1201

Why? I thought it had been established that the XPL was driven as XML, no better performance than XML, but heat management of XP-G. ie: its a heat choked XML. Sure it has its place, but here surely XML2 is more suitable?

1202

You might know more than me, I thought the XP-L had a smaller die for better throw but almost the same lumens as XM-L.

1203

Keep in mind I’m sort of a nube. From what I gather, I think the die size itself is the same as an XML, but the foot print (what is soldered to the mcpcb) is much smaller. In fact the foot print isn’t much bigger than the the die itself. This could be an advantage in lights with an small reflector opening such as your small pocket rocket type lights. I hope I’m correct, if not, please wise me up as usual. Thanks you guys.

1204

I have read the entire thread and I don’t remember it ever having been discussed. However, the samples are going out and we shall soon have a wealth of information on this light. :bigsmile: Let’s just wait and see. (I know - easier said than done. :wink: )

1205

Nah, its essentially an XML emitter on an XPG footprint. So it fits on smaller mcpcbs etc making an XML possible were only an XPG would once have been possible, easier for edc triples etc if/when the optics appear. Throw should be the same as XML, as would output, with the exception of any heat issues it MIGHT have.

It has a place, but if an XML2 fits, I dont know why you would use the XPL other than because you can.

Admittedly they are new still, so what they are or arent is mostly based on other people interpretation, a few have played with them and confirmed thats pretty much it. Who knows, it might have hidden potential but it doesnt seem likely.

Thats basically it I believe.

1206

The XP-L die is the same as an XM-L2, virtually the same with either emitter.

The differences are more important to modifying or fitting the large die into a small light. Smaller lights having smaller reflectors, it can be difficult to fit the large substrate of the XM-L class emitter…that not being the case here there’s really not much point.

In direct drive lights, the two emitters pull very similar current from the hottest cells.

With the domes on, I feel like the XM-L2 gives a cleaner output with less artifacts. This is due, in my opinion, to the flat sides of the dome on the XP-L that were designed to allow tight nesting in array configurations which is why they made the XP-L.

Edit: It might also be worthy to note that the copper direct thermal path stars are being custom made for this light, and swappng to an XP-L would take a different star. The XP-L footprint on the star is, of course, much smaller. It fits on stars made for XP-G and Nichia 219.

1207

Sorry, several of us posted at the same time. :slight_smile:

1208

Thanks for clearing up the differences guys. I thought the actual emitter was smaller like xp-e etc.

So…what about XP-E2, XP-G2 or XR-E (XR-E2 not made…right?) in the X6 with a reflector re-design? Pocket throw monster?

1209

I just built an X6 for manxbuggy1 that he should get today, with the XP-G2 S2 2B de-domed at some 5A it’s doing 99.75Kcd. :slight_smile:

BLF17DD FET driver and UCLp AR lens

1210

Add me, pls.
NW

1211

We still don’t know about new driver. For current stock flashlight, you can refer to some review (there is link is in OP, https://budgetlightforum.com/t/-/27587 , https://budgetlightforum.com/t/-/27173 )

1212

I don’t know much about testing for PWM, but just went and directed the beam through the shower water and couldn’t tell any difference between Hi and Lo in the Stock light. (brighter and darker of course)

How do you suggest getting a picture to show PWM in Lo and Med modes if it’s there?

1213

Please put me down for one light, in NW.

Thanks,
Yoav

1214

The PWM of the stock X6 driver is very high, I can detect the 4000Hz of the nanjg drivers, but not the 9000Hz of a qlite driver. This one I can not see either.

But I noticed that the BLF version has a new designed driver, only the testers can tell hoq high the PWM is.

1215

Count me in for one NW tint.
Thanks

1216

Looking forward to the reviews.

1217

My non-scientific method for testing PWM is to shine a light at a fan in a darkened room. Reminiscent of watching the fan when using a timing light on an older car. Instead of a smooth blur of the blades there is a pattern or staccato motion of the blades. Then I video the beam of light on the fan with the iPhone. With PWM it’s just ugly.

1218

I forgot to mention the 18650 extension tube is a very cool idea.

1219

Hi JohnnyMac,

if it’s not too late please put me down for one NW-3C an one CW-1A.

Thank You for working.

1220

Put me down for one in NW please.

Thank you