Here the boss with XHP 35 ca 400 Meter:
but I want more.
Regards Xandre
I really think we should go with a buck driver or a linear driver like the ld-2.
Do we know what happens when you hook a xhp35 up to a 4s2p setup using a fet driver?
Will it kill the led?
Though I’m not sure if a buck driver has enough voltage overhead to work properly when the cells discharge?
XHP35HD (E21A 6500k IIRC) De-domed- Mtn Max 4S special built driver, 4SK70 carrier, 4 VTC5’s burn in at 1 minute mark….
The set-up
Sweating bullets! :person_facepalming:
I just awoke thinking/dreaming this question:
Two 4s1p high drain 18650 carriers in parallel becomes 4s2p. One carrier is fully charged (16.8 volts) and the other is depleted (12 volts). If these two carriers are installed in the GT, the voltage would try to equalize as quickly as possible.
Is this safe?
Lets be serious here, nobody will use it with 8 cells.
8 cells are too much i think .
weight (with cells inside) and charging 8 cells , are the 2 things i think most (as an “issue” for me) .
People keep whining about wanting a short tube yet when we showed you want it looks like it was unanimous that it was stupid looking and horribly unbalanced.
The only fixes for this that people had while keeping it a hand held light was to extend the handle to improve balance both cosmetically and weight wise.
Thus putting us right back where we started. If the handle will be extended for balance anyways, why the heck would we not allow it to be used with 8 cells?
Then simply use 4 cells.
Very well said ‘Texas_Ace’… all of it. :+1:
+1
Yea, the MT07 sure looks unbalanced with it's big head and 4 cells but actually with 4 loaded cells, the balance point is right at the 1/4 20 tripod point aligned with the switch. Of course our head will be much wider and probably longer than the MT07's, and still the MT07 feels awkward because you can't comfortably hold it on the battery tube.
The Sky Ray S88 and it's clones is an example of 8 cells and a fairly big head of 100 mm in width, but doesn't use battery carriers, so overall battery tube would be shorter.
If people wanted to give up the ability to run XP-L or XP-G2’s we could give up the battery carriers as well. The only way to use those LED’s without battery carriers is with a buck driver, which would cost 40% of the total light cost.
Or you could use dummy cells as well I suppose but seems a lot easier to use just cell carriers. Although if cost becomes a major issue then we will have to reconsider things anyways. We won’t really know any of this until we have a manufacture on board.
The HaikeLite's do both 2S2P and 4S with no carrier.
Correct, this light could also do 2S with up to 4P or 4S up to 2P without a carrier.
The issue is it could not do 1S without dummy cells or a carrier.
I don’t think I ever saw full renderings of a 4 cell design but I would like to. I probably missed them somewhere in the thread. Can they be added to one of the first posts? Personally I love the look of the 8 cell format but for me 8 cells is a bit much in every other way. I don’t have 8 matching cells or an 8 bay charger and no matter what anybody says if I have a light that takes 8 cells the only way I would want to use it is with all 8 cells and I would insist they be matched cells and I’d want them all charged at the same time every time. I treat all lights that take more than one cell this way. If that’s over-cautious then so be it but I can’t see myself changing now. I’d like to see those renderings. Was a 4 26650 configuration ruled out? I love their capacity and runtime and the sweet deal I worked out with BG for the protected KP 5200mAh cells is still going. I’m sure I could extend it as needed. Just a thought.
Yep, full renderings with a short tube were posted by 5AR 5 or 10 pages ago (maybe more?).
4x26650 was ruled out because it would no longer be a hand held light and as such the “boxy” design by djozz is better suited for that idea but that was voted down at the very start of this project.
The best compromise is 8X with 2 cell carriers, this allows for either setup to be used while maintaining balance of cost, flexibility, look and feel.
As long as we can use 2 or 4 cells and the price is lower there is no problem.
Here they are…………
Thanks teacher, didn’t have time to dig through to find them.
No problem T_A, glad to do it. :+1:
I know there’s a lot of talk going on about cell tube length and number of cells utilized, it might be prudent to again point out that the XHP-35 is a 12V emitter, as such, running a Buck driver from 4 cells is a lot cheaper than a Boost driver from 2 cells. Direct drive from an FET is really not much of an option as the XHP-35 has a max current of about 3A, which is really pushing it, best is around 2.5A or so or even less.
Essentially it’s going to take 4 cells in series, can run longer on a parallel set of 4 (8 total) of course. The very nature of the 12V emitter disallows substituting a lot of other emitters, it’s going to take a driver swap most likely to use a different emitter. It’s just really difficult and cost prohibitive to design a light to do all things, this one began as an extreme distance thrower, that’s the objective, and tweaking it with other component options will probably get expensive. (as usual)
While the look of a single 4 cell tube (1 cell in length) might be cool to some, it’s impractical in use. The TM36 Lite was like this, big head, only enough tube to grab onto. Had to put a handle on it to make it worthy of a 600 yd walk. So if the single cell length tube is really in demand, possibly an add on handle to enable carrying? Possibly have the tube sized to accept the Nitecore handle that fits the TM series? Just a thought… (by the way, this handle alone is a $36 accessory)