Trustfire x6 successfully modded by E1320 to pull 11.4A on high!

WOW! :open_mouth:

I wonder how this compares to an Olight SR91

Sorry i dont i’m new to the flashlight world and so far here is a list of what i have so far:

trustfire x6 modded
trustfire tr-j18

Thanks chris. I just registered at Kaidomain and am about to order driver.

Ok, driver ordered. For those interested, here is where I purchased my light about a year and a half ago.
X6

I want one of those now!!!

Holy cow. :D Been thinking about an SST90 light run by an IMR cell, too.. but I think heat is an issue.

Talk about an epic light. I reckon E has just started a frenzy (again). Any chance of some beam shots when you have it back in your hands? Thanks for sharing.

Hey,

You can tell you friend that he could by these lights and mod them to these specs, then sell them. I for one would be in! A sucker for a power house SST-90!

SR90 is 100mm head diameter.
X6 is 80mm. This modded X6 probably is driven slightly more. The lens probably cuts some 5-7% more light.

No way the X6 can outthrow the SR90. Maybe just slightly under the TK70 or at best same league?

TK70 would be able to maintain the lumens better, i mean this forum is extremely familar with how triple XM-L works. The SR90 already sags even with that huge body. Check out the reviews.

My TrustFire X6
SST-90 de-domed
2A at tailcap 3x18650 (stock driver)
4 meters = 4850 lux
.
XM-L U2
1320 mA at tailcap 3x18650
4 meters = 5400 lux
Both are hard to set better spot.
.
And modded some aspherics lenses…… more to come

Hi Chris

When you do get the flashlight back, please give us some beamshots between your X6 and TR-J18.

Thnx

With your X6 only driven at 6A, there is tons of room for improvement at 11A. I’d love to see a lux reading with this new driver in one.

SST-90 tops out at 9A.

VPT and similar hotrods use copper direct bonding to extract performance in the 14-15A range, but seriously tapering off already. (think stock VPT would be 13A thereabouts)
These buggers run pretty hot compared to XM-Ls.

Check this out : http://flashlightnews.net/forum/index.php?topic=2789.0
(there’s an aspheric in there)

^
^
I’m sure that SST-90 in TrustFire X6 is not N or P bin.

I bought this host for next round LED and aspherics setup :wink:

Tailcap current draw its not an additive measurement. So 2 cells in series drawing 5.6A at the tailap is going to be exactly that, a 5.6A draw. Its incorrect to multiply the measurement by the cell count. Sames goes for 3S cells drawing 3.8A at the tailcap.

With series battery configurations the voltage of each cell is added together, not the current.

Not to dampen your excitement though. The SST90 is an impressive LED when its driven to capacity. I have been wanting to try this mod on a TR-J10. Sounds like a great DIY!!

So why, on a light that can take one or two 18650, would it pull say 3A on a single cell and 1.5A with 2S configuration? Every light I’ve heard of that can take multiple cells is like that. As another example, a light that takes 2 or 3 cells depending on tubes used pulls 1.5A at the tail with 2 cells or 1A at the tail with 3 cells. They always add up.

In that case it would be based on the constant wattage pull of that driver circuit design. So the single cell that pulls 3A is doing 10.8W (3A x 3.6V), assuming Vbatt =3.6V from sag.

When you add a second cell in series that driver is still going to pull its ~10.8W. But you are doubling Vbatt, so the driver is going to pull less current to maintain ~10.8W.
So in that case 10.8W = XA x 7.2V
Solve for X = 1.5A

When you add the 3rd cell in series:
10.8W = xA x 10.8V
Solve for X = 1A

Its not an exact science as this, but this is a way to “ballpark” look at it. The reality is that driver efficiency varies slightly with Vbatt, so to assume its a constant 10.8W pull across its entire Vbatt range is not entirely correct.

EDIT
Oh wait a minute… Chris is talking about EMITTER current, not JUST tailcap current. Thats a different ballgame entirely. I’ll leave my commentary as is for now though, as it pertains to tailcap power consumption only.

3A x 4.2V = 12.6W
1.5A x 8.4v = 12.6W
1A x 12.6v = 12.6W

Six of one or a half dozen of the other. Either way yields the same wattage used based on tailcap numbers. To quote you, "Its not an exact science as this, but this is a way to "ballpark" look at it", so yes, taking the draw seen at the tail and multiplying it by the number of cells does indeed yield the same exact results. It's just a different way to reach the same conclusion and happens to be far simpler than doing it your way, IMO.

The only way it would ever differ from your formula is if each cell had a different voltage and if that was the case you'd have a whole lot more serious issues to worry about with that pipe bomb you'd be carrying.

12.6W at the tail means the emitter is getting 12.6w / 3.3v = 3.8A
Subtract 80% for driver inefficiency and you get 3.1A at the emitter.
That's an awful lot of work to figure out but at least it's pretty accurate. Or...

You could just triple the tailcap measurement (1A * 3 cells) and get 3A. WAY quicker way to get nearly the same end result and it holds true for just about all scenarios when you want a ballpark figure. Might not be the technical and scientific way to do it but it's the way it's been done as long as I've been into flashlights and it hasn't really failed any of us yet.

Ok, let’s stick with ballpark math and disregard efficiency of the driver at the moment so I can wrap my mind around the before and after wattage compared to each other.

If I use the math Kramer5150 is using:
3A x 4.2V = 12.6W
1.5A x 8.4v = 12.6W
1A x 12.6v = 12.6W

On three freshly charged Trustfire 3000mah cells I get a tailcap reading of 1.95A:
1.95A x 12.6v = 24.57W

Compared to E1320’s 3.8A on three cells:
3.8A x 12.6v = 47.88W

So about twice the wattage output.
Am I looking at this correctly?

Yes, except the math you are attributing to me is actually how Kramer5150 does it. I would have just taken Erik’s 3.8A at the tailcap and tripled it (3 cells) to get 11.4A at the driver. If you want watts then multiply that times 4.2V for 47.88 watts.

In short, Erik’s modded X6 consumes almost twice the power as stock. Definitely over driven but definitely bright.