Good advise extra emitters are a must!
Slicing and Dicing isn’t de-doming it’s slicing the dome off, the 70.2 dosen’t have bond wires, pretty hard to screw that up.
Now slicing too close can cause the LED to burn, or if you polish it/sand the silicone down, sometimes causes fishers in the silicone, and it could burn, only issue I have ever seen, but if caught in time can be saved, by chemical de-doming, where patience is a virtue….that is where I screw up, pulling phosphorous off the pad, removing the silicone before it’s ready to be removed, sometimes the silicone can never be removed with out ruining the phosphorous.
The old 70’s and the XHP35’s are the toughest, they have bond wires. The SST40’s even worse.
Not to mention that some dedomed emitters fail after an unpredictably long period of time. In my experience, the harder you drive the LED, the greater chance it has to burn. It does not necessarily have to be the phosphorus or the chip itself, but even remnants of the silicone that have been fine for a year or even two might suddenly burn without any warning.
Ya man, it really sucks, out of no where…light starts to go dimmer, then you look….SMOKE! :person_facepalming:
I have learned to use a UV light and check for silicone and missing phosphorous with a 10X glass then burn them in, on the rock and then with my test light, a SD75 Lexel Narsil/Infineon FET 6 volt driver with 4 VTC5A’s everything bypassed with 18awg, at 22-23 amps, if there is any remnants of silicone, this light will seek and destroy it.
I could give a crap about the LED, it’s the Reflector getting smoked I’m pissed about! (I usually purchase extra reflectors just in case) but now it’s really not worth it anymore, been there, done that, bought a shirt, burned it……….
Interesting. I have one that I shaved too close and it started burning. I have a new XHP70.2 on the way that I plan on slicing a little higher, but in the meantime I could try your method, I’ve already written the burnt XHP70.2 off.
I know previously we used petrol/gas to dedome XML’s and XPG’s, but you now mention strong thinners.
- Does it specifically need to be thinners?
- Would turpentine, benzine, surgical spirits, or any other solvent work as well?
- For how long do you leave it in the thinners? When do you know it’s ready?
Does the silicone float off, or do you have to peel it off?
The thinner is what we have on hand at work, it will destroy 2 part epoxy paint we use on our machines, it is very strong. I kept the burnt or closely shaved LED (s) soaked and some will fall off, some will blow off, and some can be coaxed off with a wet tipped Q’Tip ….Gently…you don’t want to pull the phosphorous off with it……
A GT reflector, interesting… I am about to try a prototype driver with an XHP-35 and have been considering what to put it in… my thoughts lead me to wanting to build a light from scratch but I don’t know with what reflector. Can I get a GT reflector? Would I contact Lumintop or what?
Not at this time, it was talked about but charging 8 cells in 4S series is no simple task and not one I trusted to a cheap budget option crammed into a light. Not to mention the stupid amount of time it would take to charge.
To do it safely or “correctly” you would probably need to go the same route as other companies did such as Olight and Imalent. You’d need to have a sealed battery pack with a BMS (battery management system). Then you could charge it at 2A@19v for decent charge times.
I’m not a big fan of battery packs and most people on BLF aren’t either. So you have to decide which would you rather have, convenient charging at the expense of a more expensive battery pack where you can’t choose what cells you want or to run only 4 cells, etc… Or slightly less convenient charging, but have full control of what batteries and whether to run 4 or 8 celks and have cheaper costs.
So each option has their advantages and disadvantages.
At this point in time I don’t even know if the GT battery tubes would even be capable of running a battery pack. Is there enough room inside? Maybe they can use the existing tube and design a new tail cap with the charging port inside? IDK.
key word above “real” lumens
He’s referencing Matt (vestureofblood) who tested the R90C and the results were significantly less than Imalent claimed output:
R90C claimed 20 000 test result 15 274 difference –24% less
GT70 claimed 7 500 test result 7 537 difference +0.01% more
Watch this video and it’s easy to see that the Imalent is brighter but the output doesn’t appear even close to 2.75x that of the GT70
I believe that currently the only direct competitor to this is the R90C but I’m curious if you think that the MF03 concept will be in this class also? At first glance the MF03 seems like it’s more of an X70 competitor with its 7x xhp70.2 and single xhp35 hi. However, from the photo below all of the 70.2 reflectors are smooth finished rather than the standard orange peel. Shouldn’t that all add up to something like 20 000+ lumen with 700+kcd?
Without some more details and/or test it is impossible to say exactly what it will do but just looking at it, I would guess less throw (the center xhp35 might bias that but the beam would be very different) and or course the possibility of higher lumens, assuming they have a good enough driver to power it properly.
