380 vs 540 Brushless
Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2020 11:35 am
Hi guys,
I have a quite specific question. When I got my first brushless (sensorless) system Hacker B40 Motor (or a clone) with a Hacker ESC, a lot of the motors were basically 380 in size, some such as the Hacker C40 were 380 sized with integrated heat fins to reach 540 can size. The modern cheap (chinese) sensorless motors such as the one in the picture are basically still like that. These Motors get their power from high RPMs and low gearing ratios around 11:1 to 9:1 -ish. I usually have little to no heat issues. On a side note, are there any such motors with sensors around?
When I compare them to the modern ROAR / IFMAR legal sensored motors which are true 540 cans, the recommended gearing / ratio is much higher around 1:7. To me it seems these motors and ESCs are more prone to heat issues, seeing how normal it has become to have at least 2 fans installed.
Now to me both systems seem to get the job done in a comparable matter, (I haven't compared yet), but with different approaches.
I do not mean sensored vs. sensorless here.
Does anyone know why the market went this way? To me a smaller 380 sized can would open up options to even lower the CG more and I have the feeling put less stress on the electrics.
I hope you understand what I am getting at, any insight would be great.
Thanks, Tony
I have a quite specific question. When I got my first brushless (sensorless) system Hacker B40 Motor (or a clone) with a Hacker ESC, a lot of the motors were basically 380 in size, some such as the Hacker C40 were 380 sized with integrated heat fins to reach 540 can size. The modern cheap (chinese) sensorless motors such as the one in the picture are basically still like that. These Motors get their power from high RPMs and low gearing ratios around 11:1 to 9:1 -ish. I usually have little to no heat issues. On a side note, are there any such motors with sensors around?
- Sensorless brushless china.JPG (19.48 KiB) Viewed 854 times
- Sensorless brushless china.JPG (19.48 KiB) Viewed 854 times
Now to me both systems seem to get the job done in a comparable matter, (I haven't compared yet), but with different approaches.
I do not mean sensored vs. sensorless here.
Does anyone know why the market went this way? To me a smaller 380 sized can would open up options to even lower the CG more and I have the feeling put less stress on the electrics.
I hope you understand what I am getting at, any insight would be great.
Thanks, Tony