illuminator196972
Newly Enlightened
Can anyone tell me about a rechargable set up for my M6?
SF/M6
- Thread starter illuminator196972
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
- Status
js
Flashlight Enthusiast
The SF M6-R - summary thread
OK! OK! I will do a 2nd run of M6-R's
The *M6-R*: FULLY REGULATED RECHARGEABLE M6 makes an auspicious debut
For starters. There is a link in the summary thread to the original M6-R thread. It all depends on how many hours you want to read about it.
Kiu also came up with a rechargeable M6, but used the M4 LA's and three Li-ion cells in a special holder.
andrewwynrouse is also working on a rechargeable M6.
And you can re-wire the MB20 to work with unprotected R123's, although I don't recommend this solution.
OK! OK! I will do a 2nd run of M6-R's
The *M6-R*: FULLY REGULATED RECHARGEABLE M6 makes an auspicious debut
For starters. There is a link in the summary thread to the original M6-R thread. It all depends on how many hours you want to read about it.
Kiu also came up with a rechargeable M6, but used the M4 LA's and three Li-ion cells in a special holder.
andrewwynrouse is also working on a rechargeable M6.
And you can re-wire the MB20 to work with unprotected R123's, although I don't recommend this solution.
illuminator196972
Newly Enlightened
We need a solution! 6 123s is too much! Please someone help!!!!!!!!!!!!
js
Flashlight Enthusiast
illuminator196972 said:
Ah. Hello? Am I invisible or something? Hmm. I wonder if I should use this newfound power for good or evil.
LOOK UP TWO POSTS! HELLO!?!? CLICK ON THE BLUE COLORED THINGYS!
Size15's
Flashaholic
Isn't there a CPF member, JP or something who was thinking about making a rechargeable battery pack or something?
I'm pretty sure it was JP - James Pathmanson I believe.
Somebody should get JP over to this thread...
Al :nana:
I'm pretty sure it was JP - James Pathmanson I believe.
Somebody should get JP over to this thread...
Al :nana:
powernoodle
Flashlight Enthusiast
js said:
Jim: you've been bombarded with so many stray quarks and gluons from that fancy accelerator thingy that you've turned invisible. Thought you knew this.
illuminator: consider the SF 10X; huge wall of light, and its rechargable. :wave:
best regards
Last edited:
LEDcandle
Flashlight Enthusiast
js said:
Haha.. his post is 4 mins behind yours, he probably was typing his desperate call for help out while your post landed.
But bumping his thread in 45 mins is a little impatient, don'tcha think?
I've said this before and I'll say it again. Two 18650's will fit in an M6 and power it successfully. The catch is you gotta make a holder for the 18650's in series. I would do this in a heartbeat if I had the means to do the mechanics. Unfortunately, my strength is in the electronics and not mechanical. Someone with a lathe and some delrin can probably whip one out. While I like the M6-R idea, it's a limited run and you can't get buy it. I don't think it's cheap either. The two 18650's is simpler in execution and takes advantage of the wide availability of 2.4AH 18650's and the myriads of chargers out there. While not regulated, the flat discharge of the Li-Ions make it a viable solution.
wquiles
Flashaholic
CM,
The way I understood it, the MN21 (and I guess the MN20???) is a 6.8 volt lamp. Would the two 18650 in series power the MN20 withouth flashing the bulb, or would it only work for the higher-current MN21?
Will
The way I understood it, the MN21 (and I guess the MN20???) is a 6.8 volt lamp. Would the two 18650 in series power the MN20 withouth flashing the bulb, or would it only work for the higher-current MN21?
Will
js
Flashlight Enthusiast
Will,
The two 18650's will power either the MN21 or the MN20. At least the LG Chem 2400's will. Pilas won't, as the 5 amp draw is really too much for them. It is almost too much for the LG 18650's, which are unprotected.
But, as I've said before, if you want to go this route, just get an M4 and bore it out slightly to accept 18 mm cells, and use the MN21 LA. The M4 has the same turbo head as the M6, so it will take the M6 LA's just fine.
Two 18650's in an M6 body is a waste of space. Better to use three Pilas in a holder, like Kiu did, and run a higher voltage lamp, like the M4 or 12PM/ZM lamps. Longer runtime.
LEDcandle,
It wouldn't have taken him 4 minutes to type that reply, would it? Besides I like my post! It was fun to write. hehe.
The two 18650's will power either the MN21 or the MN20. At least the LG Chem 2400's will. Pilas won't, as the 5 amp draw is really too much for them. It is almost too much for the LG 18650's, which are unprotected.
But, as I've said before, if you want to go this route, just get an M4 and bore it out slightly to accept 18 mm cells, and use the MN21 LA. The M4 has the same turbo head as the M6, so it will take the M6 LA's just fine.
Two 18650's in an M6 body is a waste of space. Better to use three Pilas in a holder, like Kiu did, and run a higher voltage lamp, like the M4 or 12PM/ZM lamps. Longer runtime.
LEDcandle,
It wouldn't have taken him 4 minutes to type that reply, would it? Besides I like my post! It was fun to write. hehe.
Space isn't the issue here. The question is "does it work, and does it do it as good as 6x123's". IMO, it does and does it better (longer). And you don't have to get a different lamp assembly. Just use the stock lamps. No need to try to remember "Hmmm did I put a 12V lamp in there or a 9V lamp. The key is compatibility. 18650's are readily available in high capacities while 17670s are not as prevalent and so does not undergo the same capacity increases as the 18650's do. You'll get less runtime with the 3 cell configuration, plus you gotta keep track of lamps or you'll potentially blow one up if you're not careful and you mix and match.
wquiles
Flashaholic
CM said:
CM,
Not as a challenge to you, but so that I learn/understand, but why would the 3x17670 cells have less runtime on an MN60 (LOLA) than the 2x18650 cells on an MN20 (LOLA)?
Will
wquiles said:
wquiles, you're right, I stand corrected. Runtime will be the same BUT the output is double. I'm getting my runtime/output mixed up. If you are willing to accept the same output level from the MN60 on the M6, you can drop in the MN10 lamp assembly (made for the M3) into the M6 and double your runtime. I think this is another great option on the M6. The beam tightens up nicely as well with the MN10 in the M6 head. I am not in favor of the "donkey's ****" form factor of the M4. It's too long and out of proportion. The M6 is a nice balance in the hand.
CLHC
Flashaholic
CM said:
I have to agree with you on that regarding the SF.M4—Hmmm. . .Will have to try that configuration/setup for the SF.M6 you mentioned. Thanks!
wquiles
Flashaholic
Same here. I have owned the M4 and now have the M6, and I preffer the M6 much better.CHC said:
Will
MSaxatilus
Flashlight Enthusiast
What are you guys using as a holder for 2x18560s in the M6?
NikolaTesla
Flashlight Enthusiast
Has anyone ever done that? Bored it out? Sounds like a neat idea. Anything to keep from burning up primaries..
js said:
I've bored out two cell Surefire bodies. It's time consuming with a Dremel (about an hour), someone with access to a lathe can probably do it much quicker. I run Pila 3.7V lamps in my M2 and C2 using 2AH Panasonic cells.
Lunarmodule
Enlightened
Thought I'd throw in my two pesos here.
I believe JS's M6-R pack is a very well engineered and built rechargeable power solution for the M6. Its elegant in its design, the genius is the integration of the regulation. Not just stock output with rechargeability, but constant light during the run. My sincere compliments to him for his exceptional achievement. He suggested the idea of boring out an M4 body to run the MN21 and MN20 lamps on a different platform, with 2x 18650s. Great idea. I posted a want ad thread in Machining for having the bore done and haven't gotten a response yet. I wanted to pursue that idea, but it will have to wait.
In the meantime, while others are pondering the issue, I decided to do a little experimenting. My target was to approximate the M6's performance with the MN20 and MN21 with a rechargeable solution that wouldnt require any extensive fabrication or irreversible modification. As many know you cant just jam a bunch of R123s in the stock holder (although that allows the use of the M4 bulbs, havent tried that yet...) because of its tricky three-in-series two-in-parallel double stack of CR123s. Wind up with way too much voltage and the 3.0V rechargeable cells have insufficient capacity to directly substitute the primaries.
I looked up the Kiu thread and brainstormed a bit. I hated the idea of wasted space inside the generous battery chamber but I loved the idea of 18650s, a pair in series. Nice, but... then it hit me. A very simple solution. That worked a LOT better than I ever imagined. I took a Fivemega 3-in-parallel battery holder designed to fit 17670 cells (Pila 168 S) and stacked two 800mah R123s in each of the three spaces, creating a 7.4V nominal 2.4Ah battery pack. I applied electrical tape to the positive end leaving only the central protruding "nub" exposed to mate with the MN21 spring. Almost home. Just a bit too short. Since the Fivemega holders are designed to mate together in series, I used the 1/2" thick top brass component of a second FM holder attached to the negative end of the holder and redundantly used a bit of electrical tape to secure it in place to act as a spacer. This fills the leftover space with a nice low resistance connection and provides a nice mating surface for the stock LOTC switch. Checked the connections, measured the voltage at 8.2V and into the light it went. My theory was that the three-in-parallel of lower individual capacity rechargeable cells (800 vs. 1300mah) would at least match the two-in-parallel setup of stock primary CR123s. Plus the triple parallel would distribute the huge 4.9A load more evenly amongst the cells, reducing waste heat and cell stress. Factor in the lower internal resistance of the R123s and it looked promising on paper....
I had one real concern. Well, two. One was instaflashing the bulb, a VERY expensive mistake ($30/sec). The other was the load on the cells. 4.9A is right on the edge of the 2C upper safe limit for LiIon cells. I had no experience taxing cells that hard before, especially driving a >3A load in a light. I put it together, said a quiet prayer, and hit the switch....
BRIGHTER than stock. Shocking! WHITER too, more intense, greater sear factor. A "Holy Cow" moment! Then I waited to see if it dimmed quickly as I feared it might (within a minute runtime even). Nope. Within 30 seconds it settled in to a constant brightness, like running a Mag85 on quality NiMH cells.
This was certainly a sweet spot. I shut the light down at three minutes to check the cell temps and make sure all was well. It was. There was only a trace of warmth to the cell bodies, whereas the stock primaries got very warm to the touch in the same time frame. A minor Eureka moment. It seemed in real world testing that somehow even though the load was high the new 800mah R123 cells dealt with it rather easily. I then ran the light intermittently for about 15 minutes, observing a dimming similar to stock characteristics but occurring later on during its pack charge cycle.
I was very pleased. While by no means a permanent or care-free solution (that incurs a safety concern - careful use/handling implied), it exceeded my intended goals by surpassing stock M6 performance in both quality and quantity of light delivered over time. I measured 5.10 amps at startup, diminishing to 4.95 within 45 seconds and gradually declining to 4.85 at 5 minutes. I did not test beyond 5 minutes continuous. I figured this solution was best applied to intermittent use of the light, avoiding long (>10 min) runs. The current draws seem to indicate that I hit the target of reproducing the primaries performance of 4.8A @ 6.2V. Exceeded it even. Obviously I'm overdriving the MN21 a tad and dont know how much bulb longevity will be adversely affected, BUT the quality and whiteness of the light makes it worth the cost. It really is a beautiful beam. Only a flashaholic can relate properly.
So there it is. A simple (slightly edgy) no-surgery-required DIY rechargeable M6. Best of all, absolutely NO modification to the light whatsoever, utterly reversible and compatible with the stock holder's use with primary CR123s. Not bad for having some cake and eating it too.
My thanks and credits go to JS and AWR for the inspiration to attempt it and I defer to their superior knowledge on this topic. Project M6: Almost-Guilt-Free-Photons is a success for me!
:naughty:
I believe JS's M6-R pack is a very well engineered and built rechargeable power solution for the M6. Its elegant in its design, the genius is the integration of the regulation. Not just stock output with rechargeability, but constant light during the run. My sincere compliments to him for his exceptional achievement. He suggested the idea of boring out an M4 body to run the MN21 and MN20 lamps on a different platform, with 2x 18650s. Great idea. I posted a want ad thread in Machining for having the bore done and haven't gotten a response yet. I wanted to pursue that idea, but it will have to wait.
In the meantime, while others are pondering the issue, I decided to do a little experimenting. My target was to approximate the M6's performance with the MN20 and MN21 with a rechargeable solution that wouldnt require any extensive fabrication or irreversible modification. As many know you cant just jam a bunch of R123s in the stock holder (although that allows the use of the M4 bulbs, havent tried that yet...) because of its tricky three-in-series two-in-parallel double stack of CR123s. Wind up with way too much voltage and the 3.0V rechargeable cells have insufficient capacity to directly substitute the primaries.
I looked up the Kiu thread and brainstormed a bit. I hated the idea of wasted space inside the generous battery chamber but I loved the idea of 18650s, a pair in series. Nice, but... then it hit me. A very simple solution. That worked a LOT better than I ever imagined. I took a Fivemega 3-in-parallel battery holder designed to fit 17670 cells (Pila 168 S) and stacked two 800mah R123s in each of the three spaces, creating a 7.4V nominal 2.4Ah battery pack. I applied electrical tape to the positive end leaving only the central protruding "nub" exposed to mate with the MN21 spring. Almost home. Just a bit too short. Since the Fivemega holders are designed to mate together in series, I used the 1/2" thick top brass component of a second FM holder attached to the negative end of the holder and redundantly used a bit of electrical tape to secure it in place to act as a spacer. This fills the leftover space with a nice low resistance connection and provides a nice mating surface for the stock LOTC switch. Checked the connections, measured the voltage at 8.2V and into the light it went. My theory was that the three-in-parallel of lower individual capacity rechargeable cells (800 vs. 1300mah) would at least match the two-in-parallel setup of stock primary CR123s. Plus the triple parallel would distribute the huge 4.9A load more evenly amongst the cells, reducing waste heat and cell stress. Factor in the lower internal resistance of the R123s and it looked promising on paper....
I had one real concern. Well, two. One was instaflashing the bulb, a VERY expensive mistake ($30/sec). The other was the load on the cells. 4.9A is right on the edge of the 2C upper safe limit for LiIon cells. I had no experience taxing cells that hard before, especially driving a >3A load in a light. I put it together, said a quiet prayer, and hit the switch....
BRIGHTER than stock. Shocking! WHITER too, more intense, greater sear factor. A "Holy Cow" moment! Then I waited to see if it dimmed quickly as I feared it might (within a minute runtime even). Nope. Within 30 seconds it settled in to a constant brightness, like running a Mag85 on quality NiMH cells.
This was certainly a sweet spot. I shut the light down at three minutes to check the cell temps and make sure all was well. It was. There was only a trace of warmth to the cell bodies, whereas the stock primaries got very warm to the touch in the same time frame. A minor Eureka moment. It seemed in real world testing that somehow even though the load was high the new 800mah R123 cells dealt with it rather easily. I then ran the light intermittently for about 15 minutes, observing a dimming similar to stock characteristics but occurring later on during its pack charge cycle.
I was very pleased. While by no means a permanent or care-free solution (that incurs a safety concern - careful use/handling implied), it exceeded my intended goals by surpassing stock M6 performance in both quality and quantity of light delivered over time. I measured 5.10 amps at startup, diminishing to 4.95 within 45 seconds and gradually declining to 4.85 at 5 minutes. I did not test beyond 5 minutes continuous. I figured this solution was best applied to intermittent use of the light, avoiding long (>10 min) runs. The current draws seem to indicate that I hit the target of reproducing the primaries performance of 4.8A @ 6.2V. Exceeded it even. Obviously I'm overdriving the MN21 a tad and dont know how much bulb longevity will be adversely affected, BUT the quality and whiteness of the light makes it worth the cost. It really is a beautiful beam. Only a flashaholic can relate properly.
So there it is. A simple (slightly edgy) no-surgery-required DIY rechargeable M6. Best of all, absolutely NO modification to the light whatsoever, utterly reversible and compatible with the stock holder's use with primary CR123s. Not bad for having some cake and eating it too.
My thanks and credits go to JS and AWR for the inspiration to attempt it and I defer to their superior knowledge on this topic. Project M6: Almost-Guilt-Free-Photons is a success for me!
:naughty:
- Status
Similar threads
