P-Limited Motors - Im going to jump on the hot seat.

[T.S.Davis]

This thread existed in an effort to plan for the eventual loss of the motors that are currently legal. It had nothing, zero, nil to do with the quality of the 2030 motor. It wasn't an opportunity for yet another debate about the quality of 2030 motors. I don't even race it. Lots of us don't. There are options available that work better that are on the current list.

The idea is to maintain the current level of performance (close) without rendering everyone's existing setups obsolete. I'm not ready to tell 100's of guys racing limited that they have to replace their fleets because there might maybe could possibly be 40mm motors in RTR's. 40mm motors will be faster. The level of performance will be higher. Probably not in the RTR's which they come but in aftermarket boats for sure. Existing fleets would have to change.

If there is a demand for a 40mm P light or some such thing some day it will be obvious. They'll be leaking from our pours. We'll cross that bridge then. Right now we have I think, 27 classes we can't completely populate due to FE ADD. Adding a 40mm limited specification on top of a 36mm spec will add another 7 classes (cat, mono, hydro, sport, offshore, crackerbox, OPC, is skiff a class?) ahhhhhhhhhhhh Make it stop.

Dave, I know you're thinking we'll just be back discussing this again in "x" number of years. We will. Absolutely. That's been true since I've been racing. The rules can't last. It's not possible. This isn't fossil fuel where the concept hasn't really changed in eons. The tech grows right out from under us about every 2 years. Motors, speedo, batteries, something, this, that, the other. We're always buying time. I'm still shocked limited held up as long as it has.

[T.S.Davis]

I'm really trying to reel it back in here and I'm sorry to those I offended with my 40mm motor talk.

No worries Dave. A healthy discussion where you present your thinking and don't just try to incite a riot is always welcome.

[raptor347]

If the goal is to maintain the level of performance we currently have, the 36-50 motors should be much closer to the power output potential of the existing list motors. That's just based on claimed wattage.

From what I've heard, TP's run quite a bit cooler under the same load/conditions compared to similar kV P-ltd motors. I may be wrong, but my experience has been cooler running motors can handle more load. How much additional load can be run on the 36-60 before it fails?

[Darin Jordan]

OK, because I still seem to care, I've put my own money out in order to do some testing. Time for real, controlled environment numbers.

I have 4 new motors on order. Two 36x60 sized, and two 36x50 sized. In addition, I have several samples of several already approved motors.

I order the following:

Leopard LBP3660/5D 1900KV
TP3630-10D 1950KV

Leopard LBP3650/4Y 1840KV
TP3620-8Y 1970KV

That's the closest I could get in KV for each.

I ordered the LBP3650/4Y and the TP3630-10D from here on OSE.com

I found the LBP3660/5D seemingly in stock here: http://www.rctophobby.com/ We'll see how long it takes for delivery. Cost was $88.76 + $5.81 for shipping.

I found the TP3620-8Y at TP-USA: http://www.tppowerusa.com/index.php?route=common/home . Cost was $80.00 + $11.55 for shipping

The LBP3650/4Y was $56.99 here on OSE. NOTE on this motor: it has an 1/8" shaft. Shouldn't affect the results, as the shaft through the motor is still 5mm.

The TP3630-10D was $79.95 here on OSE, making my OSE total $159.39.

So, total is: $345.51... Good Grief! Yeah, I'm just in this for myself... RIGHT. There goes my PT Stealth in Carbon...


Obviously the OSE motors will be here first. The TP should be 2-weeks out. Lord only knows on the Leopard. Probably several weeks.

I will proceed to do some comparison tests, both 36x60 to 36x60, and 36x50 to 36x60. REAL numbers.

I will also test the AQ2030, and the last revision of the PB1800, for comparison. These are arguably the two most potent P-LTD motors that were available.

I will also DISASSEMBLE these as I see necessary to take measurements, etc. Again, REAL information for comparison.

With real numbers, we can proceed to see where P-LTD should probably go.

Stay tuned.

[Diegoboy]

Just a dumb thought.
If a specific brand of motor is causing arguments and keeping the class true to its origin (as I recall) of keeping this class competitive and affordable;
Why not limit motors by MSRP instead of brand? Say any motor $85 or less MSRP is acceptable, not actual purchase price...

Just as thought guys

[rayzerdesigns]

[QUOTE=DPeterson;640654]rayzor

Doug..not chastising u r moyor..but in testing over weekend..With eagle tree and gps..The tp motor in same boat..(Lim mono) as the 2030..same proo..same setup..The tp was almost 2mph faster..and was 25 to 35 degrees cooler..The big surprise was how many more amps it pulled..has spikes at 115..where the 2030 max spike was 87..that's a big difference..now maybe u didn't get that much difference. .but also remember our temps here in AZ are above 110 degrees..With water temps easily in upper 80s..do the cooler part was good..now back to motor..only brought a few props..started both on a m445..then decided to try a detounged x447..2030 could only do about 2 laps before temps were above 140..which is not good for that motor as we all know..The tp pulled it with ease. .amps only increased by about 5..but did see a couple spikes over 120..but it pulled it..then tried a 447 3 blade..which I knew wouldn't be good on 2030..1 lap..almost 159 degrees..so probably shot now..The tp did pull it..but not without temps in 140 range..but it did do 5 laps..And again amp spikes went up..138 max spike..so in all actuality. .it is a much better motor than a 2030..and I think it's cool your club runs it...but as a comparison to a aq 2030..nothing on paper or in comparisons in water and testing show its not better all around..it's a stout motor..but really not a fair comparison..more weight..obviously stronger. .and Def more amps..again..I do think it's okay you guys have created u r own class for it..
Ray - you keep saying this. Do you have some data you could post. This conflicts with our WI. data, conflicts with what QuiteLee reported on post 177 and again with what Greg Schweers had found and posted. Again the TP is not my motor. It was an option we found to work and kept P-Limited alive in IMPBA D4 for 2015. Otherwise the 2030 killed racing in our parts.

Here again is the WI data:

http://forums.offshoreelectrics.com/...268#post595268[/QUOTe

I think the idea is

[Jeff]

Yeah, about 1-2 Mph faster if I remember correctly...so what.

I was commenting on your post about this forum only being for Darin's opinions.

Pathetic...you never seem to be happy about anything...born to complain I suppose.

This thread is the first serious look at viable motor options for the class. You guys in Cheese land should be having wet dreams right about now as what you want to happen is actually happening...opening it up to more motor options. Yet even with "Doug's" motor being at the top of the potential list, you continue to complain. Does anything make you happy?

Pathetic, childish....maybe Pappa Peterson needs to discipline his kids better..

And yet Doug and Jeff are the only ones accused of personal attacks and name calling.
Doby, do you think 1-2 miles an hour is a lot faster?
Would you be willing and have time yet this year to try and run the TP motor again and over prop it to see how it responds? I am not asking you to burn anything up so take it easy if you do.

[QUOTE=rayzerdesigns;640716]

rayzor

Doug..not chastising u r moyor..but in testing over weekend..With eagle tree and gps..The tp motor in same boat..(Lim mono) as the 2030..same proo..same setup..The tp was almost 2mph faster..and was 25 to 35 degrees cooler..The big surprise was how many more amps it pulled..has spikes at 115..where the 2030 max spike was 87..that's a big difference..now maybe u didn't get that much difference. .but also remember our temps here in AZ are above 110 degrees..With water temps easily in upper 80s..do the cooler part was good..now back to motor..only brought a few props..started both on a m445..then decided to try a detounged x447..2030 could only do about 2 laps before temps were above 140..which is not good for that motor as we all know..The tp pulled it with ease. .amps only increased by about 5..but did see a couple spikes over 120..but it pulled it..then tried a 447 3 blade..which I knew wouldn't be good on 2030..1 lap..almost 159 degrees..so probably shot now..The tp did pull it..but not without temps in 140 range..but it did do 5 laps..And again amp spikes went up..138 max spike..so in all actuality. .it is a much better motor than a 2030..and I think it's cool your club runs it...but as a comparison to a aq 2030..nothing on paper or in comparisons in water and testing show its not better all around..it's a stout motor..but really not a fair comparison..more weight..obviously stronger. .and Def more amps..again..I do think it's okay you guys have created u r own class for it..
Ray - you keep saying this. Do you have some data you could post. This conflicts with our WI. data, conflicts with what QuiteLee reported on post 177 and again with what Greg Schweers had found and posted. Again the TP is not my motor. It was an option we found to work and kept P-Limited alive in IMPBA D4 for 2015. Otherwise the 2030 killed racing in our parts.

Here again is the WI data:

http://forums.offshoreelectrics.com/...268#post595268[/QUOTe

I think the idea is

Ray, was the almost 2 mph faster with the same prop you normally run? How much faster was it when you over propped it?


The reason I am asking these questions is I think in theory the TP motor should pull way more prop but it appears to not. I think it is because of the D wind and it is almost max on our esc battery set ups now. This is why I think we need on water data along with Darins evaluations on his bench tester. I suspect that the Y winds with a lower KV could be over propped and gain some speed by getting closer to 100 amp, this is what currently is being done with the 2030. I hope we could keep the speed increase to within the 5% range(or actually less).

I have some opinions on some of the discussion about the specs for the rules, if you would like I would comment on them for this discussion but only if you realize it isn't for attacks but to have rules that are more manageable.

[Darin Jordan]

I have some opinions on some of the discussion about the specs for the rules, if you would like I would comment on them for this discussion ...

I'd encourage anyone with constructive comments, thoughts, data, opinions, etc., to please contribute.

...but to have rules that are more manageable.

Sounds like we have some common ground here...

2 mph faster...

I'm a little slow on my math this morning, but I think people need to BACK OFF of being so fixated with "max speed", especially if they are only recording this with a single-point GPS system.

A more accurate measure of "same-ness" would be to record LAP TIMES. Or, better yet, to help average out that one bad lap, 6-LAP HEAT times.

This would take into effect power off the corners, acceleration, loading in the corners, AND top speed. It would give a MUCH better measure of how two setups perform against each other.

Example would be this... My P-LTD OPC Tunnel regularly runs 1:32-1:35-ish heats when I'm against the top competition. The other boats run more in the 1:40-1:42 range. HOWEVER, the next two boats are usually FASTER top speed. I give up 1-2mph in the straights with a setup that let's the boat be faster though the corners.

One motor can have more top-speed, but if it doesn't have as much torque, it'll load up more in the corners and the overall lap time would be slower.

It's knowing how this works that let me figure out pretty much immediately after bench testing the last versions of the 1500 and 1800 DYNAMITE motors that they were going to be able to do what they do. Their Idle Currents and IR showed on the bench what has been proven on the water.

I will do the same tests with both the 3660 and the 3650 sized motors, and, once I have this data in hand, we'll see where to go from there. Perhaps then on-the-water tests might help.

I honestly think that just comparing the bench testing data between these and the current motors will be quite revealing.

[Darin Jordan]

do you think 1-2 miles an hour is a lot faster?

I was able to get past my poor early morning math skills and find an online Speed Distance calculator... I can answer this question from an "on the water" perspective.

On a 1-mile course, Average Speed = Heat Time:

40 MPH = 1:30
41 MPH = 1:27.80
42 MPH = 1:25.71

So, to answer the question "is 1-2 mph a lot faster"...

YES, most certainly. 2 mph means you finish the race almost 5-seconds before the next guy.

In our local club, there are a couple of guys running the TP 3660-1950KV and their boats are noticeably "more competitive"...

[Brushless55]

See any Brushed Motors or NiMH these days?

36mm x 60mm motors are a standard size across the industry. We're not talking about a dieing technology here. RTRs don't define racing. Their power systems were convenient at the time.

We now have the formula. I say let's keep it.

You know me, I'm all about RTR boats (You won't BELIEVE what Pro Boat sent me THIS week!! ), but their inclusion in the race day needs to be handled at the club level.

Imagine, if you will, if we had pushed to have a NATIONAL class for Spec-SV27? Where would that be today??

Hmmmmmmm......

[T.S.Davis]

Darin, Tom and I will sift through our boxes of stuff and see what SSS motors we have. I know I have a couple 60mm1780 and 1950 and Tom might have a 50mm 1950 still alive. When we were trying to lead TFL towards something that would be legal we couldn't find anything that was 56mm. 60mm was too large of a can so that left us with the 50mm which in our opinion wasn't up to the task.

We'll send what ever we still have kicking around to ya My 1950 was in a pretty graphic accident but I think it's still okay. I'm still apprehensive about even considering the SSS'ss's's to be honest. The availability thing concerns me. I know we can get them but I think mass produced supply line kinda matters.

Plus (we're still just a conversifying here), I'm still not convinced that more choice is better. Choice sure but at some point the racers are trying to pick the best noodle from a bowl of spaghetti. Nuts like father Ken will just buy the whole bowl.

[LuckyDuc]

On water data

I would say that 1 - 2 mph faster averages in a 6 lap heat race is a fair assessment over the original version UL-1 2030 motor. My tests were conducted with the same prop, setup, and water conditions for these 6 lap heats using a Whiplash sport hydro plane.

Does this mean that it should be excluded for consideration... Perhaps. That is for all of you to debate and test over the next season.

I know from my own experience racing with this motor, and against it with the UL1, that the winner of the heat race won because of their driving and setup skills. It takes more the 1 -2 mph to pass someone on the outside.

The TP 3630 1950kv did not run cooler than the UL-1 however. It averaged 16 degree hotter temps on the motor leads than the UL1 with the same setup and water.

The older version UL1 motor (circa 2012) had a bit more top end speed in the straights, ran cooler, and pulled more amps on average. The timing for the UL1 was set to 10 degrees.

The TP 3630 – 1950kv motor pulled less amps than the “old” version UL1 on average, but ran hotter, had less top end speed, but averaged higher speeds overall because it carried more speed through the corners. The timing for the TP 3630 – 1950kv was set at 0 degrees timing.

I can provide the Eagle tree charts for anyone interested in seeing more details.

[Darin Jordan]

We'll send what ever we still have kicking around to ya

Thanks, Terry, that would be fantastic.

Plus (we're still just a conversifying here), I'm still not convinced that more choice is better. Choice sure but at some point the racers are trying to pick the best noodle from a bowl of spaghetti. Nuts like father Ken will just buy the whole bowl.

I'm kind of leaning towards enough of the RIGHT choices. I'd like to see at least three manufacturers, but we'll see.

the 50mm which in our opinion wasn't up to the task.

You might be right. The current crop of motors are all listed at 36x56mm.

However, if you take a look inside, they have a LOT of room inside that can. That's why I want to take these samples apart and measure the inside.

I'm also not sure what the difference is in performance between a 4-Pole and a 6-Pole. I hope to get info to resolve that as well.

[T.S.Davis]

40 MPH = 1:30
41 MPH = 1:27.80
42 MPH = 1:25.71

To give a visual of a 5 second difference......

That's like you are entering turn 3 on your last lap and the guy ahead of you just finished......approximately.

Now that doesn't take into consideration corner speed, acceleration out of the corner, blah de, blah, de blah. Think Darin touched on that. Max speed matters sure but it ain't everything if you lose more speed to turn than the guy with more torque. All that speed doesn't win every time. I can out run anybody with my hotter P mono setup in the straights. Eventually I gotta turn and Don Huff is passing me there.

[T.S.Davis]

That's great stuff Sean.

Any idea why the variations on the 2030 motor? Max speed fluctuated and the wire temps were all over the place. Whereas the 1950 seemed to stay pretty consistent. Not a critic of the data. Just wondered if you had any ideas why the UL acted weird.

Pretty consistent average speeds for each motor. That's same prop same everything?

Did you guys try taking the 1950 up to 130+ degree ranges? I think that's where guys start to get concerned. They worry that we can take the TP up to a higher temperature without losing the motor. Some are already doing this with the existing set of motors that they know can take a little more heat. The discontinued PB1800 was a little more forgiving for example.

2 mph wont let you run around the outside of a guy but all things being equal (driver, traffic, wind, whatever) a 2mph increase in speed equates to losing by about 1 turn like I described above.