What’s interesting to me is that at the very end, it was giving 1497 lumens from 5.5A with a Vf of 4.00 volts for an efficiency of right around 68 lumens per watt. If Cree can get the efficiency up in the XM-L3, as well as better thermal handling, we might see over 2000 lumens at the high end (before death).
Yeah, thats what I am thinking as well. I just killed another XM-L2 today at around ~5A when testing the VG10 driver which I did not expect.
I was curious about that light you sent as well, nothing has shown up yet but then a lot of my overseas orders have been delayed since Christmas. They all started showing up in the last few days though so hopefully it is not far behind.
lol, no worries. I have been putting a bunch of these up so it is easy to miss one. Thats why I am spreading them out instead of just posting them all at once. Still have a few more ready to go I will post over the next few days.
Sorry friend, I am unsure. I have never heard of a way… I was wondering if some of the difference could be explained by a higher vf in the newer leds. I haven’t seen any total wattage comparrisons but I know some of the newer xml2s were said to have a higher vf.
Edit: looking at the chart now, it doesn’t seem like the led tested had an overly high vf so, IDK?
Well, I am wondering sort of the same thing Yokiamy does. I have a spare 7A3 high CRI emitter with a batch date of 2016/07/23. It'll likely never go beyond 4.2 - 4.5A, but seeing those dieing not much above that figure is a tad scary, especially considering the emitter's cooling won't be as good as in Texas Ace's testing hardware.
Well, comparing djozz and Texas_Ace’s tests of XML2 vs XPL, I can see that Texas_Ace’s XML2 has a higher Vf. Old XML2 was 3.8v at 6A and only 4.0v at 8A, whereas TA’s XML2 was 3.8v at 5.25A and popped at ±3.9v at only 5.5A.
Do anyone know of this is also the case of the XML2 U3 and U4? Has anyone done similar tests on the U3/U4?