The new Arc-LS

[smokelaw1]

I'm here every day. Doesn't that count? :nana:

Cute. I can think of about 1,000 people who would be so kind as to "volunteer" some time to test the new LS. For the record, I am also one of them.

 

[Groundhog66]

Cute. I can think of about 1,000 people who would be so kind as to "volunteer" some time to test the new LS. For the record, I am also one of them.

Unfortunately for you, nobody with under 1,000 posts is eligible. Sorry bout yer luck.

:shakehead

:laughing:

 

[greenLED]

Unfortunately for you, nobody with under 1,000 posts is eligible. Sorry bout yer luck.

:shakehead

:laughing:

I think you missed a "0" in there, Tim. It's 10000 posts minimum for doing evals.

 

[jcompton]

Cute. I can think of about 1,000 people who would be so kind as to "volunteer" some time to test the new LS. For the record, I am also one of them.

OOooo, OOooo, Pick me! Pick ME!!!

 

[jcompton]

I think you missed a "0" in there, Tim. It's 10000 posts minimum for doing evals.

I guess I'm out of the runnings...(yet one post closer to the 10,000 mark )

 

[Groundhog66]

I think you missed a "0" in there, Tim. It's 10000 posts minimum for doing evals.

Okay....I GIVE.....GEEEEEEZ

 

[ViReN]

where to sign up for testing

 

[SunnyQueensland]

Great info... :thumbsup:

No matter when its ready, my Paypal account is waiting for the word. :candle:

 

[Stillphoto]

This is not my first rodeo.

peter

Bingo! The ARC-R!

Would be appropriate considering the hoops everyones jumping through over it lol.

 

[smokelaw1]

Unfortunately for you, nobody with under 1,000 posts is eligible. Sorry bout yer luck.

:shakehead

:laughing:

Wow...I need to come up with 800 more posts before the new ARC is ready for testing. So much for working this month, but I can do it!

 

[Cyclops942]

I would be VERY interested in doing some field testing if you happen to need non-technical, EDC, everyday guy kinda feedback.

:naughty:

Tim

There's actually a quite a loooong line of "non-technical, EDC, everyday guy kinda feedback"-providing people in front of you.

But, hey, it never hurts to ask! You never know what kind of criteria might need to be met with the latest need for prospective customer input, right?

I'm waiting to be able to post this one ===>

 

[Groundhog66]

If you would like to post I am sure R&D funds would be accepted.:nana:

 

[Cyclops942]

If you would like to post I am sure R&D funds would be accepted.:nana:

Actually, no, Peter doesn't work that way. We've offered before, and he turns us down.

 

[jef144]

As much as testing, I'd be equally interested in getting into the lottery for the first 100 non-random serial numbers. Of course, I would secretly hope to lose in this lottery, because owning an heirloom would require me to buy a second one for EDC.

 

[Optik49]

Also, I having the website updated this week so you will see a placeholder page for the LS on the site. Hopefully this doesn't wig anyone out.

peter[/quote]

Am I missing it or is it just not up yet. I'll keep checking.

Oh ya I am an amateur product tester / reviewer. Hint, Hint :naughty:

 

[paulr]

The cree xlamp package already has been fitted in the LS as you know (see bare Al prototypes in pictures). However, the resulting beam doesn't throw as far as the P4 or K2. The center spot is less powerful while the flood is more powerful. The change is significant and in my opinion, less desireable. This could be fixed by making the head larger, but any dolt can make a light brighter by making it bigger. I would rather wait for the same high flux die to end up in a better package (p4). Modders can put in whatever LED they want (within reason), but our main offering will be more in line with the traditional beam distribution people expect from an EDC.

peter

I'm not sure what you mean by traditional beam distribution or even that there is such a thing. Surefire, for example, is well known for making lights with wide beams based on the idea that small lights are mostly used at near and medium distances. They have some interchangeable turboheads for those who need throwers. I myself prefer wide beams. I got a P--k Pacific recently and its beam is much narrower than I'd like; quite small hotspot and rather dim spill that is itself narrower than some other lights. IMO the Arc4+ beam was slightly on the narrow side though still satisfying.

I realize it's a tradeoff and preferences will vary but please count this as one vote in favor of less spot and more flood. It's like preferring a wideangle lens to a telephoto lens on a camera. Since 95% of my usage is indoors I'd rather light up the whole room evenly all at once than have to scan around with a tiny little searchlight-like beam. Of course you could always think about some kind of interchangeable reflector scheme. I'd go for medium orange peel.

 

[Lebkuecher]

I think I would prefer the traditional beam distribution myself because I would use the light both in and outdoors and I find the traditional beam distribution satisfactory for both purposes.

My guess is it is to late to do this but I do like paulr's idea of a interchangeable reflector scheme but not sure how you could accomplish this without making the head much larger. Of course now you can choose a different led and accomplish basically the same thing so I'm not sure if it is really needed.

 

[Kiessling]

A big and soft hotspot with a concentrated spill and gentle transition has huge benefits in near an dmedium field illumination and is, IMHO, preferable over a bright and small spot with a pale spill. Especially in lower illumination modes where this spill will be useless and the high contrast between spot and spill makes it way more difficult to use.
But then again .. this is IMHO
bernie

 

[havand]

A big and soft hotspot with a concentrated spill and gentle transition has huge benefits in near an dmedium field illumination and is, IMHO, preferable over a bright and small spot with a pale spill. Especially in lower illumination modes where this spill will be useless and the high contrast between spot and spill makes it way more difficult to use.
But then again .. this is IMHO
bernie

+1

 

[ViReN]

Throwwwwwwwwwwwww...... in smallest package.... IMHO

for flood, we always have an option to use a diffuser cap