# XM-L lets discuss



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

There has been a few posts with plans for this led but no real info has appeared .

Lets discuss this new kid soon to be on the block .

what is your perceived sweet set up for this led .

and what optic would you like to exist 


Me I think the Cute spot triple will be a goer from what is available at the moment .

will you want to drive it at the full 3 amps or be happy with less .

can we still make tiny lights from this baby ? 

single optic that may work the MCE boom 
will the sheer amount of lumens cover up some optics failings


----------



## vroom9 (Feb 24, 2009)

I just don't see the tiny lights unless you are OK with a wide beam. The three up 20mm will just be too wide. The die on these is 2mm x 2mm right? That should put them on par with the MC-E or even P7 as far as focusing goes. That makes me think that the Ledil Iris will be about the best helmet light optic. Perhaps something in the 20mm range like the BOOM reflector might be sufficient for a bar light. As far as the 10mm lenses go I somehow doubt they will be useful.

A three up at 20mm might be too much concentrated heat if you run at the max of 3 amps. Perhaps three in a MR16 (50mm) size? I know that's pretty big, but it will give 2700+ lumens.

I don't think that we will really know until some more optics are released. Right now I'm only aware of the few Ledil ones. I'm sure that many will follow.

One positive of the XM-L is the lumens per dollar ratio. If I remember correctly they are going for less than $10 US and that is not all that much more than the XP-G, but with twice the light output. Fewer LEDs also translates into less optics, less machining, etc which should really lower cost.

One thing is for sure. The XM-L will be a MC-E and P7 killer. Less expensive, brighter, and more efficient, what's not to like about that.

I see in another post that KD has XM-L lights and dropins. Anyone know if they are actually shipping those or if they are really a month (or more) away?


----------



## Prophet Julio (May 8, 2008)

Only 3.35 volts at 3,000ma. Only one element. Looks like a promising platform. You could use a 7.2v battery with 4,000mah rating and get 2.5 hours runtime easy. 

Those are my simple thoughts. I like my triple XP-G, but the triple optics seem to lose a fair bit of the lumens that are theoretically there. My old double XR-E with the 8 degree spot is my choice if I only have one light.


----------



## vroom9 (Feb 24, 2009)

Prophet Julio said:


> Only 3.35 volts at 3,000ma. Only one element. Looks like a promising platform. You could use a 7.2v battery with 4,000mah rating and get 2.5 hours runtime easy.
> 
> Those are my simple thoughts. I like my triple XP-G, but the triple optics seem to lose a fair bit of the lumens that are theoretically there. My old double XR-E with the 8 degree spot is my choice if I only have one light.


Even better you could go with single cell or a few cells in parallel with a simple 7135 linear regulator and get good efficiency (90%) and get about 85% of the charge capacity before dimming sets in.


----------



## biketuna (Mar 28, 2008)

Is this it?

http://kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=11102


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

I'm thinking P4 optics may work OK with this thing or BOOM. I need to get my Boom's on order!


----------



## langen (May 21, 2005)

biketuna said:


> Is this it?
> 
> http://kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=11102


Wohoo! Just ordered 2 

Hope they arrive before summer....


----------



## kwarwick (Jun 12, 2004)

langen said:


> Wohoo! Just ordered 2
> 
> Hope they arrive before summer....


Might want to order these ones instead as they are a few dollars cheaper and appear to be the same product:

http://kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=11107

I have two shipped by Kai and currently waiting to be processed by HK Post... if I'm really lucky might have them in hand before the end of the year but I'm sure not counting on it.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

I was idly planning a MC-E bar light for early next year, but was put off by the larger housing I'd have to make to fit a Ledil Iris. If 20mm reflectors work well with the XM-L I might think about a single or double XM-L with a hipflex, using my trusty inch square alloy tubing


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

mattthemuppet said:


> I was idly planning a MC-E bar light for early next year, but was put off by the larger housing I'd have to make to fit a Ledil Iris. If 20mm reflectors work well with the XM-L I might think about a single or double XM-L with a hipflex, using my trusty inch square alloy tubing


What about these MCE lens setups? Anyone tried them?
MCE Optics


I just had a few sent over since I have that 1000 lumen special bin MCE 20mm star on the way from cutter with my 7-up board.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

As soon as the decent bins are released i'll order 3 and try it with my 3 ledil boom's..


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

gticlay said:


> What about these MCE lens setups? Anyone tried them?
> MCE Optics


Troutie spent a lot of time trying different MC-E optics and I'm pretty sure he's tried those (long time since I read the thread though). Would be worth checking  here  anyway, though the general message I got was that MC-E = 35mm reflector


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

Goldigger said:


> As soon as the decent bins are released i'll order 3 and try it with my 3 ledil boom's..


that'd be neat to see, pretty much a drop in for you  You're using Boom SS's right? Let us know how you get on!


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

mattthemuppet said:


> Troutie spent a lot of time trying different MC-E optics and I'm pretty sure he's tried those (long time since I read the thread though). Would be worth checking  here  anyway, though the general message I got was that MC-E = 35mm reflector


Actually, I meant using the MC-E optics on the XML. Both have a bigger dome, with the XML being a little smaller (more throw, less flood curing the wide problem?) and not having the 4 seperate emitters and creating the 4-leaf clover effect. It could be perfecto. Now I wish I had an XML star ordered up


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

mattthemuppet said:


> Troutie spent a lot of time trying different MC-E optics and I'm pretty sure he's tried those (long time since I read the thread though). Would be worth checking  here  anyway, though the general message I got was that MC-E = 35mm reflector


I did indeed and pretty much was disilusioned with the beggers then the XPE was released so pretty much gave up on the MCE .

so have a fairly good collection of MCE optics to have a play with when the XMLs hit the door mat .

I also wonder what the Regina will be like will need a small mod to the base but gut feeling is it may be an OK one . as far as small goes .

I have not liked any of the 16 mm ledils for the XPGs so dont hold out much hope there .
and am looking forward to trying the Cute triple I am hoping for good things there .

and also have a few asphericals to try out too


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

gticlay said:


> Actually, I meant using the MC-E optics on the XML. Both have a bigger dome, with the XML being a little smaller (more throw, less flood curing the wide problem?) and not having the 4 seperate emitters and creating the 4-leaf clover effect. It could be perfecto. Now I wish I had an XML star ordered up


oops, sorry, misunderstood your post


----------



## raid (Sep 18, 2005)

Troutie, take a look to the german forums...i think there are the experts ;-)

Zur SST90 bei 3,2A : Na, ja. Wenn man mal die Werte so anschaut würde ich auf etwa 800 lm tippen. Da ist eine XM-L deutlich überlegen weil viel, viel billiger!

SST @ 3.2 A 800 Lumen....XML better,because cheaper !

http://www.mtb-news.de/forum/showthread.php?p=7839947#post7839947


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 28, 2007)

Hmmm ... just noticed digikey has T5 bin XMLs in stock (http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=XMLAWT-00-0000-0000T5050CT-ND), but no thermal boards.

Anybody have a source of thermal boards closer than Oz. I like Cutters, but it always takes 2 weeks to get an order from Oz to the former Colonies.

If I get my hands on an XML I want to light it up 

Not much fun having parts you can't power up 

Oh well, guess I'll get in the queue at Cutters.

Mark


----------



## WeLight (Aug 12, 2007)

T5 in stock on 20mm star and 16mm round, T6 will be in stock by Tues next week, same PCB


----------



## rlouder (Jun 26, 2007)

WeLight said:


> T5 in stock on 20mm star and 16mm round, T6 will be in stock by Tues next week, same PCB


What tint is the T6? 1A, 1B......?


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

How about a limited 1 time free shipping on XML stars and 20mm round (stars?) for mtbr people that have been a part of this thread so far? If you can do it for $100 orders, you could do it for this thread


----------



## g3rG (Aug 29, 2009)

The mind reels at the possibilities!

Troutie, since you asked, I would like a 2 or 3 LED floodmonster for the bar. I am curious how the pattern would look without any optics at all. Well, maybe a 2D top reflector to fold the upper third of the emissions downward for better efficiency.

More importantly, I want a 2 LED beamer for the helmet. This one needs good optics, maybe one very narrow and one medium narrow. User retrofitable optics would be a huge plus. I would be inclined to run it at half power most of the time to gain the efficiency, with a full power turbo mode fro those times when I need to see what owns those large eyes staring at me from across the ravine. That reminds me, I also need enough output on turbo to temporarily blind a mountain lion.

gerG


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

WeLight said:


> T5 in stock on 20mm star and 16mm round, T6 will be in stock by Tues next week, same PCB


Oh well thats my christmas playtime fubared unless they get shipped by rocket powered carrier pidgeon .
I will just have to watch you lot closer to OZ to see first impressions.

G3rG

I dont think there will be any problems getting the flood monster .
the 2 led beamer may be a while for the optic makers to get to grips with .specially if you want small too .


----------



## WeLight (Aug 12, 2007)

troutie-mtb said:


> Oh well thats my christmas playtime fubared unless they get shipped by rocket powered carrier pidgeon .
> I will just have to watch you lot closer to OZ to see first impressions.
> 
> G3rG
> ...


Hi Chris
We hope to ship backorders before we close, I cant speak for Santa's sleigh though, he's well booked


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Cheers Mark .

have you tried any stock optics at your end any pointers


----------



## hootsmon (Feb 7, 2008)

*Lumens per $$$*

Haven't actually done the sums, but my guess is XML offers pretty good lumens per buck.
So I'm idly wondering about doing a 2x XML helmet light. No idea which optics yet tho.


----------



## Whitedog1 (Feb 3, 2009)

The best 20mm optic for the mce is the ledil lm1-RS (best throw)
as it was testet on the mtb forum for the 4x MCE board in rob1111's light!!

so i assume that this optic wil work with the XM-L too and there are also other beam angels available!


----------



## WeLight (Aug 12, 2007)

troutie-mtb said:


> Cheers Mark .
> 
> have you tried any stock optics at your end any pointers


Hi Chris
I emailed you a ZIP file with beamshots on many existing Optics with XM that Matt set up


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

Mark, how do I ordel XM-L on a 20mm star?


----------



## hootsmon (Feb 7, 2008)

*Ordered*

Just ordered 3 XM-L's plus Regina optics to experiment with.


----------



## HEY HEY ITS HENDO (Feb 23, 2008)

[email protected] Toaster
http://www.cutter.com.au/proddetail.php?prod=cut1026

http://www.cutter.com.au/categories.php?cat=Cree+Leds+on+Printed+Circuit+Boards


----------



## WeLight (Aug 12, 2007)

Thanks Hendo. This link is T5 on 20mm Star

Here is a little more detail

http://www.cutter.com.au/proddetail.php?prod=cut1027 T6 on 20mm star

14mm Round is
http://www.cutter.com.au/proddetail.php?prod=CUT1030 for T5
http://www.cutter.com.au/proddetail.php?prod=cut1031 for T6

T5 is 1A bin, 
T6 I have 8000 pcs inbound, these are the bins
2T
2B
1C
1A
2S
1D


----------



## hootsmon (Feb 7, 2008)

*Tell me more!*



WeLight said:


> Hi Chris
> I emailed you a ZIP file with beamshots on many existing Optics with XM that Matt set up


Guys, I'd be most interested to hear Troutie's opinion on those beamshots Mark mentioned.

Pure guesswork on my part, but I'm betting the Regina optics should work OK with XM-L
But if anyone has real experimental results, then I'd love to see that! 
Thanks


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

T5 is 1A bin, 
T6 I have 8000 pcs inbound, these are the bins
2T
2B
1C
1A
2S
1D

Could somebody be so kind as to explain what this chart means please? All i know is were talking color temps.. 3000k more yellow 6500k white
Whats the difference between for example 2R and 2S?


----------



## WeLight (Aug 12, 2007)

Perhaps a simple way to look at it is


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

Obviously 1B would be nice, but they don't bother to make it........


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

WeLight said:


> Hi Chris
> I emailed you a ZIP file with beamshots on many existing Optics with XM that Matt set up


Thanks Mark .
just got up to check on the cricket is it OK to post them up on here


----------



## odtexas (Oct 2, 2008)

So does anyone have/know where the chromaticity chart is that has the colors under the chart. I can't remember if 1c or 1a is bluer.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

you can see the pics here

https://s199.photobucket.com/albums/aa46/amticoman/XM-L STUFF/

So if 8000 T6 s and a mixed up lot of bins does this mean we the punters will not know what we will be getting till they arrive .


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

Thanks for sharing Mark and Chris.

It would be nice though if those pics had some sort of dimensions on them, including distance from wall


----------



## rlouder (Jun 26, 2007)

odtexas said:


> So does anyone have/know where the chromaticity chart is that has the colors under the chart. I can't remember if 1c or 1a is bluer.


Post 15 http://budgetlightforum.cz.cc/node/898

Does anyone know if the US group buy at cpf is going to happen? With the long delay and all the speculation, the thread is a bit mangled.


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

So, based on those shots the EVA-S and 10193-10425 look real good to me.

INTERESTING, the 10193 is the "plain tight MC-E" optic.

Optics


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

I see dead people


----------



## Vancbiker (May 25, 2005)

gticlay said:


> INTERESTING, the 10193 is the "plain tight MC-E" optic.QUOTE]
> 
> That is pretty interesting. I tried that 10193 on the MC-E a couple years ago and found it pitiful at best.


----------



## yetibetty (Dec 24, 2007)

Goldigger said:


> T5 is 1A bin,
> T6 I have 8000 pcs inbound, these are the bins
> 2T
> 2B
> ...


Black & white charts to explain colour:nono: This should help:


----------



## Itess (Feb 22, 2009)

Why colors are so different for different optics?


----------



## Itess (Feb 22, 2009)

And finally I know how to use 10193 optics that I have


----------



## odtexas (Oct 2, 2008)

Thanks rlouder and yeti for posting that chart. I can usually find things, but last night was a complete bust trying to find those charts. Saved to photobucket now... Real life savers their guys.:thumbsup: 
Troutie- Thanks for making the beamshots that Cutter did available. 
Looks like the 35mm Fraen will be the thrower for me.  
Now to start planning the 2012 collection.


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

Vancbiker said:


> gticlay said:
> 
> 
> > INTERESTING, the 10193 is the "plain tight MC-E" optic.QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Next question 

what are we all going to be using to drive these Lumen loverlies 

B2flex up to 1.5 amps which would be OK 

H6flex for 3 amps 

what else is available to us mortals who cant russtle up our own .


what about direct drive is this possible for a small helmet light .


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> Next question
> 
> what are we all going to be using to drive these Lumen loverlies
> 
> ...


I've got A lonely hipflex I can use..just won't be able to get the full 3 amps to the xmls

I also Have A constant current driver for 2.8 amps that needs A home
One of these http://www.dotlight.de/products/fr/...constant-current-source-KONLUX-DC-2800mA.html


----------



## langen (May 21, 2005)

troutie-mtb said:


> what about direct drive is this possible for a small helmet light .


Wouldn't it be better to instead use a 7135 based driver, and use a 1SxxP batterypack? If I understand correctly the efficiency wouldn't be half bad.
An added bonus is that you wont get issues with the cells in the pack going out of balance


----------



## baker (Jan 6, 2004)

I had a Kaidomain 5 mode drop-in delivered yesterday. Seems pretty incredible for the $$$. Very floody. I did some ceiling bounce lux meter comparisons and measured the tailcap voltage.

Ceiling bounce test lux readings:
XM-L 175 
MC-E 139
MagicShine 900 5mode 133
MagicShine 900 3mode 129
Linger 2xXPG-R5 128
XPG-R5 107

Current measurements at the tailcap on a fresh cell (a couple minutes runtime already):
Hi 3.3A
Med 1.25A
Low 0.13A


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

baker said:


> I had a Kaidomain 5 mode drop-in delivered yesterday. Seems pretty incredible for the $$$. Very floody. I did some ceiling bounce lux meter comparisons and measured the tailcap voltage.
> 
> Ceiling bounce test lux readings:
> XM-L 175
> ...


Baker - very jealous you got yours. So that's the P60 drop in they are selling... by floody, you mean in general or for a drop in flashlight beam? Beam wise, it's more floody than a MS900?

This beamshot from one of their 5-mode XML's looks like crap, IMO.
Kaidomain Beamshot


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

odtexas said:


> Now to start planning the 2012 collection.


Odtexas, there'll be something new and even brighter by 2012! :winker:


----------



## odtexas (Oct 2, 2008)

+1........:thumbsup:


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

odtexas said:


> +1........:thumbsup:


Aha, with you now, I missed the irony! Sorry I was being a bit dumb.


----------



## kelly3512 (Jan 9, 2009)

*Other possible drivers?*

For the record, I've been a lurker for a LONG time and building lights with your knowledge. I'm clearly not the expert and would love some of your thoughts on these drivers.

These are 'designed' for the MCE/P7 four die emitters. Being that they are designed to have 4 parallel wired emitters, I'm thinking that they wouldn't work but need to ask anyway.

http://www.kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=10973

http://www.kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=9906

http://www.kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=9534

http://www.kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=7947

http://www.kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=5595

Troutie: for helmet light?
http://www.kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=1845

To my untrained eye, this one shows the most promise:
http://www.kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=1770

Thanks, Kelly


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 28, 2007)

The first 5 have an inductor, so are probably more efficient if driving the XML form more than 5 volts. The technical term used for these is buck converter. If you search on this forum you should find a decent explanation of how they work.

The last 2 should be OK with a single cell (or a bunch of cells in parallel). Running them off 2 Li-Ion cells in series would probably burn them up.

Thanks for posting the list. I haven't look at KD in quite a while.

Mark


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

Goldigger said:


> I've got A lonely hipflex I can use..just won't be able to get the full 3 amps to the xmls
> 
> I also Have A constant current driver for 2.8 amps that needs A home
> One of these http://www.dotlight.de/products/fr/...constant-current-source-KONLUX-DC-2800mA.html


I thought the hipflex ran up to 2.8A, but with some nice steps in between (1>1.4>2>2.4/2.8)? I checked out the h6flex, which is its replacement and it goes waaay higher than necessary (6A? It's late ) but only goes 1.4>2>2.8>3A. Hmm. I wouldn't mind the hipflex if you're interested in selling or trading for a bunch of cateye spacers + $?


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

troutie-mtb said:


> you can see the pics here
> 
> https://s199.photobucket.com/albums/aa46/amticoman/XM-L STUFF/
> 
> So if 8000 T6 s and a mixed up lot of bins does this mean we the punters will not know what we will be getting till they arrive .


what was the mod for the Regina? Opening up the hole at the base a bit? I think that it's one of the nicer beam patterns, along with the EVA S.


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

mattthemuppet said:


> I thought the hipflex ran up to 2.8A, but with some nice steps in between (1>1.4>2>2.4/2.8)? I checked out the h6flex, which is its replacement and it goes waaay higher than necessary (6A? It's late ) but only goes 1.4>2>2.8>3A. Hmm. I wouldn't mind the hipflex if you're interested in selling or trading for a bunch of cateye spacers + $?


Matt, I think you're missing the point of the Flex drivers.
Those currents you have quoted above are the maximum you can set, so for the XM-L you'd likely choose 3A. With in that maximum you can then select duomode or multi mode and then program the required "step levels" up to that maximum you have already selected, depending on what type of Flex driver you have. It's not a case of only having 1A as low, then 1.4, 2, 2.4 etc upto the max permissible.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Hi Emu, thanks for clarifying the Flex current stuff.

A lot of folk think the current table max values are the 'steps' available during operation. I suppose I need to figure out how to clarify the difference between choosing a current table via the menu system versus the available steps within a chosen current table.

I specifically added the 3A choice to the h6flex to cater for the XML

So, for the XML, most folk would select/choose the 3A current table in the menu system. Then the 5 levels that are available in UIB would be nominally:

L1 50mA
L2 200mA
L3 700mA
L4 1700mA
L5 3000mA

cheers,
george.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

georges80 said:


> Hi Emu, thanks for clarifying the Flex current stuff.
> 
> A lot of folk think the current table max values are the 'steps' available during operation. I suppose I need to figure out how to clarify the difference between choosing a current table via the menu system versus the available steps within a chosen current table.
> 
> ...


Personally i think the h6flex pretty much covers everything, there's not much reason as to why you cant use it with any led..unless you wanted 9amps for a sst-90.. 700mah or 1amp max.. but as anything below 1000mah is pwm you might get away with a higher current level? 
:thumbsup: 
The only thing i dont like is the 50ma level..
edit: i just read that 50ma is actually 1000ma PWM so i take that back..

Below 1000mA the h6Flex now transitions to PWM (at a nominal 400Hz) to provide dimming as recommended by Luminus. This means that, e.g. the 50mA L1 level is actually 1000mA pulses with a 1 in 20 duty cycle at 400Hz (1000mA/20 = 50mA average current to the load).


----------



## WeLight (Aug 12, 2007)

troutie-mtb said:


> you can see the pics here
> 
> https://s199.photobucket.com/albums/aa46/amticoman/XM-L STUFF/
> 
> So if 8000 T6 s and a mixed up lot of bins does this mean we the punters will not know what we will be getting till they arrive .


I have set up the ordering, as I always do, so you can select the bin you want


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

emu26 said:


> Matt, I think you're missing the point of the Flex drivers.
> Those currents you have quoted above are the maximum you can set, so for the XM-L you'd likely choose 3A. With in that maximum you can then select duomode or multi mode and then program the required "step levels" up to that maximum you have already selected, depending on what type of Flex driver you have. It's not a case of only having 1A as low, then 1.4, 2, 2.4 etc upto the max permissible.





georges80 said:


> Hi Emu, thanks for clarifying the Flex current stuff.
> 
> A lot of folk think the current table max values are the 'steps' available during operation. I suppose I need to figure out how to clarify the difference between choosing a current table via the menu system versus the available steps within a chosen current table.
> 
> ...


ah, that makes more sense, thanks guys :thumbsup: In my defense, I work on soil nematodes, so all this is akin to voodoo for me. I've also only used bflex drivers (programming one of the older ones now), where it's a little more obvious - I didn't realise that there were other steps for the h6flex than the ones listed in the manual, depending on the max value set. I'm guessing that choosing 6A L5 (for whatever reason) would give different L1>4 values than if 3A L5 were chosen.

hmm, goes off to think..


----------



## ortelius (Dec 6, 2007)

mattthemuppet said:


> I've also only used bflex drivers (programming one of the older ones now), where it's a little more obvious - I didn't realise that there were other steps for the h6flex than the ones listed in the manual, depending on the max value set. I'm guessing that choosing 6A L5 (for whatever reason) would give different L1>4 values than if 3A L5 were chosen.


It's exactly the same principle with all Taskled's *flex drivers. You set the max current level and by that all the other lower levels are adjusted automatically. So, it's the same with your bflex that you have set up.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

ortelius said:


> It's exactly the same principle with all Taskled's *flex drivers. You set the max current level and by that all the other lower levels are adjusted automatically. So, it's the same with your bflex that you have set up.


wow, you're right. I just went back and read the manual (RTFM FTW!) to see that "brightness scales to this max setting" plastered all over it. That's interesting. So when I set my max to 1.5A (currently 1A), my medium and low settings will get brighter too. How is it calculated, so I can figure out what the current is supposed to be at each setting?

sorry for derailing the thread, I am still interested in XM-Ls


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

mattthemuppet said:


> wow, you're right. I just went back and read the manual (RTFM FTW!) to see that "brightness scales to this max setting" plastered all over it. That's interesting. So when I set my max to 1.5A (currently 1A), my medium and low settings will get brighter too. How is it calculated, so I can figure out what the current is supposed to be at each setting?
> 
> sorry for derailing the thread, I am still interested in XM-Ls


Scaling is performed such as to maintain 'nice' even and applicable steps in brightness.

Basically the human eye responds in a logarithmic fashion to light intensity. Here's a document I found, read and have based my dimming on since way back in 2003 with the first of the flex drivers (the uFlex). So, I typically take that curve and choose current values to sit on the curve - but then tweak values so be more useful for the intended application, e.g. the bike UI has different steps than say UIF.

I prefer to not publish the current values for each level since they have changed over the years to better fit new LEDs and also to better fit the application (UIP versus UIF etc). If you really want to know the levels, the easiest way is to measure them with a meter.

Finally, as another "twist" on trying to document or measure the current, some of the drivers (h6flex in particular) use adjustable constant current for the higher output levels (>= 1A for the h6flex) and then switch to PWM at lower output levels. For the h6flex this was done specifically so that it could work well with the Luminus -50 and -90 parts. The Luminus spec recommends a minimum driver current of 1A and to "contact" them for lower dimming information. Turns out for <1A the recommend using PWM of 1A pulses because they do not guarantee that their LED will "light" at lower current densities, i.e. at say 200mA constant current the LED may draw 200mA but no light comes out.... The -50 and -90 parts are single large monolithic emitters (like the XML) and since the current is shared over the entire die they have a minimum current density requirement for the "LE" part of LED" to occur 

When I first released the h6flex it only did PWM at levels lower than 200mA. I then had a customer mention erratic turn on of his SST-50. On reading the Luminus datasheet and then talking with a factory engineer I changed the firmware to do the PWM at levels lower than 1000mA.

So, hopefully you get a bit of an idea of some of the work that goes into the flex driver firmware and a bit of an idea of why some parameters aren't documented and may change over time to improve the product performance as new LEDs come to market.

Presumably this ends the thread derailment 

cheers,
george.


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

georges80 said:


> Scaling is performed such as to maintain 'nice' even and applicable steps in brightness.
> 
> Basically the human eye responds in a logarithmic fashion to light intensity. Here's a document I found, read and have based my dimming on since way back in 2003 with the first of the flex drivers (the uFlex). So, I typically take that curve and choose current values to sit on the curve - but then tweak values so be more useful for the intended application, e.g. the bike UI has different steps than say UIF.
> 
> ...


Hi george,
Any chance you are working on 20mm diameter drivers? I ask because with the new stuff out today, there is the opportunity to make single led lights (and triple 20mm) lights with a pretty small form factor... except the bestest drivers on the market are a larger diameter. Just a thought.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

gticlay said:


> Hi george,
> Any chance you are working on 20mm diameter drivers? I ask because with the new stuff out today, there is the opportunity to make single led lights (and triple 20mm) lights with a pretty small form factor... except the bestest drivers on the market are a larger diameter. Just a thought.


+1 hate to say it but thats the only reason why i bought some of Quazzles tripple boards as i wanted to keep the light as small as possible..
No disrespect to Quazzle his boards are still great. 
But i'm not so keen on the temp sense of the L332MC as it just kills the light if things get to hot, plus i have to have two switches to access the modes.. This maybe changing with the L333.

Please guys i'm not trying to start a war here you both do a great job:thumbsup:


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

georges80 said:


> Scaling is performed such as to maintain 'nice' even and applicable steps in brightness.
> 
> Basically the human eye responds in a logarithmic fashion to light intensity. Here's a document I found, read and have based my dimming on since way back in 2003 with the first of the flex drivers (the uFlex). So, I typically take that curve and choose current values to sit on the curve - but then tweak values so be more useful for the intended application, e.g. the bike UI has different steps than say UIF.
> 
> ...


wow, you really know your stuff - all very interesting indeed! Thank you for such an in depth explanation and no worries about not publishing current levels, I just didn't want to post misleading beam shots (X brightness at Y current).

not to speak for George, but he posted on another thread that heat dissipation and gadgets/ bells'n'whistles limits the minimum size of the flex drivers, hence no 20mm board sizes. I'm guessing that's why the higher current boards (h6flex et al) are much larger than the bflexes.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Thanks George very informative .:thumbsup: 
not a derailment of the thread as very important to get the driver right too

gticlay .
you have a point but yes a single XM-L and say 20 mm driver fine in a small housing still going to be a fair bit of heat to get rid of if you want to drive it at full .

with the H6flex it will drive a whole multitude of the beasts at and above the max rated .
so the housing will need to be a fair size to disipate all that heat .

Quazzles stuff nice as it is does tie you to a particular optic so makes for less (Flex)ibility  for experimental and future upgrades .


















This optic may hold some promise as with minimal modding of the holder the XML will fit in nicely .
and the beam will be a floodier one but twice as bright from ONE led .

the beam shots are one XPG @ 1400 ma so around 400 lumens so imagine it twice as bright and a bit wider

.


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

georges80 said:


> When I first released the h6flex it only did PWM at levels lower than 200mA. I then had a customer mention erratic turn on of his SST-50. On reading the Luminus datasheet and then talking with a factory engineer I changed the firmware to do the PWM at levels lower than 1000mA.
> 
> cheers,
> george.


And its this level of customer service that makes Taskled drivers worth ever cent :thumbsup:


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

emu26 said:


> And its this level of customer service that makes Taskled drivers worth ever cent :thumbsup:


agree 100%!


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Well now I am wondering if we have all been under achieving and only looking in one direction .

this is 2 XPGs running at 1.4 amps so about 800 lumens ish 
so about what we can expect from one XML

OK its a snow shot but still WOW .

Edited 
LAURA RS X 2 @ 1400 MA


















CXP RS X 2 @1400 MA 

















its got throw , Its got spill and its not a Regina 
its an overlooked optic that I cant remember much mention of in the past .

and paired with a B2Flex @ 1.5 amps is a killer


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

troutie-mtb said:


> Well now I am wondering if we have all been under achieving and only looking in one direction .
> 
> this is 2 XPGs running at 1.4 amps so about 800 lumens ish
> so about what we can expect from one XML
> ...


you're such a tease.

Oh, and the 1st shot looks like something out of a Harry Potter film


----------



## Vancbiker (May 25, 2005)

troutie-mtb said:


> its got throw , Its got spill and its not a Regina
> its an overlooked optic that I cant remember much mention of in the past .


Can we take guesses????? pleeeze????

LXP-RS?


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Vancbiker said:


> Can we take guesses????? pleeeze????
> 
> LXP-RS?


Thats the Spirit !!!!!!!! :nono: Nope


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> Thats the Spirit !!!!!!!! :nono: Nope


How 'bout a clue. Is it 20mm or bigger?


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

JezV said:


> How 'bout a clue. Is it 20mm or bigger?


approx 20 mm


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

One of the original square 20mm lenses for the XR-E family but i can't remember what brand they are


----------



## WeLight (Aug 12, 2007)

troutie-mtb said:


> Well now I am wondering if we have all been under achieving and only looking in one direction .
> 
> this is 2 XPGs running at 1.4 amps so about 800 lumens ish
> so about what we can expect from one XML
> ...


Im trying to work out the shirt/jacket, nice flannel....:thumbsup: 
Man it looks cold, cant say much about downunder, its been raining all week in the middle of summer. My daughter slept at Heathrow overnight but did manage to get on the flying Kangaroo home for chrissy, Merry Xmas to all


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> Thats the Spirit !!!!!!!! :nono: Nope


ill have a stab at ledil CXP square?


----------



## odtexas (Oct 2, 2008)

mattthemuppet said:


> you're such a tease.
> 
> Oh, and the 1st shot looks like something out of a Harry Potter film


+1 on both

First thing I thought as well.... Now he's making magic wands. Sure beats Magic Shines though.....


----------



## Vancbiker (May 25, 2005)

troutie-mtb said:


> Thats the Spirit !!!!!!!! :nono: Nope


He said optic, but was that meant to throw is off the scent?????

IMS20 reflector maybe?


----------



## g3rG (Aug 29, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> Thats the Spirit !!!!!!!! :nono: Nope


I vote that the optic in that shot is nothing but cold dark air. aka, no optic at all, except for the one built into the LED.

gerG


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

Polymer optics 120?

Ledil CRS RS 6?

Oh, I give up


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Yep minus nine degrees c the shirt is an anti-central heating shirt. As worn by construction workers all over the UK , padded and really warm .

Tell Laura I love her


----------



## odtexas (Oct 2, 2008)

troutie-mtb said:


> Yep minus nine degrees c the shirt is an anti-central heating shirt. As worn by construction workers all over the UK , padded and really warm .
> 
> Tell Laura I love her





troutie-mtb said:


> Laura Ledil
> 
> getting towards aspherical here wonder if it will have the same effect on the XPGs


Thread


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

Now I'm confused.

Aren't they the same as what cutter has listed as the CXP which when you select beam actually change to a LXP code?

So, if an optic designed for a considerably smaller dome does that then wouldn't the equivalent optic from the same manufacturer designed for the XRE do an even better job? I don't remember if anyone ever tried one of those on an XPG

And here I was thinking Laura was WeLights daughter and she was in the UK hand delivering stuff to you Troutie


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

emu26 said:


> Now I'm confused.
> 
> Aren't they the same as what cutter has listed as the CXP which when you select beam actually change to a LXP code?
> 
> ...


LOL Im a bit confused too but have added the same shots to the pics post but useing the CXP RS and will let you compare .
curious why Ledil have 2 optics so similar but as you can see a bit different in beam .

:lol: Welights personal courier service :lol:


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

WeLight, can you shed some light on what you actually have online? Is it CXP or LXP and does the L actually stand for Laura and the xp designate the LED it is designed for?

Chris, does the CXP have the tighter spot, just aimed down slightly further than the Laura?

Thanks for sharing, again


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

emu26 said:


> WeLight, can you shed some light on what you actually have online? Is it CXP or LXP and does the L actually stand for Laura and the xp designate the LED it is designed for?
> 
> Chris, does the CXP have the tighter spot, just aimed down slightly further than the Laura?
> 
> Thanks for sharing, again


Didnt have the time to study. Was in a hurry to beat the dawn .

The Lxp is a round optic iirc

The laura rs. Is different to the cxp rs. Will take a pic of the wo side by side tonight .

The CXP does appear to have a tighter hot spot. But the laura seems to be the nicer trail light. 
With a better close up light.

A bit more messing is needed I think


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Here is xp-g page off the Ledil site: http://www.ledil.com/index.php?page=xp-g

The LXP is a round optic that produces a smoother beam than the CXP. The CXP always had a slightly square edge on one of the sides of the beam.

If you notice they also have a LXP2 and a LXP3 that have been on their site for quite a while but have never had their .pdf updated with beamshots. If you look at the pictures you can clearly see that they are different from one another. Assuming they actually make improvements through the revisions, then a LXP3 should be on par or better than a Regina. Who knows if we'll ever seem them though as the .pdf has a revision date from 8/2/2010.

Sent ledil an email about the lxp3, curious what they'll say.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Found this on google
selector tool, need to register to use it https://pct.cree.com/Register.asp


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

I compared the 3 contenders.. XM-L, XP-G and MC-E








Available Bins








Top Bins









If people can wait for the U2 bin of the XM-L and you only run it at 1.5 amps you get 590 lumens vs XPG 493, MCE 456..and its more effecient than the XPG/MCE..
obviously this is ignoring lumen losses with optics..but all things being equal..

Two of these in a helmet light could be a killer..


----------



## vroom9 (Feb 24, 2009)

Goldigger said:


> Found this on google
> selector tool, need to register to use it http://pct.cree.com/Register.asp


Cool. Thanks for that link.

If you change one of the columns to lumens/$ and enter some costs, you will see the true advantage of the XM-L. More lumens for less cost.


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Technically, it's still cheaper to buy 2 XP-G R5 than it is to buy 1 XM-L T6

DX has R5 1B bins on 14mm or 16mm mcb for $5.61ea shipped if you buy 3 or more. The cheapest T6 I can find is at Kaidomain for $12.31ea shipped. You can get that down to 11.62ea if you buy 3. Cutters shipping and the currency free thingy makes them more expense. Plus, I believe they up'd the price of their XP-G after it went off pre-sale as they seem much more expensive than I remember? If that's the case I'm assuming they'll do the same for the XM-L.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

XM-L also available here.. found them on a polish forum
http://www.lck-led.com/p853/Cree-XL...mm-Board-T6-Group,[email protected]/product_info.html


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Response from Ledil in regards to the LXP3

_"Thank you so much for your inquiry.
LXP3 is brand new product, so I believe it will take approximately 1-2 months
before our vendors have these in stock.

Best regards,
Joni Mäki"_


----------



## quazzle (Apr 1, 2009)

XM-L is gorgeous, no doubts, but this LED is originally positioned for industrial illumination. Just my two cents – unlike MC-E (where you can connect the dies in series), XM-L drastically increases the amperage requirements to switching regulators which is used in portable lights. Increased current drain always leads to extra losses and a higher cost. So the XM-L’s mere advantages may be compensated by the complexity and power conversion losses in the regulator electronics.

Of course this concern is not relevant to the XM-L’s primary occupation – power illumination modules - where many LED’s are used and the electronics’ share is not critical in the total costs.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Driver efficiency can still be high at higher currents. Obviously the driver becomes larger, but here's an actual MEASURED chart of the performance of the h6cc (and hence h6flex), both buck drivers and both running P7's (basically an xml as far as Vf and I are concerned):










So, I wouldn't assume you would necessarily give up some efficiency in the driver at higher currents. The key is to choose your driver wisely.

cheers,
george.


----------



## quazzle (Apr 1, 2009)

I'm glad that you addressed my statement. Even your example clearly demonstrates that driving 3 LEDs in series is a way more efficient than driving just one LED with the same driver. High voltage conversion is always more efficient than high-current conversion. I'm not trying to argue that _all_ 3A drivers which may drive an XM-L are less efficient than 1A for triple XP-G. My statement is that a high-quality low-voltage 3A driver is more complicated, more bulk, thus more expensive than an equivalent high-voltage 1A driver, both transfer the same power - about 10 watts.

I have attached another example, a very compact driver which is integrated into a 20mm triple XP-G board. It delivers 10watts to three XP-G (@ 1A), the overall efficiency exceeds 90% in range 6V - 9.5V. And this is an old data, it was possible to increase the conversion efficiency on 2-3% in new version (333). This driver of course is not a top notch power converter as I had to compromise trying to fit it in a very small footprint and minimize the costs.

Both drivers need a 2S lithium battery - 7.2V (it seems 2S LiIon is an optimal supply for both) 

so @ 7.2V:
h6flex + XM-L will drive 9.5watts to the LED consuming 10.7 watts in total.
L333 + 3x XP-G will drive 10watts to the LEDs consuming 10.75 watts in total.
In terms of conversion L332 saves 0.45 watts.

according to the official CREE data:
3x XP-G R5 @1A produce 1050 lumens
1x XM-L T6 @2.88A will give 882 lumens


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Yes, a single XML from a buck driver will generally be less efficient than two or three series XML's.

I agree that for a single XML bucked from say 2 li-ion you would have better efficiency if it was 4 series die and a boost from 2 li-ion.

The issue of course is more complicated since the XML provides a single monolithic die and different optic issues - hopefully easier to solve than a 4 die MC-E/P7. So, which gives a better final SYSTEM efficiency (lumens/watt out the front) and better final Beam is more the issue...

Once you get to 2 or 3 series XML then buck efficiency is >90% and at 3A you have a better solution than trying to boost 2 or 3 series MC-E (or 6 or 9 XPGs) from a 3 or 4 cell pack.

So, as always it is a SYSTEM solution that folk should be looking to solve and the XML just provides another option when building a light. It obviously isn't the best choice for every light, but is an excellent choice for certain lights.

In summary, yes, a single XML buck driver versus 3 series XPG boost driver will have the boost driver winning. Now, whether 3 XPG + optics gives a better beam, similar or more light and head size versus a single XML... that's a system question...

cheers,
george.


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

So if you drove 3 XML at a lower A to produce the same lumen output, it would be even better?



quazzle said:


> I'm glad that you addressed my statement. Even your example clearly demonstrates that driving 3 LEDs in series is a way more efficient than driving just one LED with the same driver. High voltage conversion is always more efficient than high-current conversion. I'm not trying to argue that _all_ 3A drivers which may drive an XM-L are less efficient than 1A for triple XP-G. My statement is that a high-quality low-voltage 3A driver is more complicated, more bulk, thus more expensive than an equivalent high-voltage 1A driver, both transfer the same power - about 10 watts.
> 
> I have attached another example, a very compact driver which is integrated into a 20mm triple XP-G board. It delivers 10watts to three XP-G (@ 1A), the overall efficiency exceeds 90% in range 6V - 9.5V. And this is an old data, it was possible to increase the conversion efficiency on 2-3% in new version (333). This driver of course is not a top notch power converter as I had to compromise trying to fit it in a very small footprint and minimize the costs.
> 
> ...


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Even if you take out all the components except for the LED in a MC-E comparison, the XM-L wins. It produces the same or better l/w even giving the MC-E a S/P wiring advantage, it's cheaper by $2-3ea and it produces a better beam than the MC-E.


----------



## quazzle (Apr 1, 2009)

Agreed. I'm looking at XM-L for two areas:

1. A single die light with self-designed variable-focus optic. In contrast to P7 and MC-E new XM-L provides a smaller emitter area, much better efficiency and sufficient luminous flux for lightweight head/EDC lights. I used to experiment in this area with P4 in 2009 but later froze this project as P4 left the stage. XM-L gave me a chance to return to this idea.









2. High-voltage 3A fully-integrated boost clusters rated for 30-50 watts. I strongly doubt that such monsters will be demanded by DIY builders in large volumes as there are no high-capacity, safe and compact batteries for them. It seems that 10-15 watts is the reasonable maximum for portable flashlights in terms of weight/size/safety.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Whoo Whoo 
My order has shipped yesterday from cutters to the UK .


Let the waiting begin


----------



## quazzle (Apr 1, 2009)

troutie, are you waiting for the top notch bin T6?


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

quazzle said:


> troutie, are you waiting for the top notch bin T6?


Quazzle Yep that is what I ordered but it was before the diferent tints were made available on the Cutter site so dont know what colour I will be getting .


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

I don't see a tint selection on their xm-l page only bin. Is it somewhere else on their site?


----------



## rlouder (Jun 26, 2007)

Tints are available if you look at the T6 14mm round or 20mm stars. http://cutter.com.au/products.php?cat=Leds+on+14mm+MCPCB

I'm waiting on some 1D tint to try. Seemed like the warmest that would be least likely to have a green tint. Many people in the cpf group-buy opted for the 2B and 2T. We'll see.


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

Well, I also ordered a pair of T6 2T bins and a bunch of different optics, just to try them out. I've also got a new small lathe (but don't spread the word) to make some housings maybe even torches.


----------



## rlouder (Jun 26, 2007)

Toaster79 said:


> Well, I also ordered a pair of T6 2T bins and a bunch of different optics, just to try them out. I've also got a new small lathe (but don't spread the word) to make some housings maybe even torches.


TOASTER HAS A LATHE! 

I'm jealous of all those neat looking designs produced with lathes and milling machines. With a hacksaw, dremel, and grinder, I'm going to try cobble together an amoeba style helmet light first.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

rlouder said:


> TOASTER HAS A LATHE!
> 
> I'm jealous of all those neat looking designs produced with lathes and milling machines. With a hacksaw, dremel, and grinder, I'm going to try cobble together an amoeba style helmet light first.


go for it! Light is light, it doesn't much mind where it comes from  When it warms up enough to go out to the garage again, I'll be making a dual XM-L/ h6flex out of 1in.sq alu tubing..


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

just ordered 3 from KD (T6 1A) for a pretty reasonable $9.23 ea. I'm planning on replacing one of my XP-G R5s with it in my dual helmet light, then using the other 2 in a bar light.


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

mattthemuppet said:


> just ordered 3 from KD (T6 1A) for a pretty reasonable $9.23 ea. I'm planning on replacing one of my XP-G R5s with it in my dual helmet light, then using the other 2 in a bar light.


Did you punch in the "buckrate" coupon code? Pricing is $8.51ea if you buy 3-4 of them.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

kan3 said:


> Did you punch in the "buckrate" coupon code? Pricing is $8.51ea if you buy 3-4 of them.


nope :madman: but a big :thumbsup: for the heads up. I've requested a refund so I can place the order again with the coupon code (or they can process it and refund the difference) as it was still pending. Thanks again!


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

How does Kaidomain work... when it says "packing" am I nearly to shipping or is it all a big joke?


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

OK, so if I modded my TridenX with 3 XML, how do I figure out how much more light it would (on paper) be putting out vs. the stock 3 Seoul P4's? $35 is a lot 'just to see' since I have XPG R5's here already.


----------



## odtexas (Oct 2, 2008)

My Trion 600 has a current of ~750mA on high. 
At 750mA 
P4 ~ 172 lumens
XPG ~ 280 lumens

Per the Cree data sheet @ 700mA the XML T6 will produce 280 lumens.

No real improvement there with the additional 50mA going to the XML. The forward voltage being lower might increase current/efficiency slightly. 

So either will be a big step up from the P4. 
Not really seeing any lumen difference between the XPG and XML at the lower currents.
Still would be a cool project either way though.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

odtexas said:


> My Trion 600 has a current of ~750mA on high.
> At 750mA
> P4 ~ 172 lumens
> XPG ~ 280 lumens
> ...


sorry to be picky, but it'll be ~23lm difference between XP-G and XM-L, plus the XM-L will use ~250mW less. Not a huge amount, but for 3 it adds up to a bit more light (will +75lm be noticeable?) at 0.75W less, which would should provide a bit longer run time.

I'm more interested at the 1.5A level - my dual XP-G lamp with 1 XP-G swapped out for an XM-L should put out 87lm more at 0.6W less


----------



## odtexas (Oct 2, 2008)

mattthemuppet said:


> sorry to be picky, but it'll be ~23lm difference between XP-G and XM-L, plus the XM-L will use ~250mW less. Not a huge amount, but for 3 it adds up to a bit more light (will +75lm be noticeable?) at 0.75W less, which would should provide a bit longer run time.
> 
> I'm more interested at the 1.5A level - my dual XP-G lamp with 1 XP-G swapped out for an XM-L should put out 87lm more at 0.6W less


No worries. We all have our demons.
More lumens... Good..... Better efficiency....... Great.... 
But can we focus and use those extra lumens??? :skep: Only time will tell..... 
That is why we all hang out here. Things are constantly changing.
Have at and post the results....:thumbsup:


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

odtexas said:


> No worries. We all have our demons.
> More lumens... Good..... Better efficiency....... Great....
> But can we focus and use those extra lumens??? :skep: Only time will tell.....
> That is why we all hang out here. Things are constantly changing.
> Have at and post the results....:thumbsup:


pedantry is indeed my demon 

time will indeed tell on how well those lumens can be focused. I'm pretty interested in how the XM-L will pair up with the XP-G in my helmet lamp, both using Reginas. I'm hoping that the hot spot will be wider with a bit more fill, to smooth out the hot spot of the XP-G+Regina. That'll also dictate what reflectors I go with in the twin XM-L bar light on the list.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

Whoo-hoo! Cutter shipment here. My withdrawal symtoms are subsiding.  An XP-E R3 to replace the damaged dedomed XP-G far beam on the helmet (solder heat effect, works, but color bugs me), AND the XM-L T6 2S for the errand bike so I don't have to swap out low beams & Hub generator so no battery swap, either. Should be fun.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

AFAIK KD are no longer offering the "buckrate" discount - I think it ended sometime over Christmas as I remember 3 being ~$25 when I checked them out originally, but now they're $27.69 for 3. Tried "buckrate" with some other things, but no joy, guess they haven't updated their website.

Still, only a couple of $ more each than XP-Gs, not too bad.


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

I can't seem to be able to find the XML at KD!
What gives?
I can find the XPG, and XML drop ins and lights.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

here  you go 

I ordered the T6 on 20mm stars, 1 of them will be a direct replacement of an XP-G 20mm star.


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Thanx Matt!!!!


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

savagemann said:


> Thanx Matt!!!!


no worries  let us know if you have any luck with the "buckrate" discount


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Did you try BUCKRATE in all caps?
It seemed to work for me......hmmmm


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

*There here*










Yabba Dabba Doooooo some thing to play with .

MMM slightly bigger than I imagined but quite a bit smaller than a MCE


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

A few ceiling beam shots with optics I have available .

first up is an XPG / Laura RS










XM-L Regina 









XM-L Laura RS 









XM-L CXP RS










its a point and shoot camera and daylight outside just for beam shape only .

8 feet led to ceiling and tapes 1 foot apart

I tried the MCE Boom too but it was terrible so didnt photo it


----------



## langen (May 21, 2005)

troutie-mtb said:


> I tried the MCE Boom too but it was terrible so didnt photo it


But not XM-L + Boom?


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Nice. Is there any chance the XML will work with the regina? Without heavy modification?
OOPS, nevermind........for some reason I thought you used the XPG in your beam shot Troutie!!!
The Laura looks pretty good.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

savagemann said:


> Did you try BUCKRATE in all caps?
> It seemed to work for me......hmmmm


er, erm, "whistles", nope :blush: Tried it again and it worked perfectly! Even better, KD refunded the difference without me even asking, how cool is that?


----------



## odtexas (Oct 2, 2008)

Floody.................:cryin:

Will make a good bar light. Had high hopes for the Regina taming the view angle.
So probably Iris and Fraen 35mm for throw.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

XM-L + Regina seems pretty reasonable - decent wide spot and smooth gradient to spill. Any chance you could do an XP-G + Regina by way of comparison? I know what that looks like in real life, so it would help me extrapolate your ceiling bounce shots.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

odtexas said:


> Floody.................:cryin: ... Iris and Fraen 35mm for throw.


I hope it is OK to share my prelin=minary intent for the XM-L here. While a single XM-L at 3 amp will give about the same light as my triple XP-G MR11 light, I like the efficiency gain on the driver with two, and my 11.1 or 13.2 volt packs. To a point, weight is not a big issue for me. So a double headed light setup would be OK fo me.

Two separate housings can be aimed independently, each with 35 mm optics (or bigger in the case of the Iris). The Eva (or Fraen) for closer in and floodier to cover the lane, the Fraen (or Iris) to cover further out to my narrow helmet thrower. The H6flex driver may be a bit large to tweak into the back of a Marwi housing (asking George whether it can take a 0.015" trim, or not), guessing no, so a separate larger diameter and length housing may be needed, if so, then it would be made to also accomodate the 27 mm deep, 38 mm diameter, Iris.

I use full power of six XP-G R5's riding the shoulder of a 55 mph road, Half is OK as long as oncoming headlights don't mess up my night vision, like on suburban streets. The extra will be nice on the trails (re-aimed, of course). (At least for a little while.)


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

odtexas said:


> Floody.................:cryin:
> 
> Will make a good bar light. Had high hopes for the Regina taming the view angle.
> So probably Iris and Fraen 35mm for throw.


Yep it seems big is beautifull for this led .
its a bit too early to make a summary but from early checking with the optics available to me it is an MCE repeat looks good on the ceiling but runs out of puff in the distance .

went out to the woods with the test rig and it was hopeless as a heavy fog decended when I got the camera out


















so needed to gain altitude and went to the hill top but its not an ideal location so took a few shots and but not very impressed .

the first pics are a 35 mm reflector from a cree torch off DX

then the CXP rs










Laura RS 









and 3 x CXP RS all at 2.8 amps









I guess we now wait for the optics to catch up .


----------



## equalme (Sep 8, 2010)

Hmm. So XM-L + Regina = great flood bar light?


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

To me, it looks absolutely amazing for a trail riding light. I can't imagine needing to see any further than that. Maybe not for road riding, but for trail use, it looks perfect?



troutie-mtb said:


> Yep it seems big is beautifull for this led .
> its a bit too early to make a summary but from early checking with the optics available to me it is an MCE repeat looks good on the ceiling but runs out of puff in the distance .
> 
> went out to the woods with the test rig and it was hopeless as a heavy fog decended when I got the camera out
> ...


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Gticlay
Yes it is a stupendous light in any of the pics and configs but it doesnt have the wow factor just yet with these optics OK but nothing special yet .

wouldnt mind seeing it with the Magicshine reflector and the larger optics 

and going to have a look in the dont chuck anything out box for some XRE optics to have a go with 

2 XPGs under the CXP or Laura @ 1.5 amps is better than 1 XM-L @ 3 amps under the same optic but hopefully this will alter with new offerings from the optic people .

Edit just looking at those shots , I should have done them all there as they show the beam shape in the fog .


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> 2 XPGs under the CXP or Laura @ 1.5 amps is better than 1 XM-L @ 3 amps under the same optic but hopefully this will alter with new offerings from the optic people .
> .


It really shouldn't change much more than them being even. 2 XPG at 1.5A should around 890-920lum while 1 XML T6 at 3A should be around 900-920lum.


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

I liked the CXP RS. What is that anyway?


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Ledil CXP Real Spot

Is that you're question?


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

gticlay said:


> I liked the CXP RS. What is that anyway?


About 2300 lumens out the front. Might work pretty well on trails for me on the bars (I 'm slow).


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

kan3 said:


> Ledil CXP Real Spot
> 
> Is that you're question?


Yes but is that a lens, a reflector, and is it withe the single xml, or ???


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

http://www.ledil.com/datasheets/DataSheet_CXP-G.pdf

Looks like 3 in the last pic


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

*gticlay*
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Ledil+CXP+Real+Spot


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

*Fogs Gone*

Fog lifted so got the pics this morning .

single CXP-RS 









Single LAURA - RS










Single REGINA trimmed to fit


















single DX 35 mm torch reflector


















Three CXP-RS










thats more like it :thumbsup:


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

Troutie, XML was @ 3A or 1,5A?


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

klynk said:


> Troutie, XML was @ 3A or 1,5A?


All shots the XMLs powered by a hipflex so 2800 ma drive current .


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

Regina and CXP RS combo should really do the trick


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

Ledil lists the Eva optic for XM-L. Googled the Eva optic and found no beamshots, builds, or reports. Cutter has them, so they are not unobtanium and have been around a couple of years. Found Troutie's request in 2008 for the flange thickness, depth below flange and diameter of lens at the flange. (The diagram in the specs is not thorough.) Estimating from the diagram's measurements that are there, it looks to be 24 mm in diameter under the flange and about 12 mm deep from flange backside to bottom of the lens. So it will fit an MR11 housing with an extended bezel like the Marwi, like it was made to.

Is the Eva an unknown wrt the MC-E (it obviously is wrt XM-L), or was it dismissed for good reason? Cutter has the SS (10 degree FWHM) and the M (12 degree FWHM) A guess based on Trouties beamshots would say they should be as tight as 8 and 10 degrees FWHM with the XM-L. 

Goal: one near and one medium distance road beams that could be put side by side for trail. As I understand it, tradition with halogens is about 10 degree FWHM for near and 5 degree FWHM for a high, but the proportion of spill is less for LED's and these optics, I think. 

Any input on ordering & testing the Eva SS and M (NOT S&M), the Fraen, a Regina, and an Iris (though it will not fit in an MR11 housing without some tricks or I make/find a bigger one so the H6Flex can fit without trimming.)


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

Brian -  this  is the only build I've seen on here with an Eva SS (using an MC-E). Still, the beamshot looks pretty decent and Itess is a friendly guy.


----------



## Vancbiker (May 25, 2005)

Luminousdiy.com

This is run by an occasional poster to this forum, sdnative. He has used the EVA for a long time.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

looks like CXP-RS and Regina for me too, if only because I can't get the Laura at Digikey. Troutie - what was bad about the Boom beam pattern (SS, I presume)? It'll only cost $2 to try, but if it's awful, that's still $2


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Some info on refectors, p60 drop-ins with beam shots..

http://budgetlightforum.cz.cc/node/993

Click the links for beam shots eg http://www.makeagif.com/TFRbAP


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

*Boosting the MS*

Anybody thrown one into a bastid yet?


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

mattthemuppet said:


> Brian - this is the only build I've seen on here with an Eva SS (using an MC-E). Still, the beamshot looks pretty decent and Itess is a friendly guy.


I don't understand why my search did not pick it. The thread predates my joining the forum, so at least it wasn't the ol' memory forgetting reading it! I have seen his posts. Agree. Friendly. Decent beam for my purpose especially if it tightens a little.



Vancbiker said:


> Luminousdiy.com This is run by an occasional poster to this forum, sdnative. He has used the EVA for a long time.


Saw his battery holder thread and other posts. Read about the Eva-lution but didn't 'get' it. Did not know of the Eva until it was listed for the XM-L.

Thanks to both of you..


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

BrianMc said:


> I don't understand why my search did not pick it.


I think "CXP" is too short for the MTBR search to pick up.

But Google works well.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

It was the Ledil Eva lens. I tried MC-E in it too. On Google. And on CPF. Me and MTBR search are not best of friends. Lower blood pressure just to throw the towel in and ask. :thumbsup:


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

anyone tried any XRE optics or have i missed it?


----------



## rlouder (Jun 26, 2007)

Using a 8*7135 and a single xml, I can't measure the current with either of my dmm's. The Vdmm screws up the circuit. 

Vf is 2.95v on high. Does this sound right?

It's bright, and it heats up the little sled fast.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

I just rooted out a ledil Iris for the MCE and hers a couple of shots on the XML



















Thats my optic choice all used up now


----------



## langen (May 21, 2005)

Looking good Troutie!

Have you (or anyone) tried the 35mm Fraen reflectors? Both 13,5 degree and the 32 degree were very good for spot and flood, respectively. Great spill too.

They kicked ass on the MC-E, so I guess there's not any reason they shouldn't be good on the XM-L too?


I think I have a package from kaidomain at home with some T6s. Hope to be able to test XM-L with at least the Fraen(s) and Boom SS in the next few days


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

These  used the Fraen FRC Narrow. Beamshots included.


----------



## langen (May 21, 2005)

BrianMc said:


> These  used the Fraen FRC Narrow. Beamshots included.


But no XML beamshots?


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

We're waiting on you Langen


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

langen said:


> But no XML beamshots?


Still waiting on a package from cutter to arrive


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Almost seems that if you have to use a 35mm optic on a single xm-l that you may as well use a triple xp-g on a cute. Would cost you about $6-7 more to build but it would be better than the xm-l for the most part.


----------



## equalme (Sep 8, 2010)

Toaster79 said:


> Still waiting on a package from cutter to arrive


Not sure when you ordered your items, but Cutter stopped shipments on 12/22/10 and will not resume until 1/10/11. FYI.



WeLight said:


> We shipped all orders up until 22nd, we have entered all orders up until today but wont start shipping until Monday. Sorry for the delay


----------



## langen (May 21, 2005)

emu26 said:


> We're waiting on you Langen


Will pick it up from the post office tomorrow


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

T6's also available from LED-TECH 6.90 euros each
http://www.led-tech.de/en/High-Powe...rie/CREE-XM-L-T6-Emitter-LT-1731_120_170.html


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

langen said:


> But no XML beamshots?


No, that was me thinking of them with XM-Ls, sorry.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

kan3 said:


> Almost seems that if you have to use a 35mm optic on a single xm-l that you may as well use a triple xp-g on a cute. Would cost you about $6-7 more to build but it would be better than the xm-l for the most part.


:nono: 
Why use 3 XPG when you can use 3 XM-L with the Cute XM 35mm optic?
http://www.ledil.com/datasheets/DataSheet_Cute-3-XM.pdf


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Goldigger said:


> :nono:
> Why use 3 XPG when you can use 3 XM-L with the Cute XM 35mm optic?
> http://www.ledil.com/datasheets/DataSheet_Cute-3-XM.pdf


That's not really comparable to what was said before. Both had a 35mm optic like you mention but the previous setups both were ~11watt setups. A triple xm-l is a 30+ watt setup. 
It would be the best choice for a 35mm setup obviously.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

kan3 said:


> That's not really comparable to what was said before. Both had a 35mm optic like you mention but the previous setups both were ~11watt setups. A triple xm-l is a 30+ watt setup.
> It would be the best choice for a 35mm setup obviously.


You dont have to run all 3 XML at 3amps..

3 XML at 1500ma = 550x3 = 1650 lumens
3 XPG at 1500ma = 463x3 = 1389 lumens

at 1 amp you dont get much gain with the 3 XML, only 120 lumens..

Personally i dont worry about how many watts a setup is


----------



## ortelius (Dec 6, 2007)

Goldigger said:


> You dont have to run all 3 XML at 3amps..
> 
> 3 XML at 1500ma = 550x3 = 1650 lumens
> 3 XPG at 1500ma = 463x3 = 1389 lumens


And beam pattern doesn't play any role in decision which led to use with which optics? It's not all in lumens, I'd say.

Do you think Cute triple with XML produces as good beam as with XPG? I wouldn't bet on it.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

ortelius said:


> And beam pattern doesn't play any role in decision which led to use with which optics? It's not all in lumens, I'd say.
> 
> Do you think Cute triple with XML produces as good beam as with XPG? I wouldn't bet on it.


Thanks for stating the obvious..
All depends on the beam quality and if you prefer flood beams or more throw.
Personally I like floody beams..

Anyone care to add a beam shot of a cute-3-xpg for the xpg's and cute-3-Xm for the Xml's, that's if anyone has the cute-3-xm optic yet?


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

Goldigger said:


> T6's also available from LED-TECH 6.90 euros each
> http://www.led-tech.de/en/High-Powe...rie/CREE-XM-L-T6-Emitter-LT-1731_120_170.html


Yes, but not on a PCB


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Goldigger said:


> Thanks for stating the obvious..
> All depends on the beam quality and if you prefer flood beams or more throw.
> Personally I like floody beams..
> 
> Anyone care to add a beam shot of a cute-3-xpg for the xpg's and cute-3-Xm for the Xml's, that's if anyone has the cute-3-xm optic yet?


Beam pattern matters as I have gotten used to the Liberators throw and flood so do like some of both in a light .
I did think about a Cute triple for a helmet but undecided on XPG -XPE - XML

I have the optics just havnt got around to trying them on the leds yet

Just started with a damn cold so might go and dribble in the garage to take my mind off it.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

JezV said:


> Yes, but not on a PCB


Never noticed that last night, still I need a bare emitter..
They will probably have them soon on pcb's


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

I question if the cute 3 xpg and cute 3 xml are the same optic?
I know the ledil drawings are the same, but I would assume that the openings for the leds should be different for two different size leds.
If they are the same then one will not be as efficient as it could be..


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Goldigger said:


> I question if the cute 3 xpg and cute 3 xml are the same optic?
> I know the ledil drawings are the same, but I would assume that the openings for the leds should be different for two different size leds.
> If they are the same then one will not be as efficient as it could be..


Not to imply anything bad against Ledil but they seem to do that a lot. When a new LED comes out they will test their optics/reflectors. If some seem to work well enough they'll move those over to that LED as well. The cute3 for the xp-g/xp-e and xm-l share the same product code of C1075x so they are the same optic. For the Cute-SS, the xp-e is rated at 5deg, the xp-g 8deg and the xm-l 9.5deg.

We should see the new lxp2 and lxp3 optics in the next couple of months according to them. These should hopefully be the best optics out for xp-g in it's size.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

kan3 said:


> Not to imply anything bad against Ledil but they seem to do that a lot. When a new LED comes out they will test their optics/reflectors. If some seem to work well enough they'll move those over to that LED as well. The cute3 for the xp-g/xp-e and xm-l share the same product code of C1075x so they are the same optic. For the Cute-SS, the xp-e is rated at 5deg, the xp-g 8deg and the xm-l 9.5deg.
> 
> We should see the new lxp2 and lxp3 optics in the next couple of months according to them. These should hopefully be the best optics out for xp-g in it's size.


I had a funny feeling that was the case.. so much for development of new optics

The cute 3 for that xre is different, maybe that will work better? Order code c4102


----------



## MtbMacgyver (Jan 23, 2007)

Goldigger said:


> Anyone care to add a beam shot of a cute-3-xpg for the xpg's and cute-3-Xm for the Xml's, that's if anyone has the cute-3-xm optic yet?


They are in post 23 in this thread XML Light Build


----------



## MtbMacgyver (Jan 23, 2007)

Goldigger said:


> You dont have to run all 3 XML at 3amps..
> 
> 3 XML at 1500ma = 550x3 = 1650 lumens
> 3 XPG at 1500ma = 463x3 = 1389 lumens
> ...


You're not taking into account the substantially lower thermal resistance of the XML over the XPG.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

MtbMacgyver said:


> You're not taking into account the substantially lower thermal resistance of the XML over the XPG.


Oh i have, just not expressed my thoughts.. driving the xpg at 1 amp or especially at 1.5amps wil certainly generate more heat id imagine than the xml at the same levels.

Any chance you could post some beam shots of the tripple XML at 1 and 1.5amps please?

You already have one of the xpg at 1amp..any chance of 1.5amp?

:thumbsup:

On the other hand im a lumen monster and will just settle for a bigger battery and drive the buggers at 3amps..


----------



## MtbMacgyver (Jan 23, 2007)

Goldigger said:


> Oh i have, just not expressed my thoughts.. driving the xpg at 1 amp or especially at 1.5amps wil certainly generate more heat id imagine than the xml at the same levels.


Well, I was talking specifically about the difference in lumens. Not about how much heat the light generates.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

second attempt at the comparison beamshots

First up the Quad XML/Regina @ 1300 ma 













































TRIPLE XPG CUTE SS @ 2800 MA  It changed colour pretty dramatically 









TRIPLE XML CUTE SS @ 2800 MA 









DOUBLE XML LAURA SS @ 2800


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Nice work Troutie, thanks for the beamshots..did you really pump the tripple xpg at 2800ma? 4th pic where you said they changed colour..
Hope you dont mind me doing this to the first 2 pics XPG and XML at 1300ma, but it helps see the difference 









Tripple XML at 2800:thumbsup:


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Dont mind at all .
yes the poor little blighters had a 10 second blast at 2.8 amps 
they are on a huge ali heatsink and a frosty morning so dont think they suffered much .

I like the Cute and 3 xmls .
but also like the double Laura / xml too .


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

The double laura is pretty good to, less spill and more throw..
I've done the same to both the double laura and cute 3 XML at 2800 pics
I like the extra spill the cute 3 gives, that way i can spot any pedo's lingering in the woods, stop and give them a kicking


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Nice can you do the same with the single CXP and Laura earlier in the thread .

Looks like a nice setup would be dual or single CXP or Laura on the helmet 
twinned with a cute triple on the bars


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> Nice can you do the same with the single CXP and Laura earlier in the thread .
> 
> Looks like a nice setup would be dual or single CXP or Laura on the helmet
> twinned with a cute triple on the bars


No problem..
single CXP RS + Laura RS









I ordered 5xXML from cutter over the weekend, am i meant to get an email confirming my order?
Wish i had ordered a cute 3, i wonder if i can get them to add it to my order?


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Thanks 

cutters wernt back at work till today iirc 

they will mail you when the order is entered in the system 
and again when it is shipped .


Farnell have the Cutes in stock that is where mine came from 
or was it RS


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> Thanks
> 
> cutters wernt back at work till today iirc
> 
> ...


If I'm not mistaken farnell charge £15 postage or some minimal order terms?
I was wondering if I could get cutters to just add one to my order so I don't have to pay shipping costs twice..

I think the laura out throws the cxp and has more spill.. that could be the helmet light for me..


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

Goldigger said:


> If I'm not mistaken farnell charge £15 postage or some minimal order terms?


Yes, £20 minimum order. That's a lot of optics.

Just on the phone to them now to find out where my order from 15 Dec is! Seems lost in transit somewhere.

EDIT: Very nice lady called Christine is re-sending my order today. Lets see if it gets here before my cables and connectors arrive from DX!

EDIT2: New order arrived yesterday, 24 hours after re-sending. Thanks Farnell, my faith is restored :thumbsup:


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Troutie, do you have 3 laura XP optics?
would be interested to see what 3 of them in parallel look like together..

Which ones are you using? xp rs?
http://www.ledil.com/datasheets/DataSheet_Laura-XP-G.pdf

Who's going to try a 7up XML


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Goldigger said:


> Troutie, do you have 3 laura XP optics?
> would be interested to see what 3 of them in parallel look like together..
> 
> Which ones are you using? xp rs?
> http://www.ledil.com/datasheets/DataSheet_Laura-XP-G.pdf


Yes I do have 3 will need to dismantle the triple test rig to liberate an XML 
that combi was on my mind .

Yes RS even though I put SS on the pics


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> Thanks
> 
> cutters wernt back at work till today iirc
> 
> ...


RS have the cutes but on back order for the SS 16/02/2011, cheap to.. 
1-4 £2.21
5-9 £1.81
10+£1.41
http://uk.rs-online.com/web/search/searchBrowseAction.html?method=getProduct&R=7107344

They have quiet a selection of optics now 
http://uk.rs-online.com/web/search/...955734+4294578056&multiselectParam=4294563051 4294955734&selectAttribute=Ledil#breadCrumb


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Their site reminds me of Mouser


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

I'm going to try 7up XML with this 7up optic for the MX6 
http://www.ledil.com/datasheets/DataSheet_MX6-7.pdf

Led holes are 4.9mm wide, cute-3 are 4.2 so the leds should fit, just not sure if the holes will be deep enough..


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Goldigger said:


> I'm going to try 7up XML with this 7up optic for the MX6
> http://www.ledil.com/datasheets/DataSheet_MX6-7.pdf
> 
> Led holes are 4.9mm wide, cute-3 are 4.2 so the leds should fit, just not sure if the holes will be deep enough..


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

That would be a fair light what battery would you like with that Sir ??

Heatpipe cooling maybe


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

Goldigger said:


> I'm going to try 7up XML with this 7up optic for the MX6
> http://www.ledil.com/datasheets/DataSheet_MX6-7.pdf
> 
> Led holes are 4.9mm wide, cute-3 are 4.2 so the leds should fit, just not sure if the holes will be deep enough..


You could also try the Polymer 7-up lens. I think it's made for a pretty big LED. I bought a couple but they won't fit over my driver board 7-up


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
> 
> That would be a fair light what battery would you like with that Sir ??
> 
> Heatpipe cooling maybe


I think i'll need a generator 
could always run the lot at 1.5amps but still need some hefty voltage


----------



## gticlay (Dec 13, 2007)

troutie-mtb said:


> :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
> 
> That would be a fair light what battery would you like with that Sir ??
> 
> Heatpipe cooling maybe


Wouldn't it run pretty cool and bright if you did it at more like 1.5 amps?


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

gticlay said:


> Wouldn't it run pretty cool and bright if you did it at more like 1.5 amps?


Great minds think alike..
I was looking at the datasheet and trying to work out what the junction temp would be at 1.5amp and 3amps. but my brain doesn't wnat to work today

Here's the real question, does driving one XML @ 3 amps outshine 2 @ 1.5amps? and which setup runs cooler?
We cant physically compare 7 XML's at 1.5amps to half driven @ 3 amps.
so lets call it [email protected] and [email protected]

figures from cree's product selector from post 48 using T6.
1 XML @ 1.5amps 3.1v = 550.8 lumens
1 XML @ 3amps 3.35v = 910.6

6 XML @ 1.5amps 18.6v = 3304.8 lumens
3 XML @ 3amps 9.3v = 2731.8 lumens

question is which one runs the hottest?

I was only joking when i said i was going to try 7up...now im doing the maths!!

Should be able to get enought 18650's in one of these


----------



## Whitedog1 (Feb 3, 2009)

Goldigger said:


> figures from cree's product selector from post 48 using T6.
> 1 XML @ 1.5amps 3.1v = 550.8 lumens
> 1 XML @ 3amps 3.35v = 910.6
> 
> ...


hope this helps


----------



## xyz-saft (Sep 23, 2010)

Since the first option puts out more light it should be more efficient meaning less losses i.e. heat. Am I right?


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

xyz-saft said:


> Since the first option puts out more light it should be more efficient meaning less losses i.e. heat. Am I right?


I would agree, if cooling isnt correct the hotter the leds get could result in lumen loss..

Might be in for a wait as it looks like my XML's might be on back order, i got a load of order status updates from cutter..


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Not too shabby a beam from a single XML and Ledil Rocket ss



















and for a comparison

top left Regina - top right Laura - bottom left Rocket - bottom right Iris


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

Thanks for beamshots, Troutie! 
IMO, Iris + Regina will be my next light.


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

Troutie, how did you manage to focus Iris to XML. Modding the holder, or using the optics without it?


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Postman bought me some xml's today..
I made a mistake getting the LC1 xre optic, the holder raise's the optic up so it sits on the xre's reflector..so you have about 2mm gap with a xml..
Still at £2.90 for two i'm dont care.
I trimmed off some of the holder with the mill, to get the xml sitting right in the opening of the optic you need to remove the 2mm of material. But it removes the hole that centers the led. 
I didnt get the LC1 for the XPG s i assumed the opening in the optic would be to small...not the case. The drawings on the datasheets are crap! and dont show the detail of the holders or the od of the opening in the optic.

Initially i wasnt that impressed with the beam, it seamed pretty soft. But the house isn't dark.
So i compared it to the tripple P7, it seems brighter than all 3 on level 3 @2amps.
Im driving the xml with a hipCC 2.8amps, I have the star mounted to a piece of ali that weighs approx 37 grams. It gets hot in about 4mins..

I think people wanting to drive these at 4amps are going to need to kiss skinny light weight housings goodbye..

Once i've got everything mounted nicely and grown another pair of hands ill take some beamshots..

If you want a small light 2xLC1 might make a nice little bar or helmet light. But i think the 20mm optics are not optimal for the XML, the 26mm seems to be the best so far in a small form factor..

I did try a 52mm P7 dx reflector, its quite difficult to get the led in the opening...
You get a tiny hotspot!!


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

I also tried one of athortons aspheric lens...interesting..
P60 reflector isnt to shabby either..


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Guys do you want to see one or two xml's with the lc1?
I've just trimmed the holder back and got it nicely placed on the led..
If you want to then i need to butcher the other holder..


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

just the one then we can see what it is like solo


----------



## natac (Jul 26, 2008)

Troutie,
I'm liking the look of the Laura, and the fact that it will fit neatly into a thin walled 1" square aluminum tube. Did you have to make any modifications to the Laura holder to get it to fit the XM-L?


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

natac said:


> Troutie,
> I'm liking the look of the Laura, and the fact that it will fit neatly into a thin walled 1" square aluminum tube. Did you have to make any modifications to the Laura holder to get it to fit the XM-L?


Yes the led hole needed opening out and also some trimming to clear the solder pads on the star but nothing too drastic










Toaster I used it without the holder and used a bit of bluetak to hold it on the test rig


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

Goldigger I agree with Troutie, just one. It also makes it easier to compare against other single optic pics.

Thanks for all the effort with the beam shots both of you. Chris that Iris looks so much "brighter" than the others but sometimes the camera can be a little misleading, was that your impression first hand?


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Right guys as promised..
Driver used HipCC 2800ma
*XML LC1*
















*Quazzle tripple XPG High*

















Heres the comparison gif's

















*The King of throw*
And for fun and dive lights using XML and Athorton Aspheric

This one a bloody car came at the vital moment!

















According to my phone its 5degrees outside, doing the aspheric shots, the heat sink got bloody hot and was burning my fingers..


----------



## Ofroad'bent (Jul 10, 2010)

Thanks Golddigger. Anybody compare an XM-L with a modified Regina against a Quazzle XP-E with triple optic? It's a better thrower than the Quazzle XP-G.

Trying to decide for a next build.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Giffs added to my beamshots for comparisons, just encase some of you missed them..


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

MMM not bad at all Nice ones Jay . the future is looking Bright with these optics that seem to work quite well with the XML .

Certainly puts the Carclo triple xpg in the shade 

so we have 

Regina modded to fit good throw but sharp edge cutoff 
Iris good throw good spill but huge .
Laura good throw good spill good size 
cxp slightly better throw but not as good spill 
LC1 good throw good spill 
Rocket good throw good spill but slightly larger and needs a fair bit of modding .

Cute 3 Good throw good spill insane light  

Seems like a good year for lights 2011 with the new offerings from George too .

Pics please of your dive light I have a mate wants me to build him one 
and got a few of those Aspherics kicking around .


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Yeah i was dubious when i lit the LC1 up in the house.. it's a very useable beam
2 or 3 of them would be cool

The only dive lights i have are the ones that i've bought or modded..nothing built from scratch...yet.
Depending on the diving your mate does will be the deciding factor as to what type of beam he will need.
If hes a uk diver like myself then it needs to be a tight beam with no or very little spill, aspherics give the tightest beam as you probably know.
The uk suffers from crap visibility, average 2-4meters! any beams with spill or to wide just illuminate the particals in the water, creating back scatter so you can't really see what your looking at..
If hes a tech diver, a tight beam is needed for signalling. we use the light to communicate to our buddy or team.
I use one of these as my main light..At 981 euros its not cheap, but its fantastic and rivals a 21w hid.
It has a focusable head, uses a SST-50 with an fresnel aspheric lense. 9ah battery


----------



## odtexas (Oct 2, 2008)

Goldigger said:


> *The King of throw*
> And for fun and dive lights using XML and Athorton Aspheric
> 
> This one a bloody car came at the vital moment!
> ...


Poor driver......... He probably thought aliens were coming for him.

Troutie did a good summary there on the optics.

Its always a good year for LEDs and building........:thumbsup:


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Right i had to try this for my own satisfaction..
2 XML's with LC1 2800ma
















compared to my tripple P7 with Boom SS 2800ma

















Here's the comparison gif's, sorry the file size is a bit large as i did them properly in photoshop. This way no colours or details are lost


















1XML vs 2XML LC1 2800ma


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Not sure if someone has already posted this, XML T6 1A available on DX
XMLAWT-0-1A0-T60-00-0001
1 $9.80
3+ $8.59
5+ $8.49
10+ $8.39

http://www.dealextreme.com/p/xmlawt-1000-lumen-led-emitter-white-light-bulb-3-0-3-5v-51989


----------



## xyz-saft (Sep 23, 2010)

It's been available for a few weeks now. What about 1A? Is it the colour? I.e. does it make any difference or should it be okay to order some?


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

xyz-saft said:


> It's been available for a few weeks now. What about 1A? Is it the colour? I.e. does it make any difference or should it be okay to order some?


1A is the bin, exactly the same ones as I've got.. 
Yes it it the colour tint..


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

Led-Tech now have XML T6's on 20mm stars

http://www.led-tech.de/en/High-Powe...XM-L-T6-auf-Star-LT-1734_120_170.html?nref=13


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

JezV said:


> Led-Tech now have XML T6's on 20mm stars
> 
> http://www.led-tech.de/en/High-Powe...XM-L-T6-auf-Star-LT-1734_120_170.html?nref=13


Thanks JezV. I can't see what binning the XM-Ls they are selling are, unless I've missed it?


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Has anybody tried a xml at 4amps yet? id like to know how many lumens difference there is between 3 and 4amps

Chris could you take one of your xml's with a h6flex to your friends for a lumen test? obviously if they are not charging you..


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Goldigger said:


> Has anybody tried a xml at 4amps yet? id like to know how many lumens difference there is between 3 and 4amps
> 
> Chris could you take one of your xml's with a h6flex to your friends for a lumen test? obviously if they are not charging you..


Yes a light will be going to the Lab soon probably a single with Regina .

Just read this on CPF

No real benefits to overdriving XML
I've done a little bit of testing with the XML, a bench power supply and an Extech HD450 Lux meter.

So far I've concluded that there appear to be no real benefits to driving an XML past 3A even with proper heatsinking for any length of time!

My heatsink is an Intel CPU heatsink with copper core designed for the Q6600 (95W CPU). The XML is Artic Alumina epoxied onto the copper heatsink.

At 3A in my lab room, I measure the ceiling bounce Lux @ 103 right when I turn on the LED. 5 minutes later I came back and the lux meter was reading 101 Lux. About a 2% drop in 5 minutes.

I then let the heatshink cool down for 5 minutes and started test #2:

At 4A in my lab room I measure a ceiling bounce Lux @ 101 when I cranked the LED to 4A, after 5 minutes, Lux had dropped to 91 Lux! A decrease of about 10%! I turned the current down to 3A and the Lux went up to 98 almost instantly!

Moral of the story. There appears to be no point in driving the XML much past 3A.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> Yes a light will be going to the Lab soon probably a single with Regina .
> 
> Just read this on CPF
> 
> ...


Thanks Chris..
The clarifys what i thought..driving the xml at 4 produces to much heat and the lumens drop off..
But would still be interested to see what the lab test is..


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

A nice guy sent me a packet full of stuff.. this morning it arrived..Thanks Gav :thumbsup: 
various optics and some drivers I've never seen before..
The driver on the right looks like a dx driver..










Im pretty sure this optic is a LXP2 G Tape..

















The holder is a pain in the ass, i opened up the hole to 5.5mm but there is no room for the solder lumps for the wires on the star, so they need to be cut out to

Without the holder you get a pretty good beam..
no beam shots at the moment as its day light..

I wonder what the 4up cute will look like..unfortunatly all my XM-L's are on 20mm stars!


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

Be interested in a beamshot of the LXP-RS with an XML if you can. I've got a pair I was planning to test with XPG's, as well as some LXP-SS's and I also ordered the medium version as well (got me up to Farnell's minimum order value!) although those were on back order and I have yet to see them. Mediums will probably be too floody anyway.

Anyway, I'm thinking of using XMLs instead of the XPGs I bought so interested to know which lens best for a bar light.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

JezV said:


> Be interested in a beamshot of the LXP-RS with an XML if you can. I've got a pair I was planning to test with XPG's, as well as some LXP-SS's and I also ordered the medium version as well (got me up to Farnell's minimum order value!) although those were on back order and I have yet to see them. Mediums will probably be too floody anyway.
> 
> Anyway, I'm thinking of using XMLs instead of the XPGs I bought so interested to know which lens best for a bar light.


I'll pop up the woods later on..
From what i can see from a ceiling shot, the LXP2 G RS looks a bit tighter than the LC1..


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

mfj197 said:


> Thanks JezV. I can't see what binning the XM-Ls they are selling are, unless I've missed it?


Umm, me neither


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

What's the difference between an LXP and CXP, other than one's square and the other's round? Is the same optic in a different form factor? Troutie did some good beamshots of the CXP somewhere earlier in this thread and they looked pretty good, but maybe not as good as the Laura

EDIT: Is there a round equivalent of a Laura?


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

From my messing about and now with the double I am coming to the conclusion that from the optics I have the CXP and Laura are the best and I think the CXP beats the Regina for throw , this is based on a couple of rides now with the quad xml / regina light and the double CXP/Laura on the lid .

I am toying with the idea of dismantling the Quad and using the leds to do a 3 XML with the square ledil holders so I can mix the optics easier 
Gut feeling for the bars would be 2 Laura`s and one CXP and I am making a helmet light as a present to my mate so that will be 2 CXPs .

Be interested to see the round equivalents beam shots .


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

JezV said:


> What's the difference between an LXP and CXP, other than one's square and the other's round? Is the same optic in a different form factor? Troutie did some good beamshots of the CXP somewhere earlier in this thread and they looked pretty good, but maybe not as good as the Laura
> 
> EDIT: Is there a round equivalent of a Laura?


I know this is not the answer to your question but here are the difference's between the LC1 for XRE and LXP2 G/E
LXP2 left LC1 right
the cental part of the optic is narrower in the LXP2








LXP2 has more of a curve from the front of the optic to the base. LXP2 is shorter, i dont have a digital vernier, but roughly LXP2 13.8mm vs LC1 14.2mm








Here you can see the OD of the base is narrower than the LC1


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> From my messing about and now with the double I am coming to the conclusion that from the optics I have the CXP and Laura are the best and I think the CXP beats the Regina for throw , this is based on a couple of rides now with the quad xml / regina light and the double CXP/Laura on the lid .
> 
> I am toying with the idea of dismantling the Quad and using the leds to do a 3 XML with the square ledil holders so I can mix the optics easier
> Gut feeling for the bars would be 2 Laura`s and one CXP *and I am making a helmet light as a present to my mate so that will be 2 CXPs .*Be interested to see the round equivalents beam shots .


Do you need my address?:thumbsup:


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Here's the beamshots of the LXP2
Driven with the usual hipCC @ 2800ma

















Here's the comparison gif of the LC1 vs the LXP2
sorry as they were taken on different nights, the angles are different


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Trouble here's another aspheric shot..this time using a 44mm DX aspheric
Worth considering if you make your mate a dive light, its a tighter beam than the athorton
Still my mb sub sst50 pees all over it


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

I've just noticed that the XML i used last night is missing its dome..
It was on there when i took the LXP2 shots, but i have a suspicion that once the led gets hot the domes are easier to knock off?
So i'm not sure if it was on there when i took the aspheric shots..as the XML still works..
Which i think lends it self better to aspherics...no 130 degree viewing angle anymore


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Wow GD. I wonder if it is stuck inside one of the optics.


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

so now you have to test a naked emitter with all those optics. Is it possible we'll see tighter beams?

Thanks in advance Goldigger


----------



## Kaitsu (Jun 12, 2006)

I got one XM-L for testing, glued it to al bar and connected everything. I was holding Iris on XM-L with fingers and with the other hand I switched hipFlex to 2.8 Amps and Wow for about two seconds. Then Iris slipped a little bit off center and the smoke came off.:madman: 








The smoke is not electric blue as usual, light is still on.

Now I have a modified Iris holder and must try the dome off method:









I wonder if the heat is going to be an issue with XM-L and lenses of very tight fit?


----------



## MtbMacgyver (Jan 23, 2007)

Kaitsu said:


> I got one XM-L for testing, glued it to al bar and connected everything. I was holding Iris on XM-L with fingers and with the other hand I switched hipFlex to 2.8 Amps and Wow for about two seconds. Then Iris slipped a little bit off center and the smoke came off.:madman:
> 
> The smoke is not electric blue as usual, light is still on.
> 
> ...


Something is wrong. None of my XMLs run that hot. Did you use a thermal epoxy to glue it to the bar? Is is a really really thin coat? If that were the problem the star MCPCB would be getting really hot ... not just the LED.

The thing that comes to mind is the thermal slug of the LED isn't soldered properly to the MCPCB. Where did the star come from? They may have done a really bad reflow solder job.

The only other possibility is your drive current isn't really 2.8 amps which seems unlikely since you're using a hipflex and that's the max current.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Goldigger said:


> Here's the beamshots of the LXP2
> Driven with the usual hipCC @ 2800ma
> 
> 
> ...


I can confirm that the images of the LXP2 are all a domeless XM-L, dont know why but without the dome the camera pics the light up as more green than white.
I cant notice it with my eyes...

I've taken these two shots tonight..
De-domed XM-L 2800ma








Domed XML 2800ma


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

de-domed pics look like the spots smaller but also less bright. Not sure if the difference in brightness is somehow tied to the change in hue though.


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

mattthemuppet said:


> de-domed pics look like the spots smaller but also less bright. Not sure if the difference in brightness is somehow tied to the change in hue though.


+1 but if you look at the pics above it doesn't appear to have lost any of its throw and from memory Goldigger commented that the colour change was perceptible to his eye. This may be a good way to get a tighter beam pattern for those prepared to try and take the dome off.

It would be interesting to see results from a lux test to see if there is any loss of output.


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

*Goldigger*, *Troutie* - what optics would you recommend for double XML bar light?
More flooder, but with some throw too :skep:


----------



## heniekkrol (Jan 26, 2010)

I'd also like to hear yours opinion about optics for 2x XM-L setup. I thought about EVA-D ( throw ) + EVA-WW (flood )


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

I've been messing around with some MCE Boom SS reflectors and the XML. I think they would work really well as a floody bar light with a bit of throw.
The beam is very even. All fill with no hot spot.
Would compliment a dual regina helmet setup very nicely.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

klynk said:


> *Goldigger*, *Troutie* - what optics would you recommend for double XML bar light?
> More flooder, but with some throw too :skep:


Depends on the size of the housing..

But i'll let the cat out the bag.. a double xm-l with LC1 optics is in process in the Goldigger house...
I find that combo really useable.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

klynk said:


> *Goldigger*, *Troutie* - what optics would you recommend for double XML bar light?
> More flooder, but with some throw too :skep:


well its no secret I like the Laura a lot and have ordered a couple of Laura D `s to put one with a RS .

what is good is we are finding workable existing optics before the bespoke ones come out from the manufacturers.

I see Ledil are ever changing their stuff :thumbsup:

what is this one 
looks interesting like the flange for mounting purposes









 :yikes: And what about Sandra  
you could run 4 strings of 3 XPGs from a H6flex at 6 amps and they would still get 1.5 amps 5500 lums


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

Thanx for your opinion, next week I'll do some shopping.


----------



## harman92 (Jun 2, 2010)

Troutie-mtb: Did you receive my e-mail (contact form on your site), as I know you had some problems with e-mails that didn't come through. 

Yoshie


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

I was wondering about a pair of Iris's. 

Yes, they're big at 38mm but from the beamshots they look pretty efficient. The interesting bit is that if you use 20mm stars then there's enough space between them to fit an Lflex and still space for switches and cables. The case would then be quite wide and tall, but doesn't need to be more than about 35mm deep. So you could end up with a usable 1800 lumen bar light driven at 3A off a 7.4v battery and lots of area for cooling. Should be relatively inexpensive (although the Iris's aren't cheap)


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

Anyways, using Iris means no holder, so u are at about 35 mm, but still you can remove the flange from the optic so you end up at about 32mm. I'm still working on this one for a helmet light. The depth should be around 30mm for the star and the optic including cover glass. As soon as I get some connectors and switches I'll start on the housing and report. The OD should be about 35 -.5mm and length at about 50-55mm with the back cover.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

emu26 said:


> +1 but if you look at the pics above it doesn't appear to have lost any of its throw and from memory Goldigger commented that the colour change was perceptible to his eye. This may be a good way to get a tighter beam pattern for those prepared to try and take the dome off.
> 
> It would be interesting to see results from a lux test to see if there is any loss of output.


As i dont have a lux test this is the best i can come up with at the moment.
Left domed - right de-domed








De-domed








Domed


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

Toaster79 said:


> Anyways, using Iris means no holder, so u are at about 35 mm, but still you can remove the flange from the optic so you end up at about 32mm. I'm still working on this one for a helmet light. The depth should be around 30mm for the star and the optic including cover glass. As soon as I get some connectors and switches I'll start on the housing and report. The OD should be about 35 -.5mm and length at about 50-55mm with the back cover.


Useful. Thanks for the data :thumbsup:


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

heniekkrol said:


> I'd also like to hear yours opinion about optics for 2x XM-L setup. I thought about EVA-D ( throw ) + EVA-WW (flood )


Making some progress on getting the test bed fired up with an H6Flex to test the Eva D, Iris, Regina, CMC RS, & 28 mm aspheric with the XM-L. Too much snow right now for outdoor shots to tell us much and the wall shots have been done for all but the last two. More snow on the way, too.


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

*Goldigger*
De-domed XML looks closer to neutral white, am I right?


----------



## OldMTBfreak (Apr 8, 2006)

I also have been wondering about a pair of Iris'es with the XML. Tests with 1 Iris looked good. I made a up a light with two XMLs with modded Reginas (overdriven at 3800mA). It vastly outperformed the light with two overdriven MCE's with Fraen narrow reflectors. I have the triple XML on order from Cutters, with the Cute3 optic, this should be the bomb. I shouldn't have to drive it too hard for LOTS of light. Let the chips hit the floor! James


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

harman92 said:


> Troutie-mtb: Did you receive my e-mail (contact form on your site), as I know you had some problems with e-mails that didn't come through.
> 
> Yoshie


Hi Yoshie and first post I see Welcome .

I am as you say having a few mail issues but I think they are sorted now (hopefully)

reply on its way .


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

That's what the Iris with 32mm OD turns out to look like









Had to do it, since I have got 35mm OD aluminum bar and the ID of the light head will be 32mm.


----------



## brad72 (Jun 12, 2009)

My xml's and optics arrived today so time to fire up the mill or lathe and make some housings. 

I've got some Ledil rocket MR16 triple's, Cutter MR11 triple's, Fraen Reflector and some ledil CRS optics to test. 

To go with all that I'm going to make up a 8 up XPG with Regina optics for my brothers Quad Bike. Should punch out a reasonable amount of light


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Has anybody tried leaving the holders of the leds and putting them into their lights?
I have a theory that they stop the light escaping out the sides, so when taking a beamshot of a optic on the led without the holder it looses some of its brightness.

So how much difference is there once the optic is placed inside a light housing without the holder?
Does the reflective nature of machined ali have an effect? maybe painting the cavity where the leds are matt black may be better?
The problem for me is that the holders add a couple of mm's so may not fit into any housing's that you may wich to upgrade.

There is also the problem of getting the optic centered over the led leaving the holder off.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Goldigger said:


> Has anybody tried leaving the holders of the leds and putting them into their lights?
> I have a theory that they stop the light escaping out the sides, so when taking a beamshot of a optic on the led without the holder it looses some of its brightness.
> 
> So how much difference is there once the optic is placed inside a light housing without the holder?
> ...


Totally opposite of my feelings there probably doesnt make any difference what light escapes the TIR of the optic is not going back in to enhance the beam 
best liberating it and having it as spill .

the holders for me are a hindrance in the way of the solder pads and as you say make the optic bigger .

centering the led and optic is not too bad


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> Totally opposite of my feelings there  probably doesnt make any difference what light escapes the TIR of the optic is not going back in to enhance the beam
> best liberating it and having it as spill .
> 
> the holders for me are a hindrance in the way of the solder pads and as you say make the optic bigger .
> ...


Ok maybe your right.. there is little difference between these
LC1 with holder








LC1 without holder








Gif..


----------



## Itess (Feb 22, 2009)

Toaster79 said:


> That's what the Iris with 32mm OD turns out to look like
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How the lens was held being cut?


----------



## brad72 (Jun 12, 2009)

Well i set up a test rig last night and had a fiddle with the optics.

To my surprise the Ledil CRS Oval optic for XRE produced a fantastic beam pattern with a single xml on 2800mA throwing out a phenomenal amount of light. Helmet or bar it would be great. I'll post some beamshots soon but there was no wasted light up in the tress, just a wide, narrow intense beam of light. The CRS spot was a little disappointing compared to the the oval .

I'll report on the triple optics when I get some alloy machined up


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

I had a play around with Ovals and the XREs so should have those optics somewhere to try.

The Quad had to go in the interest of science and I didn't like the 4 Reginas too much 
so built up a triple with Laura's RS in for a compare agains the Cute triple .


















Its a close run thing with not much difference in the photos .
I rode with the cute triple this morning and the triple Laura tonight .

the Cute is quite floody and a great light but my preference goes to the narrower farther throw of the Lauras

but I can see some liking the Cutes beam more for the wider spill .
and easier to build a light from .

with either light when you hit max it is jaw dropping I rode with either light on level 3 most of the time and that was wow and only pulling 440 MA from the battery as opposed to 2100 ma on max .


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> I had a play around with Ovals and the XREs so should have those optics somewhere to try.
> 
> The Quad had to go in the interest of science and I didn't like the 4 Reginas too much
> so built up a triple with Laura's RS in for a compare agains the Cute triple .
> ...


Looks to me the cute has more throw..the tree to the right of the telegraph pole is more visible.

edit.. ok just compared them on my laptop..its the angle they are both pointing..laura has a tighter beam with a bit more throw.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Goldigger said:


> Looks to me the cute has more throw..the tree to the right of the telegraph pole is more visible.
> 
> edit.. ok just compared them on my laptop..its the angle they are both pointing..laura has a tighter beam with a bit more throw.


Difficult to see on the pics the Cute most certainly has a wider beam with good sideways and close up spill but down the tow path it sort of stops going we are talking a good distance though and it will be a popular build I think.

but for me the Laura`s ( and I am sorry to keep banging on about them ) whilst not as good spill they have enough but it is the long range I like about them I could see way further into the gloom and could spot the rabbits at a greater range .

I rode for 4 miles on the flat towpath on max just thinking Wow these XMLs are great .

Sorry no pics of the Triple Laura its not pretty


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

troutie-mtb said:


>


I'd definitely say the Cute has more spill - you can see that dog, which is hidden in the first pic 

I've ordered a couple of Lauras from Newark in the US - reasonable price but excessive shipping ($4 for the optics, $6 for the shipping!). Hopefully they'll be worth it, though I may be pairing one with a CXP-RS or Boom SS for some more spill, if the 2 Lauras aren't floody enough (it's for a bar light)


----------



## brad72 (Jun 12, 2009)

These beam shots are of a single XML driven at 2800mA using a Ledil CRS oval optic designed for the XRE with adhesive backing to stick it to the star board. Since the XRE led's dome height is 1.4mm higher than the xml I am going to modify one of the CRS holders and see how that affects the beam shape.

The 1st image is with the oval horizontally orientated to the ground. The secound picture is with the optic turned 90º. You can clearly see from the 2nd picture that no light is wasted giving just a bar of light. To be honest for 1 led it is amazingly bright with a very good beam


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

brad72 said:


> These beam shots are of a single XML driven at 2800mA using a Ledil CRS oval optic designed for the XRE with adhesive backing to stick it to the star board. Since the XRE led's dome height is 1.4mm higher than the xml I am going to modify one of the CRS holders and see how that affects the beam shape.
> 
> The 1st image is with the oval horizontally orientated to the ground. The secound picture is with the optic turned 90º. You can clearly see from the 2nd picture that no light is wasted giving just a bar of light. To be honest for 1 led it is amazingly bright with a very good beam


Thanks Brad. Could be a good lens for a road light as there should be a lot less glare for oncoming vehicles.

Have you tried it in woodland at all? I wonder if the lack of vertical light spread is a benefit or disadvantage in other conditions.


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

Thanks brad72, looks very interesting. For it to be even better as a road light it would have a gradual fall-off in power to the feet whilst retaining the sharp cut-off above the horizon. I've just noticed Ledil's Strada DN lenses which do pretty much that - anybody tried them? Here's a link.


----------



## piesoup (Feb 9, 2009)

Thanks for the pictures Brad. I like them both really, need to make something to rotate the Oval on the fly!


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

piesoup said:


> Thanks for the pictures Brad. I like them both really, need to make something to rotate the Oval on the fly!


RC servo & rf control? Could helmet mount then. Water tightness might be a trick to pull off, may have to settle for water resistant.

If a bar light to give wide and close on trail, you change over at either end, then it could be manual.

mfj: the strada looks to me like it has a bit too strong a spill to be road friendly. The vertical oval beam with a narrow thrower on the helmet to pick up where the oval is fading out would be an easy setup and two XM-Ls would give enough on half power for a lot of riders on a lot of different roads.

If I don't like the road worthiness of both lenses in what I am building I may try that lens.


----------



## Itess (Feb 22, 2009)

piesoup said:


> Thanks for the pictures Brad. I like them both really, need to make something to rotate the Oval on the fly!


Just use two! One horizontal and one vertical


----------



## bravellir (Nov 24, 2008)

nah.. just one and make it spin really fast


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

BrianMc, I've seen you posting on CPF and seem to have done some thinking on road lights. In your opinion, would the narrow vertical beam be less offensive to other road users than the flat, wide beam? At the moment I use my mtb lights for commuting but am aware that if I build, say, a triple XML cute it'll be fearsome for other road users and I will likely need a separate roadie light.


----------



## HEY HEY ITS HENDO (Feb 23, 2008)

you *WILL* need a separate light for road use,
you can easily check by riding/driving towards your own light,
even dim led lights are unbelievably bright/blinding in the pitch black darkness, in fact you can see a single flashing 5mm led for miles,
on road i only use my 6s/nFlex on the lowest 50ma setting and/or with a blinkie
...........or, consider some sort of `dipping` cut off mechanism?


----------



## brad72 (Jun 12, 2009)

JezV said:


> BrianMc, I've seen you posting on CPF and seem to have done some thinking on road lights. In your opinion, would the narrow vertical beam be less offensive to other road users than the flat, wide beam? At the moment I use my mtb lights for commuting but am aware that if I build, say, a triple XML cute it'll be fearsome for other road users and I will likely need a separate roadie light.


I ride both road and mountain so I'll do test in the next few days comparing the glare to oncoming traffic from an XPG 7up medium @ 1300mA, XPE triple narrow @750mA, XML single oval @ 2800ma, XML triple MR11 narrow @ 2000mA and lastly a single XPG regina @ 1400mA. This should cover most of the lights we use.

At present all my lights have a momentary thumb switch enabling me to quickly change from high when you meet oncoming traffic, just like you would in your car. Seems to work well with no one flashing me for some time. On the road I always find myself using full power as the the bitumen soaks up the light, especially when wet.

Regarding the XML with the XRE narrow optic I'l make a housing in the next few days and take is out on the road. I think the 10 meter wide beam with little top and bottom spill will be excellent especially when pedaling out of the saddle when the bars are moving from side to side. I'll report back after the test.

Brad


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

Firstly am I allowed here, as I don't really ride mountain at all? :eekster: But this is a very good forum for DIY bike lights!

With the advent of more and more powerful emitters the issue of reducing glare to other road users is becoming more of an issue. Not only that, but also it is more efficient to put the emitted light down on the road where it is useful rather than shine it up into the sky. The lights are now powerful enough to usefully see by, rather than the weedy things of past which were only good for being seen. Even a single P7 emitter is pushing the boundary of what's acceptable on the road if it is not controlled properly. However as brad72 says, in the wet you really do need a lot of light hitting the road surface, especially if there are commuter cars all around adding to the glare.

My XM-L turned up today so I'll be able to join the playtime. I've been trying a couple of things with an incandescent reflector cut in half and the LED firing down (or up) into it, to provide a dipped headlight sort of effect. Much work to go, but now I'll be able to try proper outdoor tests.


----------



## dara (Feb 11, 2011)

How long would a 14.4v 3.3 ah battery last driving 3 xmls at 2800 milliamps? I had worked it out at about 100 minutes but I'm new to this so I'm not sure. Any suggestions would be much appreciated. I ordered three xmls and a 2800 buck driver but I think I may order a 1400 buck and use it instead.


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

dara said:


> How long would a 14.4v 3.3 ah battery last driving 3 xmls at 2800 milliamps? I had worked it out at about 100 minutes but I'm new to this so I'm not sure. Any suggestions would be much appreciated. I ordered three xmls and a 2800 buck driver but I think I may order a 1400 buck and use it instead.


dara, I don't think you're far off. Each XM-L has approximately a 3.3v forward voltage, so 3 of them is 9.9v * 2.8 amps = 27.7 watts of power. Assuming the driver is 90% efficient, that's 30.8 watts drawn from the batteries. Your batteries have 14.4 * 3.3 = 47.5 watt hours of power, so 47.5 / 30.8 = 1.54 hours, or just over 90 minutes.


----------



## dara (Feb 11, 2011)

Cheers for the reply. I might try and integrate both drivers into the housing and switch between them. I have been using a magic shine light up to now so I'm very excited to see how the triple xml set up will compare.


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

Or get a single switchable driver?


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

mfj197 said:


> Firstly am I allowed here, as I don't really ride mountain at all? :eekster: But this is a very good forum for DIY bike lights!


Of course, you are very welcome. Never know, we might convert you .

My main interest is mountain but I commute on the road too so I've a foot in both camps. Frankly, if it's got wheels and pedals it's good to me.



mfj19 said:


> My XM-L turned up today so I'll be able to join the playtime. I've been trying a couple of things with an incandescent reflector cut in half and the LED firing down (or up) into it, to provide a dipped headlight sort of effect. Much work to go, but now I'll be able to try proper outdoor tests.


Sounds an interesting experiment. Keep us informed of what you find, good or bad :thumbsup:


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

mfj197 welcome.

did you see this thread by Pepko? Overkill for what you are talking about but the ideas and implementation in it may be of interest to you. He has used a mirror to reflect the output from the leds in a very controlled "low beam" for use on road.

Well worth the read.


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

Itess said:


> How the lens was held being cut?


Cut? :nono: The flange was filed off and the rest was sanded with a piece of sandpaper attached on a right angled piece of wood. The optics was held down with two fingers which still hurt


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

JezV said:


> .... In your opinion, would the narrow vertical beam be less offensive to other road users than the flat, wide beam?... .


So many factors.

As a general rule I agree that the best setup for the road will not be satisfactory on the trail, and the best trail is excessively antisocial. Share the road goes both ways.

If it is as easy as a vertically oriented oval why aren't there commercial lights like that? A prior lack of LEDs like the XM-L may be a factor, but maybe they falt-out won't work. AKAIK there aren't any commercial lights like that. Makes me suspicious. If I already had that lens, though or if my SWAG at a design does not pan out, I'd be tempted to check it out.


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

Thanks JezV and emu26! I have seen Pepko's light( over on CPF I think), but whilst it is great craftsmanship it's not the perfect light for me. The low beam has too much spill (it's all spill, although of course cut off above the horizon) and doesn't throw enough. My commute after dark takes me along a fast, undulating road with quick traffic, with a very poor road surface to the sides. When it's wet, with car headlights breaching the horizon, it's very difficult to see the road surface when riding at any sort of speed.

I don't think a vertical oval lens would work too well as if it is aimed near the vertical you'd still be wasting light above the horizon, and if aimed lower then there is both some loss of far sight (throw just under the horizon) and a bright spot closer to the front wheel meaning you don't see what's in the shadows. Have been contemplating an ellipsoid reflector and aspheric (a la projector headlight) but think a half-parabola might be easier.


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

mfj this is sounding very interesting and worthy of a thread of its own.

Please start one up so we can follow the build, and the results, without the general xml discussions that will continue to take place in this thread.

FTR I think the problem you will have is to get a LED with the sort of throw you are talking about, it is going to be very difficult to control the beam so it doesn't blind the oncoming traffic. Good luck


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

Yes, good point emu26. My enthusiasm for the issue got the better of me! My apologies, back to the XM-L for this thread (which I will be watching with interest).


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

Don't apologise, its all relevant to this thread but I think your project warrants a thread of its own.

should be very interesting to follow


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Looks like a dual led system might work.. one side with an aspheric focused to give a wider beam but still throw.
And the other side a setup for spill.


----------



## cagliari (Aug 9, 2010)

XML's & 6 various optics turned up on Friday Test rig sorted out over W/E and went to shoot some beam shots last night. 2 lenses were so bad didn't bother with photos. The other 4 seem to offer a mixed bag but all look okay.
Maybe not the best location, but....
First up is XPG R5 @ 1A
http://forums.mtbr.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=597722&stc=1&d=1297810657

The next 4 shots are all XML T6 @ 2.4A 
Think I know which I prefer but,
Which would you have?  
1
http://forums.mtbr.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=597723&stc=1&d=1297810657
2
http://forums.mtbr.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=597724&stc=1&d=1297810657
3
http://forums.mtbr.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=597725&stc=1&d=1297810657
4
http://forums.mtbr.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=597726&stc=1&d=1297810657
All shots Daylight ISO100 4" @ F4
Cheers guys.


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

Would you mind adding lens types to the photos, so we know, which beam belongs to which lens?


----------



## HEY HEY ITS HENDO (Feb 23, 2008)

no. 5
..


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

*cagliari*
Nice beamshots, but we want names of that anonimous optics


----------



## Whitedog1 (Feb 3, 2009)

seems like no. 1 is the spottest and no. 5 has the smoothest beam....

therefore i would combine them in a dual setup!!


----------



## cagliari (Aug 9, 2010)

Toaster79 said:


> Would you mind adding lens types to the photos, so we know, which beam belongs to which lens?


Hi toaster
sorry, didn't put any optic info on as a bit of a tease and so all opinions would be objective. A bit cruel I know but one beam was quite a suprise to me and I wanted to get an unbiased view !! Will add info later along with a daytime shot of location.
This was the first time I have added any pics to a post and I seem to have added links & the photos!!! Not sure what happened, will try harder next time
Cheers


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

...And "Album of the Year" award goes to Unknown Artist with Unknown Album! :drumroll:


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

Am thinking two lights plus helmet thrower, so #2 as is # 5 aimed lower and closer.


----------



## Ofroad'bent (Jul 10, 2010)

What's the Official DIY favourite XML emitter now, and where do we get it from in decent time? T6 from Cutter, I presume, or are there U2s yet?

I got some 1" square Al and my Mattthemuppet-style Sled Housing is taking shape. My Reginas, switch and battery holders arrived, but no sign of my Dealxtreme emitter or batteries yet of course, and I'm not confident about the bin either.

Awaiting the name of the mystery lenses from Caligari's testing. I like the thrower #1 (First XM-L, not the XP-G)


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

kaidomain is a bit cheaper because of the free shipping and discounts starting at quantity 3 instead of 10 like cutter.


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

I ordered a bunch of stuff from KD and DX about 4 weeks ago.
DX has not even started packing my order.
KD has sent it out, but it hasn't left china yet. Been stuck in their post for a couple weeks.
I've ordered twice from cutter since then, and have received both packages.
In fact, the first one I got less than 9 days after ordering, and the most recent one I got in about 5-6 days after order.
I ordered 12 XML, and a couple other little things. I guess one of the things I ordered qualified for free shipping after $99, so I didn't have to pay shipping. The fact that it went half way around the world in about 5 days on free shipping was amazing.
Great job Cutter!!!!
I think I am pretty much done ordering my LEDs from DX and KD.
Even if you have to pay shipping at Cutter, it arriving in a timely manner is totally worth it.
I guess if it doesn't matter when the stuff arrives, KD and DX are OK, as long as you are willing to wait who knows how long.
It is possible that by the time your stuff shows up, the new technology will be out on the streets, and you have to go through it all over again.


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Cutter has always gotten me my stuff under 2 weeks. Usually takes about 12 days on average. Kaidomain has been decent for me as well. I just ordered 40 xp-g and got them in 14 days. Deals extreme is horrible and usually takes 4 weeks or more. I won't even suggest them anymore, even if their prices happen to be cheaper...which they haven't lately.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

I got my T6 XM-Ls from KD and they arrived in ~3wks. I wasn't in a rush, so the wait wasn't a problem. DX I've gone off of quite a bit, although I think the problems over Xmas lay more with China Post than DX itself. I looked at Cutters, but the postage charge took it to ~$40 compared with $25 from KD.


----------



## cagliari (Aug 9, 2010)

Hi Guys
thanks for the input. 
The results of todays quiz are:drumroll: :drumroll: 
http://forums.mhttp://forums.mtbr.c...nt.php?attachmentid=597855&stc=1&d=1297874041
it's the DX one that threw me!!
LED's & optics (not DX) came from led-tech Germany. 4 days. Not sure what bin they are but not too blue or green slightly bluey/creamy white. Suit me:thumbsup: 
Let the discussions begin


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

How compressed are those jpegs?


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

Maybe I'm wrong, but XPG @ 1A must give more light.
XPG R5 @ 1A gives 350-370 lm; XML @ 2,4A is about 700 lm.
On the photos XPG looks like total [email protected], XML is minimum 3 times brighter.


----------



## cagliari (Aug 9, 2010)

kan3 said:


> How compressed are those jpegs?


kan3
my camera doesn't take pics in raw format so as far as I know the jpegs have the original compression which I thought was a fixed standard! Maybe it's not.
Not sure if this is what you mean?


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Cameras usually have a few settings, "fine" being the best in most cases. If you used some software to shrink the pictures then you get some more. MS Paint sits around 75% quality. I was just curious because some the details looked pixelated but it could be me. Could you link some 800x600 pics? =]


----------



## cagliari (Aug 9, 2010)

klynk said:


> Maybe I'm wrong, but XPG @ 1A must give more light.
> XPG R5 @ 1A gives 350-370 lm; XML @ 2,4A is about 700 lm.
> On the photos XPG looks like total [email protected], XML is minimum 3 times brighter.


Hi klynk
not sure the XPG looks total crap but sure it does look a little bit dark.
The light has 3 output levels sooo it may have been set low or med. But pretty sure not.
Only one to find out....another nocturnal outing!
Cheers


----------



## cagliari (Aug 9, 2010)

kan3 said:


> Cameras usually have a few settings, "fine" being the best in most cases. If you used some software to shrink the pictures then you get some more. MS Paint sits around 75% quality. I was just curious because some the details looked pixelated but it could be me. Could you link some 800x600 pics? =]


Right think I see. Pics were in fine not superfine but only took them @ 2M pixels, that could be why they look a bit pixelated. Also I resized them with MS picture manager. Maybe this makes things worse?


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

Cagliari are you using the LXP with or without the holder? Is this the XPE optic or any other type of it?

I'm just curious, because after some ceiling bounce test, I decided for the same type of optic, comparing to LM1, Boom SS, Polymer 186/147 and Fraen Medium.


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

cagliari said:


> Hi klynk
> not sure the XPG looks total crap but sure it does look a little bit dark


Thnx. Of course it's not - I use double XPG-Regina combo and it's very bright and wide - that's why I'm curious. So, maybe LXP+XPG optics is [email protected]


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

none of the beams are bad at all 
which optics were the 2 you discarded for future ref


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

cagliari said:


> Right think I see. Pics were in fine not superfine but only took them @ 2M pixels, that could be why they look a bit pixelated. Also I resized them with MS picture manager. Maybe this makes things worse?


Cagliari, don't worry about that. Fine / Superfine won't make a blind bit of difference when posted here, and MS Picture Manager has compressed them significantly more. 2 megapixels is also fine, especially as they are posted here at 640 x 480 pixels (which is 0.3 megapixels). They are perfectly acceptable to gauge beamshots - good work.

As troutie said, which were the 2 optics you didn't think were worth photographing? Will be useful information.


----------



## cagliari (Aug 9, 2010)

Toaster79 said:


> Cagliari are you using the LXP with or without the holder? Is this the XPE optic or any other type of it?
> 
> I'm just curious, because after some ceiling bounce test, I decided for the same type of optic, comparing to LM1, Boom SS, Polymer 186/147 and Fraen Medium.


Hi Toaster,
the optic info on the led-tech site says ledil LXP 10deg for XPC, XPE & XPG ! hope this links to the lens in question!
https://www.led-tech.de/images/products/resized/LT-1561-1254410604.jpg

pic was without the holder, still find it such a faff with their holders & solder pads. There must be a better way to fit them than butcher half the holder!!!!
Hope this helps.


----------



## Itess (Feb 22, 2009)

klynk said:


> So, maybe LXP+XPG optics is [email protected]


No, it's not. But there's no mention what exactly LXP optics was that, there's no "6 deg" LXP. LXP-RS is a very good optics for XPG.


----------



## cagliari (Aug 9, 2010)

mfj197 said:


> Cagliari, don't worry about that. Fine / Superfine won't make a blind bit of difference when posted here, and MS Picture Manager has compressed them significantly more. 2 megapixels is also fine, especially as they are posted here at 640 x 480 pixels (which is 0.3 megapixels). They are perfectly acceptable to gauge beamshots - good work.
> 
> As troutie said, which were the 2 optics you didn't think were worth photographing? Will be useful information.


mfj197
cheers for the photo info:thumbsup: I thought the res on the site would be low so thats why I didn't bother with any mega large pic files.
As for the 2 lenses I didn't bother with, and should have mentioned, they were just a couple I thought I would try just incase I stumbled on something great, and didn't! Both Carclo
20mm. 1- 13deg for XR/E/C led-tech no.10199 2- 6deg for XL led-tech no.10003.
Thanks again for the info & +ve feedback.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Cheers for that Cagliari I have been wondering about the carclo stuff .

been playing with the new camera and as I had the single led set up for a heat test this was the next curious experiment .

how the heat effects the lumens a non scientific test but with the camera on full manual 
and a consistent cloudy day .
set it up and I did take a pic every 10 degrees c but when I did a slideshow it was not great so condensed it to 3 shots 25 degrees / 70 degrees / 100 degrees


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Hard for me to tell a difference but I think that flashing transition is messing with me. I'm trying to stare at a single point near the perimeter of the image and the flash removes my reference. Did you feel you could tell a difference in person?


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

kan3 said:


> Hard for me to tell a difference but I think that flashing transition is messing with me. I'm trying to stare at a single point near the perimeter of the image and the flash removes my reference. Did you feel you could tell a difference in person?


Yes I would have like to do the picture and hover mouse to change method but dont know how .
I dont realy like the quick change of these slide show things


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Here we go and thanks to Odtexas for doing the gifs

this gives a way better impression of why it pays to keep the leds nice and cool


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

Wow. That's quite a difference.

You do think up some interesting experiments Chris :thumbsup:


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

Cagliari, was the 18mm DX reflector you used this one? Interesting if it is, as that is apparently the same reflector as in the little Akoray K-106 I currently use as a helmet light. May be a good mod as a beacon with an XM-L, the right driver and a suitable heatsink, such as this one.

The XM-L seems to be performing pretty well with these small optics?


----------



## cagliari (Aug 9, 2010)

mfj197 said:


> Cagliari, was the 18mm DX reflector you used this one? Interesting if it is, as that is apparently the same reflector as in the little Akoray K-106 I currently use as a helmet light. May be a good mod as a beacon with an XM-L, the right driver and a suitable heatsink, such as this one.
> 
> The XM-L seems to be performing pretty well with these small optics?


mfj197
that's the one:thumbsup: got these to mod a very spotty torch I had. Had some left over so gave it a go with the XML. No mod needed, just make sure you don't short anything out as the reflector is metal!!!!
Cheers


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

*random beamshots*

some comparison beamshots to try and put the XMLs in perspective to a few other lights 
so not all shots are xmls .

thought I would experiment with shots over water so the foreground doesnt burn out the pic .
they are all pretty close on the lumen count I think

194 LIBERATOR 3 @ 1 AMP









195 7 UP @ 1 AMP 









196 DUAL XML - LAURA @ 3 AMPS









197 DUAL XML - REGINA @ 3 AMPS









198 7 UP WITH ASPHERICS @ 1 AMP


----------



## equalme (Sep 8, 2010)

All pictures are shot with ISO 80, F4, 6 sec shutter, and daylight WB.

Setup: XML (Bin 2S), 2x CXP-RS and 1x Laura RS, b2Flex @ 1.5A, and 4S1P Li-Ion.

XML-Control









XML-Low









XML-Med









XML-Hi


----------



## brad72 (Jun 12, 2009)

Nice work Anthony. The XML on full power is a weapon. The poor homeless men would of crapped themselves and deviants run for the hills.


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

Wow, that looks a lot of light from 3 LEDs and 'only' 1.5A


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

I gotta say, I actually quite like the XM-L + Regina. Going from the pics you posted above Troutie, it looks like it slightly out throws the Laura, which seems to go against your experiences with it. Consequence of the setting perhaps?

I tried my upgraded helmet light last night (1 XP-G, 1 XM-L, both with Reginas) and the spot was noticeably wider with more spill, but without losing any throw (that I could tell anyway). I'm thinking of trying Laura+Regina and CXP-RS+Regina for my twin XM-L bar light. Optic + reflector should hopefully give good spill (no harsh reflector cut off) but decent throw.


----------



## WeLight (Aug 12, 2007)

mattthemuppet said:


> I got my T6 XM-Ls from KD and they arrived in ~3wks. I wasn't in a rush, so the wait wasn't a problem. DX I've gone off of quite a bit, although I think the problems over Xmas lay more with China Post than DX itself. I looked at Cutters, but the postage charge took it to ~$40 compared with $25 from KD.


$40:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: I must be packing meter maids in the boxes


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

WeLight said:


> $40:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: I must be packing meter maids in the boxes


"Took it to $40" 
I don't believe the shipping was $40


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

WeLight said:


> $40:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: I must be packing meter maids in the boxes


Mark, I'll take one set please, Paypal ok?










Damn I love Oz


----------



## WeLight (Aug 12, 2007)

emu26 said:


> Mark, I'll take one set please, Paypal ok?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No worries, hope you dont mind, but for $40, I will have to pack them nose to tail


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

I don't think my wife would be ever so happy for me to get one (or two!) of those in the mail. I got in enough trouble when a friend re-used a padded envelope his girlfriend sent him something in. I get home to find a very angry wife (she's from the same part of Ecuador as Waynetta Bobbitt, so scary too) brandishing a parcel with "to my honeybuns, kisses" on the outside.

that aside, yep, the $40 was total cost ($10 or 12 shipping, I can't remember)


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

Looks like DX has XM-L's on 18mm copper stars 
http://s.dealextreme.com/search/54704

Wonder what bin are those, if there is a constant bin possible at all.


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

Toaster79 said:


> Looks like DX has XM-L's on 18mm copper stars


DX indicate that they *may* have subj  
The phrase "Typically ships in 4 to 7 days" by DX means almost everything when it comes to delivery.


----------



## hoobs (Feb 13, 2011)

I cant figure out the XML lumen output spec.
In the datasheet it says that T6 delivers 280 lm @ 700mA.

And if you look at the diagram (in the datasheet):
RELATIVE FLUX VS. CURRENT (TJ = 25°C)

100% at 700mA (280lm for T6)
325% at 3000mA

That gives 280*2.25=630 lm at 3000mA
Is this correct? I have read that the XML should deliver 975 lm at 3000mA.

And this is from the datasheet to:
Delivers 1000 lumens at 100 lumens per Watt.

At the maximum 3000mA 3,35V it delivers 630 lm according to the diagram in the datasheet. How can it deliver 1000 lm?

At what ampere has the XML the optimal lumen per watt point?


----------



## xyz-saft (Sep 23, 2010)

Not totally right. You have calculated the additional output. 280*3.25=910.


----------



## hoobs (Feb 13, 2011)

No, if 100% is 280 lm then 325% is 225% more, that gives 2,25 times more.


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

No Hoobs, it is 3.25 times more.

200% is twice 100
300% is three times 100


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

hoobs said:


> No, if 100% is 280 lm then 325% is 225% more, that gives 2,25 times more.


xyz-saft has it correct - if 100% is 280 lumens then 325% is 280 * 3.25 = 910 lumens. That is not 2.25 times more - it is 3.25 times more.

If 100% of your apples corresponds to 2 apples, then 200% of your apples would be 4 apples. 325% of your apples would be, erm, 6 and a bit apples.


----------



## arnea (Feb 21, 2010)

hoobs said:


> No, if 100% is 280 lm then 325% is 225% more, that gives 2,25 times more.


This is not correct. 325% means that it is 3,25 times bigger.

All(?) LEDs have the best lm/W ratio at very low currents. There was a thread either here or in the CPF that showed this relationship. But if you try to maximize this parameter then your $/lm goes way up.

Arne


----------



## hoobs (Feb 13, 2011)

Sorry, I misunderstood the diagram.
Now it's clear to me.

But what about the 1000 lumens with 100 lm per Watt?

If 910 lm is max, then it delivers: 
(280*2.25) / ((Vf * forward current)) =
910 / (3.35*3) = ~90 lm/W


----------



## arnea (Feb 21, 2010)

hoobs said:


> But what about the 1000 lumens with 100 lm per Watt?
> 
> If 910 lm is max, then it delivers:
> (280*2.25) / ((Vf * forward current)) =
> 910 / (3.35*3) = ~90 lm/W


They say that 280 is minimum luminous flux and 3.35 is typical forward voltage. So 910 is pretty much guaranteed. But they may find an emitter that delivers more light at lower voltage and meets the [email protected] claim. So marketing can say things that sound cool like 1000 [email protected] 100lm/W without lying 

Arne


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

The data are for 25 * C junction temp. Extrapolate the output and temp chart and there is no problem hitting 1000 lumens @ 100 lumens per watt as output would be about 10% higher and Vf will be lower at -25 * C. So for lights operating in polar regions or those of us who commute/trail ride at -25 * C and below, it could be seen in the real world at low temperatures.


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

hoobs said:


> Sorry, I misunderstood the diagram.
> Now it's clear to me.
> 
> But what about the 1000 lumens with 100 lm per Watt?
> ...


The other thing to remember is that Cree quote MINIMUM output for that bin. So as Arnea says there will be others in that group that will go higher. I don't remember exactly but I have a feeling that most of their "bins" for the earlier leds ( xp-e, xr-e , xp-g) have a spread of about 14 lumens


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

Their bins seem to be 7-8% ranges. So a 302 lumen output would likely be almost the next bin. 325% of that is about 982 lumens at 3 A, but that assumes that the increase follows the curve. That response needs only be about 2% better to give 1000 lumens. The Vf would likely be lower (if its putting out more light, that's likely), so the 100 lumens per watt would be a snap if the 1000 lumens max output was reached. Make 'em colder and the average ones will do it. If they have a few unreleased U1? bin XM-L's, no problem at all.


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Cutter is showing some warm white binned xm-l showing up in march. Does anyone here still do 2800-3500k lights?


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

They're also showing some neutral bins too. Those might be of some interest.


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

kan3 said:


> Cutter is showing some warm white binned xm-l showing up in march. Does anyone here still do 2800-3500k lights?


I would think that with the amount of output an xm-l is producing, our greedy insistence on continuing multi LED builds, there will will be enough light on hand that people won't mind giving up a little bit of that light to improve the colour rendition. I also think this will become more important the brighter that white light gets and as such I think more people will return to the warmer bins.

I'm waiting on a DX delivery. If what I get is what I am expecting and it works then I'll be ordering some of these warmer bins from cutter asap


----------



## Whitedog1 (Feb 3, 2009)

emu26 said:


> I would think that with the amount of output an xm-l is producing, our greedy insistence on continuing multi LED builds, there will will be enough light on hand that people won't mind giving up a little bit of that light to improve the colour rendition. I also think this will become more important the brighter that white light gets and as such I think more people will return to the warmer bins.
> 
> I'm waiting on a DX delivery. If what I get is what I am expecting and it works then I'll be ordering some of these warmer bins from cutter asap


already done 7up XML:
http://www.mtb-news.de/forum/showpost.php?p=8055110&postcount=1312


----------



## xyz-saft (Sep 23, 2010)

New XML at DX. Is it U2 or have I got it all wrong?

20mm star
http://www.dealextreme.com/p/xml-u2-1c-320lm-7000k-led-white-light-emitter-with-20mm-base-3-7v-57009

14mm star
http://www.dealextreme.com/p/xml-u2-1c-320lm-7000k-led-white-light-emitter-with-16mm-base-3-7v-57008


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Supposedly the supplier they are sourcing those from is pretty unreliable.


----------



## heniekkrol (Jan 26, 2010)

So here it is, my first build is ready for tests. 1x XM-L @ 2.8A, Ledil Eva W lens. There are 4 types of Eva. If You're interested, I try to post all of them.
With eva D, or Iris in pair, it would be great I think 

Don't know why the photo is so poor. ISO 200 manual exposure F3,5 2s daylight ( Lumix lz8 )


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

Kaidomain has their U2 Bins up now. Price is under $10ea if you buy 3 for the 1C bin.

1C is here:
http://www.kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=11257

1A is here:
http://www.kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=11253


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

kan3 said:


> Kaidomain has their U2 Bins up now. Price is under $10ea if you buy 3 for the 1C bin.
> 
> 1C is here:
> http://www.kaidomain.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductId=11257
> ...


I've seen grumblings on CPF that these U2 bins are somehow fake, although I'd trust KD over DX any day. What's the difference in tint between 1A and 1C - is 1C warmer?


----------



## yetibetty (Dec 24, 2007)

1A looks a bit pink.


----------



## HEY HEY ITS HENDO (Feb 23, 2008)

..... 1A equals WC tint


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

Cutters now have U2-binned XM-Ls up with 2S tint here.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

now call me a complete idiot (and thanks for the graphs chaps), but aren't 1A, 1C and 2S all on the same part of the "topography curve" with most green at the top left and most pink at the bottom right - it looks almost analogous to a relief map.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, just trying to figure out from pictures what most people learn from experience


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

I don't know if it's from their forum crash or maybe I'm missing it, but there were some posts on CPF that had beam shots of different tint xpg. The goal being to show color differences between them.

If you didn't have them all in front of you then it's pretty hard to tell the difference between tints that are one off from each other. For example a 1a, 1b, 1c and 1d would look very similar in real life. If you had them in front of you then you'd notice that a 1c may look a little more yellow than the more neutral 1a. With tint variation of 2 it should be easier to spot without the reference in front of you. A 2s tint should be easy to separate from a 2a tint in real life.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

thanks, 1A ordered - the 1C was more expensive and on a smaller star. Interesting to note too, that the XM-L T6 have dropped ~$1 in price.


----------



## yetibetty (Dec 24, 2007)

I have 1C tint and find it very natural in colour unlike the first unknown tinted green ones I first tried.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

On the very first ride, when I saw how bright the lights were, I wondered: are the XM-L lights at only 1.4 A as bright as my car's lights? People have terrible memories for light intensity. I am constricting their area so the helmet does high beam duty so, it is possible. Last night, I videoed rides with the twin XM-L Marwi lights (Iris medium distance and Narrow Eva as a low, hot spots touching) without hoods in a test of night side visibility (see experiments thread). I was riding across my car's high and low beams that were coming from about 30-50 feet away depending which side of the street I was on (best headlights I have ever had in a car.). Also compared them side by side with the car. The 1.4 A (max selected on H6Flex setting) was brighter than the car's highs, and the 0.7 A level 4 low was brighter than the car's lows aimed slightly down but without hoods to block top spill. I want to test for the best hood/angle before I do beam shots. Without hoods I was getting a bit too much light above the car door handles. I will likely try the 2, 2.8 and 3 A settings for a lark while testing the road worthiness to see whether the setups can take the heat. I will need a bike to take these off road, I guess. :thumbsup: 

Troutie's video of his XM-L ride looked good. Any $300-500 HD video camera recommendations for a DIYer? 

I want to do beamshots of the Dyno light at the same time that I do the new Helmet and the Twin XM-L's. I have an idea how to pull this off with what I have, but any ideas expecially based on experience would be appreciated. :idea:


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

I took some pics last year when I was working on my 6up xpg light. Here were the results against my saturn which has ok lights.


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

BrianMc said:


> Troutie's video of his XM-L ride looked good. Any $300-500 HD video camera recommendations for a DIYer?


Go Pro is apparently at the top of the pick list at the moment according to our local AMB mag test results. I have been told the Contour HD was a distant last


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

emu26 said:


> Go Pro is apparently at the top of the pick list at the moment according to our local AMB mag test results. I have been told the Contour HD was a distant last


Dont get a Go Pro / contour / hd max for beam shots and nightime videos they all have pretty bad low light capabilities

I have a go pro and have tried a HDmax both crap get better as the lumens go up to 5000 but thats not what you want .

my better vids are using an old bullet cam which has a better low light ability


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

I have some 2S ones in my lights and they are very nice and to my old eyes look natural on the trails .
that was until the other night when I lent a liberator with I think wg xpgs on board to a fellow rider and that was crazy white compared to the XML light when we were side by side .

also the XML bastid sample I have is very white but dont know the actual tint 

cooler whites look brighter but more natural tints are more restfull on the eyes imho


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

mattthemuppet said:


> thanks, 1A ordered - the 1C was more expensive and on a smaller star. Interesting to note too, that the XM-L T6 have dropped ~$1 in price.


Did you get the right one mattthemuppet? At Kaidomain it's the other way round - the 1A is more expensive and on a smaller star - or did you get it elsewhere?

Good find on the price of the XM-L T6 too.

Michael


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> Dont get a Go Pro / contour / hd max for beam shots and nightime videos they all have pretty bad low light capabilities
> 
> I have a go pro and have tried a HDmax both crap get better as the lumens go up to 5000 but thats not what you want .
> 
> my better vids are using an old bullet cam which has a better low light ability


Have you tried the Go Pro HD?



troutie-mtb said:


> I have some 2S ones in my lights and they are very nice and to my old eyes look natural on the trails .
> that was until the other night when I lent a liberator with I think wg xpgs on board to a fellow rider and that was crazy white compared to the XML light when we were side by side .
> 
> also the XML bastid sample I have is very white but dont know the actual tint
> ...


I'm surprised you don't do more neutral bins with your lights? I think a lot of people enjoy something more towards the center instead of 6500-7000k lights.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

mfj197 said:


> Did you get the right one mattthemuppet? At Kaidomain it's the other way round - the 1A is more expensive and on a smaller star - or did you get it elsewhere?
> 
> Good find on the price of the XM-L T6 too.
> 
> Michael


ah, you're right - I got confused with a comment on the product page that said they thought it was 1A. Doubt it'll matter too much either way and good job I don't do this for a living


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Yes it is a Go Pro HD Hero not good for night filming 

I gave the customers the choice of natural or cool tints and most went for the cool .
as they perceived them to be brighter when side by side .


----------



## kan3 (Nov 11, 2009)

troutie-mtb said:


> I gave the customers the choice of natural or cool tints and most went for the cool as they perceived them to be brighter when side by side .


Do you think that will start to change with the kind of output we're getting from the newer LED?


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

kan3 said:


> Do you think that will start to change with the kind of output we're getting from the newer LED?


Maybe now the lure of outright lumens is easy to achieve and certainly from my experience I like the more natural light on the ground . I was using a triple XML but only at level three H6flex so I think about 750 ma drive and it was plenty for the forest trails must have been as I never went for a higher level .


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

troutie-mtb said:


> Yes it is a Go Pro HD Hero not good for night filming


I'm surprised to hear that, I thought Jays video's looked quite good, certainly compared to my first version Go Pro which is almost useless at night.

Have you got a vimeo page set up Chris so I can see a comparison between yours and your early bullit cam ones which I was always thought were pretty good for night video


----------



## HEY HEY ITS HENDO (Feb 23, 2008)

Brianmc..not sure how much you can pick these up for but the video is  . 
.....http://www.vio-pov.com/
.............



it has auto gain for shooting in dull/darkness


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

Thanks. Hmmm. GO PRO Hero (Helmet) $300, VIO-POV $600. I'll just use some of the money I saved going DIY! :lol:


----------



## HEY HEY ITS HENDO (Feb 23, 2008)

or the 720 x 480 @ $399.... 
..http://www.vio-pov.com/products-all/pov-1-5.html


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

Pushing the topic, but goal is to record XM-L lights, so I guess it sneaks in.

Interested in your takes on this. What about the Drift HD Stealth? It has a night setting in addition to +1 and +2 exposure. The VIO POV HD doesn't have a night mode listed

Features

MTB

Looks like some of our XM-L lights are needed? Not a lot of warning there.

Streets, Night Mode @ +1 (+2 is available)

I'd guess unlit streets and bike light beam video would need +2. But you can see the headlights of other cars and the camera car on the road in some places where they are not washed out by overhead lights.

Has remote for tagging short video (dropping the boring stuff) making it a possible on-demand traffic or trail recording device for fun sections with enough resolution to read license plates and trail detail. Not as compact a camera, as it is one unit. It has an internal mike and port so a separate external mike is needed to do on-the-ride commentary, whereas the external mike is stock on the VIO POV HD. Adding a spare battery to get the same sort of run time and large memory card to make the two comparable bring it to within $50 or so in price. I have a suitable mike and it has a switchable wind noise filter on the audio.

Not finding VIO POV HD night videos but it appears to be released about 2 months later. So that is not surprising. OTOH Drift released night test footage from the get go, so I have a bad feeling about the VIO POV HD in that regard.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

The XM-L with Eva lens in the Marwi housing works well with a hood and aimed so the hot spot starts about 3' (1m) in front of my tire this gives a good wide spot as well. In a walk toward the standing bike, trying to see how much light is at driver height and placement in lane, it is inoffensive at either 0.7 or 1.4 A. 

The overachieving Iris equipped middle beam light is another story. If I wanted a 2 driver Hi/low beam setup then an Lflex in the high beam unit, and bar mounted on/off switch would be very good. Aim it so the hot spot is just below the horizon and put 3 A through it if you want, and it will light up the road ditch to ditch plus out further than most will need. There is up to another 80% output @ 3 A to compensate for the greater spread aimed higher, if needed.

As the setup is now, I can reach the switch to drop to 0.7 A in duomode and by my eye be share-the-road social, using the same hood on both lights. I have met one driver with the lights at this level and the beams were below door handle height as the car passed. I am going to play with different hoods and maybe try another fresnel lens to see If I can rein it in a tad in the spill that is driver bound but keep the 1.4 A beam on the road. A bit more spill to be seen by than the German standards allow, is a good thing in my experience, but not too much more. Still at 0.7 A, I have about 500 lumens out the front and at least 500 with the helmet high beam to aim where I please, so not exactly light starved even if I have to dim them.   

So I'll sort out my best options for the Iris light while I search (and get funds) for the video camera that will document the lights well enough. Winds are gusting above the forecast 35 mph tonight so no testing the 3 A output and heat management with the LiPo pack. The Eva is available in wider floodier versions, so this might be a wicked off-road bar combo @ 3 A. Won't know unlil I light those fires. 

Brian


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

LEDTECH have tripple XML boards and cute XM tripple optics
http://www.led-tech.de/en/High-Powe...REE-XM-L-T6-on-round-PCB-LT-1749_120_117.html

http://www.led-tech.de/en/High-Powe...CREE-CUTE-3-XM-optic-19°-LT-1751_106_146.html


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Whats the max lumens on the U2bins @3amps


----------



## Road_Runner (Mar 31, 2009)

Goldigger said:


> Whats the max lumens on the U2bins @3amps


http://www.dealextreme.com/forums/forums.dx/forum.-209~threadid.530221

FYI :smilewinkgrin:


----------



## rschultz101 (Oct 5, 2009)

BrianMC -> LFlex is a linear Driver,...
if you use a 2-cell,... double the power, 1/2 the power the driver needs to burn up.
the only time I could see using a LFlex, in a 3x serious LED, 
and it would still burn-up 1/3 of the power at max Battery pack voltage.
I do like the size, and user interface. But it's already hard to keep the LED's cool,
never mind , extra heat from a driver.
maybe somebody can explain to me, where it would be possible to use an Lflex driver,
without burning up excessive power ? 
It's not , like I can't account for extra power , with a heavier battery pack on the handlebar mount light. Just , don't know where to put the extra heat ? And don't think, people, like to cut their runtime, on a custom light !?
as such, still looking for an smaller LED Driver (H6Flex, is kinda big), and a little bit more affordable. would only need 1.8 - 2.1 A. 
Any alternatives ?



BrianMc said:


> The XM-L with Eva lens in the Marwi housing works well with a hood and aimed so the hot spot starts about 3' (1m) in front of my tire this gives a good wide spot as well. In a walk toward the standing bike, trying to see how much light is at driver height and placement in lane, it is inoffensive at either 0.7 or 1.4 A.
> 
> The overachieving Iris equipped middle beam light is another story. If I wanted a 2 driver Hi/low beam setup then an Lflex in the high beam unit, and bar mounted on/off switch would be very good. Aim it so the hot spot is just below the horizon and put 3 A through it if you want, and it will light up the road ditch to ditch plus out further than most will need. There is up to another 80% output @ 3 A to compensate for the greater spread aimed higher, if needed.
> 
> ...


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

rschultz101 said:


> BrianMC -> LFlex is a linear Driver,...
> if you use a 2-cell,... double the power, 1/2 the power the driver needs to burn up.
> the only time I could see using a LFlex, in a 3x serious LED,
> and it would still burn-up 1/3 of the power at max Battery pack voltage.
> ...


I think you're misunderstanding how a linear driver works (not that I'm an expert mind you) - they simply turn the difference between battery voltage (Vin) and LED voltage (Vout or Vf) into heat. So, plucking some no.s from the air, an Lflex driving a single XM-L with a single series battery will burn up (Vin - Vf) x I, so 4.2V - 3.2V(ish) x 3A = 3W at full battery voltage, typically 1.5W once the battery has started discharging. Lower currents offer a disproportionally lower heat dissipation as the Vf is lower at lower currents.

To figure out heat dissipation in a linear driver for multi LED setups, simply multiply the above by the no. of LEDs. For a double XM-L off a 2S pack, you're looking at ~3W heat, triple XM-L off a 3S pack, 4.5W heat, and so on.

That's why George is pushing this as a single XM-L helmet lamp driver - the losses are manageable, you don't need a stat LED output (as you can't see it, right?) and the small size matters more on the helmet.

For 1.8-2.1A and cheap, any of the KD/DX 2.8A drivers should work well - next to none of them put out 2.8A. They're usually torch sized (16-20mm) and cheap as chips.


----------



## rschultz101 (Oct 5, 2009)

still don't add up.
linear drivers usually need Vf + 0.5V 
XML 3.2V +
li-ion discharge to 3V , lot of the pcb's do down to 2.6V
on a single cell setup, you'd only have 2/3 of the juice from the cells.
besides, there are no 3.7V packs, and you'd need large ones.
if you add another cell on top, you'd burn 3.7V+ voltage from the other cells, 
multiply be 3A,.. ~10-13 Watts, with an extra cell.
now if the Vf on XML is 3.14V and the linear regulator , not need any above voltage,
you'd loose ~15%-20 of the battery power, not beeing able to use, 
what is better than burning it up on heat.
But Battery power is at premium , so is heat , when you run the LED's on high.
--
looking at the P7 drivers, doing ~2.3-2.5A, would be ok, maybe change the resistor, to get it lower, their diameter is smaller, but they stack higher, and their quality , is nothing to write home.
And driving multiple LED's is another ballpark. 
If you'd guys, be happy with 1-Mode, on-off, be a lot easier.
But once you jam, a couple of LED monsters in, and they start getting burning hot,
and suck down your battery juice, everybody is looking for some lower modes.
Guess, we could have it, getting a nightrider 1400, with 2x drivers, and a microprocessor on board. And you can't use your old Battery pack. And since we double the juice to the LED, means need double the battery pack, keep the current low, double the voltage,
now at a new 4-cell battery pack, with new charger.
That be at minimum 4x-6x the price. Anybody ok with that ? 
$300-500, be the ballpark. And you got a spare old light to.
oops , rambling again. guess, I'll be designing a new LED driver,... cheers, Rob


----------



## Vancbiker (May 25, 2005)

rschultz101 said:


> li-ion discharge to 3V , lot of the pcb's do down to 2.6V
> on a single cell setup, you'd only have 2/3 of the juice from the cells.
> besides, there are no 3.7V packs, and you'd need large ones.


Once the battery drops below Vf then the lflex essentially goes into "direct drive" allowing you to run the cells as low as you want or until the protection PCB shuts down. Granted the LED will dim during this period but some people like that as a way to gauge remaining power.

3.7V packs are available, there was a recent thread with lots of 3.7V options and ideas.

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=689523


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

rschultz101 said:


> still don't add up.
> linear drivers usually need Vf + 0.5V
> XML 3.2V +
> li-ion discharge to 3V , lot of the pcb's do down to 2.6V
> ...


erm, sorting the wheat from the chaff was a bit tricky with that one. If you want a properly educated electrical engineer's answer, ask George from Taskled. He's very helpful and friendly, plus, as he's the guy who designed the Lflex, one would assume he knows what he's talking about


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

rschultz101 said:


> BrianMC -> LFlex is a linear Driver,...... But it's already hard to keep the LED's cool, never mind , extra heat from a driver.


You have a point about heat. About 8 watts of heat from the XM-L at 3 A alone, and the shaved H6Flex in the one lamp driving two XM-L's at 93% efficiency, adds 1.5 watts of heat to dump in one light with less that 8 square inches of air interface. Need to use 3 A only on cold nights or on fast descents or thermal epoxy some fins on or only use flash mode at this level.

Drop to 2 A and heat is manageable in these housings.



rschultz101 said:


> .... still looking for an smaller LED Driver (H6Flex, is kinda big), and a little bit more affordable. would only need 1.8 - 2.1 A.
> Any alternatives ?


There was a NZ chap with a database of drivers. Don't know if it is currrent, nor have the link.


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

BrianMc said:


> There was a NZ chap with a database of drivers. Don't know if it is currrent, nor have the link.


I *think* thats Torchboy on CPF
http://www.videofoundry.co.nz/ianman/laboratory/research/driverlist.php


----------



## rschultz101 (Oct 5, 2009)

thanks for the link !

Now, if we could get them in 3D , so we could figure out what fits, be nice.

The problem with the list:
- most of them to small, 
- most of them, not quality build
- higher current ones to expensive
- not efficient enough
- or to big in size
- not dimming, nor modes
- sold out
- not available
- shipping cost
---
a module LED Driver be nice, so you don't need to redesign or change the housing,
just to change the driver,... 
Cheers, Rob



znomit said:


> I *think* thats Torchboy on CPF
> http://www.videofoundry.co.nz/ianman/laboratory/research/driverlist.php


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

you have a cake and eating problem there Rob 

if you want features (dimming, temp sensing etc) they cost in both money and driver size. If you want higher current, you need a bigger board or you'll run into heat issues. If you want quality, you need to spend money.


----------



## WeLight (Aug 12, 2007)

rschultz101 said:


> thanks for the link !
> 
> Now, if we could get them in 3D , so we could figure out what fits, be nice.
> 
> ...


And they fail to tape $5 to base of each one when they ship it, bad form


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Cutter have dont have many xml bins in stock 

Can anyone confirm if the U2 comes in bins 1A 1C 1D etc, as in the drop down list there is a U2 2S bin?
This makes me think that the U2 only comes in 2S rather than 1A/1B/1C/1D etc??


----------



## WeLight (Aug 12, 2007)

You will find the other U bins here
http://www.cutter.com.au/products.php?cat=Cree+XM-L


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

WeLight said:


> You will find the other U bins here
> http://www.cutter.com.au/products.php?cat=Cree+XM-L


Thanks, Is it still free shipping on orders over $99? does that include to the uk?


----------



## WeLight (Aug 12, 2007)

Goldigger said:


> Thanks, Is it still free shipping on orders over $99? does that include to the uk?


anywhere on the planet


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

WeLight said:


> anywhere on the planet


even the Ross Ice shelf? Not that they need lights for 6mths of the year..


----------



## rschultz101 (Oct 5, 2009)

1000 lumens on a XML 
per my Bender calculator, it gets there past 4.1A , after 3 min warm up.
for 2A ~550 (+/-40) in practical terms, including optics.
and yes , the Lflex is good to drive 2 XML's on a 2S battery.
it's less than 20mm in size, good for 2x led's, and programmable,
get's an design award for that. still is not the most flexible or efficient driver.
and most, do like to use their 2 cell battery packs, it's the easiest driver to get.
this one runs ok at 2.5A, but do prefer to run it at 2A 2x xml 1040+ lumen.








at 3A, it gets more hot, than it delivers lumens. ~1320 with optics, if you don't ride , throttle kicks in fast, less than 6 min, that's almost 20W,...








anybody want one, ? limited edition, 1 of 1, proto/demo,... you you can program it to drive it up to 5A, if your battery can handle it, probably burn like toast, smell different.
cheers, Rob


----------



## mrradlos (Sep 3, 2010)

*Cree now with chinese lumen ratings?*

Were the chinese sellers allways right with their lumen ratings? Cree now claims over 900 lumens @ 2 A:eekster: - it used to be over 900 lumens at 3 A

used to be








now


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

And 1amp gives you 1975.4 lumens for the Cree XLamp CXA2011 {EZW} F-680 flux
- 1amp for the K - 1200 flux gives you 3486 lumens for the Cree XLamp CXA2011 {EZW}

Something wrong with there site maybe or can we maybe save some juice and run them at 2amps??


----------



## rschultz101 (Oct 5, 2009)

cca2011 any drivers ? 
that be 45v - 45-54 watts , 
that would need a CPU heatsink including a fan ,...
you won't run this of your old ms battery!
and some be complaining not getting a tight spot 
of the led, ;-) 
for drivers need one that can do at least 50v


----------



## gozal (Jun 16, 2010)

I have 2 xml's on the way for my light, but missing a right optics for it. I need a 20 mm optic for each XML.
LED-TECH are my best place to order from in terms of shipping costs (not all ship to israel for cheap..)
can u please tell me which optics fit my xml?
I have a veriaty of carclo here to choose from:
http://www.led-tech.de/en/High-Power-Supply/Carclo-Optics-c_106_107.html

cheers, dor


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

gozal said:


> I have 2 xml's on the way for my light, but missing a right optics for it. I need a 20 mm optic for each XML.
> LED-TECH are my best place to order from in terms of shipping costs (not all ship to israel for cheap..)
> can u please tell me which optics fit my xml?
> I have a veriaty of carclo here to choose from:
> ...


If you want some throw, then go for the LXP 6deg. optic 
. The size is 21.6mm which is actually the same as the 20mm star board of your led. If you need some flood, then pick any other wider type. You can find beamshots of the particular 6deg optic in this thread.


----------



## rschultz101 (Oct 5, 2009)

try , TjC 80 multiply with 0.85 (optics, etc)
that be for the first couple minutes, that's for 2A numbers.
after 6 min, more like x 0.8 .
--
oops forgot, optics 85% electric 93%
might be easier, still optimistic.
think, they base these numbers of having the LED mounted 
on a heatsink brick. while in reality it's mounted on a cheap star board,
the TjC goes down the Toilette fast. 
they said 20% better, maybe 15%, so whatever you got, driver optic etc,..
be about %15+ , if everything is designed in a usable fashion.
and most of them are not,...
also most optics, waste a little extra, due the XML spacing difference,...
for lumen monsters, a little squinting, and hold the thumb up in the air,
will get me 50 lm/w . (anything over 25W)
oops, just me rambling again, Rob



mrradlos said:


> Were the chinese sellers allways right with their lumen ratings? Cree now claims over 900 lumens @ 2 A:eekster: - it used to be over 900 lumens at 3 A
> 
> used to be
> View attachment 618616
> ...


----------



## gozal (Jun 16, 2010)

my light (hope led 2 old version) soesnt use a lens holder, it has another system of holding the 2 lens of 20 mm.
so if i remember correctly I can order the lens that comes with a holder 21.6?, and take it out of the holder? =20 mm right?


----------



## brad72 (Jun 12, 2009)

I have been using the xr-e optics for my xml's but I am curious if anyone has tried these optics from ledil http://www.dotlight.de/products/en/LED-accessories/For-HighPower-LEDs/LED-Lens/Ledil-Optics/Ledil-EVA-D-Optic-for-CREE-XM-L-Emitter.html


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

Have an EVA not sure if its the EVA XM D I have spec sheet for. It is slightly frosted as shown.










The right one is the EVA, and also houses the driver and is used as the closer beam.
The other is an Iris.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

I wanted to get some of the tripple XML boards from cutter, but the usual tint i go for 1A is out of stock.
Anybody else ordered any of the other tints? I'm worried they are going to be on the green side or yellow..
1B, 1C, 1T, 
2B, 2S

I'm thinking the 1B is the next best bet?


----------



## scar (Jun 2, 2005)

I have been getting 1C and have been very happy. I don't like green/yellow/blue stuff either. Very bright white. I don't have any beamshots (very overdue) as the days have been so long. May be I can get something quick tonight or tomorrow night.

****


----------



## rschultz101 (Oct 5, 2009)

Do you like Yellow !?

It's funny, to see, people don't like the yellow / green, 
but are ok, if it's blue, with the quality of fluorescent tubes, is ok .
and of course the mega color temp, 8500k the best, 
Do think it's fashion/hype driven, and education wise, it's behind.
remember those french yellow fog lights ?
well, if you got enough like, might as well, try out those nifty yellow shooting glasses.
don't expect wonders, with the cheap stuff, the good stuff is 100-400 bucks for the glasses. the new fad , for the super bikes, and for off-road junkies, is 2700k HID.
that's for the rides, who just need a practical light, what might safe their life,....

back to tints, 
ball-park white, is good, like the 1A,
for leds with low CRI, it is a ball-park.
if you do want actual quality, you got to forget about high lumen,
and look at CRI and steppings, and lower kelvin.
for the base, you find labels, like warm-white ...
there are a few flashlights now, mostly custom, high end ones,
that are offered in a minimum CRI, and lower Kelvin.

just rambling again



scar said:


> I have been getting 1C and have been very happy. I don't like green/yellow/blue stuff either. Very bright white. I don't have any beamshots (very overdue) as the days have been so long. May be I can get something quick tonight or tomorrow night.
> 
> ****


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

Has anyone used the copper MCPCB 18 mm star (SKU 54704), for DX. I know the shipping is lets say variable. Are these reliable?

BrianMc


----------

