The new XP-G: another big announcement from CREE

Candle Power Flashlight Forum

Help Support CPF:

Toohotruk said:
7777 has solved the centering problem with his design...
Click to expand...
I've got a Quark and am aware of this, but I don't expect that design will extend to other manufacturers. Particularly all the budget brands. I've seen badly-centered XR-Es even with the metal collar they could have used as a guide.

R@ndom said:
Interesting... Can't they alter the dome optic to have a smaller apparent die size?
Click to expand...
This is pretty much what happened when they went from the XR-E package to XP-E.
 
old4570 said:
The 10mm Base is to small , id like to see 14-15-16mm for a larger thermal footprint for transferring heat away from the XP-G ..
.
Click to expand...

I think the same thing

old4570 said:
A 2A mine started @ around 400Lumen but quickly faded down to around the 340 level ...
A larger base/star may help absorb and transfer this heat .
Click to expand...

:mecry:OMG pfffffffff never mind. I will buy some XP-G....maybe at 1.5-1.8 amp....
 
Last edited:
Curt R said:
Optics is the most important feature of a flashlight as everything else is designed around those. As of right now there are no optics designed for the XP-G LED in the commercial market. It will be a trial and experiment to find suitable units. The wrong optics can be a disaster. As an example with a Carclo optic and the XR-E driven at 100 Lumens, the Candela out the front is 1400 and with the XP-E driven at the same 100 Lumens it is 4600. Raw power from the LED is important but finding the correct optic makes or breaks a flashlights usefulness.

In our current Eiger AAA flashlight that uses a Rebel 0100, the switch to the XP-G should not be a problem. The output would more than likely increase by about 30% from the #8 power level Eiger of 100 Lumens and 500 Candela to 130 Lumens and 700 Candela using the XP-G and a 10440 Lithium-Ion battery. (The original Arc LS was 25-30 Lumens at 350 Candela). In the larger lights that were to use the K2 at 1.5 amps drive current the XP-G should give the same output with 50% less battery usage, that means longer run times and less generated heat in terms of watts of energy. Another positive is that we would then be able to stock a smaller number of different LEDs. The results in the end will be a better product for the buyer but a pain in the other end for us designers. (Short time only).


Curt
Click to expand...

This hit the nail right on the head for me. OPTICS baby! The one thing that really gets me excited about the XP package is not having to use the long wonky reflectors that were necessary with the XR's. Imagine this if you will. Novatac/RA build, Smo/Shallow (Khatod/IMS 20?) novatac/ra like reflector/beam, and novatac/ra UI, all with XP-G efficacy... I'm already drooling in my imagination. :drool:
 
RyanA said:
The one thing that really gets me excited about the XP package is not having to use the long wonky reflectors that were necessary with the XR's.
Click to expand...

If you want a good thrower you will still need deep reflectors. The most collimated portion of the beam comes from the very edge of the reflector. The farther away that edge is the more collimated it will be. With the XP-G you will need an even deeper reflector for equal throw as the XR to compensate for the reduction in surface brightness. Of course this assumes one is not terribly overdriving the XP-G.
 
moviles said:
I think the same thing



:mecry:OMG pfffffffff never mind. I will buy some XP-G....maybe at 1.5-1.8 amp....
Click to expand...

Wont help ... My second R5 runs 1.5A to the LED and suffers just the same ..
Only Runs a little better , starts around 380+ and sags to 340 ...

Im just waiting ATM for a 1A driver and a new XP-E pill ...

Overdriving might just be a waste of time ... Or make a great hand warmer .
I just dont have any spare 1A drivers ATM to see how they run limited to 1A .
But it could yield the same result .. 340OTF possibly ...

Just waiting on parts ATM ..
 
One thing I can comment on is the low low vf. Tested a couple that I was shipping out by hooking it up to a cr123a of unknown condition. Plenty bright!
 
saabluster said:
If you want a good thrower you will still need deep reflectors. The most collimated portion of the beam comes from the very edge of the reflector. The farther away that edge is the more collimated it will be. With the XP-G you will need an even deeper reflector for equal throw as the XR to compensate for the reduction in surface brightness. Of course this assumes one is not terribly overdriving the XP-G.
Click to expand...


Isn't the XP-G closer to the viewing angle of the Luxeon III than it is the XR-E?

The Luxeon III in a shallow mag reflector had a fairly tight focus.
 
Hello, this is a day that I discovered this new LED, but I can not find a photo of achievement, or photo beam with different lenses? You have any links to me?
Thank you
 
RyanA said:
This hit the nail right on the head for me. OPTICS baby! The one thing that really gets me excited about the XP package is not having to use the long wonky reflectors that were necessary with the XR's. Imagine this if you will. Novatac/RA build, Smo/Shallow (Khatod/IMS 20?) novatac/ra like reflector/beam, and novatac/ra UI, all with XP-G efficacy... I'm already drooling in my imagination. :drool:
Click to expand...

+1 for optics

hopefully, it wont be too long before the best degree angle is figured out for the XP-G w/ optics.
hmmm, wonder what Gene M. is thinkin'

Bigger question,..how long before the neutral tints are available?
 
Just got in 100 XP-G LEDs and had some circuit boards made for them. I had been concerned about hand soldering them because they are rather small. Some others had mentioned problems soldering with the XP-E LEDs previously and I didn't look forward to the job with much enthusiasm. After solder blobbing the pads I discovered that all I had to do was to place the LED somewhere close to the proper location and apply the iron tip to the heat transfer pad. The solder melted, the LED aligned itself and settled down in the correct location. Even if it was 10 or 20 thousands off center and 10 to 15 degrees off angle it floated into the correct position. The last batch of 24 LEDs took less than 30 seconds each and I didn't even have to lay down the soldering iron once. I normally solder small parts like this with the aid of a 20 power 3D microscope just to be careful and so was able to watch the LED settle in. This is turning out to be a great little LED. Powerful and easy to use.

Curt
 
Last edited:
This is turning out to be a great little LED. Powerful and easy to use.

Curt[/QUOTE]

So what light did you put these in??
 
Curt R said:
After solder blobbing the pads I discovered that all I had to do was to place the LED somewhere close to the proper location and apply the iron tip to the heat transfer pad. The solder melted, the LED aligned itself and settled down in the correct location.
Click to expand...

That's the beauty of these smd-style LEDs! they're way easier to solder than people think. But it does depend on how well the solder pads were laid out.

If you use flux too, you don't have to worry about too much solder, as you can push the LED down some and the solder balls up next to the LED. flick that ball away and the LED will stay there, leave the ball there and the LED will suck the solder back up. But after doing 3 or 4, you get an eye for how much to tin the pads.
 
I'll add that the XP-G seems pretty robust as far as dealing with soldering heat. I soldered an XP-G onto a modified PCB originally designed for the Rebel. I had to doctor a few pads to get the layout correct. First time I had to reheat the XP-G twice to get it into position. Unfortunately, one of the traces was pulled off the board after I connected a wire. I had to desolder the XP-G, and resolder it to another board. Again, I had to reheat it a few times to position it correctly. Honestly, after all this abuse I was fully expecting the XP-G to either not work at all, or if it did to have been damaged in some way. Turns out it tested well within the R5 bin as it was supposed to! After the abuse I put this XP-G through, I would have no worries at all about soldering these to a pcb designed specifically for them.
 
Curt R said:
After solder blobbing the pads I discovered that all I had to do was to place the LED somewhere close to the proper location and apply the iron tip to the heat transfer pad. The solder melted, the LED aligned itself and settled down in the correct location.
Click to expand...
SMT electrical components and chips do the same thing if light enough. You're seeing one of the benefits of surface tension in action. :twothumbs

bshanahan14rulz said:
If you use flux too, you don't have to worry about too much solder
Click to expand...
I wonder if the emitter package can tombstone.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top