19LikesRadio Benchmark program and results.
08-26-2017, 09:04 AM
#32
I think the "zero" latency that Sanwa claims is due to the fact that anything faster than 2ms can't be done with normal digital servos. Therefore if you get a 2 - 2.2ms reading them you have virtually "zero" latency because you responding as fast as the servo can move.
Even with SR type servos the theoretical limit may still be somewhere between 1.5 - 2ms max for minimum latency. At that point I'm not even sure if a 380'ish Tx Framerate would be fast enough to get down to 1.5ms. Condac tested the 4PX in race mode with the TFhss Rx (telemetry off) to be at 2.1ms for minimum latency, so it's vertually as fast with digital servos as the M12S and MT44S. With that noted, the new SR protocol that Futaba is debuting for Sbus servos on the 7PX seems to be the same/similar to Sanwa's SR setup in that they can use these special servos that have a 750u. Therefore it may allow the potential lower latencies I've mentioned for the M12S/MT44S as well. It is interesting to ponder that the 4PX supposedly has the same CPU that the M12S, and upcoming 7PX use. The limiting factor for the 4PX's Tx frame rates getting towards the 380's Hrz of the M12S seems to be the Rx. Condac found that the 4PX's Tx frame rate actually changed based upon the Rx (Sfhss, Fasst, TFhss), topping off at 333 Hrz with the Tfhss (telemetry off). The upcoming Futaba SR protocol will probably raise this Tx frame rate. So we 4px owners are looking forward to hopefully having Futaba port this over to us as well.
Even with SR type servos the theoretical limit may still be somewhere between 1.5 - 2ms max for minimum latency. At that point I'm not even sure if a 380'ish Tx Framerate would be fast enough to get down to 1.5ms. Condac tested the 4PX in race mode with the TFhss Rx (telemetry off) to be at 2.1ms for minimum latency, so it's vertually as fast with digital servos as the M12S and MT44S. With that noted, the new SR protocol that Futaba is debuting for Sbus servos on the 7PX seems to be the same/similar to Sanwa's SR setup in that they can use these special servos that have a 750u. Therefore it may allow the potential lower latencies I've mentioned for the M12S/MT44S as well. It is interesting to ponder that the 4PX supposedly has the same CPU that the M12S, and upcoming 7PX use. The limiting factor for the 4PX's Tx frame rates getting towards the 380's Hrz of the M12S seems to be the Rx. Condac found that the 4PX's Tx frame rate actually changed based upon the Rx (Sfhss, Fasst, TFhss), topping off at 333 Hrz with the Tfhss (telemetry off). The upcoming Futaba SR protocol will probably raise this Tx frame rate. So we 4px owners are looking forward to hopefully having Futaba port this over to us as well.
01-31-2018, 01:12 PM
#33
I will see if i can make a small guide on how I setup the radios during the testing. But don't expect any soon, it is still summer and most of the spare time goes to driving and building RC cars 
Sadly I have tested most of the radios in my small club already, only a few old stuff left.
Sadly I have tested most of the radios in my small club already, only a few old stuff left.
08-12-2018, 05:03 PM
#34
Justpoet-
I haven't seen anything more from Condac. I changed to an M12S in February of this year. The Sanwa's lower latency, better average latency, and higher Tx frame rate were noticeable (over my 4PX); I found myself turning in earlier than anticipated, and loved it. The M12S made my car (in back to back tests) easier to drive consistently; I think this may be what people are referring to when they speak of feeling more "connected".
Lately I've been able to run the Sanwa servo in my 12th scale using SSR mode and I love it; it's even faster and more responsive (part servo and part SSR mode). I have never had to rebind more than once when I was comparing my SSR servo vs my SHR one. To make sure this was working properly, I would change it to SSR mode with my SHR servo and it would never work.
Due to the new Fhss 5 protocol, the new M17 is supposed to be even faster than the M12S with its Fhss 4 protocol. It would be nice to see quantitative data about all of this but I'm happy with my M12s.
I haven't seen anything more from Condac. I changed to an M12S in February of this year. The Sanwa's lower latency, better average latency, and higher Tx frame rate were noticeable (over my 4PX); I found myself turning in earlier than anticipated, and loved it. The M12S made my car (in back to back tests) easier to drive consistently; I think this may be what people are referring to when they speak of feeling more "connected".
Lately I've been able to run the Sanwa servo in my 12th scale using SSR mode and I love it; it's even faster and more responsive (part servo and part SSR mode). I have never had to rebind more than once when I was comparing my SSR servo vs my SHR one. To make sure this was working properly, I would change it to SSR mode with my SHR servo and it would never work.
Due to the new Fhss 5 protocol, the new M17 is supposed to be even faster than the M12S with its Fhss 4 protocol. It would be nice to see quantitative data about all of this but I'm happy with my M12s.
08-13-2018, 03:13 AM
#35
I still have not found any M12* radios to test, I will try and bring my gear with me when I travel to other places to see if someone can help me. But it is all about finding a radio that the owner allow me to disassemble.
10-22-2018, 12:24 PM
#37
Tech Master
iTrader: (4)
The question for me is what is not so much the latency/speed of a flysky but what are risks of having this system compared to a Sanwa etc. Are trim settings more solid and don't drift, for instance center trim. If that drifts you will never be able to drive with consistency or speed.
I guess what Im saying is are we getting our moneys worth when we buy a Sanwa Futaba Spektrum?
I figure if latency overall is less than say 6ms and the settings dont drift you should now focus on setup and driving
I guess what Im saying is are we getting our moneys worth when we buy a Sanwa Futaba Spektrum?
I figure if latency overall is less than say 6ms and the settings dont drift you should now focus on setup and driving
10-23-2018, 01:50 AM
#38
The question for me is what is not so much the latency/speed of a flysky but what are risks of having this system compared to a Sanwa etc. Are trim settings more solid and don't drift, for instance center trim. If that drifts you will never be able to drive with consistency or speed.
I guess what Im saying is are we getting our moneys worth when we buy a Sanwa Futaba Spektrum?
I figure if latency overall is less than say 6ms and the settings dont drift you should now focus on setup and driving
I guess what Im saying is are we getting our moneys worth when we buy a Sanwa Futaba Spektrum?
I figure if latency overall is less than say 6ms and the settings dont drift you should now focus on setup and driving
About the drifting of settings, I cannot answer that and I know you said it's not so much about latency but they were so glaring that it was hard not to notice them. The steering especially felt delayed. Maybe it's because I'm used to Sanwa/Futaba that the delays were so apparent but I can't imagine that would do any good. Add to that the gyro wobbles we noticed with it; the steering would wobble slow and wavy. We tried testing our transmitters (mt4, mt4s, mt44, 4pls, 3pv) on the same chassis and the wobbles were gone.
Every single one of those who changed to Sanwa or Futaba said it was worth it. They bemoaned why they even cheaped out in the first place when they spent more now since they had to sell them at a loss.
10-23-2018, 02:48 AM
#39
I created this thread and test methods because I was tired of peoples feelings. All you hear in the arguments of why a radio is better than the other is how people feel. They complain about plastic or rubber quality and how easy the menu is to use and things like that. And it makes no difference to actual technical performance. I wanted to know the real performance, something that are lacking in the RC world, people always buy in to the crap manufacturers sell them, noone verify if the claims are real. As long as the wheel turns and the information is sent to the servo fast enough, the plastic quality is irrelevant. I have seen "reviews" on the tube where people say the feel the difference and think a radio is faster than the other, when my test said the opposite.
So with the real technical information about the delay times people can compare and buy the radio they feel have the things they are looking for, if it is best value or best feeling is up to you.
The only thing missing is more radios from more manufactures to make this test thread better.
So with the real technical information about the delay times people can compare and buy the radio they feel have the things they are looking for, if it is best value or best feeling is up to you.
The only thing missing is more radios from more manufactures to make this test thread better.
10-23-2018, 05:10 AM
#40
I created this thread and test methods because I was tired of peoples feelings. All you hear in the arguments of why a radio is better than the other is how people feel. They complain about plastic or rubber quality and how easy the menu is to use and things like that. And it makes no difference to actual technical performance. I wanted to know the real performance, something that are lacking in the RC world, people always buy in to the crap manufacturers sell them, noone verify if the claims are real. As long as the wheel turns and the information is sent to the servo fast enough, the plastic quality is irrelevant. I have seen "reviews" on the tube where people say the feel the difference and think a radio is faster than the other, when my test said the opposite.
So with the real technical information about the delay times people can compare and buy the radio they feel have the things they are looking for, if it is best value or best feeling is up to you.
The only thing missing is more radios from more manufactures to make this test thread better.
So with the real technical information about the delay times people can compare and buy the radio they feel have the things they are looking for, if it is best value or best feeling is up to you.
The only thing missing is more radios from more manufactures to make this test thread better.
. Nevertheless, your findings and the real world shows the huge delay the flysky has.
10-23-2018, 05:55 AM
#41
I would like to share a very recent experience that I had with a Radiolink RC4G, which I was forced to use as a backup system for several weeks while I sent my primary "Luxury Brand" system in for service. I would consider Radiolink to be a huge step up from FlySky in terms of the quality of the signal. Both budget systems share nearly the same frame rates on paper but Radiolink isn't plagued with all the issues that can cause problems with direct sequencing which is what Fly Sky uses. Anyway, I used Radiolink for something like 6 race days over a 3 week period and both my fast lap times and my average 95% consistency remained the same, in fact I had a couple 98% consistency runs sprinkled in too. Don't get me wrong, I have no plans to continue racing with Radiolink for too many reasons than I care to list, but for someone who is in a pinch, a cheap budget system like Radiolink does in fact have the ability to deliver comparable results with luxury brand systems. Some key differences that set a luxury system apart are mostly around the ergos, and yes I agree that ergos can help improve comfort/confidence, this doesn't necessarily translate to faster lap times and better consistency. A focused driver can still be competitive with a budget system, or least with Radiolink in my case.
I have raced with FlySky in the past, and I was burned too many times with hit and miss glitching, I would also get burned by other systems who used direct sequencing to the point where I will never buy another system again that uses direct sequencing
I have raced with FlySky in the past, and I was burned too many times with hit and miss glitching, I would also get burned by other systems who used direct sequencing to the point where I will never buy another system again that uses direct sequencing
10-24-2018, 01:16 AM
#42
If I can add my experience with a modded GT3B, the disconnected feel of the radio is simply the ADC (analog-digital converter) that uses too much pot samples to smooth it out. With the setting changed to minimum ( one frame, from originally four!) the radio becomes way more connected.
10-24-2018, 05:39 AM
#43
That's nice to hear, kinda wish I knew about that feature and would've tried it out before I sold all my FlySky systems, I did try the firmware hack once, but I ultimately did not care for it because it was nearly impossible to program anything on the radio without having the firmware hack guide at your side. All the mod menu options were extremely cryptic. You also had to rob Peter to pay Paul in that many short cut buttons were disabled and you had to painfully navigate through the primary dial selector for the most menial tasks. Then there were many features that weren't documented in the hack guide, but folks would learn through trial and error until they got a feature working, here's an example of getting channel mixing to work so folks can see some examples of what I'm talking about:
