I don’t see any reason not to limit the firmware on the 219B version. I guess if someone managed an emitter swap they wouldn’t want the output to be limited, but in that case wouldn’t just buying it with other emitters in the first place make more sense? Can’t imagine someone who bought 219B version would suddenly want a lumen monster instead of amazing tint! 
[♛ FreemeGB] Fireflies PL47 Gen II 4*XP-L/ Nichia/ SST20 Hi CRI 21700 Right Angle Flashlight - ENDED
Thanks TK.
I agree with the above, I mainly bought this light with the 219b for the tint and as a headlamp, not for a lumen rocket that can burn a hole in my forehead!
I’d happily go with the limit on the Nichia version if it saves the LED’s from early expiry…
did any one from Australia got their shipping notification yet?
Im still pending on two of my lights.
I’m in the UK and not had any shipping notes yet. Not too bothered, I’d rather they took their time and sent me a first class product rather than rush it through with potential faults.
Im dont want them to rush it either, I just wish Fireflies wouldnt make promises of shipping by a certain date and then miss each of them repeatedly. That makes people more nervous than a super pessimistic ship date, but then the light ships earlier.
Interested
I personally dont want my light handicapped. Let me decide how I want to use it, knowing full well ipl have no recourse, should I destroy the LED’s.
However, if ToyMaker could do something similar to Zebralight, where you could put the light into another power saving mode like G5 or G6 that would be cool! G5 is factory wide open. G6 would limit turbo to 65 or 70% of max.
What is it about the Fireflies ROT66 and PL47 that is different from other Nichia torches ? How different is the 219b from say the quad 219C in an Astrolux S43S which hit 20A?
It is much more easier for S43S to get rid of heat with its copper head. [quote=nokoff] What is it about the Fireflies ROT66 and PL47 that is different from other Nichia torches ? How different is the 219b from say the quad 219C in an Astrolux S43S which hit 20A? [/quote]
+1
These use the Nichia 219B, which is similar to the 219C but its performance dealing with high amps is worse because of a bunch of electrical engineering stuff I don’t understand. Basically thoughm its way easier to pop with too much current from a FET than a 219C is. The 219B is great because of its incredible tint and color rendering, there are just some tradeoffs obviously.
“I personally dont want my light handicapped.” It literally isn’t though, past a certain amperage with 219Bs you’re just damaging the emitters, and there can even be reduced output.
Normally I would not agree with lowering the max on the 219B version because there’s a chance we might swap emitters in the future. However, Fireflies made a bad decision to use press fit instead of threaded bezel so the PL47 is not modable anyways. In this case, I rather have a limited turbo since going 100% will not provide any output advantages and might be bad for the emitters.
I don’t know exactly which Nichia 219B is in use, but generally speaking they are not well suited to a poky direct-drive FET with a strong cell.
Mis-matched, and needs to be throttled back.
A linear or buck driver, even as simple as a x8 7135, or similar, would be a better match.
E.g. see Nichia 219B 4500k D220 9080 CRI Emitter output test by Texas_Ace; Amazing tint and CRI! Output is what you would expect. and study the curves.
I.e. maximum output achieved at only 3.30 Vf, after that it’s all downhill.
Edit: and increasingly inefficient as that voltage, current is approached. Then falls off a cliff afterwards.
To use these Nichias well, you need multiples, as in this one. But they also have to be driven well, with some sanity about what is possible and appropriate. Which I don’t see happening here.
Goodness knows what will happen with a strong cell at 4.2V. I think FF have already given a clue.
I.e. don’t even think about trying it.
Entirely predictable.
Sadly, just throttling back by limiting the PWM of the FET won’t alter anything, except thermal dissipation. The LED will still be being hit instantaneously with massive over-current into a deeply inefficient and stressful region of far lower output.
Maybe put in some really light gauge LED wires to try to limit peak current, if you can take it apart.
Keep it in the x3 7135 region only and it will be safe, but I don’t suppose you bought this multi-emitter torch to just tick-over at x3 7135 levels.
Well, that’s my theory, based on some actual facts and data. Once you have them in your hands, we’ll begin to know, I suspect the “Maxx Power at any cost” peeps will be the earliest to report on the 219B choice.
By the way TK, is it realistic to consider re-flashing this torch with your updated code ? It’s just that I got the impression that FF like to seal these up as tight as a very tight thing.
It’s starting to sink in. So I have some 10A cells I use in my ROT66 based on similar advice there and they use the same 219b. What keeps each individual emitter from receiving/pulling all 10A in this case? I think of it as being spread evenly however I know it’s not that simple. TIA
Well, that’s what you get for choosing ancient LEDs… 
Ahh, but with an awesome tint 
What are you gonna do with the most awesome tint of a fried emitter?
Easy, not fry it in the first place 
So if the 219b, even throttled down in FET, still pulls max amperage because its PWM, is the statement above true, that using it anywhere above the regulated mode will eventually damage the LED?