Lumens Factory EO-R5?

:thinking:I wonder if Lumens Factory will come out with an imr lamp for G@P's R500 and UltraFire's WF-500? That would be really nice to get a lamp rated at 850 or above to use with AW's IMR 18650 cell. if they did I would get a WF-500, 2 of AW's IMR 18650's for a nice bright and cheap package. :naughty: :devil:

An imr setup for Wolf Eyes M90 Rattle Snake would be nice too. Say like 600 lumens.

In December Mark@LF posted :

"EO-R5:
Probably not, I don't think we will produce it. There is too many things to consider because the quality of the host is not that great and extreme setups of the IMR lamps might not be a good idea."

:mecry:

thats too bad:thumbsdow

brunt_sp said:

In December Mark@LF posted :

"EO-R5:
Probably not, I don't think we will produce it. There is too many things to consider because the quality of the host is not that great and extreme setups of the IMR lamps might not be a good idea."

:mecry:

Click to expand...

Was that in regards to the host being the G&P and Ultrafire models, or the Wolf Eyes M90 model?

I've rarely seen a negative comment posted about the M90. Am I missing something?

The HO- R5 lamp do not fit on the Wolf-Eyes M90, so I was definately not refering to that.

Also, I think G&P builds good lights.

Cheers,

Mark

Hey, thanks for the clarification.

Thats a Pity :shakehead ... the WF-500... although being a knockoff is built pretty tough. The only thing that could fail.. is the version with the rear clicky which might melt under higher current. But there are alot of momentary twisty versions out there like I have that would be quite up to the task... other than that I cant think of anything that could be a problem.. the light is solid aluminium . Mayyyybe the o-rings might melt under high temp, but even if it did happen they could easily be replaced with silicon. come on LF ... you will have plenty of buyers for a 800-900 lumen Bulb :thumbsup:

cerberuss,

I see 2 points on your post:

1. The clicky might melt.
2. The O-rings might melt.

And you commented the "the light is solid aluminium", I totally agree.
But......

Basically what's left of it after the clicky and the O-rings melt IS the aluminium part, right? (well and the glass lens)
Is this supposed to be a joke or something? LOL. :laughing:

You can use a twisty, but that twisty is rock hard and the IMR18650 cells are shorter then the usual 18650 cells, contact might be an issue. Not to mention the spring on the twisty is very questionable if it can take the heat and the high current.

Well seriously, if I am to make a 800-900 Lumens lamp for it the current draw will be even higher then the current IMR-M3T (700 Lumens) which is already drawing 3.4A.

So making a lamp for the WF-500 at 3.4A+ will probably not be a good idea. Most of all, I am suspecting that some guy might buy the lamp and use it on the stock UF batteries that comes with the torch. I could not imagine what will happen next, so I better leave it at that.

I am in a fairly good mood, so please do not misunderstand the tone of my post.


Cheers,

Mark

Mark@LF said:

cerberuss,

I see 2 points on your post:

1. The clicky might melt.
2. The O-rings might melt.

And you commented the "the light is solid aluminium", I totally agree.
But......

Basically what's left of it after the clicky and the O-rings melt IS the aluminium part, right? (well and the glass lens)
Is this supposed to be a joke or something? LOL. :laughing:

Click to expand...

Well yea that was sort of the point I was making, there's not much that can go wrong with the light cos theres not much to it :huh:

as for the spring being questionable.. seems pretty strong to me ... truth be told 3.5 Amps isnt that much if you look at the build quality of the light ... Battery spacing can easily be sorted by using extenders :shrug:

But thanks for the reply.. its cool that customers can communicate this easily with representatives :thumbsup:. I'm going to order the HO lamp soon ... and come to think of it.. It's the perfect compromise with a 45 min runtime and high brightness. ::thinking: