1.18+ cells -vs- orion's 1.19= cells
#106
Tech Fanatic
Originally posted by Rick Hohwart
Don't forget to tell "someone" to use the packs as intended (on the track) and report those results too.
Don't forget to tell "someone" to use the packs as intended (on the track) and report those results too.
#107
Originally posted by Jack Rimer
That's right. We want an "unbiased" report just like the one Orion did for RC World. No monkey business.
That's right. We want an "unbiased" report just like the one Orion did for RC World. No monkey business.
#108
Now this is the kind of thread that makes me willing to read them all from the beginning..
PS: Just posting so I got auto subscribe
PS: Just posting so I got auto subscribe
#109
This thread is too funny. I'm not one to get into politics, but I have to agree with Danny from SMC 100%. We've matched thousands of cells, and I can say with certainty that there is no such thing as a 460 second 1.195+ GP3300 (Not a GP3700) cell. It DOES NOT exist - Yes let me write again - It DOES NOT exist. Even if you were to zap the cell to death or dead short it, the metals inside the cell that hold the energy would burn away, leaving you with less runtime... I could potentially see 400 seconds at 1.195 volts on a GP3300 cell... but certainly not 460 seconds of runtime. There are ways for matchers to increase voltage of a battery cell, but there is NO way to increase runtime, again as it is dependent on the amount of active material that is encased in the cell. One way or another something is NOT right with those numbers.
In truth, in past few weeks GP has playing with their cell chemistry again. The result seems to be higher voltage, but runtime has come way down. Where we use to see a fair amount of 430-450's, it now seems that low 430's are about the peak runtime on the 3300 cell. I believe GP is making this change in anticipation of the release of the GP3700 cell. Unless there is a discernable difference between the 3700 and 3300 cell in terms of runtime, no one will buy them...
If it looks to good to be true, it probably isn't...
In truth, in past few weeks GP has playing with their cell chemistry again. The result seems to be higher voltage, but runtime has come way down. Where we use to see a fair amount of 430-450's, it now seems that low 430's are about the peak runtime on the 3300 cell. I believe GP is making this change in anticipation of the release of the GP3700 cell. Unless there is a discernable difference between the 3700 and 3300 cell in terms of runtime, no one will buy them...
If it looks to good to be true, it probably isn't...
#110
Originally posted by ghuber
This thread is too funny. I'm not one to get into politics, but I have to agree with Danny from SMC 100%. We've matched thousands of cells, and I can say with certainty that there is no such thing as a 460 second 1.195+ GP3300 (Not a GP3700) cell. It DOES NOT exist - Yes let me write again - It DOES NOT exist. Even if you were to zap the cell to death or dead short it, the metals inside the cell that hold the energy would burn away, leaving you with less runtime... I could potentially see 400 seconds at 1.195 volts on a GP3300 cell... but certainly not 460 seconds of runtime. There are ways for matchers to increase voltage of a battery cell, but there is NO way to increase runtime, again as it is dependent on the amount of active material that is encased in the cell. One way or another something is NOT right with those numbers.
In truth, in past few weeks GP has playing with their cell chemistry again. The result seems to be higher voltage, but runtime has come way down. Where we use to see a fair amount of 430-450's, it now seems that low 430's are about the peak runtime on the 3300 cell. I believe GP is making this change in anticipation of the release of the GP3700 cell. Unless there is a discernable difference between the 3700 and 3300 cell in terms of runtime, no one will buy them...
If it looks to good to be true, it probably isn't...
This thread is too funny. I'm not one to get into politics, but I have to agree with Danny from SMC 100%. We've matched thousands of cells, and I can say with certainty that there is no such thing as a 460 second 1.195+ GP3300 (Not a GP3700) cell. It DOES NOT exist - Yes let me write again - It DOES NOT exist. Even if you were to zap the cell to death or dead short it, the metals inside the cell that hold the energy would burn away, leaving you with less runtime... I could potentially see 400 seconds at 1.195 volts on a GP3300 cell... but certainly not 460 seconds of runtime. There are ways for matchers to increase voltage of a battery cell, but there is NO way to increase runtime, again as it is dependent on the amount of active material that is encased in the cell. One way or another something is NOT right with those numbers.
In truth, in past few weeks GP has playing with their cell chemistry again. The result seems to be higher voltage, but runtime has come way down. Where we use to see a fair amount of 430-450's, it now seems that low 430's are about the peak runtime on the 3300 cell. I believe GP is making this change in anticipation of the release of the GP3700 cell. Unless there is a discernable difference between the 3700 and 3300 cell in terms of runtime, no one will buy them...
If it looks to good to be true, it probably isn't...
#111
Originally posted by speedxl
Who said anything about 460's?
Who said anything about 460's?
#112
Tech Regular
Please read the posts before you reply, nobody say Orion has 1.19v with 460s. Speedxl only say 1.19v with 430s and RC driver gary say 1.197 with 417s.
#113
Tech Regular
WELL AS I WAS PROMISED A LIFETIME SUPPLY OF Batterys hah hah id like to test them but THEY NEVER SHOWED UP!!!!!!! OSCAR MUST BE SENDONG THEM BY PONY!
#114
Originally posted by pony klr
WELL AS I WAS PROMISED A LIFETIME SUPPLY OF Batterys hah hah id like to test them but THEY NEVER SHOWED UP!!!!!!! OSCAR MUST BE SENDONG THEM BY PONY!
WELL AS I WAS PROMISED A LIFETIME SUPPLY OF Batterys hah hah id like to test them but THEY NEVER SHOWED UP!!!!!!! OSCAR MUST BE SENDONG THEM BY PONY!
#115
Tech Master
iTrader: (19)
Caveman,
http://www.jrxs.net/forums/uploads/p...1106189589.jpg
Or look at page two of this thread. 449 sec @ 1.195V
http://www.jrxs.net/forums/uploads/p...1106189589.jpg
Or look at page two of this thread. 449 sec @ 1.195V
#116
Tech Regular
Advil, sorry. Oops, I think those batteries came from Atsushi Hara.
#117
Originally posted by ghuber
Ah seems I misread that, but wrote I applies to 450 seconds at 1.195 volts as printed on label of the cells in the picture... Those numbers do not exist if the battery is being matched at the industry standard 5-6 amp charge rate, 30 amp discharge, .90 cut-off, and 5000 second discharge end time.
Ah seems I misread that, but wrote I applies to 450 seconds at 1.195 volts as printed on label of the cells in the picture... Those numbers do not exist if the battery is being matched at the industry standard 5-6 amp charge rate, 30 amp discharge, .90 cut-off, and 5000 second discharge end time.
Mc smooth on here knows what I am talking about because his dad is the infamus Mike Mcbride of the old school battery matcher Team Smooth, and they experimented with that process back in the late 80's and early 90's!
The batteries were awsome because they were matched under racing simulations.
You people are getting out of control you need to start doing some reading before making assumptions without knowing the facts.
But one fact is for sure there are matchers out there fudging numbers.
#118
Tech Regular
STILL NO BATTERYS !!!!!!!
#119
Tech Fanatic
speedxl- If you want to use a variable rate discharge, shouldn't you discharge at a higher rate that more closely emulates an actual race? And if so, shouldn't the numbers be LOWER not HIGHER? Why use anything below 30 amps? Unless you are running a Mabuchi motor, I doubt even 30 amps is an accurate measure of actual discharge amperage.
#120
Tech Fanatic
pony klr- If Oscar said he sent them, then I'm sure he did. I've known Oscar for a long time and he would not still be a respected figure in the industry if he was not a man of his word. We may disagree about many things, but I don't doubt his integrity.