P-Spec Motors

**bigwaveohs** · 11-23-2009, 12:59 AM

This chart doesn't print very well...too hard to read.

**properchopper** · 11-23-2009, 01:44 AM

Darin,

I have some thoughts & "seat of the pants" info to share on the Scorpion 3026/1900. After seeing one in person in Jan's DH, and watching it perform,I bought one. First, I installed it in the VS-1 which was using a Hydra 120 [ v1.04 with timing set to low- 4.75 deg. advance]. Same prop as when the UL-1 motor was used; Grim 42/55. No big increase. M445 - no big increase. M545 -cogged. Put the UL-1 motor back in the VS-1. Put the Scorpion in the UL-1 with a CC BAC 80. M445- no big increase. Put the Scorpion back on the UL-1 with the UL-1 SC and the Grim 42/55 and performed on par with the UL-1 motor. Haven't tried bigger props yet to try out the potential for using the supposed more torque. Apparantly, I've heard, the UL-1 SC has more advance [ possibly 11 degrees-according to what Greg Schweers told me] and I'm hearing that the Scorpion likes advance. Of course, as you've observed, a big wheel on an OPC can cause some issues. My conclusion is that the Scorpion for OPC, at least, won't create any unfair advantage.
On the subject of "max watts" maybe this analogy might dispel what seems to create an unfair comparison: Loudspeakers have max watt ratings. Take one rated at 100 watts and one rated at 200 watts. This rating is what they can [I]handle[I] before voice coil deformation. With the same amplifier power, the 100 watt speaker will actually likely play louder. A 150 mph/rated tire will go just as fast as a 200mph/rated tire on the same car. The way I interpret the "max watts" rating on the motors is what they CAN put out before degradation. The Scorpion may just be built to Take more, not PUT OUT more. That's my read, anyway.
I'm not trying to advise here, just giving my 1.5 cents. I'm usually wrong anyway ! Plus it looks like I need to shell out more dough for a Blackjack motor [which now looks like the "flavor of the day"] to race LSO in AZ next month and I'm running out of money

**Darin Jordan** · 11-23-2009, 01:47 AM

Originally posted by bigwaveohs

This chart doesn't print very well...too hard to read.

Once I get more data, I'll do something a little more readable...

Basically what it shows is that the current P-Spec motors are rated at 50A/600W. Still looking for all the data for the SV27 and UL1 (Grim??? Can you help??).

The AMMO 1800KV motor is rated at 50A/1100W, with a burst (5sec) of 90A/2000W.

The Scorpion 1900KV motor is rated at 80A/1400W, with a burst (5sec) of 80A/1400W.

**Ub Hauled** · 11-23-2009, 01:47 AM

Darin, I think your club chose well... it's obvious that the Scorpion motors and the Ammo don't suit your clubs situation. No need for any "outsiders" to flame you guys. I can say that IF these rules one day become the standard NAMBA Spec class, it would be a good choice of motors...
now Darin, what are the rules as far as ESCs go? Do you have battery specs or any hull specs?
I may know the answer but just wanted to "spill the beans" so to speak.

**Darin Jordan** · 11-23-2009, 01:52 AM

Originally posted by Ub Hauled

Darin, what are the rules as far as ESCs go? Do you have battery specs or any hull specs?
I may know the answer but just wanted to "spill the beans" so to speak.

No special rules on hulls, ESCs, or batteries... P-Class battery specs... ESCs are open, and hulls follow P-Class rules...

746W = 1HP...

**Darin Jordan** · 11-23-2009, 01:53 AM

Originally posted by Ub Hauled

I can say that IF these rules one day become the standard NAMBA Spec class, it would be a good choice of motors...

That's fine... but the "choice" of motors need to be simliar in specs... 600W vs. 1400W is hardly apples to apples...

**Ub Hauled** · 11-23-2009, 02:02 AM

Originally posted by Darin Jordan

That's fine... but the "choice" of motors need to be simliar in specs... 600W vs. 1400W is hardly apples to apples...

absolutely!
that was an easy decision (to me at least)...

**ozzie-crawl** · 11-23-2009, 02:12 AM

just a thought wich maybe way of course but i see the ammo 1800 specs as 50a 1100 watts constant, this suggests a 6s motor,being that its a plane motor desigened for planes running gear drives (im assuming) would its capacity in a direct drive boat be the same, as i take the sv and bj motors to be made more specifacly for boats

**Ub Hauled** · 11-23-2009, 02:43 AM

Scott, all these motors have it's max wattage estimated with max voltage input... that being said,
if one has a higher wattage motor it would too have a higher wattage at 4s even w/o running max cell count.
The SV, BJ and UL1 motors are made for boats, they have a higher amount of poles for max torque with direct drive.

**ozzie-crawl** · 11-23-2009, 02:56 AM

okay iam just missing the big picture i guess as i dont race and not sure on your spec classes.
i assumed (and you know the saying "assumption is the mother of all") that they are restricted to a 4s setup
if all motors are capable of 50 amps constant draw and everyone is limited to 4s then to me none of them can produce more than around 740 watts (nominal volts) this is once again assuming the motor specs given by manufacturers are correct

if a motor has a 50 amp constant capability i dont see if it matters that it could produce 1850 watts at 10s if its restricted to 4s and can still only produce 50 amps constantly
WHAT AM I MISSING

**Greg Schweers** · 11-23-2009, 03:48 AM

Darin, at yesterday's meeting you said the Amo wouldn't be able to compete against the Black Jack and UL1 motors because it was only a 2 pole motor and wouldn't have enough torque. Basically, we only have a 2 motor choice right now because no one is going to purposely buy an SV motor. Like I said, I don't like supporting one company - what happens when you can't buy a UL motor, you'll be stuck buying a motor you don't want. I just checked Tower and the Amo 1800 is only $49.99. The reason we voted it in is to see how well it will compete - now you're trying to ban it before we ever get a chance to test it. The Amo might not even work - this could be a moot issue.

**Scott T** · 11-23-2009, 07:44 AM

Just an observation, but a lot of people have installed the Ammo 36-50-2300 as an upgrade to the Sv27 motor. I've seen both motors in 26" monos, and the Ammo wins every time. So rather than the 36-56-1800 (which to me would have more power again), you'd be better off nominating or testing a 36-50-1500? Similar weight, power and revs to the Proboat motor (obviously different # of poles).

Unfortunately it's more expensive than the 36-56-1800, but it seems to tick the right boxes and offers an alternative.

**Fluid** · 11-23-2009, 08:28 AM

What everyone apparently has chosen to overlook is that for a number of years we had two-motor LSH and LSO classes and they worked rather well. The choices? The SS-1 and the 700 SC. We did have a larger pool of 700 motors to choose from, but all serious racers used one of the above two motors - the most expensive two.

All the hand-wringing aside, these are LIMITED classes. Open the door to a large number of motors and the result will be just as before - all serious racers using the one motor which provides the greatest performance, regardless of the cost. Listen folks, history is speaking to us.

.

**Steven Vaccaro** · 11-23-2009, 08:43 AM

What is driving the need for new choices in the class?

P-Spec Motors

P-Spec Motors

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment