My default is a 3S 40C/80C 4200mAH Thunder Power pack, but something tells me that I should be able to get away with a 40C/8C 5000mAH pack with this motor if the track can hold the power.

Edit: FYI, here's all the batteries I get to play with at any given race (their's another 3S 4200 40C pack in my dragster that I didn't take out for the photo). I run three classes if possible so I need to have these options for best results.

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/h...40242Small.jpg

Wow dude sweet rig! Like the cf sticker on the motor can! Can't wait to see how this 4 poler whips your funny car down the track. I've raced with my 1406 4600 a couple more times since my last post and it totally dominates on the track. Currently set up for 3s but I haven't had a chance to run it yet cause we just had my baby boy on Thursday. Will get a vid up of some testing.

Thanks Slim. I like my rigs neat, helps between rounds when fine tuning.

David M has a 1406-7700Kv in his dragster and he says it's very smooth which will work well in a short wheelbase car. I expect the Funny Car to be very manageable and fast. David had a best ET of 1.38 in his dragster with it, so I imaging that should also be possible with my Funny Car.

And congrats on the baby!

Coolbeans Sunny. I'm going to try to make it Saturday at the autorama and check your ride out, along with Jason's and his brother carbon fiber rails.

Thnx Sunny good luck with your new mill! Hopefully you can best the 1.38 4 pole style! Let us know how it turns out. On a side note got any use for a new style cm36 9000? Had it nib for a while with nothing to run it in. You seem to like to go fast or maybee sombody you know?

That will be great. Maybe you can have a go at it with the Funny Car? :whistle:

David went 1.36 today IIRC, he'll post the details here I'm sure. If I can get the Funny Car into the 1.3s, that will be super! Also, check your inbox.

yep , went 1.36 with the 1406 7700 testing yesterday, The motor is very smooth and very consistent, I am at a little disadvantage since there is no gear changes I can make since I have a dd car but i changed tire size and it helped, haven't played with timing yet but so far I am very happy with it and I am sure there is more in that beast. Not sure if I can make it out next week or not but if times get better I will let yall know.

here is a pic of the car that the motor is in now.
http://i756.photobucket.com/albums/x...TkxNS5qcGc.jpg

OK y'all, this week is Autorama and I'm getting stuff ready for the event. I can't wait to run the 1406-7700, and I get to do it for 4 days!!!

Funny car with the 1406-7700 is on the right, body off, battery on.

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/h...40244Small.jpg

Team SunnyHouTX AKA Team Punisher

Nice! Team punisher good stuff! Have fun at the races. I haven't even seen my rigs for the last week. Work kinda blew up right now and turned into 20 hour days. Still waiting to run my 4600 on 3s in the 4x4 slash to really see what it can do. Worked well on high speed test runs but now it's geared down for the track. We shall se....

Yes indeed, we shall see!

BTW, I have three Punisher logo shirts now, started off with the one I'm wearing below at the 2010 Texas Worlds.

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/h...MAGE_111-1.jpg

So, if these produce 30% more torque, and they are classified with the same KV as the CM36's, does that mean they also output, and consume, 30% more power?

I'm only interested in these because I want something ROAR legal.

Right now, I have a Lehner Basic XXL, which cranks out way more torque than a CM36, or by these estimates, the 1400 series. The only trouble is, they are not ROAR legal and probably never will be. They are 36mm in radius, 58mm in can length, and can drive my SCRT10 with a 21 tooth pinion, achieving only 145f after 45 minutes, on Norcal Hobbies' Short Course Track.

I seriously wish that ROAR classified motors on power consumption, alone. It would allow people with heavier kits to run heavier motors and keep the races interesting...

...it would also keep you motor makers honest...not that you aren't ;-) it just means you'd lead your press releases with dyno tests instead of funny numbers.

Coreyfro, it's just some suppositions but here is my opinion :
When you put a 4 poles rotor instead a 2 poles, you divide the Kv by 2, but the Kt (torque coefficient) rise by 2, that mean for the same amp draw, you have twice the torque you would have with the 2 poles and as the RPM drops too there is less magnetic losses in the stator. So the 4 poles motor would be more efficient and would handle more power if it has to, or will consume less power for the same performance
Obviously the stator of a 4 poles motor is designed differently than a 2 pole motor (more slots) but here is the idea...

There are other things that come into play as well, such as rotor diameter (which increases torque by the square of the diameter) stator length (linear torque increase with stator length) air gap (decreased torque by the cube of the air gap) etc...

What we've tried to do is make the most efficient possible motor -- while making it as efficient as possible over the entire usable range.

This means increasing the torque per turn as much as possible, while minimizing no-load current. The 1406 motors are all 1-turn motors, with small tweaks in other areas to change the Kv (mostly by changing the stator length...)

So the motor that makes the most power is the 1409 SCT motor, with it's very long stator and rotor. As the Kv of these motors goes up, the maximum continuous power goes down... but high Kv motors are usually used in fast, lightweight cars, so the power requirements are lower.

Burst power from these motors is incredible... the 50% efficiency point (the point where more input power won't generate any more output power, just more heat -- those of you who run ROAR motors know what I'm talking about) is so far down the graph that we can't hit it without destroying the motors. So they can be used in high burst applications (like drag racing) just as well as oval, dirt track, etc...

These motors use .2mm powder coated laminations (expensive -- but much lower no load current -- almost all other motors on the market use less expensive .35mm laminations) oversized NMB bearings, high temperature magnets (N38UH -- good to 180C temperatures) 180C rated windings, 6061-T6 case components, etc...

These motors were designed to be as bulletproof as possible, and as efficient as possible.

I like the sound of that :yes:

Impressive! Thank you for giving us such a well designed product at a great price point. :great:

Great stuff.

I know the 1409 and 1410 have longer cans than the 1406, but, within the 1406 series, do the kigher KV 1406 motors have less mass since the motors are optimised by rotor/stator length? So someone with a pan car, shaving micrograms, would get the 1406-7700 and gear it low, saving some weight over the 1402-4600 and gearing it high?

But, if weight isn't a primary factor, if someone wants maximum power draw, they get the SCT motor (websight says 1410) and gear it tall. When they run out of teeth, but not out of track, they get a faster model, so long as temps stay healthy.

So with the NUE motor series, each motor is really a different motor since they have rotors/stators of differing lengths?