Astrolux MF03 - new pictures + video

Let’s discuss how much is too much for kcd? Do we want to use binocular to see so far. The answer is yes, please make it shoot the farthest as possible.
When I play with 450kcd, I am worried I shine on people at distance unknowingly because I can’t see clearly anymore. So everyone please use our big toy responsibly. I am thinking to bring my binoculars to be safe.

I’m sorry that I do not I understand that calculation, especially why the battery configuration matters, I just see 200W of heat that is generated at the front part of the head, that either stays where it is or it goes somewhere else and thus keeps the head temperature a bit cooler for a bit longer time. And the little practical experience that I have with these power levels is that to funnel 200W to elsewhere it needs a large aluminium cross-section, a tube in the center with common wall thickness will not do that sufficiently.

(btw, always I’m all for keeping material thickness as low as possible, don’t like big chunks of material where it is not needed, but here I see a very good reason to add that material)

Just options is enough. Save on engineering cost. MCPCB changes only.

That would be great :slight_smile:

I think for the approximately size of the tube which transfers the heat to the fins.

I see, so the idea is that that central shaft is close to massive then, with a small hole for the wires? (in that case I still think that a higher cross-section would matter))

Rather see 3-XHP70’s with 3 big deep reflectors at 8-9000lm Turbo like a huge BTU shocker and 5-70’s at 8-9000lms Turbo like a Ace beam X60. Not one for mixed emitter, multi-emitter lights. Rather have them all the same, but this is still very interesting… :+1:

Which is a shame. You’d think some manufacturers would take notice after the Q8’s positive reception.

Take a look on current >100W lights like X80, MF01, they are barely bigger than a Q8 and handle the heat for more than a minute

The MF03 compared to them has a huge head and also way more surface to loose some of the heat, that will increase sustained output

I agree. It doesn’t really make sense to have such a bottleneck directly under the heat source even though that (hopefully) thick tube is large. Trying to funnel 100% of the heat into 50% of the heat conducting area isn’t ideal.

Still looks like a very cool light though. Interested to see more details.

I’m sure that with its clunky build it will do much better than those tiny monsters, but with my simple suggested correction in the design that hardly costs extra (if any) I’m pretty sure it will still perform noticably better.

djozz, is it you are suggesting to have more thermal mass under leds mcpcb seating by reducing the length of fin? Those deep section of fin don’t have much airflow anyway, might as well make the fins shallower?

It is not the thermal mass I want it for (although it does add a bit that will help lengthening the turbotime somewhat just because of that), but I want it for a large enough cross-section to help the heat getting through to the rest of the body of the flashlight.

(and with 200W power the fins are mostly cosmetic, they will do a certain job at lower powers)

wolfdog1226. Are you four?

See what led up to my comments before you judge me….then mind your own business. :wink:

And what will this “little darling” be powered with? Driver and batteries is the next question. I do like my 20700’s, I just got a few for $7.91 each from a U.S.A. store.

Awesome !

You know they can’t push them that hard due to the poor efficiency.

The Imalent DX80 does 8 x 70.2 at 4,000 lumen each which is about 5A (6v). That’s about 32,000 lumen at 40 amps.

If this light had 8 x 70.2 at 8,500 lumen each that’s about 16A. Which is about 68,000 lumen at 128 amps.

You get double the output, but triple the power consumption.

Would we need to triple the batteries? Load it with 24 18650 cells? 6S4P.

The Imalent draws maybe 10A per cell on 8 cells.

This light would draw 32A per cell on 8 cells. So you’d need to at least run 16 cells to get it down to a more manageable 16A per cell. So at least 16 18650 cells. That’s a long battery tube.

I haven’t even mentioned the heat. You’d probably be triple at over 750 watts.

These are the reasons we are not seeing manufacturers push things so hard. The light would be so big and bulky and expensive to produce. It would not be practical at all and would therefore not sell well.

Kawiboy, I’m sure you know all this already, but I wanted to explain to all the newer folks the major hurdles involved.

^ Good information. The 5000 lumen Q8 is one of the harder driven lights stock but thanks to the non-bypassed springs the leds are not in the really inefficient region (they are with bypasses!). And the body size of the Q8 is quite in balance with the leds/currents, unlike i.e. the Acebeam with 25,000 lumen in a comparable package, that needs ultrafast stepdown (but is still IMO the coolest light around).

I get your idea. Highway for the heat to transfer to flashlight body and surrounding, not just adding thermal mass.