Lumintop GT4

686 posts / 0 new
Last post
Wieselflinkpro
Wieselflinkpro's picture
Offline
Last seen: 13 hours 44 min ago
Joined: 05/21/2015 - 04:34
Posts: 853
Location: Germany - TLF

KawiBoy1428][quote=johny723 wrote:
p. I could give a crap about the LED, it’s the Reflector getting smoked I’m pissed about! (I usually purchase extra reflectors just in case) but now it’s really not worth it anymore, been there, done that, bought a shirt, burned it……….

Do you need a GT-Reflector? I have a spare one becaus of my aspheric-mod.
KawiBoy1428
KawiBoy1428's picture
Online
Last seen: 3 min 24 sec ago
Joined: 04/11/2014 - 18:05
Posts: 3623
Location: The Motor City

Lothar wrote:
KawiBoy1428 wrote:

Yes the 70/70.2 and the XHP35 can be de-domed cleanly…. I have done it a few times…

Here is a too closely shaved XHP70.2 that started to burn….I soaked it in a strong thinner to remove the silicone.

It can be done… Wink


Interesting. I have one that I shaved too close and it started burning. I have a new XHP70.2 on the way that I plan on slicing a little higher, but in the meantime I could try your method, I’ve already written the burnt XHP70.2 off.

I know previously we used petrol/gas to dedome XML’s and XPG’s, but you now mention strong thinners.
- Does it specifically need to be thinners?
- Would turpentine, benzine, surgical spirits, or any other solvent work as well?
- For how long do you leave it in the thinners? When do you know it’s ready?
- Does the silicone float off, or do you have to peel it off?

Thanks


The thinner is what we have on hand at work, it will destroy 2 part epoxy paint we use on our machines, it is very strong. I kept the burnt or closely shaved LED soaked and some will fall off, some will blow off, and some can be coaxed off with a wet tipped Q’Tip ….Gently…you don’t want to pull the phosphorous off with it…..

KB1428 “Live Life WOT

KawiBoy1428
KawiBoy1428's picture
Online
Last seen: 3 min 24 sec ago
Joined: 04/11/2014 - 18:05
Posts: 3623
Location: The Motor City

Wieselflinkpro][quote=KawiBoy1428 wrote:
johny723 wrote:
p. I could give a crap about the LED, it’s the Reflector getting smoked I’m pissed about! (I usually purchase extra reflectors just in case) but now it’s really not worth it anymore, been there, done that, bought a shirt, burned it……….

Do you need a GT-Reflector? I have a spare one becaus of my aspheric-mod.

Thanks for the offer, But I have 2, they were in the picture I posted. Thanks again!

KB1428 “Live Life WOT

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 59 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 19893
Location: Heart of Texas

A GT reflector, interesting… I am about to try a prototype driver with an XHP-35 and have been considering what to put it in… my thoughts lead me to wanting to build a light from scratch but I don’t know with what reflector. Can I get a GT reflector? Would I contact Lumintop or what?

Blinkinglights
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 48 min ago
Joined: 01/06/2019 - 06:28
Posts: 85
Location: NY

I am selling my GT70, I just got it, still has the wrapper on it. Back in the box it goes. PM me if you anyone wants it.

Me love lights lonng tyme!

California_Prepper
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 02/23/2019 - 13:25
Posts: 77

Any possibility of the gt4 having a built in charger?

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 hours 51 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8377
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas
California_Prepper wrote:
Any possibility of the gt4 having a built in charger?

Not at this time, it was talked about but charging 8 cells in 4S series is no simple task and not one I trusted to a cheap budget option crammed into a light. Not to mention the stupid amount of time it would take to charge.

Better to just use an external charger.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 35 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 10937
Location: Houston Texas

California_Prepper wrote:
Any possibility of the gt4 having a built in charger?

To do it safely or “correctly” you would probably need to go the same route as other companies did such as Olight and Imalent. You’d need to have a sealed battery pack with a BMS (battery management system). Then you could charge it at 2A@19v for decent charge times.

I’m not a big fan of battery packs and most people on BLF aren’t either. So you have to decide which would you rather have, convenient charging at the expense of a more expensive battery pack where you can’t choose what cells you want or to run only 4 cells, etc… Or slightly less convenient charging, but have full control of what batteries and whether to run 4 or 8 celks and have cheaper costs.

So each option has their advantages and disadvantages.

At this point in time I don’t even know if the GT battery tubes would even be capable of running a battery pack. Is there enough room inside? Maybe they can use the existing tube and design a new tail cap with the charging port inside? IDK.

California_Prepper
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 02/23/2019 - 13:25
Posts: 77

Makes perfect sense thank you.

California_Prepper
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 02/23/2019 - 13:25
Posts: 77

Is there an update on the release date? Last I recall was sometime after the Chinese New year.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 hours 51 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8377
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas
California_Prepper wrote:
Is there an update on the release date? Last I recall was sometime after the Chinese New year.

There are issues that need to be addressed with the prototype, so figure it will be some time before it is ready for production.

scr79423
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 3 days ago
Joined: 04/29/2018 - 15:12
Posts: 160
Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Texas_Ace wrote:
California_Prepper wrote:
Is there an update on the release date? Last I recall was sometime after the Chinese New year.

There are issues that need to be addressed with the prototype, so figure it will be some time before it is ready for production.

will the GT4 beat the R90C in lumens and throw?

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 5 days ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta
scr79423 wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
California_Prepper wrote:
Is there an update on the release date? Last I recall was sometime after the Chinese New year.

There are issues that need to be addressed with the prototype, so figure it will be some time before it is ready for production.

will the GT4 beat the R90C in lumens and throw?

Please see post from Texas Ace:

Texas_Ace wrote:
This light was first planned WAY back when the GT was still in the planning stages. Needless to say things have progressed since then and it is not quite as revolutionary now as it would of been 2 years ago.

At this point, yeah there are other lights that would be direct competition for sure. How they would compare is something I can’t know without some testing though.

Lumintop finally said they want to proceed with this project and I was sure not going to say no lol.

Based on VOB’s lumen readings from the R90C though, I do expect higher lumen output from the GT4. My goal is ~20k real lumens or more.


key word above “real” lumens
He’s referencing Matt (vestureofblood) who tested the R90C and the results were significantly less than Imalent claimed output:
R90C claimed 20 000 test result 15 274 difference -24% less
GT70 claimed 7 500 test result 7 537 difference +0.01% more

Watch this video and it’s easy to see that the Imalent is brighter but the output doesn’t appear even close to 2.75x that of the GT70

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 5 days ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta

Hey TA,

I believe that currently the only direct competitor to this is the R90C but I’m curious if you think that the MF03 concept will be in this class also? At first glance the MF03 seems like it’s more of an X70 competitor with its 7x xhp70.2 and single xhp35 hi. However, from the photo below all of the 70.2 reflectors are smooth finished rather than the standard orange peel. Shouldn’t that all add up to something like 20 000+ lumen with 700+kcd?

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 hours 51 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8377
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

mattadores wrote:
Hey TA,

I believe that currently the only direct competitor to this is the R90C but I’m curious if you think that the MF03 concept will be in this class also? At first glance the MF03 seems like it’s more of an X70 competitor with its 7x xhp70.2 and single xhp35 hi. However, from the photo below all of the 70.2 reflectors are smooth finished rather than the standard orange peel. Shouldn’t that all add up to something like 20 000+ lumen with 700+kcd?
!{width:80%}https://m4dm4x.com/wp-content/uploads/MF03/8c7fb64298cbf4b.jpg!

Without some more details and/or test it is impossible to say exactly what it will do but just looking at it, I would guess less throw (the center xhp35 might bias that but the beam would be very different) and or course the possibility of higher lumens, assuming they have a good enough driver to power it properly.

M4D M4X
M4D M4X's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 49 min ago
Joined: 03/19/2014 - 05:17
Posts: 7336
Location: Austria (GMT + 1)

my MF03 draft was made a year before i heared of the X70...

 

already member of M4DM4X.com ?

the best deals are waiting for YOU!

 

before you buy elsewhere mail me: MARTIN@M4DM4X.COM - i will try to save you money!

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 hours 51 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8377
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas
M4D M4X wrote:

my MF03 draft was made a year before i heared of the X70…

I think he meant more as a general final performance competitor vs a flashlight designed to compete with another light.

Yokiamy
Yokiamy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 55 min 8 sec ago
Joined: 10/18/2016 - 15:47
Posts: 1481
Location: Netherlands
Texas_Ace wrote:
M4D M4X wrote:

my MF03 draft was made a year before i heared of the X70…

I think he meant more as a general final performance competitor vs a flashlight designed to compete with another light.

LOL

Edited by: sb56637

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 5 days ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta
Texas_Ace wrote:
M4D M4X wrote:

my MF03 draft was made a year before i heared of the X70…

I think he meant more as a general final performance competitor vs a flashlight designed to compete with another light.

Correct.

I currently have a few big lights that each cover a rather specific category:
DX80 extreme output – high flood – medium throw
MF04 low output – no flood – extreme throw
MT03TA extreme output – extreme flood – no throw

The GT & MF04 created a new category of extreme throw – low output/flood
The GT70 & R90C created a new category of high throw/output – mild flood (due to spill)
-I don’t personally consider the MF04S in the above category given it’s reported less than 1 minute runtime on turbo. otherwise sure it’s in.

The GT4 looks like it could amplify the high throw/output – mild flood category into extreme throw/output – medium flood (due to spill)

The DX80, X80GT, MS12 & X70 are just output monsters with no realistic throw in comparison to the new 1 000 000+ cd category. The X70 makes only 311kcd and has extremely small reflectors so to me the MF03 looks kind of in between with it’s deeper smooth reflectors was my guess. Maybe like a DX80 with extra throw?

Anyway… I’m stoked for the GT4 whenever it eventually comes out. I really like the idea of a mild/medium flood, huge hotspot, mega thrower! My MF04 is crazy but in the dark I basically can’t see where I’m walking. My DX80 is also crazy but using turbo in the winter basically blinds me due to the sheer amount of light reflected back at me off the snow

Or maybe it just looks cool and I’m good at rationalizing why I need more super expensive toys! Facepalm

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 35 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 10937
Location: Houston Texas

MF04C?

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 5 days ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta
JasonWW wrote:
MF04C?

“S”… corrected. good catch!

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 35 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 10937
Location: Houston Texas

Okay, I thought they where releasing a new model. Lol

johny723
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 11 hours ago
Joined: 06/08/2014 - 08:48
Posts: 379
Location: slovakia

do we actually have any beamshots or info about lumen output, runtime and temperature of the GT4 or are we just speculating and waiting for it to be released?

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 59 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 19893
Location: Heart of Texas

Texas_Ace has a prototype and the lumens numbers are as tested by him, there are some revisions to smooth out details but other than that the functioning light has been tested. Wink

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 hours 51 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8377
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas
johny723 wrote:
do we actually have any beamshots or info about lumen output, runtime and temperature of the GT4 or are we just speculating and waiting for it to be released?

I did get a prototype in and have tested it but it has issues so I have not made the tests public yet until I know how they will be fixing them.

I can say the thermal performance is the best I have ever seen, With this much power it will still have to step down the output of course but it heats up surprisingly slowly considering the power. I am very pleased with the thermal performance.

The output is also good but sadly the LED’s died during disassembly/reassembly so I am unable to test it properly until I get replacements. They should be in next week.

Based on basic math though, 20k lumens is a very reasonable number I expect. The MT09R with 3x xhp70.3 and only 4 batteries can do ~18k lumens, so with 4x XHP70.2 and 8 cells it is not a big leap to assume that 20k lumens is well within reason assuming they get some good bin LED’s.

mattadores
mattadores's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 5 days ago
Joined: 01/21/2019 - 18:45
Posts: 610
Location: Alberta
Texas_Ace wrote:
johny723 wrote:
do we actually have any beamshots or info about lumen output, runtime and temperature of the GT4 or are we just speculating and waiting for it to be released?

I did get a prototype in and have tested it but it has issues so I have not made the tests public yet until I know how they will be fixing them.

I can say the thermal performance is the best I have ever seen, With this much power it will still have to step down the output of course but it heats up surprisingly slowly considering the power. I am very pleased with the thermal performance.

The output is also good but sadly the LED’s died during disassembly/reassembly so I am unable to test it properly until I get replacements. They should be in next week.

Based on basic math though, 20k lumens is a very reasonable number I expect. The MT09R with 3x xhp70.3 and only 4 batteries can do ~18k lumens, so with 4x XHP70.2 and 8 cells it is not a big leap to assume that 20k lumens is well within reason assuming they get some good bin LED’s.

SOLD! NOW:

California_Prepper
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 02/23/2019 - 13:25
Posts: 77

If the blf gt70.2 can push 7.5k-8k lumens, am I wrong in multiplying this by 4 and thinking this has the possibility to push 28k-32k lumens?

New to this. Just trying to learn as much as possible.

mortuus
mortuus's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 30 min ago
Joined: 12/16/2014 - 09:33
Posts: 1899
Location: Sweden

California_Prepper wrote:
If the blf gt70.2 can push 7.5k-8k lumens, am I wrong in multiplying this by 4 and thinking this has the possibility to push 28k-32k lumens?

New to this. Just trying to learn as much as possible.

well in theory maybe yes, since this light will have no active cooling i think going over 20k is not needed imo. Better if they keep around that mark and make it run as stable as they can before thermal stuff does the job and steps down, but this is just me guessing unless lumintop wanna compete with acebeam and imalent in lumens war… Just looking at the few images posted i can imagine even at 20k lumens or so it will be an impressive light with 4 deep reflectors pushing what 1km throw or something ?

...where Frugal meets with Flashlight!

BlueSwordM
BlueSwordM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 55 min ago
Joined: 11/29/2017 - 12:34
Posts: 4825
Location: Canada

How are you going to limit the current of a FET driver?

Unless the driver is a buck+FET driver, you won’t be getting less than 20k lumens in this light, personally knowing it’s going to be in the real of 28k lumens+ instead.

Indeed, with 8×18650s and dual silver plated BeCu springs in the carriers, and a thick short dual silver plated dual BeCu springs, current is going to go amok.

My very own high current Beryllium Copper springs Gen 3:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/67401
Liitokala Aliexpress Stores Battery Fraud: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60547

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 hours 51 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8377
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

California_Prepper wrote:
If the blf gt70.2 can push 7.5k-8k lumens, am I wrong in multiplying this by 4 and thinking this has the possibility to push 28k-32k lumens?

New to this. Just trying to learn as much as possible.

Kinda sorta. You never get exactly 4x the output due to resistance and other factors but yes, it is safe to say I am being conservative in my 20k+ lumen estimate.

Pages