+1
A few not-so-surprising results:
I just removed the emitter centering ring to test for changes in the beam pattern and output. The ring actually consists of 2 parts:
1) A small centering ring that fits tightly around the emitter. This is the part with the “shelf” that protrudes part way up the emitter dome. 2) A larger removable ring surrounds the smaller centering ring.
After removing the centering rings and then trying them in different combinations, (while moving the lens in and out to seek a good compromise between beam pattern and output) I discovered that it was a complete waste of time. At least in my experiments, the beam pattern became completely whipped out with rings and other artifacts. At the tightest beam that I could muster (both centering rings removed and lens as close to the emitter as possible), lux* went from 15,400 before the mod to 12,300 after. Even with the reflector pressed in as far as it would go, the emitter still sits below the reflector and wastes lux. Clearly, the white centering rings reflect some light which ads to the lux output. The next step might be to trim the shelf off the inner ring or carve another one. I’ll hold off for now on that one. A copper shim between the pill and star to bring the emitter closer to the reflector might produce some interesting results, but Im under the impression that the beam pattern would probably continue to deteriorate. I wonder if this reflector was optimized for a different emitter and then adapted to be used with the XM-L. Either way, it appears to be optimized to the point where it cant be improves as-is.
I dont have any spare 8 × 7135 driver’s on hand to play with. Looks like its time to order more.
*lux measurement taken at center beam after 30 second turn-on at a range of 6 feet @4.18V.
thanks for the in depth notes! It looks like then this light will be a driver swap only for me… i do not want to monkey around with the focal point unless there is an easier way… i wonder if you de-domed the emitter if that would just make things worse… it sounds like its best left alone…
maybe a nice 3 amp 3 mode driver and call it a day 
Oh boy, didn't realize it was a 16mm driver, ouch. I really don't like the retainer ring setup on an all alum pill, but I've done some creative dremel'ing before, maybe, again, I'll retrofit a brass pill with a 17mm mount in there. I prefer higher amps though (more power), got C8's at 3.8A with extra copper, and this one has a bit bigger host to it, so I'm think'n 3.8A will be fine. Also, crap - no time, but just got in my USB programmer and 8 pin clip, so hoping to download some decent drivers, so 3.8A becomes a "turbo" mode, and can use a secondary "high" mode. Just too busy, gotta get to my XinTD XM-L2 SinkPAD mod...
UPDATE: I just measured the driver, and driver mount inner opening - driver is 16.6 to 16.7 mm, and the opening inside the threads will fit a 17 mm driver, so don't worry. Please check again - think my caliper is pretty accurate. This is all standard stuff. I got a bunch of new Nanjg drivers and they are measuring between 16.9mm to 17 mm.
there is room to file the nanj down too. they can be filed down to 16mm if your careful
Well, I finally didn’t bought one because lately I prefer smaller lights and without strobe (and because I don’t have too much extra $$$ to spare 
)
On the other hand I must say that it’s a good price for that light, even with those “drawbacks” (for some). You get a good host with somewhat less output (thus you can use it on HI for more time) than regular (probably DD) lights.
As for AR coated lenses…
As far as I can see, these lenses are not coated 
That’s a shot from Dino web.
Anyway, most of chinese sellers don’t know how to distinguish them. Same happened with TN ( Review: Small Thrunite Ti 2011 and 2012 versions ) when I asked them why they stop using AR lenses in 2012 versions of Ti. They said they was AR coated (when they are definitely not)
On the other hand, all ITP lights I have or played with, have/had normal lenses, but really good quality. You can’t compare them with lenses my HD2010 have, for example :bigsmile: It’s just a piece of normal glass :bigsmile: As for my Ti’s, that 2012 version with non-AR coated lenses is brighter actually 
(maybe driver related). Anyways, if those lenses X5 use are of good quality, I wouldn’t bother changing them. If you want more light, change the driver instead. Just my .02.
Ah, btw, deeper reflectors not always make better beam (more throw), it makes spill smaller and thus, brighter.
Picture found on taobao search: looks like fine quality as some reported: is this typical of the condition received?
s. THANX for the outdoor wall snow shot FLASHPILOT!!!
Hope the mail during CNY isn’t TOO slow
(sorry for size: one big 5300px height pic at http://item.taobao.com/item.htm?spm=a1z10.3.17-5457488367.23.76shoP&id=19451784547
Yes the quality is good, If my Jetbean BC40 was 9.5 out of 10 then I would give this a 7. I would have given it a little more but for the number on the side of the torch is badly misprinted, which looks bad. Also not having the AR lens does knock it down a bit. There are also a few very small nicks on the host. But it is much better and far more substantial than a C8.
The thing is if you are going to mod the light then in my opinion I would have bought a host from Solarforce and a separate pill from fasttech. I would not have bought a $19 Supfire host.
The tint is also crappy, quite purple.
Marc.
Still waiting on mine and appreciative of your impressions.
Got to wonder where these lights are all coming from? Just too many variances in finish/amperage/tint/no serials from the responses so far to think these are first quality (and yours with that logo misprint) Starting to seem like a pot luck dinner. You’ve got a request in directly with Supfire, right? Wonder if we’ll see a response here.
If you ask me they are rejects or seconds, that’s why they don’t come in a Supfire box and why they don’t have a serial number. I’ll say again it is a nice torch but should be treated as a host, as it does need mods. But at $19 for a host, or $29 after the mods, there are a lot of torches out there and it does not seem the bargain it was.
As an example Fasttech has the Convoy C8 and you can choose you driver and tint, for $15 after the code BLF. The Supfire is a nicer host though. But that would work out at half the price and be a better thrower.
Marc.
You’re probably right and the biggest failing they didn’t pass the flame test…
If you look at the difference between a normal C8 and this one (even though I dont own one) I must think this is a much better deal that the KD C8 quality wise.
I don`t believe that you would rock the world by showing a difference between a 2.4A and 2.8A !
Haha, yeah I saw that. They must have done this to my serial number card! Because it’s not there.
Marc.
About 100 lumens or so but none the less. Someone on this thread measured the lumen output and 600+. It seems lower than the tail cap reading suggests it should be. I have to say compared to my BC40 there is a massive difference in output. I guess I was expecting similar outputs from the two lights.
Marc.
Dear All,
Supfire X5 has 2 different packages:plain package and luxuriantly package.The plain package includes 1 flashlight and a Carrying strap.
The luxuriantly package includes 1 flashlight,1 battery,1 charger,1 Chinese manul, a serial sticker card and 1 supfire box.Packages are different but the flashlight is same quality.
The luxuriantly package has more accessories and is more expensive.The above pictures come from the conversation on QQ (a popular instant messenger in China)between Supfire’s domestic trade sales and I.We talked in Chinese.The Chinees word for Supfire is 深圳市神火光电设备有限公.
Re the serial sticker card,I had mistakenly believed that “Anti-fake telephone on flashlight” is the” serial sticker card”.I’m sorry for the mistake
Best regards,
summer
Thanks Summer, But what about the AR lens? What is the explanation for our torches not having one when they should?
Marc.
it would have been nice to know what package & accessories we were getting ahead of time.
i am not complaining because its a good price and i would have bought it anyways, but still - i would have liked to know exactly what i am getting
it appeared to me that this would only be coming with the lanyard (a Chinese manual was listed and when I pm’d Summer to ask about the possibility of an English manual was told the manual was a mistake and that was taken out)
The idea of a “luxuriantly package” only came up with that other poster’s purchase (not purchased from DD). Seems like you can get the whole shebang direct from the company for $33 to the US so $19 for just the light seems about right.
Still waiting on mine, I’m concerned with things like the missing serial# (explained above: translation/misunderstanding???) driver regulation/power variations and manufacturing defects received by some (not explained) With the kind of advertising this company produces, doesn’t seem to be the typical Chinese budget company allowing things like a logo misprints slipping by QC. (edit; removed slow company video)
Thanks for working on this during the holiday Summer.
Hopefully I’ll be as satisfied as you jmpaul320: keeping fingers crossed
im sure i will be satisfied… i am going to test it out and then probably mod it
If Summer had said this light will NOT be in a proper box, it will come without a serial number, it will not have AR glass and it will have an output of about 600 lumens. I would not have bought it. I could get an O-light I6 for the same price! A proper brand.
Like everyone here we all have a list in our heads of lights we need or want, this was not on mine, but looking at the spec I put it to the top of my list. Now to find that it is not what it should be, P’s me off. Regardless of how good it is as a host.
Marc.