The P7 is Dead???

I don't know if this already came up, but it was a surprise to me. I went to download the P7 data sheet the other day and found it on their discontinued products page. Under the Z-Power LED tab was a notation for W724C0 that said, "Last order date - 20 Mar 12 and Discontinuation date - 20 Jun 12". So in a little over 2 weeks, RIP P7. So sad.

OK, if I wanted a light in that power range I wouldn't have to think about choosing between the P7 and the XM-L. But I still remember my first P7 Mag 'Super' light, donut and all. It seems tame now by comparison to my SST-90. But at the time I kept pointing it at a nearby wall because I couldn't believe it was that bright. Was that 4 years ago now?

It's replacement the Z7, is really just a ceramic version of the MC-E. Why bother?:thumbsdow At least the thermal pad is electrically isolated. Thermal resistance has dropped from 3.0 °C/W to 2.5 °K/W. The MC-E is also 3.0 °C/W so the Z7 is slightly lower than that. It has the same footprint as an MC-E. But if you wanted an MC-E, why not just buy that? It seems like they invested a lot of money in yesterday's technology.

Al Combs said:

I don't know if this already came up, but it was a surprise to me. I went to download the P7 data sheet the other day and found it on their discontinued products page. Under the Z-Power LED tab was a notation for W724C0 that said, "Last order date - 20 Mar 12 and Discontinuation date - 20 Jun 12". So in a little over 2 weeks, RIP P7. So sad.

OK, if I wanted a light in that power range I wouldn't have to think about choosing between the P7 and the XM-L. But I still remember my first P7 Mag 'Super' light, donut and all. It seems tame now by comparison to my SST-90. But at the time I kept pointing it at a nearby wall because I couldn't believe it was that bright. Was that 4 years ago now?

It's replacement the Z7, is really just a ceramic version of the MC-E. Why bother?:thumbsdow At least the thermal pad is electrically isolated. Thermal resistance has dropped from 3.0 °C/W to 2.5 °K/W. The MC-E is also 3.0 °C/W so the Z7 is slightly lower than that. It has the same footprint as an MC-E. But if you wanted an MC-E, why not just buy that? It seems like they invested a lot of money in yesterday's technology.

Click to expand...

I do feel bad about this. The P7 is no longer state of the art compared to newer LED's, but it certainly has been one of the easiest LED's to use in my own experience. Now-a-days the better LED's are SMT (surface mount), so you either need small PWB's, or you learn how to use/mount surface mount parts on your own (not that is hard, but definitely a LOT more time consuming than the "old" P7!).

Will

I was hoping they would upgrade the P7 by using an XML die instead of the 4 XRE dies. But I guess its too expensive to manufacture. Plus their major clients probably prefer the SMT LEDs which lends itself better to automation.

LEDninja said:

I was hoping they would upgrade the P7 by using an XML die instead of the 4 XRE dies. But I guess its too expensive to manufacture. Plus their major clients probably prefer the SMT LEDs which lends itself better to automation.

Click to expand...

The P7 is SMT Its leaded, but still surfacemount. The small new LEDs (XM-L, XP-G, etc) are definitely harder to use bare on post style heat sinks like you can the p7, SST50/90, etc. They definitely needed to lose the thermal slug being connected to the anode though.

The round shape of the LED probably makes it harder for a robot to put the P7 on a board aligned properly every time.

well, that's the cue to stock up if you favor the P7
btw, this guy is still selling CSWNI bin P7s for $12 each
http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?218293-WTS-Lots-of-cheap-leds

LEDninja said:

The round shape of the LED probably makes it harder for a robot to put the P7 on a board aligned properly every time.

Click to expand...

Nope, no more than any other LED, they all need relatively special suction tips for a pick and place machine sinec you have to be careful when lifting by the dome, and the leads still need to be oriented properly, and they arent so fine pitched that the vision system would have to inspect each part. However, smaller LEDs have less packaging which makes it cheaper to make.

And Z7 package has leads on both sides, so a little scraping with a razor blade, and you can glue it down to a heatsink and solder leads on top, easier for hobbyist use, and having a ceramic base and an isolated thermal pad means we can solder it right to a chunk of copper. Much friendly to use imo than the P7 having an anode connected base

I had some fun times doing MAG mods with P7's back in the day. Easy to work with and put out quite a bit of light. Although its sad, look on the "bright" side.

The new XB-D is out and does 180L/W @ 25C at very low currents. Amazing!

CKOD said:

Nope, no more than any other LED, they all need relatively special suction tips for a pick and place machine sinec you have to be careful when lifting by the dome, and the leads still need to be oriented properly, and they arent so fine pitched that the vision system would have to inspect each part. However, smaller LEDs have less packaging which makes it cheaper to make.

And Z7 package has leads on both sides, so a little scraping with a razor blade, and you can glue it down to a heatsink and solder leads on top, easier for hobbyist use, and having a ceramic base and an isolated thermal pad means we can solder it right to a chunk of copper. Much friendly to use imo than the P7 having an anode connected base

Click to expand...

I looked at the 'zoom' image of the Z7 on SSC's page and you can see the electrical vias on the solder pads. A small carbide burr in the Dremel should make reflowing on a copper plate possible. The dome on the Z7 is only 5.5mm in diameter, 0.86mm smaller than the MC-E. There was no spec in the pdf for the P7 on dome diameter. I had one lying around that measured 9.12mm diameter. The Z7 should give a much tighter beam than the P7. But with a proportionally same sized donut as its older brother. The P7 listed lumen output @ 1400mA and relative luminous flux at 2.8 amps to be 1.75. The luminous intensity bin of the P7 was always at full power. The top flux bin of the Z7 is A1 with a range of 440~490 lumens @ 1,400mA. The 2.8 amp relative output is now only 1.6 now, so 704~784 lumens. I think the two LED's are the same, but with a re-estimated luminous flux like Luminus did with the SST-90. Apparently SSC doesn't want any direct comparison between the Z7 and the P7.

jasonck08 said:

I had some fun times doing MAG mods with P7's back in the day. Easy to work with and put out quite a bit of light. Although its sad, look on the "bright" side.

The new XB-D is out and does 180L/W @ 25C at very low currents. Amazing!

Click to expand...

Speaking of things that make me want to cry, the XB-D has the phosphor embedded in the encapsulant instead of layered directly on the LED die. It allows the LED to shed more of the heat without cooking itself and makes it more efficient. It's good for making light bulbs and apparently a sign of things to come, but not so good for flashlights. It makes the apparent diameter of the light source much larger which will reduce the lux or throw of the light. There is a good example of this on the Lux-RC beamshots page. If you click on 3UP XP-G R5 1 amp and 3UP XP-E HEW R5 1 amp from the Narrow Clear 10507 column, it will toggle the two beamshots as a comparison. They are both R5 bins and have roughly the same intensity. But the XP-E HEW has a much larger hotspot than the XP-G, even though it has the smaller die.:shakehead