Page 1 of 27 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 791

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

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ma
    Posts
    8,693

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

    Please give me the pros and cons of a rule similar to this.

    A max kv and max weight on a motor. Local clubs races would be able to self regulate and when it comes to bigger events, a kv checker and scale would be used.
    Steven Vaccaro

    Where Racing on a Budget is a Reality!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    8,335

    Default

    For the sake of discussion, here is a staring point for a motor specification:

    Specs:
    Can Measures: 36mm diameter x 58mm long (perhaps allow to 60mm, which seems to be a standard)
    Poles: 4 pole (perhaps allow 4 OR 6 Pole)
    Weight: 252 Grams (That's without water jacket. Perhaps allow up to 260 Grams)
    Max KV: 2050


    Perhaps people would be willing start gathering a list of motors to post in this thread that are close to these specs, and those motors could then be discussed and compared.

    A prudent way to manage the class would be to get an initial list of motors together and make them official... re: part of the rulebook. Pretty much how we have P-LTD now.

    Then, perhaps before each season or National event or ???, any new motors that come up could be considered, discussed, voted on, and added to the list... Should be pretty cut and dried if the specs are setup correctly, and shouldn't require too much controversy.

    I think the level of power we've been running is great and provides a very nice level of competitiveness and excitement, so pushing that bigger doesn't make a lot of sense. We have the "Open" motor classes if you need a new thrill.

    I think I just got myself involved deeper than I should have, but with our club hosting the Nats in 2016, I think someone from our club needs to be concerned about this. I'll start the ball rolling.

    Ready, Set, GO!
    Darin E. Jordan - Renton, WA
    "Self-proclaimed skill-less leader in the hobby."

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Co
    Posts
    3,915

    Default

    I am really interested in finding a real cheap end result but it is tough. Dougs P's TP 1950Kv motor is one I would like to see added. I will add more as I find them. thanks guys.
    Randy
    For ABS, Fiberglass, Carbon hulls and Stainless hardware
    BBY Racing

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    On
    Posts
    7,279

    Default

    Well, as the current batch of AQ (gold and blue) and older Proboat motors (blue and grey?) would be obviously grandfathered in, the first one that comes to mind obviously would be the (sorry Darrin) TP motor the cheese-heads have been using. Test results from a few people, myself included would seem to indicate that it is pretty close in all aspects.

    By the way Darin, when did you start working for Target?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    8,335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doby View Post
    the first one that comes to mind obviously would be the (sorry Darrin) TP motor the cheese-heads have been using.
    Hence, the suggested starting point specs...
    Darin E. Jordan - Renton, WA
    "Self-proclaimed skill-less leader in the hobby."

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    1,580

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

    you know you could throw away all the motors if you would just spec max RPM/v say 2200 and spec a prop. Like. a 445 or M445. Use any motor you want. Why would a NEU or Lehner or any other cheaper brand be any different with a max KV? Argument solved.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Co
    Posts
    3,915

    Default

    Howard this/your idea is a little too radical. but it would get a motor like this one if the length was expanded a little.
    http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/s..._Inrunner.html
    and real cheap at $32.00
    Randy
    For ABS, Fiberglass, Carbon hulls and Stainless hardware
    BBY Racing

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ON
    Posts
    9,384

    Default

    Since we are going down the HK road. I like this: http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/s...90mm_EDF_.html

    It has skewed windings similar to a NEU or HET. Very smooth 4 pole motor. I have one and I should give it a go. People have pushed it on 6s and find it's pretty tough.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Nortavlag Bulc

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    8,335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ray schrauwen View Post
    Since we are going down the HK road. I like this: http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/s...90mm_EDF_.html

    It has skewed windings similar to a NEU or HET. Very smooth 4 pole motor. I have one and I should give it a go. People have pushed it on 6s and find it's pretty tough.
    That definitely physically fits within the specs above.

    Turnigy SK3 Fandrive - 3659-1900kv
    Kv(rpm/v) 1900
    Weight (g) 249
    Length B (mm) 60
    Diameter C (mm) 36
    Can Length (mm) 35
    Darin E. Jordan - Renton, WA
    "Self-proclaimed skill-less leader in the hobby."

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    8,335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RandyatBBY View Post
    Howard this/your idea is a little too radical. but it would get a motor like this one if the length was expanded a little.
    http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/s..._Inrunner.html
    and real cheap at $32.00
    For reference in this discussion, here are the motor specs for Randy's suggestion:


    Turnigy XK-3665 2100KV Brushless Inrunner
    Kv(rpm/v) 2100
    Weight (g) 275
    Length B (mm) 65
    Diameter C (mm) 36
    Can Length (mm) 60
    Darin E. Jordan - Renton, WA
    "Self-proclaimed skill-less leader in the hobby."

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,778

    Default

    This is going to be a touchy subject. The biggest problem I see is no matter which motor you stick in the boat we are all going to push the motors to the limit and eventually to failure. In the non-limited classes you can go as wild as the hardware available will allow. The racer will find the best compromise between power, hull weight, set-up, prop, etc to make a combo work. I don't think anyone complains about someone having an unfair advantage in the non-limited classes.

    I think we can all agree the motor is the limiting factor in the ltd classes. I would prefer to see current limiters used in line, say 75A and any motor/ESC combo allowed. This greatly reduces failures while allowing freedom to use different motors. I know this topic has been discussed at length previously.

    TG
    Tyler Garrard
    NAMBA 639/IMPBA 20525
    T-Hydro @ 142.94mph former WR

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    1,580

    Default

    Why Not a 1521 Neu/ its only 1860kv.... With a 445 you would never blow it up. Save you the cost of 3 AQ2030 Motors.
    Wouldn't be my choice to Heavy. My choice would be.1515/1y....Never blow that up either with a 445...
    A Leopard 4072/2200 or a Leopard 4082/2200...Would save tons of money over time. I know TP and Many others make 2200 and below KV Motors. Heck why not a Lehner 1950/6 or 7....Big Money but would last FOREVER!

    I got out of the Spec game because it was costing a fortune in Bad Motors.....******Spec The Prop!*****

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    1,580

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RaceMechaniX View Post
    This is going to be a touchy subject. The biggest problem I see is no matter which motor you stick in the boat we are all going to push the motors to the limit and eventually to failure. In the non-limited classes you can go as wild as the hardware available will allow. The racer will find the best compromise between power, hull weight, set-up, prop, etc to make a combo work. I don't think anyone complains about someone having an unfair advantage in the non-limited classes.

    I think we can all agree the motor is the limiting factor in the ltd classes. I would prefer to see current limiters used in line, say 75A and any motor/ESC combo allowed. This greatly reduces failures while allowing freedom to use different motors. I know this topic has been discussed at length previously.

    TG
    No Motor failures if you limit the prop!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,778

    Default

    Howard,
    Would you propose a specific spec prop like the 445 or any 45mm prop?

    TG
    Tyler Garrard
    NAMBA 639/IMPBA 20525
    T-Hydro @ 142.94mph former WR

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    1,580

    Default

    Easy to check too: All you need is a Tachometer. Any More than 30K at the prop on dry land and it is disqualified. (I am not sure what voltage to use for a charged 4s pack)

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    1,580

    Default

    Specific Prop and Pitch. Octura X445 or M445.... (only balanced no pitching an tweeking)
    Octura x445
    Diameter: 1.77"
    Total Pitch: 1.4x1.77=2.478" (For guys that don't know a prop is like a gear. Every rotation is going to move the boat 2.478" approx. There is slip in there and that is were tuning comes in.)

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    8,335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by photohoward1 View Post
    Specific Prop and Pitch. Octura X445 or M445.... (only balanced no pitching an tweeking)
    Octura x445
    Diameter: 1.77"
    Total Pitch: 1.4x1.77=2.478" (For guys that don't know a prop is like a gear. Every rotation is going to move the boat 2.478" approx. There is slip in there and that is were tuning comes in.)
    Only one prop allowed? Monos, Cats, Hydros, Sport Hydros, OPC Tunnels?? One prop?
    Darin E. Jordan - Renton, WA
    "Self-proclaimed skill-less leader in the hobby."

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    On
    Posts
    7,279

    Default

    Notice the topic was P-Limited motors...now we are on to props....didn't take long to go down a different tangent...

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    6,183

    Default

    I have a question. Not an answer. Just food fer the nogg'n.

    First a waltz down memory lane......haha

    Anybody remember LSH or LSO?

    Here's how it went..........we all already owned 700 motors. There were a variety available. We thought we had it figured out. We wanted to be inclusive and not committed to any one manufacturer. For fairness sake. We didn't want to exclude any suppliers or manufacturers. There were choices. All seemed good in the world. Group hug. Little kiss for the monkey. Then someone figured out how to have motors manufactured that were just a tick better. They looked just like 700 motors, smelled like em, sounded like em but not quite the same. Higher rpm with less heat. The SS1 wasn't the only choice but it was the only motor you could have if you wanted to win.

    Then brushless RTR's came along. Guys started running them in their old LSH and LSO boats. And why not? They were faster, ran cooler, and were just more fun. But to get even close with a legal 700 motor you killed it. Those of us clinging to the 700's because they were in the book were ridiculed by the cool kids. About 2008 everyone was starting to do it. It was cool that an RTR guy could show and run. They absolutely did. No way around it. Our club is filled with them. By the end of summer 2008 the 700 was a mere memory. So the spec had to be burned into the book somehow. LSH and LSO were history. We had good intentions.

    We thought we had it figured out. We wanted to be inclusive and not committed to any one manufacturer. For fairness sake. We didn't want to exclude any suppliers or manufacturers. There were choices. All seemed good in the world. Sensing a recurring theme? The spec attempted to include the two most popular sources for RTR motors. ProBoat and Aquacraft. For what ever reasons Proboat has moved on from their early offerings and Aquacraft has moved on from it's talent gene pool. The AQ line of motors is still available. Wild speculation for any of us to venture even a guess if that will always be the case.

    My point is..........thought I'd never get there didn't ya.

    All this effort we've put into not committing to a single motor has done jack for us. We ended up in the same damned spot. Motors in question again. Where are we going? Those motors suck why did we go with those? Everyone has a favorite they want included. Arguing about it for a year. Heck, friendships wrecked over it.

    Sooooo.........What if?..... we just settled on a single motor and ran with it? A TP3630, or some Leopard, or even a Neu if the price was right? We ain't ROAR. We're not going to get a bunch of manufacturers attention and get them to produce what we want. We can't even get BOAT manufacturers to produce what they already make consistently. If we came up with a 10 motor list, who's to say the HK motor wont suddenly be made with bearing "x,y,z" because they got a hot deal on some ABEC 5's? They don't care about FE and care even less about our tiny racing niche.

    Maybe if we went to a company like Neu and said......make us "this" and we'll buy a poop ton of them we could get a good motor that's comparable in performance to a 2030 that will last a decade. 36mmx60mm, 6 pole, 10 gauge wire, under $85 and tell him to expect to sell at least a 100 in the first batch. Keep allowing the current list but the as the old stuff disappears, what ever, we'll already for that next gen.

    I just am tired of the bickering over them. A reliable source, quality motor, at a decent price.......done.
    Noisy person

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    1,580

    Default

    Yep. One prop. The ultimate limiting factor. Evens the playing field. Obviously different motor have different watt ratings so limiting the RPM and. the pitch is the magic key.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    8,335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T.S.Davis View Post
    Maybe if we went to a company like Neu and said......make us "this" and we'll buy a poop ton of them we could get a good motor that's comparable in performance to a 2030 that will last a decade. 36mmx60mm, 6 pole, 10 gauge wire, under $85 and tell him to expect to sell at least a 100 in the first batch. Keep allowing the current list but the as the old stuff disappears, what ever, we'll already for that next gen.

    I just am tired of the bickering over them. A reliable source, quality motor, at a decent price.......done.
    That's how Classic Thunder has done their 1/10th Scales for years. They do their homework, select a motor to use, and that's the motor everyone uses. They have changed them from year to year (every couple of years or ???), but generally use the same stuff for a couple of seasons.

    If NAMBA spec'd a single, quality, appropriately sized motor, and leave everything else alone (any hull, prop, etc.), that would appeal to me as a racer. Would definitely be a "Limited Spec Class"... :) Let's face it, we kind of have that concept right now (AQ2030)...

    The motor offering could be revisited at such a time that supply dries up and another motor selected.

    Something worth discussing.

    If that would sustain or continue to grow the class, and would also keep us from beating the crap out of each other, I'm for it. I don't want to post... I want to race. But I want the racing to be fair and fun.
    Darin E. Jordan - Renton, WA
    "Self-proclaimed skill-less leader in the hobby."

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    6,183

    Default

    If the motor had some sort of tamper resistant construction, teching them would become non existent.
    Noisy person

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Wa
    Posts
    5,905

    Default

    Couldn't each club do that at the beginning of the year? You bring a motor in sealed box and put some kind sticker that would have to be damaged to tear the motor apart. you check each race to make sure the seal is not tampered with?

    Quote Originally Posted by T.S.Davis View Post
    If the motor had some sort of tamper resistant construction, teching them would become non existent.
    "Our society strives to avoid any possibility of offending anyone except God.
    Billy Graham

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    8,335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JimClark View Post
    Couldn't each club do that at the beginning of the year? You bring a motor in sealed box and put some kind sticker that would have to be damaged to tear the motor apart. you check each race to make sure the seal is not tampered with?
    Jim,

    How does Classic Thunder "tech" their motors, or do they even bother?
    Darin E. Jordan - Renton, WA
    "Self-proclaimed skill-less leader in the hobby."

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    ON
    Posts
    9,384

    Default

    The one I posted, 1900kv EDF motor is not a type of motor that you can disassemble easily at all. No screws anywhere. I found a cooler for mine and I'm going to solder it up, put it in my PTSS and see how it does vs Doby's Popeye powered by TP. We'll duke it out in a month at the Wellesley butter festival.... Those kinky Mennonites!! lol...

    Quote Originally Posted by T.S.Davis View Post
    If the motor had some sort of tamper resistant construction, teching them would become non existent.
    Nortavlag Bulc

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Wa
    Posts
    5,905

    Default

    I don't think they do. They just spec out the exact motor to use
    Quote Originally Posted by Darin Jordan View Post
    Jim,

    How does Classic Thunder "tech" their motors, or do they even bother?
    "Our society strives to avoid any possibility of offending anyone except God.
    Billy Graham

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Au
    Posts
    806

    Default

    Here's what our rule for restricted/limited is
    EA RESTRICTED MONO-
    Hull--Mono (No Steps) as per AMPBA SECTION 7.2.2
    Motor--700 brushed, Proboat A3630-1500 Part Number-(PRB3310)/(DYNM3835), Aquacraft L36/56 Part Number-(AQUG7000).(There is no rpm per volt rating after the motor identification numbers on this aquacraft motor).
    Battery--up to 12 x Sub-C NiMH cells or 4S lipo (up to 650 grams maximum)
    Speed Controller--Any brushed controller, Proboat Brushless 45 amp Part Number-(PRB3309), Aquacraft Marine Brushless 45 amp, Part Number-(AQUM7005 or AQUM7010).
    These Motors and Speed Controllers are the only ones to be used in this class, if in doubt please ask the Committee for confirmation before purchasing.
    Motor and Speed Controller are available for purchase from club.
    Brisbane,QLD, Aussie

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    or
    Posts
    1,088

    Default

    Specs:
    Can Measures: 36mm diameter x 60mm
    Poles: 4 pole (perhaps allow 4 OR 6 Pole)
    Weight: 252 Grams (That's without water jacket. Perhaps allow up to 260 Grams)
    Max KV: 2050

    I'd support this in a heartbeat. Run anything that fits those limits. One motor goes out of production or quality goes out the window and you're free to replace it with something else that fit the specs.

    What's the heaviest water jacket that's commonly used?
    Brian "Snowman" Buaas
    Team Castle Creations
    NAMBA FE Chairman

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    WI
    Posts
    842

    Default

    Bad mistake tying rules to Manufacturers. Short sighted. Short lived. Try and learn from this. Tried to express this many times.

    It would be another mistake to tie rules to manufacturer specs. All this is, is a set of numbers on paper. Some are legit, some are just marketing, and there is no standard method of testing across the manufacturers.

    Listen for once - Establish a 3 or 5 person Tech committee. Get representation from the East, West, Midwest etc. The motors have to be tested on the water with data logging. This is the only way to try and match up the performance as close as you can get it. All persons in the Tech committee must be independent of any suppler. The Tech committee then reports their findings on each motor requested to be analyzed for consideration. If the 3 or 5 person Tech committee shows that a particular motor is matched up with the current performance parameters we are looking for in a Spec boat it then can go to a vote. It's not rocket science. Us dumb cheese heads already done it.

    I still think there is merit in a prop spec. Albeit diameter only. 45mm or 46mm max limit. Turn a pipe with an ID measurement. Easy to check. Your P-Limited prop had better fit into the pipe. This still allows tweeking of props that we all enjoy doing.

    Take more time and try not to make more mistakes this time around. Cleaning up these messes are difficult once they happen.

    Doug
    Last edited by Doug Smock; 08-25-2015 at 05:51 PM. Reason: Off topic..............
    Doug Peterson
    IMPBA 19993
    www.badgerboaters.com

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    8,335

    Default

    Returning to the threads topic, as I drove home today and thought of the options, I decided that the proper thing to do, in my opinion, is to define a dimensional limitation, and, if people feel it's necessary, an upper KV limit, and simplify the rules once and for all.

    As I originally suggested above:

    Proposed P-Limited Motor Specs:

    MAX Motor Dimensions: 36mm Diameter x 60mm Length without water jacket
    Maximum Weight: 260 Grams without water jacket (Include contacts??)
    Poles: 4 or 6 poles allowed
    Max KV: 2050
    SENSORLESS, FIXED Timing motors only. No Sensored motors allowed.



    Let me lay out my reasoning for this, and then I think I'll drop off this topic for awhile and let you all have your say.

    1) The physical dimensions are EASILY verifiable with simple measuring equipment. Manufacturers specs would be for reference only.

    2) These physical dimensions are WIDELY available from about every manufacturer, in all price ranges.

    3) These physical dimensions are equivalent to the current P-LTD motors on the list.

    4) Motors of this size would NOT make the current motors obsolete and would be equivalent in performance, protecting existing investments while allow an endless supply of available motors.

    5) Maximum Weight is, again EASILY verified. by removing the water jacket and weighing. I would keep the water jacket out of the equation to prevent people from maximizing the motor weight by minimizing the water jacket in order to slip in a heavier motor.

    6) This weight is, again, equivalent to the currently allowed motors.

    7) The 4 or 6 Pole allowance makes available a wide range of motors.

    8) The 4 or 6 Pole allowance keeps the performance of the motors similar, while allowing for options to help suit different setups.

    9) The QUALITY of the motor and it's durability will no longer be a concern. It will become the responsibility of the competitor to decide how much quality they want. Cost won't be an issue, so if you want an inexpensive Chinese motor, that's your choice. If you want a better quality motor, that's an option as well. Performance of each will still be within an acceptable performance range, just like the current list of motors (PB1800 vs. AQ1800, for example).

    10) Rules will NO LONGER be tied to MANUFACTUR'S or BRANDs. No part numbers need to be listed, quality won't be an issue, supply won't be an issue. Again, if will fall on the competitor to decide. If the motor fits the spec, it's allowed.

    11) The Rules will NOT NEED TO BE REVISED AGAIN. Once you establish a spec, the discussion is OVER. Much like the Nitro engine rules, the dimensions are what they are. Go race! New motor comes out that fits the dimensions, there is no question as to it's legality if it fits the spec.

    12) KV Upper Limit only will allow the racer to choose where the "sweet spot" is for their particular hull/motor combination. This also would be beneficial for Offshore setups, Hydros, etc., where one might work better on 1500KV, while the other works better at 2050KV.

    13) Allowing any KV up to a limit protects people's current investments in hulls/hardware, etc., as, again, the competitor can choose the appropriate KV for their particular setup.

    14) KV is easily verified with readily available KV checkers.


    I'm sure there are other arguments for, and likely some against, defining the power system in this manner. It's all worth discussing.

    At this point, unless someone can give me an argument against this type of motor specification, this is the direction I would support.

    Thank you for considering my opinion. I'll look forward to hearing the thoughts of others.
    Last edited by Doug Smock; 08-25-2015 at 05:51 PM. Reason: off topic
    Darin E. Jordan - Renton, WA
    "Self-proclaimed skill-less leader in the hobby."

Page 1 of 27 12311 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •