher current can result in a circuit with more losses? Wouldn't in-series have been more efficient with higher voltage and lower current? Of course, the in-parallel configuration gives us more flexibility in using less than 4 batteries (in an emergency) but this advantage is a secondary benefit.

2) Would it be correct to assume a built-in carrier with an unbroken copper path between the head and tail end is still a better design? The battery carrier posts could be made of copper (more expensive too). Right now, there are multiple physical breaks in the current path between the head and tail which I assume have the affect of increasing resistance. This must be alleviated by screwing all the components down tightly, and even then, there is probably some residual resistance remaining.

Thank you for your answers!

Did you paid attention to anything in the flashlight or you just like to assume negativities?
"Right now, there are multiple physical breaks in the current path between the head and tail which I assume have the affect of increasing resistance."
I believe you don't even know what you are saying.

 

[carl]

For clarification of my previous words: "Right now, there are multiple physical breaks in the current path between the head and tail which I assume have the affect of increasing resistance."

What I meant by "physical breaks" is, for example, the interface between the gold band in the head and the bare aluminum end of the battery tube. Although they are in direct contact when the tube is screwed to the head, this is still a physical break (the gold and aluminum are not a one-piece item) which increases resistance over and above another design which might involve a one-piece design of some sort.

This principle was previously discussed on another thread here where a forum member was designing a low-resistance tailcap spring. He discovered that his design - which involved a two-piece tailcap spring, 2 very short springs assembled in series - resulted in a significant increase in resistance over the one-piece spring of the standard McClicky switch. This increase in resistance, it was discovered, was from the "physical break" between the two short spring pieces although they were mechanically connected. From this finding, he abandoned his project.

I am not assuming negatives, but simply trying to learn. No offense was intended to the maker/designer of the M43, to any owners of the M43, or to anyone else here.

If my words sounded like I was assuming negatives, I can only say this was not my true intention.

One of the difficulties of communicating in written form (like on this forum) is that we have no idea how the words were meant if they had been stated in-person - no word inflections, verbal or physical expressions, etc. Of the thousands of questions I have previously asked here on CPF (in a similar manner) in the past decade, I have always strived to ask questions respectfully and I have never been told I have done otherwise. I have appreciated this forum and my experiences here for the past decade because the other members here have made the environment here comfortable for all of us to feel free to ask questions, regardless of how ignorant we are on the subject (I practice medicine for my daily livelihood, not electronics). I know we all strive to remain open to others and their opinions and questions. This is the environment we strive to maintain. This is why we love being here on CPF!

 

[carl]

I will let you know when I get the M43 :) I am interested in the small size and good throw of the m43 versus the Zebralight. I love my 6330, as it was and still is quite an achievement in size and power, IMHO. But I also have the Lupine Betty TL-S that is lighter and slightly more powerful then the 6330, hence my interest in the M43.... :)

Tonkem,

I would still like to see the 6330 brought back, as Zebralights are small and powerful, and have great circuits, once again my opinion.

I keep wishing the Lupines will come down in price so I occasionally check their mountainbike sales site - no chance on any sales, LOL! I almost purchased the Piko a while back but the dealer left ebay. German tech is nice but expensive!

I was also hoping the S6330 would return, but this M43 may fit me even better! For almost the same size light, there is almost 3 times the light output! No going back on the lower output, right?

When you get your M43, maybe you can give us a few quick comments on your comparison with the Lupine and ZL.