Ra Clicky Part 5

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why would anyone want to change the emitter?

I was origanally interested in the Clicky because of the Seoul SSC P4
emitter - have one in another light and think it an excellent beam.

I'm here to learn
 
Why would anyone want to change the emitter?

I was origanally interested in the Clicky because of the Seoul SSC P4
emitter - have one in another light and think it an excellent beam.

I'm here to learn
No one would at this time. However, the ease with which the emitter can be changed at a later point can be a factor when purchasing an expensive light. HDS/Ra lights are virtually indestructible and will basically last forever, but in a year or two LED technology might have moved far enough ahead that an emitter change can be beneficial. For example my old HDS is still going strong and the emitter upgrade I did doubled the output. If this wasn't possible I probably wouldn't use this light as much, which would be a shame given how expensive it was. In short, a light offering an easy upgrade path is a better investment.
 
Why would anyone want to change the emitter?

I was origanally interested in the Clicky because of the Seoul SSC P4
emitter - have one in another light and think it an excellent beam.

I'm here to learn
....and we are here to learn you something! :ohgeez: Keep in mind that even Seoul P4s will improve over time, at the very minimum, in the category of efficiency. My modded U60 uses the first generation Seoul P4. Seoul now has a U2 version of the P4, which gives more light for the same unit of power as the original P4.

As you can see, Henry has offered a Clicky model using an Osram Golden Dragon emitter, something he first introduced in his Twisty lights. It is too soon to tell how Seoul and Osram compare in the efficiency area, since Osrams have not been used in production lights until recently. Osram has been around almost since the dinosaurs, but the Golden Dragon is their first emitter in the form factor used in our EDC lights.

It would make no sense at all, if we just let technology pass us by when we could have the same light in our hand yielding more light output.

Jeff


 
It just proves that flashlight collecting is not all about lights. It is also about the human/flashlight relationship and how it differs between people. People who are so serious about this hobby that they cannot have a jolly good time with others on CPF, are missing out on so much. The same applies to any hobby.
A profound observation that I strongly agree with, thank you. I'd say that the human/flashlight relationship and the celebration of it is at the very core of my private light stories blog that I showed you. That idea of a simple little illumination tool proving to have such tremendous value to so many people in so many different ways is kind of inspiring to me. I love to look back on the good memories of situations where the light I was carrying performed a vital service or helped someone else, or a friend's story of how a light I may have influenced them to carry was there for them when they needed it. To paraphrase a friend of mine, a good edc flashlight is a friend for life.


No one would at this time.
Oh don't be so sure... coughdiscoverEDCcoughcough
 
No one would at this time. However, the ease with which the emitter can be changed at a later point can be a factor when purchasing an expensive light. HDS/Ra lights are virtually indestructible and will basically last forever, but in a year or two LED technology might have moved far enough ahead that an emitter change can be beneficial. For example my old HDS is still going strong and the emitter upgrade I did doubled the output. If this wasn't possible I probably wouldn't use this light as much, which would be a shame given how expensive it was. In short, a light offering an easy upgrade path is a better investment.
Eloquently stated, Sir! :thumbsup:



 
A profound observation that I strongly agree with, thank you. I'd say that the human/flashlight relationship and the celebration of it is at the very core of my private light stories blog that I showed you. That idea of a simple little illumination tool proving to have such tremendous value to so many people in so many different ways is kind of inspiring to me. I love to look back on the good memories of situations where the light I was carrying performed a vital service or helped someone else, or a friend's story of how a light I may have influenced them to carry was there for them when they needed it. To paraphrase a friend of mine, a good edc flashlight is a friend for life.
Truer words have not been uttered! I will take this one step further, with LightHound's website motto....."man's best friend for flashlights....." Gee, even a merchant's business model is to be good to our flashlights, just as "a dog is man's best friend" is to a dog owner. Are you listening, ChocolateLab33? :nana: Where has the gal been hiding?

Jeff


 
Would it be correct to assume that the reflector in a 140CN will be slightly different than in the 140C as the Golden Dragon emitter is smaller? I'd really like to go for a 140CN but I don't want to lose a ton of spill.
 
:thinking: Down the road, would it be as easy to replace an emitter in a Cn as it would be in a C - model?
 
Would it be correct to assume that the reflector in a 140Cn will be slightly different than in the 140C as the Golden Dragon emitter is smaller? I'd really like to go for a 140Cn, but I don't want to lose a ton of spill.
I am trying to figure out how Henry could place different length or different diameter reflectors in the same head? I was under the impression that the lights are identical except for the emitter installed on each heatsink! I think that Henry would have to answer such a question.

A ton of spill is a huge amount. Henry's lights have always been portable utility lights, with the ability to handle any lighting task asked of it. While the Cn will surely offer more throw, it will not reduce the sidespill to an unusable level. It would not make sense to do this.

Jeff


 
Last edited:
It's pretty hard to predict the future. If the next Gen of high efficiency LED's have a differnt form factor or die height it could be very difficult. If its the same LED just a brighter bin it should be no problem in either case.
 
I have been reading posts stating that our 140 lights exhibit very little visual difference between the 140lm burst and the 100lm sustained levels. Although our brains are not wired to perceive light in a linear manner, I have come to the conclusion that 140lm is an appreciable increase in output over 100lm.....under the right conditions. It is true that when one shines a Clicky on a wall and jumps from burst to high, then the 40% increase in output IS NOT perceived as such. But try doing this to prove my point.

Go into as long and as dark a room as you can find with a light colored ceiling, aim your light at the ceiling at one end of the room and keep your focus on the other end. Go from high to burst repetitively, and notice how much more the room is illuminated on burst. Note that both levels are coming out of the same light and that they are bouncing off the same point in the room. This ceiling bounce test is the next best test to compare luminous output levels, without resorting to an integrating sphere. The actual lumen value is not important. How the room is illuminated by different outputs.....IS!

Consider the mathematical difference between 100lm and 140lm. If our brains were wired linearly, then the 40lm increase would perceptually translate into another 40% throw and 40% spill. It is not. But Henry has posted and science has proven, that a 40% increase in output on paper translates to a 19% increase in the perception of throw and spill. That means that if a 100lm output can be seen 100ft. from the light, then a 140lm output can be seen 119ft. from the light. I am going to see for myself, if I can find a dark area in my heavily lit NYC neigborhood. Here is an excerpt from Henry's FAQ. page....."
In general, you need to increase the light output by 40% for most people to easily recognize the increase in light output. That is, you would need to go from 85 lumens to 120 lumens in order to easily notice the difference. This translates into a 19% increase in beam throw."

My plan, although not 100% scientific, is to find a distance that I can measure using my footsteps, a distance at which point I can just barely see the light at 100lm. Then I will go to burst mode and take steps backwards until I can just barely see it. The added steps compared to the distance at 100lm will tell me how much farther a 140lm output can be seen compared to a 100lm output.

I welcome anybody else to do this, since this is an idea that I may not be able to impliment in my neigborhood. If any of you have a laser measuring device, your job would be easier. Try to find a terrain where it is as dark as possible, so that ambient light will not mask your dark adapted eyes, and the results.

Jeff


 
Would it be correct to assume that the reflector in a 140CN will be slightly different than in the 140C as the Golden Dragon emitter is smaller? I'd really like to go for a 140CN but I don't want to lose a ton of spill.
The Narrow and Wide beams are primarily different in the width of their spots. Also, it seems the Wide beams not only have a wider spot but slightly more light put into the spill, but that's just based on what I've heard. The limiting factor on the width of the spill is the angle between the point of light emission and the edge of the bezel, since spill light is, by definition, light that is not being influenced by the reflector. If you ask Henry, he'll tell you the two models have basically the same spill width. My comparisons between my Twisty Tr and 140C have shown that the Wide Clicky has an ever so slightly but insignificantly wider spill than the Narrow Twisty, but I have to line them up on a wall to tell. I think this is because the Osram die is both smaller and a little lower/flatter, creating a more acute angle with the bezel opening. Or maybe it just seems flatter because it doesn't have a dome. I assume the Cn will be the same as the Tr and that I'm seeing a difference between Narrow and Wide, not a difference between Twisty and Clicky.

85Tr vs 140Cgt
I think this shot actually overemphasizes the spill difference. Not sure they're perfectly aligned but they're at least basically same distance from wall.


:thinking: Down the road, would it be as easy to replace an emitter in a Cn as it would be in a C - model?
No, I don't think so. I haven't opened them up to have a look yet, but I think I've been told that the two models are put together a bit differently. And you can see from close macros that the two emitters are physically very different. I'm not entirely certain of how big the differences are though, I'm kind of speculating.
 
I finally got around to taking Henry's little family of lights for a spin in my "poorman's lightbox" the results are as follows:

Twisty 120TW maximum 2220 lux

Clicky 140C burst 2700 lux, maximum 1950 lux

Proto 140C burst 2750 lux, maximum 2010 lux

HDS U60 (Seoul) maximum 2400 lux

RC
 
Would it be correct to assume that the reflector in a 140CN will be slightly different than in the 140C as the Golden Dragon emitter is smaller? I'd really like to go for a 140CN but I don't want to lose a ton of spill.

I don't think it necessarily should... The whole point of the Golden Dragon emitter is to get a tighter beam. The reason it is tighter is, in part, because the emitter area is smaller.
 
Orcinus,

Actually, there should be some runtime consequences, depending on the Vf of the emitter vs. battery voltage, because the efficiency of the driver will change depending on the Vout vs. Vin.

Actually not. Since the power fed to the emitter is the same regardless, if you swap emitters, the power to the new LED is still the same. Since the output power remains essentially constant, the input power remains essentially constant under similar conditions of input voltage - i.e., state of charge of the battery. Again, the standard proviso applies: all other factors being equal.

LuxLover,

Lower Vf is not a guarantee of higher efficiency. In fact, I can easily show you examples where the lower Vf is way less efficient. The only thing that counts is power in and light out.

Now that is not to say that some LED drivers require lower Vf in order to work or that because of poor regulation characteristics they require lower Vf for maximum output.

The only time a lower Vf translates into higher efficiency is when it translates into lower input power for the same light out.

H2OFlyer,

People are discussing a future LED swap - future being a year or two or three down the road when LED efficiencies have improved. LED efficiencies have been increasing around 20 to 25% each year for the past many decades and there is no reason to assume this will not continue to happen for at least the next 5 years. Therefore, in two more years there will be LEDs that are likely to be 40 to 50% higher output for the same input power. That is when it might make sense to swap emitters.

MatrixShaman,

You will not loose any spill by choosing the Cn over the C model.

GotTaWearShades,

That is difficult to know. My guess is that they will be equally easy/difficult to mod. It all depends on what LEDs are available at that time.

Henry.
 
Thanks SaturnNyne and thanks Henry for your help on the C/Cn differnces. Does anyone have info on availability at this time of the C and Cn models? Will there likely be some available in the next week or two?
 
I know I have mentioned this before but, now people have there lights.
Has anyone found away to attach a lanyard?
The price of this light means I don't wanna lose it, LOL.
I mentioned a circlip before but that will maybe affect water ingress and I know you can tie a lanyard round the narrow middle bit, but that doesn't look that great.
Someone said that when the clip arrives you can attach to that, does that mean it will have a hole in it?
Like I said there must be away as I Dont want to lose it when I get it!
Kam.
 
HDS_Systems said:
LuxLover,
Lower Vf is not a guarantee of higher efficiency. In fact, I can easily show you examples where the lower Vf is way less efficient. The only thing that counts is power in and light out.

Now that is not to say that some LED drivers require lower Vf in order to work or that because of poor regulation characteristics they require lower Vf for maximum output.

The only time a lower Vf translates into higher efficiency is when it translates into lower input power for the same light out.
Henry,
Thank you for the rude awakening about input/output power readings and their effect on light output. I have to brush up on my science, as it seems that I have become rusty, dusty and musty! :sigh:

Jeff


 
Orcinus,



Actually not. Since the power fed to the emitter is the same regardless, if you swap emitters, the power to the new LED is still the same. Since the output power remains essentially constant, the input power remains essentially constant under similar conditions of input voltage - i.e., state of charge of the battery. Again, the standard proviso applies: all other factors being equal.

Yes, i got that... What i'm saying is, the efficiency of a typical DC-DC converter changes depending on the difference in voltage between Vin and Vout. If you change Vf of the emitter, the Vout will change, resulting in a slightly higher or lower efficiency (depending on whether it's now closer to the battery voltage or farther away).

The output power, i.e. voltage x current, will remain the same, but the input power (current draw) will change. Slightly.

At least that's the theory...
 
A random comment.
Henry has done as much as humanly possible to center the emitter in the Twisty and Clicky. Take a look at the pocket that sits on top of the heatsink. I will note that the emitter is dang near press-fit into the pocket, there is NO play or slop.

Pics007a.jpg


I took a perfectly good 140C and replaced the emitter because I wanted a higher color rendering index (CRI) factor. This would not be something 99.9% of the CPF would do because of the loss of total output and the very nearly incan color temperature of the currently available emitter.

I am happy with my choice and when higher output, high CRI emitters come out one of those will find a new home. Thanks to Henry for producing a fanstastic light.

Regards,
Walt
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top