What Is a good working current for the MTG-2.

I should have clarified….

That driver won’t push the MTG2 to nine amps, at least if you’re using 2 cells.

I tried it w/ two brand new MNKE IMR 26650s. If you scroll down through the pictures you’ll see tail current measurements.

Summary: 48 watts into the driver (at turn on with FULLY charged cells)

If the driver was 100% efficient the emitter would be getting about 7.3 amps.

It most certainly is NOT 100% efficient.

I doubt it is less than 50% efficient…but at 50%, the emitter would be getting just below 4 amps (lower Vf).

My best guess…is right in the middle of those….so 5.5 amps…

If you’re talking about the 3-18V, 5A driver, you’re going to get more like 3.5 - 4A at the emitter.

edit: which is still plenty - and it will still be brighter if you solder that right to some copper :slight_smile:

Thanks for talking Chinese to me. :wink: I think what your saying that if a 5 amp driver was for a 3 to 4 volt led that delivering 6 volts to a led would drop the current of the driver at the led? Yes I do need help here. Thanks.

Its chinese to me, too - but yes.

I don’t know much about how they work…I just can relay what I’ve tested :wink:

It seems some buck drivers still deliver the same current, even with the higher Vf…but others don’t quite make it.

Some drivers, like that 3-18V 5A and the manafont 3T6 driver that we’re discussing in a current page 1 thread, are also designed for use with multiple LEDs in series…so maybe that’s why?

We need help. This is the driver I have. What will it do with a six volt MTG-2?

http://intl-outdoor.com/boostbuck-318v-triple-xml-circuit-board-p-542.html?zenid=fn4op0poakq696m11c7btdd2j6

depends on how many cells you use

3 or 4 cells.

3 cells I got 3.7A to emitter. You might get a bit more in an assembled light (no skinny test leads in the circuit).

I didn’t test 4 cells, but judging by the 1/2/3 cell figures, it should work great (4A, maybe 4.5?)

It’s a good idea if your reflector doesn’t interfere. If you are satisfied with having reflector rest on the emitter’s pcb, you should have adequate clearance for your wires. If you decide like I have that the emitter needs to be higher into the reflector, you will probably not have enough clearance because the star’s wire contact pads are almost touching the emitter. The Super Thrower’s reflector is much thinner than my spotlight’s reflector. So you might be lucky.

Heres a link to ImA4Wheelr’s thread.

Thank you MRsDNF. I’m currently working on version 2. No pill will be in it. 3/8” copper post for emitter. The post goes perpendicularly through a 1/2” copper pipe. The 1/2” copper pipe extends out both sides of the spotlight to heat sinks. Very fancy top view diagram below (the “D” is the emitter:

EDIT: Diagram didn’t work. Anyway, the post idea is what I was recommending to you if you have wire clearance issues.

The same host?

Yes same host. I’m experimenting and don’t want to spend big dollars. Hopefully, I will post an update his weekend.

I don’t want to derail your thread. I’m so looking forward to whatever you decide to do with this fantastic light you are building.

Thats a funny thing those dollars. Looking forward to your never ending search build on the perfect light.

Making a pseudo-star out of copper sheet with cutouts for the wires to connect to the underside of the emitter would be the least fab work, and work just about as well as a custom pill/pillar, as long as it's sized right (thickness) to get good pressure from the reflector. What size board does the original use?

It’s 20mm.

Curiosity was killing me so I went to my car and grabbed my Super Thrower. You can disregard all I said about getting the emitter higher into the reflector. This reflector is quite thin on the bottom. So it looks like it will work great resting right on the emitter’s pcb. That should give you adequate room to solder wires flat to a star.

The reflector on my S1100 is just barely too small for the entire MT-G2 PCB to pass through. I considered opening it up, but... just couldn't bring myself to do it. The base is really thin on this one, too. I reused the original XM-L plastic centering plate, it's about .040" thick, and the step up that fits inside the reflector I.D. is only about .010" high, and is just about exactly the same thickness as the MT-G substrate. So the actual die surface is something like .015" lower than the inside surface of the base of the reflector. The focus with it set up this way is so good, I'm glad I didn't touch the reflector. I don't think it would be possible to get it any better.

That is good to hear comfychair. I think MRsDNF is has the same situation. I put the MTG2 up against the Super Thrower reflector and it looks like it will be exactly as you described. In my situation the reflector has a very wide base and is very thick. Even if I could get the wires down to zero thickness, the top of the emitter is still well below the reflector’s interior.

Just checked out comfychair’s build thread for the S1100. Sounds like an great light.

I managed to goad someone on mtbr into doing a direct to copper MT-G2 mount and it worked a dream (both the goading and the mounting :laughing:, so I’d be amazed if you couldn’t do it too. In fact, I think it would be a dastardly insult to the dreams of the BLF collective if you didn’t :smiley:

here’s the post

Wow, theres another whole world out there. This one here keeps me far to busy. That mod on the MTG was amazing. Keep throwing thinsgs at me even if its not going to get done it keeps the old cogs well and truly kicking over. Thanks a lot guys. :slight_smile:

I just did a crude direct mount last night. It’s not pretty and it could be designed much better. Next time.