XR-E Q5, XP-G R5, & XM-L T6 Runtime Test

Ever wonder just how much runtime you have with your single 18650 XR-E Q5 flashlight? :huh:

I'm doing a series of experiments to see what my lights are really putting out. I am using the cheap 18650 Q5 zoomies for be-seen lighting on my recumbent trike. These have no boost or buck circuits and the video really does well in showing what happens if you draw 1A at the start of your charge.

The inside scoop is that I got 3 hours out of a quality 2350mah Panasonic cell. In strobe mode, I've gotten 6.5 hours (~50% duty cycle) in the same setup. The only reason for the extended runtime is that the Vf at the emitter keeps going lower from the beginning of the charge so the current is also dropping. There is no obvious regulation going on, only a Vdrop at the regulator and other circuit connections (~150mv total). In the same 1-amp test on an XP-G R5 I only got 2 hours but the output was much more consistent (video in process). I suspect an XM-L will do even better with a current regulator at 1 amp, but runtime will be less than 2 hours, I'm sure.



Just stop the video if you need to see the details. :ironic:

edit: XP-G R5 runtime test added - same format and extrapolated data at the end of the video.



Very nice result!

Edit again: XM-L T6 results added



At 1 amp drive from a single 18650, the XM-L and the XP-G are virtually identical. The XM-L should put out about 8% more light; the drop off at the end of the charge was 15 minutes for the XP-G and 10 minutes for the XM-L. Nothing to write mother about.

Re: XR-E Q5 Runtime Test

Cool, here's some of our runtimes..

Re: XR-E Q5 Runtime Test

StarHalo said:

Cool, here's some of our runtimes..

Click to expand...

Someone has been -very- busy :twothumbs

In this case, it was not so much about the flashlight as it was about the emitter itself. The driver in this one is a very basic unit capable, I believe of 1.2A and in this configuration would barely reach over 1A.

My driver of choice is the NANJG 101-AK with the 17 mode TINY13A. This can be dialed to any number of outputs including 3+ amps with relative ease.

My interest is obtaining a steady output for about 4 hours in a hybrid flash mode. This means a steady state of either 350ma or 700ma and one of several flash modes on top of this. Not your everyday flashlight to say the least. The use cases are red or white dedicated be-seen bike lights. This host is probably my go-to host formfactor due to its small size, aspheric configuration, and overall performance to date. Quality however can be improved upon with regard to the tail switch.

The performance of the XP-G is significantly better than the XR-E at the cost of 1/3rd the runtime. I am looking forward to the same tests on the XM-L (received new drivers today).

I will probably limit the output to 700ma, including the flash, to maximize runtime. Either the XM-L or the XP-G are perfectly suited at this lower current. It is a tough balance to settle on.

This is the driver in the test subject:

Re: XR-E Q5 Runtime Test

Be-Seen Triker said:

This means a steady state of either 350ma or 700ma and one of several flash modes on top of this. Not your everyday flashlight to say the least.

Click to expand...

Roughly half of our serious lights have a strobe mode on them, many have several to choose from; you should check out some of the offerings, a lot of bikers prefer a good tactical flashlight over what they sell at the bike shops..

And why aspheric and Li-ion? Wouldn't a locator work better wide angle? And with larger capacity cells?

Re: XR-E Q5 Runtime Test

StarHalo said:

...
And why aspheric and Li-ion? Wouldn't a locator work better wide angle? And with larger capacity cells?

Click to expand...

The aspheric in the small zoomies works very well in full spread mode. I get a 60 degree cone of light without a specific hot spot in the center that can become a hazard in traffic. With the emitter that close to the lens also means a lot of lumens out the front. I am not sure what you mean by locator.

The modes I am looking for is ~350ma drive (at 3.7V) steady light with various flash modes that ride on top of this. The driver I use has 5 useful flash modes: Fast strobe, Police strobe, 1/3hz strobe, 1hz strobe, and 10 second beacon. In addition, since the drivers come with 5%, 30%, 100% steady modes, this lets me also use 3 constant modes wihtout the flash; 370ma, 455ma, and 700ma. With memory and low voltage warning, it is a pretty good list of mode options. The only thing missing is the ability to turn off the 350ma constant mode.

Tell me more about your offerings with regard to bike specific lights and their modes. I have a good line on people that would like a source for bike specific lights with significant being-seen characteristics. I am working with what I have because I know they work. And explain "Locator"

Re: XR-E Q5 Runtime Test

Be-Seen Triker said:

The modes I am looking for

Click to expand...

Yeah, a multi-mode light with a variety of strobes, there are several hundred lights that fit that description; flashlights mind you, not bike-specific lights - most retailers carry bike mounts for their lights because they're so popular with bikers. I'd start over at 4sevens.com and be prepared to browse for quite some time, you have many options.

One example is the tiny Quark MiniAA that I have in my pocket; 1xAA with three regular/steady modes, a strobe, two SOSs, and two locators (beacons, slow blink). The strobe is roughly 10hz at 90 lumens, and will run for well over six hours on a single AA cell, all for $40.

Re: XR-E Q5 Runtime Test

I see. Beacons won't work due to the limited time I have to gain someone's attention meaning soccer moms ready to blast through stop signs. 18650 is a good format and a Q5 at 700ma would be the least I would want for output. A narrow beam too would be severely limited. I have a 2xAA 5 LED headlamp that does a 10hz flash. It is the backup and works well at night for being seen, but during the day, it simply disappears even with aspheric lenses at each emitter.

Fast strobes are a no brainer but they are not welcomed by the general public, be they riding, driving, or walking. It is what I use now and I am totally immune to them, as a matter of fact I can see by them quite well. My wife goes into fits because of them.

I have only seen a few lights that incorporate a solid along with a brighter flash from the same beam. The Cycler is one of those and even there it is considered "innovative". So I took that to mean that they, and the one I made before knowing about the Cycler were still rather unique. The reason for the solid is the fact that solid lights are easier for traffic to "locate" on the road. That, along with a bright flash at a reasonable rate will be the best of both worlds.

When you said "We" I assumed you and Co. were selling specialty lights but I didn't see anything on your linked site. So who is this "We" you were refering too?

Anyway, I've looked till the cows came home at all kinds of flashlights that would be bikeable. "Seeing" lights are no problem. I seem to always go back to a P60 light so I can drop in whatever I need for that night's ride. Being seen, however... now this is still the big mystery that is lining the pockets of some very serious manufacturers. I did learn you can be "too bright" though. An XM-L T6 at 1.4A near a 28mm aspheric, even with a rubylith film red filter, can hurt from sgnificant angles!

Re: XR-E Q5 Runtime Test

Yes, the Quark MiniAA is an XP-G R5 which on high is a steady ~850ma from 1.6V, definitely noticeable, although the emitter area is quite small since it's a pocket light; it does have a broad beam though. That's modest compared to most current larger-cell and li-ion powered lights, which usually strobe at their max output (700+ lumens from some of the XM-L models..)

The "we" I was referring to was flashaholics, the flashlight community. Roughly half the lights on that site I liked to have both steady and strobe modes, though it sounds like your ideal setup will involve using two lights.

Re: XR-E Q5 Runtime Test

StarHalo said:

...though it sounds like your ideal setup will involve using two lights.

Click to expand...

You can bypass one of the AMC7135's gate straight to pin 1 of the MP (diode protected positive). This will provide a non-PWM 350ma constant while the remaining AMC7135 will be driven by the selected mode of the Tiny13A. Works perfectly and no reprogramming required.

BTW, I run at least 4 lights for being seen. One on every corner (redundancy).

The whole purpose for these tests is to provide a more consistent output light throughout the runtime. I know the Vf of the XR-E is very high compared to the XP-G and XM-L. Overall, the Q5 does provide good runtime and the range is between 240 to 160 lumens thoughout the usable runtime which is nothing to sneeze at. The quest for greater consistency is probably more driven by completeness rather than a real need. But if I'm going to replace drivers anyway, why not upgrade the emitter?

I have the XM-L test running now at 1 amp. I'm very interested in these results.

I'm not into programming the MP ...yet. :tired:

Re: XR-E Q5 Runtime Test

I'm not an engineer guy, but there are others here who might be able to help your quest for regulation. And the XM-L is definitely my new favorite emitter; big hotspot, big spill beam, big output, big all over..

Re: XR-E Q5 Runtime Test

I just added the XP-G video to the original post. 01:48 of well regulated output from the XP-G of around 350 lumens (spec lumens) and 2:00 and a bit before the battery was down to 3V. Same cell as in the 1st test also charged on the XTAR Wp2 II.

Just completed the XM-L T6 test at 1 amp. Will add the vid once I parse all the data. So far, very impressive!

I do keep my eyes out for new and interesting drivers. Right now I am only gathering worthwile data for the every day cyclist who also happens to share the hobby interests in electronics and modding potential for lighting. People who really need lighting end up buying Magicshine, Niterider, or for the really hard core ...or fearful which go for Dinotte. I -wish- I had $900 lying around for a light set (don't ask me what I have in the flashlight hobby though )

All the tests are complete with significant results. See the 1st post for all 3 vids.

If you want runtime and don't really care about consistent light output using only 1x 18650 (or 16340, etc.), an XR-E will self regulate based on Vf until the battery is dead. with a 1 amp starting current through the driver, the XR-E lasted a good 3 hours with brightness of around 240 lumens down to maybe 140 lumens (@2:40) when the battery begins to drop off quickly. The median brightness would be around 170 lumens for much of the runtime (spec lumens, not OTF).

This study makes the choice a little easier for what to use for my Be-Seen bike lights... if you plan to run either of these emitters at 1 amp or less, you can choose your preferred beam performance, cost performance, or packaging consideration when choosing the emitter.

If consistent brightness is important, both the XP-G and the XM-L regulated very well through the 1st 85-90% of the batteries total runtime. I got 2/3rd the runtime of the XR-E but it was ~1:50 of very consistent output with only an additional 10-15 minutes to a fully depleted cell (unregulated). The XP-G was terminated by me, and the XM-L terminated with its low voltage alarm circuit. The XP-G was drawing .23A at the end and the XM-L was well over .4A. I would give the edge to the XM-L as the current was just a hair more consistent throughout the primary runtime (XP-G=1.01A-.98A | XM-L=1.0A-.99A). Remember that the flashlight was being cooled with a fan throughout the tests. The XP-G and the XM-L used the same host, battery, meter setup. The drivers were both NANJG 101-AK w/ 3x AMC7135 (100%/no PWM) but not the same driver since each was built into their own P60.

Disclaimers: My analog meters are not in calibration, These are reference meters only. My RadShack DMM has been very reliable, however, and all the voltage curves use the data from this meter. Cell performance too can change these results. I feel the Panasonic CGR18650D cells are an average quality cell that can deliver reasonable results for a test of this nature. Aged or lower quality cells may skew the results toward the XM-L's lower Vf requirements.

I honestly expected the XP-G to fall out of regulation much quicker. I am quite sure the results will degrade at 1.4 amps (4xAMC7135) but for the moment, I have enough data to move forward.

I hope this study is useful to others. Feel free to ask questions. :ironic:

PS: for the same light output, running either the XP-G or the XM-L t 700ma will produce approximately the same light output as the 1A into the XR-E. This should bring both the XP-G and XM-L close to the runtime of the XR-E with slightly improved output. Hmmmmm oo: