ARC4 vs. LSH-P (with hi/lo switch mod)

OK, so I finally GOT my ARC4... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif
Before it arrived, I was impatient for the switchability, so I talked to Dan (Gadget Lover) and installed one of his hi/lo switches in my LSH-P.

I wondered which light I would EDC once I got the ARC4. When it came, I immediately didn't like the feel of the button compared to the kroll. I missed that solid click-clack that let me know my light was doing something, but as I played with it, the new action didn't seem so bad.

After a couple days of carrying and using both lights, I've noticed that although sometimes it doesn't matter which one I use, there are times when the ARC4 is definitely the better light for the job, i.e.; tonight I got home and found that the propane truck had come by and filled our tank, which meant they also shut off gas to our house. When I hunched down to re-light the pilot-light on the water heater, I grabbed my LSH, (on hi), and it was really TOO bright to see what I was doing, so I had to set down the propane torch to turn the cap and adjust the brightness down. (What? You don't use a propane torch to light YOUR pilot light? Well it works good!!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif)

Anyway in retrospect, I realized that since the ARC4 allows a very quick one-handed access to four different light levels, it is a superior light, because you usually need your other hand free when your doing something that requires a flashlight...

The LSH-P is a great light, and the hi/lo functionality really improves on an already awesome design, but the ARC4's functionality is proving itself more useful in practical daily applications.

I will still carry both for now, well because I can... (And I admit, I'm an ARC-aholic.) but eventually I will probably settle on one main EDC light (plus my keychain AAA) /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
I admit too that I'm really liking the clip, which improves grip, and makes a cool headlamp on the brim of my hat. Two features unavailable with the LSH...

So, jpeg.Do you still feel a big need for the upcoming optional tailcap ? I like and use the clip,too-- but I would like to eventually improve the stock clip
aesthetics,maybe get a ti clip fabricated.

I'm currently waiting out the 4+ for the new tailcap, though my thinking is line with you on functionality. My choice is vs LSH-S (with Gadget_lover's hi-low mod, which I find very useful). Please continue to pass along your perspective! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/popcorn.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

chiaroscuro if you're looking into a titanium clip, make two. I'd buy one...
I'm still very much looking forward to the new tailcap.
Even if I end up liking the stock arc4 better than with the tailcap, I think I'd want one anyway just for the versatility... Probably has something to do with why I liked legos as a kid...

I think that you folks need to do the tail switch mod posted by CY. It improves the tactile feel (actually now has a slight clickie feel), allows the tail to stand on end, protects the switch from accidental latching, and reduces the length by 1/3 inch. In fact, when the new protected tail switch comes out, I think that I might still prefer the original switch with the CY mod due to the overall shorter length of the light.

jpeg,

Was that the 7 ohm or 10 ohm high/low switch? I'm thinking of getting one for my LSH-P (second), not sure which one to get. I'd like to get about as much light as my Ultra-G on "low".

Mike

I got the 10 Ohm option, Dan said it was about the AAA level, but I still think it's brighter... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

jpeg,

Thanks for the quick response. I may go for the 7 Ohm. Figure it will still have plenty of run time and a wee bit more light.

Thanks again,
Mike

I like both, but as a computer guy (software and hardware) I must say that I don't care for hardware with electronic on/off switches. They waste power while in standby and are overly complex. I also prefer a seperate button(s) for manipulating the light (entering menus and configuring the light). The single button is fine for turning it on, off and changing modes.

So, while the LSH-P is not perfect, and the hi/low switch mod is a hack, I find it very reliable and predictable, so I prefer it for everyday use.

I do like the ARC4 for its gadget factor. I'll get one sooner or later.

Daniel

Daniel, I feel I should defend my baby... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Yes, electronic switches do draw more power than mechanical. The Arc4 electronic switch will drain a 123 cell in about 8 years.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

And when the FET turns on the LED, the 'on' resistance of the electronic switch is much less than the contact resistance of a mechanical switch.

Should you let this assumed "disadvantage" keep you from benefiting from a more reliable switching mechanism?

But in reading your post, I notice you say the Kroll is more reliable than the Arc4 switch.

That is simply contrary to imperical evidence. The electronic switch in the Arc4 has already proven itself from our testing and customer feedback to be more reliable than our previous switch option.

Complicated? Sure, if you want it to be I guess.

Peter

The Arc4 switch is more complicated than the Kroll in the same way a digital watch is more complicated than a mechanical one. A G-shock is still a more reliable watch than any mechanical watch ever made though. A circuit might be complex but if it's potted and non-moving, it causes less unreliability than a mechanical device whose parts have to stay in close tolerances while moving around.

Peter,

I find the Arc4+ switch to be an absolutely elegant design. Anyone that has taken the time to study how it's put together would have to come to the same conclusion. The rear gold disc alone is a work of art.

Thanks for taking the risk of taking such a design to production.

Thanks,
CY

[ QUOTE ]
Gransee said:
Daniel, I feel I should defend my baby... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Yes, electronic switches do draw more power than mechanical. The Arc4 electronic switch will drain a 123 cell in about 8 years.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

And when the FET turns on the LED, the 'on' resistance of the electronic switch is much less than the contact resistance of a mechanical switch.

Should you let this assumed "disadvantage" keep you from benefiting from a more reliable switching mechanism?

But in reading your post, I notice you say the Kroll is more reliable than the Arc4 switch.

That is simply contrary to imperical evidence. The electronic switch in the Arc4 has already proven itself from our testing and customer feedback to be more reliable than our previous switch option.

Complicated? Sure, if you want it to be I guess.

Peter

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no need to defend it. It's a neat light based on a clever idea and many people are very happy with it. I was simply putting forth my peculiar point of view. I deal with software and hardware daily. I deal with user interface issues and reliability issues and failure modes. I often prefer simpler solutions if the end result is the same.

Please note that I did not say that the kroll was more reliable, just that it was reliable enough for my purposes. Because I am a techno-geek, I took the time to service the Kroll switch in my LSH, applying anti-oxidant where appropriate. If it malfunctions I can fix it quickly on the spot. I can't say if the switching in the ARC4 is better or not, as it is a sealed unit with no published technical data or schematics.

So, to sum it up. I prefer simple when it's sufficient to the task. I Like the ARC4, and would not dissuade people from purchasing it. I also like the ARC LS, and have sold many people on the idea that they are worth the price.

But thanks for acknowleging the post. I was beginning to think that you didn't like me. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Daniel