Warbird Electrics Discuss e-powered warbirds in here!

Converting PZ Spitfire to brushless

Old 10-13-2008, 03:39 PM
  #376  
DetroitHawk
Super Awesome
 
DetroitHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 1,160
Default

Three hours before the flight :

Originally Posted by joeted View Post
LOL yeah or because of something im about to do, i.e crash my plane .going out in a minute to fly it , if the worst happens and i have a heavy crash or something how careful should i be about unplugging and handling the lipo after a heavy crash ? and will it blow up lol ?

After the flight:



Originally Posted by joeted View Post
Well heres the maiden report :
Not good.
At this minute its upstairs pretty much in bits im affraid to say lol.So back to the drawing board.
The launch was perfect but I guess I was just too rusty and not used to the power of it.I think full throttle even on the launch was too much coz my friend launched it at 45 degrees and due to the power it just climbed pretty much vertically so I cut the motor off so i could gain control again
Too rusty = doesn't know how to fly


The motor i suggested was powerful enough to take this plane strait up on takeoff, planes do not crash because they have too much power, they OFTEN crash because lack of power.
DetroitHawk is offline  
Old 10-13-2008, 05:51 PM
  #377  
LectricPlane
Member
 
LectricPlane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 76
Default

I'll be testing the 1100 vs 1450Kv theory shortly for you all. Or the 1450 bit anyway.

Just ordered. The numbers do seem to look a bit more intresting for the 1450KV.
YOU CAN always use less throttle , no?
LectricPlane is offline  
Old 10-13-2008, 07:26 PM
  #378  
AETCBoom4
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 57
Default

Originally Posted by LectricPlane View Post
I'll be testing the 1100 vs 1450Kv theory shortly for you all. Or the 1450 bit anyway.

Just ordered. The numbers do seem to look a bit more intresting for the 1450KV.
YOU CAN always use less throttle , no?
The problem with the 1450 is excessive amp draw. Its ok if you want short flights spinning a 8 inch prop. I have used the Turnigy 35-36-1100KV in my T-28 and Mini pulse each with either a 10x8 or 11x7 prop. The largest kv IMHO usable in these applications are 1250KV swinging a 10x8. Thats currently what is in my GWS P-40. IMHO a really high KV motor = high amps + highly discharged batteries= a quick LVC.

An example of what a 1200KV with a 9 inch prop equivalent set up can do is here:
http://www.wattflyer.com/forums/show...&postcount=238
AETCBoom4 is offline  
Old 10-13-2008, 08:02 PM
  #379  
DetroitHawk
Super Awesome
 
DetroitHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 1,160
Default

Originally Posted by LectricPlane View Post
I'll be testing the 1100 vs 1450Kv theory shortly for you all. Or the 1450 bit anyway.

Just ordered. The numbers do seem to look a bit more intresting for the 1450KV.
YOU CAN always use less throttle , no?
I will try to avoid opinion and let the FACTS of the numbers speak for themself.

Keep in mind prop pitch speeds, the plane will not travel faster then the prop pitch speed (+/- wind speed), @ speeds greater then the pitch speed the prop acts as a break.

With the 1450kv motor you can use a smaller prop then you would on the 1100kv and reach higher thrust at the same amp draw, BUT you also get a higher prop pitch speed which allows you to fly faster.

I own both a 1000kv motor and a 1440kv motor and the high Kv motor allows me to do more.

with the 1000Kv motor i can swing a 10x5 prop which will produce 45oz of thrust @ 26 amps but with a prop pitch speed of only 45mph.

BUT

with the 1440kv motor with a 7x9 prop produces 48oz of thrust @ 26.5 amps BUT the pitch speed is 107mph which allows the plane to travel at a much higher speed.

when you use throttle control you will find you get longer flight times and have the ability to really lay down the hammer when needed. Many of these guys new to the hobby don't under stand the ability to change out props to achieve the desired performance from these motors. Sure if you put the same prop on both of these motors the numbers do not work, but if you do some research you will find the higher Kv allows you more options with prop selection to get the desired result. (not every motor but when you run the numbers you will run into a road block with the 1100kv motor)

There is no advantage to swinging a bigger prop at a slower speed compaired to a smaller prop at a higher speed. The bigger the prop diameter just makes for slower planes.
DetroitHawk is offline  
Old 10-13-2008, 10:19 PM
  #380  
LectricPlane
Member
 
LectricPlane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 76
Default

I played with the motor calc for a good few hours.

Decision making below:
-I usually fly alone so 5min is about the enjoyment level before I get bored and start wanting to do stupid things :-) like chase birds and buzz the footballers.
- I want it to go vertical; palne = 30oz so I think 40-45oz static thrust should do but will fly well on 30oz thrust(This is a big guess, I am certain someone can help here - what is the stock thrust on this thing?)
- 27A Max Battery; I will get a better one/two soon anyway if this is close.
-Do not want a gearbox... one more thing to unbalance & suck power.
-APC prop.. minor choice but ever since one chopped the tip of my thumb when I was a kid I like to break them as revenge! (takes some doing though!)
-Nice if I can use a bigger prop for looks but performance & No gearbox first...

Rough numbers = if I did this right - feel free to correct me if not.

-1100Kv has me wanting to use a 8x9 prop.. 5min/ 91mph / 51oz static / 23A
or a more "relaxed" 8x6 for 6:50min/ 63mph/ 37oz static /19.5A

-1450Kv has me wanting to use a 7x8 prop.. 4:30min/ 104mph/ 51oz static / 26.4A
or a more "relaxed" 7x5 for 6:20min/ 68.5mph / 35oz static/ 19A

Close,, but the over 100mph (I know it will never go that fast) twisted my arm slightly against the more reasonable Amp draw of the 1100KV.

I will probably be using 1/3 throttle for 80% of most flights anyway and getting 2x 5min flights in on a battery..
LectricPlane is offline  
Old 10-13-2008, 10:47 PM
  #381  
LectricPlane
Member
 
LectricPlane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 76
Default

Originally Posted by dk_aero View Post
//
What is the thrust from the stock setup?
I decided to use this on my FW190... I would think that for a 800g plane, 1000g thrust should make it a fair performer. With a 10x5, I'd expect around 37oz thrust @ 20A and pitch speed of 41 mph (or go to 10x6 - pitch speed 49 mph).
//
& answering myself:
Stock with lipo measures 5500RPM so with a 10x8 I get about 23oz (652g) thrust (by calc not measurement) ?
LectricPlane is offline  
Old 10-14-2008, 09:39 PM
  #382  
DetroitHawk
Super Awesome
 
DetroitHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 1,160
Default

Originally Posted by LectricPlane View Post
I
Close,, but the over 100mph (I know it will never go that fast) twisted my arm slightly against the more reasonable Amp draw of the 1100KV.

Good to see that someone else does their research before selecting a motor. I feel the majority buy a motor THEN research what it can do.

As for it being able to do 100mph, you shouldn't completely count that out, remember heading down wind you can take your average airspeed + the wind speed and when you combine that with gravity 100mph is easier to obtain then most people realize. Sure you will get the die hard nuts who insist the only real way to do it is level flight, but that is a bunch of BS if you ask me. Who cares how you do it, the fact you can is amazing in the first place.



this is a peregrine falcon, which is widely concidered the fastest bird......guess what: it doesn't do it in level flight either.
DetroitHawk is offline  
Old 10-15-2008, 05:34 AM
  #383  
dk_aero
Member
 
dk_aero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Posts: 236
Default

"There is no advantage to swinging a bigger prop at a slower speed compaired to a smaller prop at a higher speed. The bigger the prop diameter just makes for slower planes."

Yes there is... do some research...

Thrust production is really no more than the efficient utilization of horsepower. Both these motors have the same rated current (max eff. current) for the same rated voltage (15A for 11.1). This means they have the same rated power (assuming they have the same efficiency - Hp = V * I * eff / 746). Having the same rated power, but different rated speeds means that they must have different rated torques (T = hp * 5252 / rpm). This is why you must use a lower diameter prop on the higher Kv motor (greater diameter = more mass at longer arm moment = needs more torque).


I didn't "buy a motor THEN research what it can do".
Factors that affected my decision:

1. With a high pitch, the prop becomes inefficient at low forward speed and high rpm, as when during the take-off and/or climb.
A propeller designed for greatest efficiency at take-off and climb (lower pitch & large diameter) will accelerate the plane very quickly from standstill but will give less top speed.

Since I'm more concerned with successfully launching (and not top speed), I would tend toward a larger prop diameter/lower pitch.

2. Rule of thumb is adequate static pitch speed should be greater than 2.5 times the plane's stall speed.

I should be looking for a static pitch speed of 40 - 50 mph (stall speed 15 - 20 mph).

3. Most of the propeller's thrust is made between about 30% and 90% of the blade radius.

With a 4 1/2" diameter cowl, I don't think I should be using a 8" prop...
dk_aero is offline  
Old 10-15-2008, 12:53 PM
  #384  
DetroitHawk
Super Awesome
 
DetroitHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 1,160
Talking

Originally Posted by dk_aero View Post
"There is no advantage to swinging a bigger prop at a slower speed compaired to a smaller prop at a higher speed. The bigger the prop diameter just makes for slower planes."

Yes there is... do some research...


3. Most of the propeller's thrust is made between about 30% and 90% of the blade radius.

With a 4 1/2" diameter cowl, I don't think I should be using a 8" prop...
You keep telling yourself that your large prop is better then the smaller ones i use that go faster and produce more thrust at the same amp comsumption.


Again here is the problem :

Originally Posted by dk_aero View Post
"I don't think"


I HAVE used a 8"prop on a plane with a 4.5inch cowl (Fw190) with NO problems infact it worked very well with my plane.


VIDEO PROOF

http://media.putfile.com/Fw190-first-flight

8x6 prop on a 4.5" cowl
DetroitHawk is offline  
Old 10-15-2008, 09:07 PM
  #385  
LectricPlane
Member
 
LectricPlane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 76
Default

I think you (DKA & DH)have a few points each there.

I was concerned about the area covered by the cowl/spinner on such a small prop.

Maybe I could find an efficiency curve for APC (or any other for that matter) RPM vs fwd velocity. Some % surface area derating factors maybe... And a calculator.

Or maybe I'll just check the Amps to not fry the ESC/Motor/Battery and see how it Flies!

Anyone know where to get (or if you can get) onboard amp/voltage loggers suitable for RC?

Joeted- Where did you get the spinner? Any luck with a rebuild yet?
Never mind the 1st flight crash, the nerves usually fade fast once you have a few flights without incident. I am finally back down to takoff/landing in the usual 30m square area - I needed about a mile of flat grass all sides to be confident just 6 months ago.

Last edited by LectricPlane; 10-15-2008 at 09:22 PM.
LectricPlane is offline  
Old 10-16-2008, 01:22 AM
  #386  
dk_aero
Member
 
dk_aero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Posts: 236
Default

Lectricplane,
Onboard dataloggers - http://www.eagletreesystems.com/

DH,
I'm not saying that one prop is better than the other - just different... and my opinion is that a larger diameter may suit me better. If not, I'll try the higher Kv motor with a smaller prop - If I like it better, I'll be the first to post a "DetroitHawk is right!" thread...

Here's test data from similar motors from Jeff @ HURC...
"Propeller test data for the 3530-10:
APC props fit on the prop adapters that can be purchased for this motor. GWS props will need to be drilled out to fit on the adapters. It's a good idea to balance all propellers before using them on this motor, due to the high RPM's.
APC 11 x 5.5E: 40 oz thrust @ 23.0 amps with a pitch speed of 38 mph.
GWS EP1170: 42 oz thrust @ 25 amps with a pitch speed of 48 mph. Avoid constant wide open throttle.
APC 11 x 7E: 38 oz thrust @ 25 amps with a pitch speed of 47 mph. Avoid constant wide open throttle.
APC 10 x 5E: 37 oz thrust @ 20 amps with a pitch speed of 41 mph.
GWS DD1060: 38 oz thrust @ 21 amps with a pitch speed of 49 mph.
APC 10 x 7E: 37 oz thrust @ 23 amps with a pitch speed of 53 mph.
GWS HD1080: 31 oz thrust @ 26 amps with a pitch speed of 52 mph. Avoid constant wide open throttle.
APC 9 x 4.5E: 33 oz thrust @ 17 amps with a pitch speed of 41 mph.
APC 9 x 6E: 34 oz thrust @ 19 amps with a pitch speed of 52 mph.
APC 9 x 7.5E: 29 oz thrust @ 22 amps with a pitch speed of 57 mph.
The above data is a result of my own testing using a fully charged 3-cell 2250mah 20C (45 amp) Lipo battery. Thrust and amp draw may be less with the use of batteries rated at lower amp output, and slightly more using batteries rated for higher amp output.

Propeller test data for the 3530-14:
APC and TP props fit on the prop adapters that can be purchased for this motor. GWS props will need to be drilled out to fit on the adapters. It's a good idea to balance all propellers before using them on this motor, due to the high RPM's.
APC 9 x 4.5E: 41 oz thrust @ 26 amps with a pitch speed of 47 mph. Avoid constant wide open throttle.
GWS EP8040: 31 oz thrust @ 17 amps with a pitch speed of 49 mph.
APC 8 x 4E: 35 oz thrust @ 22 amps with a pitch speed of 47 mph.
APC 8 x 6E: 33 oz thrust @ 26 amps with a pitch speed of 61 mph. Avoid constant wide open throttle.
TP 8 x 6E: 33 oz thrust @ 26 amps with a pitch speed of 61 mph. Avoid constant wide open throttle.
GWS HD8060: 30 oz thrust @ 25 amps with a pitch speed of 62 mph.
Master Airscrew 7 x 4 x 3: 26 oz thrust @ 17 amps with a pitch speed of 60 mph.
APC 7 x 5E: 26 oz thrust @ 18 amps with a pitch speed of 62 mph.
TP 7 x 5E: 26 oz thrust @ 18 amps with a pitch speed of 62 mph.
The above data is a result of my own testing using a fully charged 3-cell 2250mah 20C (45 amp) Lipo battery. Thrust and amp draw may be less with the use of batteries rated at lower amp output, and slightly more using batteries rated for higher amp output."
dk_aero is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 05:12 PM
  #387  
Larry G
E-Pilot
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Peoria, Arizona
Posts: 444
Default

I have been running the Turnigy 1100 and 1400 on my 35oz Super Cub, and this test data is dead on for the real world flight testing I've experience.

I'm looking for good thrust with decent flight times, and have found the 1400 not to be any improvement over the 1100 for my application. Looking at the numbers, it looks like I can get lower amp draw with nearly the same thrust out of the 1100 for longer flight times.

I'm running the 1700kv on my 31oz Spitfire with a 7x6 prop, and it seems to have plenty of thrust and speed. It also flies well with the 8x4 prop, not as fast but might be easier to fly and land.
Larry G is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 06:03 PM
  #388  
DetroitHawk
Super Awesome
 
DetroitHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 1,160
Default

Originally Posted by Larry G View Post
I have been running the Turnigy 1100 and 1400 on my 35oz Super Cub, and this test data is dead on for the real world flight testing I've experience.

I'm looking for good thrust with decent flight times, and have found the 1400 not to be any improvement over the 1100 for my application. Looking at the numbers, it looks like I can get lower amp draw with nearly the same thrust out of the 1100 for longer flight times.

The amount of drag the supercub has compaired to the spitfire it huge.

Keep in mind also static bench testing will not give accurate results on amp draw either.
DetroitHawk is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 07:08 PM
  #389  
Larry G
E-Pilot
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Peoria, Arizona
Posts: 444
Default

Originally Posted by DetroitHawk View Post
The amount of drag the supercub has compaired to the spitfire it huge.

Keep in mind also static bench testing will not give accurate results on amp draw either.

Is the amp draw less in with the plane in the air?

My poor Spit developed a split on both sides of the fuselage from the hole for the pilot down to the wing fillets. I didn't notice it at the park, luckily I ran out of batteries before it ripped in half in the air.

Looks like some epoxy should take care of the crack. I better start doing a better inspection after each flight.

I recently added a rudder with steerable tailwheel and main gear from
a GWS FW190 kit. I haven't used the wheels yet (took them off for grass belly landing), but the main strut wires seem too bouncy.

I haven't found much use for the rudder in the air yet, maybe when my flying skills improve it will get more use. Did do some nice Hammerheads though.
Larry G is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 07:33 PM
  #390  
LectricPlane
Member
 
LectricPlane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 76
Default

Originally Posted by Larry G View Post
Is the amp draw less in with the plane in the air?

My poor Spit developed a split on both sides of the fuselage from the hole for the pilot down to the wing fillets. I didn't notice it at the park, luckily I ran out of batteries before it ripped in half in the air.

Looks like some epoxy should take care of the crack. I better start doing a better inspection after each flight.
.
The amp draw should go down a bit in the air as the planes actual speed approaches the prop pitch speed,, more drag on plane or higher pitch prop= greater mismatch in speeds = less amp reduction inflight.

My Spit also developed a nasty "I'm gonna split in half" crack. On the orrigional glued seams. I ran some aliphatic resin (yellow wood glue) down each seam from the inside - made the fuselage much more rigid. The stuff they glue these things with at the factory is crappy and/or badly applied.
LectricPlane is offline  
Old 10-18-2008, 01:42 AM
  #391  
Aviator24
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 61
Default

Ok, did some doppler style runs with my Spitfire today. I measured off 500 feet using my GPS. Then I did WOT runs and timed them as best I could. There was no wind so this was not an issue. The best I could measure was a good 4 seconds. This was using the Align Brushless 430 and ESC. Now the battery was the kicker I feel. It was a Zippy I just bought. Details on it are as follows...
Capacity: 2200mAh
Voltage: 3S1P / 3 Cell / 11.1v
Discharge: 30C Constant / 40C Burst
Weight: 194g (including wire, plug & shrink wrap)
Dimensions: 108x36x24mm
By my calculations, my Spit was doing ABOUT 85 miles per hour. Not sure how accurate all this is, but it sure looks as if it is going that fast!! It is a rocket!!!! Love it...
Aviator24 is offline  
Old 10-18-2008, 02:02 AM
  #392  
groundrushesup
Super Contributor
 
groundrushesup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Pflugerville, TX
Posts: 2,338
Default

Originally Posted by Aviator24 View Post
Ok, did some doppler style runs with my Spitfire today. I measured off 500 feet using my GPS. Then I did WOT runs and timed them as best I could. There was no wind so this was not an issue. The best I could measure was a good 4 seconds. This was using the Align Brushless 430 and ESC. Now the battery was the kicker I feel. It was a Zippy I just bought. Details on it are as follows...
Capacity: 2200mAh
Voltage: 3S1P / 3 Cell / 11.1v
Discharge: 30C Constant / 40C Burst
Weight: 194g (including wire, plug & shrink wrap)
Dimensions: 108x36x24mm
By my calculations, my Spit was doing ABOUT 85 miles per hour. Not sure how accurate all this is, but it sure looks as if it is going that fast!! It is a rocket!!!! Love it...

I believe it. I run the same setup with a TP 2070mah 25/50c 3S and it moves plenty fast for me. I suppose I am not a speed junky and therefore top speed (in a dive or otherwise) is not the full measure of a model, but if I had to guess I would say mine tops out in the high seventies. Here's the video of my maiden, and I was taking it easy on the throttle and flying with 75% rates..

If I ever wanted pure speed I would be flying a wing anyways, not a warbird. I enjoy seeing the plane in the air and not as a brown streak every 15 seconds or so lol

Anyways, back to the mathematics lesson...
groundrushesup is offline  
Old 10-18-2008, 04:35 AM
  #393  
DetroitHawk
Super Awesome
 
DetroitHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 1,160
Default

Originally Posted by Larry G View Post
Is the amp draw less in with the plane in the air?

My poor Spit developed a split on both sides of the fuselage from the hole for the pilot down to the wing fillets. I didn't notice it at the park, luckily I ran out of batteries before it ripped in half in the air.

Looks like some epoxy should take care of the crack. I better start doing a better inspection after each flight.

I recently added a rudder with steerable tailwheel and main gear from
a GWS FW190 kit. I haven't used the wheels yet (took them off for grass belly landing), but the main strut wires seem too bouncy.

I haven't found much use for the rudder in the air yet, maybe when my flying skills improve it will get more use. Did do some nice Hammerheads though.
It is true you built drag from the plane at higher speeds, but your motor has to work harder to suck the air into the prop when you do a bench test. I have found that using a high speed fan to force air into the prop will give you data that is much closer to how the ESC/motor/battery work while in flight.

As for the fuselage comming apart i would suggect banding the fuse with some acrylic carton sealing packaging tape; I find it to be very strong for how light weight it is.

My rudder on my spitfire is more for show there any real practical use. Just like most planes in flight the rudder is hardly ever used. (except on landing)
DetroitHawk is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 03:32 PM
  #394  
abagnalejr123
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 23
info Parkzone spitfire brushless gearbox or not? Question

GEARBOX OR NOT ?

As a relative "newbie" I have a question -

I'm just in the middle of my 3rd (and FINAL) parkzone spitfire rebuild, and was really impressed with the apparent performance of the Align 430L and standard gearbox combination detailed previously in the thread (thanks Shayne!), but have a question, more for my own piece of mind than anything!

Is there any real advantage to having a gearbox? I know it makes things easier regarding thrust angles and prop positioning, and I understand that the gearbox is a 3:1 ratio motor:prop, and that the Align 430L is a 3550kv motor, wouldn't it be more efficient just to run a 1200kv motor (3550 divided by 3) straight to the same sized prop? Or am I missing something?

I'm looking for vertical accelleration and about 80mph level speed. Have all the parts except the motor/prop. Was looking to use a spare 40A ESC I have.

Any help would be highly appreciated!
abagnalejr123 is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 05:08 PM
  #395  
DetroitHawk
Super Awesome
 
DetroitHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 1,160
Default

Originally Posted by abagnalejr123 View Post
GEARBOX OR NOT ?

As a relative "newbie" I have a question -

I'm just in the middle of my 3rd (and FINAL) parkzone spitfire rebuild, and was really impressed with the apparent performance of the Align 430L and standard gearbox combination detailed previously in the thread (thanks Shayne!), but have a question, more for my own piece of mind than anything!

Is there any real advantage to having a gearbox? I know it makes things easier regarding thrust angles and prop positioning, and I understand that the gearbox is a 3:1 ratio motor:prop, and that the Align 430L is a 3550kv motor, wouldn't it be more efficient just to run a 1200kv motor (3550 divided by 3) straight to the same sized prop? Or am I missing something?




I'm looking for vertical accelleration and about 80mph level speed. Have all the parts except the motor/prop. Was looking to use a spare 40A ESC I have.

Any help would be highly appreciated!

Direct drive is the way to go, 80mph is no joke, the plane really needs to have a lot of power to do 80. Your 40A ESC should be enough, if you read thru the later pages you will find different motor/prop combos that should get you there. If you choose to go for speed; unlimited vertical will likely only be possiable at wide open. You will liekly have to build a motor mount but that is rather easy to do.

*** BTW don't worry about thrust angles, just make sure it pulls strait.
DetroitHawk is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 05:15 PM
  #396  
abagnalejr123
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 23
Thumbs up

Originally Posted by DetroitHawk View Post
Direct drive is the way to go, 80mph is no joke, the plane really needs to have a lot of power to do 80. Your 40A ESC should be enough, if you read thru the later pages you will find different motor/prop combos that should get you there. If you choose to go for speed; unlimited vertical will likely only be possiable at wide open. You will liekly have to build a motor mount but that is rather easy to do.

*** BTW don't worry about thrust angles, just make sure it pulls strait.
Thanks for the info Hawk, I was aware of the info on the previous pages, but wasn't really sure if they were gearbox/direct drive numbers.

If YOU had to go direct drive, with a 40A ESC, what would YOU use?

p.s. sorry to put you on the spot!
abagnalejr123 is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 06:52 PM
  #397  
LectricPlane
Member
 
LectricPlane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 76
Default

Originally Posted by abagnalejr123 View Post
//
If YOU had to go direct drive, with a 40A ESC, what would YOU use?

p.s. sorry to put you on the spot!

Oh no, here we go again.
LectricPlane is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 08:47 PM
  #398  
DetroitHawk
Super Awesome
 
DetroitHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 1,160
Default

Originally Posted by abagnalejr123 View Post
Thanks for the info Hawk, I was aware of the info on the previous pages, but wasn't really sure if they were gearbox/direct drive numbers.

If YOU had to go direct drive, with a 40A ESC, what would YOU use?

p.s. sorry to put you on the spot!
I am using a Hacker A30 22S with a 40amp ESC from eflight

http://cgi.ebay.com/Hacker-A30-22S-R...3286.m20.l1116

There are cheaper motors out there, but i have found the hacker motors to be top notch and are able to take quite a beating. I have ran this motor almost twice over it's rated limit. (for short bursts)

BUT


I bought that motor over two years ago and some things have changed.

http://www.hobbycity.com/hobbycity/s..._1400Kv_/_470w

This motor with a 8x6 prop should get the job done. It will have insane power and thrust. This will give you the rocket ship you always wanted. While you could use the 8x6 prop to rip holes in the sky, i would suggest that using a 8x5 prop and see how that works, it might give you slightly longer flight times, remember while you will draw over 30 amps at WOT, you will likely run at 50% and still outperform the stock version.
DetroitHawk is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 09:25 PM
  #399  
abagnalejr123
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 23
Default

Hey, thanks Hawk, really. Exactly the kind of thing i was looking for! I presume that this would be best WITHOUT a gearbox, as a direct drive application?

Thanks again.
abagnalejr123 is offline  
Old 10-22-2008, 09:35 PM
  #400  
abagnalejr123
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 23
Thumbs up

Answered my own question, Without gearbox of course!! I think the Turnigy will do the trick! EXACTLY what i was looking for! Thanks again!
abagnalejr123 is offline  

Quick Reply: Converting PZ Spitfire to brushless


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.

Page generated in 0.14621 seconds with 13 queries