IF25A charging board

My IF25A reports 4.3v in battery check, whereas a battery charged in my FC11 reports as 4.2v.

Is the IF25A charger broken or are Sofirn batteries meant to charge to 4.3v?

Sofirn told me:

Was more concerned about the charging circuit than the battery.

I did find on google that some batteries are 4.3v ones.

Just noticed one of the 6500k emitters is quite dim (There are 2x2700k and 2x6500k). I might have just been sent a faulty unit.

Are you talking about IF25A or IF25? IF25A has no tint ramping and all emitters are of the same tint. I am asking because you created another thread talking about a defective IF25A and in your OP you are also talking about the IF25A. Just out of curiosity, do you mind posting a picture showing the dim or failed emitter along with the other ones? If it's only slightly dim and only on moonlight mode it's probably not as severe as if it failed completely. The voltage deviation is not really a defect as the components used on the driver have a big tolerance when indicating the battery's voltage. This lack of calibration will be solved with the introduction of Andúril 2.0 which has a voltage calibration feature included.

IF25A. It has no tint ramping but the 4000k does have 2x2700k and 2x6500k.
Please view the image of the emitters: https://sofirnlight.com/if25a-anduril-max-3800m-with-battery-choose-4000k-6500k-p0104.html

In mine I can tilt the torch and read the emitter kelvin numbers.

It’s dimmer in all rampings btw. I can try to get a picture later.

I just looked at the emitters and the dim one is actually really dark colour somehow too around it.

There’s no tint ramping only brightness ramping, despite the different tint LEDs.


Here we go, see bottom right is the dim one and it seems it is not that yellow anymore.

This seems to be a fluke, you just happened to get a lemon if that is the case. The actual IF25A does have all 4 of the same emitters although.. they have kept the original MCPCB that they were using in the regular IF25 tint ramping one.. It's just how industry and production lines work.. If you can re use a part, or make it so it can be used in multiple products, then you will use that part in multiple similar products. It's just cutting costs and using old batches of parts that might otherwise end up unused or unused for a period of time and that is not cost effective.

See the following 2 pictures:

As you can observe from the optics removed picture, the MCPCB still retains the 2700K/6500K markings from the original IF25 MCPCB..

But.. you can also clearly observe that physically, all 4 emitters are of the same kind, namely the 4000K variant, (in this particular picture it's actually the 6500K version) regardless of the obsolete/leftover markings.

The IF25 and IF25A are literally/physically the same light, take away the driver and the used LED's (even the Switch indicator LED's are now green&red instead of blue&red)

Sofirn simply changed the driver and the emitters but used all of the otherwise compatible parts from the original IF25, simply to cut costs on developing same basically MCPCB twice..

That's also why they have kept the 2 wires for the supposedly 2700K/6500K (or so marked) emitters, because on the old/original MCPCB they used to be split paths electronically on the old light.. Now they are only soldered on the same pad (in parallel) on the newer driver.. simply to avoid extra costs on producing an extra MCPCB with only one electrical path.

Just do the math on how much extra costs would you have in R&D plus production costs, compared to simply adding another wire to run the "2 sets of 2 emitters" in parallel. I bet using the extra wire was cheaper ;)

Cheers!

I am surprised no one commented how cool the answer from Sofirn was.

In regard to IF25A on-board charging all my cells (Panasonic / LG / Samsung18650, Sofirn 21700) top out at 4.15~4.14 measured on a Fluke 179.

Mine is the 6500K cold tint version. No major complaints.