Sofirn SP70 Alone $50, PM for AMZ US CODE(LIMITED)

A Ring of xhp70.2 like acebeam XT80 and Direct drive all the LEDs :disguised_face: :smiling_imp:

Triple 21700 is thicker than quad 18650.
If you want thinner than quad 18650 and thicker than single 26650, consider triple 18650 and single 32650.

As far as I know, there are no really good 32650 cells in production, so I would also prefer 3×18650 flashlights.
It is a very handy format, and I think, Sofirn could develop awesome models of it.

My detailed proposal (I could not determine, in what extent I am off topic, but I need to spread words ;) ) for one possible model:
3×18650 in parallel configuration
3 separate XP (3535) footprint emitter on d=16mm copper boards each (high CRI emitters would be welcomed - LH351D !)
one separate TIR optics per emitter (essential part!)
spacers and bezel should be designed for super easy optics swapping
efficient mass and some fins for heat spreading
don't have to be super bright, but around 2-2.5A sustainable current per emitter would be good (I am not expert at the driver part)

And...
please take a look at optics chosen by me, here (all have sizes d1=20mm d2=18mm, h=12.8mm):
Clean/smooth optics
Frosted optics
Bead optics

Once this would become alive, I think, it should be super awesome - and this wouldn't be something extraordinarily bright and heavy, just very practical.
(I think, it would weigh around 280-350 g without batteries.)

Btw, I had some of these optics installed already in one of my lights, and had very interesting results.

With everything in parallel and separate it sounds like you just want 3 tube lights welded together and controlled by a single switch.

After some thinking I like that idea a lot, though I would do it with a factory-shaved dome and quad 18650.

I wonder what current did you really mean…
because 8-9A 6V won’t deliver 7500 lm even on the LED. 8-9A 12V would, but that’s quite a lot….7-8 would be more like it.

High power and high CRI with a focus on good tint would be nice. Being able to swap the head for flood/throw and the tube for different size cells would be pretty sweet too. Add a special anodizing colour option like dark blue or bright green, with tubes/heads to match.

Basically yes, but two main reasons would be:

  • triple and quad optics are manufactured with very few possible beam patterns (mostly one or two), and if you look up the optics, which I have linked, they offer way much better beam shape customization (regarding hotspot size, hotspot to spill transition, spill brightness - I can include my observations, if you are interested) - which would really shine, when it would be used in the 2000-3500 lumen range.
  • because of the 3535 format, anybody could source his own preferred emitters - even attempting to mix tints

Considering how popular the BLF Q8 form was, sticking with 4x18650 batteries and an XHP70.2 LED would make for a very nice light. 4 cells in series matches the 12v needed for the LED (with a buck or linear driver), much better than a 3-cell version would.

Just a single XHP70.2 would probably be enough, and be well matched to what the light could maintain without overheating.

You could distinguish the light from the Q8 by including a diffuser cone to make it a nice optional lantern.

I know a lot of people here want to see the 21700 and 20700 cells being used, but IMO we all have a lot of 18650 cells already and I’m not ready to make that jump quite yet. I’m not convinced they’re a better cell than the 18650, especially in multi-cell configurations (due to heat, spacing, and energy density).

The 2S 28650 will offer more natural in the hand not too fat like 4x18650 also the classic look of old Maglite and the good cell like Lii-500 or Shockli 5500 is cheap and provide decent current/capacity. Today we have plenty of 4x18650 light to buy in the market but not many good 2x28650 the L6/S70s were couple years old and not powerful enough for 2018 …that my idea.

You are correct, the 8-9A was for the 12V situation, in 6V it needs quite a lot more current, like 15A (and very good heatsinking but that should be possible with a host this size)

Please, no. Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.

We’ll get a better light, sooner, for less money, by not going for stuff like this. The fewer bespoke parts, the lower the cost and the easier it is to build in quantity. Plus, if the light has a plausible market beyond BLF, one an order of magnitude larger than the BLF, then the fixed costs can be planned to spread over a much larger volume, again leading to a cheaper light and a happier manufacturing partner, one who will want to do more projects like this.

Actually the fact that there’s a large market beyond BLF speaks for factory shaving.
Because shaved dome makes a much better thrower and few non-BLFers will be able to shave LEDs themselves. So this would be a much better stock product for not much higher price. With 9 cm reflector it should outthrow BLF GT with domed XHP70.2 while providing not much lower output. Similar performance, 2/3 size, half price.

I thought this “K70” dealy was to essentially be a revamped L6 of sorts.

If so, I’d recommend no tailswitch. Tailswitches are fine for one-hand-hold lights, so you can hold it and operate it on/off/momentary with your thumb (icepick grip), but just having one to use the switch instead of a tailcap lockout unnecessarily adds resistance (no matter how good the switch). Worse, with a 2×whatever cell tube would make it really unwieldy to try to operate it one-handed by pretty much holding it by the tail and having a really nose-heavy head pulling it down.

As much as I prefer FC switches, something this big would probably be best served by a RC sideswitch like a 2D Maglite or something. Or have an e-switch with a UI that could be switched (haha) between EDC mode (standard half-click to change modes UI) and “tactical” mode (simulate a momentary-on for flash’n’dash ops).

Replacing a mechanical switch with an e-switch also gets that pesky switch-resistance out of the way and lets the FET do the heavy-lifting.

If you’re going whole-hog anyway, why not do the UI right and get rid of the weak-links?

YES! A sustainable 5000 lumens. Does that sound realistic?

No, that would not be realistic. The stock L6 at about 3200 lumen just barely is sustainable. The temperature gets way up beyond safe levels, but it does not destroy itself. For an L6 sized light, about 2,000 to 2,500 lumen might be sustainable without burning anyone.

I’m just gonna ignore all these “wide ranging” ideas and focus on a modern version of the L6/S70s.

I agree. The 26650 is like the C cell Maglite. I am used to the D size Maglite as it’s not too big. I wish there were good 32650 cells with the same energy density as top 18650 cells. The 32650 is 3 times the physical size of an 18650 so imagine it having 9,000mah to 10,000mah. That would be sweet, but unfortunately 26650 is the best choice we have today. The newer Shockli 5500 and KeepPower 6000mah seem to be the same cell as both measure about 5750mah.

Also keep in mind the L6/S70s are still using the older xhp70 and OP reflectors. A modern version should use the 70.2 and SMO. You get a nice even hotspot and more throw. I use this combo daily on my L6 and it works great. You do get a slightly yellow corona, but it’s not that big a deal.

The real question is the driver. Should it be a FET (like so many folks currently use, myself included) or a Buck (like in the stock L6)?

I think Sofirn could definitely build a FET driver as we have seen on their other lights. It would probably pull 17A or so (with good double springs or bypasses).

Maybe a 9A to 10A driver like the K70 was going to use would be best? You lose maybe 1700 lumen, but it’s a lot less heat and gives more runtime on turbo before the thermal protection can kick in.

If Sofirn could somehow use a UI like NarsilM or Anduril we could set up the top of the ramp to be about 9A to 10A and then turbo could be full 17A to 18A. This makes sense to me, but Sofirn probably wants to design their own driver and UI. Whatever the case, I hope it has one click on/off on the side switch. Please don’t be one click on and then a “press and hold” for off.

I have no problem with a tail switch. My L6 does 17A and it’s been going strong for a year or so. I tried to measure any losses in the tail switch by measuring lumens with it and with a piece of wire. I got the same output.

A flat tail cap is okay as well, I suppose. Just as long as we can twist it to do a mechanical lock out.

Would you guys want Sofirn to use a similar UI to their C8F which has multiple “groups” you can choose from?

The MF03 is not time sensitive so it had to be put aside temporarily to get the MF04 and MF04S to market (to compete with Lumintop). They will start up the MF03 project later on.

For right now I think Sofirn wants to do a single emitter light.

Later on they can do just like they did with the C8 to C8F. They can machine the head with a taller shelf, run 3 emitters and make a triple reflector. We know the 3” head on the L6/S70s lights can support this. Just look at the Haikelite MT09R. It has a 3” head and it can do 20,000 lumen! You won’t get the same power from 2 x 26650, but I could still see it easily doing 15k lumen. (A pair of 30T cells, if they fit, might get 20k lumen)

I really like the idea of a MT09R head using a 2 x 26650 battery tube. No one has done this. The old BTU Super Shocker was a bit bigger in diameter and only had a tail switch. I think Sofirn could do it, but later on as it would cost quite a bit more money.

It would depend on the heatsinking solution though. Copper heatpipes for more efficient transfer of heat away from the LED, and more fins/surface area to dissipate that heat would theoretically mean a higher stable output than a solid chunk of copper with a small number of thick fins.

I wonder about using a design like the NoFan CR-95C CPU heatsink as a flashlight head. Flip the orientation of the CPU block, add gaps for the electrical, mount the MCPCB, LED, and reflector on the inside. Then add structural support with horizontal aluminum fins and aluminum posts. Waterproof or economical? Not in the slightest. The cooling potential should be excellent, though. Some napkin math says a single XHP70.2 cooled in such a manner (assuming some airflow and quality direct thermal path MCPCB) could theoretically sustain more than Caleb’s mentioned 5k lumens.

More practically, I doubt copper heatpipes would be economical, and thin aluminum fins flatly wouldn’t be sturdy enough. Maybe a vertical orientation of medium thickness, more densely packed fins, curved to provide better airflow when the flashlight is held parallel to the ground, attached to a copper heatsink would be an effective next step? It would be a unique look, at least.

Has the Sofirn K6 project been abandoned or left in stand-by? :zipper_mouth_face: