# SSC P4 Discussion



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

I thought I'd start this thread so we can let poor *drjay9051*'s thread get back on track! 

Just to clarify for those who don't realise, the Seoul Semiconductor P4 shares the same Die as the Cree XR-E. In fact Cree have a long standing relationship selling technology to SSC and other manufacturers. However the Die is only just a part of the total product, how it is packaged and managed goes a long way to how the final emitter functions and performs.

I was hoping the SSC P4 would solve some of my perceived issues and shortcomings that the Cree XR-E has from my point of view. Please note _I still haven't received any P4 devices to evaluate myself_, but for the time being just from what I have read over the last few days I'll be sticking to the Cree devices for future mods and builds despite the fact that the P4 does have some advantages. I think once the fuss dies down a little, most enthusiasts will also ditch the SSC P4 do the same. 



Allen said:


> From what I understand, the SSC P4 is supposed to be the same dimensions as a Luxeon LED and able to use the same reflectors and lenses.... we'll see.


Unfortunately this is not the case as most optics currently available will not be compatible, although Luxeon compatible reflectors will work on the P4 if a little material is removed from the back of the reflector to get things back in focus.

At the moment is seems that rougher surfaced reflectors will be needed for the P4 to help smooth a pronounced variation in tint through the beam (which may not be of great concern to most riders), and to help smooth more of the produced light into a flood as it appears that the extra light emitted sideways by the P4 will be pushed forward by the reflector creating nice bright throwing hotspots, but possibly lacking as far as side spill is concerned. A rougher reflector will hopefully go some way to blending out the hotspot.

Also it has been demonstrated hat with a few smooth reflectors in certain focuses it is possible to actually see the Die bond wires on the edge of the hotspot. Again it may not be an issue for us out on the trail, it's easy to look at things a little too closely and get over analytical; really it's something you'll have to experiment with by trying various shaped reflectors and playing with the emitters and their placement yourselves. It's not going to be a "bad" emitter by any means.

Another issue though is the soft silicon "dust collector" dome surface that the P4 has, which is very similar to the old Luxeon K2's. It's not an issue once housed, but for those who get all fussy with the little details they are a real pain to clean.

It's interesting to notice the lower thermal resistance of the SSC P4 - 6.9 C/W in comparison to the Cree XR-E - 8 C/W, which shows that there was definitely scope for improvement in the XR-E like I had hypothesised. This also shows that the extreme tint shift at different die currents that has appeared in the SSC P4 is likely to be a result of the phosphor used by SSC rather then the Die. This tint shift may be of notable concern for those that notice these things easily, while for others again it may be a non-issue.

I feel that the P4 packaging is superior to the Cree XR-E, the move back to a similar package to the Lumiled Luxeon devices is a definite advantage and an improvement to the Cree XR-E from the point of view of us enthusiasts. The difference in dome size is going to be the only main complaint for many I feel, which is a pain for those who had hoped that the device would be a direct swap for Luxeon devices which it is not.

Once I get hold of some more devices I will throw them on my test rig and compare them to some other manufacturers devices and give you guys a "real" comparison of my own, rather then repeating others comments which I have read. 



Chris said:


> Though using that method with thermal epoxy will make the heat transfer worse (since the heat conduction isn't that good unless in extremely thin layers - normally you would compress the epoxy when using it), and if you're not careful it could even be worse than with a star.





Allen said:


> Then what method would you recommend for electrically isolating an emitter's slug?


I think Chris was meaning that there is no need for the two layers. You want to get any thermal interface material as thin as possible, regardless of if it's an adhesive or not. Thermal interface materials in general are designed solely just to fill microscopic irregularities between components; any increased thickness (by using more then one layer for example) just increases thermal resistance, negating any advantage of using the material to start with.

Carry on... 

Dave.


----------



## msxtr (Dec 10, 2006)

Low_Rider said:


> Another issue though is the soft silicon "dust collector" dome surface that the P4 has, which is very similar* to the old Luxeon K2's*. It's not an issue once housed, but for those who get all fussy with the little details they are a real pain to clean.
> 
> Dave.


Old?? :bluefrown: But until a few months ago it was the latest thing :rant:

Greetings - Saludos

msxtr


----------



## GMF (Jan 10, 2004)

Low_Rider said:


> It's interesting to notice the lower thermal resistance of the SSC P4 - 6.9 C/W in comparison to the Cree XR-E - 8 C/W, which shows that there was definitely scope for improvement in the XR-E like I had hypothesised.


One thing to note, and which is a caveat to the "improved" thermal performance of the SSC P4, is that it has an electrically live slug, rather than an electrically isolated pad like the CREE has. The 6.9 C/W rating is just the bare emitter - you have to add in the thermal resistance of whatever adhesive or electrical isolator you are using. Crees can be soldered, of course, which might make them perform better at the system level.

For example, if you wanted to use a bergquist bond-ply gap pad, you'll be incurring about 4 C/W on the SSC, which makes things worse than the Cree system. Now Arctic Alumina is about 10x better, but it is not a very production friendly method, and still practically closes the gap between the SSC and Cree LEDs.

Anyway, i hope to be playing around with both very soon.

-Damon


----------



## chrism (Jan 27, 2004)

achesalot said:


> Then what method would you recommend for electrically isolating an emitter's slug? I've been using a thin layer of the AAA for a while now (as a means of electrical isolation) and not had any noticible problems of overheating an emitter... after all, that's what AAA is designed for... to conduct heat but not electricity. I'm always open to new and better suggestions of course.





Low_Rider said:


> I think Chris was meaning that there is no need for the two layers. You want to get any thermal interface material as thin as possible, regardless of if it's an adhesive or not. Thermal interface materials in general are designed solely just to fill microscopic irregularities between components; any increased thickness (by using more then one layer for example) just increases thermal resistance, negating any advantage of using the material to start with.


I was suggesting that the layer should be as thin as possible, and that the normal method using compression is best - however using a single layer doesn't guarantee electrical insulation, which is the problem here. The optimum method is probably to use a properly designed MCPCB - noting that it's not the MCPCB itself which causes thermal problems (it's alu rather than cu, but the difference that makes is far less than the difference of excess AAA), but the interface between the MCPCB and the LED, which at least on the ones used with Crees appears to include a layer of insulator which is also a poor conductor of heat. I'll note that at least with previous power LEDs, SSC supplied them ready mounted (I have some SSC P1s here with bin numbers on the MCPCB, which means they must have come from the SSC factory like that), unlike Cree who only supply emitters, thus resulting in the poorly designed MCPCBs which are used with those.


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

GMF said:


> &#8230;that it has an electrically live slug, rather than an electrically isolated pad like the CREE has.


As do many emitters, the difference with the SSC P4 is that it's positive in polarity rather then negative like many others. It's probably not a problem for us, but for the flashlight guys who are planning on upgrades it's another little thing to consider.



chrism said:


> &#8230;unlike Cree who only supply emitters, thus resulting in the poorly designed MCPCB's which are used with those.


I have covered this in the past, but the Cree 7090 package definitely isn't overly friendly for DIY enthusiasts. Designing a solution with the package soldered directly to its electrical / thermal host is the best way to go about it from a manufacturers point of view. For those DIY guys without surface mount soldering capabilities there are a few alternatives. Isolating the bottom of the package is not difficult without thermal interface material.

Dave.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Hi guys. Good idea to start this thread Dave.

Glad we cleared the thin layer of AAA issue. Yes. I agree. Thinner is better as long as we have electrical isolation. I just worry that electrical isolation can't be guaranteed with just one layer, but maybe I'm just paranoid.

After reading an initial CPF review on the SSC P4 it does look a little less exciting than the first info that I'd seen. Looks like out of 3 emitters tested, 2 had pretty bad tint shifting issues when run at higher current levels (such as 1 amp). I personally don't want a blue bike light. Hopefully SSC will get these issues straightened out. I was also just a little dissapointed in the apparent manufacturing quality of the emitter itself. Still, I will try to obtain a few U-binned SSC P4s for testing.

- Allen


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

NewBie is a real champion isn’t he! I must admit I have been a CPF lurker for a long, long time, mainly following his posts along with a couple of other members. :thumbsup:

The SSC P4 is not a “bad” emitter by any standard, it’s just that we have been spoilt a little with the relative stability of recent emitters. Tint shift over emitter’s current range has been a huge issue from the beginnings of LED development, although recently many manufacturers have been successful in minimising tint shift a great deal.

As I mentioned before, the fact that the Cree XR-E is relatively stable in comparison to the SSC P4 points to the phosphor that SSC are using rather then the die. It will be interesting to see if the “U” binned devices are any different, rather then just an increase in output.

I’m still waiting for a quite a few various emitters to turn up in the mail… 

Dave.


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

Developments, *check this out* folks! NewBie at CPF has dissected one of his P4 emitters and as a result he has found the cause for the nasty tint shift, along with taking some awesome photos! :thumbsup:

You can read it for yourself, but it turns out that the die in this particular emitter was not bonded evenly to the slug resulting in a hotspot. Now this brings up a couple of issues. Firstly it means that lumen maintenance could be severely compromised, and secondly the extra heat produced on the die itself is going to affect the phosphors. Phosphors are used in white LED's to create the white light that we see, as the actual die produces blue light. Some phosphors are heat sensitive and as a result in this case, their performance is compromised resulting in the extreme shift in tint that has been shown with the P4.

Who knows if this will be an ongoing issue or not. These emitters haven't really hit the market yet, and those that have been tested could be from an early batch or even pre-production. Time will tell but it's certainly going to be worth watching.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

I hope this just turns out to be an isolated problem and that he received some SSC-P4s from a bad batch. Just looking at the emitters, they don't appear to be of very high quality manufacturing... compared to a Cree or a Luxeon, which look like nicely manufactured devices. OTOH, if SSC can make them as bright as they claim, I don't care what the emitter looks like!


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

Yeah we’re not going to really get a good idea of where things are at until more parts are evaluated. Even so, apparently in the past Seoul Semiconductor hasn’t exactly had a great track record as far as consistency is concerned.

While I must admit I love chasing every possible lumen out of a light as I can, how that light is presented and able to be used (tint / angle / efficiency) is just as important.

Dave.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Looks like Newbie got some U bins in from another batch and things look much better. He has an interesting thread going there, but probably spent too much time delving into a defective LED... interesting none the less.

FYI, I've also noticed that SSC P4 U bins are now available from mouser.com.. Well it actually says no stock at the moment, but they are supposed to have them soon and I believe it says they are accepting orders. It's a U.S. stateside place to order from anyway, if that matters. I think only bare emitters are available.

I've got three of these on order from a groupbuy on CPF. We'll see how it turns out. I'll probably try sticking them in my original TriLux III light since it already has a one amp 3021 driver with dimming. Who knows what I'll have to do with reflectors or optics to get it to look decent. If all works out according to SSC specs, this should be a 600 - 700 lumen light  , but of course there are other considerations as well (beam, color, etc)... and they might not live up to advertised specs... who knows. I know the Crees sure did. Right now, the Cree XR-E is the LED for bike lighting. We'll see if that's true in a month or so.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Still waiting on my SSC P4s, but they should be here any day now, as the group buy has shipped. I've seen some flashlight mods on CPF that look to be quite an improvement when upgrading from a Luxeon III, and the mods were less drastic than those of replacing a LuxIII with a Cree. The thing that might be a turnoff for bike lighting, using the SSC P4, is that most modders are reporting that it has a tighter beam than the Lux III. I've had trouble getting my Luxeon III light to not be such a spotlight and provide more flood. Optics are probably the answer, but as most of us know, they are less efficient than reflectors.

I guess by now most of you have heard of yet another player in the bright LED game, the Edison Edixeon EDEW-KLC8. I believe (not positive though) that, like the Seoul P4, it is based on the Cree die. Here's a link to a thread about it over on CPF. There's a picture and a link to the data sheet somewhere in the thread. Looks like it is supposed to put out 160 lumens typical, at 700ma. Not bad.

BTW, I don't know if it was mentioned here, but I see that the Sandwich Shoppe is now carrying the Seoul P4 U-bin.


----------



## chrism (Jan 27, 2004)

Is that Hotbeam's CPF GB you're waiting on? Mine came yesterday, and I've already completed my first mod, putting one of these in an Exposure Lights Joystick http://www.use1.com/exposure/products/exposure_joystick/. At least for this it's an all round positive result. I simply replaced the stock Luxeon with the P4 - no shimming or modding to the optic. This results in a very nice clean beam with no holes, which seems to be generally wider than the stock beam - which is a good thing as the original is very narrow. Also possibly even a cleaner beam than the original, which I remember not being too impressed with (I'll point out that this light was a prize, I didn't pay real money!) Unfortunately I obviously no longer have a stock one to compare with, but as my teammates do (at least until I get round to upgrading them), I will be able to compare when we meet up at some point.

The reason for the easy success may be that as standard the Luxeon is raised slightly compared to the normal focus point of the optic, sitting on a slight pedestal above the part the lens holder sits on (I'm guessing they do this in order to make the beam more of a spot). Therefore the P4 naturally sits in the right place.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

chrism said:


> Is that Hotbeam's CPF GB you're waiting on? Mine came yesterday, and I've already completed my first mod, putting one of these in an Exposure Lights Joystick ...


Yes Hotbeam's GB. Glad you got yours and that you are happy with the results so far. I'm still waiting...nothing yet here in Florida.


----------



## chrism (Jan 27, 2004)

You guys in the US seem to have bad luck with the delivery time on this (I'm in the UK). Worth the wait though, as all reports (mine included) are very nice performance and colour on this batch.


----------



## p97z (Dec 19, 2006)

I got two SSC P4's on a CPF group buy from a guy named download. I put one in my DIY helmet light with an IMS 20. It's real bright! The P4 made my K2 look like a halogen it was so white.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

chrism said:


> You guys in the US seem to have bad luck with the delivery time on this (I'm in the UK). Worth the wait though, as all reports (mine included) are very nice performance and colour on this batch.


 It looks like some folks on the U.S. west coast have gotten theirs, so it'll take another day or two to get to me.

Have you guys noticed that Cree is now advertising that it's fine to run the XR-E at 1A. I've been doing it anyway most of the time  thanks to the flexibility of the nFlex driver. Even the P3-bin XR-Es that I have really kick butt at one amp.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

p97z said:


> I got two SSC P4's on a CPF group buy from a guy named download. I put one in my DIY helmet light with an IMS 20. It's real bright! The P4 made my K2 look like a halogen it was so white.


Cool. Glad it turned out so well.

Did you have to trim the reflector?
What kind of beam pattern do you get with the SSC P4 + IMS 20?
Can you post a beamshot?


----------



## p97z (Dec 19, 2006)

The first picture is a shot with the stock ims 20. Bright hotspot but not much flood.
The second picture I sanded down the back of the IMS 20 to give more flood.

First picture 1/10sec F2.8 iso-160
Second 1/12sec F2.8 iso-160

I like the flood better. I can't post a picture next to the K2 because I am making a cree out of the original K2 light.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

p97z said:


> The first picture is a shot with the stock ims 20. Bright hotspot but not much flood.
> The second picture I sanded down the back of the IMS 20 to give more flood.
> 
> First picture 1/10sec F2.8 iso-160
> ...


That looks great! I was hoping the IMS 20 could be sanded to give a little more flood, because I have several lying around waiting to be used. So you just sanded off the back to let the SSC dome go up further into the reflector?

I'm beginning to wonder if the Cree XR-E Q2-bins I ordered from Cutter will ever come. But I haven't noticed that anyone else has Q2 or Q3 bins, so I guess the holdup is with Cree. My SSC P4s should be here tomorrow or Saturday. I was planning some flashlight upgrades, but I might just have to upgrade my old TriLuxIII bikelight and sand the IMS 20 reflectors down a bit  It'd be good to compare with the Triple Cree, each light running at 1A.


----------



## p97z (Dec 19, 2006)

I also clipped the legs on the reflector but you probably don't need to. Just sand the bottom till you get the flood that you like. Sand a little with some 220 then pop it in and see if you like it. If you go to far then you can use it on a CREE.  To replace your TriLux with SSC's would be to bright!

I ordered two SSC's and one CREE P4 from Download (in Hong Kong) on CPF... I got them in 4 days!

I ordered 3 CREE and 6 optics from Cutter several weeks ago and i'm still waiting. How long do orders usually take from Cutter? Do they send a tracking number or let you know when they shipped?


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

p97z said:


> I also clipped the legs on the reflector but you probably don't need to. Just sand the bottom till you get the flood that you like. Sand a little with some 220 then pop it in and see if you like it. If you go to far then you can use it on a CREE.  To replace your TriLux with SSC's would be to bright!
> 
> I ordered two SSC's and one CREE P4 from Download (in Hong Kong) on CPF... I got them in 4 days!
> 
> I ordered 3 CREE and 6 optics from Cutter several weeks ago and i'm still waiting. How long do orders usually take from Cutter? Do they send a tracking number or let you know when they shipped?


On my first order from Cutter, it went reasonably fast (considering AU). I think I got the order in about 10 days. I think they sent an email when it shipped. In this order, I know the Q2-bin Crees just don't seem to be available yet... so that's the hold up. I've seen several more places carrying Cree XR-E P4-bin now, and if I order anymore SSC P4 U-bin I will probably get them from the Sandwich Shoppe or try Download. Unfortunately, it's the lenses that are the trick. I like the Ledil, and I haven't seen them anywhere but Cutter. If the IMS20s can be made floody enough with the SSC P4, that will be great because the reflectors are generally more efficient.


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

As far as Cree XR-E cutter orders go, I believe when the Q2 bins were first offered it was as a pre-order. They originally mentioned a mid January delivery date, but as we know it has been a bit longer then that.

I have heard mention that the Q2 bins are starting to become available from other sources now, so hopefully they won’t be too far off. P3 and P4 bins are available at the moment from many sources, including cutter.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Low_Rider said:


> As far as Cree XR-E cutter orders go, I believe when the Q2 bins were first offered it was as a pre-order. They originally mentioned a mid January delivery date, but as we know it has been a bit longer then that.
> 
> I have heard mention that the Q2 bins are starting to become available from other sources now, so hopefully they won't be too far off. P3 and P4 bins are available at the moment from many sources, including cutter.


I originally ordered from Cutter on Nov 28. At the time they were saying "Late Nov" on the Q2-bin so I figured it wouldn't take too long. Then they changed it to "Mid-Jan". It's now Feb. So there's definitely some slippage going on with Cree's delivery of the higher-binned product line... I realize it's probably out of Cutter's hands.

Yeah, hopefully the Q2s will be available soon. About six more weeks and I'm back to mostly daytime riding until next Fall. These things will probably be obsolete by then!


----------



## p97z (Dec 19, 2006)

Snow is flying here so I don't have to worry about riding day or night. I ordered P4's and the web site said they were in stock. I just sent cutter an email, I never even got a shipping notice.

I have two cree's but no optics. I found a double cigarette lighter that matches my triple that I want to use for another cree setup.


----------



## super-fast (Sep 28, 2006)

[slightly off-topic]
When there are a few guys that want the same (leds and angle) optics from Ledil, we can buy them directly from them. The price is a lot nicer then the price I see at the website of Cutter. I couldn't find Ledil lens for SSC so I sent them a mail or they could help me out:
The smallest quantity we supply is 20 of each lens type.
The price is 1.50 euro/lens.

Transport to the Netherlands costs per airmail 10 euro.

[/off-topic]


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

*SSC P4 (U-bin) to Cree XR-E comparison shots*

I got three (U-bin) Seoul P4 emitters this weekend. I modded one of my flashlights with one of them because I wanted to see what they looked like and I didn't have a bike lght body ready for them. I was happy with the results of the Flashlight mod.

Today I decided to go ahead and steal the driver out of my TriLux III helmet light and play around with the remaining two emitters, trying different reflector combos etc.

Anyway, I ended up with two SSC P4s on a light body and stuck on some IMS 20 reflectors that I'd grinded the front down on, to get more spill with the Luxeon IIIs. I drove the two emitters @1A using a 3021 Buckpuck. I went out back and took some comparison shots against my Triple Cree, also running at 1A. Below are the results:

All shots are at the same manual camera setting: 1/4sec, F2.8, ISO 200.
_It's not exactly a comparison since the Cree has 3 emitters and the Seoul has only 2, but interesting nevertheless._

First is my modded flashlight (Fenix L1T w Seould P4)









Next is the dual SSC P4 setup: (U-bin @ 1A, w/ modded IMS 20 reflectors









Next is the Triple Cree (P3-bin) running @ 1A (2x9, 1x4 degree Ledil lenses)









I happy with the amount of flood that I was able to get using the Seouls. I think the beam pattern using the modded IMS 20 reflectors looks similar to that of an L&M HID, and when I add the third LED (I'll have to order another now), it should be about as bright!

The U-binned Seoul P4 emitter should be putting out around 104 lm @350mA (if I take the middle value of the binning range). Then driving them @ 1A should give me about 220% more output, or about 230 lm, and the two together should be giving me about 460 lumen... adding the third should put me at about 690 lumen total output, minus any loss from the reflectors.

Driving the Triple Cree XR-Es (P3 bin) at 1A should be giving me about 500 lumen, minus light loss in the lenses. The XR-Es really kick butt @ 1A. The lenses being used with the Cree gives it a bigger hotspot area, but the Seouls + reflectors give more even spill light.

Thought you guys might enjoy the comparison.


----------



## Y-Wrench (Jan 9, 2007)

Do you think that the three seoul setup with the IMS reflectors will have as wide of a hotspot as the cree's when finished? From the pictures it looks like I am looking for the spill that the reflectors offer. I just finished installing the third cree in my light (I got it up and running with 1, then 2, now 3) and now I'm getting the itch to play around with optics/reflectors. I've been debating between ledil and IMS as I would like to use the Ledil lenses for their ease of building a small form helmet mount light, but the light I have now is bar mounted and I have overbuilt it to allow me flexibility of lenses/reflectors.

Also how was the lottery with the P4's? I got all three cree's evenly spread in the spectrum, low, middle, and high.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Y-Wrench said:


> Do you think that the three seoul setup with the IMS reflectors will have as wide of a hotspot as the cree's when finished? From the pictures it looks like I am looking for the spill that the reflectors offer. I just finished installing the third cree in my light (I got it up and running with 1, then 2, now 3) and now I'm getting the itch to play around with optics/reflectors. I've been debating between ledil and IMS as I would like to use the Ledil lenses for their ease of building a small form helmet mount light, but the light I have now is bar mounted and I have overbuilt it to allow me flexibility of lenses/reflectors.


 It looks to me like the Seouls with the modified IMS reflectors will have more spill than my current Cree/Lens configuration, not necessarily a wider hotspot though. You can't have both big hotspot and lots of spill. The light has to be divided up somehow, so finding the ideal trade-off is the key.

I don't know how well those reflectors will work with the Crees. But you might just try getting wider angle lenses if you want more spill. I've ordered a couple of the Ledil CRS-M ±15° lenses, but I haven't gotten them yet. Most of the reflectors that are available for the Cree are designed for flashlights and thus quite spotlighty. It might be possible to modify the reflector to get what you want, but that doesn't always work.

Y-Wrench: as to the last part of your question, the brightness and tint of all 3 of the Seouls that I got were pretty consistent. They do tend to get a little more blue in the tint when driven at 1A as opposed to about 700mA. You probably can notice in my previous photos that the SSC tends toward blue a little where the Cree tends towards a warmer yellow (especially since 2 of my 3 Crees were a little more yellow looking than the third, which was very white).

Good luck.


----------



## p97z (Dec 19, 2006)

achesalot,

Which side of the reflector did you sand down? 

Looks nice!


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

p97z said:


> achesalot,
> 
> Which side of the reflector did you sand down?
> 
> Looks nice!


 The front of the reflectors have been sanded off about 1/8" (~3 mm). Here's a photo of the 2 IMS 20 reflectors that have the front ground down compared with an untouched reflector in the middle. Nothing was done to the base of the reflectors at all.










I'd initially sanded these down for my Triple Luxeon III light, which was terribly spotlighty. It helped that light a little, but the reflector mod seems even more effective at providing spill on the Seouls.


----------



## p97z (Dec 19, 2006)

Interesting... I sanded the other end... I guess it doesn't matter. More flood either way. 
Here's a picture of three reflectors far left is the one in my previous post... sanded the LED end. Second is a stock IMS 20 and the far right is a stock IMS 17.

I guess yours kind of looks like an IMS 17 in a way..


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

p97z said:


> Interesting... I sanded the other end... I guess it doesn't matter. More flood either way.
> Here's a picture of three reflectors far left is the one in my previous post... sanded the LED end. Second is a stock IMS 20 and the far right is a stock IMS 17.
> 
> I guess yours kind of looks like an IMS 17 in a way..


Yes, it does sort of look like the 17, but it has about 3 mm more in diameter. I had another 20 that I'd sanded off from the base, and I never could get it to look right. It might have had too much sanded off.


----------



## Dark Mower (Sep 2, 2006)

Consider this if you want to amaze other bike riders. 2xD Maglites with a P4 U-bin emitter is made by a friend of mine. His specialty is making LED lights out of Maglites; he has been doing it for years. It is easily the longest throwing LED beam I've ever seen. The light is simple to use; off and blazing. 20,000 lux (I agree) is estimated to come out of the front at one meter. It's got a beam that will outdistance a car headlight and is in the range of HID. The output is big shaft of light. The ProCharger has a converter to run the emitter. It runs off 3xC or 2xD rechargeable cells. With constant brightness, it runs 8 hours with 2xD and 2.5 hours with 3xC cells. It focuses too.

It's big with a big reflector. I could use it for a hammer. The beam is crazy-bright and white. I use a Maglite holder to mount it in place on the bike. I don't think his website pictures do the light justice. Look at the beam at 475 feet. Oh, it's good. It will blind the traditional LED bike lights that you are used to.

I've toyed with the thought of cutting down the Maglite body so just the switch remains then cap the tail with an RCA connector. Or even cut off the switch part and have a separate switch mounted on the handlebar. Then run a wire to a battery pack and you'd have a compact and bright LED light.

Kevin's webpage-
http://home.mchsi.com/~lambda_lights/pro_charger.htm


----------



## p97z (Dec 19, 2006)

See http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=262507... I cut down a AA Brinkman (same as mag) And put a SSC P4 in it.


----------



## brum (Dec 19, 2004)

Dark Mower said:


> Consider this if you want to amaze other bike riders. 2xD Maglites with a P4 U-bin emitter is made by a friend of mine. His specialty is making LED lights out of Maglites; he has been doing it for years. It is easily the longest throwing LED beam I've ever seen. The light is simple to use; off and blazing. 20,000 lux (I agree) is estimated to come out of the front at one meter. It's got a beam that will outdistance a car headlight and is in the range of HID. The output is big shaft of light. The ProCharger has a converter to run the emitter. It runs off 3xC or 2xD rechargeable cells. With constant brightness, it runs 8 hours with 2xD and 2.5 hours with 3xC cells. It focuses too.
> 
> It's big with a big reflector. I could use it for a hammer. The beam is crazy-bright and white. I use a Maglite holder to mount it in place on the bike. I don't think his website pictures do the light justice. Look at the beam at 475 feet. Oh, it's good. It will blind the traditional LED bike lights that you are used to.
> 
> ...


I thought I got to see a 3-7x P4 light, but it uses only a single emitter. No way that comes in the range of HID. What driver is he using?
'It will blind the tradional bike lights'. Uhm, a P4 might be brighter than a lux III, but again, no way it vanishes a 3xLuxIII light. Let alone our DIY 3xXR-E/P4/KLC-8 lights.


----------



## Dark Mower (Sep 2, 2006)

You know better then I do. Sorry.


----------



## brum (Dec 19, 2004)

Dark Mower said:


> You know better then I do. Sorry.


Well, I might have been a bit harsh. Sorry for that, but a P4 puts out max 240lm (not that we can get those), minus 10% or so for the lens and reflector, that puts us at 220 lumen (still very, very hypothetical). A typical HID system (10-14W Wench Allyn) puts out 500-600 lumens out the front. My Lumapower M1's hotspot overshadows my triple XR-E bikelight, but the bikelight still puts out 3-4x as much light.

But: post a beamshot comparing it with a common HID bikelight and I'll STFU.


----------

