Be careful not to destroy your motor, when trying timing rpm with no load on your car, or bench testing, seen a few motors go bang testing like this.

I don't want to get ahead of myself... but the new software appears to have addressed the problem. Still called v3_508, but it's from the 121204 database.

Brakes on the bench are sharp at the first pull, the tell-tale delay before the full-brake light illuminates is virtually indistinguishable.

Racing tomorrow so will get a chance to test properly.

I updated to the new software and have noticed an improvement of brakes on the bench, yet to test it on the track.
Looking forward to seeing your results on the track.

Cheers
Rob.

how much difference in on track performance is there between the v2.1 and the v3? mod and stock opinions welcome.

I just upgraded my V2.1 to the V3. I race 21.5 boosted TC. I'm still playing around with my boost and motor timing settings (I also changed motor brands), but so far, I have noticed the power delivery is much smoother, brakes much stronger (at least in boosted racing), case size is smaller & much better quality, ESC fan is much stronger and my ESC & motor temps are lower with more or less the same car speed on the track.

There's not much difference between the V3 and V3.1 2S ESC, so I'm glad I grabbed mine when RC Mart were selling them for $135 each :nod::D

Test complete.

Test done on a 13.5...

ESC @ zero boost & zero turbo
Endbell timing:
0 - 20,800 rpm
10 - 22,140rpm
20 - 25,620 rpm
25 - 29,520 rpm (maxed)

Endbell @ zero timing
ESC Boost:
10 - 21,540 rpm
15 - 21,840 rpm
20 - 22,320 rpm
25 - 23,220 rpm
30 - 28,140 rpm
35 - 36,240 rpm
Setting boost to zero and timing on turbo gave similar readings

Found that to match rpm with endbell timing @ 25 degrees, ESC boost had to be set at 31 degrees. This means:

25/31 = 0.806 = For every 1 point of ESC boost, timing is increased by 0.806 degrees. lewis110 was right.

However as per Hobbywings manual, max timing will not exceed 60/64 points (firmware dependant) even if boost & turbo is maxed. This means max timing added will only be around 50 degrees total.

Interesting numbers, although on looking at them, I think there is something up with the esc ones. Have a look at the attached graph of your results, there is a very distinct kink in the ESC line... whereas the endbell is more linear. In theory, they should be both linear additions.
What other boost settings did you use?
I will state again (and this was direct from the Hobbywing factory), that the max amount of timing was 36° actual.

RPM gain was pretty linear with timing up to about 30 degrees which then increased exponentially from there on. Experienced the same with another motor previously when I twisted the endbell past 30 degrees. Boost setting was start rpm 1000 with accel 150/degree, which does not matter as those settings only affects acceleration. The whole idea of testing it was to see rpm gain from boost to match endbell timing.

I don't intend to argue with whats on Hobbywings website but 36 degrees of timing does not produce so much rpms like what we experience. Find a motor which you can twist the endbell to 36 degrees and run in blinky mode, after that put it back to zero and run boosted with max boost & turbo settings and you'll know what I mean.

Hi,

Can you tell me which motor you were using to test. And did you record the Amp of the test point?

Thanks.

Motor was Turnigy Trackstar. Did not record Amps. True zero endbell timing was at -1.8 from centre line. This was determined by running sensorless first then matching endbell timing to rpm.

very interesting.
using the endbell to 20 (average motor current) which would be the rpm band, tested it?
The important thing (is difficult) is to what extent gains in performace, and find out what that point is to lose performance.

Nice job! ;)

Interesting approach. But I would also call the 22Krpm a match as well, which means .5deg per step.

Along time ago, Micheal, and Angelo came on here and posted (basicly when I complained really loudly), that the HW was now using steps instead of the "true" degrees. The old FW used degrees (I believe 1224 was one of the last that used "true" degrees.)

I am sure they had their reasons, but Micheal gave a quick formula to calculate between the two, and it worked out to ~=.6 deg/per step, and max 38 degs timing.

I think your approach was very original. Bravo!

Cheers,
Shawn.

Indoor track today didn't really need brakes. The big test will be when the outdoor season starts around March, the local track has a 2 or 3 big stops.

Ok. I'm planning on racing tomorrow myself on a medium sized asphalt track and will see how the brakes work after the update.

Cheers
Rob.

i have Xerun 120A 1S model. What is correct voltage cutoff for 1cell lipo's????? Will be used in 13.5 WGT
Thanks
idbdoug