The point is we are not saying it should live up to anyone's mark or standard, just define and back up that mark. A blanket "we have the best batteries in the world" is fine, if can be proven true. If so, great. Do they have anything to prove to us? Not if they don't want to. They could have just scoffed at this thread and walked away. No, they chose to post here and then many of us responded. Yeah, those discussions can get heated, but that's the nature of the beast. "Can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen."

No, maybe not everyone is as knowledgable as some here, but for how long? BL is not exactly cutting edge anymore being made available for the masses at a decent price.

As you pointed out, many other industries have standards for rating and testing. Seeing a sticker saying "meets <insert name here> standards" would eventually be trusted and would let people know that the product is rated approriately with a common set of guidelines, whatever those may be. And many of those companies you stated are considered good companies because of their quality/longevity, not their marketing. Ford could say they are the most reliable car in the world, but repair shops and consumer experience will eventually tell the tale. And guess what? Consumers will eventually come not to trust them.

You are right, many of the ratings went UP. Here's another 60C (non burst) rated. http://www.maxamps.com/Lipo-2000-74-Pack.htm

Might as well go for 70C http://www.maxamps.com/Lipo-4200-74-Flight-Pack.htm

Let those in the know better than I decide which pack is to be tested and let me know were to send the $.

I'm in for $20.00.

Well, I can't entirely disagree with you. I don't think your reasoning is off base at all really, but it's going to take a lot of time, effort, and testing to prove them wrong... right for that matter. Not to mention all the public smearing that will need to happen if u prove them to be full of it.

I guess what I was trying to imply, was that some of those companies I named have a HIGH suck factor, but have the power to crush the nay sayers. So what is the point? I agree that MA is no GM, so they are ripe for the picking if the claims are bogus. And I think the point is, they rewrote the rules (that don't exsist) to hype up their packs to those that don't realize it's not likely to be possible? Right?

It may not be possoble to damage their reputation at this point, but all is fair in love and war I guess. But don't assume they didn't see the backlash coming from this. They probably said, "those guys at RCM are going to have a fit!" They were right!

You know, if the MA packs I had for some reason burst into flames, I would definitely say this thread wouldn't be here at all.

I usually jump on crazy claims such as a ESC that can do 400A to the one that states 780A. Can they prove it, no why, because it's impossible for such little devices to put out that kind of AMPs. I tell everyone if a ESC has a real rating use it a the max continuous burst which means that will be what you see on hard acceleration and that's all. Most ESC will average from 5-20A for 1/8 scale racing depending on the voltage and correct motor used (Gearing and everything else as well). Now for a pack to claim 60C surge, I'll use that as a max burst figure that's all even if it's a number I'll never see in my RC life time. After I get a project out of the way, I'll start focusing more on my full scale electric race car and I'll show everyone what a real cell that can put out over 1500A continuous and 2 second bursts of over 3000A looks like. Now this cell has a 2V cut off and it will discharge at 240A and hold over 3V at 90% DOD. The numbers mentioned of the cell are not false as it's being used by the military.

Prove it I want to see a discharge graph - lol :whistle:

I will when the time comes. I am though trying my best to get 2 smaller cells and it's tough. I should just claim I do military work and see if I can get some.

Edit: I did actually let 2 members here see the datasheet.

Herein lies my issue with this new rating system MA is using. Nothing but Rookie problems and misunderstanding.

This is a quote from another forum, I have NOT altered it in anyway.


My issue here it that these kids are going to the 60C BURST rating here and think its the same as the 30C CONTINUOUS rating. The proof is in the pudding on this claim. And I'm sure this isn't the only guy I have noticed.

Honestly, changing the rating system sounds like a ploy to take advantage of the misinformed. They see the "60C" rating printed on the pack and think this is one hell of a pack if rated at 60C, think of it as a continuous rating of course. Just seems like another advertising plot thats going to mislead people into misunderstood buying. Sure they can read the specs underneath, but do you really think most truly understand what they mean. They see the 60C printed on the label and think thats a wrap.

Any comments? Questions Concerns?

thank you sir. :smile: very big of you, and certainly progress in the right direction IMHO.

Honestly , I took it the same way. Many of the batts say 60C burst, The ones we are talking about testing say 60 and 70C. The current is there as well. Then many of the batts list the "constant" and "sustained" and "burst"

I'm guessing it is an oversight (mistake) since a similar pack shows this

25C Constant(105 amps)
35C Sustained(147 amps)
60C Burst(252 amps)

I'm also guessing that a fair current on the "70C" packs would be around 30-35C , but am willing to pull them at whichever current Austin feels is safe. Get the info right from the "man" so to speak.

Austin may be able/willing to define the terms constant,burst, and sustained as well. One thing is for sure:

During testing one can tell very quickly when to "stop" raising the current. Things start to get very hot.

That is exactly what I was thinking. Most noobs to lipo read the new rating system and have not a clues to what it means. All they see is the 60C in MA's advertising and on the label.

Even those of us who think we know what it means , don't know what it means. The burden of interpretation of a text is always placed upon the author of that text. In this case is maxamps. That brings up the question to Austin.

Austin what is meant by the various terms listed on the website? Thank you.

sustained,constant,burst, ect. Then again, maybe we do.

It is possible I overlooked the definition and hopefully we all don't need help with the numbers in front of the terms or the terms which are very well defined by the industry.

I think I need to amend my Tutorials page somehow....

But yeah, constant ansd sustained mean the same thing to me- its the maximum amount of current a lipo can put out without dropping below below an acceptable voltage level, 3.2v per cell for arguments sake, and without heating up beyond 120*F with good airflow (the 130*F MA states in various places is simply too high, and thats not an opinion).

Im curious about the specifics of the new rating system myself, and of the old one too for that matter.

I think most of these suggestions are really fair and well thought out. At this point I do not see how anyone could take them negatively or feel that they are being bashed upon.

Again I will point toward the CC forum and Patrick Del Castillo. When he disagrees with something whether by opinion or fact there is always a detailed explanation of why with many facts to back that up. Case in point his belief in why sensorless is superior to sensored and/or why ESC constant amp ratings are so arbitrary. A lot of the issues coincide directly with the lipo rating issues and many are directly correlated.