TrustFire X9 - Thoughts and beamshots

254 posts / 0 new
Last post
fishmaniac
fishmaniac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/03/2011 - 07:21
Posts: 1019
Location: Peoples Republic of California

how2 wrote:

fishmaniac  you need to get some news cells.

You might be right pal...

I've only got some LG laptop cells, some UF 17670's and the blue UF's that came with the light.

However, I shudder at the thought of paying $20+ for one cell. lol Anything decent in the $10 range? I know that this will rule out AW, Callies, Redilast, bare Sanyos and Panic's.

I was really hoping the LG cells would work nicely as they didn't cost anything per se.

agenthex
agenthex's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 11 months ago
Joined: 07/14/2010 - 04:49
Posts: 3070
Location: Merica

There were some forum deals on the xtar 2600. They're protected sanyo cells, which are top of the line.

Reading this makes you smarter: http://lesswrong.com/

SirJohn
SirJohn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 2 months ago
Joined: 09/28/2010 - 10:12
Posts: 479

Check out the Hi-max 18650. They test out very well and are reasonable at about $7 each shipped or less. (The seller accepts offers of $5/each without issue and then you pay the shipping costs)

http://budgetlightforum.com/node/2166

I own both the Himax and Xtar cells and I like them both.

weiser
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 1 week ago
Joined: 07/18/2011 - 15:25
Posts: 1811
Location: Montana, USA

My X9 is pulling 0.8A on a freshly charged cell at 4.2V. I'm not sure if there is an issue with the leads because all I can verify that works correctly is testing voltage. It also only reads 1.3A for my L2i with a MF 3-mode drop-in. I'm getting a good connection with the body on both. Is there a problem with the DMM or could they both possibly be duds? I doubt the L2i's results because that thing is dang bright and will certainly get hot on high after a bit. 

 

0.80A on HIGH

0.50A on MED

0.11A on LOW

 

These numbers are all reliable every time I test it and not on the same spot (threads) either. 

 

EDIT: Now tested with the Equus 3320

 

1.85A on HIGH

1.00A on MED

0.20A on LOW

 

The DMM (or leads) do make a big difference and the Equus 3320 has proved to be far more consistent. In fact, I'll go as far as to say it's primarily the leads because I used the HF leads in the Equus and got similar results as I got with them plugged into the HF DMM. 

SirJohn
SirJohn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 years 2 months ago
Joined: 09/28/2010 - 10:12
Posts: 479

Could be crappy leads on your DMM. Really need heavy gauge leads or very short ones.

weiser
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 1 week ago
Joined: 07/18/2011 - 15:25
Posts: 1811
Location: Montana, USA

SirJohn wrote:

Could be crappy leads on your DMM. Really need heavy gauge leads or very short ones.

 

I can't tell what gauge since I'm not sure of the casing thickness but they're about 3' in length. It's a cheapo Harbor Freight DMM. I suppose they work good for voltage but maybe aren't quite up to the task for amperage testing?

 

 

Sparktastic
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 1 month ago
Joined: 01/12/2011 - 00:50
Posts: 26
Location: Earth

OK, so here's the low down..

As I have mentioned before an XML emitter requires about 3.35v to be applied to it before it will draw 3A

or about 10 Watts. If the voltage across the emitter drops by only 100mV to 3.25V, the emitter will draw only

2.4A or 7.8 Watts.

Forget about the un-loaded battery terminal voltage of your freshly charged 18650 - It is meaningless!

All 18650 batteries (no matter what brand or how much you spend on them) will immediately start to drop the terminal voltage as soon as a load is placed them. Place a 3A load on a freshly charged 18650 and even the best 18650 cell (arguably the AW 2600's) will drop to 3.6V almost immediately and worse still, that voltage will keep dropping albeit at a slower rate..

The green line on the chart above represents the battery terminal voltage of an AW 2600 at 3amp draw.

The red line is at 1A draw and the black line is 0.3A draw.

(courtesy of 'HJK' at CPF).

The green line on the chart above represents the battery terminal voltage of a typical generic 18650 at 3amp draw. Notice the immediate drop to 3.4V at 3A load. This battery would be unsuitable for a single 18650 flashlight. Most 18650 batteries do not have a low enough internal resistance to handle a 3A load well. They might be fine for an XPG or R2 and 1-1.5A, but no good for an XML.. Again courtesy of 'HJK' at CPF.

You can see how important it is use good quality 18650 cells with low internal resistance and to mimimize driver and wiring losses with single cell XML lights. Even with the use of an 8x AMC7135 (regulated to 2.8A & 9.25W) and a AW 2600 battery, the driver could only regulate that output for about 15-20 minutes. After this point the battery terminal voltage will drop below the voltage required to maintain regulation and the output will start to dim gradually. Even after you loose regulation though, you should still have another 30-40 minutes of runtime at reduced output..

edc
edc's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 12 months ago
Joined: 01/16/2011 - 02:28
Posts: 3300
Location: NSW AUSTRALIA

weiser701 wrote:

SirJohn wrote:

Could be crappy leads on your DMM. Really need heavy gauge leads or very short ones.

 

I can't tell what gauge since I'm not sure of the casing thickness but they're about 3' in length. It's a cheapo Harbor Freight DMM. I suppose they work good for voltage but maybe aren't quite up to the task for amperage testing?

 

 

Try new leads. I'm sure it will improve

 

http://i1193.photobucket.com/albums

agenthex
agenthex's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 11 months ago
Joined: 07/14/2010 - 04:49
Posts: 3070
Location: Merica

I used the exact same meter to get 1.9A on mine, but as mentioned before: direct draw means essentially arbitrary current/power.

Reading this makes you smarter: http://lesswrong.com/

2100
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/28/2011 - 10:28
Posts: 4512
Location: SINGAPORE

Sparktastic wrote:

OK, so here's the low down..

As I have mentioned before an XML emitter requires about 3.35v to be applied to it before it will draw 3A

You can see how important it is use good quality 18650 cells with low internal resistance and to mimimize driver and wiring losses with single cell XML lights. Even with the use of an 8x AMC7135 (regulated to 2.8A & 9.25W) and a AW 2600 battery, the driver could only regulate that output for about 15-20 minutes. After this point the battery terminal voltage will drop below the voltage required to maintain regulation and the output will start to dim gradually. Even after you loose regulation though, you should still have another 30-40 minutes of runtime at reduced output..

No problem bro, thanks for the detailed explanation, it'd be nice for the newbies. 

Bro mitro did all the hardwork for us.  The Sanyo 2600s have a really good knee. And even the TF flames 2400 are usable.  You'd be happy to know after the XTAR promotion in July, a lot of us are operating on XTAR 2600s which are Sanyos. Bro picthris said correctly that these are "not good" because they are unable to provide a lot of current, he is somewhat  correct....only in the sense that the PCB is tuned to cut out like 4.0A so not exactly suitable for the hardcore lights. I cannot run my DD triple XM-Ls with this at full charge, can only charge to say 4.0V and let it sag.  But CNQG is selling Sanyo 2600 unprotected cells (be careful) for $5.50 ea.  Great stuff/great price.

The Solarforce 2400 are pretty good stuff also. They just tail the XTAR 2600 a wee bit in all the run time tests in 2-cell regulated triple XM-L lights doing 2.5A starting and ending at about 3.6A, so that's pretty hard discharge. Eg 50 mins for Solarforce 2400, 54 mins for XTAR 2600.

Here's a zoomed in portion that we'd be interested in, approx 3.3V.  But no worries, 3.2V loaded giving 2.4A is still plently bright.  (if you don't put a meter on it, you'll never know)

ased

krikstas
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/02/2010 - 16:43
Posts: 181
Location: Lithuania

Today I have got 2 TF X9 (one of them with batteries and charger)

Here is what we have:

with the batteries it comes (blue crappy ultrafire) one was 3.84V another 4.01V

High - 0.4 A (on both X9 and with both batteries)

2  Surefire CR123  both 3.24V

High - 1.92A (almost 4 A to the emitter)

Later will update measurements with Xtar 18700 and Solarforce 16340 batteries

2100
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/28/2011 - 10:28
Posts: 4512
Location: SINGAPORE

Kristas, one guy tried 2 cells and partially burnt the driver.  Could not change modes. Better not try it.

fishmaniac
fishmaniac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/03/2011 - 07:21
Posts: 1019
Location: Peoples Republic of California

krikstas wrote:

2  Surefire CR123  both 3.24V

High - 1.92A (almost 4 A to the emitter)

Very interesting. Totally forgot about testing my light with 2 primaries. And like 2100 said, careful about using 7.2-7.4v.

fishmaniac
fishmaniac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/03/2011 - 07:21
Posts: 1019
Location: Peoples Republic of California

Sparktastic wrote:

...use good quality 18650 cells with low internal resistance and to mimimize driver and wiring losses with single cell XML lights.

Thanks for the info Spark. I guess I really need try some better cells.

agenthex
agenthex's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 11 months ago
Joined: 07/14/2010 - 04:49
Posts: 3070
Location: Merica

krikstas wrote:

Today I have got 2 TF X9 (one of them with batteries and charger)

Here is what we have:

with the batteries it comes (blue crappy ultrafire) one was 3.84V another 4.01V

High - 0.4 A (on both X9 and with both batteries)

2  Surefire CR123  both 3.24V

High - 1.92A (almost 4 A to the emitter)



No, current doesn't sum like that.

Reading this makes you smarter: http://lesswrong.com/

Jacobhl
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 10 months ago
Joined: 05/15/2011 - 15:36
Posts: 108
Location: Denmark

agenthex wrote:

krikstas wrote:

Today I have got 2 TF X9 (one of them with batteries and charger)

Here is what we have:

with the batteries it comes (blue crappy ultrafire) one was 3.84V another 4.01V

High - 0.4 A (on both X9 and with both batteries)

2  Surefire CR123  both 3.24V

High - 1.92A (almost 4 A to the emitter)



No, current doesn't sum like that.

If there is an ideal buck converter on it, it will(approximately).

IE, 3.24V*2, 1A => buck converter => 3.24V, 2A

I do not know if there is a buck on the X9(but I suspect there is - otherwise the emitter is driven at a way too high voltage), and obviously it's not ideal(~85-90% efficiency), the voltage will sag on the CR123 batteries and the buck will probably swich the voltage down to ~3.4-3.5V, so it's not anywhere near 4A at the emitter.

Moving electrons to light my way.

krikstas
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/02/2010 - 16:43
Posts: 181
Location: Lithuania

[/quote]

No, current doesn't sum like that.

[/quote]

maybe you are right, but somehow I think 1.9A on two primaries is too high so it should be more than 3A

fishmaniac
fishmaniac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/03/2011 - 07:21
Posts: 1019
Location: Peoples Republic of California

Well, I tried out my X9 with 2 CR123 primaries. For the quick moments that I actually had the light on, it was obviously brighter than with my 18650 cells. Did a quick reading and got 2.35v.

So what's the verdict with regards to primaries? Ok to run?

agenthex
agenthex's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 11 months ago
Joined: 07/14/2010 - 04:49
Posts: 3070
Location: Merica

Jacobhl wrote:

agenthex wrote:

krikstas wrote:

Today I have got 2 TF X9 (one of them with batteries and charger)

Here is what we have:

with the batteries it comes (blue crappy ultrafire) one was 3.84V another 4.01V

High - 0.4 A (on both X9 and with both batteries)

2  Surefire CR123  both 3.24V

High - 1.92A (almost 4 A to the emitter)



No, current doesn't sum like that.

If there is an ideal buck converter on it, it will(approximately).

IE, 3.24V*2, 1A => buck converter => 3.24V, 2A

I do not know if there is a buck on the X9(but I suspect there is - otherwise the emitter is driven at a way too high voltage), and obviously it's not ideal(~85-90% efficiency), the voltage will sag on the CR123 batteries and the buck will probably swich the voltage down to ~3.4-3.5V, so it's not anywhere near 4A at the emitter.

If you look at how much the current sags on this light, it seems somewhat evident that it's akin to a direct driven system with some fairly static resistive elements in between.  It really doesn't take much for an XML to take a big current drop for a delta in Vf.

The only reason IMO that cr123's even work IMO is that it's hitting their current supplying capacity and sagging voltage all the way down to emitter Vf levels. If you look at the folks who tried 16340's above, they got 5A @ tail briefly before the driver smoked.

fishmaniac: yes it works, but only as backup measure since it's not exactly the most stable system in that config.

Reading this makes you smarter: http://lesswrong.com/

Langcjl
Langcjl's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 6 months ago
Joined: 03/05/2011 - 05:36
Posts: 2162
Location: Wisconsin USA
I got my eBay X9 today. On a fully charged SF 18650 I get 4200 lux in my I.S. I get 4000 with the same battery in an L2i with the UF 3 mode. Both readings taken after 20 second sag time. It is a beautiful light. The only exterior flaw is the printing on both sides is crooked. It also has a lanyard ring so I can put my new paracord skills to work. It's not dark yet so only garage testing so far.

Piers said " ....but who wants enough light, when you have the option for far too much "

Langcjl
Langcjl's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 6 months ago
Joined: 03/05/2011 - 05:36
Posts: 2162
Location: Wisconsin USA
Ok, I went out tonight to take a quick look at what the x9 could do. More often than not, a new light just doesn't measure up to what I thought it would be. That is not the case here! I don't want to be hasty here but this might be my favorite light of all. It looks great and the output is awesome. Great spot and throw with a decent amount of usable spill. I'm all Foy over this one!

Piers said " ....but who wants enough light, when you have the option for far too much "

vawayne
vawayne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 1 month ago
Joined: 07/26/2011 - 14:38
Posts: 156
Location: Calif

One in the mail on its way

fishmaniac
fishmaniac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/03/2011 - 07:21
Posts: 1019
Location: Peoples Republic of California

Langcjl wrote:
Ok, I went out tonight to take a quick look at what the x9 could do. More often than not, a new light just doesn't measure up to what I thought it would be. That is not the case here! I don't want to be hasty here but this might be my favorite light of all. It looks great and the output is awesome. Great spot and throw with a decent amount of usable spill. I'm all Foy over this one!

I agree! I was so hyped about this light during the shipping wait. Glad it didn't disappoint. Smile

Langcjl
Langcjl's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 6 months ago
Joined: 03/05/2011 - 05:36
Posts: 2162
Location: Wisconsin USA
My eBay X9 draws 2.6A at the tailcap.

Piers said " ....but who wants enough light, when you have the option for far too much "

pounder
pounder's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 01/20/2011 - 16:43
Posts: 1788
Location: Ontario
Good to hear lang..just ordered one off eBay for 33$..good deal..will replace the driver if it doesn't pull hard enough
fishmaniac
fishmaniac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/03/2011 - 07:21
Posts: 1019
Location: Peoples Republic of California

Langcjl wrote:
My eBay X9 draws 2.6A at the tailcap.

Wow..yours must be extremely bright...!

Does your DMM have stock leads? And what cell did you use?

Langcjl
Langcjl's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 6 months ago
Joined: 03/05/2011 - 05:36
Posts: 2162
Location: Wisconsin USA
It is very bright. This is my new favorite flashlight. The leads I used are in this thread http://budgetlightforum.com/node/4101. The X9, for the price they can be had for on eBay is one of the great budget lights.

Piers said " ....but who wants enough light, when you have the option for far too much "

2100
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/28/2011 - 10:28
Posts: 4512
Location: SINGAPORE

Looks good if it's like Langcjl 's 2.6A.  Unfortunately here and CPF there are too many reports of lower current.  Will get one just for collection after the new Shadow lights from CNQG come out, i have always like gun-metal (like the OTR X5, seriously i don't need that light).

weiser
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 1 week ago
Joined: 07/18/2011 - 15:25
Posts: 1811
Location: Montana, USA

2100,

 

The finish on this light is very nice. I'm also a fan of the gun metal scheme and I was still surprised at how nice this light looks in person. I chose Solarforce's version of gun metal for my L2i for my first P60 but it's much lighter than the X9 and not as professional looking. It would be hard to get any better for the money.  

2100
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/28/2011 - 10:28
Posts: 4512
Location: SINGAPORE

weiser701 wrote:
The finish on this light is very nice. I'm also a fan of the gun metal scheme and I was still surprised at how nice this light looks in person. I chose Solarforce's version of gun metal for my L2i for my first P60 but it's much lighter than the X9 and not as professional looking. It would be hard to get any better for the money.  

Cool, will get one soon.

Pages