Anyone fry their L0D Q4 with a 10440 li-ion yet?

[Khaytsus]

Yep. It's been discussed in various threads. On medium and low, it variates between brighter and less bright as something in the light doesn't like the 10440. Glad 3 out of your 4 are problem free.
But hopefully some people can understand my point, that for such an expensive purchase you shouldn't settle if you get unlucky and have this behavior. Therefore you really should consider going with a light that was designed (and supported) for 10440 in mind in the first place as a key buying factor.

It only happens to me on Low when the battery is fresh. If it's been used a little, it seems to go away.

I just don't use low mode.. Medium is fine, and it's as bright as High on an Alkaline, and if I need it, I set it to High.

If I want lower output, I use the NDI. The L0D high too-high of a low even on alkaline, so it's a floody high output light for me.

 

[Ray Tseng]

It only happens to me on Low when the battery is fresh. If it's been used a little, it seems to go away.

I just don't use low mode.. Medium is fine, and it's as bright as High on an Alkaline, and if I need it, I set it to High.

If I want lower output, I use the NDI. The L0D high too-high of a low even on alkaline, so it's a floody high output light for me.

This was the kind of response that puzzled me why L0D supporters are still so gungho about their light in this combo.
Why would you want to "compromise" and settle for a mode that doesn't work so good, to the point where you recommend using a completely different light; while the liteflux (as an example, if there are other 10440 capable AAA lights those are cool too) is available that does exactly what you want properly.

Guess it really depends what factors are important to each individual as the owner and I'll leave it at that. To me, I see proper 10440 support for all modes as a huge factor (and therefore gap in the L0D).

 

[todo]

I have no idea what these people are talking about. I have 2 q4's and 2 ce models. have used the same lodce with nothing but 10440's for over a year, and all modes work perfect. Although Each mode is ramped up brighter, low is still low enough for my purpose.

None of my 4 lod's have performed anything less than perfect. And I run nothing but 10440's. Single most useful light I own, by far.

 

[WadeF]

Does anyone know what kind of actual voltage the 10440 is supplying when under load? Since it's a small battery, and since the LOD-CE on turbo is drawing a fair amount of current, is the 10440 really holding up at 3.7v or higher, or could it be sagging down to 3.3v, which would be within the limits of the LOD?

 

[GLOCKshooter]

I have a LOD CE that I run on 10440's and it works great. I "fried" one of my 10440's (just stopped taking a charge) but no problem with the light at all.

How does the Q4 version compare with the original? Is it much brighter with the same batteries in each? I have been thinking of getting a Q4, just "because".

 

[tsask]

I have a LOD CE that I run on 10440's and it works great. I "fried" one of my 10440's (just stopped taking a charge) but no problem with the light at all. How does the Q4 version compare with the original? Is it much brighter with the same batteries in each? I have been thinking of getting a Q4, just "because".

I have had excellent service from my L0D CE on 10440s, so I thought about a Q4 upgrade. From what I've seen here it sounds like the Q4 version has some flickering issues with 10440s. I am glad I picked up 2 L0D CE's. I'll wait for a something past a Q5 in my next AAA/10440 Fenix.

 

[Khaytsus]

This was the kind of response that puzzled me why L0D supporters are still so gungho about their light in this combo.
Why would you want to "compromise" and settle for a mode that doesn't work so good, to the point where you recommend using a completely different light; while the liteflux (as an example, if there are other 10440 capable AAA lights those are cool too) is available that does exactly what you want properly.

Guess it really depends what factors are important to each individual as the owner and I'll leave it at that. To me, I see proper 10440 support for all modes as a huge factor (and therefore gap in the L0D).

The L0D's low is way way too high on Alkaline, so I use the L0D for a floody high output light. What part of that did you not get from my first post?

 

[cv3po]

I have had excellent service from my L0D CE on 10440s, so I thought about a Q4 upgrade. From what I've seen here it sounds like the Q4 version has some flickering issues with 10440s. I am glad I picked up 2 L0D CE's. I'll wait for a something past a Q5 in my next AAA/10440 Fenix.

All of the LOD's use the same driver and the Q4 is just a more efficient, higher binned version of the Cree used in the original LOD-CE so it is just as likely (or unlikely by most accounts) to flicker with 10440's. I have never seen this flicker so cannot comment on that but all of my LOD's through the years have done just fine. IMO it is as reliable as the Arc-AAA and alot more versatile with multiple modes (that work every time unlike programmable lights ala LF2), a simple UI and many different battery options. Fenix made a fantastic light in the LOD! :twothumbs

 

[IMSabbel]

Works fine here, but you can hear the driver buzzing on low and medium (if you put the light close to your ear) .

 

[Illum]

Works fine here, but you can hear the driver buzzing on low and medium (if you put the light close to your ear) .

I know of one L0d that sounds like a grasshopper even if its not by ear on low...mine :devil:

 

[HighLight]

Works fine here, but you can hear the driver buzzing on low and medium (if you put the light close to your ear) .

Never heard that before..interesting:thinking:

 

[Jarl]

that's normal for PWM drivers.

 

[TigerhawkT3]

Huge thread on this topic here:

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/161778

 

[Crenshaw]

haha, i love how the thread titles are almost exactly the same...

Crenshaw

 

[IMSabbel]

that's normal for PWM drivers.

Well, its normal if the electronics are not potted, and have the freedom the start vibrating.

Also, it seems to scale with current (well, obviously), as on a NiMh, its nearly impossible to hear.

 

[HighLight]

Well, its normal if the electronics are not potted, and have the freedom the start vibrating.

Also, it seems to scale with current (well, obviously), as on a NiMh, its nearly impossible to hear.

Yes I can hear the buzz and I'm using a nimh cell right now. I should get a bigger buzz when the 10440's arrive and I use them!

 

[LEDninja]

To me this is the definitive pot on Lod/10440. Take a good read and hope Luminescent does not put you to sleep before you are through.
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2243191&postcount=9

 

[Luminescent]

To me this is the definitive pot on Lod/10440. Take a good read and hope Luminescent does not put you to sleep before you are through.
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2243191&postcount=9

Sorry if the post linked above was a little long winded. :thinking:

The short version is that because the Vf of the LED emitters can change from batch to batch, YMMV (Your Milage May Vary) when using 10440's in the L0D.

When the Vf is too high, the light doesn't stay solidly in 'Direct Drive' mode and will flicker badly (this is very stressful for the boost driver, and will often fry the light in short order).

When the Vf is too low, the light will go VERY VERY HARD into 'Direct Drive' and draw so much current that the PWM Mosfet used for power mode switching may fail (even in the lower power modes).

From the statistics I see from other CPF users, it looks like only about 5% of the L0D's will fairly quickly fail (some instantly) when used with 10440's, with perhaps another 5% showing a problem or failure of some sort over time.

This means that, though you have about a 9 out of 10 chance of getting away with it, there is still a very non-trivial risk of frying your light.

It is great that about 9 out of 10 L0D's can take the severe punishment inflicted on them by 10440's (about 5 times the designed power level), because this shows that this little light is very rugged, and should be EXTREMELY reliable when used with standard Alkaline, NiMH, or Energizer L92 (Li/FeS2) 1.5 volt lithium cells.

So, with the L0D, you can have a light that is either fair to middling reliable and EXTREAMLY bright, or fairly bright and EXTREMELY reliable (but I wouldn't count on both). It's your choice.

For me, the deciding point is that I EDC my LOD, and want to make absolutely sure that it will work reliably when needed; so, I stay with standard NiMH batteries.

 

[Khaytsus]

Or, to summarize in another way, if you put 8 pounds of crap into a 5 pound bag, you're sure to get some on your shoe.

I figure if my L0D fries, there will be a better replacement by that time. I think that likely there are three main failure modes:

1. Immediate/Near immediate death.
2. Extended use on Low (stressing PWM)
3. Extended use on high (Heat damage, even possible battery runaway)

Mine has passed 1, I don't use Low mode and Medium doesn't flicker at all for me (Nor High for that matter), and I avoid 3 although I've used mine for 30+ seconds and didn't even notice it getting warm.

 

[HighLight]

Ok my 10440's from AW have arrived and I'm running the L0D on one now....OMG! OMG!:devil::naughty: This thing is bright. I'm going to continue using the 10440 in it for the immediate future. If I experience a failure then I'll post here but for $60.00 bucks or so I'm willing to take the risk given the awesome output. I have to be careful not to over discharge the 10440 though.