Fireflies E07 preview

Does anyone know why the Nichia 219B variant of this light seems to have disappeared? It does not appear to be available from anyone any longer. Is this temporary, or has this version simply been permanently withdrawn?
Thanks

I think fireflies ran out of 219Bs.

here's some 21700 battery test results I ran:

You do have to put this into perspective:

  • These tests are done for turn-on only, no indication how the cell droppage works
  • it's a one shot test, no averaging over several runs, etc.
  • amps is measured first, then lumens reading taken
  • amps is taken using a clamp meter with the tailcap removed - stock tail spring is high qual but not bypassed, so lumens may read lower compared to measured amps.

Interesting the 30T got such high amps but didn't deliver based on comparisons to other cells. The 40T is the actual winner, over the 30T. Also interesting the true branded 30T and 40T did notably better than the rest.

@TomE, I think the Samsung 30T was pushing the emitters way too hard.

Maybe, but it's only about ~4 amps per LED, but could be the heat.

M4D M4X Did you already attempt the emitter swap?

Thank you Tom E! This supports my assumption that the LK4000, the Shockli 4000 and the Sofirn 4000 are all made of rewrapped Lishen 2170SA cells. It would be nice to know if these fake 40Ts use this cell, too. So far, I only know about two cells with this ring in the negative pole: Lishen 2170SA and Samsung 48G.

Did you use Vapcell's 21700 5000mAh with 10A or the one that is branded with 15A? The latter one is known to be the Sanyo NCR21700A ("Tesla" cell) and has a significantly recessed positive pole.

Cheers,

Thomas

Isn’t it the LG M50 also has a ring on the bottom?

Puts some credit into my E07 XPL measuring slightly more with the 40T than the 30T.

I see Fireflies have upped the quoted output of the XPL 5000k from 6200 lumens to 6900 lumens.

The Vapcell 5000 I have is 15A marked, and has the annoying great depression on the batt+ end -- pain to charge because even a magnet won't stay in place.

Yea Lux, think you are right. I was hoping the Shockli's, Sofirn's anf LK's were true rewrapped 40T's, but clearly not now. Notice how tight they all test in amps? Chances are good they are the same cell, I'd say.

TomE, fix the mcpcb heat path before u do more testing.

Huh? I'm not familiar with the problem that needs fix'n, and probably won't be doing any more battery testing. I haven't taken my E07 apart yet.

Ohh, u mean the lack of thermal grease? I don't know, is that really true? I'm very confused reading the posts and seeing pics - whether surfaces were cleaned or not. Maybe I missed something? I see pics but not a clear explanation, or some posts but no pics.

My tests above were just at turn on, mainly because of the low temp setting for thermal regulation. Tried resetting it but I guess for 30 sec tests with raising the thermal reg, better take her apart and check the MCPCB...

I don't like posts that keep you guessing - say it or don't mention it - Martin's post with the pic is not clear to me. The pics with clean MCPCB's and clean shelf top is exactly what I would do - clean the surfaces, re-apply good grease before re-assembling. There's nothing odd in those pics.


Post #1362 - pics and comments: https://budgetlightforum.com/t/-/53669/1331

If this is true that they are not using a single drop of thermal grease (??), then that's a pretty bad oversight for such a powerfully driven light. I expect to see this in 1-2 amp cheap budget no name lights (like TESLACOM ), but not a light like this. If they are doing this in an attempt to keep the housing cool, or not heat up super fast, that's even worse.

Tom E, the problem is there is a thin air gap between the MCPCB and the shelf. So the stock thermal compound doesn’t come into contact with the MCPCB.

I fixed mine by making sure my MCPCB is flat (ran it over fine sand paper on a flat surface) and also ran it over the sand paper at a 45 degree angle over all the edges so it sits down into the shelf better (the edges of the shelf are a little rounded).

I don’t think their intentions were bad. From what I understand the MCPCB is just slightly too large to sit flush with the shelf. The super thin layer would have been fine if it was flush since it’s screwed down. I will take mine apart soon to verify but I suspect I have the same problem since mine has a “delay” in the body heating up.

Yeah, well … Tom I said with the pics that this was taken immediately upon seeing the situation, clearly show it right beside the head of the light and actually say the hemostats used to pull it out are still holding it. It’s true. No cleaning supplies were harmed during the filming of this picture. :wink:

Not only that, but the MCPCB doesn’t fit onto the shelf, it’s held away by the corners and needs a little work to sit down onto the thermal paste you put on it when you do this. If you don’t file it down some, you’ll be wasting your time as there will still be air pockets between the MCPCB and shelf.

So distrustful, what’s a guy gotta do?

There is some paste on the shelf, it just doesn’t touch the MCPCB due to the non-fitment issue. Even at that, it’s a very thin wiped on layer of grey paste that ends up only touching the very corners of the bottom of the MCPCB.

One sure way for you to find out, but you’ll see what I and others show in their pics should you go there…

Sorry, no idea what pics or posts you are talking bout - must have missed it. The only one I saw was the one I linked above. Too many posts, not enough search time....


Ok, now I get the purpose of this post: https://budgetlightforum.com/t/-/53669/1470

I had no idea what this post was about, was staring at it for a while - no clue what I was looking at or what is was about -- now it makes sense. I totally missed, I guess, posts about this flatness issue. Too much on finish, colors, clips - you know, the important stuff

you see the mcpcb did just touch the body on a small circle (1mm)

looks like the floating mcpcbs from the sky ray clones ;)

mine had leftovers from pushing the holes and shape of the mcpcb too which also prevebted the copper from touching the head

Ahh, ok Thanks! I'm starting to get it now. Sorry, takes me a while...

All this stuff is so much more critical on high powered lights. I've seen this many times before so when I have a light apart, I just make it a habit of checking the MCPCB and shelf flatness. For an MCPCB, sanding the bottom on a flat surface is the ultimate test - it can tell you a lot about the surface. For the shelf, sometimes you can see the problems, sometimes it helps getting a straight edge on it, and get one as close to the width of the shelf as possible. P60 pill surfaces are notorious for being unlevel, but can be leveled with a flat ended punch easy enough - few taps.

Seems like FF is a newbie at all this. Always check your vendors for quality, insist on them meeting detailed specs and do their own quality checks to ensure all spec'd dims are met or exceeded, penalize them if not done so. Might be difficult with typical sourcing over there though.

any suggestions on how to protect the LEDs on the mcpcb while fixing it?

they shouldn’t need any special protection.

After you pull the star out, run a handfile around the edges to chamfer the lower edge of the star. Keep the file perpendicular to the star so there is no chance of it slipping and hitting the LEDs. Should take no more than 10 minutes with a small file to make a 1mm chamfer all around the lower edge. A quick few swipes with a file over the bottom the star with a file should be enough to get any burs at the bottom of the holes.

Course, it might be harder if you plan to run a razor blade over the bottom like a previous poster did. Safest way to protect the LEDs if you plan to do that is to remove them all, fix the star, then reflow them all afterwards. I think that’s overkill though.