E17A quadtrix is a better MCPCB for those small lights. The main reason is optic compatibility. Quadtrix E21A (0,2mm gap) can’t be used with standard 5050 TIR lens, the LES is 6,22mm. E17A quadtrix (0,1mm gap) LES is 4,95mm.
Single E21A is indeed the best from beam control perspective but, it can’t output more than 900lm at R70 (700lm at R9080) temporarily. And 2,5A is the max reliable current.
4x E17A array can take at least 7A (and triple the output of a single E21A). And lots of CCT/color mixing option
Optic compatibility is a good thing, but how are E17As color-wise and efficiency-wise compared to E21As? Personally, these are the characteristics I find the most important.
E17A is the smaller clone of E21A. For white color, it has the same options in all CCT and CRI. Being smaller also means slightly less efficient at the same current rating and obviously lower max power.
Is optic compatibility worth the efficiency losses? I am asking because I intend to use quadrix E21A with 5050 TIR optics and afaik It should fit just fine, with the exception that not all emitter surface is properly covered with lens.
Did you know that as the LES gets bigger you need to use larger optic to get the same Out-The-Front efficiency? And it’s not all about fitting the LED under the optic, it’s about beam control. Smaller LES means you more freedom to shape the beam with less light loss. As the light source moving farther from the LES center, more of the light “leaked” from the TIR optic sides rather than projected to intended direction.
Even with modification by trimming the optic base so more LES covered we still lost control (can’t shape the channeled beam).
Yes, I know that some lumens are lost in E21A/TiR setups due to incompatible optics, but I don’t know how many. My biggest concern about moving to E17A is what system(E21a+TIR or E17A+TIR) will have better OTFE as a whole. Do you have any data regarding luminous flux for quadrix E21A and quadrix E17A at the same current without optics?
It is also important to mention, that we are speaking here only about TIR optics, typical XM-Lx or XHP50 or other 5050 insulation gasket + OP reflector systems will be compatible with E21A and there shouldn’t be any light loss.
I have the same feeling about 4xE17A vs 4xE21A. Despite the potential optic loss of the 4xE21A, it will still end up much brighter than the 4xE17A. Also on all of my modded 4xE21A lights, I need to use DC-Fix to smooth out the beam anyways and I believe the same is required for 4xE17A so I don’t think beam tuning is a big concern in most cases. Therefore, I think for any host that fits a 16mm mcpcb, the 4xE21A will always be brighter and more efficient than the 4xE17A version.
I think where 4xE17A would shine is if it is used in a smaller mcpcb such as 13 or 14mm 3V only boards. There are a huge number of 16340, AA/14500, and some 18350/18650 lights where 16mm mcpcb is too large to fit and that is where the 4xE17A would be best put to use.
Well, there’s 4xE21A VR16SP4 for you guys don’t like E17A. You won’t believe me until it’s tested, totally understandable.
Just think of it as XHP35 vs XHP50 and you would perhaps, get the idea.
We arranged to try new material with said 20% better performance. It’s a beta release, but I took the risk. Sounds like finer and thinner aluminum oxide grain.
Now they’re still finding a facility and vendor where this new process can be done. Usually everything should be done within 2 weeks after order approved. I sent the design about a week ago and still waiting for their next step.
Interesting to hear of an E17A-optimized board in the works. The logic makes sense, and if the E21A continues to be offered, then there’s not loss of existing choices.
Since your site currently lists the E17A’s as out of stock, I assume you’ll be getting more of those. Will that include high CRI versions in multiple color temperatures like you offer for the E21A?
Also, are you planning to stock more of the E21A red, green, blue, and amber emitters?
Thanks! I see the store is already updated with a complete range of high CRI E17A.
Do you know if the E17A would be a better match for the Armytek optics that you have been selling?
I suppose if so, that question would be more relevant for the Tiara, as the Wizard seems like it would have high enough power it should use the E21A quadtrix regardless of how it pairs with the optic.
Armytek optic has 5,5mm aperture size. So a quadtrix E17A should fit with plenty of wiggle room. You’re right, its a better fit for Tiara (3A max). Wizard max current is about 2A. Although I haven’t tested VR16SP4m until they’re made, they should perform well up to 4A. The narrower gap at only 0,1mm will reduce it’s max over current capability for much better beam.
So, will VR16SP4 still be available? Or is it a discontinued product that will be replaced by VR16SP4m?
I agree with you. 4xE17A may be useful when you want to archive a tighter beam with more candelas or in smaller flashlights, but 4xE21A most likely will be brighter and more efficient even with current incompatible optics.
Some numbers from ESTtool(E21A 3500K and E17A 3500K):
)
