umm, the satburn switch is most definitely not an identical design, and lower resistance coils are not a short, (not sure what you mean by that) and should not create a short as long as the switch is designed properly. Im not sure why you are suggesting to to intertwine springs in a properly designed switch in the first place as the current should pass through the plunger and body of the switch rather than the spring, the springs only job should be to return the plunger to its original position. The heat factor you are describing is when the spring heats up due to improper design, basically causing there to be a second coil inside the switch. None of that is an issue on andreas' switch and i think thats what matty was describing.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
In all due respect, i designed the button, i know how it works and also have a satburn and yes, it is definitely an identical design. It is a dual grounding (through friction with the screw on bottom cap and the spring) and completes the circuit by making direct contact with the battery when it is depressed. I know this, i invented it almost five years ago and has been adopted by many bottom protruding mechanical mods the world over. Just because it is machined in a different shape, don't let that fool you. It reuses your ela spring and rhodium center contact post, uses an outer screw on shield that the button passes through and completes the circuit through the exact same electrical path. I said Lower resistance coils are "essentially" a short as the lower in resistance you go, the more amperage draw placed on a battery and the more heat that is generated, and YES, coils have become so low, they are simulating a short, some setups drawing 20,30, 40+ amps on these small batteries.
Last edited: