Motor heat

[Darin Jordan]

Jeff, I could post nothing and YOU would still think that I was the problem, so whatever.

I was NOT the one talking different pole counts in this thread. I just responded to that post. And I did it politely and honestly.

If that's a problem, then I'm sorry.

However, what I DID post has one hell of a lot to do with "motor heat", so I'm actually very much on topic.

[Doby]

Remember , they are only toy boats...

[Darin Jordan]

Remember , they are only toy boats...

True, but in one seemingly simple decision, like spec'ing a motor that can handle the heat better under similar loads, the rather large investments in time and treasure of others can be rather quickly negated. Especially when said motor can then be pushed harder, making "also-rans" out of the rest.

For now, it's just a D4 thing, and they are all on-board, so it's all good. But we'll have to keep all this in mind, since this is obviously going to spill over to other areas.

I'm looking forward to hearing how this goes in D4 this summer. Will be good to see results on a smaller scale before $hit hits the fan in the other areas of racing that use this type of motor spec.

[Jeff]

Darin, I just wish you would leave the spec rules out of it, there is a thread for that. Motor heat and how the number of poles affect motor and esc would be useful. Your other information on this thread is great.
Darin, are you of the mind set like the man in a straw hat, that cold water temperature helps one motor and not the other when data logging back to back? Sean ran four times each on the same day and the logs for each motor was very consistent. Somehow this data was invalid because of the water temperature. What do you have to say about that?

[Darin Jordan]

Darin, I just wish you would leave the spec rules out of it, there is a thread for that. Motor heat and how the number of poles affect motor and esc would be useful. Your other information on this thread is great.
Darin, are you of the mind set like the man in a straw hat, that cold water temperature helps one motor and not the other when data logging back to back? Sean ran four times each on the same day and the logs for each motor was very consistent. Somehow this data was invalid because of the water temperature. What do you have to say about that?

Jeff... I did leave the "spec motor rules" out of this. I haven't even concerned myself with those rules. YOUR group listed that all of the "spec" motors are legal, plus this new one. Enough said on that. I could give a RIP about IMPBA, NAMBA, or any other spec rules at this point. It's not the POINT anyhow... Where NAMBA or IMPBA go with that is up to them. I'm staying out of it.

Sean ran four times each on the same day and the logs for each motor was very consistent. Somehow this data was invalid because of the water temperature. What do you have to say about that?

I have to say this... and it's VERY simple... If the motor fills the can with the windings, presumably indicating that it also has more mass, then it's NOT going to generate as much motor heat, which is part of the whole point of finding a new motor, right??

Plain and simple... it will be able to be pushed harder.

By the information provided from your groups OWN testing, the motor doesn't build as much heat. It "bends" before it will break, etc.

AND, without knowing ANYTHING else, the fact that the motor keeps being touted as a better quality motor, all in itself, indicates it's a BETTER QUALITY MOTOR.

I'm NOT trying to cause a problem here, but I insist that people be honest. I am. I have no hidden agenda...

Your testing has only indicated that, given some very simple comparisons "on the water", the motors were "basically" comparable. That's it.

It doesn't take a huge leap in logic, especially for someone like me, who is an engineer (BS CS/EE) with a background in electronics who has likely tested and pushed these motor packages more than 90% of the people here (likely more), AND who has some NASTY friends who likely make up the remaining 10%, to discern that there is ONE motor out of the bunch that, because it won't generate as much motor heat (see... keeping on topic ), is going to be the ONE motor to have. This is RACING. That's the nature of how this works.

And, like I posted before, THAT's FINE, but be honest about it, and realize that the minute you start trying to include other motors, like 2-poles or 4-poles, etc., disparity will once again start.

[Jeff]

Fair enough Darin, I think Doug was talking about motor poles in relation to esc heat on Lehner verses other with more poles, Neu?
Based on what you said about motors, would the aquacraft motor have had the advantage running in cold water? I was there, I just chose not to post my data. My set ups were 70 amp, not the 90 Sean had. I also had the same difference in motor rpm. Mine was almost 10% less with the TP vs. Aquacraft. Keep in mind the aquacraft motors were the known bad ones, why would change them otherwise. For me the good old ones vs. the newer bad ones was 12 to 20 degrees hotter with everything the same. Have not tested the very new ones but they should be even closer to TP in my opinion. This is why we are running them before making rules, just like NAMBA did.

[ray schrauwen]

Edited...

Darin, I am so truly sorry for the previous post here. Maybe you will forgive me some day.

I did not see grim's post on an update UL-1 motor or, I still don't know where to buy a new version unless direct from AQ.

I still will have a hard time trusting them and would like to see a tail shot like the pics I have posted so, I know what I'm buying.

I have no idea who's stock is new or old. Can anyone answer this? I'd like to buy from OSE.

[rayzerdesigns]

in my testing the new 2030s ae running cooler..not that's its hot yet here in az..they have updated the motor, and the problems they had..seems to be working great..no wire problems..

[ray schrauwen]

Where did you buy this? Why is it a game of hit and miss?

[DPeterson]

Chalk up another thread disaster to the NAMBA P-Limited trolls. Funny - were not allowed to post a pleasantry on a swap shop thread, but destroying a perfectly well intended topic thread seems to be OK.

Darin - you really should back away. I remember when the AQ2030 came out. You were the first one to say this was bad and made it a one motor class that eliminated all the other 1800 kv motors. I didn't really sink in at the time but now it hits home. Now PB has the 2000 kv motor coming out and as you say an actual 2000 kv. What do think this is going to do? I believe you are too smart to get caught up in the ego/politics of this crap. In my experience, engineers are the more fact based personality. Don't cut your self short. You know more than anyone that you can not rely on artificial motor numbers supplied by unstable suppliers to meet the objectives of a spec class.

As for the hard work and time investment made by certain persons with the NAMBA P-Limited rules. Hogwash. I have been in the hobby as long or longer as most. My club was also involved in rule writing along the way. Been there done that. Fact is there are a few of us no longer following what we thought at one time was the expertise and the leadership. We are going in another direction. Get over it. Some of you may want to back off some. Your panic is showing a tremendous lack of confidence in your own rules.

Doug

[Darin Jordan]

Doug, again you are REALLY reaching. I'll keep this simple.

1. I had NOTHING to do with much of ANYTHING Pro Boat related, especially motors, in the past year. The reliability improvement to the 1800 was the last time I had any input. Do you REALLY think I'd recommend or approve of marketing a 2000kv motor for a 6S application? Have I promoted the motor at all? Big NO to both. I've acknowledged it's existence and honestly provided info on the specs. That's it. I have NO IDEA how it will compare and frankly don't really care.

2. I have clearly stated, with no ambiguity, that I really, REALLY, don't care about the rules, NAMBA or other. It's just not a topic I'm interested in and I haven't concerned myself with them here either.

3. You have selected a motor that is better than the rest. It was your whole point in doing this exercise. Why is this debatable?

4. I sense that you only appreciate a conversation challenging thoughts are NOT shared. If everyone who questions things or has experience contrary to your own classifies as a "troll", so be it.

5. Since YOU keep dragging this into a NAMBA rules debate, I'll just say this: NAMBA does need to address this here soon. Expanding the motor list.... or reducing it further (single spec'd motor) both have merit. Going to take some bold decisions and likely heated discussion to work all that out. It will be interesting to see how that all works out.

6. Finally.... you are not the only one on this forum who receives pm's and emails, and let's just say that I'm aware of many of the circumstances that have led to this point. I'll leave it at that.

I will bow out to avoid more labels. None of this affects the big picture anyhow, and I think it's cool that you guys are doing what is seemingly best for your club. Best of luck with it and I look forward to watching it all unfold.

[keithbradley]

Keith - The preference for a small can for saws would only be an assumption on my part today. I have put zero thought into it. I guess maybe because of the weight savings?

I took all my Lehners out of storage yesterday to look at them again. I miss them. Can't believe I am even remotely involved in those other ones.

It looks to me that any and all of the lower cost 4 poles are way better quality than any of the 6 poles. Is there such a thing as a 2 pole low cost motor?

I always wondered about the relationship between esc's and the various motor poles. More info here would be most beneficial.

Doug

I'm not sure about quality difference between 4 pole and 6 pole motors. Design is still very similar from a mechanical perspective. Some manufacturers (Like TP Power) use a 4 pole configuration on their smaller motors (40mm and below) and 6 pole configuration on larger motors like the 56mm motors, which makes sense considering the larger motors are typically ran at lower RPM.

Leopard used to make 2 pole motors. I assume they still do. A few other companies make them as well but I don't have experience with them so I have no idea if they are any good. I personally wouldn't assume that they are less likely to take out an ESC just because they're 2 pole though. If the build quality sucks, they may be even more likely to cause a problem.

1. TFL makes a 6 pole motor. Are they not close to TP Power quality? I ran an SSS in my 40" mono and it never broke a sweat for 3rd in Q-mono and Q-offshore. Steve sold out dang quick on the SSS 4074 2200kv 6 pole motors....??

The TFL motors are TP Power copies, but are not hand wound. I have no idea how things like magnet quality compare. Often times that's a variable even if you compare two motors from the same manufacturer.

[Peter A]

Wow as someone who watches these debates from afar, I think that you guys need to change the way you do P-ltd. You are going round in dizzying circles and trashing every thread that's related. Here's my suggestions;
1) Take a chill pill.
2) Instead of limiting the motors, limit the power available. Eg. actually use a fuse. This did come up in a thread in the past, but if there is a 60 amp fuse on th circuit then it won't matter what motor is used, there is a limit on the power available. Easy to scrutineer/tech and ends the arguments!
3) Suit yourselves but it sort of sucks seeing a group of experienced boaters getting offside with each other over what is possibly rather petty issues.

[DPeterson]

Darin
I give a rat about NAMBA and their rules. Done with NAMBA. Done with NAMBA rules. Done with NAMBA Nats. Check with NAMBA, I did not to renew. Not done refuting nonsense posted by NAMBA P-Limited trolls attacking my posts.

I am focused on IMPBA D4. Found a motor that is close in performance to the AQ2030. Found a motor that as you say "may bend before it breaks". Found a way to save cost by buying in volume and offering said savings to fellow boaters. Done deal.

The circumstances that led to me leaving NAMBA and focusing on IMPBA D4 has been well documented publically in this forum. I have not been shy about my reasons. There are some reasons I choose not to divulge. This is good for NAMBA that I do not.

Done with this. Happy Boating.

Ray - Direct quote from an AQ Rep - "when the current AQ motors are purged (purchased by boaters) the new version will be available". Do you feel lucky!

[rayzerdesigns]

wow doug so because im a namba member and race p limited im a troll..thats a classy thing to say..and no im not lucky..i got 2 older motors in my order of 4, I called, they told me to send them in, they sent out 2 newer ones..thats awesome customer service in my eyes..but the fact you are bagging on namba and members that run p limited rules and calling them names is pretty pathetic..you truly are delusional, I guess if it doesn't fit what you seem to think is perfect in your eyes its terrible..good riddens to you sir..good luck with your club..maybe namba is glad you aren't a part of it anymore...geez..