Arc4 Testing

[CM]

Corona shots

Sorry for the poor picture but...

The beam on the left is an LSHP and the one on the right is the Arc4. The LSHP is not really yellow, it just appears that way. Note how much larger the sidespill is without comprimising the intensity or size of the hotspot. The Arc4 reflector is a very efficient photon management system.

CM

 

[CM]

[ QUOTE ]
carmel said:
CM,

I don't understand your comment about the boost mode now being the "highest" setting, with no distinction of the highest setting from the lower setting. Please explain so that even I can understand. (Do you mean that the Arc4 primary setting can be set to the boost mode, so there really is no boost from the primary setting in that case???)

Thanks!

carmel

[/ QUOTE ]

It is my understanding that is correct. Your primary setting can now be set to the maximum level. Peter, please correct me if I'm wrong.

CM

 

[Alan Hsu]

this_is_nascar,

I can imagine some CPFers will some up with a modified screw-like thing with opening for lanyard attachment to replace LS4's clip.

 

[this_is_nascar]

[ QUOTE ]
Alan Hsu said:
this_is_nascar,

I can imagine some CPFers will some up with a modified screw-like thing with opening for lanyard attachment to replace LS4's clip.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, I'm sure they will. Again, the clip is very functional. It's placed in such a way that the top of the bezel is equal to the curve of the clip. If you recall how the SF E2E/E2O bezel sits way above the clip when mounted in your pocket, you won't have that problem with the Arc4. My preferd method will continue to be the belt-mounted OEM pouch, minus the clip. I'll probably look for plugs or shorter screws to keep in the holes. I don't like the idea of keeping them opened, plus the heads of the screws will allow the Arc4 not to easily roll off the table.

Testing update..... I've never worked my thumb muscles like this before. If I had a penny for every click, push, double-click I've made tonight............... anyway, things are going well. Of the things I've tested (I'm basically going down the manual), things are performing as advertised.

 

[BlindedByTheLite]

could yall tell me a bit about the many light level selections?
do they seem to make a "custom fit" to daily uses?

 

[CM]

There are about 16 or 17 levels of light, each one is 1/sqrt(2) difference in current from the adjacent settings. I think this is enough granularity for even the pickiest users who want exacting control of light level. I consider myself pretty picky, wanting a wide continuum of levels to select but I gotta say 16 is plenty, maybe too much for some as the difference between the settings is very subtle.

CM

 

[LLLean]

Very, very beautiful beam!!! And a very beautiful and solid looking flashlight. Love the new inscriptions.

Can one of the testers post pix of the beam at different levels? That would be great. I'm most curious about the max level and how that compares with the boost level. (Remember to set camera at manual with fixed ISO, aperture and shutter-speed since you may have to take 2 separate pix, unless you have 2 Arc4). Thanks a bunch.


- LLL

 

[Billson]

CM,

Is the unit you're testing the premium version?

Are the beamshots set on the highest setting which you said is now boost mode?

If the highest setting is set to boost mode then there would be no boost mode anymore?

Since the Arc4 is temp-controlled, how long does boost mode last before the brightness level is toggled back.

Can the ARC4 maintain the next highest brightness level, supposed to be 500mA indefinitely as long as the battery can maintain it

Will Peter be providing us with the current settings for each brightness level?

Billson

 

[cue003]

So if the Primary setting is NOT set all the way up will there then be a boost mode? Or is there no boost mode anymore no matter what the setting?

Thanks.

 

[Carpe Diem]

[ QUOTE ]
Darell said: I'm checking in here just to mark it as a favorite, whilst I await MY sample... [fingers tapping]

[/ QUOTE ]

Ditto! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

 

[this_is_nascar]

[ QUOTE ]
cue003 said:
So if the Primary setting is NOT set all the way up will there then be a boost mode? Or is there no boost mode anymore no matter what the setting?

Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are basically 3-modes available by clicking or pushing the tailcap. I currently have my unit set at a medium level output for primary and few clicks lower for secondary output. When I turn the light on, it comes on to the level that I last turned it off at. Note, this is user configurable to allow the light to always come on in Primary. So, assume I power up in Primary. I double-click to go to secondary. In either primary or secondary, I press and hold the button and I'm in top-of-line, boost, high-power, eye schorching (call it what you will) mode. Releasing the button puts be back in the mode I was in prior to pressing and holding. Click three times from either primary or secondary and I'm in low-light mode. In low light mode, the only option is a single click to power off. I don't say this as a bragging thing or anything like that, but you really need to use this to appreciate its usefullness.

 

[carmel]

So the basic question still remains: can the Arc4 be set to the "boost mode" as the primary setting, in which case there is no boost mode beyond it? If this is so, the original idea of the boost mode (momentary extreme brightness beyond any primary setting) has been rethought.

Another way of stating it: is the "boost mode" one of the 17 configurable modes in the Brightness Menu, or is it beyond them? Peter??

carmel

 

[BlindedByTheLite]

it doesn't sound like you can set "boost" mode as "primary" mode.

 

[cue003]

The reason the question of boost mode as max brightness primary setting came up is that up above from CM

"The boost mode is now the highest setting. There is now no distinction of the highest setting from the lower setting. It is the maximum output the light will make. "

That quote makes it sound like if you set your light for primary of 1 (assuming that is the highest/brightest) then holding the button does NOT yield a change or does NOT enter boost mode which could suggest that level 1 is in essence boost mode.

That is where the questions came from.

This_is_nascar, can you confirm this to be true or false?

 

[Billson]

I don't know if this is the right topic but since this is where I noticed it, this is where I'll post my comments.

I was looking at the pictures and I don't know if anybody else feels the same way but the light looks great without the clip. The clip looks like it was added as an afterthought so it kinda ruins the attractive lines and design of the light. It's kinda like putting a roof rack on a Ferrari. Unfortunately, if the clip is removed and since the lanyard attachment is on the clip, there is no way to easily carry the light without the risk of it slipping out of the hand. Maybe just a lanyard attachment without the clip.

I find the keyring on the current line of ARC lights to be more useful but don't see the clip having the same utility except if you want to clip it on a cap or something and how many people actually get to use it for this purpose. If you want to clip it on your belt the pouch works better because it protects the light at the same time.

I don't have a suggestion on how to remedy this without having to redesign the body but maybe Peter can provide an alternative to the unsightly clip. Judging from CM and TIN's comments, both of them prefer the light without the clip but is afraid it will easily roll off the table without it. This is not supposed to be the primary use of the clip but it's beginning to sound like it's a major reason for not removing it and for me it's a pretty lousy reason. Personally, the clip is useless to me apart from the lanyard attachment.

Without the clip, I think the light looks better without the knurling but it would probably be more difficult(slippery) to use.

I'd like to know what the other testers think about this.

I like the working features of the light but I think the physical design still needs some revisions/improvements before I'm gonna put up money for one of these babies.

In the meantime, I have my wonderful LSHF and AAA-P to tide me over.

 

[paulr]

Nice beamshots, I like the wide spill. If you remove the clip, the screw holes might be good places to put tritium markers.

 

[RadarGreg]

Any discussion on pricing for the new Arc4 and premium model? I thought I saw the figure of $180 around on one of the posts, but this seems like a lot of money even for a premium light. I'd would like to see the price in the sub $100 range, but with the LSH in the $120 range, I don't know if this is possible.

 

[Ardy]

I love the way the new ARC4 looks. Personaly the only problem I had with my LSH-P is the fact that when I dropped it a few times it landed on the side of the head and nicked it. So, I like to see some amount of knurling around the head and around the other end where the switch will be. If the light falls on its side it will not nick at all only when it would fall on the head/tail staright or on its side that it will make damage or nick the light. Knurling will prevent that or at the very least hide it. For that price personaly I like to see no nicks what so ever.
Ardy /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[LukeK]

As stated earlier Greg, the Arc4/LS4 will be selling for $150 for the standard version (M,N bin) and the premium (P,Q Bin) will go for 180. These are complicated, extremely high quality tools so they will be expected to be priced rather high compared to the 'normal' flashlight. But I digress since this thread is supposed to be only about testing and nothing else. If you have any further questions that don't directly involve beta testing then please direct your attention to the other Arc4 Thread (pre-release-candidate testing discussion). Thanks.

 

[RadarGreg]

Thanks for the info, Luke. This seemed like the best forum to bring up Arc4 issues, like pricing, and other performance characteristics. I'll take your suggestion to post on the other forum under advisement.