Yep, that’s kind of what I was expecting as well. The die is 1.78x the size of the SFN55.2 but the output is only 1.5x. This mean the candela should be about 80% of the SFN55.2. I did tell Ben Tang from Mateminco that the springs should bypassed for such a high power LED and showed him Tom Es numbers with his SFN55.2 mod. He agreed that it’d be better but said “spring bypass is better but the driver and battery will limit the current output” “single battery can’t perform the best, even a Samsung 30T is not enough”. I don’t really understand this logic…If you can improve the performance with such a simple thing, why not do it? They had one spring bypassed in the MF01S so it can’t be that difficult. I think with a smooth reflector and reduced circuit resistance it could probably throw as well as the stock SFN55.2 but will have a yellow hotspot according to Mateminco.
The answer is simple, most customers care about how it looks, operates and costs. Spring bypasses cost the manufacturers money and time and the result won’t be seen with the unaided eye. Faster production, lower costs and long term reliability are more important than a little extra candela. Simply put, most customers are not going to measure their lights output.
Different people have different priorities and super technical enthusiasts who make and calibrate their own integrating spheres, buy light meters to measure candela and amp meters to measure current draw are in the small minority. I think we forget this.
Besides, hard-core enthusiasts that want every last bit of measurable performance can easily add a spring bypass themself.
I hope this makes logical sense.
Interested in code for FT03 SFT40. Thanks.
Interested in code for FT03S SFH55
Thanks 
Need code & link for FT03S SFH55 please, thanks
Interested in code for FT03S SFH55 and FT03 SFT40. Thanks.
Thanks Freeme! SHF55, and SFT40 ordered. Very easy process for my first time BLF group buy.
Interested in ft03s sfh55 ,
Interested in code for FT03S SFH55
Instead of everyone diving in and reserving something that is unproven, can someone explain how we went from 4300 lumens with XHP50.2 to 9000+ lumens with no change to the host?
This is a technical question for members of a technical forum. I would like to think we don’t have impulse buyers.
XHP50.2 > SFH55 is the same jump as XPG3 > XHP50.2
It’s simple. The SFH55 is GIANT. Somewhere in the low 30mm² of die area. Another approximation is 16*W2 osrams on one chip.
Why don’t you take a look around before critiquing others? The BIG LED SFH55 - 11 x 10 mm 3V no dome monster
Cool, thanks
Maybe these can help visualize:
1) Astrolux FT03 (XHP50.2 5700k) beamshot
2) Mateminco MT70-Mini (SFN55.2 LED) beamshot
(MT70-Mini is the exact same flashlight size as the FT03, although the reflector used for the SFN55.2 LED version is orange-peel;
the FT03S SFH55 is said to also use orange-peel reflector)
3) Sofirn SP70 (XHP70.2 cool-white)
(SP70 is much bigger than the head/reflector of the FT03/MT70-Mini)
4) Pioneman K80 (SFH55 LED) beamshot
The K80 has a just slightly smaller head diameter than the SP70, although the reflector of the K80 is a bit deeper)
(max brightness is probably not yet reached for the K80 SFH55 in my beamshot test, as I used a 26800 battery. Using tail current measurement, I can get a bit higher amps reading if using a Samsung 30T compared with the 26800 battery... Although the K80 I got only works with 26800 battery size...)
Although based on observation, the SFH55 does appear to output more total light than the XHP70.2 of the SP70.
My very rough estimate is somewhere around 6000+ to 7000 lumens for the K80 SFH55..
Interested in code for FT03S SFH55 and FT03 SFT40. Thanks.
Yes thanks
Order placed thanks freeme
I watched the videos. I would be lying to you if I said I see a difference. I guess for double the lumens, I expect more.
Hi Freeme,
Interested in code for FT03S SFH55 and FT03 SFT40. Thanks.