TR-J19 modded

50 posts / 0 new
Last post

Pages

JohnnyMac
JohnnyMac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 9 hours ago
Joined: 04/12/2011 - 16:03
Posts: 8879
Location: Eastern PA
TR-J19 modded

I purchased my TR-J19 from Fasttech with the intention to mod it following 18sixfifty's great success with his.  Not the most powerful triple after modding but for an inexpensive mod this thing is a beast!  The best thing of all is I'm into it for well under $100.  Cash

TR-J19 - $68.04 (after BLF discount)
DRY driver - $5.00
3 * XM-L2 U2-1A on Noctigons - $19.35

Total = $92.39 

And what exactly did $92 and some time get me? 205,435 lux @ 1m and 906.5m of throw

Here is the stock setup.  The driver appears to be exactly the same as in the TR-3T6 and the J19 only does 1363 OTF lumens stock, just like the TR-3T6.  The reflector and pill are massive!

Here is what I swapped the stock emitters for.  XM-L2 U2-1A on Noctigons.  I dedomed them in gasoline in case you didn't notice. Wink

Rewired them in series using silicon insulated 20awg silver-plated copper strand.  Arctic silver was used under the Noctigons.  I also chamfered the lip in the centering rings to reduce the slight amount of light blocked by them.

I replaced the wiring from the DRY driver with the same.  I stripped the components from the stock driver and used it as a contact plate.

On the switch end I added a piece of the 20awg wiring for less resistance and soldered the heavy brass cap to the end of the spring.

The stock setup for the anode spring is a floating design.  The driver retaining ring contains a nylon insert into which the driver spring is set.  Tightening down the retaining presses the spring against the back of the driver plate.  I have no pictures of what I did to this but simply put, I pulled the spring form the nylon then bored out the nylon using a stepped bit so that the spring moves freely inside the nylon.  I could have removed all of the nylon but keeping it retains the insulating property so that the spring cannot short out on the retaining ring.  I then simply soldered the spring directly to the back of the driver contact plate.  On the battery end of the spring I added a 6mm brass contact button so it makes better contact with the cell top.

Here are the original output specs and the modded specs.  I didn't take a lux reading from stock but I can assure you it wasn't that great. My numbers are taken running King Kong unprotected ICR 26650 cells.  The DRY driver is DD in Turbo mode.  Different cells will result in different output results and I'm sure even better numbers could be attained with even better cells.

STOCK

Low119.6 OTF lumens
Medium    586 OTF lumens
High1363 OTF lumens

 

POST MOD

Low

102.4 OTF lumens

Medium

520.9 OTF lumens

High

1,294 OTF lumens

Turbo

2,215 OTF lumens

Lux @ 4m

12,840

Lux @ 1m (converted)   

205,435

Throw distance

906.5m

 

Edited by: JohnnyMac on 10/15/2013 - 23:37
RMM
RMM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 7 months ago
Joined: 07/23/2013 - 13:47
Posts: 4006
Location: USA

Very nice. It looks like the Reflector and pill can really take the heat.

Do you have any idea how many amps it is pulling?

Mountain Electronics : batteries, Noctigon, and much more! What's new? 

RaceR86
RaceR86's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 7 months ago
Joined: 02/22/2012 - 08:32
Posts: 3777
Location: Norway

Nice to get some numbers... Thanks for sharing. Smile

How do you like it compared to some of your other powerful lights?

What batteries did you use, and how many amps are you seeing on turbo?

BLF LED database – collaboration spreadsheet and latest news about where to buy LEDs
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/19342

panthervision23
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 8 months ago
Joined: 02/19/2013 - 00:37
Posts: 545

Great! I say you did a good job modding the TR-J19.

JohnnyMac
JohnnyMac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 9 hours ago
Joined: 04/12/2011 - 16:03
Posts: 8879
Location: Eastern PA

RaceR86 wrote:

Nice to get some numbers... Thanks for sharing. Smile

How do you like it compared to some of your other powerful lights?

What batteries did you use, and how many amps are you seeing on turbo?

I'm only seeing about 3.28A at the tail but that is with very long stock probe wires.  I don't list tail amps because I find them to be utterly useless and inaccurate.  Better than nothing I suppose but different people will see different results with the same exact light depending on the thickness and length of their DMM leads.  When it comes down to it the only accurate measurement is a good light meter and a calibrated IS or light box.

The cells used are listed in my OP right above the output tables.  Unprotected KK ICR 26650 Wink

RaceR86
RaceR86's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 7 months ago
Joined: 02/22/2012 - 08:32
Posts: 3777
Location: Norway

I normally check emitter amps. That way the switch is included and I get a much more consistent reading by soldering a wire directly to the emitter. It says a lot about if you have reached the max potential. In the lights that are essentially direct drive I think it says a lot. Your amp and lumen number seems to somewhat make sense... But the question is, why isnt turbo higher?

Im not too familiar with the dry driver myself (still waiting for one and never used one), but 3,28A at the tail and 2150 OTF lumens both seem quite low for your direct drive setup with KK ICR cells... Sounds like something is limiting the peak output..

Your SRK lights have around the same OTF lumens, I would expect more from this setup. Seems like there is something that still can be improved...

BLF LED database – collaboration spreadsheet and latest news about where to buy LEDs
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/19342

JohnnyMac
JohnnyMac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 9 hours ago
Joined: 04/12/2011 - 16:03
Posts: 8879
Location: Eastern PA

You are correct that it seems low but you must remember that lumens drop a good 25% after dedoming while lux increases.

DBSAR
DBSAR's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 4 hours ago
Joined: 02/11/2013 - 23:28
Posts: 6467
Location: Newfoundland, Canada

looks awsome Smile are you going to do any beamshots ?

That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight

bibihang
bibihang's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 11 hours ago
Joined: 11/10/2011 - 09:32
Posts: 2452
Location: Malaysia

JohnnyMac wrote:

You are correct that it seems low but you must remember that lumens drop a good 25% after dedoming while lux increases.


Yeah but I remember Tom E’s Super Shocker mod that being directly driven at 5~6A to each de-domed LED his Shocker is able to put out 4000~5000 OTF lumens. The driver he uses is different though which is from IOS, but if the DRY driver is able to do DD in turbo mode, which is above 4A to each LED then your light should give at least 3500 OTF lumens, just saying.
B42
B42's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 03/07/2013 - 21:03
Posts: 1878

It does seem a bit low lumens wise for XML2s, but I’d expect runtime to be awesome with 32650s and very little heat to kill efficiency due to great thermal transfer and massive head.

18sixfifty
18sixfifty's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 12/25/2012 - 20:19
Posts: 4161

I just checked mine by eye doing a ceiling bounce up against a Fandy Fire UV-S5 (SRK clone) one of the early good ones that is actually a little brighter than the SRK's I have had and the J-19 is a LOT brighter even though the tint is not as white. It lights up every nook and cranny in the room where the FF doesn't. It's not terribly scientific but I can tell that the J-19 is way brighter. Both with fresh batteries as well. I can't see anything that you did differently so it's strange. Well on this one I did leave one emitter's dome on and stretched the spring a bit to make better contact with the board, it's kinda jammed in under the plastic piece. When my light gauge was still working I tested the one I sold to Gords with it and it was showing about 1,000 lumens more than the FF. Now that could be because of extra light bouncing around but I still would have guessed at more like 3,000 lumens, very close to my terminator. I didn't use the centering ring for the emitter either, the Reflector is sitting right on the noctigon with electrical tape over the wires so it doesn't short, I have found that when I de-dome that it hurts some if the emitter isn't up into the reflector as much as possible. Well anyway it's one heck of a mod and thanks for posting the numbers. Maybe my eyes are playing tricks on me. I have another lux meter on the way so when it shows up I'll have to build a better box for it and post my numbers. Here are pics of the stock J-19 and my newest J-19 mod.

 

edit, I just had my wife do a "blind" test for me with a ceiling bounce. She didn't get to see what lights I was playing with and she confirmed that the J-19 was far brighter than the FF SRK and that the J-19 modded was also much brighter on High (not turbo) than the J-19 stock was on high. In fact the J-19 modded was slightly brighter on high (not turbo) than the FF SRK although it was close. 

 

One more edit: Just another slight difference I used Wakefield Deltabond epoxy for the emitters. Can't think it could make that much difference though. 

 

I’m a junky, I mod lights so I can sell lights so I can buy more light to mod so I can sell lights to buy more lights to mod.

gords1001
gords1001's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 months ago
Joined: 05/07/2012 - 14:02
Posts: 5276
Location: wigan england

I’d be expecting to be much closer to 3000 lumens than 2000 just because an xm-l2 u2 at 3a on alu is rated to be comfortably above 1000 lumens, your direct bonded to copper, yes their dedomed but emitter lumens should still be above 1000 so your losing 800 – 900 lumens somewhere.

thats like misplacing a good hd2010

gords1001
gords1001's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 months ago
Joined: 05/07/2012 - 14:02
Posts: 5276
Location: wigan england

id definitely try pulling the emitter locators and retesting, , everything points to getting dedomed emitters as high up in the reflector as possible.

bibihang
bibihang's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 11 hours ago
Joined: 11/10/2011 - 09:32
Posts: 2452
Location: Malaysia

On the other side, is it possible that the DRY driver doesn’t deliver REAL high current in DD? As JohnnyMac mention that he measured only 3.28A at the tail, is this where the problem is?

gords1001
gords1001's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 months ago
Joined: 05/07/2012 - 14:02
Posts: 5276
Location: wigan england

it always has done in the past, I’ve got a couple now (one none step down model). but thats besides the point.

the 3.2a tail current is at 12v, I’m not sure its the same as emitter current, but even if it is, it still comfortably puts those three xm-l2’s over 3a with better than average heat sinking.

RaceR86
RaceR86's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 7 months ago
Joined: 02/22/2012 - 08:32
Posts: 3777
Location: Norway

How many amps are you seeing on the tail of your light gords1001, and are all/both springs copper braided?

Amps on the tail should be the same as emitter amps. The voltage of the 3 batteries in series are divided on 3 emitters since they are wired in series.

If the driver is proper direct drive on turbo without lots of resistance, the batteries are good, and there is not a lot of resistance somewhere, amps on fresh batteries should have been much higher than 3,3A, and OTF lumens should also be higher.

BLF LED database – collaboration spreadsheet and latest news about where to buy LEDs
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/19342

JohnnyMac
JohnnyMac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 9 hours ago
Joined: 04/12/2011 - 16:03
Posts: 8879
Location: Eastern PA

bibihang wrote:
JohnnyMac wrote:

You are correct that it seems low but you must remember that lumens drop a good 25% after dedoming while lux increases.

Yeah but I remember Tom E's Super Shocker mod that being directly driven at 5~6A to each de-domed LED his Shocker is able to put out 4000~5000 OTF lumens. The driver he uses is different though which is from IOS, but if the DRY driver is able to do DD in turbo mode, which is above 4A to each LED then your light should give at least 3500 OTF lumens, just saying.
Do you know exactly which driver he used?
JohnnyMac
JohnnyMac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 9 hours ago
Joined: 04/12/2011 - 16:03
Posts: 8879
Location: Eastern PA

LOL...darn you guys! You've taken all the wind from my sails. Silly

Now I have to figure out why this giant is refusing to wake up. All your help and suggestions are very helpful. Please keep them coming.  Smile

RaceR86
RaceR86's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 7 months ago
Joined: 02/22/2012 - 08:32
Posts: 3777
Location: Norway

Sorry JM, there was no intention to take away all the wind from you sails. Just wanted you to have a light that lives up to its potential and what you probably modded it for. Smile

Tom-E normally uses this driver since its direct drive when using 3 cells in series and 3 emitters in series.

Maybe try your light without the driver circuit. Test proper direct drive and see what kind of lux and amps you get in comparison. If its the same, I would double check resistance between batteries and the driver..

Edit: Before doing that, do you have another set of batteries you could try it with. Just in case you have a bad cell or something..

BLF LED database – collaboration spreadsheet and latest news about where to buy LEDs
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/19342

gords1001
gords1001's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 months ago
Joined: 05/07/2012 - 14:02
Posts: 5276
Location: wigan england

I’m not doing tail current tests at the moment, I’ve been getting too many wonky readings and until I figure out why, its not going to be helpful.

I can try with the clamp meter tonight if need be though,

johnny, do all you king kongs drop right through the battery sleeve without interference? And is there definitely some resistance when screwing the tail cap on?

for those who’ve not seen the guts of this light, everything is HUGE I sleeved some 18650 cells into it to test and they wouldn’t reliably run it, the plungers are almost the size of an 18650 so those puny cells don’t work so well lol

bibihang
bibihang's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 11 hours ago
Joined: 11/10/2011 - 09:32
Posts: 2452
Location: Malaysia

Sorry for my discourtesy JohnnyMac, but you’ve actually done a great job there with those assembling and cooper-braid-ing etc, I will need to refer to your work if I happen to try my hand on modding this J19 in the future. Smile

Yes as RaceR86 pointed out that’s the driver that Tom E used for his Shocker mod. Note that though it is written as 4.5A in IOS website but members here reported that it is actually DD in high mode, which is varying in between 5~6A. Also the contact board that comes with it is about 1mm smaller than the DRY driver.

JohnnyMac
JohnnyMac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 9 hours ago
Joined: 04/12/2011 - 16:03
Posts: 8879
Location: Eastern PA

gords1001 wrote:
I'm not doing tail current tests at the moment, I've been getting too many wonky readings and until I figure out why, its not going to be helpful. I can try with the clamp meter tonight if need be though, johnny, do all you king kongs drop right through the battery sleeve without interference? And is there definitely some resistance when screwing the tail cap on? for those who've not seen the guts of this light, everything is HUGE I sleeved some 18650 cells into it to test and they wouldn't reliably run it, the plungers are almost the size of an 18650 so those puny cells don't work so well lol
Yes, Graham, they all drop right in with no resistance at all.  The adapter sleeve is perfect on mine except for being @10mm too short and sliding front to back if you shake the light hard the same way.

There is also resistance when screwing the tailcap on.  The switch plunger is definitely pressing against the back of the last cell.  Tonight when I get home I will swap the KK for my TF Flame 26650 and see what happens with them with output.

I checked the tailcap resistance this morning while eating my breakfast.  Resistance in the switch is just 0.1mohm.  As a comparison I checked the body of my CQG S2 and with the leads about 3" apart (no tailcap joint in the mix) the resistance was 0.2mohms.  I would have to say there is no contributing resistance in the tail section.  I think tonight I will put a piece of 20awg wire in the anode spring as well to ensure no resistance from the driver spring.  I had one when I first modded the light but that was before I change the spring from a floating design to being soldered directly to the driver contact plate.

Other that those things I can't imagine what else could possibly be causing the lower than expected output.  Let me just add, so you are aware of another possible cause for low tailcap readings, my test leads are stock 3ft leads made of 24awg wire.  They have been pretty spot on in the past with single emitter lights but may have too much resistance for this light.

JohnnyMac
JohnnyMac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 9 hours ago
Joined: 04/12/2011 - 16:03
Posts: 8879
Location: Eastern PA

Here is another calculation for those who feel the OTF lumens are low for 3.28A at the tail.

dedomed OTF lumens = 2215

Add back 25% that is lost by dedoming = 2768.75

Add another 20% lost by the reflector and uncoated glass = 3322.5 emitter lumens or 1107 lumens per emitter.  Frankly this sounds just about spot on for 3.28A

I really feel that the less than expected output is due to the driver and/or anode spring resistance which will be addressed in short order.  I'm also ordering that driver from Intl-Outdoor.  Hopefully it arrives before FCW10 but I'm not holding my breath.

JohnnyMac
JohnnyMac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 9 hours ago
Joined: 04/12/2011 - 16:03
Posts: 8879
Location: Eastern PA

bibihang wrote:
Sorry for my discourtesy JohnnyMac, but you've actually done a great job there with those assembling and cooper-braid-ing etc, I will need to refer to your work if I happen to try my hand on modding this J19 in the future. Smile Yes as RaceR86 pointed out that's the driver that Tom E used for his Shocker mod. Note that though it is written as 4.5A in IOS website but members here reported that it is actually DD in high mode, which is varying in between 5~6A. Also the contact board that comes with it is about 1mm smaller than the DRY driver.
No need to apologize and no discourtesy seen from my end at all, Bibihang.  Wink  I was only joking about the wind being taken from my sails.  

I truly appreciate everyone's suggestions and encourage even more.  This was posted originally by me not so much as bragging rights but as an example of a fantastic and inexpensive alternative to lights costing twice as much and not performing half as well.  We are all here to share our knowledge and learn from one another.  It's what makes places like this so wonderful!  :hat:

As for the I-O driver being smaller than the DRY, it is of no issue.  The DRY is smaller than the original driver anyway and had to be fujik'd to the back of the original driver anyway.

RaceR86
RaceR86's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 7 months ago
Joined: 02/22/2012 - 08:32
Posts: 3777
Location: Norway

amps is amps.. If you can easily measure 4-5 amps then there is no reason why you should have issues here just because the voltage is higher.. Its not really a big deal if your reading is 0,1A too low either.. 

I was not one of those questioned you OTF vs amps numbers (,although I do think 25% loss because of de-doming sounds a bit high compared to what I have read some places..)  The issue is that both your amps and OTF are low. I would worry more if you saw 4amps and only 2215 OTF. Wink

Improving the resistance in a stock driver spring can do a lot in a setup like this.. (And so can freshly charged batteries)  Fingers crossed you will find some hidden oomph! Smile

BLF LED database – collaboration spreadsheet and latest news about where to buy LEDs
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/19342

JohnnyMac
JohnnyMac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 9 hours ago
Joined: 04/12/2011 - 16:03
Posts: 8879
Location: Eastern PA

RaceR86 wrote:

amps is amps.. If you can easily measure 4-5 amps then there is no reason why you should have issues here just because the voltage is higher.. Its not really a big deal if your reading is 0,1A too low either.. 

I was not one of those questioned you OTF vs amps numbers (,although I do think 25% loss because of de-doming sounds a bit high compared to what I have read some places..)  The issue is that both your amps and OTF are low. I would worry more if you saw 4amps and only 2215 OTF. Wink

Improving the resistance in a stock driver spring can do a lot in a setup like this.. (And so can freshly charged batteries)  Fingers crossed you will find some hidden oomph! Smile

I know you didn't question the output vs amps.  I thought my output (and amps) was low but the still brilliant output (no pun intended) makes me giggle like a school girl when I fire it up.  The cells were/are freshly topped off when I tested.  I will test again with different cells, then again after I mod the driver spring some more.  Something has to be causing resistance.  I just need to keep trying.
Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 1 week ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 15065
Location: LI NY

Great Job on this mod!! Those are very good #'s. I'm really thinking of getting one of those now.

I'm not a fan of the DRY driver for several good reasons. If you could have gotten an IOS or LCK-LED driver in there, you would definitely get more amps out of it, though something else may be stressed - tailcap switch, etc. Here's the issues with the DRY driver:

- seems to have/add resistance, quite a bit

- short timed turbo mode (don't tell me you can't handle the heat, I'll decide that! Smile)

- poor PWM's on low and med

Of course at $13 or so, the IOS driver is pricey, and it's 2 board design is awkward - usually I replace the wires with heavier gauge separating the board, and you need to thermally insulate the components. Overall, the IOS driver is more a PIA, but, wow - it's super low resistance and can produce crazy amps!

Yes - +1 with the other issues raised above as well. Just trying to help JM Smile. Still, this light has more potential than I previously thought, so it's all good. It's a 90%-95% Shocker, with a much better power source (26650 or 32650's).

 I've seen/measured 20% typical loss for de-doming, many times. Sometimes I saw 15% loss, but still suspect it was really 20%. 25% is bit high to rate the loss at - if so, could be focusing issues.

RMM
RMM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 7 months ago
Joined: 07/23/2013 - 13:47
Posts: 4006
Location: USA

Are you guys talking about this driver from ios?

Mountain Electronics : batteries, Noctigon, and much more! What's new? 

Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 1 week ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 15065
Location: LI NY

RMM wrote:
Are you guys talking about "this":http://intl-outdoor.com/xml-multicell-circuit-board-45a-ouput-55126v-p-5... driver from ios?

Yep - same as LCK-LED 5A driver - one with the same looks.

JohnnyMac
JohnnyMac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 9 hours ago
Joined: 04/12/2011 - 16:03
Posts: 8879
Location: Eastern PA

Tom E wrote:

Great Job on this mod!! Those are very good #'s. I'm really thinking of getting one of those now.

I'm not a fan of the DRY driver for several good reasons. If you could have gotten an IOS or LCK-LED driver in there, you would definitely get more amps out of it, though something else may be stressed - tailcap switch, etc. Here's the issues with the DRY driver:

- seems to have/add resistance, quite a bit

- short timed turbo mode (don't tell me you can't handle the heat, I'll decide that! Smile)

- poor PWM's on low and med

Of course at $13 or so, the IOS driver is pricey, and it's 2 board design is awkward - usually I replace the wires with heavier gauge separating the board, and you need to thermally insulate the components. Overall, the IOS driver is more a PIA, but, wow - it's super low resistance and can produce crazy amps!

Yes - +1 with the other issues raised above as well. Just trying to help JM Smile. Still, this light has more potential than I previously thought, so it's all good. It's a 90%-95% Shocker, with a much better power source (26650 or 32650's).

 I've seen/measured 20% typical loss for de-doming, many times. Sometimes I saw 15% loss, but still suspect it was really 20%. 25% is bit high to rate the loss at - if so, could be focusing issues.

Thanks, Tom!  I have the IOS driver on order and will be swapping it in shortly after it arrives in my grubby mitts.
RMM
RMM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 7 months ago
Joined: 07/23/2013 - 13:47
Posts: 4006
Location: USA

How do the reflectors and total heatsinking mass on this compare to the BTU Shocker? This seems like it could be a comparable option in a different format. Tempting too, considering the price. Another big investment but 26650/32650 batteries seem like they could potentially bring a lot more runtime to a power hungry (or capable Smile ) light like this.

Mountain Electronics : batteries, Noctigon, and much more! What's new? 

Pages