BTU Shocker Mod - XM-L2 U2's/SinkPAD's

Tom do you offer your modding services on the BTU?

Well, I have done a few for fellow BLF'ers, but really need a break - been buried in mod'ing every evening and all weekend, still need to work, and got other things going on, so afraid I need to turn new mod'ing work down for now. There's always the risk luming over my head and I've had some close calls recently, and diffculty keeping track of all on-going communication -- just a lot of time & effort, and it's been getting crazier and crazier...

hey completely understandable - just figured i’d ask

good luck with everything!

thats what happens when you do good work lol

Thanks!! I got a pile of my own stuff-to-be-mod'ed as well, need to catch up, a little anyway...

Is it advisable to dedome the emitters of the BTU Shocker? Has anyone tried it already?

vinz did a mod on the shocker with dedomed xml2s… it was around 380-400kcd i believe… it required shims and focal point adjustment to get the emitters to focus correctly

I have not seen it done yet.
The reflector design does not allow deep focus adjustments that are usually needed for dedomed emitters. The wires will probably short out on the reflector. With some serious reflector mods, you might get this to work.
Edit: OK, I stand corrected :smiley:

Now the BTU shocker can come stock with XML2, just when I bought one and being told by Ric it will not be available for a long time…
I hope I can replace the LEDs easily.

Thanx jmpaul320. I guess I’ll stay away from dedoming the Shocker - for now. :slight_smile:

I have the original BTU (dry/cool white) but also have another on build order from one of the wonderful people if this forum. I think down the road I will mod my original BTU but I really need to learn a lot more on some cheaper torches first before attempting a mod on a pricey one, just to be safe. :stuck_out_tongue: Its nice to see the option for XML2’s, although Ric doesn’t list outputs for these models. I would also be interested in knowing what sort of mounting they are using (sinkpads/copper star/alum star etc).

I have been trying to figure out how to make Rics volume price points work…BLF group buy instead???

Buy 5 @ $95 each.

Buy 10 @ $85 each.

I am all over the qty 5 price to one BLF member but by the time you reship USPS or UPS, you’ve probably blown through $20.

Maybe Tom E would change his mind, do the emitter, driver, sinkpad etc mods and do an I-95 run one day…great time to leave L.I. and see the rest of the Sound area.

Can’t wait to see what the feedback is on the new XML2 option is…

Tom E, my eyes seem to be playing tricks on me. Are those depressions underneath the sinkpad stars?

Ohh, I'm totally swamped!! Little time for modding in the summer and over-committed myself.

depressions under the SinkPAD's? That's from the manufacturing process, stamped to elevate the surface and keep the direct copper path in tact. Some guys think it's really bad -- I personnally think it's not that bad and doesn't seem to have any noticeable effect - basically I'm filling it with AS5 but the surrounding surface contact area probably makes up for it pretty well. Noctigons don't have that issue, but they might have a slight depression on the top emitter side that has to be filled in with solder from re-flowing. Not sure, my preference right now is the Noctigon, but again, no known proof I know of says one is better than the other - relic and CPF has some pretty good charts on this - think it shows SinkPAD's slightly better, but only one sample test piece/emitter were used, so who really knows.

The same graphs also show how lapping the IS copper pcb decreases lumen ouput, so I doubt the Sinkpad is better, it all comes to the tolerance of the testing equipment.

Yes, that blew me away - hard to make sense of that. Lots of potential issues - none of our testing methods are perfect for sure... I know for me lapping is very time consuming, but again, don't think there is any definitive proof it helps, then again on some pill surfaces, they are so uneven it makes it impossible for me to level out. Some guys have a better setup and/or equipment for sanding, so could be possible or at least easier for others.

I’m one of those who thinks the depresson is a bad idea. (but of course, I have no evidence of this.) If I were to design a star, I’d put the depressions on the other side of the board where the +ve and -ve contacts are. I’ll try to find those graphs over at the evil forum.

What graphs show lapping the IS board reduces output? Mine didn't. The graphs were virtually the same, definitely within equipment tolerances. Here's a mouseover:

Note: Both of those tests were before I reflowed the emitter to fix the bonding problem.

I haven't seen the results posted on CPF yet.

With all the circumstances mentioned, it's the "Test Results Data" that showed lower lumen output when lapped. You made it clear that is all in tolerance levels but it can't be denied that physically one can go on the review page and read the "Test Results Data" and see the "Lapped" ones are slightly lower.

What it is an interesting that a reflow issues does not affect the output much and if we are to take the below that into consideration it's only the equipment's sensitivity and tolerance that made the small differences.

Current Stock Lapped Reflowed

2A 796 781 781

3A 1080 1062 1075

4A 1304 1287 1322

I disagree, you're omitting some critical data in your table; The 6A range. A DCB star's primary benefit is when the power is turned up.

Current Stock Lapped Reflowed
2A 796 781 781
3A 1080 1062 1075
4A 1304 1287 1322
6A 1582 1590 1754

The difference at 6A is definitely not measurement tolerances.

Another mouseover: