Motor Differences
11-03-2016, 08:49 AM
#16
Put it this way.
Why do you think the fastest cars are the most powerful? (not necessarily viceversa).
Changing the gearing might help reduce the power drain on acceleration but you will have to accelerate for longer.
Ultimately speed is hard to achieve and maintain and the price paid is power (energy) consumed.
11-03-2016, 09:22 AM
#17
Ok thanks for the replies I have my answer!!!
11-05-2016, 07:32 AM
#18
Update:
I got the 800kv installed and did a couple test hits, looks like the peak amps went down and the continuous amps went up. Not enough to worry about more testing needed...
I got the 800kv installed and did a couple test hits, looks like the peak amps went down and the continuous amps went up. Not enough to worry about more testing needed...
11-05-2016, 08:14 AM
#19
Is the car faster?
Gearing?
How long does it take to get to top speed (compared to the 600kV motor)?
Gearing?
How long does it take to get to top speed (compared to the 600kV motor)?
11-05-2016, 08:19 AM
#20
It did seem to be much more responsive, and the logs show much more rpm's and speed. So yes I think so, I will know more later today after testing..
11-05-2016, 08:42 PM
#21
Another Update: Yes it is much faster and gets there faster. Also the peak amps are much lower and the continuous amps are a lil bit higher not enough to worry. The overall speed is about 10 mph more and the motor temps are really cool...
11-06-2016, 01:31 AM
#22
what gearing?
11-06-2016, 07:51 AM
#23
11-06-2016, 08:19 AM
#24
I don't know what your gearing was before, so can't compare. Is it higher or lower?
11-06-2016, 09:43 AM
#25
11-06-2016, 07:17 PM
#26
Well, there you go. Change back to the old ratio and log some data and then you'll be able to pinpoint what happened (though you have some info already). Little wonder it gets there quicker and with less Amps. Would be curious though to see the Amps at the old ratio. What you are doing is building a power/torque curve for the new motor. You just need some more points on the curve to define it better and see where you'd expect the max would be for both torque and power. Does your data logger record RPM?
11-07-2016, 04:13 AM
#27
Well, there you go. Change back to the old ratio and log some data and then you'll be able to pinpoint what happened (though you have some info already). Little wonder it gets there quicker and with less Amps. Would be curious though to see the Amps at the old ratio. What you are doing is building a power/torque curve for the new motor. You just need some more points on the curve to define it better and see where you'd expect the max would be for both torque and power. Does your data logger record RPM?
11-07-2016, 11:35 AM
#28
I did some real testing Saturday night and was impressed and happy with the results. The peak amps are all under 240 amps and the continuous amps are 160 and less. The only dislike is the battery draw, the load is so impressive it is pulling the packs down 5-7 volts with each run of 132'... Think I need bigger packs..
Look up:
IMDRA.com
RCDRL
11-07-2016, 12:03 PM
#29
It's Drag racing! why don't you just charge the batteries for every run? What scale is your car, 1/10th? I noticed you mentioning a 2.5sec run over 132'. That's insanely slow for a 12 cell dragster. Many 3 cell dragsters run under 1.5sec at over 100mph in 132'. I would suggest looking into one or two of the RC Drag Racing clubs to get some better informed advice. Drag racing is a completely different discipline so much of the advice you will get here is irrelevant. Talk to an experienced drag racer. You will see what I mean.
Look up:
IMDRA.com
RCDRL
Look up:
IMDRA.com
RCDRL