i throw 5$ in the pot to help with shippingcosts…
I think I heard that Vinh, over at the other place, is going to put some XP-L HI’s in some M43’s. Anybody been following that?
Vinh has put an option on his M43 thread to purchase the XPL-HI but he hasn’t posted any output numbers yet so this tells me he hasn’t finished building and testing one yet. Mountain Electronics has a sale on the XPL-DD so I wonder if this means the factory is clearing the way for the XPL-HI in the future? Hope so.
My point is quite simple and I will repeat it, because there is nothing more fun to say the same thing again. :)
My point is that the driver is current regulated and no matter the Vf of the LED the current output is not going to change and increase just because the LEDs have a lower Vf than 10V (nominal of course), someone commented that because using LEDs with lower Vf the output will increase (like this would be a direct drive circuit), which of course makes no sense when you have a current regulated driver through current sense resistors (as the name implies). I was just making the post in order to avoid further "this is my opinion vs your opinion" and not believing what I had to say about a simple concept like that.
So I had demonstrated how 2 MT-G2 6V LED in parallel (meaning 6V total and dividing the output current between them) get 7.76A and much higher VF LEDs at 10V get 8A also and just because the Vf is lower there is not a higher current output.
Not only that but emitters with the higher Vf will have a higher wattage output and potentially more lumens.
That is correct because the light is current regulated as opposed to voltage regulated or not regulated at all for example. You expect the same thing from a current regulated buck driver by current sense resistors, meaning no matter what is the Vf of the LED the current output stays the same (or course assuming the buck driver does not have tons of voltage drop and it is still in Vin>Vout)
I think I see now how 7.76 and 8 are the same thing, exactly. I was thinking there’d be some hundreds of lumens in there somewhere, but I guess that’s just data sheets and all that.
Yes, I’m being facetious. 
I’m really not trying to be asinine, but would like to understand how these things work… saying 7.76 and 8 are the same isn’t getting it done for me as 250mA on the charts shows significant lumens output differences. (especially multiplied x 12)
I also fully understand that the way the big MT-G2 converts current is entirely different than the XP-G2 emitters and since the XP-L HI is so new, none of it makes much sense… current regulation or not.
The thing is, I had the light in hand and tested with XP-G2 S4 2B emitters in it. I know how it performs at that level. And with the HI’s in it, it’s a whole different story. When you actually have the light in hand and can see and feel the results, you’ll know what I mean. Paperwork be damned.
Dale you now are in the realm of emotion, not in the realm of science. My post was never about the lumens you claim, which I have nothing against but please do not ignorantly try to put down my data.
Now take the effort to understand please:
2 parallel MT-G2 6V get 7.76A, meaning each gets half of the current since they are in parallel.
12 XP-G2, 3 in series 4 in parallel get 8A with those 3in series having a 10V forward voltage.
So I will say it the 3rd time, a lower VF than 10V, in case of my test that is 6V, does not allow a higher current, clear as daylight. That mentality comes from unregulated light like direct drive circuits. But where we are talking about a current regulated boost converter.
What you argue is that 12 XP-L HI have a tiny bit lower voltage than the 12 XP-G2 and that is allowing more current, not even a tiny more but a whole lot more. You have the proof that much more lower Vf (6V) does not allow for any more current, actually less current, yet supposedly just a tiny bit should allow for much more. Such claims makes no sense.
I I had 4 MT-G2 I would have proven to you that a 2S2P, meaning 12V (meaning even higher voltage than the 12 XP-G2) would actually allow for the same 8A current (possibly even higher due to higher voltage), in now way for less current because of higher Vf.
I need 4 of them because if I only use 2 in series (12V) each would run at 8A and ultra-overheat close to making the test unreliable, adding 2 in parallel means that 8A output is shared by 2 more LEDs not ultra-overheating the LEDs.
My Meteor M43 does 12,523.5 lumens. That’s what I know.
And the results are all that I care about. Hell of a light, glad I bought it.
I just purchased one from mtnelectronics the other day with XP-G2 S4 2Bs…so all I have to do is replace those with XP-L HIs and I’ll get 12,000 glorious lumens?
try it and let us know :bigsmile:
Lol, I’m not a very good modder by any means. The thought of me tearing into such a beautiful light that I haven’t even received yet terrifies me.
If it hasn’t shipped yet you could ask RMM to do the mod for you… He’s usually willing to do that kind of thing, especially if it’s an interesting project like this one or will answer a hot question.
I’m still tempted to get a Meteor, even after months of telling myself I shouldn’t. It’d be brighter than my SRK and BST combined, and smaller than either one, and that’s without even modding it! Plus, it’s the sort of probably-short-lived premium item which remains both impressive and useful for a long long time. And maybe in a couple years I could give it high-bin XP-L HIs and double the output. I’m getting ~3045 lumens from a low-bin (U5) XP-L HI triple, so if they were to eventually make a V6 bin that would mean about 4500 lumens from a triple or up to 18,000 lumens from a Meteor. Maybe 14,000 or 15,000 in more realistic terms, but that’s still double what the XP-G2 version gets.
I wouldn’t even be getting one right now if it wasn’t for the crappy TN36 I just got from Amazon a few days ago. It was supposed to be cw but ended up being nw, there are several big pieces of lint under the lens, and there’s a couple of chips in the anodizing. The M43 was on my “wanted” list so I figured I’d return the TN36 and get it.
I've just taken a look at it, his measurements kind of match pflexpro's testing where the XP-L dedomed outputs more than the XP-L Hi V2.
Max output of 7450lumen for the XP-L HI V2, while with the XP-L dedomed he got max 7960lumen.
I’d happily take a 500 lumen cut for 5700k of creamy whiteness
Yeah indeed, I think we will get the 5700K V3s.
I’m a bit disappointed by Vinh’s latest numbers. Anyone venture to guess why the HI outputs less the the dedome? Is it because the HI is a lower bin? But then why are the HI’s bins lower? It seems the only difference between the domed LED’s and the HI LEDs is the shape of the covering over the LED - flat vs. hemi-spherical.
Also, the 5700K rating is the same as the XP-G2 cool white currently offered on the M43. Is this a bit too cool for any of you?
His XP-L HI V2 is actually a high bin, the second best you can get now. "U" bins are lower than "V" bins.
As I was mentioning in my other post.
90% of other cool tints/ratings are cooler than that, so it is not too cool at all. Anyway there are always neutral white tints (I mean in general)
Most likely, yes. I put a HI U5 into a light which previously had a de-domed V4, and the output went down slightly. However, the tint massively improved.
This was a direct-drive light though, so it’s not directly comparable to a Meteor.