Convoy C8+ New look for an old favorite

I think the tint choice of the Convoy C8, but with the Astrolux C8 high-output driver, would be a real winner. I wouldn’t want the exact same firmware as the Astrolux (which is the BLF A6 firmware), but something along the lines of the biscotti firmware would be good.

Or, for a few more bucks, an XHP35 HI emitter, along with a decent boost-driver, would give both high-output and good efficiency. IMO, that should be the next evolution of the Convoy C8. May as well leap-frog the budget competition.

Nah, just use a ‘70 so you get a big ’+’ in the middle of the hotspot. :laughing:

Not a lot of point in trying to use a Boost driver with the XHP-35 in a single 18650 light as the same lumens and essentially the same beam can be had with a well driven XP-L HI. Similar amperage will be drawn from the cell in both cases, so there’s no real gain to go with a boosted 12V emitter. Just a more complicated driver that costs more.

That’s a fair point if you use the light only in maximum, which is probably what most people do with a C8. I was thinking of more efficient modes other than max, but I suppose that’s something more applicable to a light like the BLF A6. I think the XHP35 is supposed to be brighter and more efficient than the XP-L, but perhaps not worth the extra expense of a boost driver in a budget light.

Still, it would be nice to know what a C8 with an XHP35 HI would cost, before giving up on it.

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Desert-tan-convoy-C8-host-not-include-LED-and-driver/32871197026.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.B4GdUY

Host version available, i got one.

Although i like the new improved design i think that C8+ should have been 20% beefier than the standard C8 and run of 20700/21700 battery. Would be sweet spot for everything.

I agree it should have a little more lumens and take bigger batteries wouldnt hurt but i guess since convoy is about budget u cant expect that perhaps idk but then again whats the point calling it + if just the host changed? not much need imo. i have 2 c8 already.

J-dub:
Can Simon make the led shelf thicker? In the old C8 it was only 2mm thick. Nowadays many of us put SST40 leds and fet drivers in these hosts and I will be happier if it will have a 4mm thick shelf. It doesn’t really a big change and it is not even make the machining time longer. It even make it shorter as you need to remove less material from driver side.
The old shelf can handle well the stock 2,8A current but with 6-8A it will be better with more mass. Also like the 21700 battery idea.

I’m thinking maybe around $30?

http://www.kaidomain.com/p/S027411.KDLITKER-C8_2-Cree-XHP35-HI-Neutral-White-5000K-2000-Lumens-5-Mode-LED-Flashlight-Black

Nice! I wonder if that is really 2000 lumens, or somewhat exaggerated. Anyone know?

If it’s putting 1500mA into that LED, it might be 2000 lumens.

If that’s the light I think it is my buddy in H town got one and it was quite a bit short of the advertised lumens.

Edit: With the 12V emitter a single cell has to be boosted 3x and then some, so if the limit is 1500mA then the 35 isn’t going to do all that much more lumens than a well driven XP-L HI. Current overall will end up very comparable.

1500mA is overdriving the 12v XHP35, but it should be do-able with good heat-sinking. The XHP35 is more efficient than an XP-L. It might produce 2000 lumens at that current, but I’m not sure. The XHP35 HI, perhaps not.

But, yeah, specs are often over-stated, so 2000 lumens has me suspicious.

I thought the XHP35 HI had a slightly different beam (a bit more spill) than XP-L HI?

I also thought it used less current than XP-L HI to produce similar output, in other words I thought an XP-L HI had to be driven harder to produce the same output as an XHP35 HI, and thus XHP35 HI is more efficient?

Looking at these (Mfg. Specs) below there isn’t much difference in output/throw. Is there any reason to use an XHP35 HI at all? Why is Thrunite and Utorch using it for their single cell throwers instead of XP-L HI?

Emisar D1S…………18650…………XPL-HI…………1300lm……………720m
Maeerxu M8…………26650……….XPL-HI…………1200lm……………800m
Utorch UT02……….26650……….XHP-35 HI………1300lm……………700m
Catapault V6……….26650……….XHP-35 HI………1700lm……………750m

I need to learn about this because I had been planning on modding a single cell light with XHP35 HI instead of XP-L HI because I understood it would have slightly more spill and slightly higher lumen output, using less current from the cell.

.
The efficiency I was basing from the Cree specs:

Cree Data:

XP-L High
Maximum Drive Current………3 A
Max Power (W)………………10 W
Max Light Output…………….1095 lm

XHP35 High
Maximum Drive Current…….1.05 A
Max Power (W)………………13 W
Max Light Output…………….1483 lm

The XHP-35 can make around 2500-2600 lumens at 2.5A-2.8A, will burn up somewhere North of 3A usually. Anything over 2.5A or so is typically just making more heat without making noticeably more lumens.

The XP-L HI can do around 6.5-6.7A and make up to 1700-1800 lumens. It’s forward Voltage will limit it on a single cell so that it will not burn up.

So if you look at what the single cell from a boost driver is actually being asked to provide, the current from the cell is upwards of 4.5A or more, the driver itself producing heat to go along with the pushed emitter. You’re really not gaining much going 12V XHP-35 on a single cell. That’s what I find in the lights I’ve looked at. Most boost drivers won’t push the 35 to 2.5A from a single cell, so it’s lumens is down around where the XP-L HI is, begins to look like a lot of work to get back to where we started…

Spec sheets? Do we use those here?

BeamO:
The UT02 putting out a pathetic 900 lumens in real world in stock. But the Emisar D1S putting out about 1500 lumens stock. See my measurement google tables. You will fi d various flashlights with a lot of led type and beamshots.

XHP35 will rock once GXB172 or Shocki’s boost driver are out. Which can happen at any time…either close or far, they are a quarter late already.

Thanks, so if I understand correctly this is current draw at the emitter not current draw from the cell? And when the emitter pulls this current, the boost driver is actually pulling nearly twice that from the cell?

.

It was all I could find to see the numbers. :person_facepalming: I guess I need to ignore those cree specs and look at real specs here like ZozzV6’s measurement tables.

Thanks I didn’t know! You’re tables are a great reference I should have been looking at.

It really looks like the SST40 dedomed comes out on top over both XHP35 HI and XP-L HI, so I have to also consider that emitter for my mod.

I don’t. I use the CREE PCT. And what I find is that counting the LED only, the highest bin XHP-35 HI is more efficient than the highest bin XP-L HI along its entire rated range. The needed boost driver would have to be less efficient in order for the flashlight to end up less efficient. I thought it’s been said that a boost circuit is more efficient because it’s using the whole voltage output of the cell instead of burning up the voltage difference from the cell to the emitter like linear drivers do. But, I don’t know. Just going off what’s been said around here. I’m curious how real life differs from these widely held BLF beliefs. You mentioned heat, but I’m just looking at efficiency as power in, light out. Heat just makes up the difference in lost power.

In reference to what Dale wrote (post #43 above) how will this new boost driver make the XHP-35 HI an advantage over a FET driven XP-L HI?