SST-50 and SST-90

Okay, I'm emphasizing these two emitters specifically

What application do you see for these now that we've come into the XM-L era and hype? Obviously they have their purpose as they can be driven harder, but I'm curious if their existence is slowly coming to end or if they just have their own place in the LED flashlight world. Is there still interest here?

I'm sure there are some applications where the SSTs will continue to hold their own. The most obvious is in applications with active cooling where you only have space for a single emitter. I think as far as flashlights are concerned you've seen the end of the sst-50 and sst-90 as the kings of the hill due to price point. When you can buy 3 XML emitters for less than an SST-50 let alone a 90, that is what is driving the market. A 3 x SST-90 would be a wickedly powerful light but comes with its share of technical hurdles.

Unless you're going to really drive the SST's as hard as they can be driven (5A or 9A), then I don't see the point. That means a lot of battery power and heatsinking. I think they can probably throw better too since you can design one reflector to focus all the light. One thing I don't like about the multi-XML lights is they really don't throw any better than a P60 because there is a separate reflector around each LED.

Outside of the extremes, the XM-L seems to have replaced the sst-xx’s. They have replaced the SSC-P7’s and MCE’s even more however.
I’m not going to get rid of my SST-90 any time soon though.

The SST-90 seems like a separate beast but I see little need for the SST-50 now.

I'm not sure but I think my MC-E light light throws better than dropping a XM-L in the same 50 mm head.

The issue is driving them !

The SST 50 is hard to drive well @ 4.2v ...

THe SST 90 is almost impossible to drive well @ 4.2v

At 8.4v its a different story ,

Anything the SST 50 can do , the XM-L can do , making the SST 50 redundant ..

The SST 90 is expensive , needs to be driven hard , Im sure they have there fanboys , but for mods and DIY there just not worth it , the XM-L is choice !

When $$ count , the XM-L cant be beat ...

Is the SST 50 like $35

The SST 90 like $70 or something

The XM-L can be at your door for $9

I have a SST 50 P60 drop in , and it can only compete with the samsung 30A battery @ 4.35v , the slight voltage increase = about 200Lumen

With a fresh 4.2v it will do about 500L and with a fresh 4.35v it will do 700L , I think I need to add some 7135 chips to that driver one day .

But the thing is , a lowly driven XM-L will do 700L with a regular 4.2v cell ..

Im sure we all dream of monster output , I even built myself a Dual XM-L U2 P60 drop in , but I just cant drive that drop in hard enough , yeah , more driver mods needed .

>40 watts of led idiocy makes for a fantastic show off light. Why is it that non-flashaholics so often look into the light to see how bright it is?
The efficiency and low Vf of the XML really allows high lumen lights to scale down in size and battery requirements. When my parts arrive I will have a Yezl S5 running an XML off a 14500 IMR. Should be pushing >500 lumens in an AA format. Never would have thought that was possible a few years ago.
It’s a sickness that I am already looking out for the next offering.
200 lumens/watt with 10 amp max current in an EZ900 format, please!

Bro, just for info and for the record only.... those 57mm heads triple XM-L in DD gets me at best 35k (8m plus measurement distance).

Nailbender P60 XR-E R2 1.3A is about 23k.

Throw depends on total apparent reflector area.

With equivalent LEDs, 3 small reflectors throw as well one bigger reflector with the same total apparent reflector area.

And 3*XM-L @3A each yield more luminous flux than 1*SST-90 @9A.

I always wanted an SST-90 light, but now I might go for that compact 3*XM-L torch... Maybe even T5 neutral white.

I don't have a triple XM-L or any way of testing light output anyway, but the reviews I have read say they provide a ton of flood. Maybe since the 3 separate reflectors don't use all of the reflector area, you are losing something? Or maybe with all of the spill it just doesn't look like the throw is as good as it really is. It seems like one big LED in the middle of a big reflector is going to throw better than 3 smaller LED's in 3 smaller reflectors.

With "total apparent reflector area" I actually meant only the apparent area of the reflecting surface; with typical triples there's indeed some waste area, and for the same total apparent reflector area a bigger head diameter is needed.

In comparison, such a light (in theory) would yield 3 times the luminous flux; that more of flux goes into a bigger spot, but with the same intensity and throw.