Any other info on the driver changes, etc. and how to determine whether a given light has which version? Received a new SC64 HI direct from ZL recently and was surprised that they switched from pogo pins like in earlier SC64s and SC600 Mk IVs to what appear to be SMT spring contacts?
Here’s a terrible quality pic:
The only significant change I’m aware of for the SC64w HI is the new positive cell terminal they introduced in May 2021. The SC64c has gone through a few minor driver changes, the switch from XP-L2 to LH351D, new LED pads in late 2020, and then of course the same new positive cell terminal. You can tell if an SC64c LE was manufactured before late 2020 because the LED pads don’t have this obscenely huge thermal pad and side overflows.
I don’t know about them much. I don’t remember exactly what it was, but they or their behavior was getting a few complaints from people around here or reddit. I had bought from the Fireflies US Warehouse early last year and it was awesome. Same exact price as FF-Light.com except with free local shipping that arrived in under 7 days (3 days for me). Actually, they even had slightly better priced kits of their lights but with some of the extra accessories already included.
When Brayn Gear came out, they made it seem like they were supposed be the US warehouse of Fireflies now. But when I went to their site and saw what they offered, their options and at what prices, I knew they were not gonna compare to the original FF US Warehouse one bit. So I’m not too worried about what happened to them. I wish way more that Fireflies could find a way to restart their US warehouse again. It was awesome to have that available to us. Come to think of it, the US warehouse closing up probably saved me some serious cash. 
Did they change the regulator on the SC64c at some point or was it always the TLV62085 ( 3A buck) ? it seems people assume it uses a buck-boost converter but that’s not the case apparently.
AFAIK there haven’t been any major changes to the driver design. I’m talking about things like different resistor tolerances you can use to approximate the manufacturing date. I also forgot about the PID ringing issue with the initial batches of SC64c that was fixed at some point in 2018.
Alright, I just saw your pics from 2018 and it was also a TLV62085 so it never used a buck-boost converter, maybe the previous SC6x gen did (SC/H600 mkII did).
Depends on the LED, like XHP35.
Well yes, the XHP version uses a boost converter (TPS61088) but not buck-boost, I was referring to the 3V model.
I was just wondering if the SC64c (3V) used a buck-boost before because people (esp on reddit) seem convinced it uses a buck-boost converter.
I remember reading that too. I have the SC64c LE and I’m curious to know the truth of it.
It’s a buck, but I don’t think it’s a bad thing, it’s more efficient than a buck-boost and with low Vf LEDs like the LH351D 90CRI there isn’t that much boosting to do, Zak has a runtime measurement of the LE with sufficient cooling so that it runs at maximum output :
It starts to drop at the last 20% mark but only down to 70% (2.1A) at the very end, this is IMO minimal and even with a buck-boost converter it would still drop a bit at the end because available buck-boost converters are not very powerful.
(Edit : re-hosted the graph because it wouldn’t load)
TPS63020 can push up to 2Amps with empty 2.6V battery
In light of all this… is anyone else offput by what’s happened or is this par for the course for cheap(ish) flashlights?
Asking as I’ve got my first ZL on order but I’m now not sure whether I want this or something else.
Yes, the fact that this has happened disappoints me a lot. I understand that sometimes mistakes are made though and how they deal with this issue will have a big impact on how I feel about it as well. At worst it could have been ZL trying to pull a fast one, someone there was negligent and mixed up LEDs they have in stock, or at best (for Zebra’s competence) the supplier sent them mislabeled product.
I have had and seen others have even more serious issues from other brands, a number of which are selling light for the same or even higher price. There is going to be a number of “lemons” for any mass-produced product and how the company handles customers that receive them is what is really telling IMO.
if i really wanted that specific emitter in that CRI and didn't get it, i'd be pissed.
but if that's not the case, i don't think this affects you. also, it's possible that an informed consumer would take a gamble and buy it anyways in hopes of getting the bait-and-switch, lower-CRI emitter because supposedly it has a nice tint.
i still continue to buy ZLs as gifts for family and friends, and i'd buy replacements if i broke my headlamp or flashlights today.
the newest ones i got have the new battery cathode contact. i can see that it might be less prone to denting batteries in the event of a drop, but i wonder how it compares in terms of current carrying capacity (within the requirements of the flashlight) and long term durability. being optimistic, maybe it's all-around better?
Kinda sorta the same deal in this thread……. 
I don’t follow, that thread is about the mechanics of how spectral composition and Ra rating relate, not a product failing to meet it’s advertised specs.
You’re correct in exactitude. It was more related to some of the comments than the subject itself.
Bowing out.
Butt I did say, “kinda, sorta”. 
OK I’ve got to ask… what’s the go with your signature?
Sorry I’m not following.
Your signature is extremely long.