Zebralight SC700d 21700 XHP70.2 90+CRI

[Nichia!]

I got mine to flash then shut off, just took a triple click, pause, single click.

So it's there??!!

 

[holygeez03]

So it's there??!!

He might be making a joke... Three clicks likely put it into "beacon mode".

 

[WalkIntoTheLight]

It's even worse. Just did 4 clicks on my Zebra. It flashed a few times then shut off. :sigh:

 

[Mr. LED]

:laughing:

 

[holygeez03]

You all are going to start a panic.

 

[markr6]

I just rubbed the cap and a genie popped out. Slapped me in the face and said "how'dya like that tint?"

 

[burntoshine]

The bug is real, my friends. The little ******* was hiding in the battery tube.

 

[radellaf]

Did some tailcap measurements and calculations for runtime.

Lumens mA 4Ah Time 5Ah Time
3000 8000 30 37
1485 3070 1:18 1:37
945 1770 2:15 2:50
583 950 4:12 5:16
192 300 13:20 16:40
52 89 1d 20h 2d 8h
25.2 44 3d 18h 4d 17h
11.6 20 8d 8h 10d 10h
2.1 5.6 29d 18h 1m 7d
0.32 1.2 4m 18d 5m 24d
0.12 0.816 6m 24d 8m 15d
0.04 0.678 8m 6d 10m 7d

50E Battery at 3.9 OCV, Victor VC890D meter 20A range (52lm on up) with Fluke leads.
Could be off a bit at 8A or maybe 3A, but remember the Zebralight driver will draw _more_ current with added resistance.
Top 3 levels are PID, so these runtimes are for well-cooled use like a bicycle light where PID is never active.
Nice to know it's within spec for a 9-10A rated battery, though I'd love to know if it really gets over 30min at 3000lm on a 50E. I could try one of my light-in-a-bowl-of-water tests.

Edit: Just for curiosity's sake, here's efficiency in lm/ma:
3000lm 0.38lm/mA, 1485 0.48, 945 0.53, 583 0.61, 192 0.64, 52 0.58, 25.2 0.57, 11.6 0.58, 2.1 0.38, 0.32 0.27, 0.12 0.15, 0.04 0.06

Maybe that's why they kept trying to drop the lowest sub-lumen mode? Less than a year's runtime does make ZL look bad. /s

 

[likethevegetable]

Nice work! 8 A, dayum...
678 μA, dayum.

 

[burntoshine]

Did some tailcap measurements and calculations for runtime.

Lumens	mA	4Ah Time	5Ah Time
3000	8000	30	37
1485	3070	1:18	1:37
945	1770	2:15	2:50
583	950	4:12	5:16
192	300	13:20	16:40
52	89	1d 20h	2d 8h
25.2	44	3d 18h	4d 17h
11.6	20	8d 8h	10d 10h
2.1	5.6	29d 18h	1m 7d
0.32	1.2	4m 18d 	5m 24d
0.12	0.816	6m 24d	8m 15d
0.04	0.678	8m 6d	10m 7d

Right on! Thank you!!! : high five :

Zebralight: copy and paste these times into your item description for this light. We all know that you know how to copy and paste.

...And put radellaf on your payroll.

Thx.

 

[Derek Dean]

Did some tailcap measurements and calculations for runtime.

Edit: Just for curiosity's sake, here's efficiency in lm/ma:
3000lm 0.38lm/mA, 1485 0.48, 945 0.53, 583 0.61, 192 0.64, 52 0.58, 25.2 0.57, 11.6 0.58, 2.1 0.38, 0.32 0.27, 0.12 0.15, 0.04 0.06

Maybe that's why they kept trying to drop the lowest sub-lumen mode? Less than a year's runtime does make ZL look bad.

Thanks for taking the time to do those measurements and post them here. I'm always interested in seeing real world data.

When the SC600 Mk IV+ came out, I contacted ZL as to why they had dropped their lowest levels (and expressed my desire to have them returned in the next light). Their reply was that as they had continued to increase the max output of the their lights, they were attempting to keep some sort of logarithmic spacing between levels, which meant increasing the lowest level.

What's nice, of course, is that they obviously listened to their customers and have returned the lower sub-lumen levels in this latest light.

As with most things, there are always trade offs, and I've always felt that ZL has done a good job of giving us a driver that maximizes performance where we need it the most, which I think for many of us are the middle & lower levels, and yet still does a respectable job of giving us solid performance with the sub-lumen output levels. And by solid performance, I mean extremely low output levels that are stable, with no PWM, and run times measured in months, not days.

Of course, there's always room for improvement, and I've got a feeling ZL is always on the lookout for ways to increase the performance of their driver. I'd be interested to hear if you know of any other manufacturer that has a driver with this amount of flexibility and better overall performance.

 

[Mr. LED]

Right on! Thank you!!! : high five :

Zebralight: copy and paste these times into your item description for this light. We all know that you know how to copy and paste.

...And put radellaf on your payroll.

Thx.

They know how to copy it, but they're too lazy to do it!

 

[burntoshine]

They know how to copy it, but they're too lazy to do it!

True. They could put up something.


I like the tailcap measurements and also real runtime tests, too. I like knowing what the light could do in each level without step-downs if cooled, and also the runtimes with step-downs. It's annoying to get neither one from the company you bought the light from, and to have to search around for runtimes, or do them yourself.

I'm going to buy another 18650 light at some point and so I was recently looking at different models, when I kept coming across other lights with nothing listed for runtimes.

I'd love to know if it really gets over 30min at 3000lm on a 50E. I could try one of my light-in-a-bowl-of-water tests.

I vote yes.

 

[markr6]

I wonder how sales are doing on this one. Did the excitement wear out? In stock for a while. Not much new talk. I'm still liking mine, just not using it a lot (or any lights) lately.

 

[WalkIntoTheLight]

I wonder how sales are doing on this one. Did the excitement wear out? In stock for a while. Not much new talk. I'm still liking mine, just not using it a lot (or any lights) lately.

If sales are decent, there will likely be different XHP70.2 emitter choices, and a frosted lens choice. It costs them almost $0 to swap in a warmer tint or floody lens.

If we don't see any other options, then likely sales didn't go well and they'll probably just try to sell off existing stock.

It's a little outside Zebralight's normal niche (very compact lights), so it will be interesting to know if it caught on, or is just a flashaholic novelty.

If 21700 becomes the new standard in lithium-ion cells, then I can see the SC700 size still being a leader in compact high-output lights. But it's tough to compete against the 18650 size.

 

[Connor]

I was initially all over the SC700d but ended up not ordering one because it is IMHO just too large to conveniently EDC it.
What I would like to see is a "SC70d", i.e. a SC64-alike as-small-as-they-can-make-it 21700 Zebralight (in high CRI, of course).

 

[WalkIntoTheLight]

I was initially all over the SC700d but ended up not ordering one because it is IMHO just too large to conveniently EDC it.
What I would like to see is a "SC70d", i.e. a SC64-alike as-small-as-they-can-make-it 21700 Zebralight (in high CRI, of course).

The SC64 thermal controls start ramping down the light after only about a minute, and that's with only 1400 lumens. A SC70 would have more than twice that output. Full output would be very brief.

Then again, people seem to love the Emissar D4, even though it can only last for a few seconds on turbo.

I think a SC70 would be similar in size to the SC600w Plus, and only 30% more output. And to keep that minimal size (like the SC64), the SC70 would have to use thinner aluminum (like the SC64 uses), so have less thermal mass to absorb heat. The SC600w IV Plus might beat it for sustained output. You'd get longer run-time with the 21700 cell, though.

 

[Connor]

Yes, H1 on a SC70d would be <2000 lumens for sure but the runtimes in low/medium and some of the H2 modes would be awesome.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

An SC70C would be a must have lights for me. :candle:

 

[Derek Dean]

I use my SC700d every day. I keep it on my night stand for late night ventures and as a general around-the-house light. It's perfectly suited for that type of duty. I still use my SC600 as my main in-pocket EDC and work light.