Whilst waiting for some decent weather to come my way I have been running the test rig on a few motors ESC's and prop's.
Without going into a lot of data that nobody really cares about anyway. Here is my results based on a Phantom operation. On the sampled standard motor I was please to see that it came perfectly balanced. The tests were done at 400, 450. and 500 grams of lift which is the kind of operating loads that you will be seeing in flight.
So the first revelation was that the efficiency was much more about props. than motors. The standard DJI 8040 prop. was not great as it drew 67 watts 79 watts and 89 watts respectively at the above lift values. The 10x5 E-flight was the best with 58/66/76 but it is a little too big for a phantom so I would recommend a 9x5 or even a cut down 10x5 to 9. 59/66/79. So at 79 watts the 9x5 was 50 grams up. Err. thats the weight of a motor...So what about motors? well the cheepo iflight were pretty close to the standard DJI but not quite as good and need to be balanced. So what about the white series motors. The ones tested were from kopterworx. They ran with perfect balance out of the box and were quite close to the DJI motor. At 400 grams of lift they drew the same watts. but with a 10x5 they were just slightly more efficient 55/63,74.
In the air I was aware that they had more power when you gave it full throttle but I don't see much improvement in efficiency at normal hovering settings. If you like to pimp your quad then buy them but if you want better duration it would be a lot cheaper to invest in some 9x5 E-flights. Not tried the new Vision 2 props but I am assuming that they will be close to the E-Flight 9x5's.:tennis:
I ran a number of larger motors with some big 16 and 17 inch diameters. One fact emerged was that the wide chord prop. tips were not good. especially if squared off.
Without going into a lot of data that nobody really cares about anyway. Here is my results based on a Phantom operation. On the sampled standard motor I was please to see that it came perfectly balanced. The tests were done at 400, 450. and 500 grams of lift which is the kind of operating loads that you will be seeing in flight.
So the first revelation was that the efficiency was much more about props. than motors. The standard DJI 8040 prop. was not great as it drew 67 watts 79 watts and 89 watts respectively at the above lift values. The 10x5 E-flight was the best with 58/66/76 but it is a little too big for a phantom so I would recommend a 9x5 or even a cut down 10x5 to 9. 59/66/79. So at 79 watts the 9x5 was 50 grams up. Err. thats the weight of a motor...So what about motors? well the cheepo iflight were pretty close to the standard DJI but not quite as good and need to be balanced. So what about the white series motors. The ones tested were from kopterworx. They ran with perfect balance out of the box and were quite close to the DJI motor. At 400 grams of lift they drew the same watts. but with a 10x5 they were just slightly more efficient 55/63,74.
In the air I was aware that they had more power when you gave it full throttle but I don't see much improvement in efficiency at normal hovering settings. If you like to pimp your quad then buy them but if you want better duration it would be a lot cheaper to invest in some 9x5 E-flights. Not tried the new Vision 2 props but I am assuming that they will be close to the E-Flight 9x5's.:tennis:
I ran a number of larger motors with some big 16 and 17 inch diameters. One fact emerged was that the wide chord prop. tips were not good. especially if squared off.
Last edited by a moderator: