Convoy L2/L6 modding thread

I’ve got plenty of walking lights, I just wanted to make sure that the hotspot at 300 feet wasnt so small that you can’t tell a tree from a bush. When it’s too laser like, well, it’s like a laser. You can’t tell what it’s illuminating. :slight_smile:

I took up to much space here. I’ll do some more reading in the forums. Thanks

I still remember a great C8 Mitko made using xp-g2 s2 2b , about a year ago , using fet driver and single cell, running @ 5.5amps for ~175kcd .

Higher binned xp-g2 s4 2b (old production) needs less current (4.3-4.5) to achieve a better result in the same host (around 192kcd). I have some of the old s4 leds running @ 4.3amps (single cell) without an issue .

I’m using C8 because i know the numbers for sure.

My most useful thrower currently is a L2 with XP-L V6 1A dedomed and FET+1 driver. It pulls almost 6 amperes of a single fresh Liitokala 5200 for 280 kCd and 1400 lumens. The light is very handy with its short tube, the spot has a reasonable size and runtime is suffizient.
The only thing I miss is a reverse clicky, haven’t found any yet in the size needed.

Huh? I’m using a little omten 1288 in mine, it works great. I don’t remember having to do anything special to make it fit.

I use the little Omten in virtually everything. even if you have to Make it work, it’s worth it. JB Weld Water Weld. About 4 minutes. :slight_smile: You can make spacers, adapters, or just plain glue it in.

Omten 1288 (left) and switch in my L2 (right):

I thought about gluing something on top of the switch but feared it would break.

Not gluing something, just glue. Hot glue to be exact. Works great.

With a hot melt-gun? I’ll give it a try …

Scuff up the top of the switch some, hold the glue/iron on it for a second, pull the iron away leaving a little ball of glue, wait for it to cool a couple seconds, then just before it gets hard shape it into a post with a flat top.

Only , V6 1A at 6 amps is arround 1900 lumens, there isnt practicaly ANy light loss caused by dedoming, when i first tested it i had to redo the test 3 times to believe it, cant explain it yet its true…i think other here tested it with same results

Not to mention that L2/W2 1A gives 1870 lumens OFT and nearly 2k lumens ” in the box” at 6 amps, there are some 6.5 amps yet they are rare
Those new W2/3 binned ones are kinda close to the new XPL2, they have lower Vf, made a C8 recently with W2 1A and even at 3.3 amp battery it gives 2.8 amps and 110k cds

ABout XHP35…well tested a dedomed E2 1A in L2 at 3 amp single mode buck driver yet the results aint that good, like 2700 lumens, nearly the same cds as V6/W2 yet tremendous ammount of heat coming from the body
I dont think this setup will be long lasting, especialy with warmer HI tints

Lumens might be more, I do my lumen measurements in an improvized “guest bathroom integrating sphere”. Readings seem a bit low generally, and probably even lower with throwers.

I also took some measurements of the L6 lens, although I don’t have any other L6 compatible lenses to compare it with. The light is stock and from the first batch with a cool white (6000K) emitter. I did my lux measurements from 50 cm away on the mid mode to keep the output as constant as possible.

On average, the lens reduces output about 5 percent and makes the light appear a tiny bit more cooler (6002/6001 K vs. 6054/6034 K) and greener (deviation of 0.0018 towards green away from the black body radiator line). It has a negligible effect on CRI: –1 point on most methods but –5 on the CRI (R9). Visually the difference is just about visible (delta e CIE94 1.99).

With lens

Without lens

Lens vs. bare difference

Since the spectrum is kind of spiky on the low CRI XHP70, I also put the lens in front of a high CRI 219B light (Astrolux S41). The loss of light is more pronounced on the higher wavelengths which explains the tiny loss of fidelity in red (R9) and the tint shift towards green. Keep in mind that the shifts are very minimal.

Since it’s a L2 mod thread here i have to ask :

Are there any buck drivers for L2 capable for resistor mod (that can deliver 4.5+ amps without any issue after).
I’m aware of Mtn buck drivers ofcourse , but I’m searching something cheaper if available.

I think this is about the best we can hope for with the XHP35; similar lux to top bin XPL but with nearly 50% more lumens.

XHP35 is a bigger (brighter) beam and this is comparing the TK61V4vn to the TN42 CW and NW…cd being almost equal…… :wink:

Plus you can get the XHP35 is warmer tints then a W2. I don’t know about others but I find a neatural tint / high CRI thrower to be FAR superior to a cool white thrower eve if the technical numbers are lower. The extra contrast allows me to see further with the warmer tint.

Let me start this by stating the obvious… opinions are personal renditions of one’s own experience. For example, in my own personal experience Chinese people have shiny black hair and very very dark brown eyes. That might lead me to deduce that ALL Chinese people have shiny black hair and very very dark eyes, but as I have yet to see every person of Chinese origin’s it would just be guessing, based on my own observations. With me so far?

I have built a lot of lights. I don’t know exactly how many, but probably somewhere in the 400 range. I personally have never seen an XP-L get 1900 lumens. I personally have never seen a de-domed emitter of any kind retain lumens output, or even come close. I have seen an XM-L2 U4 get 1811, that’s the highest I’ve seen from a single die Cree emitter. I’ve never personally seen a C8 make over 151Kcd. Not one of mine, nor anyone elses (and I have actually measured a few builds from some other people.)

I was once accused of having higher numbers than anyone, it was said that my methods were questionable. And here I see Mitko consistently give reports of numbers considerably higher than I’ve ever seen. I can’t say that Mitko does or does not see those numbers, I’m not there, I don’t know how he goes about it, I don’t know what equipment he uses. I don’t know where he buys his emitters and drivers. I can only say that I personally haven’t seen anything close to what he reports, and I’m the guy that has stood accused of spouting false high numbers.

The reason I say any of this is merely to introduce speculation that we all see some variance, numbers are a test result at a given time, people like getting hung up on these numbers and act like it’s the holy grail of all things flashlight. This is why I’m saying we need to be careful to not do that.

Can we perhaps do a test? Can we, Mitko and myself, someone else if they’re interested, agree to build a light, say a C8, with given specs, given materials and components. Measure said light. Then cross ship for cross measurements? See if I measure Mitko’s light at the same levels Mitko does and if Mitko measures my light at the same levels I do? Perhaps we could find where the middle ground is, there is probably some concrete truth to be found in there somewhere. Is it possible for two or more people to build the same light and consistently have the same results show in testing? If someone in Bulgaria acquires named parts, will they be the same parts someone in Texas acquires? We assume, I think, that a Cree XP-L V6 1A is a Cree XP-L V6 1A, regardless of where sourced, but perhaps this is not the case. What if we both bought from Hank at Intl-Outdoor, so our emitters came from the same source, would that then give us the same light? I’m curious about these things, about what makes the differences we see here.

I bought Old-Lumens modding supplies from him, a few months ago. In his things there is a second light meter just like my own. (Well, it’s the same model number, there are some different writings such as his says Dr. Meter, where mine does not. Could I have a clone?) I will attempt to take meter readings from each and see if they are consistent, this might tell me something in and of itself…

maukka, I love those charts! I may not fully understand em, but I love seeing all those results. Is there anywhere in there that gives a definitive 98% or 99% light transmission statement? (or 97 or whatever?) Because to be quite honest, my testing on the L6 confused me. I was going to test a second factory lens but alas, it was damaged by the blue plastic protective sheeting that comes on the UCLp lenses. (stripped off AR coating when I removed it, I tend to put the two blue sheets onto the stock lens for storage, thought I was protecting it, didn’t know I was effectively killing it. :frowning: )

Very well put^

I think people put WAY too much stock in lumen numbers personally. The idea that one of our home grown spheres is even 10% as accurate as a real mathematically calibrated sphere is stretching things IMHO.

I say this having put dozens of hours into calibrating, perfecting and setting up my own. While mine is now super consistent, reading the same output on the same light even 6 months after building it, I am still well aware that I would be surprised if it is within 10% accuracy of a real sphere.

This is why I never quote exact numbers from my lights/sphere, just rounded figures. That is simply the best I can hope for.

Now consistency is key and I can compare my own readings with other readings in the same sphere very accurately. Great for seeing how much of an improvement a mod made ect. But those numbers are still only applicable to my own setup except for possibly a percentage increase.

This is my own opinion but I wish people would stop quoting lumen readings down to the last digit (aka, 1466 lumens). Instead just round it off (instead say 1450 lumens).

When readers are always reading lumen readings down to the single digit it makes them think that we actually have them measured with enough accuracy to know the lumens down to the single digit. In reality we would be lucky to know the reading down to the hundreds.

Just my opinion, I will keep rounding my numbers and I do not expect anyone else to change the way they do things because of this post.

Yep I’m loving the NW TN42 is a beauty (liking it more and more every night) it’s alot nicer then the de-domed TK61V4vn which is yellow in comparison, or the TN42CW too ME IMHO!

cd only matters to the meter reading peter’s out there, in real life who can see that far with out a scope, binoculars, telescope. It’s just nice knowing it cranks it out according to the meter, bragging rights. The TK61XPG-2 was totally useless to me, so I gave it away, for cheap!

Now I’m glad RMM had the Neutral Tints in the XHP35HI’s when I ordered them, that’s what I’m running in my Black L6, SD75 and one of the T90-2’s Keepers all! Of course just my opinion. :+1:

To test these two meters of the same model but different purchase dates and places, I grabbed my Thrunite TN42 off the shelf along with the also new Eagle Eye X7. Both are stock lights, with the exception of spring bypasses in the TN42 carrier. Cells are As Is, straight off the shelf.

My meter reads the TN42 at 2487.45 lumens and OL’s reads 2494.35. Lux from my meter shows the same as his, at 697.5Kcd. Cells are at 4.12V (LG MJ1 * 4)

My meter reads the X7 at the same 1045.35 lumens as OL’s, but my meter shows 48.25Kcd while OL’s shows 50. A purple Efest 3500mAh 26650 was used in this one.

Lux reading taken at 5M, meter at x100, they both showed 27,900 for the big TN42.

Essentially a wash. The two meters basically give the same result, both have new 9V batteries in them, OL’s just got one today, mine got one Friday. Both from the same package.

At least I know the 1330B meter is pretty consistent. lol