Cosmetics of Lights

[zackhugh]

Peter,

I have an Arc AAA LE, 3 regular Arc AAA's, one LS first, and one LSH-P headed to me (unfortunately delayed at a Fedex facility). Let me add my voice to the chorus and say that I love your products. I also agree with you about functionality being the primary focus. It's like some people I know who buy stereo equipment with nice gauges and lights as a criterion instead of how it sounds. Anyway, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and your lights look good to me.

Steve

 

[FC.]

Hey Peter, I am not trying to put you down. I was just pointing out some problems that in my opinion need to be addressed.
I tested few lights for PK a while back, and I did not sugar coated my findings.
All I care about is a reliable light. My LS does not seem to fit in that category.

And thanks for starting a new post instead of replying to mine. "Some People", ha? You know I am not stupid, and can read between the lines.

Instead of making me look like an ***, maybe you should address the issuses I brought up.

Thanks,

 

[Flashlightboy]

Yikes!!

I just posted on the new Skunk light and then I saw this one.

I have several Arc lights and have given away others as gifts. That said, I can say Arc lights are purely utilitarian and that pureness, to me, makes the lights good looking tools.

The clean function makes the lights beautiful.

 

[Tomas]

Peter, I tend to agree that the functionality and reliability of the light is much more important than suave good looks.

My Arc LS has three different anodize colors, two different finish glosses, some irregularities in the finish, and foam washers that are torn and tattered. None of these affect the operation of the light with either the CR123's or NiMH batteries I use with it.

The variability of color and texture in fact give it a nice "industrial" look that fit's it's personality nicely.

The only thing that bothers me about it is it's water resistance. In even a light rain it sucks up water like an old gym sock. Turning it on or off causes it to blow bubbles 'round the lens.

This would bother me considerably less if I could dismantle and dry the head out, and even give a shot at sealing it properly, but it is locked into it's current porusness by whatever was put on it's threads at the factory. The head does NOT come apart.

Overall, I really like the light, and appreciate what it represents in the evolution of the Arc LS series. Thing is, even my 15 year old *ini*ag with a BB400 in it is more trusted. I know the MM/BB is more water resistant, and should some get inside in normal outdoor use I can quickly and easily field strip it and clear the problem.

Do I want a sexy light or a reliable light?

Reliable and maintainable is my preference.

(The shape / size of the single 123 Arc LS is preferred, but sadly the larger MM/BB is the one I trust.)

Love my Arc AAA's!

P.S. OPINION: If there were one thing I would ask of Arc it would be for the magic potion to dissolve whatever was used to lock the threads on my Arc without damaging anything else. I dislike any product that has features added solely to prevent maintaining the product. Potting for durability as in the AAA is fine, and makes the product more durable. Locking threads only to prevent access does not.
-30-

 

[Gransee]

fc-fire/rescue, you weren't the first to talk about cosmetics. This comes up from time to time. I did see your post. I started a seperate thread because that one was just about LSs. I wanted to make a blanket statement about our policies and how they affect of all of our products. Not sure if that worked. I also noticed that the other CPF'ers already responded to your questions (or so I thought).

If I may, I see three catagories of points you had.

One was about the P-123 pack. I think this is how the dealer choose to package it, so you may not have known of our TSP packs. The P-123 is obsolete and a lot electrons have been spent writing about it. I feel like we have addressed this with the new pack design. Since this affects the reliability of the light, I will be happy to exchange your P-123 for a TSP-123.

The second issue was about the foam retainer. Again, an obsolete item and written about prior on this forum. Again, we provide these for free if you want to use the old style P-123 pack.

Both of these items were mentioned by Sean and Gadgetometry. I could also post a reply but their responses seemed informative.

In another thread, "dirobesh" (see, I am not just singling you out, which my above post in your thread would have seemed), mentioned that he had dog hair, dust and a question about housing revisions. Again, a good response from the members. I posted with what I thought was a helpfull post. I also offered to replace his light.

I apologize for my confusing manner and not communicating in the best possible way.

--
Thomas, the number one reason for the rev2 upgrade as some may remember was to add water resistance. The current design is now water resistant.

Now if you have a rev2 that is leaking, this is news! (not saying they can't leak if you beat on them enough, just saying, I haven't heard of them leaking. All the leaks we hear about are from the older pre-rev2 units).

 

[Gone Jeepin]

I have to agree the idea of utility over looks. When I press the TSP I expect the light to work, or I guess I wouldn't have turned in on in the first place. My "AAA" models and LS2 blem all work as designed and have never even hinted at a failure of any kind. I am pleased with my Arc products.

When I first started lurking on this board, I read about all the different lights I had never even heard of before. I read many differing opinions on all these lights as well. I admit that while some of the lights that seem to get alot of attention seemed odd in form and function at first (Arc LS models and Eternalights mostly) I waited and learned more. I grew to understand why these lights were different and appreciate them. Now I even have to admit that to me these lights are also very attractive.

My .02 is that the LS is one of the best looking small lights around. To me, the LS has met the main goal of being utilitarian and has also kept its cool factor. To those who thik I ramble on... Just ask yourself which light do I play with the most?

 

[Anarchocap]

Peter,
I also prefer function over form. I can't imagine that the majority of people purchasing flashlights for ~$100+ are doing that and expecting function sacrifices.

I recently purchased an Arc LS1 rev 2 right before the new model changes for 2003 were made. The reason I bought it was simple. It was the brightest LS in the smallest package on top of the extremely durable HA housing.

The only complaint I have is that there is a fair amount of lint and/or scratches inside the lens/optics. Would I care normally? No. But for this kind of money on a package that is sealed, I expect it to be almost spotless. If you can't do that, you need to go to a system that allows the user to replace or clean the lens/optics.

I haven't tested my LS1's resistance to water yet, but my expectations in this price range would be at least moderate waterproofing (a few meters).

I have also purchased a Bad Boy 400 mod like Tomas, and considering everything I feel it is a better value as long as size is not a factor. That being said, the Bad Boy is now on my wife's nightstand...

I also will not purchase another LS based light because of the immaturity and inconsistency from Lumileds. That has nothing to do with you guys specifically, but it does have an impact on your market and bottom line, and its obvious from your posts that you understand the ramifications.

Given what I think are minor details that can be easily remedied (if not already), the look and feel of the ARC LS is exactly what I expect from a light in this price range and certainly competes with like lights in a similar niche (aka SureFire). I would consider it an essential tool like a Leatherman, Chris Reeve, or a good .45!

 

[Gransee]

Thank you Gone Jeepin and Gun Nut.

I don't want you guys to feel like you all must say nice things about our products. And I also understand that sometimes a customer just has to vent. The purpose of this particular thread was to rid ourselves of any possible hype or misconceptions. Sometimes people may get the impression (I don't know who) that our lights are next to perfection. They are definitely not. And I think I am one of people most aware of that.

As far as cosmetics, we do offer a 30-day satisfaction guarantee. This is time when you can look at the light and decide if any cosmetic issues are something that is going to bother you. Now in fairness, we do ask that after 30-days, you don't return the light unless we did something to make it break (manufacturer's defect). Now of course, I am a softy and have been known to replace lights after the 30-days because of the tint of the beam or user abuse, etc. I am not trying to be ungracious, I just ask for reasonableness.

I also don't want you guys to get the idea that my solution for our incompetence or negligence is just to keep replacing things. It bugs me when I have to replace something. Not because of what it costs me, but because I strive to make a light that is going to uncomplicate some part of your life. Having to replace the light now makes the light we sold you inconvenient. Not sure if I explained this correctly. If I could replace the light instantly, so you didn't have to even send us an email, that would be a heck of a lot better. Making the product better, which I constantly work on, promises something better than an instant replacement.

As far as all these revisions, etc. Those will happen. A big company would keep the product back for 6 months and do all sorts of detailed tests before releasing a product. And then when they made revisions (and they do), they wouldn't make a big deal about it.

We work on stuff for several months before releasing it. The tests can all turn out great but some things just require time and lots of units in peoples hands. Not sure how we, as a small company, could do our tests differently. You'll notice that I contracted with a world class engineer (probably one of the 10 top flashlight engineers in the world). Our R&D bill for just the month of November was equal to my yearly wage at Arc. Another thing we do is beta test right here on the CPF. Another thing is put together new and constantly refined QC procedures.

In all this, remember the LS is one complicated son of a gun. It has over 25 parts. OK, that doesn't sound like much compared to say, a TV. But TV's are built by multi-million dollar plants.

Anyways, I am not telling you to take whatever crap we make. All I am saying is, know what you are buying.

Peter Gransee

 

[Gransee]

Gun Nut posted while I was still typing and brought up the "dust in optics" issue. I have written about it prior, but I want to add some more thoughts to this.

We used to place the optics using gloved fingers. We then switched to a delrin picker tool. Next up was the addition of filtered air to blow the optics clean, which we added about 3 months ago. In spite of these techniques, our latest units still have dust on them from time to time. In most cases, you have to turn the light on in order to see the dust. We do QC for this and remove units that have a gross problem. Yes, it doesn't affect the beam, but it still bugs me.

Henry (our expensive consultant), looked at the problem and suggested a positive pressure tent with in-wall gloves. We would also need a micron filtered air supply. Even then, it wouldn't get all the dust, but it would certainly help. What's keeping us from this next evolution in dust control is the cost of the tent and supply. There are higher priority inititives on the list at this point. How soon? Maybe 6 months at the current rate.

So until then, there will be noticable dust in the optics, especially with the LED on.

Now the lens "farkle" (another thread), is a cosmetic with a higher priority. I have already tasked Henry on this, he finished his research and we have samples of a custom gasket on their way. If everything goes smoothly, these will start showing up in by February.

That should bring you up to speed on the lens cosmetics.

In the past year or so, we have worked on the cosmetics of the lens, anodize, knurl, interior, battery pack and a few others I may have forgotten. Now just so you know I haven't changed my ways, we have worked on a lot more utility features than cosmetics.

Just so you know.

Peter Gransee

 

[Anarchocap]

Peter,

Its nice to know the little details. Thanks for the response. The reason I posted the lint/scratch issue (I can't tell if it is one, the other, or both on mine) is because the Arc LS that I have is such a quality, solid tool. Whatever is going on inside the sealed housing with mine makes it seem that some quality control was missed.

Its the one visual flaw in an otherwise perfect package, and to not fix it is just a shame. I know I am anal as all hell, but it still made me think, "Wow, they got everything else right, but they can't prevent lint and dust from getting in there before they seal it?" However, I also understand based on my limited experience with air handlers and scrubbers that the costs for a company of your size are probably initially prohibitive.

 

[Gene]

Peter,
To start out, I don't know you or want to kiss up to you but I do own a few of your products. You though have touched on a subject that is dear to my heart and that is cosmetics. I was once a knife and gun collector, (and still am to a certain degree but not seriously). I became tired of collecting stuff that if I even used or sometimes TOUCHED, no matter how carefully, it would decrease in value considerably. I have always been a flashlight lover but the thought of a flashlight NOT being cosmetically PERFECT has gotten to the point of being over the top. Flashlights are made to be USED and SOMETIMES abused. I'm not sticking up for you but I can't even imagine being a manufacturer in this day and age. I have come to the opinion that most folks that complain about cosmetics are the ones who NEVER use these products anyway! They scrutinize them and complain and then sell them a month later for the next "flavor of the month". I agree that if you buy a product and pay for the research and development of a "first", then that should be as good as it can be. If there is a bunch of junk under the head and you pay full retail, then by all means send it back. But examining things under a loupe to find imperfections in a flashlight, what can I say? This silly stuff about an HA head or body that is not perfectly matched, is beyond understanding. I'm NOT criticizing anyone here but my gosh! A flashlight is meant to be used! If I drop it and it no longer works, or it only produces 2/3 of the brightness as advertised, THEN I have a problem with it. I'm not trying to flame here but I assure you, the most complaints you will get about cosmetics is from folks who do not USE the products. They just like to LOOK at them!

 

[GlockDoc]

The GlockDoc Home for Cosmetically Challenged ARC Lights is now open. Send your unwanted lights here. Please enclose a one time $20 feeding fee for each light.

Thank you for your concern, and remember, "It's for the photons."

GD

 

[FC.]

Peter, thanks. I just want ot point out again that I did not mean to offend you in any way.

I will keep the head, but would like to try a different cell pack+foam ring. I tryed emailing you, but it bounced back. If you get a chance, email me at: [email protected]

 

[PWork]

Peter,
I was glad to read your feelings on utility over cosmetics. If it doesen't work, who cares what it looks like?
The only Arc product I have is the AAA. I am very impressed to say the least and the cosmetics on mine were GREAT. I will be watching closely as LED technology and your company grow.
Looking forward to more Arc purchases....

Paul

 

[Gransee]

I think sometimes people get the wrong idea of us and our products. We don't make artsy collector flashlights, we make tools. If you are looking for a nice looking flashlight, let me save you some time: Arc may not be what you are looking for. Now, I think our lights are good looking, but this is because I think function is beautiful. I am not saying we make the most functional light, but I am saying this is my goal.

That being said, we will try to make the light also look good from a cosmetic standpoint. This means using a balance of resonance and dissonance in appearance of the parts.

But this is not my first design consideration, nor is the second or third. The First consideration is utility.

There is something else you should know. We are a small company making one of the more complicated flashlight designs on the market. It tasks our company heavily to regularly improve the product. Being a true flash-a-holic at heart, I naturally have a long list of changes I want to make. Most of them have to do with derivatives of utility like making the light more reliable, more compact, brighter, less expensive to operate, etc.

And yes, I do want to make it look better (what some people call, "quality").

Functionality----VS----Cosmetics
---------------------------------------
Anodize thickness------Anodize mismatch
Anodize voids----------Anodize blemishes
Utility of beam--------Dust/scratched optics
Loose parts/flickering-Conductive epoxy blobs
Batt compatibility-----Phallic push button
Supplier redundancy----Knurl/etc differences

Sometimes people just don't like the design choices we made to pursue utility.

One of the most important things I read here on the CPF are posts that help me make a more reliable light. If our light is the most reliable flashlight you can carry but it looks like it was dropped down a dusty coal chute, I am very happy.

Problems that get a lot of my attention are things like flickering, dead units, dim units, not working with some batteries, left at home units, not waterproof, shock resistance, corrosion, ergonomics, etc.

Spending too much time talking about cosmetics takes me from what I really like to work on.

Some manufacturers have told that they don't post on the CPF because our focus is unrealistic and out of touch.

In conclusion, I am not saying that buying lights because they look good is wrong. You do what you want. Please. I am, however, trying to provide some helpful information on what to expect from our products. It is not my intention to be contentious but I am sure some will not be please with my opinion. Regardless, I do intend to forge forward on producing useful flashlights.

Peter Gransee

 

[BigHonu]

Reliability, ruggedness, and performance are the things I look for in an ARC product. Cosmetics only matter if it affects any of the previously mentioned traits or if I am giving it away as a gift.

Aloha

 

[Gransee]

Originally posted by fc-fire/rescue:
Peter, thanks. I just want ot point out again that I did not mean to offend you in any way.

I will keep the head, but would like to try a different cell pack+foam ring. I tryed emailing you, but it bounced back. If you get a chance, email me at: ------------

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">No problem. Sorry for not being more clear about the condition of the product we sell. I sent you an email this morning.

Peter

 

[Carpe Diem]

My thoughts about Arc after just reading this thread for the first time:

As usual, Peter...good work.

 

[StuU]

My LS1rev2 is highly functional. Lens clear. Beam is excellent. Finish & appearance can only be described as industrial art. Having a flashlight the size of your thumb that can outshine the Mag2D is a significant accomplishment. How about different LS models with varying beams ie a sharp point and a McFlood? Sometimes the sharp beams become *too* bright when brought into close range for manual work.

A nice appearance counts, also. It's nice to have something that signals quality all the way through.

 

[alberto]

Peter, since I'm one of the guilty who has commented on cosmetics, let me say that I appreciate the better understanding of your goals and objectives. Without function, cosmetics mean nothing.

However, let me also say that there's also a place for both. Beyond function, there's a certain enjoyment and pride in owning something that is the best of the best in every way. Said another way, I do not NEED a dozen or more flashlights (so says my wife), but I enjoy each of them for reasons beyond their ability to propel photons at great speed.

I'll continue to buy Arc products because I appreciate everything you're doing, your innovative creations, your incredible concern for your customers, and where you're going with your products. Keep up the good work.