Instead of a full dedome CK, try shaving the dome off with a razor, just “shorten” it and see if that affects the light transmission any
Perhaps many requests for a triple XP-L in their emails might make them up the ante at developing one 
Remember, the squeeky wheel gets the grease
Have you seen dedomed x-pl’s in a 20mm triple TIR in person?
These shots from Dale look nothing like a mule. (triple xpl board with TIR @ 2960 lumens)
The beam offers a very wide spill whilst maintaining a fairly large hotspot. I wouldn’t gravitate towards calling the characteristics of this beamshot as a mule. (Although maybe there is no hotspot but rather the ridiculous amount of lumens coming from this Sinner Cu 18350 light washes out the camera and makes it appear like it has a hotspot?) If the xpl with 20mm TIR offers a mule beam characteristic than I won’t be buying the parts for one. But if they look like Dale’s shots in real life than you can bet your a$$ I’m going to build one J)
Second that. Currently building my third XP-L triple. I’ve been building them in several EDC-sized lights that used to have 20mm reflectors to see which host handles heat the best (err… better than the others? None will be ‘great’ since they’re so small).
The beam is nothing like a mule, and is WAY better than an MT-G2 in a 20mm reflector (built one of those too)… Plus, a 3-up XP-L generates a ton less heat with a 3A driver (emitters in parallel) than a zener’d qlite at 3A.
I’m not super disappointed yet about the lack of XP-L triple optics… The 1A tint looks pretty decent dedomed. Also they dedome really well in gas. On all of mine there’s been white silicone left behind only on the bond wires while the clear dome falls off in just about 2-3 hours. Almost like Cree designed them to be dedomed in gas.
But then again, I suppose I’d prefer not to have to dedome and gamble with tint shift and lose some of the output.
It would certainly be great if carclo did make xpl TIR’s.
As far as lumen loss, djozz excellent graphs seem to indicate that there was extremely minimal
lumen difference between domed and dedomed xpl’s (except in very high current’s, 5 amps+).
Ok guys update:
He stated that the minimum order for a group buy would be 40 pieces, @ $.45 per optic. Great news! I thought it would be a minimum of maybe 1000 or more. So this is definitely doable.
The problem is he said there may be a problem fitting the optic mechanically… As if he’s trying to sell me the xpg2 TIR… I’m waiting for his response on whether it’s a custom built TIR (as he initially mentioned for a group buy) or not.
Sounds good.
This thread is about a triple TIR that will fit over the XP-L with the domes still on. Beam pattern with dedomed XP-L is about the same as XPG2 with the domes still on. XP-Ls in a 20mm TIR (three 10mm individual lenses) would be extreme flood even with the tightest/narrowest TIR, because of the relationship between the apparent die size (larger with the domes on) and the available size of the TIR lenses.
If it's actually a custom lens made to fit over the XP-L with domes on, put me down for at least ten, although I'll order more if others don't step up.
Yes leaftye, we should have known that Carclo wouldn’t be creating new optics in the range of 40 to 50 cents per piece, with a minimum order of 40 pieces… or hell RMM would probably buy 100’s of them himself.
If anyone wants the old 10507 for the XP-G2, then the offer stands at 45ish cents per optic, with a minimum group buy of 40 pieces.
But for an optic to fit an XP-L triple:
:_(
Thank you! There are more of us than you think…
All they should really have to do is to make the center holes larger in diameter at the bottom and re adjust the taper. It should still be a "10 degree" optic, with a larger center hole. The beam should be comparable to an XP-G triple. The larger die size does not cause a 10 degree optic to be anything other than 10 degree. The optic directs the light. The biggest problem will be fitting it all into the standard 20mm diameter of those triples. The way the TIR spreads out the light is done in the taper of the center hole, towards the top. The 20mm optics I have for XM-L have a large hole at the bottom, to accommodate the led and they taper considerably, to make it 10 degree. The 45 degree ones have an almost straight hole, with no taper. 10 degree can be done in the 20mm three-up, it's just the high cost of making a die. Well, actually, they only have to make the inserts, as the die bases are standardized, so the cost is probably in the couple thousand dollar range for just the inserts. They can just change inserts for one cavity in the die and save themselves lots, by making them in a standard run and sorting the cavity out after. I would be surprised if they only want a small run, even with those costs.
ditto — except I think I’d take 10 even if they’re just plain ol’ Carlco 10507’s at that price. But especially if they’ll fit XP-L’s with the domes on. I’m eager to see what that might look like, even if it’s a super floody beam. I like the beam pattern with them dedomed a whole lot… hopefully it wouldn’t be too drastically different.
So why do LEDs with different die sizes give different beam angles with the same TIR? Same goes for the same LED with dome on and with dome removed in the same TIR. The beam angle changes dramatically.
The 10mm lenses in the 20mm TIRs are so small, enlarging the bottom hole enough to fit over a XML-size dome would also remove a lot of the lower section of the cone, there's just not enough cross section down there. Another way to put it, the OD of the dome is larger than the OD of the bottom section of the lens where the dome needs to go.
Enlarging the hole would mean the part below the horizontal line would no longer exist.
Below?
The part of the TIR below the horizontal line. To make it do otherwise would require two objects occupying the same space at the same time and I don't think our technology has progressed to that point yet.
Gosh that’s little to nothing.
Are you saying you can shave part of the TIR bottom off and remove the need to dedome an XP-L to fit under an xpg2 TIR?
That's a huge amount to remove on such a tiny lens. I've cut and chopped and mutilated lots of these things, and doing that would severely alter the beam. I've experimented with both shortening the legs and extending them and shaving that bottom part of the cone to let the lens sit lower. It doesn't work. Some things you can do to them with little effect and some things destroy them. Messing with any part of it down around the LED opening is one of the things that destroys them.
I think that de-doming a led, allows a lot of light to get out from under the center hole. Those three ups sit up off the die face a little. That light gets out around the outside of the cone, especially on a three up, where there is some thin areas between the three cones. It has to go out and it's not focused, so it makes for a much larger beam. Same with a bigger die. The hole has to be sized for the die, so that the majority of the light goes up and out that center. Light is still going to get out around it and with a small hole and big die, you get a much less pronunced spot.
If you shorten a TIR at the bottom and sit it down on the die face, the beam starts looking more like an aspheric that is partly focused. So the depth of the center hole and the taper, plus the diameter, in relation to the die size, all have an effect, but I still think they could make a 20mm three-up, using a larger hole and steeper cone, so that the overall diameter stays within 20mm.
It's just my thoughts, but not based on anything more than playing around with TIR optics for a while. I maybe all wet. Been there before, will be again.