The following is from a relative noob's perspective.

Been lurking this thread since early on. This is my first group buy.  I committed to a light back in the early 1,000's (count, not Year AD) IIRC.  I did so mostly out of curiosity, with no expectations, so have not been disappointed with timing or anything else.

Fascinating process.  The challenges have been well documented IMO, and the issues with dealing through multiple individuals across different cultures have been educational to watch.

Kudos to all involved who selflessly spend their own time & resources monitoring the details, keeping the thread updated, and in general shepherding the thing along to fruition.  Thank You!

The discussion of emitters has been somewhat confusing to this writer, simply from lack of experience.  Modding is still some time in my future, so I'd like to make a good choice on the initial order(s).  Which brings up my question:

Could there be a synopsis added to post #1 that briefly describes the advantages and disadvantages of each emitter choice as related to this particular light/optics combination?  Nothing fancy, just some indication of CRI, total lumens, current draw and relative throw per emitter.  Runtime would be nice if only comparing basic modes but, the complexity would be daunting I suspect.  Perhaps links to deeper info per-emitter could be included for educational purposes for those like myself who aren't well versed on the finer points of the emitters being proposed.

slmjim

slmjim wrote:

Could there be a synopsis added to post #1 that briefly describes the advantages and disadvantages of each emitter choice as related to this particular light/optics combination?

I added an updated copy of the comparison used in the emitter poll:

——

Emitter Comparisons:

	Price	Lumens	Throwiness	CRI	Beam	Heat
Cree XP-L HI	$36	2800?	****	70+	****
Luminus SST-20	$30	2400?	*****	95+	****
Samsung LH351D	$30	2800?	*	90+	****

For price and heat, lower values are better. Throwiness depends on personal needs and taste. For everything else, higher values are better.

Throwiness is a rough measure of candelas per lumen. It’s the overall beam shape. Even the throwiest option is not a thrower, because compact triples are floody by nature. At a guess, the range here is about 2 to 4 cd/lm, and common reflector-based EDC-style lights are usually about 5 to 10.

Beam is the overall beam quality, like smoothness and color consistency.

More peppers makes thermal management harder, reduces the sustainable brightness after step-down, and increases risk of damaging the emitters on turbo.

Values indicate approximate performance in a Carclo 10511 optic using a FET for direct drive on 1×18650. These have not been directly tested in the FW3A host, so this data is more of an educated guess than a measurement.

All of the emitter types are good, but here is the worst part about each:

• XP-L HI: Costs more. Medium CRI.
• SST-20: Green at low levels.
• LH351D: Super floody. Green at low levels. May be unobtainable.

Visual estimate of the floodiest option compared to a throwy option:

Actually, the heat should be the same for the LH351D and SST-20 since they have about the same forward voltage.

Quote:

I would also add for the XP-L HI: Low CRI.

Sorry, mistake on my part.

And I think it should be clarified with the two high cri options (without getting into specifics of duv) that their color is not as well-described as green as it would be if they were a cooler temperature, regardless of whether you say lemongrass or just say “yellowish/greenish color”. To me, the sst20 comes across more yellow than green, as I have probably mentioned.

Thanks TK!

8000 posts

caramba wrote:

8000 posts

BlueSwordM wrote:

Actually, the heat should be the same for the LH351D and SST-20 since they have about the same forward voltage.

Same Vf, same amps, but SST-20 makes fewer lumens… so it should also make more heat.

Uh, that would mean power is the same for both if the VF and current is the same?

I think heat should be based on power consumption.

All in all, the XP-L HI has the highest VF, meaning it emits less heat.

We then have the SST-20 65CRI which has slightly lower VF, consuming a bit more power, but not really enough to be significant.
Not available here, but would be nice for max throw.

Then, we have the SST-20 95CRI and LH351D 90CRI have the same lowest VF, consuming the most power and emitting the highest amount of heat.

ClaudeMBallz wrote:

Quote:

I would also add for the XP-L HI: Low CRI.

What is the need for adding that? The CRI for each LED is plainly listed. Am I missing something?

If we’re listing the worst thing about each LED, it seems like performing far worse on a metric some people value highly might be worth a mention.

BlueSwordM wrote:

Uh, that would mean power is the same for both if the VF and current is the same?

I think heat should be based on power consumption.

All in all, the XP-L HI has the highest VF, meaning it emits less heat.

.

The power consumed produces two things; light and heat.
If one produces more light than the other then the one with less light output should be producing more heat, if the voltsage and amps are the same.

If it was possible to build a 100% efficient led all the power consumed would go into light output and there would be no heat.

Huh, I completely forgot about that.

Thanks MtnDon.

ToyKeeper wrote:

I added an updated copy of the comparison used in the emitter poll: ---- Emitter Comparisons:

	Price	Lumens	Throwiness	CRI	Beam	Heat
Cree XP-L HI	$36	2800?	****	70+	****
Luminus SST-20	$30	2400?	*****	95+	****
Samsung LH351D	$30	2800?	*	90+	****

For price and heat, lower values are better. Throwiness depends on personal needs and taste. For everything else, higher values are better. Throwiness is a rough measure of candelas per lumen. It's the overall beam shape. Even the throwiest option is not a thrower, because compact triples are floody by nature. At a guess, the range here is about 2 to 4 cd/lm, and common reflector-based EDC-style lights are usually about 5 to 10. Beam is the overall beam quality, like smoothness and color consistency. More peppers makes thermal management harder, reduces the sustainable brightness after step-down, and increases risk of damaging the emitters on turbo. Values indicate approximate performance in a Carclo 10511 optic using a FET for direct drive on 1x18650. These have not been directly tested in the FW3A host, so this data is more of an educated guess than a measurement. All of the emitter types are good, but here is the worst part about each:

• XP-L HI: Costs more.
• SST-20: Green at low levels.
• LH351D: Super floody. Green at low levels. May be unobtainable.

Visual estimate of the floodiest option compared to a throwy option:

Thank You TK!  That's very useful for me.

slmjim

zak.wilson wrote:

Quote:

I would also add for the XP-L HI: Low CRI.

If we’re listing the worst thing about each LED, it seems like performing far worse on a metric some people value highly might be worth a mention.

It’s not low CRI; it’s just average CRI. Since you think it’s worth mentioning though, I added it.

I really hope they can get the LH351D!
The Super floody beam is much more usefull to me. Can not wait to get my hands on it. Perfect UI, high CRI, E-switch, super floody and very compact.
If it works without problems it will be hard for any other light to beat it as my new EDC.
Thanks to all that spend their time and work to make it possible!

+2 please

lionheart_2281 wrote:

mattadores wrote:

lol my only gripe comes with the exciting news of potential production within the next month or two..

OFCOURSE this project HAD to finally come to completion just as the D18, MF01S, MF01 mini and MS18 all drop….

I’m over the moon… my wallet is looking for new ownership

LOL, you haven’t been around here long huh?

lol only lurking… My wallet is not a fan of my new life decision

TheOnlyDocc wrote:

I really hope they can get the LH351D! The Super floody beam is much more usefull to me. Can not wait to get my hands on it. Perfect UI, high CRI, E-switch, super floody and very compact. If it works without problems it will be hard for any other light to beat it as my new EDC. Thanks to all that spend their time and work to make it possible!

yeah me too, but it seems that for now it will be not possible, maybe later on i dont know

Probably asked before, but I cant find it. How difficult it will be to flash modified firmware to FW3A? Can it be done without disassembling and without soldering?

Look what I found.

https://www.lumintoponline.com/lumintop-fw3a-triple-p1492292.html

zak.wilson wrote:

Look what I found.

https://www.lumintoponline.com/lumintop-fw3a-triple-p1492292.html

But your link clearly says fw3a-triple.

teacher wrote:

zak.wilson wrote:

Look what I found.

https://www.lumintoponline.com/lumintop-fw3a-triple-p1492292.html

Hmmm… I click the link & it take me to the Tool AA 2.0

But your link clearly says fw3a-triple.

If it’s not too late I’d like to get in for 1 of these!

You can type anything you want in that URL before the “-p1492292” and it’ll take you to the Tool AA 2.0 page.

https://www.lumintoponline.com/Buzzy243-is-bored-at-work-p1492292.html

Edit: https://www.lumintoponline.com/You-got-me-Good-one-Zak-p1492292.html

Buzzkill243 wrote:

You can type anything you want in that URL before the “-p1492292” and it’ll take you to the Tool AA 2.0 page.

https://www.lumintoponline.com/Buzzkill243-is-bored-at-work-p1492292.html

Edit: https://www.lumintoponline.com/You-got-me-Good-one-Zak-p1492292.html

Username fixed.

well if the model name appears in their page it must mean something… i hope not april fools joke i dont find that funny at all if so..

that’s cruel