RC-Monster Forums  
RC Monster

Go Back   RC-Monster Forums > RC-Monster Area > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old
  (#46)
Finnster
KillaHurtz
 
Finnster's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 2,958
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Bucks Co, PA
04.28.2008, 11:26 AM

My thoughts on MA are this:

They are a dealer of "cheap" entry-level/basher packs, unfortunately they are not that cheap. They tend to consistanly overrate their product to stay competitive w/ other makers and justify inflated prices.

I remember when they were first starting out on Ebay selling GP3300 cells. They guaranteed 1.21v/cell@30A (IIRC) on unmatched and untested cells. They had a money back guarantee if the cells if they could not do this.

Question is, how can they make that claim? The cells were never tested! They were sold right out the box. Well, because people don't have a $600 CE discharger to test them and prove they are not what they say they are. People (n00bs) see those cells guaranteed, and then see tested and matched cells going for much more. Why pay $75 for a matched racing pack that does maybe 1.18V, when you can buy a ~$30 pack that is guaranteed to do 1.21V? Where were they getting all these magical GP cells that did huge voltages, and that were so reliable they didn't even have to test them to be sure? Meanwhile all the other batt makers had to screen and match cells to find the very rare few that could do such high voltages... talk about overhead... Meanwhile those buyers prolly only ever owned crappy powerizer packs or such, and the difference was so big few questioned the claim.

Its complete BS, and most should know it, but they sold tons of packs. Now the price they were charging for a normal sxs 6cell GP3300 wasn't hugely expensive, but it was several $$ more than other makers just selling (the same) plain jane 6cell GP packs. I call it the MaxAmps Bull$%it Mark-up Factor, and frankly its been very successful for them and they've grown tremendously.

I don't think their products are necc horrible. They are just not that good, and expensive for what they are. They are roughly the same quality as several TrueRC packs but with an easier form factor, regardless of actual manufacturer. TrueRC doesn't overhype their cells (you know what you are getting), their website is fairly crappy, but they are fairly-priced and honest in what they sell.
I have, and will continue to buy my cheap packs from TRC, and if I want better cells I will buy Neus. The price is not that far off MA's, but they are considerably higher quality and performance.
Caveat emptor, bitches. [/Chappelle]
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#47)
lutach
RC-Monster Dual Brushless
 
lutach's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 5,139
Join Date: Sep 2006
04.28.2008, 12:29 PM

TrueRC keeps it real with what I like to call it TrueCR (C Rating). I have their packs that I bought before my Max Amps pack and guess which one is still going. All Max Amps has to do is make a really nice apology letter to everyone. Aqwut probably bought the 2100mAh pack by going with what MA said that they were 20C and in fact they are 15C. That is really messed up. They should just get rid of this packs they have with true C rating (10C) and move on to high quality cells. Now people are catching on to their fake rating and with some guys sueing companies for stuff like this, they better keep on a look out.
  Send a message via MSN to lutach  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#48)
johnrobholmes
RC-Monster Aluminum
 
johnrobholmes's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 905
Join Date: Aug 2007
04.28.2008, 03:40 PM

I am adding my .02 to the discussion over on the nitrokillers forum. I wonder if it will stay posted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Maxamps.com View Post
Austin has been in contact with the originator of the Traxxas thread and he has explained the same thing, you cannot compare a 6000 pack against an 8000 pack. And considering he was using these in a high amp draw Revo converison it only makes sense that an 8000 would perform better. So to clear the air Austin is sending the guyour 8000 packs to compare with the True RC packs. Now hopefully he will report back with the truth and if so you will see our packs on top.


Jason


Since your 6000 pack is actually rated for a higher discharge rate I see it as a fair comparison from one capacity to another. Comparing your pack to the 8000 pack is actually unfair to TrueRC imo, as it is not rated for the amp draw that yours is. Since your 6000 pack has a higher burst rating it should actually have a higher voltage under load as compared to the trueRC pack. It is quite possible that he just got a bunch of bad packs though, so there are certainly other variables to consider.

Just so we can get more data, do you have any discharge graphs of your packs being used in cars? The only one I can find on your site is a 5000 pack in a heli under 6.6c max usage. I assume you have graphs of the trueRC cells being used too since you already know which is better?

Since the poster is getting an 8000 pack to compare we will be able to get a better comparison in your eyes. You have made it clear that the truth is that your packs are better, so if that is not his finding is he lying? I find it hard to believe that a pack that is thinner and lighter can have the same capacity with better discharge performance without large increases in price. It is like saying that I can buy a 4500mah sub-C that is the same weight as a 3800, it just isn't possible. Of course without more information and discharge graphs I cannot make fully valid conclusions.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#49)
lincpimp
Check out my huge box!
 
lincpimp's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 11,934
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Slidell, LA
04.28.2008, 03:58 PM

That is some nice wording by Jason! If he reports back with the truth maxamps will be better. I love it!

I love how he back pedals with the fact that the better performance was due to the fact that the truerc pack had more capacity than the maxamps pack.

I wonder what he would say to my findings that a polyrc 3700 25c 5s pack outperformed the 5000 maxamps 5s pack? I am guessing that the 25c rating of the polyrc pack would be why it was better than the 20c maxmaps. So whatever pack has whatever number that is higher would be better. I guess the polyrc pack is longer than the maxamps pack, must be why it is much better?!

All boils down right here:
Maxamps 5000 5s 20c pack = 5ahx20c=100amps cont (according to maxmaps rating)
Poly rc 3700 5s 25c pack - 3.7ahx25c=92.5amps cont

So how did the polyrc pack give the same runtimes, more punch, and also pull a higher gear (changed the revo to a wide ratio gearset)? Must be because the polyrc pack is longer, by about 7mm or so. (I just believe that the poly rc is rated properly and the maxamps is not, but the previous sentence would be the only way that Jason could justify my finidings!)

Maxamps are selling a bunch of 10c batteries, that is all there is to it. Their 8000 packs are the only packs that will work well on 4s in a heavier MT or 1/8 scale vehicle. The 5k packs are not powerful enough, neither are the 2p 3000 cell 6000 packs. The 4000 3s packs are good lightweight packs for 10th scale 2wd, and fit where they need to. For 2 lipo a trakpower pack will fit anywhere a 5k maxamps will and outperform it.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#50)
johnrobholmes
RC-Monster Aluminum
 
johnrobholmes's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 905
Join Date: Aug 2007
04.28.2008, 04:20 PM

I can't even say that I liked the performance of my 8k 10C packs. Dropping to dual 3700s that were 25C made a HUGE difference.

Now enerland has some pretty good looking 3000's that are 30c/60c and pretty cheap too. Dang it I don't need more batteries.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#51)
VintageMA
RC-Monster Aluminum
 
VintageMA's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 660
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: CT
04.28.2008, 04:34 PM

Found a great link:

http://rclovers.com/Documents/Enerla...SpecSheets.pdf
and
http://rclovers.com/Documents/Racing_Car_Battery.pdf

Granted it looks like these are olders cell and not the 25/50C and 30/60C cells out now, but there are some really cool test graphs in there (like 15C/40C burst tests) an also tests that show battery capacity at 1st, 30th and 50th cycles of the pack.


“Everyone has a right to be stupid; some people just abuse the privilege.”
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#52)
lutach
RC-Monster Dual Brushless
 
lutach's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 5,139
Join Date: Sep 2006
04.28.2008, 04:53 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by VintageMA View Post
Found a great link:

http://rclovers.com/Documents/Enerla...SpecSheets.pdf
and
http://rclovers.com/Documents/Racing_Car_Battery.pdf

Granted it looks like these are olders cell and not the 25/50C and 30/60C cells out now, but there are some really cool test graphs in there (like 15C/40C burst tests) an also tests that show battery capacity at 1st, 30th and 50th cycles of the pack.
I still have 10C rated 3100mAh 3S PQ-3100HP-3S that I bought from rclovers now rclipos.com and they are wonderful packs. This are the ones I use on my 3S2P set up for my Stampede which has seen 45mph with them . They are roughly the same size of the current 2500mAh packs. I wish rclipos still had this 3100 packs that had out performed my MA 4000mAh 3S packs. Max Amps will not come out looking good if they do their tests to claim their cells are truly what they are and we have seen proof they are not.
  Send a message via MSN to lutach  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#53)
johnrobholmes
RC-Monster Aluminum
 
johnrobholmes's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 905
Join Date: Aug 2007
04.28.2008, 04:58 PM

The owner of rclipos is a good guy, I have talked to him a lot about this and that.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#54)
lutach
RC-Monster Dual Brushless
 
lutach's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 5,139
Join Date: Sep 2006
04.28.2008, 05:02 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnrobholmes View Post
The owner of rclipos is a good guy, I have talked to him a lot about this and that.
He seems to be a true business man and it's shown on the prices the items he sells. Look at what Mike has done and it shows how a business man should do for this hobby. Mike offers high quality products and the price is not bad at all.
  Send a message via MSN to lutach  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#55)
johnrobholmes
RC-Monster Aluminum
 
johnrobholmes's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 905
Join Date: Aug 2007
04.29.2008, 01:22 AM

That thread on NK is getting hot! I really don't think that Jason is seeing where I come from. I have never had anything against them, I just haven't ever seen any data to support their claims.

I ask for info and I don't get it from them. What am I to do? Test myself.

He accuses me of only promoting packs I sell, yet I don't sell 90% of the packs that I recommend. I'm not in the business of batteries! How am I supposed to take this?


Jason certainly is passionate about his work.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#56)
lincpimp
Check out my huge box!
 
lincpimp's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 11,934
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Slidell, LA
04.29.2008, 01:44 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnrobholmes View Post
Jason certainly is passionate about his work.
Almost fell off the chair!

I have to wonder if he really believes what he says? Do you think that he is fooled by the website too? Is Jason a maxamps owner, or just an employee? I get the feeling that Austin is the owner, but wanted to make sure.

I just have a hard time seeing this as anything other than a bunch of lies from maxamps. If I compare 2 packs from 2 diff mfgs that have similar discharge ratings, and one out performs the other am I to think the "better" pack is under rated? Or that the "poorer" pack is being used past its abilities. I know what my systems can draw, and that proves that maxamps claims are bs to me. I need to look up the NK thread and have a read, should be funny, and full of it!
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#57)
johnrobholmes
RC-Monster Aluminum
 
johnrobholmes's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 905
Join Date: Aug 2007
04.29.2008, 01:56 AM

Austin is the owner, he used to work for CBP.

Austin's response:

The only real fair way to test is to weigh the packs, test the capacity of the packs(true mah), and test the voltage under load....
It is all very confusing because there is no standard for the “C” rate testing.


So Austin is saying that the fair way to compare is to test capacity and voltage under load. That is what Kung did, and Jason says it is not fair. Of course there is no real standard for C ratings, but there is a standard charged voltage and voltage cutoff that makes determining what the cell can handle a very easy task. To determine a C rating all one has to do is pinpoint an average voltage and increase the discharge rate until it gets there or the discharged MAH hits 90% below rated capacity (or whatever). There are other methods but that is not really important. What is important are the two things that a battery produces- voltage and amperage. Controlling other details of the matter just makes measurement more precise.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#58)
lincpimp
Check out my huge box!
 
lincpimp's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 11,934
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Slidell, LA
04.29.2008, 02:32 AM

How about some blind testing? Settle on a tested vehicle setup that can draw a certain amount, and pit all of the various packs that are rated close to that setup. Have a pro diver run the vehicle on a track for x number of laps, and measure the various parameters, including speed and lap time.

At that point the various packs could be grouped in various ways, and a best pack out of the bunch could be determined. One could also check the stated ratings against pack performance from the runs. Maybe some average numbers could be extrapolated and listed.

The ratings are important for descision making. How are we supposed to figure out which battery to use. If you go with maxamps ratings, you will have issues. I did. I can find eagletree info of what a similar, to identical setup will pull, average and burst. Factor in some safety space (a la BrianG) and there you have your info for battery purchases.

So, everyone with a 8xl in a revo geared for 40mpg should be fine with a 6000 maxamps 4s pack. Could I have some backup on this conclusion Kulangflow?!

I had a pair of 6000 2s packs, and ran them in series in the above listed revo. They did not like it. Yet a pair of trakpower packs work fine. Same rated discharge spec between the two, and 1000 mah less on the trakpower.

Bottom line is we need apples to apples comparisions. Until then, all of the testing and graphs leads me to belive the 25c rated enerland cell based packs are the best value for dollar to capability. I would like to see some info that disproves that.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#59)
BrianG
RC-Monster Admin
 
BrianG's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 14,609
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Des Moines, IA
04.29.2008, 02:42 AM

I like bench testing better - much better controlled environment without the added variables of track conditions, the driver taking corners a tad differently, etc. Just need some time, dummy loads, and measuring equipment...
  Send a message via Yahoo to BrianG Send a message via MSN to BrianG  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#60)
lincpimp
Check out my huge box!
 
lincpimp's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 11,934
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Slidell, LA
04.29.2008, 02:46 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianG View Post
I like bench testing better - much better controlled environment without the added variables of track conditions, the driver taking corners a tad differently, etc. Just need some time, dummy loads, and measuring equipment...
I guess you could mimick a variety of loads and cycle times to esablish a set bench test that would emulate a real world situation. Standardizing that sounds like fun.
   
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump



RC Monster




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com