Texas_Ace wrote:

giorgoskok wrote:

Are you testing a buck driver for xhp70.2 ?

How many amps can provide max ?

I am testing a Texas Avenger driver for the xhp70.2. Since the GT is so large it was pointed out that we might as well give it all the power.

The stock buck driver is good for around 6A, which is good enough but also leaves a few thousand lumens on the table with a P2 bin emitter that maxes out around 10-12A (at 12V).

I plan to order a P2 emitter for testing this weekend or next week.

In the early test I am guessing it was around ~7A but I was only using laptop cells since I did not want to melt the springs. With high drain cells it would be a lot more power.

Properly setup I am guessing it will be around ~10A+ with high drain cells and bypassed springs on a P2 emitter. That should be good for over 9k lumens (possibly peaking over 10k lumens for the first few seconds).

Nice , keep us updated TA .

Theodore41 wrote:

Texas_Ace wrote:

giorgoskok wrote:

Are you testing a buck driver for xhp70.2 ?

How many amps can provide max ?

I am testing a Texas Avenger driver for the xhp70.2. Since the GT is so large it was pointed out that we might as well give it all the power.

The stock buck driver is good for around 6A, which is good enough but also leaves a few thousand lumens on the table with a P2 bin emitter that maxes out around 10-12A (at 12V).

I plan to order a P2 emitter for testing this weekend or next week.

In the early test I am guessing it was around ~7A but I was only using laptop cells since I did not want to melt the springs. With high drain cells it would be a lot more power.

Properly setup I am guessing it will be around ~10A+ with high drain cells and bypassed springs on a P2 emitter. That should be good for over 9k lumens (possibly peaking over 10k lumens for the first few seconds).

Oh my God…
And what about the throwing,700K,more,less?

A quick measurement on the prototype showed a slight improvement corresponding to the slight increase in output with the dome on (just under 1400m vs ~1350m at 6A on the old driver and this is with laptop cells).

So I assume with the shaved dome and a P2 emitter that the prior numbers would only be improved upon but won’t know for sure until I try it.

Either way, why hold the LED back if the light can take the heat is my thinking. The regulated runtime would be short anyways with the xhp70.2.

I like your thinking

Push it to the limit! Keep us posted, I know I need one

Ok, finally got caught up on the MT09R mods for the day and had some time to mess with some other things. I think I figured out a way to make lumen spheres to sell much easier and better. I already made one today that is within 1% of my sphere. I am thinking about selling them if there is interest.

The real fun though are the GT’s. I have now modded both of my XHP70.2 GT’s with the new TA drivers, installed the M4 80cri 4000k XHP70.2’s in both of them, 1 with dome on and the other with dome off.

I also got some readings. Keep in mind that I just sent my good meter to another member on here last week as part of a trade and I am needing to order a replacement. So I am just using my cheapo HS1010A that I know reads lower then my Dr lumens meter the old readings were from.

So these readings are with the lower reading meter, only taking readings at 7m, and the 4mm tall centering ring (higher numbers can be had with the shorter ones but you get a dark spot in the beam as you go shorter) I am now getting:

Dome on XHP70.2 M4 80cri 4000k – 520kcd for a whopping 1450m of throw!

Sliced dome XHP70.2 M4 80cri 4000k – 725Kcd for an even more impressive 1700m of throw!

Edit: For comparison I took a measurement with the stock GT to see what it would do on this meter. I know with the Dr meter this GT got over 1mcd on a low humidity day.

Stock XHP35 HI 4000k GT on this cheap meter – ~850Kcd – ~1850m of throw

So this means that the XHP70.2 with dedome is somehow reaching ~80-85% of the xhp35 hi throw levels!

I am pretty sure the dr lumen meter was reading about 10-20% higher then this one but did not compare them before sending it off.

I also held a small reflector over the LED to get some lumen readings in my sphere and it read well over 9k lumens! It was so powerful it started to melt my diffusing layer, which is why I set about making a replacement sphere to have on hand in case this one ever was damaged enough to change the readings.

Now far as the beam goes, the dome on version has a very nice beam, very close to the stock tint with a tad more yellow that is inherent with the xhp70.2.

The dedomed XHP70.2 does tint shift quite a bit warmer, between 3500-4000k if I had to guess. It is not bad but not for everyone.

I also stress tested the driver and light setup by cooking it with thermal control turned off and 8 30q cells until the LVP kicked in. It got up over 190f degrees but everything is still working great and these numbers are after that abuse. So I think I can say that the driver is stable at this point!

I am busy with the MT09R modding right now but if there is enough interest to sell ~20-25 drivers I can order the components and build a batch.

Now I just need to do some final testing with these and I will be listing 1 or maybe both for sale.

I will fully admit, I am looking to turn as large a profit for them as I can get. I figure after all the work for this project I don’t have to be shy about that.

I am debating weather to list them on ebay or run an “auction” here on BLF as I would prefer they go to a BLF family member. plus it saves me fees.

I am very curious what tint people would prefer to see in a light like this? 4000k like the stock GT? or a more neutral 5000k with possibly a bit less output? Or a 5700k CW that will not throw as far in the real world?

Personally for my own light I plan to go with an dome on 80cri 4000k.

Before anyone jumps in

+I CALL DIBS ON ONE BLF GT XHP70.2 DRIVER!!!! +

PayPal ready, just let me know when you are ready to sell.

Thanks!

TA- before you sell one, please post some beamshots of that 9k lumen monster!

johny723 wrote:

TA- before you sell one, please post some beamshots of that 9k lumen monster!

Yeah, I want to get some good numbers with a better meter before selling anyways. So most likely not before next week anyways.

I also want to get some beamshots with all 3 lights side by side, the stock GT, xhp70.2 dome on and xhp70.2 dome off.

Just not sure of a good location for such a shot, most of the places I use are only big enough for one light, maybe 2.

That would be awesome!
BTW, have you tried an xhp50.2 ? It should be driven to the full power even with the stock driver at 5 amps.

johny723 wrote:

That would be awesome! BTW, have you tried an xhp50.2 ? It should be driven to the full power even with the stock driver at 5 amps.

I have not been able to find an MCPCB for it that would work in the GT, if someone knows of one I am willing to check but seeing as we are getting ~70%+ of the XHP35 numbers with the xhp70.2, I am going to say that most would prefer the 70.2. Honestly even it shines further then the naked eye can really see anyways.

I took some readings with the stock GT to compare with this meter and the results are even closer then I would have EVER guessed. I will need to recheck my numbers for sure once my new meter shows up.

It appears that the XHP70.2 is somehow reaching 80-85% of the throw that the stock XHP35 hi is doing! I am not sure how that is even possible but that is what the meter said in virtually back to back tests.

TA, are you testing them outdoors and at what meter height and distance?
High output lumens tends to have more reflections into light meter from surrounding that’s not open space.

DENGOH wrote:

TA, are you testing them outdoors and at what meter height and distance? High output lumens tends to have more reflections into light meter from surrounding that’s not open space.

That is a good point, these tests were indoors. That is a possible explanation. Although in past testing I have not really noticed a difference in readings at the same distance indoors or outdoors with my particular location.

Once the new meter shows up I will take some outdoor readings.

I will say that these numbers are higher then I expected.

Even if numbers of low output leds like an xhp30 are lower and numbers of more powerful leds like an xhp 70.2 are higher due to a low quality meter or indoor testing, it is clear that shaving or dedoming increases throw significantly even with the xhp 70.2!

johny723 wrote:

Even if numbers of low output leds like an xhp30 are lower and numbers of more powerful leds like an xhp 70.2 are higher due to a low quality meter or indoor testing, it is clear that shaving or dedoming increases throw significantly even with the xhp 70.2!

Yes, the xhp70.2 seems to gain around 40% throw from a dedome, much more then I expected.

Wow! I’m very interested in a TA GT XHP70.2 driver when they’re available.

Forgive my ignorance, but I’m having difficulty understanding all of the modifications needed to get the 70.2 into the GT.

Do the battery carriers require modification? Does the 70.2 need a new MCPCB or can it be reflowed onto the GT’s stock 35 board?

Thanks, Texas_Ace!

goshdogit wrote:

Wow! I’m very interested in a TA GT XHP70.2 driver when they’re available.

Forgive my ignorance, but I’m having difficulty understanding all of the modifications needed to get the 70.2 into the GT.

Do the battery carriers require modification? Does the 70.2 need a new MCPCB or can it be reflowed onto the GT’s stock 35 board?

Thanks, Texas_Ace!

It will need the Driver, MCPCB, XHP70.2 LED itself and Centering ring.

The stress test I ran was to see if the carrier springs could handle the power and they passed, although they were pretty warm at the end of the test.

I am working on getting the mcpcb’s made and getting them sold but it has been a hard sell for lumintop and they have still not given me an answer. If they don’t sinkpad makes an mcpcb that will work with some sanding/filing although it is not quite as nice.

TA, Where did you get the GT centering rings for the XHP70.2?

Texas_Ace wrote:

It will need the Driver, MCPCB, XHP70.2 LED itself and Centering ring.

I hope Lumintop gets on board after seeing some photos of your 70.2 protos…

AlexGT wrote:

TA, Where did you get the GT centering rings for the XHP70.2?

I 3D printed them

I actually printed a bunch of different sizes since the height plays a big role in the focus. Around 2.5mm saw the highest lux but it also has a dark spot in the middle at longer ranges. By going up to ~4-4.5mm it removes the dark spot with minor effects on the lux.

goshdogit wrote:

Texas_Ace wrote:

It will need the Driver, MCPCB, XHP70.2 LED itself and Centering ring.

Thanks for the explanation.

I hope Lumintop gets on board after seeing some photos of your 70.2 protos…

Yes, I am hoping they do as well, if these numbers hold up I am guessing they will, even I am shocked at these numbers if they are real.

I would not believe them if I had not seen them myself and I still doubt.

I am interested on the MCPCB with 70.2

I am interested in modding my GT with a 70.2. I will purchase the parts if they are made available…

Guys, how hard is to replace bottom part of GT, where battery tube goes in?
Mine is broken, Lumintop offered that they can repair that or I can do it by myself.
Mike

Well, it is very simple, you just unscrew the head and then screw it back on the new light engine.

The hard part is getting the head off. You will need a strap wrench almost assuredly. I was able to get one apart without a lot of hassle by loosening the bezel first and then the head. I carefully clamped the light engine in a vice to do this.

some are much harder to open though.

I would try opening it first and see what happens.

I noticed on CPF that Vinh is in the process of modding a BLF GT.

His modded one will use XHP 35 HI emitters arranged in 18 quads … 72 emitters total!

Vinh’s 72x XHP35 HI BLF GT

Firelight2 wrote:

I noticed on CPF that Vinh is in the process of modding a BLF GT.

His modded one will use XHP 35 HI emitters arranged in 18 quads … 72 emitters total!

Vinh’s 72x XHP35 HI BLF GT

He’s said before he cares more about lumens than throw.

My prediction is that is going to cost around $20 per emitter…