P60 dropins - what dropin is your best thrower?

Throw is ONLY based on surface brightness and ratio of reflector to die size.

For the same size reflector, an XM-L cannot throw further than a properly-driven XR-E or XP-C. Period.

With a P60 reflector I think the same way, but could it change if we use a deeper reflector like the HS-801/802 USD168? In this reflector will the XR-E throw better than a XM-L?

The deeper reflector will affect spill intensity, but for the same sized diameter reflector, a maxed-out XR-E will throw further than a maxed XM-L

As gcbryan posted, it may not be as useful a beam, but it will put a dollop of light out further.

I can't tell you how many times I've read this across multiple forums. I've made 2 versions of a 52mm Aspheric Mag Mod (same body but started with the XR-E then converted it over to XM-L. The first was a direct drive 1.5A (1x18650) XR-E R2. The second was a 4.5A (4xEneloop) XM-L T6. The XM-L absolutely obliterates the XR-E when it's overdriven. I can't push the XR-E past 1.7A because it turns blue. The XM-L I can push to about 5.5A but the whole light gets too hot to hold and the batteries go into melt-down mode...

At 1.5A the XR-E produced a beam that was moderately visible at night. At 4.5A, the XM-L beam looks like a laser coming out of the light...

How did you manage to limit current in DD to keep the XR-E at 1.5A and not go to 1.7A+?

It doesn’t sound like you did a very good job with the XR-E if it was only “moderately” visible at night and the larger die XM-L looked like a laser?
Do you have readings from a light meter? You’re basically arguing against physics as stated.

Anybody know a source for dropin driverboard springs?

Need longer ones than in standard 105C driver...

edit: and just the minute I ask, I find them: http://www.manafont.com/product_info.php/flashlight-diy-component-silver-spring-10pcspack-p-6087

Thanks for bearing...

I understand it cannot throw farther... all i was pointing out is that an XM-L can come close while having a bigger hotspot at that. Some don't like pencil sized beams.

For absolute range i would go with multiple XM-L's. It makes sense what good is a 50-80cm hotspot at 300m?

Not the best execution but you get the idea. Way too much light wasted...

For the XR-E, I made a "2-D" to "1-18650" PVC adapter. The total resistance of that plus the loss of the Mag switch limited the current to around 1.5A at 4.2V.

For the XM-L I made a "2-D" to "4-AA" adapter. The total resistance of the Eneloops plus Mag switch limits me to around 4.5ish amp on a full charge.

Depending on how I want to use the light, I swap out the battery packs. I get about 25 min runtime on the 4AA (running in WOW-mode) and a little over an hour on the single 18650 (running in long-runtime-mode).

You've had this same argument with everyone in multiple threads at the other light forum. I think Ma-Sha (CPF) summed it up best when he said:

Earlier in this very thread, you stated that if you compared the XR-E at 1A to the XM-L at 3.0A, the XR-E is brighter. I don't disagree. All I was saying was, when you drive an XM-L at 4.5 or 5.5 Amp, I believe it overtakes the XR-E driven at 1.5A (before it blues out).

There is nothing to guarantee that I didn't receive one exceptionally poor XR-E and one exceptionally great XM-L.

Also, Techjunkie (CPF) has made many Aspheric lights. He's had the same experience where his overdriven XM-L was brighter than his XR-E. Here is what he had to say about an overdriven XM-L vs the XR-E:

Maybe he didn't do a very good job with the XR-E either, I can't be sure.

Have you built a lot of Ashperic lights?

I know my 3-D Mag with the XR-E R2 emitter @ ~1.2A using the DX ~50mm aspheric optic emits a very tight laser-type beam. It brightly illuminates a barn at ~700'. With the light behind my back and that same 700' behind me, I can see the light (faintly) illuminating the treeline ~3000' from the light source. I routinely use this light to spotlight deer @ 1000'+ from my porch. For casual use, such an extreme thrower isn't a practical solution, but for my applications, it's great.


This has gotten off track! My personal experience with P60-based throwers is as follows:

XRE-R2 with blacked out reflector and 28mm aspheric > XRE-R2 @1A > XML @3A...

...even though the XML is putting out MUCH more light overall.

The aspherics I’ve build are all XR-E. I’ve tested out a XM-L in the past with several of my aspheric lenses.
Even among my aspherics when I compare them I do so using a light meter. It sounds like no one with the opinion that the XM-L throws further has used a light meter.
If you don’t disagree that when driven equally (considering their respective specs) that the XR-E has a greater surface brightness then there is no disagreement.
All of the other comments are people making subject preference s known. There is no objective way to say that a XM-L with a larger hotspot is better or more useful. It depends on the person and on the use.
If it’s really been using for throw then at the end of that range the XR-E has a broad beam. The XM-L is broader. If you are looking at a deer (in the example above) how is a beam broader than the deer “more useful”? It may or may not be.
I’m just nothing the facts. Where preferences are concerned there is no argument. My preferences vary depending on the circumstances.
The point in most of these arguments and my only reason for posting is that people frequently start out by asking for the light with the greatest throw. Sometimes they end up actually wanted a compromise of throw and a larger hotspot and then we’re talking about the XM-L. Sometimes they really mean it and are looking for absolute throw and then it’s the XR-E as long as one is talking about apples to oranges.
There is also the continual thinking amount some that since the XM-L has a greater lumens output that it must throw further if only there was a property designed reflector taking into account the characteristics of this new emitter. Again, that’s missing the point. There isn’t a magic reflector design that will make the difference only a larger diameter reflector.
Some people know this, most don’t , some want to learn, others do know and are perhaps arguing apples to oranges. I’m only trying to address those who may not quite understand the physical principals yet. For those that do, I’m not intending to talk to them. As I’m sure you will agree there is a lot of misinformation on this subject.

I have this meter: http://www.dealextreme.com/p/lodestar-premium-digital-light-meter-20000-lux-7954

What distance do you measure your aspherics at? I'll try to get a reading tonight if it's not raining outside.

There seems to be a bit of confusion between surface brightness of the die and overall light output.

The XM-L puts out far more light overall, with a larger surface area.

The XR-E put out far less overall light, but is brighter at the die than the XM-L. It is this property that makes it a superior throw candidate.

ma_sha1 states that very fact in the quoted text - that with the same setup, an XR-E would out-throw the "king of throw."

Once again, surface (die) brightness and ratio of die-to-reflector are the only factors affecting the max distance that the beam will project.

No, there is no confusion. He's saying that if he drives the XR-E at 2A (which would be very difficult without excellent heat syncing) it will beat the XM-L that's driven at 4.2A. All I've been trying to say from the beginning is, an overdriven XM-L can beat out an XR-E if you drive the XM-L hard enough. You can drive an XM-L a lot further than you can drive an XR-E. At 5.5 or 6A, I'm confident that the XM-L would beat out the XR-E at 2A in throw.

I don’t think so… Results: Testing XM-L, MC-E, SST-50, and XP-G emitters **Updated**

I usually measure it at 10 meters. You can then convert it back to 1 meter for comparisons and to standardize things. At 10 meters if you take your readings and multiply by 100 it will give you the 1 meter reading.

There is still some confusion, because it cannot.

Let's take a look at die size to explain. The XR-E is ~1mm x 1mm, and the XP-E is ~0.9mm x 0.9mm. That makes 1mm and 0.81mm squared, respectively.

The XM-L is 2mm x 2mm, for 4mm squared.

The ratio of the sizes is 4-to-1 to 4.94-to-1.

At 330 lumen at 1.8 Amps, you would need a single XM-L to output over 1600 lumen to match the surface brightness of the XP-E.

The XP-C puts it further out of reach, as you would need around 2000 lumen to match the surface brightness of the overdriven XP-C in the DEFT-EDC.

To the original poster ..

Just buy both the drop in from dino direct is 5$ and the xml drop in can be had with a free flashlight for about 12$

simplest answer ..buy both or go to home depot and buy the 2 for 8.88$ e tech xpc lights .. it throws

Buy them both

merry christmas

I already did buy the XML dropin with the free flashlight as you so eloquently put it :-) But it will arrive at the end of January and I will come home at the end og February so long time no see to that. And I also did as you suggest and bought the R2 dropin with it but the same applies to that unit.

I was asking because maybe somebody knew something that I don't ( to my amazement a lot of people do ) and to get an idea about whether I had done the right thing. And some good things did come up for sure. The aspherix idea which I would persue if it was in a proper zoomie. But currently I am holding back on the zoomies because we have Coppertop on here who is like the flood to zoom afficionado as far as I can tell. He certainly puts a lot of effort and time in to it. So i follow his posts closely and hope he soon finds something that does the trick or at least gets him very close!

But I was recently taken by the P60 format despite claims of being outdated. So that sparked my interest in the specific experiences that users here have.

And by the way - thanks for the advice. It is taken to heart ;-)