XP-G?

Anyone have any idea when the Cree XP-G will be available? I'd really like a Quark, or another D10; but if the XP-G is around the corner, it may be best to wait.

Deegle said:

Anyone have any idea when the Cree XP-G will be available? I'd really like a Quark, or another D10; but if the XP-G is around the corner, it may be best to wait.

Click to expand...

Maybe the XP-G head will be available to fit already existing Quark bodies...if possible.

We do know in a month or so a 500 lumen 47`s light will be out.

yeah i've been waiting for them as well!
ive held back on getting any of the similar output/efficiency lights that have come out this year (somehow).

I understand samples were handed out to lighting professionals a month or so ago. I'd guess we may see something late this year or more likely next year.

Hopefully this LED is free of any issues and is priced reasonably. It makes my XR-E P4 based lights seem obsolete. I stopped buying lights for now except for the that Maratac AAA thing that came along.

I'd still consider a good light with a Q5 or R2 bin though.

I'm holding off major light purchases until the XP-G starts being implemented. It probably won't be used until November or next year.




I believe this thread belongs in the Beyond Flashlights section.

Deegle said:

Anyone have any idea when the Cree XP-G will be available? I'd really like a Quark, or another D10; but if the XP-G is around the corner, it may be best to wait.

Click to expand...

In what way(s) is the XP-G so much better?

~135lm@350mA and 347lm@1A in XP-E package. More floody beam but huge amount of light.

phantom23 said:

~135lm@350mA and 347lm@1A in XP-E package. More floody beam but huge amount of light.

Click to expand...

Sounds great but how hot will it get at 1 A? I find MC-E's kind of useless oh high because they get too hot too fast

Thermal properties should be as good or better than an XP-E given that the increased light output comes from higher efficiency at the same power. They claim drive levels up to 1A (like an XR-E) in the XP-E form factor, though we'll see if they stick to that or spec them for 700mA like the XP-Es.

Efficiency is up to 132lm/watt, and even their high-CRI 92% @ 3500K warm emitters can manage 102lm/watt, which puts them in the Q4 range.

edit: This thread should probably be under Beyond Flashlights -> LED

recDNA said:

I find MC-E's kind of useless oh high because they get too hot too fast

Click to expand...

That depends on what you are using your light for. if you just want to find something in the garage, or need a wall of light for a short period, mc-e works great i think. i would not bring my mc-e or p7 for long trips in the mountains that's for sure.

phantom23 said:

~135lm@350mA and 347lm@1A in XP-E package. More floody beam but huge amount of light.

Click to expand...

So they won't be used for 'throwers'??

DimeRazorback said:

So they won't be used for 'throwers'??

Click to expand...

Judging by the photo I have seen, they should be fine for throwers.

XP-E vs XP-G:


Slightly larger die size (note the four sections), but it's not like it's a P7 footprint.

DimeRazorback said:

So they won't be used for 'throwers'??

Click to expand...

They could just redesign the reflector, make it deeper, whatever. Things will work out. =)

xenonk said:

Thermal properties should be as good or better than an XP-E given that the increased light output comes from higher efficiency at the same power. They claim drive levels up to 1A (like an XR-E) in the XP-E form factor, though we'll see if they stick to that or spec them for 700mA like the XP-Es.

Efficiency is up to 132lm/watt, and even their high-CRI 92% @ 3500K warm emitters can manage 102lm/watt, which puts them in the Q4 range.

edit: This thread should probably be under Beyond Flashlights -> LED

Click to expand...

I believe it would be the Q5. The Q4 was above 100lm/350mA but as far as efficacy it was the Q5 that was around 100lm/watt. The R2 is the one that broke 100lm/w. CRI is also stated as a number and not a %. Don't mind me nitpicking.

xenonk said:

XP-E vs XP-G:
Slightly larger die size (note the four sections), but it's not like it's a P7 footprint.

Click to expand...

That's a cool picture, it looks like the XP-G still uses bond wires. It'd be pretty coorl if they could pull a TFFC move like LumiLEDs and skip bond wires. I'm sure that would drop the vf and boost efficacy to ove 150lm/350mA or watt fast and it would possibly help thermal characteristics. I'm sure LumiLEDs has it patented.

jorn said:

That depends on what you are using your light for. if you just want to find something in the garage, or need a wall of light for a short period, mc-e works great i think. i would not bring my mc-e or p7 for long trips in the mountains that's for sure.

Click to expand...

Agreed...I'm just looking forward to the day we ge that kind of brightness w/o the heat.

HEY - My glasses were found 106 miles from my back yard so we cannot blame my Tk40 for not finding them!

tebore said:

I believe it would be the Q5. The Q4 was above 100lm/350mA but as far as efficacy it was the Q5 that was around 100lm/watt. The R2 is the one that broke 100lm/W. CRI is also stated as a number and not a %. Don't mind me nitpicking.

Click to expand...

Whoops, my bad on the @350mA vs 1W mixup. Their high-CRI warm tint was demonstrated at 102lm/W, which would mean they were R2 bin then.
Don't mind the % on the CRI, I explain the concept to laypeople a lot and that is the only way it seems to get across.