Hmm. Basically it’s looking like we will only get 6500k. Maybe this is the closest we will come to a factory de dedomed xhp70.2? They only tested it up to 7A, but I suspect it will go higher than that. It will be nice to see some samples tested.
It is closer to a dedomed 50.2, the die is even a bit smaller than that so expect some very decent throw!
On the other hand, I don't see why not. As far as my light is, the actual enemy of li-ion cells' lifespan is high voltage. This is proven. It is the reason why laptop cell packs, which by default are kept fully charged when plugged, in practice offer far less than whatever promised amount of theoretical discharge cycles. I am of course speaking of packs which are cycled from time to time and kept at full voltage otherwise.
Do you really believe 2.5V is bad for cells? I don't. That is the most usual cut-off voltage value found in cylindrical li-ion cell datasheets currently. And I've seen 2V (LG HE2, Murata VTC6). I've successfully recovered cells from old laptop packs dwelling below 2V.
Cut-off voltages are not set to damage batteries. They are chosen as the highest value for batteries to deliver close to their specified capacity rating at their highest discharge rate. This is it.
The key question here is, is a high cut-off really serving any battery lifespan improvement? In my light-full opinion it's more of an annoyance than of any service. Or maybe I should say it is of service, with cash it services the pockets of those who sell li-ion batteries. Limiting high voltage on cells, on the other hand, provides incredibly long lifespan for my smartphone batteries (usually discharged low, by the way).
But well… 
There’s so little power-juice in the cell between 3.0V and 2.5V that it’s probably a minute or less in a cranked-up light.
I actually watch the voltage numbers falling in my Ope when doing a capacity test at even a paltry 1A.
It’ll sit for a while between updates when at 3.5V, start noticeably dropping faster by the time it gets to 3.0V, and it’s only seconds later that it drops to 2.whateverV before it craps out and starts charging again.
“Drops like a rock” is the operative phrase.
Me personally, I’d rather have a stable cutoff (or at least a flash-like-Hell warning) at even 3.3V than 3.0V (absolute minimum for cutoff). Anything less doesn’t buy much if any runtime. Down that low, you got only seconds ’til it goes dark anyway.
[quote=Barkuti]
I’m no expert but everything I’ve read about dendrite formation and attempts to limit it in future cell designs outright stated or suggested overdischarge (especially at higher currents) can/does form the more deleterious ones vs the smaller/shorter formations created during normal use. (Of course overcharging definitely would too I’d imagine!) That’s why charging afterward is dangerous, either the IR could be so high the cell gets too hot, or the dendrites actually form a short but the cell doesn’t have enough energy stored for it to be… “obvious” in all the bad ways that entails.
Excellent point.
The ability for a light to even achieve decently high output when the cell gets relatively low in voltage relies on how well the driver can step-up the voltage, and in the case of a 12V emitter and relatively small light… you’re going to be pulling serious current from a single cell at that point too assuming the driver can do it. Since Simon’s drivers tend to err more on the side of caution (and from his AE reviews it seems a lot first-time li-ion light buyers shop there) I think a conservative LVP for step downs and total shut-off is the right call. Consider people might be using old or just generally bad cells too.
When the flashlight is in the working state, loosen the tail cover, this kind of abnormality will occur, but this does not mean that all drivers have this kind of problem, but a very small rate of this kind of problem.
Simon, any chance you’ll get Nichia NV3W470A as well?
Just looked this up… datasheet here
Looks like impressive surface brightness, but very specialized for automotive applications with that die configuration (aspect ratio). Do you have a use case in mind for the flashlight world? I can’t think of anything
Bike light? Wonder what that aspect-ratio would look like in a TIR lens…
That thing is like HD res - I hate what that did to monitors. I want more # of lines per screen, and instead they give us less lines, and longer lines so it's harder to read. Dumb stuff...
I see a number of uses.
As already mentioned, bikers like stuff like that. But in off-axis reflector setups rather than TIRs.
In aspheric zoomie this wouldn’t hurt, especially if the surface luminosity is quite uniform (I don’t know if it is).
In a reflector they would work as well, though 2/3 of light would end up in the corona. It is not a good thing but is it very bad? I don’t know and I’d be happy to experience that. Note that a square LED sends 1/4 light to the corona and 2mm² Osrams due to being slightly rectangular send 1/3 to the corona.
You’ve woken up an old sentiment in me. I hated HD monitors as well and I thought I would never buy one. But soon there was no choice.
As JaredM said, I also think this is an LED designed for car headlights
Simon
Is this driver 12V or 6V? (say 12V, say 12V, say12V...)
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005001965982532.html?spm=2114.12010611.8148356.2.7fe47aa0QR8gPv
Strangely i cannot see it. But you do know placing xhp50 on a 12V MCPCB can also work?
Yep, worth repeating!
Right now I'm sitting in front of an old DELL monitor that has 1200 lines (very rare) as the primary, while my clunky 1080 HD sits to the right. The 1080 is supposedly "bigger" which of course we know is a lie 
Oh, the horror!
HD is mainstream, but many companies use the WUXGA resolution. (1920 x 1200)
If horizontal line count is what you want, 1440p or 2160p are the easy solution (there are even 16:10 format options for both I bet) and are getting much cheaper, especially 1440.