[♛ FreemeGB] Haikelite MT09R 3x XHP70.2 25,000lm & 3x XHP35 Hi 6500LM Flashlight Group Buy -【 ACTIVE 】

Hmmm, I guess that means the CW that I prefer is what, 3k lumen less?

Still, 15k lumen is nothing to sneeze at.

No. CW is usually has higher lumens output.

Glad it is an easy fix. Has anyone replied you on the spare FET pad question?

Really? I vaguely remember the lower forward voltage on the NW giving it a higher output.

I’ll have to check TA’s driver thread. Wait, I’m not sure what exact CW emitter the factory is using. I may have to wait for a comparison.

Yes! TA answered it. It is designed for one fet only. Two fet will switching slower.

If you use the same bin then the output should be roughly the same between tines minus the lux meter bias towards CW tints.

In the case of the MT09R, I am not sure what CW LED’s they are using now but in the last batch the CW LED’s were a lower bin then the NW and were a fair amount lower output. Around 20% lower IIRC (so around 3 bins lower).

It is possible that they upgraded to P2 bin CW LED’s like I suggested for this batch though.

Oh, I also heard that they will be discontinuing the MT03 after this batch is sold out. I really like that light, the best flooder I own. Tempted to get another one if I could justify it.

^ That’s odd. Seems to me that the MT03 is a winner, and a Haikelite flagship as well…

My guess is they are consolidating the production into just the MT09R as it seems more popular. I don’t think the sales of the MT03 are good enough since the MT09R came out to justify selling both.

Aaaaghhh!!! Having flashbacks to the FIRST group buy!!! Lookout!! Terry is about to jump out from behind a tree and blame all of you for this issue!!

OK, that was unkind. Still licking wounds. That being said…what the heck Haikelite?? They just can’t seem to leave well enough alone. I wonder if maybe they were a victim of their own country’s nefarious business practices and settled for a cheaper FET which actually ended up being a crappy knock-off.

As a follow up - my first generation TA rework of the MT09R with its aftermarket high bin led’s, TA driver and spring bypasses is still going strong! 22k of clean, beautiful light. It scares my neighborhood every night when I go on my walk/jog.

I am pretty sure this is the case, the more I have learned about how China works the more I realize just how Lucky we are in the USA. Some companies are simply not allowed to buy certain items, no matter what they do.

In this case I think they tried to get the same FET but ended up with another model due to not really understanding what they were doing.

I wish they had contacted me about it and let me find an alternative for them instead but I was so insistent on them using the correct components and what I have learned about how China does business (never ever say there is an issue until it can not be rectified), it makes sense that they didn’t want me to go through another round of testing to find an alternative FET. Not a justification but an understanding of why it happened.

It looks like the FET they are using is good enough for the stock light if you don’t bypass the springs and luckily it is a fairly simply fix if it does fail. Once replaced the driver should be like the ones I built.

Hi Freeme. Can I have the code please?

Thanks

Does Haikelite know about this? Do we know if they have plans to fix it?

I am saying “fix it” and not just “improve it” because if with just a spring bypass the FET dies, I don’t think that it will die only after spring bypass. It could die on flashlights with a little bit better soldered springs or with the randomly “better” springs of the batch or after 10 minutes use of an unmodified light, who knows.

I think that too many factors can add 5% power and too many factors can make some FETs 5% worse, that could be the 10% difference which kills the FET.

I wouldn’t use an elevator that has 100kg limit, if I was 98kg and at 102kg it falls and kills whoever is inside.

There is a big factor to keep in mind, while the lumen output might of only increased by ~15%, the current most likely increased by at least double that due to the law of diminishing returns.

A ~30% safety factor while far from ideal should mean that the majority of the drivers should not have an issue but yes, a higher then normal failure rate is quite possible.

Far as them fixing it, they have not said anything to me in some time so I am not really involved anymore. replacing the FET’s on the drivers that are already made in bulk is not practical, it would be more efficient to make a whole new driver on an assembly line then to pay people to replace FET’s by hand.

Thank you TA, that makes sense.

It can happen that a bad solder connection on thermal pad kills your MOSFET
basically the SIR800 is thermally at its limit on the driver PCB, bridging springs and putting fresh cells in a hot light can get it to thermall runaway

There are basically 2 factors that generate heat in a MOSFET, conduction and switching losses

1. conduction losses, as simple to understand as a resistor

BSC009NE2LS5IATMA1
lateste Infineon MOSFETS with Optimos-5 technology have 1-1.5mOhms with relative low switching losses (20nC@4.5V)
https://www.mouser.de/ProductDetail/Infineon-Technologies/BSC009NE2LS5IATMA1 (look out for the excact type there are differences in Gate charge)
the suggested from MikeC I am and Intl-Outdoor are using for quite a while has 1.2mOhm at 3.5V gate voltage at 25° Tj

so as they do n ot stay cool lets add about 40% to get to Tj=125°C worst case
So 1.68mOhm@30A= 1.5W thermal loss

SIR800DP
https://www.mouser.de/ProductDetail/Vishay-Siliconix/SIR800DP-T1-GE3?qs=sGAEpiMZZMshyDBzk1%2FWi0mX49X1Ojk8bkorZS29FXY%3D
this one is nice and gives a graph for cool and hot junction resistance
3mOhm at 3.5V = 2.7W

I had recently working on a driver with a chineese company fake Attiny85s from a big chineese distributor,
maybe same problem with the MOSFET if HL is trying to source cheaper locally

on Turbo we can ignore switching losses, but they can add at very high PWM cycle

2. switching losses

to expalin simple between on and off the MOSFET transits slowly from low resistance to very high
in that short time the increased voltage drop creates heat
There are various models to calculate those switching losses, some more simple use the Gate charge and voltage to estimate a rough value
For Synchronous buck or boost converters some companies support more sophisticated formulas or even programs that calculate it (On Semiconductor, TI, Infineon, Nexperia)

to keep it simple the faster it switches and the less “dyanic reesistance” the gate has the fewer losses
also the Gate resistance ghas a role, the smaller the better

BSC009NE2LS5IATMA1
rise time 6ns
fall time 4ns
Gate charge 20nC
Gate resistance 1Ohm
0,53W switching losses at 22kHz, even at 99% PWM cycle

SIR800DP
rise time 10ns
fall time 8ns
Gate charge 41nC
Gate resistance 1.2Ohm
0,9W switching losses, at 22kHz, even at 99% PWM cycle

Overall losses when ramped to 95%
BSC009NE2LS5IATMA1 1,87W
SIR800DP 3.34W

interested in the 70.2 version

this MOSFET looks faked
the triangle is all sides symmetrical while all SIRS I had have 2 longer sides so its as high as the letters
batch numbers went from T to W on mine, not sure why they got L marking does not make sense

to verify this it makes only sense to crack an actual production R800 open and compare the inner structures

original here on my drivers 17 months ago

404 and 800 13 months ago

404 9 months ago

interested in the 70.2

Placed my order of NW XHP70.2 in silver a few days ago.

Interested XHP70.2 CW in Silver thanks