I have no problem going to tiny 1634 and programming key for future driver generations of BLF lights
but on this tail ckicky usually a 25V or 45V is more than enough room for advanced code like Bistro
This problem is known for years now
the BLF A6 is very old
I never designed drivers without the 4.7Ohm low pass resistor
I do the fix for years too 
I’m glad you are doing the driver, that ensures a good one and prevents trouble, it would be a nightmare if they attempted to make a driver to our wishes.
Looking forward to where this one goes, while I wasn’t exactly a fan of the style when I first saw it the design sure grew on me when we were doing the BLF Special Edition lights and I still highly favor the beam profile from the reflector they made. I call it a theater beam, a defined yet largish hot spot with low spill… really like that a lot and you just don’t see it often. Hope they keep it similar with the new designs.
I hope that they can find a reflector with tighter hotspot and or less spill. If not i would also be happy with the old one (with 7mm led hole instead of the 9,5 from the old one). But reflector testing is further down the road.
From now on i will update new drawings. . . in the first post. This way it is not necessary to read throu all the pages.
I just used mine last night, and Dale is right, “theatre beam” is a perfect description. I actually also love it, and hope that part doesn’t change. It has a lot of throw outside at night, but the hotspot is much larger than other small, throwy lights. Very useful.
spill angle and lumens are basically only affected by the lenght to opening ratio of the reflector
so with given head there wont be any change in that proportion
Correct me if i am wrong! But with a different curve in the reflector you will get a different beam shape or not?
I think thats what they want to test.
By tha way i updated the internal structure of the head. The stepped design is not happening. Because of the small space between reflector and head they would have to make many small stepps. It seems it is easier to fabricate this form. But we got the bigger mass un the inside + deeper finns and one more. Not a lot but without changing the appearance this is the best we could do.
I hope you like it. And the Tailcap gets a new end. What do you think about it?
I dropped a 3V XHP50.2 in my D80, with a Sofirn FET driver that I had laying around.
The FET might not be the best one, only pulls 9A from a 30Q but it does produce some photons !
The beam is nice, fat hotspot, well defined and some usable spill.
Pictures later
^ tease
That sounds really good.
If everything goes like planned i will get beam pics from the reflector test next week.
And they will make some short video clips from the machining process when they start with production.
Can not wait to see how the D80 emerge from a piece of aluminium.
Okay I confess I didn’t do any beamshot or pic at all… sorry
Though I did some measurements : 2030 lumens and 20kCd
I need your help guys.
I was asked which CCT we would like to see. They want to offer 2 CCTs. The LED will be a XP-L Hi. Let me know which CCT you prefer in a new D80.
4000k and 5000k.
I would like to see 5D/5A 4000k.
I would go away from Cree to Samsung LED LH351D
I like the LH351D a lot. But for a thrower like the D80 the XP-L-Hi seems the better option.
And correct me if i am wrong but could it be a problem running only one LH351D on a FET driver with big good springs. . . ?
It is a comercial sold light. So a burned out led would be a problem.
The D80 is more of a general purpose light than it is a thrower, even with the HI it’s not really a thrower. The LH351D should handle any cell that the light can accept, even with bypasses on the springs.
I like the beam profile an XM-L2 gives in the D80 reflector so that will likely be my choice, if I find I have another SBT-70 I may well use it here… 
The LH351D is one tough LED.
Not as tough as the XP-L2, but better than the XP-L HI.