TK I have had two day shipping from Richards on a few occasions: the three I remember the most were the three different convoy lights I have received. On separate occasions I received my C8 , L6, L2. all in two days, when 3 days was the estimate. Maybe the usps are convoy fans?
LOL. Data sheets?
Good one.
Hey, could I interest you in some ultra-high-capacity Ultrafire batteries?
The moon level varies with emitter type, battery voltage, and just in general on a per-light basis. Consistency is very low when operating at the edge of its range, and pretty much every brand has consistency issues with moon and firefly modes.
I measured anywhere from 0.3 to 0.8 lm depending on the parameters I put into the test. If the firmware is tweaked individually for each light, a lower level can often be achieved… but using something lower on all of them would mean some are fine while others don’t light up at all.
Jesus Christ thanks for figuring this out! I tested it and the first time it ramped up a bit and i was like ok, the second time i tested it the damn thing ran straight to max output and I had it pointed at my hand at not only did it blind me it actually startled me.
I won’t go through sending it to RMM over it, I’m overly appreciative that he managed to get the V2 on it so quickly; I’ll just have to be on top of it.
But i’m sure glad i know about it now!
Maybe someday. For now, maybe at least some drivers will have extra vias for “acupuncture” style flashing without removing the driver from the pill. A USB port adds an awful lot of extra complication though.
Some extra configuration will probably be possible by pointing a light at a flashing screen, but not completely rewriting the firmware. It needs at least enough stable ROM to run the optical programming code. And I’m not sure if it’s a good idea to allow ROM rewrites that way, or whether to limit it to only EEPROM.
Fasttech did one with bluetooth-based configuration, but it was pretty limited and didn’t work well in a metal host.
I think it has reverse polarity protection… at least, there’s a diode for it on the driver… but I haven’t tested it. I don’t really want to risk frying a driver.
About flat vs button tops, both seem to work fine. Just don’t use long cells with protection or a charge port. Even if they could physically fit, they wouldn’t work very well. It’s probably a good thing that they don’t fit.
Thanks. One way for me to enhance safety is the use of button top cells, as I have a more defined positive side compared to bare flat top cells. I just see it happening subconsciously someday reversing a flat top cell, thinking that one side I felt is negative, because it is flat…
Thank you! This light is so awesome! So glad I stumbled upon it and than you for all the work put into it. I ordered 3 more!
Thank you! This light is so awesome! So glad I stumbled upon it and than you for all the work put into it. I ordered 3 more!
haha sorry i meant what’s the value like… what is the point? what is the benefit of not engaging the the FET?
It took me like a minute or so and a couple of reads to finally have figured out what you just wrote, haha! Hmm… I have no idea what the answer is though. Good question! :partying_face:
It works better :innocent:
Don’t the 7135 chips work to maintain output at a fixed level even if the voltage sags slightly? While on the FET as the voltage drops, output in all modes drops?
100% 7135 is running on single chip on D4?
It matters to some people, and not to others. The feature is for people who care about it.
This driver is a FET+1 (only one 7135 chip), which allows it to be both a hotrod and a practical EDC light with good low/med modes, depending on what level it’s at.
For 7135-only modes, the runtime graph should be pretty flat — very little change in brightness over time. I haven’t run that test yet though, since it’ll take a long time. Maybe if I use an 18350 it’ll be more feasible, like 2 hours instead of 9.
For the 100% 7135 mode in particular, it also has no PWM.
The reference blink helps give people an idea of where they are on the ramp — what the absolute brightness is and how long the runtime will be… but it’s only approximate.
And some people just really really dislike direct-drive.
As with most of what I do, it tries to serve a relatively wide audience. Not all features will be relevant to all people, but I do try to prevent one group’s preferred features from obstructing another group’s features, as much as possible.
Right, so the relevance is in cell conservation and purity of light output while maintaining regulation.
Sorry my inquiry may have came off harsh; I was just trying to relieve my ignorance on the matter.
The single 7135 regulation chip should have a value of around 350mA. So when it’s at 100% you’ll be running no pulse width modulation (PWM) and the light will be well regulated through the majority of the cells life. The emitter will also be running cooler and more in line with it’s factory measured tint output.
Once the FET is engaged, PWM is applied in varying rates up until max Turbo, which is essentially direct drive on the cell for maximum current draw. This drains the cell quickly, heats the emitters in overdrive, and shifts the tint typically to a cooler spectrum.
The 7135 chip typically stays at full power up until the high or Turbo levels are reached, at which point the 7135 is disengaged and the FET is switched wide open on the cell. (hence, direct drive)
This arrangement gives the user some much needed control over how fast the cell is drawn down and how hot everything gets.
(for some clarification) when the 7135 chips is in use, PWM is applied on 350mA to get moon and low modes, so it’s a percentage of 350mA to get low power. When the FET is engaged, it’s capable of maybe 12A or more to a quad set-up, so PWM is a percentage of the full 12A (or more) and as such, it’s rough on the cell and not as efficient.
Now that I’ve bought mine 
Get them while there hot!
http://intl-outdoor.com/emisar-d4-high-power-led-flashlight-p-921.html
@hIKARInoob , argh. Wait I don’t actually see the issue within the video you sent me. What do you think would happen if I try to use the 70.7mm battery in the Emisar D4? Would it not even close?
Could I remove the bump in the metal on the + side and replace it with flat metal, as to make a mod of this battery that would bring it down to maybe 69mm? :laughing:
In all cases it’s advised to use 18650 batteries with a protector PCB no?
@radioshaq , thanks for suggesting http://www.gearbest.com/diy-parts-components/pp_599014.html , that coould be a solution yea. Do you know if there are any strong 18350 batteries out there which would fit in the Emisar D4 and which I could connect serially, and then use a small 18350 USB charger?