RC-Monster Forums  
RC Monster

Go Back   RC-Monster Forums > Support Forums > Castle Creations

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 9 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
Old
  (#16)
crusey_aus
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
11.04.2011, 10:40 AM

Just heard that HPI have sent a new batch of cars out apparently with a new ESC and Motor

Curious what they have changed

Cheers
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#17)
fastbaja5b
RC-Monster Aluminum
 
fastbaja5b's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 704
Join Date: May 2008
11.06.2011, 08:24 PM

Lets hope they do the right thing by those of us who already bought the truck and offer a direct swap (although with the HPI distributor in Oz I won't hold my breath)

I put my Castle 3800 motor in the Flux XS and top amp draw was 115 Amps, so I dropped 30-40 amps of stress from the Battery / ESC at very little if any cost of performance. Motor also ran a lot cooler. Makes me wonder what sort of magnets this HPI thing has, cheaper quality obviously, but I'd call them fridge magnet quality at best with this data.

To double check I threw the 4000kv HPI motor in my Hyper 10SC geared for 35mph, again, 151 amp spikes and threw the fan of my HPI Q Base (MMP) esc on within a matter of minutes.

I have to wonder what Castle was thinking, how can you build a reputation for 'good quality' motors etc then cheap out to appeal to a large manufacturer like HPI, produce a product that is clearly less efficient but still allow your brand name to be plastered all over their advertising for the truck. A lot of people would be attracted to the XS as it has "Castle Electronics" but at the moment, I wonder if it's less efficient than the old 2 pole Traxxas VXL motor.


Say Less, Do More.
   
Reply With Quote
Wow
Old
  (#18)
slimthelineman
RC-Monster Aluminum
 
slimthelineman's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 608
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: IBEW
Wow - 11.06.2011, 09:14 PM

Dude baja what's with tha cc bashing? It's already been stated the motors were built to HPI specs and pricing not castles.

The motor is a slightly less expensive version of the 3800kV motor, with just a slightly less expensive stator and rotor. The main differences are the stator laminations (.35mm on the HPI, .2mm on the Castle) and N35UH magnets instead of N38UH magnets. Not a big difference like with the 1517B motor and the 1515.

Patrick del Castillo
President, Principle Engineer
Castle Creations

honestly the thickness of the stator laminations will have a bigger effect on price and performance than magnets will. So ease up a little dude. Ultimately you should be asking HPI why they speced a cheaper motor for such a large truck.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#19)
fastbaja5b
RC-Monster Aluminum
 
fastbaja5b's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 704
Join Date: May 2008
11.06.2011, 09:58 PM

At the end of the day though it's still Castles name thats pushed in all the online adverts and magazine spreads etc.

If it's built by Castle to HPI spec, thats fine, but then it's not really a Castle motor is it? castle motors have a reputation that has been built up over time, but if Mercedes went out and built a Kia spec car, would they still slap a Merc badge on it?


Say Less, Do More.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#20)
Pdelcast
RC-Monster Titanium
 
Pdelcast's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 1,697
Join Date: Mar 2008
11.07.2011, 03:17 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by fastbaja5b View Post
At the end of the day though it's still Castles name thats pushed in all the online adverts and magazine spreads etc.

If it's built by Castle to HPI spec, thats fine, but then it's not really a Castle motor is it? castle motors have a reputation that has been built up over time, but if Mercedes went out and built a Kia spec car, would they still slap a Merc badge on it?
OMG -- did you ever think that the difference might be from the different Kv? Or did you just run two different motors with the same pinion side-by-side?

Cmon -- if you have constructive criticism, that's fine. But to come in here and just bash and bash for no reason (and without good cause) is just abusive.


Patrick del Castillo
President, Principle Engineer
Castle Creations
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#21)
TexasSP
Something, anything, nothing
 
TexasSP's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 2,747
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Houston, TX
11.07.2011, 10:16 AM

PDC, I think it's top notch of you to still respond to people like this.

This guy has bashed you from the beginning and that's all he does, yet he still buys your products. At this point, it really is out of your hands. I mean, if your products are as bad as he says, then maybe he should stop using them. Yet time and again he still buys CC. This can mean only one of two scenarios here for him.

I know that when I have too many issues with a manufacturer that don't get resolved, i go elsewhere.

I have had a few issues with with CC products here and there, but you have always taken good care of me. In the end, that's all I ask. No matter what, things in RC will break and fail as is the nature of this hobby. We run things to the extreme. In the 1:1 world vehicles that are treated like our RC's get constant rebuilds and tend to see much more breakage. I think scaled down our failure rate is probably much lower.


www.cubicle101.com
A friends comic strip website.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#22)
fastbaja5b
RC-Monster Aluminum
 
fastbaja5b's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 704
Join Date: May 2008
11.07.2011, 10:27 AM

So we're equating 200kv to 30-35 amps?

Because that's really what's being argued isn't it? If I was running a 9000kv motor at the same gearing as the 3800 well then yes, you'd expect a marked difference, but for 200kv?


Say Less, Do More.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#23)
brian015
RC-Monster Aluminum
 
brian015's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 768
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: NJ
11.07.2011, 10:45 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by fastbaja5b View Post

I put my Castle 3800 motor in the Flux XS and top amp draw was 115 Amps, so I dropped 30-40 amps of stress from the Battery / ESC at very little if any cost of performance. Motor also ran a lot cooler. Makes me wonder what sort of magnets this HPI thing has, cheaper quality obviously, but I'd call them fridge magnet quality at best with this data.

To double check I threw the 4000kv HPI motor in my Hyper 10SC geared for 35mph, again, 151 amp spikes and threw the fan of my HPI Q Base (MMP) esc on within a matter of minutes.
This doesn't sound like Castle-bashing to me - it sounds like actual data from testing in applications that these motors are designed for. I would be unhappy with this 4000kv motor if it was giving these results.

I also agree that the 200kv difference should not be a major factor here. It's a 5% difference.

I'm running almost all CC escs and motors and am a great supporter of the company. But if these are real results - then I agree with fb5b that CC maybe should reconsider building parts to other company's specs if the Castle name is on it. Am I bashing CC for saying this here?
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#24)
Pdelcast
RC-Monster Titanium
 
Pdelcast's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 1,697
Join Date: Mar 2008
11.07.2011, 12:24 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by brian015 View Post
This doesn't sound like Castle-bashing to me - it sounds like actual data from testing in applications that these motors are designed for. I would be unhappy with this 4000kv motor if it was giving these results.

I also agree that the 200kv difference should not be a major factor here. It's a 5% difference.

I'm running almost all CC escs and motors and am a great supporter of the company. But if these are real results - then I agree with fb5b that CC maybe should reconsider building parts to other company's specs if the Castle name is on it. Am I bashing CC for saying this here?
It's anecdotal evidence from a single person who loves to post negative comments about Castle products.

We have dyno tested this motor, and are fine with it's performance. It peaks around 88% efficiency.

It's a different motor than the 3800kV Castle motor -- but that doesn't make it a bad motor. It's better than pretty much any other motor out there in that form factor -- except perhaps for the Castle 3800kV motor.

And the difference in performance between the two motors is around 2% efficiency.

For Castle, that 2% is worth the extra cost. For a high volume product in an OEM RTR, it's not.


Patrick del Castillo
President, Principle Engineer
Castle Creations
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#25)
brian015
RC-Monster Aluminum
 
brian015's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 768
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: NJ
11.07.2011, 12:35 PM

Thanks for your response Patrick. If you are pleased with your testing and stand behind the product - that's good enough for me.

-brian
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#26)
TexasSP
Something, anything, nothing
 
TexasSP's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 2,747
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Houston, TX
11.07.2011, 12:51 PM

Brian, what PDC said is my point. fastbaja bashes CC left and right and any chance. He comes on threads constantly and makes unwarranted and unwanted comments. He has complained for the last year how bad CC is yet he still buys their products.

I don't even know if I believe his "real world" data he has posted as everything coming from him about CC is suspect in my book at this point.

You sir are in a different boat altogether and a respected member of the forums.


www.cubicle101.com
A friends comic strip website.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#27)
BrianG
RC-Monster Admin
 
BrianG's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 14,609
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Des Moines, IA
11.07.2011, 12:58 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pdelcast View Post
...For Castle, that 2% is worth the extra cost. For a high volume product in an OEM RTR, it's not.
Personally, I agree. That "measly" 2% can make a pretty big difference when we are talking about the power levels we run. At 88% efficiency, a motor drawing, say, 500w, but would have 440w of usable output, with 60w wasted as heat - a lot considering the physical motor size. An extra 2% reduces wasted power to 50w - still a lot, but even that 10w difference can translate to a few degrees in reduced temperature and/or increased runtime.
  Send a message via Yahoo to BrianG Send a message via MSN to BrianG  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#28)
slimthelineman
RC-Monster Aluminum
 
slimthelineman's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 608
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: IBEW
11.07.2011, 02:16 PM

Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but a stator is the heart of these motors. With hpi specing laminations almost twice as thick as the standard cc motors that's alot less material to focus the flux lines. If it equates to 2% then so be it. It's a rtr setup what do you expect. Like Brian G said too, 2% can be a bigger differance than most would realize when it comes to heat losses. Honestly I would have to say that the real issue here is the fixed gearing. That's a no no IMO.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#29)
BrianG
RC-Monster Admin
 
BrianG's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 14,609
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Des Moines, IA
11.07.2011, 04:18 PM

I think the overall thickness of the laminations is the same, just the better motors use thinner individual laminations, but more of them to get the same overall size. Thinner is better since you have fewer eddy current losses.
  Send a message via Yahoo to BrianG Send a message via MSN to BrianG  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#30)
RC-Monster Mike
Site Owner
 
RC-Monster Mike's Avatar
 
Offline
Posts: 4,915
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: PA
11.07.2011, 05:44 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianG View Post
Personally, I agree. That "measly" 2% can make a pretty big difference when we are talking about the power levels we run. At 88% efficiency, a motor drawing, say, 500w, but would have 440w of usable output, with 60w wasted as heat - a lot considering the physical motor size. An extra 2% reduces wasted power to 50w - still a lot, but even that 10w difference can translate to a few degrees in reduced temperature and/or increased runtime.
I always like to put it into a perspective similar to this. The 2% efficiency increase is somewhat misleading - 2% doesn't sound like a lot, but if you go from 88% efficiency to 90% efficiency, you could also express this as going from 12% inefficiency to 10% inefficiency.....or a 16.7% difference in efficiency and therefore heat. :)

Last edited by RC-Monster Mike; 11.07.2011 at 05:47 PM.
   
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 Off

Forum Jump



RC Monster




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com