Astrolux S41 or Convoy S2+ triple build?

nice! keep us updated on this please! I have a S41S coming and thinking about the same setup.

Its probably the battery too. I swapped 219c’s and a mtnelec FET+1 bistro driver into my S41S. It was pulling 6ish amps on both an efest 18350 and a KeepPower black 18350 - my best high-current 18350 cells. I swapped to a long tube and dropped in a 30Q, no other change, and it reads 13 amps, but honestly my meter leads are a limiting factor there. I should try to use a clamp meter on it, because I suspect it would really be higher than that.

Also don’t forget that quad optics are inherently more floody than a 10507 triple. So while it may seem that your triple is brighter, it really may just be more intense than the quad.

I use 30Q on both my S2 triple and E14 quad. I guess i’m not comparing the same LEDs.

I just wanted to see if it’s worth going the XP-L HI route on the S41S.

If the s41 with xpl hi quad or triple is only pulling 6 amps with a direct drive driver the only two limiting factors are the battery or small test leads or both.

I was tested with a 30q, an HG2 and a VCT6, so the batteries shouldn’t be a factor.

Do you know the gauge of your test leads? This really does make a huge different at these high of amps and low voltage.

The quad optic is also wider, compensating for the extra tir-lens. The diameter of the individual TIR’s of the quad is actually larger than the 10507, and the quad optic is clearly throwier than the 10507 (beamshot left Carclo 10507, right S41S optic, both Nichia 219 leds)

if you change to the Tpad quad you will have to fit a Carclo into the light. Emitter footprints are different to S41S MCPCB and optics, compared to Tpad and Carclo.

That’s really surprising to me. Although I never compared them side-by-side, I always felt my 219c triple was throwier.

Couldn’t tell you what gauge they are off hand, they’re relatively nice fluke leads. Tried with another meter I have and got the same results.

Yeah, I have both of the optics that mtn sells for the TPad MCPCB.

Between the stock s41 optic and the carclo, which is throwier (is that a word)?

To measure these types of numbers you will need short custom leads of atleast 12awg stranded wire. I know it seems like not much but the differences can be very surprising. I know they were for me when I was told the same thing.

My leads are 18 gauge. I’ll check the theater for some bare banana plugs or order them tororrow, do you just use the bare copper wire on the flashlight side?

Ya. You can use the bare copper wire. I made some 10awg silicone leads with 3.5mm connectors on the end. Then I have different tips I can plug into them. Such as alligator clips with wire by bass and a contraption that can be used to measure current from battery tubes. I was surprised to see how flexible the 10awg silicone wire is. It won’t hold up to being tosssed around in s tool bag though. The silicone covering can be sliced into pretty easily.

I measured the S41S current draw last weekend…Nichia 219B with Sony VTC6

Stock - 11A
Driver spring bypassed - 13A

I then measured it with a couple of VTC6 button top and i was shocked…

Stock - 5.8A
bypassed - 6.3A

Took the button off and got over 13A. The steel button installed from other vendors apparently has huge resistance on direct drive. Tested with 30Q and the numbers are even lower.

I was thinking the other day if the button made a difference.

With my tests the S41 optic vs a carclo triple they seem to throw nearly the same, which means the S41 is less efficient in that manner seeing as it has more frontal area to work with, I think the center of the S41 optic is mostly just a diffuser and not a properly focused lens like the carclo. My tests were 33kcd with the triple and 32kcd with the S41, same cells, same driver, same LED. Only difference is triple had no front lens but I don’t think that made up all the difference. The S41 with the carclo quad as vwpieces suggested though would probably throw better than the stock TIR.
kd announced copper mcpcb…are this the same quality as the ones from intloutdoor triples? this seems too thick i guess….intl. ones looks better no?

Someone mentioned somewhere that they are nice boards but they need to be lapped flat?

I dont know.but I got them and they are thinner than the int.outdoors ones…the old on alluminium board are bad as I remember.