# Anyone kill their L0D-CE with 10440's yet?



## EsthetiX (Apr 18, 2007)

I leave mine on high all the time and I've been doing this for at least 3 months (probably more) with no issues. I've run it on high till the battery completely drains severla times actually. All this BS about the l0d-ce not being capable of handling 10440's is BS!


----------



## Alin10123 (Apr 18, 2007)

The LOD-CE can handle a 10440. I think it was initially a member here that said when they left it on by mistake, the light head got very hot. But later on during actual use, he tried holding it in his hand with the light on high, it worked fine. In the end he said it was a matter of using the light on high instead of leaving it sitting there on high. His hand acted as a heat sink.


----------



## Face (Apr 18, 2007)

No obvious problems with mine yet on a 10440, although I wouldn't completely drain 10440's, as they're unprotected cells, but that's just me.


----------



## TORCH_BOY (Apr 18, 2007)

No not yet


----------



## Al_Havemann (Apr 18, 2007)

No problems with mine either after maybe a dozen charges on 4 unprotected cells. It gets a little hot on high but that doesn't seem to bother it. Low/Medium are no problem.

I just wish there were cells with more capacity, I mostly use standard lithiums because of the run time on 10440's, and there's no grace period when they die either, you have to switch right now. Great little light.


----------



## Genesis 1:3 (Apr 18, 2007)

How much more light does 10440 put out on L0DCE when compared with alkaline or NiMH battery?


----------



## Nake (Apr 18, 2007)

Genesis 1:3 said:


> How much more light does 10440 put out on L0DCE when compared with alkaline or NiMH battery?


 
Here are some graphs with light output. One of the graphs gives estimated lumens on high and a 10440. On the other graphs divide the vertical number number by 14 for estimated lumens.

http://lights.chevrofreak.com/runtimes/Fenix%20L0D%20CE/


----------



## TECENG (Apr 18, 2007)

I run mine with 10440's, no problems. I don't run it at extended times, but it is pretty darn impressive on high. Like most everyone with this light, I absolutely love it.


----------



## farscape105 (Apr 18, 2007)

No problem with my LOD on 10440's. Why is it that it can handle the current, while light like C-LE has problems of board frying from 14500's? Is the Fenix board just more robust or using better heatsink?


----------



## Verve (Apr 18, 2007)

Since it's advised not to run the 10440's down all the way, can you easily tell when the battery is dimming when using or does it happen very quickly?


----------



## oregon (Apr 18, 2007)

No problems with my LOD CE on 10440. I carry it in a sleeve in my Mission wallet, so it is usually with me, and use it often but not for long each use. Love it. Owning and carrying it are a source of comfort and pride. Thanks members!

oregon


----------



## thehappyman (Apr 18, 2007)

And I just bought an L0D CE along with 3 10440's and the Ultrafire charger. I am only going to use 10440's in this light..... and it will be on high most of the time...... I guess it's just the excessive heat we have to worry about....... If the light craps out I probably wont buy another because it's just not bright enough on a 1.5 volt cell for me.

It's about as bright as the P1D CE on medium, but the beam is wider. Yes, it would be nice to have a higher capacity rechargeable battery.


----------



## luigi (Apr 18, 2007)

No problems with mine so far using only 10440s
I love to use it on low to get a "oh that is a bright small flashlight" comment.
Then switch to max and 
kaboooom!

Luigi


----------



## IsaacHayes (Apr 18, 2007)

I've been using it for about 4 charge cycles. The runtime actually surprises me for the output you get. I keep thinking I need to charge it up but short blasts is what I use it for most and seems to not really suck the battery down a whole lot.


----------



## Flashlike (Apr 18, 2007)

I've heard that the 10440 cells are only available in "unprotected".
Does anyone know of a source for protected 10440's?


----------



## gunga (Apr 18, 2007)

Nope, the 10440 is too small for a protection cct. If we're lucky, maybe AW with come out with a LiFEPO4 10440. That too would be unprotected but safer.

Who knows...


----------



## Lite_me (Apr 18, 2007)

No problems here yet either. My brother runs his on 10440's too. It's just amazing how much light comes out of this little thing. Talk about a wall of light! It lights up my whole back yard, left to right, like no other light I have.


----------



## UnknownVT (Apr 18, 2007)

It's really good to hear that no one has yet experienced any problems running the L0Dce on 10440 3.7V Li-Ion Rechargeable.

However the XLamp XR-E LED pdf Data Sheet posted at Cree.com says the Max current for the Cree XR-E is supposed to be 1000mA -






In Fenix L0D-CE Comparison Review I got measurements of -

Current draw -
10440 Open-Circuit voltage = 4.03V
Medium = 0.38A
Low = 0.17A
High = 1.11A

which means the current drawn on High exceed the maximum rating by about 11% (others have reported similar readings)

This does not necessarily mean the Cree LED in the L0Dce will blow up or suddenly burn up - as the numerous reports of no problems clearly shows.

BUT there is the probability that the LED's life may be shortened with frequent and continuous use of over max current - eg: 10440 on High.

Might want to read Cree's Lumen Maintenance statement 
from their pdf Data Sheet -


----------



## tekka0417 (Apr 18, 2007)

Genesis 1:3 said:


> How much more light does 10440 put out on L0DCE when compared with alkaline or NiMH battery?



Here's a link to a post with pics comparing the LOD-ce and LF2, beamshots comparisons include li-ion.

http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1910249&postcount=186


----------



## Patriot (Apr 18, 2007)

Verve said:


> Since it's advised not to run the 10440's down all the way, can you easily tell when the battery is dimming when using or does it happen very quickly?


 
Verve, both of mine seem to drop pretty dramatically when the battery is done. As soon as my dims substantially I pop in a new 10440 and charge the old one.

10440s are the only thing that I use in the LODCE and I've had zero problems. I've maybe gone through 25-35 full battery cycles with no problems.


----------



## Verve (Apr 18, 2007)

Patriot36 said:


> Verve, both of mine seem to drop pretty dramatically when the battery is done. As soon as my dims substantially I pop in a new 10440 and charge the old one.
> 
> 10440s are the only thing that I use in the LODCE and I've had zero problems. I've maybe gone through 25-35 full battery cycles with no problems.


 
Thanks Patriot36! I ordered a few 10440s and a nano charger from lighthound this morning so I'm excited about this little light all over again!


----------



## shadowbuds (Apr 18, 2007)

I finally got over using a 10440 in my LoD... Now I popped one back in... damn those 10440's are amazing.


----------



## Streamer (Apr 18, 2007)

*Weighing in with a WOW !~*

Well, I had procrastinated gettin' a Nano Charger With the two 10440's (got mine from AW). The package arrived today. Opened it up and checked the voltage of the batteries. 3.86v and 3.90v. So they arrive fully charged! No need to put them on the charger when they arrive. This is definitely a Huge *WOW* factor for the LOD CE. Unbelievable light coming out of this tiny package.


----------



## Fluffster (Apr 18, 2007)

Argh, I can't wait for my 10440's! (From AW, btw). :naughty:


----------



## HarveyRich (Apr 19, 2007)

I must say that all these posts have finally convinced me to carry around my LOD-CE with a 10440, at least for part of the time. It is slightly brighter on medium with a 10440 than on high with NiMH and I feel certain not harmful to the light, and I do like the ability to throw the really high output on for short periods of time. The trade-off, though, is that run times are considerably shorter. So, I'll put a NiMH battery in if I think I might need it for an extended run. My 10440 was depleted (down to a voltage of below 3.0) when I ran it on medium for about 45 or so minutes and on low for 1 hr 35-40 mins on low. Of course, the output on low on li-ion is equivalent to medium on AAAs and on medium it's equivalent (or greater) than on high on AAA.


----------



## 2xTrinity (Apr 19, 2007)

HarveyRich said:


> I must say that all these posts have finally convinced me to carry around my LOD-CE with a 10440, at least for part of the time. It is slightly brighter on medium with a 10440 than on high with NiMH and I feel certain not harmful to the light, and I do like the ability to throw the really high output on for short periods of time. The trade-off, though, is that run times are considerably shorter. So, I'll put a NiMH battery in if I think I might need it for an extended run. My 10440 was depleted (down to a voltage of below 3.0) when I ran it on medium for about 45 or so minutes and on low for 1 hr 35-40 mins on low. Of course, the output on low on li-ion is equivalent to medium on AAAs and on medium it's equivalent (or greater) than on high on AAA.


I actually did a side-by-side test, in one we had a fresh NiMH, in the other, A lithium Primary. The 10440 was much brighter on medium than the Energizer e2 on high, which is itself somewhat brighter than NiMH to begin with.

Considering that one of the 10440 batteries costs a couple dollars from DX, about the same price as a primary Lithium cell, I don't think that's a bad deal at all, as most of the time I run it on medium, so I essentially get higher output there than before, and access to unbelievable output for burst. 



> which means the current drawn on High exceed the maximum rating by about 11% (others have reported similar readings)
> 
> This does not necessarily mean the Cree LED in the L0Dce will blow up or suddenly burn up - as the numerous reports of no problems clearly shows.
> 
> BUT there is the probability that the LED's life may be shortened with frequent and continuous use of over max current - eg: 10440 on High.


This is true, though there are a few mitigating factors. For one, if the cell has been slightly used, current does sag significantly to under 1A quickly, it's only in the first initial "spike" when the cell is fresh that I've measured current that high. The most it could be overdriving for is a couple minutes straight. To play it on the safe side it may be best to only run the light on medium for a while, before switching it onto high, and maybe not to throw a LiIon in fresh off the charger. 

Another issue is heating -- the light will get hot in high, but the temp doesn't get out of hand if you hold the light in the palm of your hand -- your hand then acts like a heatsink.


----------



## Lite_me (Apr 19, 2007)

Some good advice here in the previous post. :thumbsup:


----------



## whizzer (Apr 20, 2007)

I've been lurking for months and just never felt the need to post. This thread put me over the edge. I've had my LOD-CE since the Chinese New Year. I got one because of you Lousy Flashlight Nutjobs on this forum. That, and Flashlightreviews.com. Sheesh, am I hooked.

What a light! And of course, I carry a spare battery in one of my--worn smooth--Mag Solitaires. I use both NIMH's and 10440's. On Li-ion's you feel sorta like you ought to experience some light "recoil" when pulling the trigger. It's such an amazing, bright, light, light. Can't afford an ORB. When I think of how far pocket lights have come, it's absolutely amazing.

Somebody's gonna cook one, sometime, on li-ions. But, Oh well. I cooked a Coast David 19 on a 14500, in about 2 minutes, first try. (Tailcap clickie reads no continuity on DMM--head still works!) I can't count the 10440's I've burned through on my LOD-CE. I like my L1D-CE on NIMH and LI-ION's too, but I don't carry a spare for it, because it's so big compared. 

I have a sign company and often have 2 EDC type lights with me. I use 'em, daily, sometimes in work, sometimes not. One unusual utilization--I occasionally need to look down into poles/tubing from a bucket while a helper is fishing for wires through the conduit opening at the base. On one job, I had my good friend, Mr. LOD breathing on some 10440 in the rarified air, and was able to shine that itsy bitsy sucker down a troublesome open pole from above, so well in fact I could hardly believe it. 

In BRIGHT, BRIGHT sunlight, no less, the tiny light easily lit up the inside of the 20' length of 12" square tubing all the way to the water(!), which I could see way down into the footing. I could easily see the problem, and help my....um.....basically Faithful Sidekick (Muy) Tonto hook the drop chain. (Round Tubing is easy. Square Poles are sometimes a bear.) In the past, I used Mr. Big Bore Hotwire to do this, and the wierd color rendition, not to mention the often a burned bulb at the moment of truth, made it less than satisfactory.

So just hand me my little giant LOD and some 10440, please. Don't care 'bout no shorter lived LED, or having to pitch a batt now and then--or even, gulp, that probable future poof. Fenix hit a homer with this one. 

Prolly never post again, but I couldn't help myself.

My 2 cents.

Stan, in Kansas


----------



## shadowbuds (Apr 20, 2007)

It's really quite amazing how much light the LOD-CE produces w/o a 10440 but with one it just blows you away. Anyone looking for a pocket light should really try this one. I came from using a LOP and this killed it with a 10440. I compair my LOP-CE to my Surefire L4 Digital Lumamax with a ceiling bounce. To be honest, i'm pretty biast towards surefire, the lights they produces are just amazing but the LOP-CE seems brighter than the L4 on high with a 10440 in it and it.

It's amazing how much power we can have in our pockets.​


----------



## Nake (Apr 20, 2007)

whizzer said:


> On Li-ion's you feel sorta like you ought to experience some light "recoil" when pulling the trigger.


 
I get recoil with mine.  Welcome.


----------



## RonM (Apr 20, 2007)

Dang. I've been one of the 10440 naysayers when it comes to the L0D-CE, but all of you are proving me wrong. Guess I'll have to risk running some of those bad boys in my favorite little light. Hope I don't regret it.


----------



## Lite_me (Apr 21, 2007)

Don't think you will. You should be ok. Even though some have, I don't run mine very long on high. If you use the default mode mostly, you'll likely never have a problem. 
The only negative I've found is that sometimes it's too bright for what I'm using it for.


----------



## gunga (Apr 21, 2007)

You guys are a bad influence. I just got my LOD CE, anow I just ordered some 10440s...

Just can't help myself with a thread like this!


----------



## FlashSpyJ (Apr 26, 2007)

Because of this thread I now own a L0D CE with two 10440 batts and a charger! 
Once you tried thoose 10440 battery, you dont wanna go back to nimh or regular AAA! Man is this little thing bright on high! When I bought it (Lighthound) they claimed that you could runt it with 10440! So I will continue to do so! If it breaks one might think the warranty would cover it? Otherwise they shouldnt write it? Anyway, as I said, there´se no turning back now!


----------



## Streamer (Apr 26, 2007)

Heh hehh..for _*it's size*_ and _*coupled with the 10440 battery*_, it's* REALLY* got *THE POWER*. Come on.... in any average sized locale, this thing _*R O C K S *_and beats out _*ALL*_ the competition. 
*just ordered some spare 10440's from DX...*


----------



## Streamer (Apr 26, 2007)

Some of you may have missed the little discussion on the 10440 Nano Charger. Check it out here:

http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=162241


----------



## RonM (Apr 26, 2007)

Have used the L0D for the past few days with a 10440. Amazing what this little lite can put out, but I'm going back to NiMH because I need the lower settings. It's nice to know that I can throw the 10440 in if the occasion should arise.


----------



## HarveyRich (Apr 26, 2007)

> Because of this thread I now own a L0D CE with two 10440 batts and a charger!
> Once you tried thoose 10440 battery, you dont wanna go back to nimh or regular AAA!


Ain't that the truth


> Have used the L0D for the past few days with a 10440


. and


> but I'm going back to NiMH because I need the lower settings.



How retro. Thought I could too, but guess not.


----------



## EsthetiX (Apr 29, 2007)

haha glad to see so many people have been pushed over the edge and are buying both this light and the lithiums for it. Jeez fenix-store, aw, and lighthound should give me a nice commission. hahahahahaha


----------



## 2xTrinity (Apr 29, 2007)

...


> but I'm going back to NiMH because I need the lower settings.


...Dealextreme sells some nice coin cell lights for $0.49 each


----------



## FlashSpyJ (Apr 29, 2007)

Showed my L0D CE with lithiums yesterday to a friend....

all he could say was HOLY CR*P (can I write this?  )
I bought him a E1 a while ago, and he really liked it, he said it produced quite alot of light at night. But I think he was a bit sad when he saw my new light... 

This little bugger really are shiny! I still cant believe it! Before I bought it, I had decided that I wasnt goint to buy it ever! I was a bit dissapointed about the E1. Didnt think this one would be as bright as it is, even with regular batterys!

I am very glad I did buy it, and I am now thinking of buying a second one, and a few more AW 10440 batterys! I see they raised the price on the L0D though...not much, it is still worth every penny! 

Thank you EsthetiX for starting this thread, and to all who have posted and convinced me to buy one! :thumbsup:


----------



## EV_007 (Apr 29, 2007)

Only reason I bought the LOD CE was to run the 10440 in it. It isn't used for long periods of time, but for quick flashes here and there works just fine. 

I picked up the light, battery and charger all from Lighthound.


----------



## gunga (Apr 30, 2007)

I just got my 10440's.

All I can say is WOW. oo: 


Now I can't wait till it gets dark...

 

Maybe it's time to hit DX for some more 10440s...

EDIT: This thing is insane. It's the brightest light I own right now. 

 


And it gets really hot on high, and quite warm on medium. Are you guys sure it's okay to run on high for very long?

:duck:


----------



## Alteran (May 5, 2007)

Getting hot is usually good. However, hurts-your-hand-to-hold hot is not good. Nor is hot good if it the light is running on a configuration that usually runs cool. It is also bad if you happen to know the light has terrible heatsinking. It is even worse if the heat is accompanied by flame, or some other type of combustion/explosion. There you go, now, where does your situation fit in there?


----------



## 2xTrinity (May 5, 2007)

> And it gets really hot on high, and quite warm on medium. Are you guys sure it's okay to run on high for very long


If you run it on high, I would grip the flashlight tightly in the palm of your hand. Your hand will act like a heat sink and the temp of the flashlight won't increase (the heat will dissipate due to the contact with your skin). Medium is only a little bit warmer than running lithium primary on high.


----------



## PurpleDrazi (May 5, 2007)

Where would you guys recommend one get some 10440's and a charger?

Francis


----------



## kavvika (May 5, 2007)

Tthis thread makes me feel all warm and fuzzy about my L0D-CE. Oh, and I paid only $30 for it!:rock: Now I just need to scrape some funds together to buy some lithiums.


----------



## Patriot (May 5, 2007)

PurpleDrazi said:


> Where would you guys recommend one get some 10440's and a charger?
> 
> Francis


 

Here  
http://www.lighthound.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2461


----------



## 2xTrinity (May 5, 2007)

AW Sales Thread. AW is selling a charger, and two 10440s for $15 shipped.


----------



## PurpleDrazi (May 5, 2007)

Patriot36 said:


> Here
> http://www.lighthound.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2461



Thanks!!!!

Francis


----------



## afraidofdark (May 5, 2007)

whizzer said:


> So just hand me my little giant LOD and some 10440, please. Don't care 'bout no shorter lived LED, or having to pitch a batt now and then--or even, gulp, that probable future poof. Fenix hit a homer with this one.
> 
> Prolly never post again, but I couldn't help myself.
> 
> ...



whizzer/Stan, my post count is too low to say welcome to (active) CPF, but I do hope you post again, that was an excellent account.

I lurked for a long time also, stuck some Diamond DB-3Ws in all my 3D M*gs, thought that was okay, contemplated this $150 HAIII geegaw and that $270 Ti madness ... and then the L0D-CE with 10440s came into my life. True bliss. 

Lite_me, your avatar is giving me the creeps, I love it.


----------



## PurpleDrazi (May 5, 2007)

afraidofdark said:


> ... and then the L0D-CE with 10440s came into my life. True bliss.
> 
> Lite_me, your avatar is giving me the creeps, I love it.



Hey afraidofdark . . . were the 10440's you got from lighthound or AW (or somewhere else)? . . . how did you like the light intensity? . . . runtime??

Francis


----------



## Lite_me (May 5, 2007)

afraidofdark said:


> Lite_me, your avatar is giving me the creeps, I love it.


Kinda happy to hear that. :laughing: I was afraid it would be bothersome to some, maybe many. Should I run across a complaint, I'll change it. You're the 2d positive comment I've seen.


----------



## gunga (May 5, 2007)

I think quoted runtimes were around:

EDIT: updated with Chevrofreaks numbers

51 mins medium
1 hour 49 minutes low
10 minutes high (but only used in short increments).

It is so crazy bright now. I love it. Just no low mode...



Note: You'd probably never get the full runtimes anyways. You'd want to charge often because the 10440s are unprotected. Overdischarge will damage them.

AW has fast/good service and good prices. DX is good for extra cells you can wait a month to get.


----------



## liveforphysics (May 5, 2007)

I did thermal images to show you guys that it's safe a long time ago... 

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/153816


----------



## afraidofdark (May 5, 2007)

PurpleDrazi said:


> Hey afraidofdark . . . were the 10440's you got from lighthound or AW (or somewhere else)? . . . how did you like the light intensity? . . . runtime??
> 
> Francis



Hi PurpleDrazi, I bought two 10440 cells and a nano charger from AW, excellent service and price. I just bought a third cell--can't have too many spares--from Lighthound (his shipping was so fast I think I have whiplash :laughing. The three cells I have are functionally identical.

My experience with the 10440 cells in the L0D-CE mirrors what's been reported in this thread. For intermittant use at each of the three levels, a fully charged cell lasts many weeks -- my L0D-CE is on my keychain, so I'm constantly playing with it, ha!

I ran the little Fenix flat out for a long stretch only once, when my HID light on my bike ran out of juice. I rode home holding the L0D-CE on my handlebar, running it on the medium setting. This was for about 30 minutes, and that bit, coupled with the previous week or two of intermttant use since the last charge, led to noticable dimming. But there was a freshie 10440 waiting at home for me, so no problem. 

About the output: it's staggering. If you haven't seen Unknown_VT's stairway beamshot post of the L0D-CE/10440 vs. the Fenix P1D-CE/RCR123: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/1824132&postcount=39
This was what convinced me to buy my favorite keychain toy 

I suppose someday the 11% overdrive of the 10440 cell for the L0D-CE on max that Unknown_VT so wisely cautions about will kill my EDC's emitter. Then I shall buy another


----------



## afraidofdark (May 5, 2007)

liveforphysics said:


> I did thermal images to show you guys that it's safe a long time ago...
> 
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/153816



liveforphysics, I had not seen your thermal imaging data before, that is 
-sweet-. It certainly doesn't look like any excessive progression of the heating is occuring, for the time period measured. 

I like your summary even better: "The LOD-CE on Li-ion is the brightest single LED light I own. It is also the smallest LED light I own. Its roughly the size of my pinky, yet makes more light than full body size overdriven K2 lights and all sorts of other LED lights I've wasted money on in the past. I find it perfectly useable for all my EDC needs when useing the Li-ion cell."

Amen, brother!


----------



## Patriot (May 5, 2007)

Lite_me said:


> Kinda happy to hear that. :laughing: I was afraid it would be bothersome to some, maybe many. Should I run across a complaint, I'll change it. You're the 2d positive comment I've seen.


 
Please keep it Lite_me. I like it an it's original.


----------



## Turbo DV8 (May 10, 2007)

OK, not to beat a dead horse, but I just got my 10440's today, and I am still a little nervous to actually put them in my LOD-CE! These 3.6 v cells measure 3.96v out of the package, and I am supposed to put it into my 1.5 volt light? I can't believe I'm gonna *DO* this! Forgive my continued intrepidation, but I _just_ smoked my Inova 24/7 headlamp in under ten minutes after some guy here swore he had used a 3.6v RCR123 for a year in his with no problem, instead of the recommended 3.0 volt cell. Please, will someone just hold my hand and gently whisper reassuringly into my ear while I do this 10440/LOD-CE thing?


----------



## gunga (May 10, 2007)

:rock: Try it, it won't hurt! 


I'm still pretty nervous using it on high, even with all the posts about it being okay. It just gets hot so fast!

No big issues on medium and low tho.

Pretty cool, it's about the same brightness as a P2D or L2D on turbo (less throw, perhpas more overall output). I only use it for a couple minutes at a time on high tho.


----------



## Dobbler (May 10, 2007)

Turbo DV8 said:


> OK, not to beat a dead horse, but I just got my 10440's today, and I am still a little nervous to actually put them in my LOD-CE! These 3.6 v cells measure 3.96v out of the package, and I am supposed to put it into my 1.5 volt light? I can't beleive I'm gonna *DO* this! Forgive my continued intrepidation, but I _just_ smoked my Inova 24/7 headlamp in under ten minutes after some guy here swore he had used a 3.6v RCR123 for a year in his with no problem, instead of the recommended 3.0 volt cell. Please, will someone just hold my hand and gently whisper reassuringly into my ear while I do this 10440/LOD-CE thing?



Just go for it. You only die live once!


----------



## thehappyman (May 10, 2007)

Been using my LOD CE with the 10440's for a while now and no problems...... What a great combination..........

Comparing my lights, it turns out that the P1D-CE, the P3D-CE, the Amilite Neo T5, the Led Logic Striker, and the Gladius Night-Ops are all brighter than the LOD CE w/10440. However, from the standpoint of brightness for size, the L0D CE wins....... Hands down....


----------



## Turbo DV8 (May 11, 2007)

*Re: AM I CURSED?*

OK, this is precisely why I don't play the lottery... I topped off my new Deal Extreme 10440's in the UltraFire WF-138 charger. 4.2 volts off the charger. They both will run on high in the LOD-CE for 45 seconds, then the light output rapidly diminishes (within 10 seconds) to a level about on par with "low"! Medium and low seem to work as expected, and even strobe runs at full brightness indefinitely. If I switch the light off, and immediately turn it back on high, it outputs full brightness for a lesser period, then crashes again. As it diminishes, the barrel gets quite warm, and stays warm even as the output is reduced. Is it a delayed reaction from when it was running at full output, or something more ominous? Did I happen to get two new bad cells? But they both still measure over 4.0 volts after the light crashes. I have read that these cells in this application are being asked to deliver more current than they are designed to, but then again I have not heard anybody mention 45 seconds runtimes, either. I also keep hearing questions about how running the 10440's might affect the LED, but I haven't heard anybody address how 3.6 - 4.0 volts might affect the circuitry. I am not convinced that running the 10440's isn't doing somthing detrimental to the circuitry. Any suggestions or comments? In the meantime, I'll just stick to Ni-MH in my LOD-CE, and ponder what to do with my two brand new 10440 cells and charger.


----------



## Patriot (May 11, 2007)

*Re: AM I CURSED?*



Turbo DV8 said:


> OK, this is precisely why I don't play the lottery... I topped off my new Deal Extreme 10440's in the UltraFire WF-138 charger. 4.2 volts off the charger. They both will run on high in the LOD-CE for 45 seconds, then the light output rapidly diminishes (within 10 seconds) to a level about on par with "low"! Medium and low seem to work as expected, and even strobe runs at full brightness indefinitely. If I switch the light off, and immediately turn it back on high, it outputs full brightness for a lesser period, then crashes again. As it diminishes, the barrel gets quite warm, and stays warm even as the output is reduced. Is it a delayed reaction from when it was running at full output, or something more ominous? Did I happen to get two new bad cells? But they both still measure over 4.0 volts after the light crashes. I have read that these cells in this application are being asked to deliver more current than they are designed to, but then again I have not heard anybody mention 45 seconds runtimes, either. I also keep hearing questions about how running the 10440's might affect the LED, but I haven't heard anybody address how 3.6 - 4.0 volts might affect the circuitry. I am not convinced that running the 10440's isn't doing somthing detrimental to the circuitry. Any suggestions or comments? In the meantime, I'll just stick to Ni-MH in my LOD-CE, and ponder what to do with my two brand new 10440 cells and charger.


 
It sounds as if you have a bad cell/s I'm sitting here at my desk and I can't even percieve any noticable drop off for 3-5 minutes. Even after that amount of time is doesn't drop to an output that looks as if it's on low. The way I can determine the is because I have a 2nd identical LODCE sitting on the desk next to it running on medium and the other LODCE is still brighter after 3-5 minutes.


----------



## brighter (May 11, 2007)

It sound like bad battery, how's the other one? Same prob? Try to measure V of the cell 10 min after full charging. If it drops from 4.2 below 3.9 that not sounds good. Some of mine li-ions from DX came damaged already (measured below 2.5v), they can still be charged to 4.2 but V drops very fast. Or try another test: put it on low and leave it for 10mins, turn off and so for 7-8 times. Measure V after each 10mins. After that 70-80min period my 10440 (good one)discharges to 3.5v (thats empty cell BTW).

Clean the contacts on LODce/battery.


----------



## thehappyman (May 11, 2007)

Definitley a hardware problem.... either bad batteries or a "funny" light ......


----------



## Turbo DV8 (May 11, 2007)

brighter said:


> It sound like bad battery, how's the other one? Same prob? Try to measure V of the cell 10 min after full charging. If it drops from 4.2 below 3.9 that not sounds good.


 
They measure 4.06 and 4.09 volts after charging and sitting overnight. Well-matched and potent. The light exhibits this with either cell. Even right after the light output crashes in 45 seconds or less, the cell voltage reads over 4.0 volts. Maybe the light is at fault. Hear a lot here about is the 10440 safe to use with the LED, but no mention of compatibility with the lights electronics, or their possible negative impact upon the electronics long-term. Use 10440 cells at your own risk. I guess my LOD-CE has a discriminating taste for cells!


----------



## 2xTrinity (May 11, 2007)

> They measure 4.06 and 4.09 volts after charging and sitting overnight. Well-matched and potent. The light exhibits this with either cell. Even right after the light output crashes in 45 seconds or less, the cell voltage reads over 4.0 volts. Maybe the light is at fault. Hear a lot here about is the 10440 safe to use with the LED, but no mention of compatibility with the lights electronics, or their possible negative impact upon the electronics long-term. Use 10440 cells at your own risk. I guess my LOD-CE has a discriminating taste for cells!


Yeah, I have tried 4 different 10440s in mine, and none of them have this issue. I know another person with a L0D-CE, and they tried several cells in theirs, no problem either. I've been EDCing for weeks, and there's no apparent loss of brightness relative to the "other" L0D that has been running on Primaries for the same duration, when I switch the cells to do a controlled test.

How recently did you buy your L0D-CE? It's possible that Fenix may have made an unannounced change to the design of the circuit at some point. I'd be interested in knowing if anyone else has seen the effect.


----------



## Gene (May 11, 2007)

The great thing about these unprotected Li-Ion calls is they hold their charge almost forever. I've been using AW's unprotected 10440s for well over a year without a single problem. I have 4 cells and 2 I hadn't even used in almost a year and when I put them on the charger, they got the green light in about 2 minutes! 

I've also been carrying an Orb Raw running one of AW's unprotected RCR2s on a chain around my neck and it just lasts and lasts. I LOVE the unprotected cells for this reason and all my protected cells need charging just sitting for a few weeks.


----------



## Streamer (May 11, 2007)

Sounds like your torch's limiting circuitry is at fault. I'd be thinkin bout sending it in. Never had that problem with all four of my 10440's.


----------



## Patriot (May 11, 2007)

Turbo DV8 said:


> They measure 4.06 and 4.09 volts after charging and sitting overnight. Well-matched and potent. The light exhibits this with either cell. Even right after the light output crashes in 45 seconds or less, the cell voltage reads over 4.0 volts. Maybe the light is at fault. Hear a lot here about is the 10440 safe to use with the LED, but no mention of compatibility with the lights electronics, or their possible negative impact upon the electronics long-term. Use 10440 cells at your own risk. I guess my LOD-CE has a discriminating taste for cells!


 
In that case you're batteries sound fine. Unfortunately I'm going to say that you have a strange LODCE...sorry. I've just got done running both of them for over five minutes each on high with four different 10440s with no more that a 15 percent drop in output. They're still screaming after five minutes. 

My oldest LOECE now has been through 40-50 full discharges without any ill effects and is just as bright as my brand new one....well, maybe it's had 6-8 full discharges through it.


----------



## matrixshaman (May 12, 2007)

TurboDV8 - this might be a question to pose in the batteries section. Some real experts there and IIRC there are some times when a bad battery will read a high enough voltage to appear okay but is damaged or defective and cannot put out enough current. I'd suggest trying the battery in another light if you have one it will work in or if not try a different brand 10440 before pinning the problem on the light.


----------



## Turbo DV8 (May 12, 2007)

matrixshaman said:


> I'd suggest trying the battery in another light if you have one it will work in or if not try a different brand 10440 before pinning the problem on the light.


 
Thanks for the suggestions. However, that suggestion, and the suggestion of returning the light, could be problematic. I have no other light that takes these specialty cells. I bought two cells and the charger only for the LOD-CE. To buy even more cells to shotgun the problem seems like throwing good money after bad. Then I am stuck with even more cells I cannot use. But assuming I did try other cells, and the problem still persists, then I am faced with returning the light. I actually did return this light to Fenix Store because it had a scratch in the reflector. The one he sent back to me was the same identical light - same unique scratch on the lens, and same lube I had put on the threads. I decided to keep it and cut my losses with him. I am not confident I could trust, or expect, that he would send me out another LOD-CE if I told him that the electonics misbehave when used with a 10440 cell, with which the light was never designed for use!

However, I would like to try a known good cell. If I could ask a favor and have some kind soul PM me who would be willing to send me along a known good 10440 cell of theirs which has been used in the LOD-CE with the expected runtime. That way I am not just tossing more money into cells that may or may not work, or even be the culprit. Just toss it in a padded envelope, and I will try it in my LOD-CE, report the findings here, and return it to you. This way we can find out for certain if it is my light, or if I need to go shopping for Brand X cells! I think it would be nice to know if I just happened to have received two fluke cells, or if there is really an issue with the light. BTW, the light was purchased about 4-6 weeks ago, since someone asked. PM me if you wish to contribute to the Grand Experiment! Thanks.


----------



## Turbo DV8 (May 14, 2007)

Turbo DV8 said:


> If I could ask a favor and have some kind soul PM me who would be willing to send me along a known good 10440 cell of theirs which has been used in the LOD-CE with the expected runtime. Just toss it in a padded envelope, and I will try it in my LOD-CE, report the findings here, and return it to you. Thanks.


 

Any kind soul?  :thanks:


----------



## Alin10123 (May 14, 2007)

Send it back the fenix-store again and PM 4sevens before you send it to let him know of the situation and see what he says. There's no reason why you should keep a brand new light that isn't functioning properly. If you wait too long, then you might have issues returning it.


----------



## BMRSEB (May 14, 2007)

I've been running mine with 10440 cells ever since I got it. At least 2 maybe 3 months now, or whenever the light came out.  I purchased AW's Nano charger w/2 10440 cells, check the Dealers section for the batteries.. Too bad you're not in my area, I would gladly let you use either of my cells..


----------



## the servents of twilight (May 14, 2007)

I currently own an LOD-CE and a LOP. I never really considered 10440's for my LOD-CE because I generally use it for long periods of time. After reading this I might consider picking some up. Does anyone know how they would perform in my LOP? Since I got my LOD-CE it has become an exspensive battery carrier.


----------



## GLOCKshooter (May 14, 2007)

I took the plunge and ordered two 10440's and a charger from dealextreme. Great deal until I started loading up my cart with other stuff. Guess I'll also see how the cree drop ins work on my surefire weaponslights.


----------



## alphazeta (May 14, 2007)

Just rec'd my lodce from the fenixstore today... UGHH.... Bad luck on the tint color. This is by far my ugliest tinted cree light (perhaps I was lucky till this point?) My lodce has a nasty puke green tint to it.

In terms of output, I guess I was expecting to much out of it with a nimh. Even after cleaning the the contacts, on high the lodce seems to be putting out less output than my cheapie cree lights on nimh (i.e.- ultrafire c3, cree'd ellys, etc) I suppose this was to be expected.

I guess I'll have to include some 10440s in my next dx/kai order. But, let's see if I can stand the :green: tint for longer than 5minutes first. (Actually kind of disappointed with this light so far.)


----------



## Pumaman (May 14, 2007)

anybody here got a draco and a lod-ce w/li-lions? i would love to see beamshots or hear about a comparison. will likely end up buying a lod-ce and doing it myself.


----------



## mkphc (May 14, 2007)

45 seconds also, on all 4- 10440s all from deal extream

med and low ok - no prob

fresh batts too, do I have a bad light? or charger?


----------



## Turbo DV8 (May 14, 2007)

Alin10123 said:


> Send it back the fenix-store again and PM 4sevens before you send it to let him know of the situation and see what he says. There's no reason why you should keep a brand new light that isn't functioning properly.


 
If it is not defective cells, and the light works properly on recommended 1.5 volt cells, I tend to think it not fair to him to say that the light is not "functioning properly" on 3.6 volt cells for which the light was not designed.


----------



## thezman (May 14, 2007)

Turbo DV8 said:


> If it is not defective cells, and the light works properly on recommended 1.5 volt cells,* I tend to think it not fair to him to say that the light is not "functioning properly"* on 3.6 volt cells for which the light was not designed.



Bravo....Well said.


----------



## Alin10123 (May 14, 2007)

Turbo DV8 said:


> If it is not defective cells, and the light works properly on recommended 1.5 volt cells, I tend to think it not fair to him to say that the light is not "functioning properly" on 3.6 volt cells for which the light was not designed.



True. Guess i didn't read far enough into this thread. I guess i just assumed it didn't work with Nimh either. Maybe since it's still new, sell it to somebody in the BST section? Not everybody wants to use a 10440 with it. So sell it to somebody not planning on using it like that. Then go get another one. If you dont want to buy from the Fenix-store, lighthound carries them too.


----------



## Alin10123 (May 14, 2007)

Pumaman said:


> anybody here got a draco and a lod-ce w/li-lions? i would love to see beamshots or hear about a comparison. will likely end up buying a lod-ce and doing it myself.



I just finished up with a draco in a passaround last week. It's noticeably brighter than an LOD CE when both are on max. Actually, a lot more than noticeably brighter. The only thing is on burst mode, the draco can't be on too long in that mode because it's physically smaller. If you leave it on for more than a couple of minutes the light will get really hot. This is due to the physical limitations of the light since it's so small. Of course, heat sinking is obviously good on the light because the light cools down very fast as well. However, the LOD CE you can leave on high the whole time and it doesn't get more than slightly warm. It's also not driven as hard however. So that may play the biggest role. It's also a big larger than the draco. So i guess it's an unfair comparison. 

As for the beam, the draco's beam is pretty much perfect while the LOD CE's beam is a little ringy. Draco uses a seoul and the LOD uses a cree. I think the ringy beam is a characteristic of the cree since there's a physical metal ring inside of the dome. 

I dont think you can go wrong with either light. If you are looking for the smallest and brightest light, then go with the draco. If you are looking for a good bang for the buck light, then go with the LOD CE.


----------



## Turbo DV8 (May 15, 2007)

Alin10123 said:


> Maybe since it's still new, sell it to somebody in the BST section? Not everybody wants to use a 10440 with it. So sell it to somebody not planning on using it like that.


 

That certainly is an option. Just wish somebody would send me along a known good 10440 that they used with success in their LOD-CE so I could rule my light in or out. Somebody want to throw their cell in an envelope to me for a test? I will send it back to you after reporting back here whether my light is causing this, or my cells. Would save me buying even more 10440's (which I have no other use for) just to possibly rule out my cells. If you want to help a chum out in this regard, please PM me!


----------



## sixfellas (May 16, 2007)

How about this: Anyone with a light meter showing a noticeable change in overall output after using the 10440's for a while? You might think the Cree being overdriven would wear on it quite a bit faster.


----------



## barkingmad (May 17, 2007)

According to the mini-manual with the L0D it says it can handle up to 3.3v (whereas Lithium Ion cells are typically up to 4.2v) - wonder why 3.3v?

Wonder if they ever considered a 2 cell tube for it (i.e. 2 x 1.5v)?


----------



## LEDninja (Jun 2, 2007)

I got a L0D-CE in January and got 2 more recently as gifts. Because of this thread I got some 10440s and the Ultrafire charger from Lighthound. The control circuitry of 1 of the lights seem to be overloaded by the 10440 - goes straight to strobe. Works fine on Eneloops.


----------



## LEDninja (Jun 2, 2007)

Turbo DV8, mkphc can you 2 do the following test:
Run the light on high until it dims. Turn off the light let sit for an hour or 2. Run it on high again and see if it stays dim or run at full blast for another 45 seconds. If it stays dim you have a faulty battery.
I suspect either Fenix or the battery manufacturer may have added a temperature switch for your protection.
For example the MagLED module has temperature protection but it does not kick into low until after 10 minutes. Despite a poor thermal path that great big Mag body is one hefty heatsink.
Energizer L91/L92 lithium primaries have a temperature switch in them. Maybe other battery manufacturers are following suit now they see how much it cost Sony to recall batteries after a few laptops exploded.


----------



## mkphc (Jun 2, 2007)

did that, same thing, has to be a thermal cut off some where, allthough it doesn't get as hot as you might think (on high)


----------



## IMSabbel (Jun 2, 2007)

Mine is still not dead yet. I guess i will never feed it anything besides 10440 again. Its just too easy to get used to the pinky-sized lightcannon 

But talking about killing: How easy is it to kill those 10440 cells? I drained one far too much because i was running the light for ages on low, and noticed that it would switch back to normal again...
The cell recharged and worked again fine, but i am not sure this was healthy for it...


----------



## Turbo DV8 (Jun 7, 2007)

LEDninja said:


> Turbo DV8, mkphc can you 2 do the following test:
> Run the light on high until it dims. Turn off the light let sit for an hour or 2. Run it on high again and see if it stays dim or run at full blast for another 45 seconds. If it stays dim you have a faulty battery.
> I suspect either Fenix or the battery manufacturer may have added a temperature switch for your protection.


 

I will do this soon. It may not be until next week, though. I may be going out of town for five days. Thanks for the suggestion. BTW, mkphc, my 10440's were from DX also, along with the charger. We'll see...


----------



## dardar (Jun 7, 2007)

mkphc said:


> did that, same thing, has to be a thermal cut off some where, allthough it doesn't get as hot as you might think (on high)



To check for a possible thermal cut off protection, drop the l0d in a glass of water on high. The head of the l0d should be a bit above the water level. The l0d will stay at the same temperature as the water temperature. I left mine 5 minutes like that and the high is still high.


----------



## todo (Jun 7, 2007)

Last week upon arriving at my cabin in the U.P I discovered some plumbing problems out in the garage. I used my lod ce with a full charge 10440 lithium for next couple hour's alternating beetween high and low as nessecery. It finally gave up and went dead completly. I thought sure the battery would be toast. I stuck it in the nano charger and the charge light would'nt come on. Next morning I tried the battery again and the red charge light came on, It stayed on red for what seemed like a half day, then switched to green. The battery is fine, and holds a charge same as my other 2 10440's.

The L0DCE is by far my favorite most used light. Its been in my pocket and gotten daily use for the last 5 months. Its been dropped ,banged, soaked, chewed by dog, and accidently left on high for 1/2 hr. I recently bought a backup for when I inevitably will need it. But so far my L0D has been bullet proof.


----------



## Lite_me (Jun 7, 2007)

Good to hear. Nice story. :thumbsup:


----------



## mkphc (Jun 8, 2007)

antbody else have 10440's from DX and having the same issues?


----------



## radellaf (Jun 17, 2007)

Alright, curiosity has overcome me and I ordered an Ultrafire charger and 4 10440 unprotected cells from this guy:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160123011268

Lighthound was $27 and Batterystation a little more for 2 cells and a nano, I think.

Two questions:

1. How do you know when to stop using a cell? (in the L0D)
2. Any other uses for 10440s or should I post two or three to BST?


----------



## Gunner12 (Jun 17, 2007)

1. You should stop using the cell after any noticeable dimming(approx 10 minutes on high, 50 minutes on medium, 1hour 40 minutes on low, runtime charts).
2. Keep the other 10440s. Keep them charged. One for usage in the light, three with full charge to use when the one in the light needs to be charged. And you might buy more lights that will need the 10440 battery.


----------



## radellaf (Jun 18, 2007)

Other than the L2F (crazy UI, a little too similar), any recommendations?

Or has the dawn of 3.6V AAA size lights just begun?

A mod that used one of those 3xAAA carriers in so many cheaper DD lights would be interesting. Dunno what 10.8V would work with especially, and 3 unprotected cells in series might be...unwise.


----------



## txmatt (Jun 18, 2007)

Still running mine with 10440's with no issues.

Which brings up another question... with the Special Edition version out with Q2 Cree emitter, and hopefully a special edition Q3/Q4 eventually (pure speculation), any reason the higher bin Cree's would be less tolerant of the current that the 10440's seemingly drive the LED with?


----------



## GLOCKshooter (Jun 18, 2007)

Got my charger and 2 10440's from DX. Pretty impressive! Runs fine on either cell, no problems yet.


----------



## Turbo DV8 (Jun 19, 2007)

LEDninja said:


> Turbo DV8, mkphc can you 2 do the following test:
> Run the light on high until it dims. Turn off the light let sit for an hour or 2. Run it on high again and see if it stays dim or run at full blast for another 45 seconds. If it stays dim you have a faulty battery.
> I suspect either Fenix or the battery manufacturer may have added a temperature switch for your protection.


 

Did it tonight. It is very repeatable. I do not have to let the light sit for an hour between tests, only five minutes or so, since it never stays super bright long enough to get extremely hot. 

It goes like this: On high, the light stays crazy bright for 30-35 seconds. At 35 seconds it begins to rapidly dim at the same time the head and body temp rises at a high rate. By 45-50 seconds, the output has dimmed to a level about equivalent to low on 10440's, or medium on NiMH. One noteable thing is that just as the temp of the body and head really starts to take off in my hand, the light output drops like a rock at the same time. I let the light cool for five minutes, and repeat the test with the same identical times. I did this five times. Don't know if this is an intentional "Rev. B" by Fenix or not. 

In any case, 10440's are worthless in my LOD-CE. Now I have two 10440's and a charger I don't need. What other lights out there can take one or two 10440's? It has to be something crazy bright for it's size, like the LOD-CE, to make it worth investing in a light that uses such a proprietary cell. Any suggestions?


----------



## LEDninja (Jun 19, 2007)

Turbo DV8 said:


> In any case, 10440's are worthless in my LOD-CE. Now I have two 10440's and a charger I don't need. What other lights out there can take one or two 10440's? It has to be something crazy bright for it's size, like the LOD-CE, to make it worth investing in a light that uses such a proprietary cell. Any suggestions?


The Jetbeam AAA Jet-u is out but it's pricy.
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/167457
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/167427
EDIT
Fogot about the Liteflux LF2

There is not much else in AAA that can outshine a L0D-CE on regular batteries.


----------



## Ice (Jun 19, 2007)

Get an LF2! :twothumbs Nothing more to say! :naughty:


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 7, 2007)

2xTrinity said:


> Yeah, I have tried 4 different 10440s in mine, and none of them have this issue. I know another person with a L0D-CE, and they tried several cells in theirs, no problem either. I've been EDCing for weeks, and there's no apparent loss of brightness relative to the "other" L0D that has been running on Primaries for the same duration, when I switch the cells to do a controlled test.
> 
> How recently did you buy your L0D-CE? It's possible that Fenix may have made an unannounced change to the design of the circuit at some point. I'd be interested in knowing if anyone else has seen the effect.



My L0DCE goes dim after about 45 seconds, about the time it starts gettig hot. I think it has some kind of thermal cutoff that makes the light dim when it starts getting hot. I mostly use mine in the first, primary mode with 10440's since the high mode kills the battery so fast, but it's nice to have 150 lumens availible even if just for a few seconds. I suspect that running the L0DCE on high on 10440's for more than a minute at a time is bad for the LED anyway and I want mine to last a long time.

"I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." John 8:12 
Jesus Christ


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 7, 2007)

I put the L0DCE on 10440's on high in a small cup of water with a cube of ice and the light dimmed in the same amount of time and the head was not warm, so I guess heat is not the issue. 


"I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." John 8:12 
Jesus Christ


----------



## Ice (Jul 7, 2007)

Good idea! Interresting...


----------



## ns66 (Jul 8, 2007)

from http://www.cree.com/products/pdf/XLamp7090XR-E.pdf, the working temp can go up to 150 degree C, which is 1.5 times of boiling temp of water, I doubt it's due to temp cut off

the max voltage of led though is rated 3.9v, I think that's the danger, above 3.3v it's direct drive, so there's no circuit to cap the voltage, above 3.9v you are throwing the dice i guess

correct me if i am wrong


----------



## HarveyRich (Jul 8, 2007)

Strangely, there seems to be considerably variation in performance of the LOD-CE here. I've been using mine on 10440s with no problem. I just tried it on a 10440 now to see what would happen. On brightest, the light stayed with no perceptible dimming until about 8 minutes. There was a very gradual diminishment of light after that. However, by 11 min 30 sec (when I stopped the experiment), the light output appeared to me to still be as bright as that from my Jetbeam C-LE on high (which is presumably 80 lumens). There was noticable heat from the LOD-CE, but it seemed only warm, not hot for the entire duration. The initial battery voltage was 4.17v and the final voltage was 3.81v. 

I turned the light off for about 5 minutes and then tried it again. The battery had recovered somewhat and the output was clearly up again. It ran like this for about 1 min 30 sec then began to dim. By 2 mins, when I terminated, the output was down to about that from the medium setting for the C-LE, which is supposed to be about 40 lumens. Battery voltage is now down to 3.74v

This is quite satisfactory performance for me and I intend to keep using the 10440 in it.

Harvey


----------



## LEDninja (Jul 8, 2007)

We are not talking about the temperature rating of the LED here.**

I suspect a designer addad a thermistor to the circuit somewhere. The thermistor has a little bit of resistance at room temperature but the resistance rises as the temperature goes up. At low current the heat generated by the current can dissipate to the surrounding area. At high current the thermistor gets too hot too fast and the some of the heat cannot escape. This raises the resistance of the thermistor which reduces the current and dims the light. The torch does not have to be hot for this to happen.

** Note when an LED gets too overdriven it tends to go into thermal runaway. Resistance drops, more current goes through the LED, the LED gets even hotter. This repeats itself until something smokes.


----------



## 45/70 (Jul 8, 2007)

There are several areas of concern here. My biggest concern would be "thermal runaway" of the 10440, not the LED or overdriving the circuit. I don't have a LOD-Ce, I do have a LiteFlux LF-2 though. The same conditions apply to it except, the board of the LF-2 is actually designed to run 10440's.

If you burn up the LED or the board, that's no fun, but a 10440 exploding in your front pocket, is a whole different situation to me. :naughty: So, I limit my 100% output to very short bursts. 

Dave


----------



## ns66 (Jul 8, 2007)

because the led temp is rated so high, i don't think there's any need for them to put any kind of temp cap thus reduce performance in this cut throat market, that's why i think led temp rating is very much relevant here. 

besides led, i don't think there's any other component could get burnt by high temp, i don't think the circuit is more fragile than the led, the battery chamber is very cool, there's a thermal imaging measurement post here in cpf to prove this.

of course correct me if i am wrong :shrug:


----------



## LEDninja (Jul 8, 2007)

We now have 3 members (mkphc, Turbo DV8, LightWalker) whose L0D-CE would not run on high for more than 45 seconds. so something has changed. It is not the LED (which would get brighter and brighter until it dies) so what?

As to the ruggedness of circuit boards I have read posts that the L1D-CE circuit board has fried when used with 14500.
Of the 4 L0D-CE I bought one has a major flikering problem (or has gone into strobe mode) with 10440. Works fine on NiMH. So I suspect we are pushing the circuit components close to their limits as well.

The main problem is with the battery. The 10440 is rated for 600 mA max and the L0D-CE high/10440 pulls 1100 to 1200 mA. There were a number of threads about exploding lithium batteries in flashlights, and recently one about a Chinese worker killed by the battery in his cellphone exploding.
Many members use their L0D-CE/10440 in medium mode only (1 twist to turn on instead of 3 to get to a L0D-CE high/NiMH). The current at ~500mA is within the limits of the battery.

EDIT
I am surpriced 4sevens have not posted in this thread. Read the comments he posted in the other thread.
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2070873&postcount=21


----------



## FlashCrazy (Jul 8, 2007)

ns66 said:


> the max voltage of led though is rated 3.9v, I think that's the danger, above 3.3v it's direct drive, so there's no circuit to cap the voltage, above 3.9v you are throwing the dice i guess
> 
> correct me if i am wrong


 

The current drawn from the battery is about 1000 mA. With this kind of load, the voltage of the little 10440 would maybe be 3.6V...if that. 

I run a 10440 in mine as well. My biggest concern is the fact that we're drawing a 3C load from the 10440. The long term effects are unknown at this point, but I'm sure we'll see reduced battery life at a minimum. The best advice I can give is to charge your 10440's at the lowest charge rate possible, and to be close by your charger to detect any problems. I charge mine at 100 mA. If your battery is unknowingly damaged, and then it's charged at a high current rate (like 450 mA on some chargers), you stand more chance of a problem occurring during charging.


----------



## 45/70 (Jul 8, 2007)

I'm sure no expert on Li-Ion's, but I believe the biggest danger in running a Li-Ion at 3C that's not made for it, is not what happens when you charge it (these problems are usually associated with under voltage), but metallic lithium forming on the anode during such extreme operation. This causes the battery chemistry to become very unstable and can cause it to explode, not only while it's in operation, but at anytime afterwards.

Dave


----------



## Dynacolt (Jul 9, 2007)

SE-Q2 L0D-CE here - over 1 1/2 minutes on high with a 10440 and no dimming (it gets a bit warm but no flicker, no other issues).
It might have dimmed a minute amount, but not that I can notice.
Cell before this test had been used a bit and I would estimate it was at about 4 volts. After 3 runs of this test it measured 3.7 volts.
I won't be trying this on a regular basis, and I find the primary mode with this little wonder is good enough for most tasks (and if I need brighter I have other options of course).


----------



## Ice (Jul 9, 2007)

> There are several areas of concern here. My biggest concern would be "thermal runaway" of the 10440, not the LED or overdriving the circuit. I don't have a LOD-Ce, I do have a LiteFlux LF-2 though. The same conditions apply to it except, the board of the LF-2 is actually designed to run 10440's.
> If you burn up the LED or the board, that's no fun, but a 10440 exploding in your front pocket, is a whole different situation to me. So, I limit my 100% output to very short bursts.


 I think the over discharge protection of the LF2 would prevent the battery from suffering too much. (I'm no engineer, I'm just guessing that the voltage would drop significantly before the LiIon can explode...)


----------



## 45/70 (Jul 9, 2007)

Ice said:


> I think the over discharge protection of the LF2 would prevent the battery from suffering too much. (I'm no engineer, I'm just guessing that the voltage would drop significantly before the LiIon can explode...)


Well, Ice, you've sort of brought out my point, in an indirect way. 

Over dishcharge protection or over discharging a Li-Ion battery has nothing to do with discharging it at a higher rate than its design parameters permit.

The first part of this post by NewBie discusses what I'm refering to:

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/1258756&postcount=15

It would seem that a lot of people are not aware of this. 

Dave


----------



## ns66 (Jul 9, 2007)

thanks for the link

i *guess* if stay with the medium or low level, discharge rate is not that dangerous... at most you damage the flashlight but won't explode, but i won't try the high :shakehead


----------



## 45/70 (Jul 9, 2007)

ns66 said:


> thanks for the link
> 
> i *guess* if stay with the medium or low level, discharge rate is not that dangerous... at most you damage the flashlight but won't explode, but i won't try the high :shakehead


I want to make it clear that the reason I brought this up in this thread, is *NOT* to suggest people avoid using their lights on high with 10440's, but to raise awareness of what we are doing. As, I said earlier, I run my LF-2 at 100%, just not for very long. Maybe that isn't a good idea, but at least I'm aware that I'm pushing the limits. 

Dave


----------



## ns66 (Jul 9, 2007)

i don't think cpfers will kill the messenger 

does anyone know the current draw of 10440 fully charged while in medium/low/high?
thanks


----------



## Ice (Jul 9, 2007)

> Well, Ice, you've sort of brought out my point, in an indirect way.
> Over dishcharge protection or over discharging a Li-Ion battery has nothing to do with discharging it at a higher rate than its design parameters permit.


Well, I'm not so sure about that! You surely are right with over discharging (at low currents) not being the same as discharging at too high currents.
However I think that there should nevertheless be a rather fast drop in voltage if you draw too much current (even from a fully charged cell). Actually in the posting you linked I read the following:
"If you are pushing your cells beyond their ratings, [...] this will also increase internal resistance"
A higher internal resistance is about the same as reduced voltage (at constant current).
So I still believe that over dicharge protection (working by voltage detection) does help a little (!) in this regard, even though from another direction... 
What do you think?


----------



## 45/70 (Jul 9, 2007)

Ice said:


> Well, I'm not so sure about that! You surely are right with over discharging (at low currents) not being the same as discharging at too high currents.
> However I think that there should nevertheless be a rather fast drop in voltage if you draw too much current (even from a fully charged cell). Actually in the posting you linked I read the following:
> "If you are pushing your cells beyond their ratings, [...] this will also increase internal resistance"
> A higher internal resistance is about the same as reduced voltage (at constant current).
> ...


Well........, you asked for it! :naughty:

I interpret the metalic plating of lithium on the anode occuring any time the battery is discharged at a rate _somewhere _beyond it's spec. Question, how long does the LF-2 run at 100% before the overdischarge function kicks in? My idea is, it could be happening untill then. Possibly, it doesn't start up right away when going to 100% (my short burst theory). Then again, maybe it does.

Another point, the dendrites don't necessarily form all at once. They more than likely build up over time. In reference to your quote from NewBie's post, I think the resistance builds up over the long run as well.

This thread concerns the Fenix L0D-CE. It does not have an over discharge function so, reference to the LF-2's is irrelevant to these folks. Regardless, I really think that both lights have the same potential problem.

And one more thing, Ice, since I'm not an EE or any kind of authority on this subject, drink a Beck's dark for me. They were out of them at the grocery. :thumbsup:

Dave


----------



## FlashCrazy (Jul 9, 2007)

ns66 said:


> i don't think cpfers will kill the messenger
> 
> does anyone know the current draw of 10440 fully charged while in medium/low/high?
> thanks


 

Post #18 shows some testing results: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/1974841&postcount=18


----------



## FlashCrazy (Jul 9, 2007)

45/70 said:


> This thread concerns the Fenix L0D-CE. It does not have an over discharge function so, reference to the LF-2's is irrelevant to these folks. Regardless, I really think that both lights have the same potential problem.


 

It seems that the recommended discharge limit is 2C for most Li-Ion cylindrical cells...not sure about the 10440 though. If it's the same limit, and 10440's usually test about 300 mAH capacity, a 2C disharge rate would be 600 mA. I read somewhere that the LF2 draws about 600 mA on the 100% setting, so hopefully that rate won't cause any problems. The LOD-CE draws about 1000 mA, for a little over a 3C discharge rate. I have both lights, but I feel more comfortable using the 10440 in the LF2...and even then I don't feel totally comfortable...lol.


----------



## johnny13oi (Jul 10, 2007)

Aren't the capacities of the 10440 offered by DX rated at 500mah even though they don't perform as advertised but running them at 1000ma would be 2C of the rated capacity so okay right? Or does that not matter at all?
I would really like to get this flashlight as it seems to be an awesome 1XAAA flashlight being offered for about $33 at DX and appears that it outputs about 100lm on high running on 10440 which is the only mode i would use if I were to purchase this flashlight. On top of that it would be the most expensive flashlight I own as my next one up would only be worth $10 LOL.


----------



## Walking in the Light (Jul 10, 2007)

I am new at this so please forgive me if this question has already been asked... After installing 10440 in my LOD-CE I notice that that one of the two lower beam setting does in fact flicker. :huh: Is this a common problem? The maximum setting is awesome and does NOT flicker. Thanks!


----------



## FlashCrazy (Jul 10, 2007)

johnny13oi said:


> Aren't the capacities of the 10440 offered by DX rated at 500mah even though they don't perform as advertised but running them at 1000ma would be 2C of the rated capacity so okay right? Or does that not matter at all?


 
Nope, doesn't matter. What matters is the _actual_ capacity of the battery. If they were labeled as 2000 mAH, you wouldn't want to run them at a 4000 mA discharge...knowing they're really only 300 mAH batteries. Oh, the joys of marketing hype...lol.


----------



## 2xTrinity (Jul 10, 2007)

johnny13oi said:


> Aren't the capacities of the 10440 offered by DX rated at 500mah even though they don't perform as advertised but running them at 1000ma would be 2C of the rated capacity so okay right? Or does that not matter at all?


The 500mA rating is bogus. For all intents and purposes, treat it like a cell with slightly over 300mA capacity -- since that is the real capacity (about what I see in real world use), that's what should be used to determine maximum recommended current. 

If you intend to run a light on 10440, take a look here at a detailed comparative review I posted between the L0D-CE, and Liteflux LF2. If you are concerned about operating the 10440 cell safely, the LF2 is a better choice because it has low battery overdischarge protection, and is regulated so as not to exceed 600mA discharge. There are a whole bunch of other factors though that I talk about in detail in the thread.



> I am new at this so please forgive me if this question has already been asked... After installing 10440 in my LOD-CE I notice that that one of the two lower beam setting does in fact flicker. :huh: Is this a common problem? The maximum setting is awesome and does NOT flicker. Thanks!


The way that dimming is accomplished in the L0D-CE is by switching the light off and on rapidly in what is called pulse width modulation or PWM. When the light is on max output, it is always "on", there is no off" portion of the cycle, so there's no visible flickering. In the case of the Fenix, the PWM frequency is fairly low (100 Hz) and quite noticeable. The LF2 that I am carrying now also uses PWM, but the on-off cycles are much faster, over 8000Hz, so the flickering is impossible to notice..


----------



## FlashCrazy (Jul 10, 2007)

Walking in the Light said:


> I am new at this so please forgive me if this question has already been asked... After installing 10440 in my LOD-CE I notice that that one of the two lower beam setting does in fact flicker. :huh: Is this a common problem? The maximum setting is awesome and does NOT flicker. Thanks!


 
I've bought 3 LOD-CE's in the past two months...they all do the same as yours. The pwm (pulse width modulation) doesn't come into play in the high mode, this is why the circuit doesn't end up "stumbling" on high mode.


----------



## Turbo DV8 (Jul 10, 2007)

LEDninja said:


> We now have 3 members (mkphc, Turbo DV8, LightWalker) whose L0D-CE would not run on high for more than 45 seconds. so something has changed. It is not the LED (which would get brighter and brighter until it dies) so what?


 
Crap Ultrafire 10440 cells from Deal Extreme, that's what. mkphc also explicitly stated that his 10440 cells were from DX, and his LOD-CE exhibits the same 45 second dimming as mine. The mystery was resolutely solved today. TigerhawkT3 came to my house today with his LOD-CE and 10440's from AW. We put his 10440 from AW into my LOD-CE, and my Ultrafire 10440 from DX into his LOD-CE, and his LOD-CE then dimmed at 45 seconds, while my LOD-CE kept going. Conclusion #1: the fault is not with my light, and not related in any way to thermal cutoff. That left the question of whether my cells were bad, or my Ultrafire (DX)charger. Throughout this, I doubted that I could have two bad new cells, so I questioned the charger. So, we drained one of TigerhawkT3's AW 10440's and charged it in my Ultrafire charger (DX). Once fully charged, the AW cells performed perfectly in my LOD-CE, with no 45 second dimming. Conclusion #2: my Ultrafire charger works fine.

Final conclusion: The Ultrafire 10440's may be "rated" at 500 mAh, but they simply can't supply the current needed in the LOD-CE application on high. mkph (and Lightwalker?), dump the DX 10440 Ultrafire cells. I'm in line for some cells from AW!


----------



## gunga (Jul 10, 2007)

Just a quick note, I was doing some runtime tests on my LF2 with 10440s and I always got about 20% more with AW cells vs ULtrafire (65 vs 75 minutes on 50% power).

ANother vote for AW cells!


----------



## Turbo DV8 (Jul 10, 2007)

gunga said:


> Just a quick note, I was doing some runtime tests on my LF2 with 10440s and I always got about 20% more with AW cells vs ULtrafire (65 vs 75 minutes on 50% power).
> 
> ANother vote for AW cells!


 
Since the brightness on medium with the 10440's has been equated to high using a 1.5v cell, how does the runtime on a 1.5v cell on high compare to medium on a 10440? Are they about equivalent? Since I will seldom "need" high on a 10440, I may just "need" another LOD-CE to use on high with a 1.5v cell to avoid the PWM flicker I would see on medium using a 10440 cell.


----------



## gunga (Jul 10, 2007)

Sorry, I Was talking about the Liteflux LF2, not the Fenix, so I'm unsure about that.

I think Chevrofreak has the info you require...


----------



## johnny13oi (Jul 10, 2007)

Can anyone else attest to the Ultrafire 10440 cells from DX are not good for the LOD-CE? And what is this AW brand and where would I be able to get some?


----------



## Dynacolt (Jul 10, 2007)

johnny13oi said:


> Can anyone else attest to the Ultrafire 10440 cells from DX are not good for the LOD-CE? And what is this AW brand and where would I be able to get some?


I have AW's 10440s and my L0D doesn't dim at 45-ish seconds (as posted above, for each test 90 seconds and still going strong).
You can get AW's cells here: http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=79847

Dave.


----------



## Nake (Jul 10, 2007)

I have 2 LOD CEs, one of them a SE Q2. I use 4 Ultrafire 10440 cells for these lights. All 4 work well with the P4 LOD. With the Q2 two of the cells flicker on low setting, one on med, and one not at all. This is not a PWM flicker, but an uneven one. My eyes cannot see normal PWM flicker, even a slow one like the early C-LE, unless placed in front of a fan.
What do you guys think?


----------



## mchlwise (Jul 10, 2007)

Turbo DV8 said:


> Crap Ultrafire 10440 cells from Deal Extreme, that's what. mkphc also explicitly stated that his 10440 cells were from DX, and his LOD-CE exhibits the same 45 second dimming as mine. The mystery was resolutely solved today. TigerhawkT3 came to my house today with his LOD-CE and 10440's from AW. We put his 10440 from AW into my LOD-CE, and my Ultrafire 10440 from DX into his LOD-CE, and his LOD-CE then dimmed at 45 seconds, while my LOD-CE kept going. Conclusion #1: the fault is not with my light, and not related in any way to thermal cutoff. That left the question of whether my cells were bad, or my Ultrafire (DX)charger. Throughout this, I doubted that I could have two bad new cells, so I questioned the charger. So, we drained one of TigerhawkT3's AW 10440's and charged it in my Ultrafire charger (DX). Once fully charged, the AW cells performed perfectly in my LOD-CE, with no 45 second dimming. Conclusion #2: my Ultrafire charger works fine.
> 
> Final conclusion: The Ultrafire 10440's may be "rated" at 500 mAh, but they simply can't supply the current needed in the LOD-CE application on high. mkph (and Lightwalker?), dump the DX 10440 Ultrafire cells. I'm in line for some cells from AW!



Very interesting. 

I just got a Jetbeam Jet-u yesterday, and ran it on high on my Ultrafire 10440... 

... after about 45 seconds, it dimmed significantly. oo:

I don't have a L0Dce (yet), but the Jet's Seoul on high draws pretty close to the L0D's Cree, and I had the same problem with the same batteries. 

:thumbsdow


----------



## FlashCrazy (Jul 10, 2007)

Nake said:


> I have 2 LOD CEs, one of them a SE Q2. I use 4 Ultrafire 10440 cells for these lights. All 4 work well with the P4 LOD. With the Q2 two of the cells flicker on low setting, one on med, and one not at all. This is not a PWM flicker, but an uneven one. My eyes cannot see normal PWM flicker, even a slow one like the early C-LE, unless placed in front of a fan.
> What do you guys think?


 
I have 4 of the Ultrafire 10440's also. My LOD-CE flickers heavily on the med and low modes also, an intermittent heavy blink...definitely not the normal pwm. You said two of your cells exhibit this. I've noticed that mine flickers with all but one of the batteries, and the flickering problem is more prevalent when the batteries have been in use for a few minutes. Using fresh-charged 10440's, the light doesn't flicker at first...but will after a couple of minutes. Maybe it is a battery problem and not the light's circuit.


----------



## wintermute (Jul 10, 2007)

2xTrinity said:


> In the case of the Fenix, the PWM frequency is fairly low (100 Hz) and quite noticeable. The LF2 that I am carrying now also uses PWM, but the on-off cycles are much faster, over 8000Hz, so the flickering is impossible to notice..


I'm not certain you could see a 100 Hz PWM - 100 flickers per second is, I think, more then your eyes can handle. NTSC video is 29.97 - 30 fps (29.97-30 frames [flickers] per second), PAL video is only 24 fps. The best video cards for computer games shoot for 60 fps at the highest resolution, I'm pretty sure that anything beyond 60 cycles per second would be beyond what your eyes could perceive (on a conscious level at least). I welcome someone to provide evidence showing me wrong...I'm just going off the top of my head here. Even if it could be perceived by the eye - it wouldn't be a noticeable flicker...it would be very difficult to see. I'm just not certain that the flickering people are seeing here is due to the 100Hz PWM of the Fenix. Nothing against you 2xTrinity - just asking questions.


----------



## 45/70 (Jul 10, 2007)

wintermute said:


> I'm not certain you could see a 100 Hz PWM - 100 flickers per second is, I think, more then your eyes can handle. NTSC video is 29.97 - 30 fps (29.97-30 frames [flickers] per second), PAL video is only 24 fps. The best video cards for computer games shoot for 60 fps at the highest resolution, I'm pretty sure that anything beyond 60 cycles per second would be beyond what your eyes could perceive (on a conscious level at least). I welcome someone to provide evidence showing me wrong...I'm just going off the top of my head here. Even if it could be perceived by the eye - it wouldn't be a noticeable flicker...it would be very difficult to see. I'm just not certain that the flickering people are seeing here is due to the 100Hz PWM of the Fenix. Nothing against you 2xTrinity - just asking questions.


You can see a 100Hz flicker. The key is movement. Your monitor is stationary. If you could pick up your monitor and move it around, like you do a flashlight, you'd see it. 

Dave


----------



## wintermute (Jul 10, 2007)

45/70 said:


> You can see a 100Hz flicker. The key is movement. Your monitor is stationary. If you could pick up your monitor and move it around, like you do a flashlight, you'd see it.
> 
> Dave


Gotcha - excellent. Thanks for clearing that up. So is the flicker people are seeing with these 10440's in Fenix lights when the light is stationary...or only moving around. I guess that would be the low-tech way to determine if it is PWM or something else going on with the circuit. Thanks for the heads up regarding that though. :twothumbs:


----------



## 2xTrinity (Jul 10, 2007)

wintermute said:


> Gotcha - excellent. Thanks for clearing that up. So is the flicker people are seeing with these 10440's in Fenix lights when the light is stationary...or only moving around. I guess that would be the low-tech way to determine if it is PWM or something else going on with the circuit. Thanks for the heads up regarding that though. :twothumbs:


It is noticeable when moving the flashlight around in a sweeping motion, OR when trying to look at anything that is moving. The latter is more annoying. For example, shining the L0D-CE on low at a stream of moving water from a faucet makes it look like the water is being sprayed in "pulses". Also, trying to examine things like spinning fan blades is nearly impossible -- they will either look like they are stopped, or spinning slowly in reverse, or other weird effects. What a buddy of mine did once when I was using the light was to wave his hand in front of the light quickly and say "how many fingers am I holding up?" It looked like about 12 :laughing:


The easiest way to see the effects of PWM though would be to just wave the light back and forth as fast as you can with a diffuser over the top. The PWM will be very evident if it's low enough, as in the following photo:






Top is LF2 on 0.2% output
Middle is L0D-CE on low
Bottom is Jetbeam Mk.II X

Note: I didn't take this photo, It's from the LiteFlux LF2 Mini Review thread.


----------



## Xanteen (Jul 10, 2007)

My LOD-CE Q2 exhibits the non-PWM flickering with AWs cells, as well. It's fine with Energizers. I don't know if it's damaging the lights, but I can't stand the irregular flickering. My old LOD-CE has no issues using AWs cells, though.

Is the Q2 just pulling too much current for the battery?


----------



## Ice (Jul 10, 2007)

About the flickering (once more, to make it a little more technical): 
About 25fps are sufficient to make the eye see a series of images as one *continuous movement*. (Actually a few more are necessary, but in TV the images get blury when there's a lot of motion and that "helps" the eye...)
However, you can easily perceive e.g. 50Hz flickering, for many people (including me) that can even make a headache after some time (that's why they invented 100Hz television sets some time ago).
More important, low fps can lead to irritating ghost images! For example you may have seen an accelerating car in TV, whose wheels first rotate forward, then (seemingly) backward and so on.
And one last point: Usually you look at a TV or computer screen without moving your head and with the TV picture in the focus of your eye. Flickering is much easier visible from the corner of your eye and if you move your head.
So, I hope that was not too boring...


----------



## 2xTrinity (Jul 10, 2007)

> To make it a little more technical: About 25fps are sufficient to make the eye see a series of images as one *continuous movement*. (Actually a few more are necessary, but in the TV the images gets blury when there's a lot of motion and that "helps" the eye...)
> However, you can easily perceive e.g. 50Hz flickering, for many people (including me) that can even make a headache after some time (that's why they invented 100Hz television sets some time ago).
> More important, low fps can lead to irritating ghost images! For example you may have seen an accelerating car in TV, whose wheels first rotate forward, then (semingly) backward and so on.
> And one last point: Usually you look at a TV or computer screen without moving your head and with the TV picture in the focus of your eye. Flickering is much easier visible from the corner of your eye and if you move your head.


Another factor is the duty cycle. If the light source has a long "on" portion of the cycle (or if the phosphor on the TV has high persistence), then the flicker will be much harder to detect than if the light is only on for a small portion of the cycle, and is off the rest of the time. That is why I speak of the PWM being most evident when the L0D-CE is on low, as literally most of the time, the light is off (seen in the image shown above). On the other extreme, if the pulse width duty cycle is 100%, there is no flicker, as the light is always on. 



Xanteen said:


> My LOD-CE Q2 exhibits the non-PWM flickering with AWs cells, as well. It's fine with Energizers. I don't know if it's damaging the lights, but I can't stand the irregular flickering. My old LOD-CE has no issues using AWs cells, though.
> 
> Is the Q2 just pulling too much current for the battery?


With the L0D-CE you could actually test the current and see what's going on. Worst case scenario would be if there is no light coming out, but the battery is still drawing high current -- that would indicate an intermittent short of some kind. If the current is wavering and going up and down in sync with the changes in output (if your meter is fast enough to indicate this) that might indicate an intermittent loose connection, or some type of cutoff happening in the Fenix's internal circuitry.

Also, the amount of current drawn may actually change depending on the LED. When running the L0D-CE off of a 10440, you are essentially in direct drive, so a light with a lower forward voltage might draw a higher current. (mine drew about 1A on high, which would only last about 10 minutes. I almost always used medium when I carried my L0D-CE)


----------



## Ice (Jul 10, 2007)

@2xTrinity:
I just saw you wrote something partially similar... Anyway... 
Oh, and great picture there! 
This problem should be solved now... 

By the way: Great informative thread here!


----------



## mchlwise (Jul 10, 2007)

Xanteen said:


> My LOD-CE Q2 exhibits the non-PWM flickering with AWs cells, as well. It's fine with Energizers. I don't know if it's damaging the lights, but I can't stand the irregular flickering. My old LOD-CE has no issues using AWs cells, though.
> 
> Is the Q2 just pulling too much current for the battery?



I was JUST about to buy one of these....


----------



## Lite_me (Jul 10, 2007)

Make sure you guys understand when replying that the flickering that the guys are talking about in the recent posts in this thread is not the PWM, but is an intermittent loss of light type of flicker. 

I too have that issue with one of my L0D CE's. I have had 5 L0D CE's pass through my hands. The first 4 all work fine on UltraFire 10440's.(from Lighthound) My last one, the Q2 SE version has the flicker. For whatever reason, the Q2's seem to be more susceptible. When some work and some don't on 10440's, I think that says that the circuitry is right on the edge of being able to handle it. I'm sure Fenix knows this and that's why it's not rated or recommended for 10440's.


----------



## Xanteen (Jul 10, 2007)

Yeah-- I'm not talking about PWM flicker, here. Further, this is only happening with the Q2 edition. If you are contemplating buying a LOD-CE, go for it. They're great lights.


----------



## mchlwise (Jul 10, 2007)

Xanteen said:


> Yeah-- I'm not talking about PWM flicker, here. Further, this is only happening with the Q2 edition. If you are contemplating buying a LOD-CE, go for it. They're great lights.



I really was contemplating it, and was feeling a little pressured since the Q2s are in limited supply. 

Hearing that the flicker problem is mostly with the Q2s makes me a little hesitant, though.


----------



## FlashCrazy (Jul 10, 2007)

Xanteen said:


> Yeah-- I'm not talking about PWM flicker, here. Further, this is only happening with the Q2 edition. If you are contemplating buying a LOD-CE, go for it. They're great lights.


 

My last 3 regular LOD CE's (all purchased in the last 2 months) exhibit the flicker problem on 10440's. Like Lite me mentioned, it's a full loss of light quick type blinking...not from the pwm. One has it only in the low mode, one only in the medium mode, and the third does it in both low and medium. All are fine in high mode. I say go for it as well...these are terrific lights! These issues aren't present using NiMH or alkaline batteries...what we're supposed to be using...lol.


----------



## ns66 (Jul 10, 2007)

that's a bit strange, if flicking is caused by 10440 not being able to keep up, it should occur at high not at low/medium, not the other way around:thinking:


----------



## wintermute (Jul 10, 2007)

If the LiteFlux2 is built to use 10440's - why not that? I mean, I friggin' love Fenix lights...my LxD light is amazing in my eyes...but how is the build quality between the the two compared??


----------



## FlashCrazy (Jul 10, 2007)

ns66 said:


> that's a bit strange, if flicking is caused by 10440 not being able to keep up, it should occur at high not at low/medium, not the other way around:thinking:


 
Right..that's why I'm confused with mine. Mine sometimes works fine with the 10440 when the battery is fully charged, then acts up when the voltage drops. Other times it does it even on a fully charged cell. I'm still not sure if it's a battery or circuit issue. I'm leaning towards it's just a circuit issue, since most of the people with the older ones have no problems. I think Fenix maybe changed something in the circuit, and the newer ones are affected...who knows. Still, it's kind of unfair to Fenix to call this an "issue", since they never said you can use 10440's in them. But you know us "flashaholics"...we gotta have bright light!


----------



## FlashCrazy (Jul 10, 2007)

wintermute said:


> If the LiteFlux2 is built to use 10440's - why not that? I mean, I friggin' love Fenix lights...my LxD light is amazing in my eyes...but how is the build quality between the the two compared??


 
The build quality on the LF2 is great....just as good, if not a tad better than the LOD-CE. I prefer the finish on the LF2. I feel like a traitor for saying it, but the LF2 is my new favorite EDC. It's such a versatile light. I love the low voltage cutoff feature that automatically detects if you're using a Li-Ion or NiMH/Alkaline cell, and turns the light off when battery voltage reaches 2.9V or 0.9V respectively. It gives you warning too...it flashes 3 times every 40 seconds a few minutes before it cuts out. It also only draws 600 mA from the 10440 on high...a safer level than the 1100 mA that the LOD-CE draws. The BEST feature is the LOW low....really nice for navigating the house at night, or a really dark environment where more light would just be too bright. 

Ok, I better shut up before this turns into a LF2 thread...lol. 

Once again, the CPF mantra applies..."Buy both!" That's what I did.


----------



## LightWalker (Jul 10, 2007)

Turbo DV8 said:


> Crap Ultrafire 10440 cells from Deal Extreme, that's what. mkphc also explicitly stated that his 10440 cells were from DX, and his LOD-CE exhibits the same 45 second dimming as mine. The mystery was resolutely solved today. TigerhawkT3 came to my house today with his LOD-CE and 10440's from AW. We put his 10440 from AW into my LOD-CE, and my Ultrafire 10440 from DX into his LOD-CE, and his LOD-CE then dimmed at 45 seconds, while my LOD-CE kept going. Conclusion #1: the fault is not with my light, and not related in any way to thermal cutoff. That left the question of whether my cells were bad, or my Ultrafire (DX)charger. Throughout this, I doubted that I could have two bad new cells, so I questioned the charger. So, we drained one of TigerhawkT3's AW 10440's and charged it in my Ultrafire charger (DX). Once fully charged, the AW cells performed perfectly in my LOD-CE, with no 45 second dimming. Conclusion #2: my Ultrafire charger works fine.
> 
> Final conclusion: The Ultrafire 10440's may be "rated" at 500 mAh, but they simply can't supply the current needed in the LOD-CE application on high. mkph (and Lightwalker?), dump the DX 10440 Ultrafire cells. I'm in line for some cells from AW!



I am using Ultrafire 10440's from DX, so I think that is why my light dims. I have not had any flickering problems.

Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.Psalms 119:105


----------



## gswitter (Jul 10, 2007)

For what it's worth...

I've had no problems with the Ultrafire 10440's in my LOD CE. I've run it on high for five minutes at a time with no noticeable dimming. I've had no problems with my Ultrafire 14500 or RCR123A cells either (though combined they've only had a fraction of the usage of the 10440's).

I *did not* purchase my Ultrafire cells from DX.


----------



## mkphc (Jul 12, 2007)

Turbo DV8 said:


> Crap Ultrafire 10440 cells from Deal Extreme, that's what. mkphc also explicitly stated that his 10440 cells were from DX, and his LOD-CE exhibits the same 45 second dimming as mine. The mystery was resolutely solved today. TigerhawkT3 came to my house today with his LOD-CE and 10440's from AW. We put his 10440 from AW into my LOD-CE, and my Ultrafire 10440 from DX into his LOD-CE, and his LOD-CE then dimmed at 45 seconds, while my LOD-CE kept going. Conclusion #1: the fault is not with my light, and not related in any way to thermal cutoff. That left the question of whether my cells were bad, or my Ultrafire (DX)charger. Throughout this, I doubted that I could have two bad new cells, so I questioned the charger. So, we drained one of TigerhawkT3's AW 10440's and charged it in my Ultrafire charger (DX). Once fully charged, the AW cells performed perfectly in my LOD-CE, with no 45 second dimming. Conclusion #2: my Ultrafire charger works fine.
> 
> Final conclusion: The Ultrafire 10440's may be "rated" at 500 mAh, but they simply can't supply the current needed in the LOD-CE application on high. mkph (and Lightwalker?), dump the DX 10440 Ultrafire cells. I'm in line for some cells from AW!


 
Thanks for the detailed elimination testing!
I guess you & me got what we payed for!

I'm gonna go with some AW'S!!!


----------



## swxb12 (Jul 12, 2007)

Zero problems with Ultrafire 10440's and running them long on high mode in the LOD CE here as well...

Got the Ultrafires and Nano charger from Lighthound.


----------



## Turbo DV8 (Jul 12, 2007)

swxb12 said:


> Zero problems with Ultrafire 10440's and running them long on high mode in the LOD CE here as well...
> 
> Got the Ultrafires and Nano charger from Lighthound.


 
Is "Ultrafire" even considered a reputable brand? Since I and mkphc got our 10440's from DX and experience the dimming, but you have not had a problem with your Ultrafire's from Lighthound, is perhaps DX selling a "knock-off of a knock-off?"


----------



## BobbyRS (Jul 12, 2007)

Turbo DV8 said:


> Is "Ultrafire" even considered a reputable brand? Since I and mkphc got our 10440's from DX and experience the dimming, but you have not had a problem with your Ultrafire's from Lighthound, is perhaps DX selling a "knock-off of a knock-off?"


 
I bought my 10440's from DX back when I got my L0DCE (about 2 months ago) and mine has worked great ever since. I don't think he is selling a "knock-off" of a "knock-off". Of course this is purely speculation but maybe he is just getting bad batches to sell. It seems that maybe, to help keep his prices lower, he is looking for the cheapest ones he can get his hands on to sell and not worrying about the quality of them. They do seem to focus more on quantity rather then quality with many of their products. Maybe the problem is within his suppliers getting a hold of the bad batches and DX knows nothing about it.... 

Please don't take this as me slamming DX because I have ordered a ton of items from them since they opened. I have gotten a few broke items from them, but their service is outstanding! Even though some items have been hit or miss with functionality or even quality, their prices and range of products are great! If you are having problems with those cells from DX, I would just check into having them replace them for you. Like I said, with the history of service I have received from them, they probably won't hesitate to do so.


----------



## musicalfruit (Aug 16, 2007)

Thanks to this thread, I hopped on the 10440 wagon. Was running my L0D-CE on NiMH but couldn't resist after reading all the success stories. Ordered a couple of UF 10440s from DX and got them in a few days ago.

This L0D-CE (also from DX) runs great in high mode but there is some flicker in medium and low mode (that wasn't there on NiMH). It gets pretty warm but not hot even after 5+ minutes of high mode. The amount of light is pretty astounding from such a small flashlight.

Thanks to all the early adopters who field tested this combo!


----------



## Luminescent (Aug 17, 2007)

I think there are two reasons why some have been more secessful running on 10440's while others lights cut off very quickly.

1. There is some variability in how high the current will run in 'direct drive' because the range of Vf of the CREE emitters.

2. The DX batteries everyone is complaining about, that cut off after 45 seconds, probably have protective PTC cutoffs designed to prevent excessive discharge rates, so the lithium batteries don't go into thermal runaway and blow up.

As temperature goes up Vf goes down and the only limiting factor becomes a few milliohms of resistance in the L0D's boost circuit inductor (which is still in the circuit in 'direct drive') and the battery's internal resistance.

As far as that silly 1000mA reading goes, and all this talk about 2C vs. 3C rates, it's ludicrous to rely on a goof ball test were someone just yanked off the tail cap of their L0D and stuck their radio shack meter probes across the battery and battery tube to get a current reading.

- What was the voltage burden of the meters current shunt and the resistance of the leads? (the E/I curve of the LED is very steep so even a small additional drop in the metering shunt and leads will greatly reduce the current reading)

- What was the specific Vf of the CREE emitter?

- What was the internal resistance of the 10440 cell used in the test? Do we know that this was a typical amount of resistance or could it have been on the high or low side?

With almost nothing to limit the current in these 'direct drive' situations, even these minor differences will become important.

Some folks whose L0D-CE's have higher Vf CREE's and 10440 cells with a bit of internal resistance may be running only 800mA (accounting for those who report that their light just barely heats up), while others may be hitting peak currents of more than 2 amps.

Again, going back to the DX cells for a moment, the fact that the batteries are going into thermal limit and shutting down should be telling us something don't you think?

Running lithium cells this hard, without even knowing precisely how hard, is Russian-Roulette, perhaps we should change the name of this thread to "Anyone kill their silly selves blowing their L0D-CE up with 10440's yet?" (of course we are not likely to get a report from the first lucky winner).


----------



## Nake (Aug 17, 2007)

Luminescent said:


> As temperature goes up Vf goes down...


 
Not very knowledgable on this subject, but I remember reading the opposite, Vf goes up with the temp.


----------



## Luminescent (Aug 17, 2007)

Nake said:


> Not very knowledgable on this subject, but I remember reading the opposite, Vf goes up with the temp.



Nope, just double checked, and depending on the exact semiconductor composition, the Vf temperature coefficient of power LED's range from -2 to -3 mV/degree C. This may not sound like much, but with junction temperatures of 100C or more it adds up pretty quickly. I would be very surprised if the CREE junction in the L0D-CE is not hitting at least 100 degrees C in 10440 direct drive based on reported output levels. This would correspond to a Vf decrease of at least 0.2 volts and possibly as much as 0.3 volts. When the battery voltage is close to Vf, a few tenths volt decrease in Vf makes a big difference in current flow.

On the battery side, most chemical reactions increase with temperature, so the batteries internal resistance also goes down as it heats up, until various NASTY internal things start to happen at high current levels and offset this to finally limit the ultimate current.

Unfortunately, most of these things (like the production of metallic lithium, and hydrogen gas) are not the kind of things you want happening inside your flashlight, because they tend to make things go BOOM.


----------



## f22shift (Oct 6, 2007)

anyone kill theirs yet?


----------



## gunga (Oct 6, 2007)

I had one stop working, could have been due to 10440's (very limited use) so maybe...

It just started flickering and dienig, DIdn't work properly at all after a bunch of cleaning etc to try and fix it.

I stopped using 10440s in the LOD CE now, just the LF2.


----------



## jasonvk77 (Jun 6, 2008)

my lod ce is dead as from today:hairpull:.first it had low power now nothing at all with a 10440 at 3.4v.


----------



## Lite_me (Jun 6, 2008)

jasonvk77 said:


> my lod ce is dead as from today:hairpull:.first it had low power now nothing at all with a 10440 at 3.4v.


If that 3.4v is standing voltage, the battery is dead. It may not be able to support a load. Try charging it. :thinking:


----------



## LEDninja (Jun 6, 2008)

See jasonvk77's thread for the history of the light deteriorating.
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/199363


----------



## whitecloud (Jun 20, 2008)

No problems running 10440's.

I've switched back to NiMh a few times.... but the L0D CE, for me is meant to be a 10440 light.


----------



## kanarie (Jun 22, 2008)

Also, absolutely no problems running 10440's with my L0D-CE
used it for over a year now with 3 Ultrafire 10440's rotating
I have modded the light to a Cree Q5 a half year ago.
I still love this EDC light


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Nov 14, 2009)

I will venture that the problem can be traced to the Ultrafire 10440s.

ALL UF 10440 are NOT created equal!

I have 4 of them here. I just tried one with 4.05 starting V. My LOD CE Q4 did not act right for more than 30 seconds and as it dimmed the temp of the battery was going up.

SOME UF 10440 will obviously carry the load. There are some (plenty?) that WILL NOT.

Untill I can get to Lighthound and get some AW cells I'll just run LSD NimH or Lithium cell.


----------



## Turbo DV8 (Nov 15, 2009)

PlayboyJoeShmoe said:


> I will venture that the problem can be traced to the Ultrafire 10440's ... I have 4 of them here. I just tried one with 4.05 starting V. My LOD CE Q4 did not act right for more than 30 seconds and as it dimmed the temp of the battery was going up.


 

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2051035&postcount=103

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2074841&postcount=132


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Nov 15, 2009)

Yes Turbo those posts are some of what I based my post on.

Like I said, I'm done until I get some AW batts.


----------



## phatalbert (Nov 15, 2009)

PlayboyJoeShmoe said:


> I will venture that the problem can be traced to the Ultrafire 10440s.
> 
> ALL UF 10440 are NOT created equal!
> 
> ...



But some people are seeing permanent damage to the light (like JasonVK77) that cannot be fixed a better cell. Are you saying that Ultrafire cells are the cause of the handful of dead LOD-CE's we have seen or just the cause of ones that act weird?


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Nov 15, 2009)

I'm saying if the light starts getting dim and WARM at the same time it is entirely possible that  could come next. It is a case of battery unable to supply the load.

If the light is getting messed up to the point that it doesn't act right with a standard AAA then it must be one of a relative few LOD to not be 10440 friendly.


----------

