[REQ] Beamshot KL4 MC-E vs stock
- Thread starter sp5it
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
mudman cj
Flashlight Enthusiast
There can be artifacts depending upon how the mod is done.
In my experience, artifacts are minimized by mounting the MC-E on a spacer about 0.065" to 0.070" thick and removing enough material from the back of the reflector to allow for the LED to move further up into it. The depth of the pocket in the back of the KL4 reflector is 0.106" and the MC-E thickness is 0.052", so the amount of material that needs to be milled away to deepen the pocket = 0.052" + spacer thickness + a few thousandths extra clearance - 0.106".
I have modded about 10 KL4 heads this way with excellent results. I love the one I use daily, especially with the McE2s switch that adds a low mode. :thumbsup:
In my experience, artifacts are minimized by mounting the MC-E on a spacer about 0.065" to 0.070" thick and removing enough material from the back of the reflector to allow for the LED to move further up into it. The depth of the pocket in the back of the KL4 reflector is 0.106" and the MC-E thickness is 0.052", so the amount of material that needs to be milled away to deepen the pocket = 0.052" + spacer thickness + a few thousandths extra clearance - 0.106".
I have modded about 10 KL4 heads this way with excellent results. I love the one I use daily, especially with the McE2s switch that adds a low mode. :thumbsup:
Illum
Flashaholic
My KL4-MCE was modded by AaronM using a Cool White M bin
Control Parameters
new CR123As in each
Slight green wall, 6 feet offset
Control Shot
MC-E above, regular KL4[Lux] below
MC-E above, E2L-high below
L4 is creamy white tint
E2L is also a creamy white tint, which was quite hard to find as most are neutral white
I think the difference is pretty obvious
Control Parameters
new CR123As in each
Slight green wall, 6 feet offset
Control Shot
MC-E above, regular KL4[Lux] below
MC-E above, E2L-high below
L4 is creamy white tint
E2L is also a creamy white tint, which was quite hard to find as most are neutral white
I think the difference is pretty obvious
Justin Case
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2008
- Messages
- 3,797
In terms of beam quality, my results seem similar to the MC-E beam shots above by Illum. The MC-E hot spot has a barely detectable quad die shadow. Not really a cross, but more like four small, slightly darker lobes. However, you can't see this artifact except on a blank wall.
Illum
Flashaholic
AaronM said it was a trade off, with stock reflectors you'll have artifacts in the middle, which is eliminated using the Ledlil Boomarang faceted reflectors designed for the MCE, at a slight cost to throw.
Considering that the KL4 was designed for closeup use, I should've gone for the boomarang reflectors instead
AaronM
Enlightened
A few months ago I got a HF mini mill to help add a bit of precision to these mods.
Getting the emitter pocket depth (and the heatsink spacer height) just right is the key to a low artifact beam.
You MUST make the emitter pocket behind the reflector deeper in order to get proper focus.
And I now acid etch the emitter domes for reaaalllly smooth beams! =o]
Getting the emitter pocket depth (and the heatsink spacer height) just right is the key to a low artifact beam.
You MUST make the emitter pocket behind the reflector deeper in order to get proper focus.
And I now acid etch the emitter domes for reaaalllly smooth beams! =o]
Justin Case
Flashlight Enthusiast
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2008
- Messages
- 3,797
It's not a must to mill the emitter pocket. I've gotten good results without doing that, comparable to the beam shown by Illum above. But of course, it may not be at the exact "optimum" focus. But from my experience focusing SF TH towers and KL4s for an MC-E, I would say that the "optimum" focus height covers a range over which there is little difference in beam quality.
Referencing the datasheet for the MC-E, the MC-E case height is 1.45mm (+/-0.1mm). In fact, I measured my MC-E case at exactly 1.45mm. I also measured my Lux V case height (bottom of slug to top of black plastic case) at 2.57mm. That means you need to raise the MC-E up by 1.12mm so that the top of the MC-E case is at the same height as the Lux V case is when mounted in the KL4.
In addition, the Lux V datasheet specifies a "float" height of 0.49mm for the die above the top of the case. Thus, you need to get the MC-E die up higher by 0.49mm.
Next, we note that the emitter pocket is 0.106" (2.69mm) deep. Thus, if you shim up the MC-E by 1.12mm, it appears that there is still about 0.12mm of free space before the MC-E case hits the bottom of the emitter pocket. That means you can actually shim up the MC-E by about 1.24mm max before you run out of space in the emitter pocket. This leaves the MC-E die about 0.37mm lower than the Lux V die.
To gain this last 0.37mm, you can shim up the MC-E by 1.24mm+0.37mm = 1.61mm (~0.063") and mill the emitter pocket deeper by 0.37mm (~0.015"), give or take any tolerances you might want to apply.
mudman suggests above to use an MC-E spacer height of 0.065" to 0.070" thick, which seems to be in reasonable agreement with my estimate. mudman also recommends milling out the emitter pocket by MC-E thickness + spacer thickness + a few thousandths extra clearance - emitter pocket depth, which is the same equation I am using.
In this post, AaronM suggest a shim of 1.8mm and milling depth of 0.35mm. This also seems to be in reasonable agreement. The small variations in estimates is probably due to the inherent variability in micrometer measurements made by different people, as well as manufacturing tolerance variations in the KL4 heads and for the LED case dimensions (e.g., MC-E tolerance is +/-0.1mm).
If you don't do any emitter pocket milling, then just shim up the MC-E by the max: 2.69mm - 1.45mm = 1.24mm = 0.049". You'll be short by about 0.37mm from the optimum (on paper) emitter height.
Referencing the datasheet for the MC-E, the MC-E case height is 1.45mm (+/-0.1mm). In fact, I measured my MC-E case at exactly 1.45mm. I also measured my Lux V case height (bottom of slug to top of black plastic case) at 2.57mm. That means you need to raise the MC-E up by 1.12mm so that the top of the MC-E case is at the same height as the Lux V case is when mounted in the KL4.
In addition, the Lux V datasheet specifies a "float" height of 0.49mm for the die above the top of the case. Thus, you need to get the MC-E die up higher by 0.49mm.
Next, we note that the emitter pocket is 0.106" (2.69mm) deep. Thus, if you shim up the MC-E by 1.12mm, it appears that there is still about 0.12mm of free space before the MC-E case hits the bottom of the emitter pocket. That means you can actually shim up the MC-E by about 1.24mm max before you run out of space in the emitter pocket. This leaves the MC-E die about 0.37mm lower than the Lux V die.
To gain this last 0.37mm, you can shim up the MC-E by 1.24mm+0.37mm = 1.61mm (~0.063") and mill the emitter pocket deeper by 0.37mm (~0.015"), give or take any tolerances you might want to apply.
mudman suggests above to use an MC-E spacer height of 0.065" to 0.070" thick, which seems to be in reasonable agreement with my estimate. mudman also recommends milling out the emitter pocket by MC-E thickness + spacer thickness + a few thousandths extra clearance - emitter pocket depth, which is the same equation I am using.
In this post, AaronM suggest a shim of 1.8mm and milling depth of 0.35mm. This also seems to be in reasonable agreement. The small variations in estimates is probably due to the inherent variability in micrometer measurements made by different people, as well as manufacturing tolerance variations in the KL4 heads and for the LED case dimensions (e.g., MC-E tolerance is +/-0.1mm).
If you don't do any emitter pocket milling, then just shim up the MC-E by the max: 2.69mm - 1.45mm = 1.24mm = 0.049". You'll be short by about 0.37mm from the optimum (on paper) emitter height.
Last edited:
