[ 40,000 Lumen Manker MK38? - A Review and Teardown ]

.. Part 2 of the review / teardown.

Today I opened up the front half of the flashlight. The version of my flashlight comes with 8 XHP70.2 5000K LEDs. Personally I would have preferred a 4000K option. However, as we will soon see, this may not be too difficult to pull do..

Before further disassembly, I did a quick ceiling bounce test.

Ceiling Bounce Test

I used a Extech LT40 lux meter and a ceiling bounce to estimate the brightness of the flashlight. Note that this is not a very accurate method to estimate the brightness of the flashlight since the bounce method doesn't take into account the beam profile and so on. However, it does give a general idea of the brightness when compared to other flashlights.

  • Zebralight SC700d - 136 Lux - 3000 lumens (claimed by Zebralight, let's use this as a baseline)
  • Fireflies E12R prototype - 245 Lux - ~5400 lumens (note that this is a prototype and has some damaged emitters.. I'm not sure which LEDs it uses sadly I don't own a production E12R)
  • Manker MK38 - 1595 Lux - ~35000 lumens (again this is just a number based on extrapolation, inaccurate as it may be)

The brightness measured was in the correct rough ballpark of the claimed 39425 lumens. It's more than 10x brighter than the already very bright SC700d. For actual runtimes and such, I'm sure someone else will conduct those kinds of review since I do not have the proper equipment to do luminosity measurements.

LEDs and Driver

What's inside the MK38? Will Manker go the extra mile to laser off the markings on the IC (don't worry, we'll reveal them if they do)? What is the the LED layout like, and how well does the buck topology work (claimed 98% efficiency)?

Before that, I opened the lens and reflector.

The front bezel is very nicely machined and has a very nice polished black finish in my model. Opening the front bezel reveals a beautiful 74.5mm x 2.0mm AR-coated glass lens, together with a clear o-ring for waterproofing.

Under the glass lens is definitely one of the stars of this flashlight - the custom full aluminium reflector. It's very well machined and is very heavy, definitely contributing a huge amount of the total mass of the flashlight. I was quite impressed by this part. The reflector lifts to reveal the MCPCB.

And the MCPCB is revealed. It's a thick, full copper DTP MCPCB and a quick measurement shows that all LEDs are arranged in parallel, in the 6V configuration. Overall quite simple, but effective. Heat sinking seems robust and the MCPCB is held down by three hex screws fairly securely, which bodes well for thermal management. The main cables connecting to the driver are 16 AWG flexible silicone wires. One nit-pick I had with the layout of the MCPCB is the fairly thin copper pours around the outside edge of the PCB. They could be increased in width for better current carrying capacity.

The good thing is that the MCPCB is very easy to remove. This means that it would be fairly easy to replace this MCPCB for one with different LEDs. I'd recommend against reflowing off the existing LEDs and reflowing new ones since the LEDs on this board cost at least $80 USD by themselves. I wonder if I can get a bare MCPCB from Manker - I'd reflow my own LEDs on it myself if I could.

With the MCPCB removed, I was able to remove the driver from the cavity. The driver cavity is well machined with a huge 8.7mm Z-height. This Z-height allows for the use of wire-to-board connectors, all nicely done with silicone wires. One cable assembly goes to the lighted side-e-switch, and the other to the fandle connector. I should also note that all ingress points and body interfaces had o-ring seals. Note that there are two posts that stick out from the driver head - these act as heat-sink posts for the driver.

And here is what I assume people are most interested in. The driver came out easily enough.

Note - I bought this flashlight also because I had some plans to use it in the field, so I won't be doing a full breakdown and analysis of the driver since I need to reassemble it for actual use. In the future I may do more comprehensive testing, or if I can find a way to get another driver from Manker.

The overall design is fairly straightforward and was as expected.

The main switching coverter is the LM5145 Synchronous Buck Controller set for a switching frequency of 213kHz. The high and low side FETs are comprised of a HYG013N03LS1C2 dual-array each (in parallel). These N-FETs are rated 30V with a R_ds_on of 1.3mR at 10V V_gs each, with a surprisingly reasonable gate charge. Input and output capacitance is at least 100uF from the large electrolytic + tantalum capacitor, plus a few more large MLCCs. The star of the buck converter is a huge 1710 3.3uH inductor. I do not know which exact part it is, but the saturation current is between 35 and 40A, based on similar parts I can find on the market.

Power control is via constant-current feedback using two pairs of sense resistors, 200mR for low-modes, and a 5mR for the high modes (using two paralleled 10mR current sense resistors). Another of the same G013N03 FETs is used to switch the 2nd current sense resistor array in and out of the feedback circuit, just like my Lume X1 driver. This sense voltage is fed into a generic feedback amplifier.

Controlling the whole system is a ATTINY816 MCU, powered by a HT7150 5V LDO. Another small Micro One DC/DC controller is on the left side of the board (as pictured), which I presume is for powering the two smaller fans.

Power input from the battery pack (this will be different for the individual-battery version) is via two fat cables, which are soldered directly to the PCB.

I soldered on a slightly longer cable to conduct some peak-power measurements. Using a Uni-T UT210E clamp meter (not very accurate), I measured a turn-on current of 43.0A at 6.30V to the LEDs, corresponding to about 270W output power (note this may not be an accurate measurement since I had to use a longer wire loop to make space for the current probe I also did not measure the current from the battery pack). This PCB is definitely not going to be able to dissipate that much heat (5.5W even at 98% efficiency, plus the massive heat from the LEDs), so the system will throttle after about 30s or so depending on the starting temperature of the flashlight. Based on some measurements by Texas_Ace on the XHP70.2 LED, I'm expecting about 4500 lumens per LED, or a total output of 36,000 lumens.

Overall, here are some of my initial thoughts:

  • PCB quality looks good. I like how they used a matte-black finish. Overall layout looks OK to the eye.
  • Inductor looks a bit under-specced for the power level, if the inductor is what I think it is. 43A_avg output means a higher peak current on the inductor and I suspect that the inductor is likely going to be operating close to saturation.
  • Heat-sinking is not ideal, but the entire situation is not ideal as is; the switching transistors have some sort of heatsinking to the posts (with a silicone thermal interface pad), but the inductor is not - however the body of the flashlight gets ridiculously hot so quickly at full power that I'm not sure if it acts as a heat sink or source at that point. The flashlight is expected to operate around 6000 lumens continuous, likely around 30-35W? In that case, the driver electronics should be running well within spec, with the LEDs contributing most of the heat.
  • Just to be clear, the driver you are seeing above is NOT a 300W driver - it can handle 300W peak, but only for a short while. A 50W continuous rating would be a reasonable estimate (with proper cooling). Many parts of it are not built for continuous 300W operation, and definitely not the max output. For example, consider the losses just in the sense resistor array. At 43A, that's a total of 9.25W dissipated in just 5mR. It appears that metal element R_sns were used, but they are fairly small - I would have used a physically larger sense resistor (like some of the wide-varieties).
  • Main interconnects are soldered onto small pads - can this handle 40A continuously? Probably not safely, but should be OK for 1 minute or less. Personally I would have use larger pads on the PCB, design the PCB with thick copper (2oz or more), and use maybe a cable assembly (such as two 18 AWGs instead of one 16 AWG) or other method (solid copper post, or copper strips) to connect the MCPCB to the driver board.
  • Battery pack is directly soldered to driver PCB - this is a good thing, since it eliminates the high resistance metal-to-metal contact which will be present on other flashlights (or the individual-cell variant).
  • 3S is a good idea. I don't understand individual-cell lights that use 3P since it can be quite dangerous. Likewise, I'm so glad this driver is a proper current-regulated design, not a driver with a direct-drive FET. While I have designed drivers with FETs before (client requested), it's still something I advocate against.

It was fun to take apart the flashlight to see what makes it go. A close to 300W buck driver on a compact PCB is a fun engineering challenge. Overall the flashlight has been fun to disassemble (and reassemble), not too difficult, and even more fun to operate.

What's Next?

At the moment, I will be using this flashlight in the field since I didn't just buy this to take apart! Perhaps I'll write an update in the future w.r.t real-life use. My main use case will not be running this on turbo, but likely using the flashlight at moderate 2000-4000 lumen modes (Mid 2 and Mid 3) for long durations. As a result, I decided not to take apart the battery pack for now since it doesn't look like I can open it non-destructively (since it has a nice shrink-wrap over it and I don't have any wraps that diameter to repack it for now!).

One idea I had for this flashlight was to also develop an even more ridiculous driver for it (500W multiphase GaN?), with Anduril, and with a much better low mode (the lowest mode for the MK38 is a claimed 40 lumens... quite high, but usable and much better than Acebeam's 200 lumens), but that's probably a project for another time...

I'd also love to compare this with a Acebeam X50, but I don't have one and it's too expensive for me to buy two $300++ flashlights.

[Update - I improved some solder connections and replaced wires with nicer, slightly longer ones, re-cleaned all threads and lubricated o-rings during re-assembly.I reassembled the flashlight and everything is working great; glad I didn't break anything! ]

This post is mostly complete for now; I'll do a few more measurements and edits over the coming days and weeks, so do check this thread from time to time. As always, I'll be curious to hear what questions you have. Let me know below and I'll update this post as I get time to continue my thoughts on this flashlight.

Thanks for reading!

4 Thanks

Thanks for doing this, it’s it your first review on BLF?

My first question would be: what’s the light intensity it can sustain for a longer time? Alternatively a graph of Lumen vs time.
Having that heavy brick in hand I hope to be rewarded for my effort with high constant brightness.

Just waiting for your deep dive. Lets see what those 2 fans do. Cooling a handlebar or a electronics? :slight_smile: Its 3x 21700 in series for 12V ( from manual). Driver DD (easiest way)?

With 3S input to x*6V output it’s very likely a buck driver, probably arround 350W output for 40000 OTF (FL1) lumens, which is already very hard on 3x21700s.

Rather than more power, what would greatly benefits these multi XHP70 soda can lights would be the new XHP70.3 HI, they would produce a much more intense and usable beam.

Edit : the product page actualy mentions that it is a step down (buck) driver.
Edit : Ah I see Loneoceans also guesstimated 350W :smiley:

I’m eagerly waiting for your teardown, especially the USB charging section is of particular interest to me since mine failed yesterday.

thanks for doing this

I see. And it can sustain 9K lumen with fan on. So what power off buck driver :slight_smile: ? I’ll say about 100W at max. And another DD channel for turbo? Someone mentioned wants to build 500W driver! I want to see fans for 500W system :smiley:

Hi!

Thanks for the post. It got me really interested.

As I searched everywhere, I didn’t see either the official store or any dealer carrying the GT-FC40 option, nor is it listed in any official spec sheet. May I ask where you see that piece of info?

I love High-CRI lights and whether its available in FC40 decides whether I’m gonna buy it or not.

Thank you!

I think loneoceans talk about Acebeam X50 which have Hi Cri version with GT-FC40 LEDs.

Yes, it is particuarly tough on the cells, and most likely any higher power output will yield diminishing gains. But it could be a fun project to try to improve the driver even if it is an impractical endeavour. For example, a multiphase GaN converter would be fun. As for the LEDs, Manker calls it a 'searchlight', though I would definitely not consider the MK38 as a thrower; it's more similar to say the general-purpose SC700d, just a lot brighter.

I'm interested in the USB Charging section as well, and how the 'battery pack' is assembled. Having removable batteries in the 21700-only version seems like a tricky option since the flashlight will be drawing >100W per cell at peak draw, making interconnects and such potentially difficult to implement reliabily.

icpart is correct. At the moment, the Acebeam X50 comes in a high CRI variant. I asked Acebeam directly and they told me that it will be using GT-FC40 LEDs. They're not very efficient, but they do produce a really nice tint as I found in my Lume-X1 KR1 build. On the other hand, the Manker MK38 comes in a throwier variant using Luminous SFT40 LEDs, which supposedly halves the luminous output but doubles the intensity.

Photography Fill Light|AceBeam® Official Store | Flashlights, Tactical Lights

Mankerlight MK38 Satellite (Power by 3x 21700 Batteries) - Mankerlight Official

I have no interest in buying the light itself, but great interest in the engineering and assembly/design aspects of all lights, especially ones like this that aren’t the ordinary basics. Looking forward to following this thread! Thanks for putting in all the time to do this.

I would consider myself lucky, if I was ever able to see or handle one of these lights in person.

Thanks for the thread and future updates.

I look forward to the review! Your photography is beautiful as well!

Can you perhaps give more details on the “Micro-Arc” finish? How is it applied, and what makes it special? According to the site, the black version of the light is HAIII, it would be nice to know what (if any) difference that makes besides the color.

I have the SFT40/3*21700 version of the light coming soon for review, I assume it uses a buck driver as well, I’m very interested to see how the two versions actually compare in terms of specs/runtimes.

oooh I want one of these…
I am excited for updates!

Thanks for your comments. I'm not a metallurgical engineer so I can't comment definitively on the subject, but my general understanding is as follows (w.r.t. the treatment of aluminium / aluminum):

  • Untreated - raw aluminium is a reactive element, and quickly forms a natural, hard, and inert oxide layer on the surface in a process known as passivation. This layer is hard but quite thin (several nm thick only) and easily scratched off - in those cases, the oxide layer quickly reforms.

  • Anodized - Similar to the natural aluminium oxide layer which forms when AL is exposed to air (containing oxygen), but the layer of oxide is grown using an electric current while immersed in some acidic electrolyte such as sulphuric acid. For Type III anodizations, the layer needs to be thicker than 1mil (25um) (+ a few other specs I won't get into). This thicker oxide layer is harder than the raw aluminium and provides slightly improved wear resistance and desirable aesthetic qualities.

  • Micro-Arc Oxidation - takes anodization one step further; the process is similar, but a higher voltage is used compared to anodization. This causes an electrical breakdown through the oxide layer, and causing micro discharges / arcs to form. These arcs (which are plasma) increase the temperature locally, causing a change in the way the oxide grows. If done correctly, the oxide is converted morphologically from regular aluminium oxide to corundum (same compound but crystalline), and therefore has a significant increase in hardness, resistance and durability.

Anyway that's my general understanding of the process and I am definitely not the subject matter expert and I can't comment on how well the MAO process is done.

As to how it results in the actual product, I'm not exactly sure just yet (in terms of durability or toughness); all I can say is that it looks really nice in person and has a very pleasant, smooth but matte finish. I also like the colour (a very light grey) very much.

it also feels a bit different than anodized aluminium. Maybe it is just my mind playing tricks on me, but I had the impression it feels slighter thicker, making sharp edges less sharp. Sure, this could also be done mechanically before anodizing, but I attribute this to the treatment for now.

@loneoceans
do you have a rough ETA for the next step in your teardown?

I’m really interested in the charging circuit.

Definitely one of the coolest and most inspiring designs in recent years. Low CRI 70.2s might be the worst part about it. It begs for a good tint + high cri combo. B35AM anybody?

Still super cool :sunglasses:

I’m an absolute tint-snob for lights which are used close up. So EDC and Headlamp must have a nice tint and high CRI.

For very high output or throw I can live with low CRI, because the main task of these lights is to either reach very far or just be ridiculously bright, which requires the most potent emitters.

Well said and totally agree :+1:

Personally, I would have to agree with Pobel and Glenn7. It's true that the specs definitely sells the flashlight so I don't fault Manker for going with the XHP70.2 LED here. That said, I think it would be nice to see this flashlight with a XHP70.2 4000K CRI90 variant.

I updated the post with more details about the charger and powerbank circuitry; enjoy!

Thank you for digging into this more. I appreciated the battery pack and charging implementation information most specifically.

I’m not surprised there’s a premium on the in built pack, based on the tear down.

I passed during the sale because I wanted to fully understand the light. I regret missing the deal now, but not waiting to be informed before purchase.

Now that I have details, it’s on my want list.