ENEDED

[mizou51]

@JIGHEADWORM

@mizou51

Mine is modded with narsil driver. Limit is set to 60°c
Yesterday I used it outside with 3°c and after 6 minutes on middle high mode you can’t touch the head and battery get very hot…I need gloves.

I you want to get this thing lighting for more than 10min it doesn’t work well. My convoy L6 running on turbo doesn’t step down that way and still output 8000lm…with ta driver and narsilM.

that is because l6 is a lot bigger light and if you have a ta driver in that mf01 it is probably putting out 13000 lumen.

L6 head and MF01 are quasi identical, but L6 has lots of fins ! Also more aluminiun for better thermal inertia.
Both share the same TA Driver. I don’t use the MF01 on turbo because it step down toooo quickly like 1min30s. and then light is so hot

[JIGHEADWORM]

I have an l6 and like it a lot but it is a totally different light than a mf01.

[JIGHEADWORM]

MF01 is exactly what it is supposed to be a high powered soda can flooder.It is like a emisar d4 it throws out a wall of light ,it gets hot quick on turbo if you didn’t want a light like that you shouldn’t have bought it.

[ToyKeeper]

@RollerBoySE

the light doesn’t have to be expensive to have excellent temperature control, just look at Emisar.

Well, that’s one of the goals, at least, but that’s a very unusual example. If Emisar had paid a normal wage for the work which went into the D4, developing it all from scratch behind closed doors, it would have been an expensive light. But Tom and I made that code for the benefit of the community, not for the money. Most companies, and most employees, are in it for the money.

We can’t really compare cost between open-source and proprietary products, because one is free for the benefit of the community while the other is pricey for the benefit of the company. The latter has a tendency to create an adversarial relationship between producers and consumers, which is rather unfortunate. So the main thing I’ve been doing on BLF the past few years is trying to fix that, getting companies to work with the community for mutual benefit.

In the meantime, proprietary products with advanced features are going to stay significantly more expensive than proprietary budget lights because of how much more paid work went into them.

Sturgeon’s Law also applies here — it may be the case that 90% of flashlights are crap, but 90% of everything is crap… so this is no different. If a company wants firmware which fits in that other 10, they will need to somehow attract developers who are in that other 10, which usually means that they pay better than 90% of the market. So their products are going to be more expensive.

Changing this requires a completely different type of market which isn’t ruled by the profit incentive… which would probably sound crazy if Linux and other free software didn’t exist, but it does. There are good reasons why the majority of the internet is powered by free software instead of proprietary software. I’m just doing the same thing on a smaller scale, with shiny things.

So, um, that was a tangent. I hope it helps explain why there’s a correlation between price and code quality.

[Tom_Tom]

@Damir-777

@freeme

You are you able to manually step up, no?

@Damir-777

I have AceBeam EC50 gen II (3000 lm), if it’s cold outside, the flashlight cools down quickly and does not reduce the brightness in turbo mode, continues to work in the turbo. But MF-01 for some reason even when the cool case of a flashlight does not work at all in the turbo for more than 1 minute … :person_facepalming:

When the turbo mode is re-enabled, the flashlight dims faster and faster each time, but the flashlight itself does not have time to heat up. On the street minus 5 degrees.

To emphasise, once the thing steps down, be it in turbo or high, you can very briefly switch it back up, but within a few seconds it backs down again.

At this point the head is barely warm.

You can turn it off completely for e.g 30 minutes, but the remaining heat means it still won’t sustain desired output for more than a few minutes.

Once it has heated up enough to step down, in High (20 to 30 minutes maybe) or Turbo (1.25 to 2 minutes) it is pretty much game over, and won’t re-start brightly for more than a few seconds, or minutes respectively.

I’ve tested mine quite enough now, with cold-soak starts from 15C ambient, and 5C in the fridge, to realise that there is a problem in the implementation.

Mine will keep going on Med 1 without step-down, but that is a relatively paltry 1100 lumens (datasheet) but not what I bought this for, and I have at least two other torches that can do the same for a fraction of the price. .

I think that the v.2 driver has probably been tuned far too cautiously, it is a serious nuisance to me, and a hindrance to my continued use of this torch.

[hIKARInoob]

@Tom Tom

Once it has heated up enough to step down, in High (20 to 30 minutes maybe) or Turbo (1.25 to 2 minutes) it is pretty much game over, and won’t re-start brightly for more than a few seconds, or minutes respectively.

I think that the v.2 driver has probably been tuned far too cautiously, it is a serious nuisance to me, and a hindrance to my continued use of this torch.

Interesting. It seems V2 is doing the opposite of V1. When V1 steps down from turbo, you can activate turbo again. But it keeps going until head is way too hot. Therefore I step down manually. Perhaps Mateminco compensated V1’s fault too drastically. Interestingly, Mateminco’s design change is also a feedback control system that’s not working too well.

[Tom_Tom]

@hIKARInoob

@Tom Tom

Once it has heated up enough to step down, in High (20 to 30 minutes maybe) or Turbo (1.25 to 2 minutes) it is pretty much game over, and won’t re-start brightly for more than a few seconds, or minutes respectively.

I think that the v.2 driver has probably been tuned far too cautiously, it is a serious nuisance to me, and a hindrance to my continued use of this torch.

Interesting. It seems V2 is doing the opposite of V1. When V1 steps down from turbo, you can activate turbo again. But it keeps going until head is way too hot. Therefore I step down manually. Perhaps Mateminco compensated V1’s fault too drastically. Interestingly, Mateminco’s design change is also a feedback control system that’s not working too well.

I have not found any way to make my torch scalding hot. It does allow re-start after step-down, but only very briefly.

Yes it can momentarily blast out the magic 10K lumens from all those emitters, but ultimately it can’t sustain much more than anything else in the same form-factor, actually rather less than some alternatives.

I think that is it’s purpose, at lowest price, but engineering development doesn’t seem to have addressed practical use at lower levels.

I had hoped for 2-3000 lumens sustained, but I haven’t found that in mine.

For me it is really just a floody 1000 lumen torch with nice LEDs which takes four cells, so can last a few hours. And is very heavy. But I already have others that do that with 1 or 2 cells so much more conveniently and lightly, and carrying a few more spare cells is not difficult.

[validum]

@Tom Tom

@hIKARInoob

@Tom Tom

Once it has heated up enough to step down, in High (20 to 30 minutes maybe) or Turbo (1.25 to 2 minutes) it is pretty much game over, and won’t re-start brightly for more than a few seconds, or minutes respectively.

I think that the v.2 driver has probably been tuned far too cautiously, it is a serious nuisance to me, and a hindrance to my continued use of this torch.

Interesting. It seems V2 is doing the opposite of V1. When V1 steps down from turbo, you can activate turbo again. But it keeps going until head is way too hot. Therefore I step down manually. Perhaps Mateminco compensated V1’s fault too drastically. Interestingly, Mateminco’s design change is also a feedback control system that’s not working too well.

I have not found any way to make my torch scalding hot. It does allow re-start after step-down, but only very briefly.

Yes it can momentarily blast out the magic 10K lumens from all those emitters, but ultimately it can’t sustain much more than anything else in the same form-factor, actually rather less than some alternatives.

I think that is it’s purpose, at lowest price, but engineering development doesn’t seem to have addressed practical use at lower levels.

I had hoped for 2-3000 lumens sustained, but I haven’t found that in mine.

For me it is really just a floody 1000 lumen torch with nice LEDs which takes four cells, so can last a few hours. And is very heavy. But I already have others that do that with 1 or 2 cells so much more conveniently and lightly, and carrying a few more spare cells is not difficult.

If the outside isn’t hot when it steps down then it sounds like a case of horrible thermal conductivity. The LEDs are generating the heat but it’s not being carried to the body of the light.

[hIKARInoob]

Funny how Haikelite is maybe the first (?) to have released a light, the MT07S, with thermal control that can be switched off.

[JIGHEADWORM]

@Tom Tom

@hIKARInoob

@Tom Tom

Once it has heated up enough to step down, in High (20 to 30 minutes maybe) or Turbo (1.25 to 2 minutes) it is pretty much game over, and won’t re-start brightly for more than a few seconds, or minutes respectively.

I think that the v.2 driver has probably been tuned far too cautiously, it is a serious nuisance to me, and a hindrance to my continued use of this torch.

Interesting. It seems V2 is doing the opposite of V1. When V1 steps down from turbo, you can activate turbo again. But it keeps going until head is way too hot. Therefore I step down manually. Perhaps Mateminco compensated V1’s fault too drastically. Interestingly, Mateminco’s design change is also a feedback control system that’s not working too well.

I have not found any way to make my torch scalding hot. It does allow re-start after step-down, but only very briefly.

Yes it can momentarily blast out the magic 10K lumens from all those emitters, but ultimately it can’t sustain much more than anything else in the same form-factor, actually rather less than some alternatives.

I think that is it’s purpose, at lowest price, but engineering development doesn’t seem to have addressed practical use at lower levels.

I had hoped for 2-3000 lumens sustained, but I haven’t found that in mine.

For me it is really just a floody 1000 lumen torch with nice LEDs which takes four cells, so can last a few hours. And is very heavy. But I already have others that do that with 1 or 2 cells so much more conveniently and lightly, and carrying a few more spare cells is not difficult.

Something is wrong with your light i started mine on high checked and it was putting out 2980 lumens on fresh set of vtc6’s and 30 mins later it is still running 2940 no stepdown . this is handholding in 68f room.

[xxx]

JIGHEADWORM, thats for xpg3 v2?

Hope there is runtime test for xpg3 V1 vs V2.

[JIGHEADWORM]

@xxx

JIGHEADWORM, thats for xpg3 v2?

Hope there is runtime test for xpg3 V1 vs V2.

no it is v2 nichia.

[Tom_Tom]

@JIGHEADWORM

Something is wrong with your light i started mine on high checked and it was putting out 2980 lumens on fresh set of vtc6’s and 30 mins later it is still running 2940 no stepdown . this is handholding in 68f room.

What can I say, I think I know that, yours seems to be better than mine.

Over 500 have been sold we are told, but it seems only three of us have recently reported back any sort of facts and data, and only because at least two of us are dissatisfied.

I’m sorry but I don’t have the kit to precisely measure lumen output, nevermind to four decimal places, so can only rely on my Mk1 eyeball and e.g ceiling bounce comparisons.

I had better go quiet for a while now until other reports come in, because I don’t have much more to say about my particular torch and don’t want to seem like a moaner. I now know very well what mine can do, and what it can’t, because I have done some pretty simple basic tests over several days, and compared it alongside others.

In my opinion it could do a lot better, with attention to the driver firmware, specifically temperature management (if it has usable hardware capability to do this). And some minor UI tweaks. The fundamentals are in place for it to be a tremendous torch. Whether there is any will to do so, or look after existing owners, is a different question.

[JasonWW]

Tom Tom, if I were as dissatisfied as you seem to be, I would just spend another 25 bucks and buy a replacement driver from Lexel.

Are you hoping to get a new driver from Astrolux?

[RollerBoySE]

@ToyKeeper

@RollerBoySE

the light doesn’t have to be expensive to have excellent temperature control, just look at Emisar.

Well, that’s one of the goals, at least, but that’s a very unusual example. If Emisar had paid a normal wage for the work which went into the D4, developing it all from scratch behind closed doors, it would have been an expensive light. But Tom and I made that code for the benefit of the community, not for the money. Most companies, and most employees, are in it for the money.

We can’t really compare cost between open-source and proprietary products, because one is free for the benefit of the community while the other is pricey for the benefit of the company. The latter has a tendency to create an adversarial relationship between producers and consumers, which is rather unfortunate. So the main thing I’ve been doing on BLF the past few years is trying to fix that, getting companies to work with the community for mutual benefit.

In the meantime, proprietary products with advanced features are going to stay significantly more expensive than proprietary budget lights because of how much more paid work went into them.

Sturgeon’s Law also applies here — it may be the case that 90% of flashlights are crap, but 90% of everything is crap… so this is no different. If a company wants firmware which fits in that other 10, they will need to somehow attract developers who are in that other 10, which usually means that they pay better than 90% of the market. So their products are going to be more expensive.

Changing this requires a completely different type of market which isn’t ruled by the profit incentive… which would probably sound crazy if Linux and other free software didn’t exist, but it does. There are good reasons why the majority of the internet is powered by free software instead of proprietary software. I’m just doing the same thing on a smaller scale, with shiny things.

So, um, that was a tangent. I hope it helps explain why there’s a correlation between price and code quality.

You’re right of course.
But there are ways to cut cost:
The major part of good F/W can be reused in several lights
and
There is nothing stopping them from working with BLF.

On another note: the light is good enough to deserve to be fitted with active cooling in its next version.

[JasonWW]

@RollerBoySE

On another note: the light is good enough to deserve to be fitted with active cooling in its next version.

I seriously doubt they would do a similar light to the MF01, but with active cooling. It simply wouldn’t sell.
Maybe if they target 20k+ lumen they might consider it. But seeing as how no major flashlight company has released an actively cooled light, it may be several years before Mateminco or Astrolux build one.

[RollerBoySE]

@JasonWW

@RollerBoySE

On another note: the light is good enough to deserve to be fitted with active cooling in its next version.

I seriously doubt they would do a similar light to the MF01, but with active cooling. It simply wouldn’t sell.
Maybe if they target 20k+ lumen they might consider it. But seeing as how no major flashlight company has released an actively cooled light, it may be several years before Mateminco or Astrolux build one.

Unfortunately you’re probably right.
But a light that could sustain 10k lumens would be really useful, much more so than a light that can produce 20k+ for a minute or two.

[JasonWW]

What percentage of people actually need a light that can run continuously at 10k lumen? I certainly don’t need it. I would be happier with 20k lumen for just a minute or two because I can do a short burst here and a short burst there and it would never even get hot.

Continuous 10k lumen seems more like military spec. Maybe HID or arc light can do that?

How many watts would that be with leds? 100 to 130 watts? Have you seen cpu coolers for a 100 watt cpu? They are huge. Bigger than the head of the L6. Maybe bigger than the head of the MF01. Plus it also uses a big fan which would have to run at full speed.

I don’t even know if current technology is capable of building a continuous 10k light.

The longest, highest running light I know of is the Acebeam X65. It can do over 5,000 lumen for over an hour with no fan cooling at room temperature. It’s a much larger light, though. In this picture, the 2 lights on the left are mf01 sized and far right is the X65.

Maybe the X65 light with active cooling built in could sustain 10k lumen for 30 min or so then the batteries would run out.

Could a small light like the MF01 with active cooling built in even do continuous 10k at all? If so, it might only last 15 to 20 minutes on 4 18650. Could 4 cells handle the heat of all that load? Maybe not, you might be required to go to 8 cells to spread out the load.

I’m just spit balling ideas here because I like the idea of active cooled lights.

[JasonWW]

For 10k continuously we might have to go back a few years and build a light in the style of the X6.

We could have a lot of heatsink space and air circulation using a big fan at lower rpms.

Have a seperate battery back with a lot of cells for long runtime. 8, 12, 16?

Maybe run 4 or 5 xhp70.2. Have a non sustainable output of 15k to 20k lumen or drop it down to a sustainable 10k until the batteries drain down. This seems realistic.

[acebeam_Jack]

Hi Guys,

If acebeam hold group buy for fans. which model you will vote for? www.acebeam.com

Like our facebook page to attend give away soon: Redirecting...