# New SSC P7 Bike Lights at DX - Eastward



## norcom (Feb 22, 2007)

Looks like DX just got a few new lights in. They do not come with batteries but they do come with some nice 18650 holders:

Eastward SSC P7
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.50973
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.50972
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.50971

Eastward MC-E
http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.50946

Very tempting, I have tons of 18650's for my Magicshine lights and DIY packs.

Edit:
Just bit the bullet on the larger 55mm model.

UPDATE:

Just picked up the light. The build quality is OK, nothing much different from the Magicshine lights or the torches from DX. The screw from the metal clamp looks to be rubbing on the cord. Though the LED seems loose as it has no screws to hold down the puck. The battery pack is parallel.


----------



## CathastrophiX (Sep 28, 2008)

One of them is a MC-E light


----------



## norcom (Feb 22, 2007)

CathastrophiX said:


> One of them is a MC-E light


You're absolutely right, I didn't notice that. I was wondering why it was cheaper.


----------



## GTR2ebike (May 3, 2010)

I really like that battery idea, will certainly eliminate the problem that grouped packs (mainly magicshine) are having.


----------



## kwarwick (Jun 12, 2004)

Nice to see some competition for magicshine and I've generally found Eastward YJ flashlights to be a level above that of Ultra/Trust/Spider/I'm on/fire lights. 

Only problem I see is it appears that the battery is a 4P configuration which means this will likely not be a well regulated light as the battery voltage drops below the vf of the emitter, but I guess with 4 cells wired in parallel this would take considerably longer to happen so perhaps not that big an issue.


----------



## norcom (Feb 22, 2007)

kwarwick said:


> Only problem I see is it appears that the battery is a 4P configuration...


Actually I think it's still 2S2P. I've taken apart the Magicshine battery and all the negative terminals were connected together while the positive at the top were separate by two.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

Interesting....Not sure I like the bar mount but if it works I guess that counts for something.
This new battery holder is the real question. It looks as though the end cap slides into two small screw holes. I can't help but wonder just WHAT is holding it on once you have it together. The battery bag is totally retarded. Just why they put the Velcro strap long ways I haven't a clue.  

If someone gets one of these please post up. There are some issues here that can only be answered by an owner.


----------



## norcom (Feb 22, 2007)

Cat-man-do said:


> Interesting....Not sure I like the bar mount but if it works I guess that counts for something.
> This new battery holder is the real question. It looks as though the end cap slides into two small screw holes. I can't help but wonder just WHAT is holding it on once you have it together. The battery bag is totally retarded. Just why they put the Velcro strap long ways I haven't a clue.
> 
> If someone gets one of these please post up. There are some issues here that can only be answered by an owner.


I think the negative terminal plate rotates inside the end cap. The two small screws hold the terminals in place when you screw on the cap; so the terminals don't rotate just the cap.

The order says "Waiting on Supplier" which means a couple of days to months.


----------



## tscheezy (Dec 19, 2003)

The end cap threads onto the battery holder, and those two alignment posts keep the negative battery contacts from spinning (the gold plate with the springs appears to rotate relative to the end cap). A funky but possibly functional design.


----------



## mb323323 (Aug 1, 2006)

What would the estimated lumens really be. 550-600.

I'm assuming the brightness would be the same as the Magicshine. Is the MX E brighter than the P-7. Also, do you guys know if that is a C bin or D bin p-7.

MB


----------



## Homebrew (Jan 2, 2004)

GTR2ebike said:


> I really like that battery idea, will certainly eliminate the problem that grouped packs (mainly magicshine) are having.


 Grouped packs are not the problem. Crappy cells are the problem. This solution doesn't do much to alleviate that problem. This just relieves the seller from any battery/charging responsibility and leaves it up to the end user to work it out on their own.


----------



## GTR2ebike (May 3, 2010)

Homebrew said:


> Grouped packs are not the problem. Crappy cells are the problem. This solution doesn't do much to alleviate that problem. This just relieves the seller from any battery/charging responsibility and leaves it up to the end user to work it out on their own.


Grouped packs are the problem though whether it's because people don't care for their batteries and are running them to 0%. Not knowing how to care for batteries is also a problem.

Sorry but grouped packs with **** cells, shitty or no bms's, and people who discharge them to 0% over and over are the problem.


----------



## kwarwick (Jun 12, 2004)

I still think that's a 4P pack... they only have a single large battery direction icon so all the batteries must face with their positive end in and the negatives are together at the screw cap end. You simply can't make a 2s2p pack with all the negatives wired together like that.


----------



## norcom (Feb 22, 2007)

kwarwick said:


> I still think that's a 4P pack... they only have a single large battery direction icon so all the batteries must face with their positive end in and the negatives are together at the screw cap end. You simply can't make a 2s2p pack with all the negatives wired together like that.


Nope, you can see how 2S2P magicshine battery works in this picture below. (not mine) All the negative ends are attached as one. I found that very weird when I took it apart but that's exactly how mine was as well.


----------



## kwarwick (Jun 12, 2004)

norcom said:


> Nope, you can see how 2S2P magicshine battery works in this picture below. (not mine) All the negative ends are attached as one. I found that very weird when I took it apart but that's exactly how mine was as well.


Sorry to have to disagree with you on this. A magicshine battery pack doesn't have all the negatives tied together. What they have is two pairs of batteries tied together on the bottom, within each pair the + and - ends are tied together, but the pairs are oriented opposite of each other. See the attached photo of a pack I took apart to repair... the spot welds gave way on the right hand side causing intermittent operation. Notice how the two cells on the left have their + side up and the two on the right have their - side up.

Here's a good reference for battery wiring that will show you what I mean (select 2S 2P):

http://scriptasylum.com/rc_speed/lipo.html


----------



## norcom (Feb 22, 2007)

kwarwick said:


> Sorry to have to disagree with you on this. A magicshine battery pack doesn't have all the negatives tied together. What they have is two pairs of batteries tied together on the bottom, within each pair the + and - ends are tied together, but the pairs are oriented opposite of each other. See the attached photo of a pack I took apart to repair... the spot welds gave way on the right hand side causing intermittent operation. Notice how the two cells on the left have their + side up and the two on the right have their - side up.
> 
> Here's a good reference for battery wiring that will show you what I mean (select 2S 2P):
> 
> http://scriptasylum.com/rc_speed/lipo.html


You're right! I was just looking over the PCB from my battery pack. Because of the single lead that goes from the bottom of the pack to the top I figured they were all negative.

So why are all the cells tied together at the bottom with the square piece? I see they're connected individually but they're also tied together. I've built three 2S2P holders but I didn't connect any of them up like this. All the connections between the + and - at the bottom are individual and at the top the + and - at the top are tied together. They work though, I have 8.4v.


----------



## norcom (Feb 22, 2007)

I didn't realize it was possible to build packs like this. I built my packs without the lead where the red X is. The other information I found on the net did not require that lead and it still works without it. Is there any drawback to not having that connection?

Edit:

AH, that's a balancing wire and I don't need it in my packs.


----------



## kwarwick (Jun 12, 2004)

norcom said:


> You're right! I was just looking over the PCB from my battery pack. Because of the single lead that goes from the bottom of the pack to the top I figured they were all negative.
> 
> So why are all the cells tied together at the bottom with the square piece? I see they're connected individually but they're also tied together. I've built three 2S2P holders but I didn't connect any of them up like this. All the connections between the + and - at the bottom are individual and at the top the + and - at the top are tied together. They work though, I have 8.4v.


If you check out http://scriptasylum.com/rc_speed/lipo.html with 2s 2p selected and look in the middle of the four batteries you'll see them all tied together exactly as in the magicshine pack. The only difference is the magicshine battery pack is "folded" at that junction. That red wire in the photo is for the battery PCB to monitor the charge each pair individually.


----------



## kwarwick (Jun 12, 2004)

norcom said:


> I didn't realize it was possible to build packs like this. I built my packs without the lead where the red X is. The other information I found on the net did not require that lead and it still works without it. Is there any drawback to not having that connection?
> 
> Edit:
> 
> AH, that's a balancing wire and I don't need it in my packs.


Even without a balance wire I think there is still some benefit to keep the lead where the red X is. With that configuration the top and bottom battery are forced to balance each other out by being tied directly together at both their + and - ends. The pack will work without, but individual cells in the top or bottom string can get uneven charges which could lead to premature cell failure or in extreme cases nasty things like cells going into thermal runaway. Trust me you don't want that with lithium cells!


----------



## norcom (Feb 22, 2007)

kwarwick said:


> If you check out http://scriptasylum.com/rc_speed/lipo.html with 2s 2p selected and look in the middle of the four batteries you'll see them all tied together exactly as in the magicshine pack. The only difference is the magicshine battery pack is "folded" at that junction. That red wire in the photo is for the battery PCB to monitor the charge each pair individually.


Yes! Thanks for explaining. Now I'm thinking it's a 4P as well. Maybe there's a PCB at the top and the holder's designed for non protected cells? Guess I'll just have to wait until it gets here to find out.


----------



## Homebrew (Jan 2, 2004)

GTR2ebike said:


> Grouped packs are the problem though whether it's because people don't care for their batteries and are running them to 0%. Not knowing how to care for batteries is also a problem.
> 
> Sorry but grouped packs with **** cells, shitty or no bms's, and people who discharge them to 0% over and over are the problem.


So every bike light company is doing it wrong... :skep:


----------



## 9speed (Aug 12, 2009)

GTR2ebike said:


> I really like that battery idea, will certainly eliminate the problem that grouped packs (mainly magicshine) are having.


The problem a FEW people have had you mean?

That Eastward pack does look nice. But it is 4 batteries in parallel. So only 3.7v max. Therefore lots of current.. good run time... but the P7 will dim noticably I understand when the voltage starts dipping below 3.7v...


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

9speed said:


> The problem a FEW people have had you mean?
> 
> That Eastward pack does look nice. But it is 4 batteries in parallel. So only 3.7v max. Therefore lots of current.. good run time... but the P7 will dim noticably I understand when the voltage starts dipping below 3.7v...


The cell unbalancing issue is not uncommon (plenty of reports of short runtimes).

I dont see any quad cell chargers though... you're looking at an extra 40$ to get this going :eekster:

On the bright side, you can carry a single spare 18650 to give enough light to get home with, and you can refresh your batter pack every year or two for 20$.


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

znomit said:


> The cell unbalancing issue is not uncommon (plenty of reports of short runtimes).
> 
> *I dont see any quad cell chargers though.*.. you're looking at an extra 40$ to get this going :eekster:
> 
> On the bright side, you can carry a single spare 18650 to give enough light to get home with, and you can refresh your batter pack every year or two for 20$.


2 X WF-139 = quad bay. I'm still not going to be convinced that the battery holder isn't 2S2P until someone sticks some voltage probes into the output connector. I will admit though it does look like 4P.


----------



## MtbMacgyver (Jan 23, 2007)

Homebrew said:


> So every bike light company is doing it wrong... :skep:


Not just every quality bike light company. Almost every camera, camcorder, and most laptop batteries. There is nothing wrong with gang packs when they are built correctly with quality cells. The balance issues also have nothing to do with how the user treated the pack. The protection PCB, even in the crappy packs, prevents any user action from impacting the balance of the pack.


----------



## MtbMacgyver (Jan 23, 2007)

norcom said:


> I didn't realize it was possible to build packs like this. I built my packs without the lead where the red X is. The other information I found on the net did not require that lead and it still works without it. Is there any drawback to not having that connection?
> 
> Edit:
> 
> AH, that's a balancing wire and I don't need it in my packs.


Building a 2s2p pack without that connection is dangerous. It doesn't matter if you're using a balance connector or not. That connection is imperative to make sure the parallel cells stay at the same voltage. Having the parallel cells at the same voltage is required to make sure the current splits evenly between the series strings.

Plus, if you're using a protection PCB where do you have the center tap voltage sense lead connected? It can only be connected to one of the series strings and is therefore only protecting half the pack.


----------



## norcom (Feb 22, 2007)

MtbMacgyver said:


> Building a 2s2p pack without that connection is dangerous. It doesn't matter if you're using a balance connector or not. That connection is imperative to make sure the parallel cells stay at the same voltage. Having the parallel cells at the same voltage is required to make sure the current splits evenly between the series strings.
> 
> Plus, if you're using a protection PCB where do you have the center tap voltage sense lead connected? It can only be connected to one of the series strings and is therefore only protecting half the pack.


I've modified my packs with that connection wire last night. I'm using protected cells, so each PCB is built into each cell.


----------



## Jim311 (Feb 7, 2006)

This is a fantastic idea considering these cells are pretty cheap and now are easily replaced. The less proprietary **** they force on us the better, and now you can cheaply and easily have nearly infinite runtime on the trail.


----------



## 9speed (Aug 12, 2009)

Cat-man-do said:


> 2 X WF-139 = quad bay. I'm still not going to be convinced that the battery holder isn't 2S2P until someone sticks some voltage probes into the output connector. I will admit though it does look like 4P.


IT IS 4P.

The DX listing itself more than implies 3.7v. In fact it states 3.7v to 7.4v, indiacting that the P7 can go to 7.4v.

That is most assuredly and most definately a straight forward parallel battery pack delivering lots of current but only 3.7v.


----------



## Jim311 (Feb 7, 2006)

Do they sell that battery holder separately? Anyone got a link or DX number?


----------



## Cat-man-do (May 16, 2004)

9speed said:


> IT IS 4P.
> 
> The DX listing itself more than implies 3.7v. In fact it states 3.7v to 7.4v, indiacting that the P7 can go to 7.4v.
> 
> That is most assuredly and most definately a straight forward parallel battery pack delivering lots of current but only 3.7v.


Okay fine. Not a big issue as I see it since the driver looks to be able to accommodate either configuration. In this application a 4P set-up might be the better way to go as long as you use protected cells. As EL34 has commented before, he uses a parallel battery set-up with his P-7 lights with out too much problem. As long as the battery holder isn't a piece of junk this could work.


----------



## cgrim (Oct 25, 2005)

It seems that there is no separate battery holder on DX :-(


----------



## norcom (Feb 22, 2007)

Pix added at the top.


----------



## mlx (Jan 23, 2011)

norcom said:


> Pix added at the top.
> ...
> Though the LED seems loose as it has no screws to hold down the puck.


Epic fail. I wondered if someone would come up with something worse than early Migicshine. Now I know.

Is there a driver or is the LED driven directly/through resistor?


----------



## norcom (Feb 22, 2007)

mlx said:


> Epic fail. I wondered if someone would come up with something worse than early Migicshine. Now I know.
> 
> Is there a driver or is the LED driven directly/through resistor?


Duno, haven't taken apart the lighthead yet. Might do it later on and add some screws to hold the puck down.


----------



## Jim311 (Feb 7, 2006)

So do you recommend it? My second backup battery from my original Magicshine crapped out on me last night, I'm getting maybe 2 hours of run time out of it now, so I need to fix it soon.


----------



## norcom (Feb 22, 2007)

Jim311 said:


> So do you recommend it? My second backup battery from my original Magicshine crapped out on me last night, I'm getting maybe 2 hours of run time out of it now, so I need to fix it soon.


I picked it up from the post office earlier this morning and then went straight to work. I haven't turned it on yet. Just took some shots at work of the pack and light. I'm still at work. 

It definitely feels STURDY. The lighthead, the battery pack and the mount aren't flimsy. They are heavy though, no way would this light work as a helmet light. The puck is not screwed into the heatsink, which is very disappointing and I'll have to mod that. I don't think it's direct-driven as it couldn't have a flash mode and/or mid-high settings though I haven't tested them yet or taken the lighthead apart. The battery bag is weird and I'm not sure WTF they were thinking on how to attach it to the frame.

I'll try it out later tonight and compare it with my Magicshine. I'll see if I can take some comparison pix.


----------



## norcom (Feb 22, 2007)

Here's a quick light comparison between the new light and the Magicshine. In my view the Magicshine wins. The new light is a bit dimmer and has a yellow tint to it.

The shots are reference, new light, Magicshine, both. Not the best but gives you an idea.


----------



## Jim311 (Feb 7, 2006)

Thanks for the breakdown. I may have to get one, if nothing else for the battery holder.


----------



## norcom (Feb 22, 2007)

One more note:

The light mount will NOT fit on a 31.8 bar, at least in the center next to the stem where it's actually 31.8. It will fit closer to the ends but you will not be able to angle the light straight as it does not turn.


----------



## terricksa5 (Sep 22, 2009)

Got mine yesterday and am very happy with it, just playing with it outside lastnight(need to get it in the woods to see for sure). Esp for the price. I am going to have to do some experimenting for the mounting to the 31.8 handlebars I have. If anyone has already come up with something please post a pic. Thanks

Also will post what I think once it dries up a bit more here and I can ride at night again or if I go for a night road ride.


----------

