SureFire E-series reduced tail diameter...

Does the little inner ledge at the tail-end of the SureFire E-series serve a purpose?
It doesn't seem to have anything to do with lock-out and it makes typical body extenders impossible.
Just wondering.

Perhaps SureFire wanted to give users a less bulky flashlight for EDC (reducing the width is one of the major de-bulking methods of the E Series)

I believe that body extending the E Series was not one of the design priorities. After all, SureFire already have many options if you want to build your own.

I think it's a case of you can't have everything - small EDC or the ability to extend.

Al

I always thought it was to prevent the batteries from bring handled through the tailcap, and thus this increases switch reliability?

EDIT: Okay Al's explanation makes more sense... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

I like yours, hawk and I've edited my question to make it more clear.
That little ledge does nothing to improve EDC -- it only prevents feeding from the rear and the use of body extenders.
But if switch reliability was the issue then why hasn't this design been carried through to the rest of the line (6P, C2, D2, M2...)?

Don't know if it an issue - but it prevents users from dropping batteries down the tube to thunk against the contact at the head end.

- Darell

If you wanted to pass batteries through the tail of the E body, the tail switch would end up being the same OD as a P6 or "classic" tail switch. As far as that little lip goes, the ground path is completed when the male plug of the switch contacts the lip. The plug is isolated from contacting the battery tube by the O-ring around it. You achieve Lock Out when the switch is backed out to the extent that depressing the switch does not force the plug in far enough to contact the lip.

I guess my aswer to the question is that yes, the little lip does serve a function. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

I believe a close inspection and consideration for geometries involved as well as required will show that the switch is what it is and wouldn't work if changes were made to the existing design. The Z57 Clickie does not rely on the lip but again, to allow for battery passage, it is likely that the tube tail would require a female thread and the switch a male thread to try to keep the overall diameter of the tail switch down. Possibly doable but as Al has stated, likely never part of the design criteria for the E series. IF SF wants an E3E or E4e, they can make it in a single tube; right GloBug? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

- Don

its due to the design of the LOTC and how it mates with the body. i used to think it was a design flaw but i realized there's no other way to go about it if you want to get the body tube as thin as possible.

[ QUOTE ]
McGizmo said:
IF SF wants an E3E or E4e, they can make it in a single tube; right GloBug? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

- Don

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't tempt me Don. You know I don't have much control when it comes to this. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/naughty.gif

What Don said... with knobs on it...