Titanium Aleph & E Series compatible heads/tubes/tails**Announcing TnC Ti EDC-Flex**

[JohnTz]

Eric the 18650 tubes look great. The Mcgizmo 1x123 pack is nice but for the larger Ti 38 head I think more people will go for the longer tube. The 38 would look a little off balance with the short 123 pack.

Your tube design looks great! I'm still in at the proposed prices for a complete light: tri-led 38 head, 18650 body, all in Ti. Three Crees or Rebels please, or whatever your planning is the best combo using your heatsink etc. Hopefully the latest emitters available. I am getting more excited with every new drawing you display!

[flashlight]

I'd be interested in a 19mm or 20mm head in Ti.

[billybright]

Me too

I'm also interested in a Ti 27mm head w/P7 ?
Also a complete light eg: Multi LED -38mm Ti Head w/2X123/18650 body.

I'd be interested in a 20mm head in Ti.

[jch79]

Nice! I'd be interested in a clipped 1x123 tube with the grip like the above rendering!

[Bogus1]

Chris has been busy and our intention is to offer our EDC-Flex parts in Ti in relatively short order. Below is a proven prototype of our new EDC-Flex Titanium 18650 tube. This tube works well with the finger grips and yet allows pocket carry in a unique TnC design. Don's Ti clip is utilized and works well with the two clip holes on one side of the tube. The other side will have a milled Tritium slot if this is a feature buyers wish to see. Input on dimensions of the slot would be helpful. There are two lanyard holes for lanyard attachments. Since TnC is a custom builder we will accommodate special requests, such as leaving the finger grip round, or building tubes without milled slots, holes, etc. The tail switch is integrated and uses the McClicky so there are only two parts to this tube. We deviated from our plan of building these 18mm tubes as one single piece because we don't feel a one piece 18mm tube would result in a quality part. The metal is narrow at the threads at the head end, but perhaps Ti would be strong enough to allow for this. However the contact from the tube threading into the head is too narrow as well for a quality part. It's just not something Chris will build because it's cutting corners even though it would cost less to build. Therefore we've also included a gold plated copper contact in a delrin housing at the head end. With this adaptor and the integrated tail these tubes should work well with all 18650 sized cells.



Below is an EDC-Flex Ti 18650 tube, EDC-Flex E Series head adaptor with gold plated copper contact, and a single 18650 extender, all in Titanium.



Below is an EDC-Flex Ti 18650 tube, 1x Ti 18650 extender, and E Series head adaptor and contact.



Below is the proto of our original EDC-Flex 18650 design in process. This process was halted when it was confirmed the parts could not work in this configuration up to TnC standards.

As for the TnC EDC-Flex Ti heads, we are in the process of moving ahead with those as well. We now have 38mm UCLs lined up at a lower price. I am still looking for Sapphire windows but haven't heard about this from advocates in this thread. We have all the parts needed for the 27mm and 20mm heads already on hand and these might be built first and soon. I'll try to have pricing for the parts being discussed in addition to the price already listed in this thread for our 38mm EDC-Flex Ti 38mm heads.

Thanks for looking.

[donn_]

Wow! That's drop-dead gorgeous! I love the 2x18650 setup.

[JohnTz]

These are awesome!!!!! Any new progress on the multi-led sink, etc?

As far as the lens goes, saphire would still be prefered for the 38 head but UCL will work as well.

Great job so far guys!

[JohnTz]

Oh I forgot to mention Tritium slots. How about 4 vertical at 90 degrees at the tail end. Please size them for the ones that Bart has avialble currently.

[easilyled]

The 18650 EDC-Flex Ti Tube prototype looks great.

I personally might opt for 2 milled tritium slots in both flat sides of the
cigar grip instead of the clip holes on the one side.

I can't wait to see a picture of it with the McClickie switch installed
and also the 27mm and 38mm heads attached.

A P7-canister and matching reflectors that can be easily assembled in the heads would be the icing on the cake for me.

If there are problems with this, then the multisink would be a nice option
for the 38mm head.


PS! If I may be so bold, is it possible to modify the design of the tail-end so it looks a bit less tube-like?

ie. perhaps with an elevated ridge at the end something like Don's PD or McClickie bodies?

[Russki]

Eric those look great.
Please do no forget about 19 mm heads using XR19 reflector.
Thanks for great project.

[starfiretoo]

The body is a beauty. The twin finger tabs makes it stand out.

I am interested in a simpler 17650 tube with heavy ribs like the McGizmo tube too.

What if you were to do the 18650 body design with a screw on tail vice a screw on front? The tail can look integral. No need to use a Surefire "C" or "E" spec for the tail cap.

[starfiretoo]

Can you make a 20mm head that has an integral bezel vice a screw on? Where the lens is held by an o-ring?

[Bogus1]

Billybright and easilyled,

The P7 in a regular E Series compatable setup won't work due to the P7 size and heat sinking requirements. In Ti parts that becomes even more problematic. That's why we have the C-Flex and the SF-Series, because we were trying to build a standard that was truly adaptable. We do have designs to use E Series parts in combination with P7 setups, but these are unique products that have yet to be built.

JohnTz,

Thanks for your continuing interest. We still haven't had a consensus of feedback for how guys would want the tri-LED setup built. If we don't get more input we'll just build it our way, but the LED market is pretty fluid right now and I think it's best to leave that door open until the end.

We didn't leave enough metal on the tail end to accommodate 4 slots going around. That would add considerable weight and cost, but once again if that's really something guys want...

Easilyled,

We previously discussed milled slots on the flats of the grips for tritium but that would interfere with lanyard holes. Also that is the location with the least protection for a tritium vial. I guess we could totally try to make each part different for each buyer, but the setup costs would exceed the value of a single tube for something like this even ignoring the design time. That's why I think we are doing what isn't being done already by offering to customize the parts within the scope of what's part of the design. If there is enough interest to replace lanyard holes with slots we will consider this, as this thread is about building what guys want to see build to a large degree.

However this thread is NOT about copying other guys work. The finest flashlights have yet to be built and there's too many available designs to just build the same old things other guys build. I don't know if you guys are aware of the volume of designs TnC has put forward into the custom flashlight world to draw from, but still it's best to move forward with designs than to copy our own (or Chris') work. We can't even keep track of our new build concepts and designs as it is. I'm sure this is true for other builders as well. I truly doubt everyone wants all CPF flashlights to look the same anyhow. What could be more boring than that? We'd quit first.

Starfiretoo,

If you load a 20mm reflector from the rear of a head then the o-ring only seals from the force of the reflector pushing against the lens. That's fine and worth the compromise sometimes, however if the lens pushes back on the o-ring from the front this means there is likely better water proofing due to compression. If you load from the rear as well then the reflector remains loose in the head when you go to change canisters, which is a PITA IMO. We are running the first article aluminum proto heads now. Please comment again when you see them.

I addressed the reasoning for the integrated tail/tube earlier in the thread, however I'll recap. The 18650 cells vary widely and that's why an E Series tube at the tail is limited since it narrows down. I see you stated a different tail cap than standard is ok, but probably not with most buyers I imagine.

However there are four reasons we split the tube at the head. The first is that we would like to see more metal behind the head end threads as boring to 18mm (actually beyond) leaves little metal for integrity. The second is the tube becomes very sharp since it becomes so thin. If we don't worry about accommodating other E Series compatible parts then we could deal with this issue with an innovation. However I believe guys once again want us to keep to a standard and we want to build quality parts. If the metal is too sharp and too thin to make the type of contact we would like to see at the canister (or LE-Light Engines) then it's not a quality part. Lastly, splitting at the head end allows for further innovation and allows for the most flexibility in canister builds and battery spec variations.

Sorry for the length of these posts. If I were a better writer I could use fewer words

[flashlight]

Eric those look great.
Please do no forget about 19 mm heads using XR19 reflector.
Thanks for great project.

+1.

[easilyled]

Hi Eric,

thanks for the feedback but I think you misconstrued my request about
tritium slots probably due to bad communication on my part.

I wanted you to do what you had already planned, but just to put
an extra tritium slot in place instead of where you were going to put
holes for the clip, because I personally wouldn't require the clip.

My one "slight" aesthetic criticism about the tail end is no biggie.

I thought it looked a bit tube-like and unfinished and could benefit maybe
by a ridge/flare. I used McGizmo's PD/clickie bodies as an example to
try to convey what I meant, not in order to have you copy them though.

I certainly don't want to create loads more work for you since the
design seems really nice as it is.

Easilyled,

We previously discussed milled slots on the flats of the grips for tritium but that would interfere with lanyard holes. Also that is the location with the least protection for a tritium vial. I guess we could totally try to make each part different for each buyer, but the setup costs would exceed the value of a single tube for something like this even ignoring the design time. That's why I think we are doing what isn't being done already by offering to customize the parts within the scope of what's part of the design. If there is enough interest to replace lanyard holes with slots we will consider this, as this thread is about building what guys want to see build to a large degree.

However this thread is NOT about copying other guys work. The finest flashlights have yet to be built and there's too many available designs to just build the same old things other guys build. I don't know if you guys are aware of the volume of designs TnC has put forward into the custom flashlight world to draw from, but still it's best to move forward with designs than to copy our own (or Chris') work. We can't even keep track of our new build concepts and designs as it is. I'm sure this is true for other builders as well. I truly doubt everyone wants all CPF flashlights to look the same anyhow. What could be more boring than that? We'd quit first.


Sorry for the length of these posts. If I were a better writer I could use fewer words

[lumafist]

Insanely nice bodies...!

Thanks for showing us Eric.....!!


I would allso put my interest in some slimmer heads for
pocket-rockets.....

[Bogus1]

Hi easilyled,

I see your point and it's a good idea. I think it would look nice to have a trit slot on either side if you don't need a clip. That should fit in with the program as an option without too much effort.

Sorry for taking myself a little too seriously there in my post. I understand about the tail guard. My thinking on it is that the tube is pretty busy and the simplicity of the smooth tail guard makes a nice contrast. I really like the look of the tube. The tail guard has grown on me. I'll see what Chris thinks.

lumafist,

Ok, I hear you. I take it the 20mm heads won't work for Cree LEs and that's why guys want 19mm heads? Chris modified some McR-20 reflectors for Cree. I guess I'll take a look at the beam.

[lumafist]

Sweet....!

I`m as we speak cramming in a cree in an older host wich has been heavily modified with an 18mm reflector...

It would have been awesome to get a head that fits the TNC design and concept without having to "make it resamble" the body in looks and functionality...

The AA body (maxlitedesign) i got from you is truly amazing and everybody around me with the slightest interest in torches just gasp when it`s presented.....

What you have is something that fits just about everybody...!

I like the concept of billetdesigns and the sturdyness,
some like the insanely wide possibility of legoing...!

Hands down to you and your designers....!

Thanks!

[JohnTz]

JohnTz,

Thanks for your continuing interest. We still haven't had a consensus of feedback for how guys would want the tri-LED setup built. If we don't get more input we'll just build it our way, but the LED market is pretty fluid right now and I think it's best to leave that door open until the end.

We didn't leave enough metal on the tail end to accommodate 4 slots going around. That would add considerable weight and cost, but once again if that's really something guys want...

Eric thanks for the reply. It seems that my suggestions always add cost . So then keep the tritium alot as you originally suggested and no need for the lanyard holes for me as I would attach the lanyard to the clip.

I am not qualified to suggest the tri-led setup so I can be your guinea pig and would be happy to except whatever you think would be the best setup.

Thanks,
John

[Bogus1]

Below is a possible change Chris drew up as an alternate tail guard. We could put holes or whatever else is most popular but it would take a resounding vote.

I want to discuss what we are going to do now with this thread or perhaps even for TnC in general. CPF used to be about guys doing unique projects and having discussion threads of those projects. That was what interested me in CPF long before I signed on. We tried to continue on with that practice in this thread and have been punished for it. We have spent many hours prototyping, drawing, brain storming and posting these ideas to come up with a nice new product line. Chris is no novice. He was the first to machine custom lights, the first to make custom reflectors, the first to machine custom Ti and the list goes on.

In the past guys, including other builders would honor the efforts of others. Even though we've had this thread running for weeks now and our intentions are clear we have seen a large run of parts sold in the mean time that were just sitting around previously. Now we see a thread that was just opened today to machine Ti heads of the various sizes we are offering. This party needs an A2 to "copy" it. TnC is using off the shelf parts such as reflectors from Don so that our heads would be compatible to other parts in circulation. We are not copying heads. Is it that within a week or two someone can post the first Ti parts they make and then just open a thread to build these after we have put so much public effort into our project? Is that what CPF is about, seeing what other guys are doing and trying to beat them to their own market?

Anyhow if CPF truly doesn't want innovation then that's what will happen if this effort is supported. You cannot have a talented machine shop with the nearly unrivaled experience Chris has building custom lights working in this environment. It doesn't take much if any talent to just copy parts, but that's all you will end up with.

Sure we could use the Ti we've already purchased for this project to build something else but is that the right thing? We're going to continue on and hope CPF members will do the right thing. We might be shipping our 20mm or 19mm heads, as well as 27mm and possibly 38mm heads in a week or two weeks at the outside. Obviously we're going to have to rush if we are going to be able to sell what we've already started building. Likely I'll post drawings, prices and or pictures of our machined parts today. Thanks for your interest.

[moeman]

I really like the look of the:
EDC-Flex Ti 18650 tube with the finger grip/clip attachment.
So the Tailcap/button will thread into the tail? will it stick out or be recessed into the body?

[moeman]

Go off on a different angle:
make a head that sits down into the body of the tube, so that only the bezel sticks out, and make the bezel shape gearlike so you can grip it.... Make a spacer to use CR123's in the body....

[JohnTz]

Eric, I for one have expressed my interest since day one of this thread. I will continue to. I would even prepay for a complete tri-led light in Ti, 38mm head size with a 18650 tube. Let me know how to make that happen with you. I would hate for you guys to feel like we are not supportive of this effort. This is a very exciting product set.

[TnC_Products]

Hello moeman,

The switch will be recessed in the back. It is held in place with a small bezel. There might be a picture posted shortly.

Chris

[moeman]

Hello moeman,

The switch will be recessed in the back. It is held in place with a small bezel. There might be a picture posted shortly.

Chris

Cool,
I like the sound of that.

My head in the body of the tube is pretty out there?

[TnC_Products]

Cool,
I like the sound of that.

My head in the body of the tube is pretty out there?

moeman,

The head in the body sounds like a great idea. You just make sure you change your own batteries.. I will leave the light dissasembled when shipped so you won't have to take it apart, just put it together.

BTW the batteries won't squeeze into the back of the tube..

I think I know what you are asking.. If the above doesn't seem correct then I probably don't.

[moeman]

I don't have any way to show you what i mean....

Let me see if i can make a rough drawing and take a picture of it and post it....


thanks,
chris

[Bogus1]

Here's the pic requested of the EDC-Flex 18650 with the boot and tail switch installed.



Are you guys making a circus of my thread? Oh, that's right it's already a circus. Carry on...

[starfiretoo]

The reasoning behind asking about a screwed on tail cap is that after looking at your 18650 tube design it looked like the tube could be cut at the tail instead of the front. i know about the thin wall limitation imposed by an 18mm battery in an "E" type body. The battery contact extension is a good design using an 18mm battery. Just wondered about where you might want to split the body. You could even split it in the middle. i just felt that a screw on tail would have one less part to machine.

On another note i am using a Cree LE in a 20mm McLux Seoul reflector. The hot spot and spill is larger than the 19mm reflector but with these higher output emitters we see now it has good throw. Just a thought again.

[Bogus1]

SF2,

You raise good points. Let me see. I think you want to load your cells either close to the front or back of the tube. I've tried tubes that loaded in the middle and found issues with those, such as cutting into the battery casing on tight fits while threading the parts together.

So the choice is between tail loaded and front loaded then. We could use something like a C Series tail cap, since the E Series isn't the best choice for 18mm cells because it doesn't allow for battery size tolerances. I don't see the advantage over what we are doing now with our two piece tube/tail however.

Using our adaptors, these same exact tubes could be used as C Series tubes if we just make a different head adaptor. That's much less cost with the Ti material than making a whole tube with dedicated head threads. The advantage is the modular potential with our design. There really isn't much modular advantage to having tail caps that can be swapped. I think swapping whether you can use an E Series heads, or a C Series head or... is a large advantage. Does that make sense?