You are completely right: old dot pattern, new type of phosfor, I did not think of checking the phosfor.
Upper row: the three leds from the Jaxman E2L
Bottom left: S4 3D new phosfor-new dot pattern
Bottom right: some old cool white XP-G2 from my junk box, old phosfor- old dot pattern
I started reading and I was happy there is some hope until Mitko replied. But that is not reason that Djozz don’t put it in B158 and report results. Please tell us when you are done and thanks
Yeah m8, Cree is constantly “on a move”…in spite of they got the old structure their core is bigger, plus those 3 that i got here arent a hard runners you know, plus Jax reflowed them on a high temp i presume to they couldnt be dedomed like they should…
Its like the EU you know, always on a move but to unknown( usualy wrong) direction :sunglasses:
Let me guess Mitko… 20mm mcpcb so candidate is Supwildfire aka Mitko’s thrower light. Right?
I have just few good old xp-g2 s4 2b thanks to member The_Driver and that is emitter… Emitter like no other in single cell fet builds. Enough lumens and enough throw… Still can’t believe they gone :person_facepalming:
If some of you guys wish to sell old xp-g2 s4 2b just PM me and we will arrange something…
This is probably too little, too late, to help luminarium iaculator, but I happened to see in this Cree design guide , starting on page 21, that the XB-H is supposed to have the same die size and power of the (old) XP-G2. Maybe Cree changed the XB-H too, maybe not, but in either case there is not much to test with. I only found a 3000k in stock at Mouser
I guess it is worth a try? If it has same phosphor surface and in fact if it is same emitter like XP-G2 but only dome difference than it is worth a try Thanks
Well, I just followed that link and looked at page 21 myself, and I have an even more promising theory. It looks like the intention is that the XB-H is to XP-G2 what XP-L is to XM-L2. If that’s the case, it isn’t just as good as the XP-G2, but much better. Unfortunately, the PCT doesn’t seem to uphold this theory. The top rated XP-G2 emits a lot more lumens than the top rated XB-H does. But, like the XP-L, the XB-H is based on newer technology, so maybe it hasn’t reached its full potential yet. And, of course, if there is ever a XB-H2, that should easily blow away all the XP-G2’s by a large amount, right?
Hmmm… No one on BLF and CPF did test on above mentioned emitter? Well it will have some potential after dedoming for sure…
If it has higher forward voltage(and that is only good and not bad thing like most of you think) it will safely run on single cell 18650 FET driven light.
EDIT:
Just checked at Mouser… 41 pcs for total of 50 euro(60:money_mouth_face: qualifies for free shipping… or if it is that good.
There are more promising emitters (Lumileds has had a few interesting ones, and LedEngin), but they have weird footsprints and we are sort of stuck with emitters that fit a XM or XP foorprint because that is what we have DTP-MCPCB’s for. XB-D DTP-boards can not be sourced and you need DTP to get the performance you are looking for.
Nowadays it is a bit easier because many companies make DTP-boards and they can be tailor-made in quite small quantities (500 or so), but still someone needs to invest $500 to do that and hope to earn it back somehow.
XB-H = 2.29x2.29mm, XP-G2 = 3.5x3.5, that is quite a difference. The XB-H will even not touch the electrical pads on a XP-board. That said, you could get away with a XP-board if you can get solder to bridge that gap. I should be able to get that done, but it is not a common thing to do.