HACKER BRUSHLESS MOTORS
08-08-2008, 02:09 PM
#391
Well, paper data is not everything 
Some seem to be the same, but performance is.... DIFFERENT!
In my opinion:
Hacker - E and C series - one of the strongest and quietest, underestimated on paper, quiet, not so hot as some others, no cogging at all
Tekin Redline - quiet as hell, fast, a lot of current eater, hot runner, hard to kill, little more cogging than others
GM Racing - EVO3, SPORT and PRO - more than average speed, the coolest of everything on market, best efficiency, long runtimes, quite noisy, something like diesel TDI
Lehner Basic - much underestimated, kV always given with load, small, quiet, not so hot, average curent, hard to kill
LRP - not really well working with other than their speedos, fast, the rest average
These are my opinions only
Some seem to be the same, but performance is.... DIFFERENT!In my opinion:
Hacker - E and C series - one of the strongest and quietest, underestimated on paper, quiet, not so hot as some others, no cogging at all
Tekin Redline - quiet as hell, fast, a lot of current eater, hot runner, hard to kill, little more cogging than others
GM Racing - EVO3, SPORT and PRO - more than average speed, the coolest of everything on market, best efficiency, long runtimes, quite noisy, something like diesel TDI
Lehner Basic - much underestimated, kV always given with load, small, quiet, not so hot, average curent, hard to kill
LRP - not really well working with other than their speedos, fast, the rest average
These are my opinions only
08-13-2008, 12:42 PM
#394
Tech Master
iTrader: (80)
Chris,
Hows it going? I will give the Hacker a +1. I ran it for the first time at Big Dad's last Wednesday and was consistently faster. I switched over from the Speed Passion BL. If it wasnt for stupid mistakes I made I would have had my best run yet. If you have any gearing questions for 17.5 let me know.
Chirag
Hows it going? I will give the Hacker a +1. I ran it for the first time at Big Dad's last Wednesday and was consistently faster. I switched over from the Speed Passion BL. If it wasnt for stupid mistakes I made I would have had my best run yet. If you have any gearing questions for 17.5 let me know.
Chirag
08-19-2008, 06:05 AM
#395
Found this in another thread....
The 13.5T motors are in stock you can order them online if you would like at www.hackerbrushless.com. The newest 13.5T motors have a removable sensor plug as well.
The 13.5T motors are in stock you can order them online if you would like at www.hackerbrushless.com. The newest 13.5T motors have a removable sensor plug as well.
08-28-2008, 04:57 PM
#396
I'm hoping someone out there with an engineering background in motors or someone from Hacker can explain \ clarify something for me.
I've done a lot of research on the internet and have yet to find a clear answer to why the Hacker motors have such a low Kv value but are faster then a Novak.
From everything I've found the Kv rating is the best indicator to how fast a motor will spin which should relate to MPH for an RC car.
If this is truly the case then how is it possible for a Hacker 13.5 motor to produce more speed then Novak. The Novak 13.5 has a Kv rating of 3300 rpm/v but only produces 195 watts and the Hacker is 2360 rpm/v at 370 watts. Again from what I've read the Hacker motor is more likely to maintain it's Kv rating under a high load where the Novak may start to drop off since it has a lower power rating. But on a large track with a long straight the Novak should win on speed. This is not what I'm experiencing however. I recently purchased a H13.5 and this motor is very fast compared to Novak. In fact, i was turning the same fast lap times as cars in the 10.5 class. The track we run on is 70'x110' asphalt.
I purchased this motor based on others that have run it and am very pleased so far. But it was hard making the decision because if you use the numbers and math Novak would be the logical choice.
Did Hacker just no report the proper Kv number or is there more to this puzzle then what I've been able to find through research on the internet?
A good explanation of how Kv and Watts relate to one another and how two motors with different Kv values could perform the same would be very appreciated.
Thanks in advanced.
I've done a lot of research on the internet and have yet to find a clear answer to why the Hacker motors have such a low Kv value but are faster then a Novak.
From everything I've found the Kv rating is the best indicator to how fast a motor will spin which should relate to MPH for an RC car.
If this is truly the case then how is it possible for a Hacker 13.5 motor to produce more speed then Novak. The Novak 13.5 has a Kv rating of 3300 rpm/v but only produces 195 watts and the Hacker is 2360 rpm/v at 370 watts. Again from what I've read the Hacker motor is more likely to maintain it's Kv rating under a high load where the Novak may start to drop off since it has a lower power rating. But on a large track with a long straight the Novak should win on speed. This is not what I'm experiencing however. I recently purchased a H13.5 and this motor is very fast compared to Novak. In fact, i was turning the same fast lap times as cars in the 10.5 class. The track we run on is 70'x110' asphalt.
I purchased this motor based on others that have run it and am very pleased so far. But it was hard making the decision because if you use the numbers and math Novak would be the logical choice.
Did Hacker just no report the proper Kv number or is there more to this puzzle then what I've been able to find through research on the internet?
A good explanation of how Kv and Watts relate to one another and how two motors with different Kv values could perform the same would be very appreciated.
Thanks in advanced.
08-28-2008, 10:05 PM
#398
bk, without seeing the motors in pieces and also dynoing them, I can't say what feature makes the Hacker faster. Instead, here's some info on electric motors.
First off, when a motor can get your car around the track faster, what you are actually seeing is a more powerful motor. The key word here is power.
Power (at a given RPM) = RPM * Torque (at that RPM)
The fact that your Hacker gets around the track faster despite turning slower, necessarily means that it puts out more torque.
You mention that more kV equals more speed, but that isn't necessarily true. The part of the equation you are missing is gear ratio and electrical resistance. A lack of kV can be cancelled out by running a taller gear, though normally more kV is faster because a higher kV motor is more efficient.
Why is higher kV normally more efficient? Because it is usually achieved by using fewer wire turns, which decreases the motor's resistance. In this case, however, number of turns is stuck at 13.5, so having less kV doesn't necessarily make the motor less efficient. It slows the motor down, but the motor makes up for it in added torque.
The lower kV could be due to many design differences between the two: smaller air gap due to larger magnet and/or smaller stator ID, better magnet, better stator shape. Note that all of those actually make for a more efficient motor. That is to say, they make the motor more powerful.
Without having seen one, I'm going to take everything I've mentioned above, including the motor specs and performance results, and conclude that the Hacker is a better designed and built motor. As a consequence, it is more powerful and your car gets around faster. As a side effect, it has a lower kV.
Taking the two apart side by side will allow someone to determine just what I mean by "better designed and built." I'm pretty sure it involves most of the design differences I mentioned above, and perhaps also better wire winding.
-Adam
First off, when a motor can get your car around the track faster, what you are actually seeing is a more powerful motor. The key word here is power.
Power (at a given RPM) = RPM * Torque (at that RPM)
The fact that your Hacker gets around the track faster despite turning slower, necessarily means that it puts out more torque.
You mention that more kV equals more speed, but that isn't necessarily true. The part of the equation you are missing is gear ratio and electrical resistance. A lack of kV can be cancelled out by running a taller gear, though normally more kV is faster because a higher kV motor is more efficient.
Why is higher kV normally more efficient? Because it is usually achieved by using fewer wire turns, which decreases the motor's resistance. In this case, however, number of turns is stuck at 13.5, so having less kV doesn't necessarily make the motor less efficient. It slows the motor down, but the motor makes up for it in added torque.
The lower kV could be due to many design differences between the two: smaller air gap due to larger magnet and/or smaller stator ID, better magnet, better stator shape. Note that all of those actually make for a more efficient motor. That is to say, they make the motor more powerful.
Without having seen one, I'm going to take everything I've mentioned above, including the motor specs and performance results, and conclude that the Hacker is a better designed and built motor. As a consequence, it is more powerful and your car gets around faster. As a side effect, it has a lower kV.
Taking the two apart side by side will allow someone to determine just what I mean by "better designed and built." I'm pretty sure it involves most of the design differences I mentioned above, and perhaps also better wire winding.
-Adam
08-29-2008, 07:49 AM
#399
Thank you Adamge. This helps clear up some of the confusion. I figured there had to be more to speed output then just Kv. The hacker motor has far more Power output which it seems makes up for the lower Kv.
Is it true the Torque out of a motor is the inverse of the Kv? Again this would explain why this motor is faster.
Is there an equation one could use that takes into account Kv maybe Kt and Wattage to give a final comparison. These seem to be the two parameters motor manufactures want to to give out.
Thanks again.
Is it true the Torque out of a motor is the inverse of the Kv? Again this would explain why this motor is faster.
Is there an equation one could use that takes into account Kv maybe Kt and Wattage to give a final comparison. These seem to be the two parameters motor manufactures want to to give out.
Thanks again.
08-29-2008, 08:59 AM
#400
"Is it true the Torque out of a motor is the inverse of the Kv?"
You can't really say that is true. A small motor can have a low kV without a lot of torque. What you can say is that, if you have two motors of largely the same specs (length, rotor diameter, turns, stator diameters...), the one with the better design will generally have a lower kV. But again, this side-effect has so many pre-requisites ("same specs") that you shouldn't use kV to judge how powerful a motor will be.
If you want to predict how fast a motor will be, you need to know how powerful it is. The power rating is the most important number.
Better still, to make an accurate prediction you would use a dyno sheet of power throughout the RPM range at an average full-throttle battery voltage. A power rating in watts is just a snapshot of that dyno sheet where power peaks. Since we require power from a standstill right up to top speed, that single power rating doesn't tell you everything. And since we need the motor to live through five minutes of load, the dyno sheet won't tell you the whole story.
Best of all, to make an accurate prediction you would use a dyno sheet of power throughout the RPM range when loaded by the friction and inertia of your R/C car and supplied with the voltage your battery puts out at those continuously changing loads and throughout its capacity (run-time). That's what most of us call racing the motor.
So what I'm saying is, lower kV than other motors of the same spec is a good sign. A higher power rating than the other motors is a very good sign. A dyno curve that is always higher than the other motors is a great sign. More laps in the same amount of time is the best sign of all, and the only conclusive predictor of a motor being faster.
You can't really say that is true. A small motor can have a low kV without a lot of torque. What you can say is that, if you have two motors of largely the same specs (length, rotor diameter, turns, stator diameters...), the one with the better design will generally have a lower kV. But again, this side-effect has so many pre-requisites ("same specs") that you shouldn't use kV to judge how powerful a motor will be.
If you want to predict how fast a motor will be, you need to know how powerful it is. The power rating is the most important number.
Better still, to make an accurate prediction you would use a dyno sheet of power throughout the RPM range at an average full-throttle battery voltage. A power rating in watts is just a snapshot of that dyno sheet where power peaks. Since we require power from a standstill right up to top speed, that single power rating doesn't tell you everything. And since we need the motor to live through five minutes of load, the dyno sheet won't tell you the whole story.
Best of all, to make an accurate prediction you would use a dyno sheet of power throughout the RPM range when loaded by the friction and inertia of your R/C car and supplied with the voltage your battery puts out at those continuously changing loads and throughout its capacity (run-time). That's what most of us call racing the motor.
So what I'm saying is, lower kV than other motors of the same spec is a good sign. A higher power rating than the other motors is a very good sign. A dyno curve that is always higher than the other motors is a great sign. More laps in the same amount of time is the best sign of all, and the only conclusive predictor of a motor being faster.
08-29-2008, 09:50 AM
#401
Thank you again Adamge. I kind of figured the Power rating had a bigger impact on performance of the motor. The Hacker motor has 89% higher power rating then a Novak but only a 40% lower Kv rating which in the end makes the most difference in performance between these two motors.
It would be nice if manufactures would give torque curves for a given voltage and load as part of there spec but I guess this would make it to easy for a consumer to decide which is a better motor.
It would be nice if manufactures would give torque curves for a given voltage and load as part of there spec but I guess this would make it to easy for a consumer to decide which is a better motor.
09-03-2008, 08:35 AM
#403
09-03-2008, 10:47 AM
#405
You only need to loosen the three screws on the sensor side. The ring is very hard to move and could already be set to max. I often use a small flat head screw driver to move the ring. Mark the can now so you know how far it is moving and you can adjust up and down from there.