That's why I want a bigger alternator; because I have a heavy audio system. I would go with a class D amp for my sub, but don't like PWM DC going to a speaker - it just doesn't sound right. So, I'm using fairly inefficient class AB amps; 600w rms for the sub, and 300w rms for mids/highs. Caps help the pulses, but it's still a drain on the power and not good for a stock alternator. I would get a regular high-output alternator, but those usually have less current at idle compared to stock.

Anyway, I wouldn't mind something new. Although, these BL systems are very powerful and efficient. I'd rather see lighter, safer, smaller, and better performing batteries to be honest.

To be honest, once you look at the situation, every part in the power system for R/C cars need to be improved, one way or another. I'm not saying BL is no powerful or inefficient, that would be an oxymoron. :005:

I think the motors & batteries are becoming more powerful, but more quickly than the manufactures can design more powerful escs, at least for trucks at any rate. I saw on the CC website an esc for a boat that could handle 240 amps, and could be programmed via the castle link software thingy. Wonder if it could be ran in a truck, even if it did have limited throttle programs.....

Batteries have come a long way indeed in the last few years, but they also have a long way to go as well. BL motors are more than powerful enough, but like i've said before, I would like to see AC induction motors this size as they would be much more durable and less expensive. (maybe not at first)

The controllers are definitely in need of improvement, it seems like no manufacturer can make a controller with all the pros of a good controller. ex.

-Quark smoothness
-MM programmability
-MGM compro current handling
-cool running (proper thermal design)

It seems like they pick and choose one of those and only one to design the esc around. :032:

Stick those three escs into blender, and then bake in an oven for an hour or so.... the result should be just what we need.

Ok, I've got couple BK's and Schulze's ESC from Mike, later I will ad MM and MGM.
AAngel if you let me play with Quark you will be the first to end up with one!

Plan for MM to double the current and verification for any software current limits. For BK and alike to built new power boards with 300A capacity and 60V limit for now.

300Amps & 60v... nucking futs. I would love to see photos of the process (assuming it will be sucessful). The schulzes (which ones did you get?) could do with the better current handling for cooler running- then they would be great (Candyman runs one of the 18.97k with a bigmaxximum and it tends to get a little warm....).

18 kW ESC. This should be interesting...

Anyone up for a 1:1 scale conversion? :D

Me... check my sig! :027: ;)

future 18.61 and 15E , but I am looking for brains only so result would be like 48.300k :)

Are you sure that can be done Artur? Aren't the brains meant specifically for driving a certain FET?

What kind of package are you thinking? At the present time, is it better to use larger FET's (fewer), or more of a smaller FET?

Everything is possible, you can intercept signal and build output stage anyway you want. Looking at volume below 100 units there is no benefits in using smaller FET's but after testing it would be clear. In my opinion less components always more reliable and easy to fix.

Got some results on ESC's...

BK controller a little bit complicated to take apart but can be done
TOP view and Bottom view

Schulze - simple if not waterproof version
Top view and Bottom view

Mamba Max - easy to take apart and looks like poor design in output stage
Brains Top view, Brains bottom view, Fets top view and Fets bottom view.

Thank to Mike for provided ESC's.

Later next week I will put update on possibility putting two mamba boards in parallel.

As for now, I will put some time into fixing some of them and testing with new driver boards. After conversation with Mike, I decided to proceed with 6S version with 300A capacity.

Griffin,

Two mamba boards in parallel? Would this be similar to just soldering on a bunch of FETs in parallel to those already on the board? Forgive me if that is an ignorant question. It's just that I was thinking about it as I was sitting in court today. I wondered what the effect would be if I just soldered a bunch of FETs in parallel to those already there. Wouldn't that almost double the esc's ability to handle current? If this is just plain stupid, let me know. If it is a possibility, let me know that too. I'll source some FETs and maybe get lucky.

I don't know if this tells you anything, but I got back a couple of MMs that I sent to Castle for repair. The repair receipt says that the cause of the failure was "FET Failure." It also says, parts used:

6-BSC022N
2-F320
6-ISL6700
2-BAT54A
2-TL750
4-BAW56LT1
2-LM2665
2-LM3394

Obviously (I think) the prefix number preceeding the hypen is the number of components used to repair my two escs, but the rest of the stuff might shed light to someone that knows what they are doing.

6s...300A....:027:

How are you going to go about doing this? (package setup) What kind of FET's are you going to use?

GriffinRU: If you have look at my Quark case design, I am wondering how cooling all FET's very well will change current capability? I know it will probably ALLOW it to run to it's rated continuous current (most likely), do you think it could run a 2250 (with a bunch of added caps) in say a heavy 1/5, 1/6 scale on-road car?