Savage Flux XS Castle Electronics Question
 

I have seen the Savage XS is heavily promoted as having Castle Creations electrics, most notably a 4 pole motor and an ESC which appears to be a Sidewinder SV2 with a fan on it.

What I am curious about is the specs of this gear, given a lot of people report the motor in particular runs quite hot. Branded as a 1410 4000kv motor, how does this compare to the Castle Short Course 3800kv motor? What temps are safe for this 4 pole motor given reports of 170-180f are common (I thought we left the hot temp on motor days with the 4 pole series)

What are the specs on this ESC? We wouldn't recommend a Sidewinder to someone doing a custom prodject with 100+ amp draw on start up. Yet my Eagletree shows the Flux XS is more Amp Hungry than the Flux HP! 110 Amps on start for the HP, 145 Amps on the Flux XS, all through a Sidewinder? That was on 2s, on 3s it'd be huge? Can the ESC safely take this?

Will we see a significant reduction in temps if we remove the HPI Branded 4 pole and install a Castle SCT 3800 motor (given that Castle has said the Alphastar 2350 motor in the Flux 2350 is essentially a HP Motor with weaker magnets, is this HPI one the same deal, weaker magnets, lower efficiency, higher temps?

Would appreciate the input, I am tentatively starting to trust Castle electrics again, the MMM in my SC8e has been behaving of late, and I am hoping the XS electrics will behave as well.

You should also factor in that manufacturers usually over gear their stock stuff in order to get ridiculous speed claims, putting more stress on everything. Whenever I get a new RTR I plan on gearing down a tooth or two on the pinion.

I would but the stock gearing on the existing spur can only go up as it's a fixed position motor mount, they list a larger spur but noone has the part yet.

oh yeah, forgot about the fixed gear ratio thing on the XS :grrrrrr:

Does the ESC run a full version of the Sidewinder software ?

Can it be toned it down with punch control / torque limiting etc...

145 amps seems crazy if its only travelling 40 mph or so

Cheers

The ESC runs Sidewinder software so it can be toned down, keep in mind I got 145 amps after toning down timing and punch control.

What is concerning to me is the lack of response from Castle on this, is it top secret or something? Are the magnets in this HPI motor budget stuff (like the Flux Alphastar motor) and would we get better results substituting it for a Castle 1410 3800kv Shortcourse motor.

I haven't noticed much Castle posting on the forums lately, they might be pretty busy with other things, so one of the first things to go under the radar is posting on forums (I would think it would be low priority). I bet whenever Thomas or Patrick logs in they'll chime in on this thread.

from the reviews and motor temps i have seen so far, it looks like castle kind of cheaped out on this motor just like they did with the alphastar motor. the sct3800 motor will run cooler for sure. if you are only going to be running 2s, you will be fine with the stock motor. if you want/need to bump it up to 3s, i would swap to a 3800.

The motor is a slightly less expensive version of the 3800kV motor, with just a slightly less expensive stator and rotor. The main differences are the stator laminations (.35mm on the HPI, .2mm on the Castle) and N35UH magnets instead of N38UH magnets. Not a big difference like with the 1517B motor and the 1515.

Well I direct swapped out the Flux XS motor with a Castle SCT 3800 motor, and motor temps were 35-40f lower straight away. Makes me wonder what these N38UH magnets are, fridge spec? Will transplant the Flux XS motor into a Hyper 10SC behind a HPI Q-Base (MMP) Esc and see if the lighter truck and easire gearing helps it but didn't expect such a difference.

Hang on a minute champ! Castle made these motors for HPI based on what HPI wanted to pay. If anyone cheaped out that would be HPI. HPI could have easily paid a little more and fitted better motors to their trucks. Instead they wanted to make something for x amount less and that is the outcome.

I absolutley love Castle motors and they are kickass units but I don't really like to see what they are doing for HPI. Making lower spec motors for another company and then putting the Castle name on them will not help their reputation.

i am a huge fan of castle and the majority of my motors and escs are castle-branded. looking back on that post, i guess i was a little harsh. you are right about it being HPI and not so much castle.

I'm building a superlight 1/8 buggy. rtr weight 2800g powered with castle 1410 3800kv , 3s lipo and geared for 40mph top speed. I want a waterproof esc. Can the esc of savage flux xs handle this car?

Short answer is no, its just a rebadged Sidewinder with a fan

Cheers

I'd agree with that, which is why I am puzzled that they are advertising it as pulling 3s with the Flux xs motor which is less efficient (cheaper magnets and runs hotter) so if anything would be harder on the ESC, no wonder the failure rate is as high as it is.

I'd get a cheapy $40 Hobbyking 120A esc and coat the thing in liquid tape or silicone, if it blows, well it's $40, but the one in my Savage Flux is still kicking and I haven't really been nice to it!

Just heard that HPI have sent a new batch of cars out apparently with a new ESC and Motor

Curious what they have changed

Cheers

Lets hope they do the right thing by those of us who already bought the truck and offer a direct swap (although with the HPI distributor in Oz I won't hold my breath)

I put my Castle 3800 motor in the Flux XS and top amp draw was 115 Amps, so I dropped 30-40 amps of stress from the Battery / ESC at very little if any cost of performance. Motor also ran a lot cooler. Makes me wonder what sort of magnets this HPI thing has, cheaper quality obviously, but I'd call them fridge magnet quality at best with this data.

To double check I threw the 4000kv HPI motor in my Hyper 10SC geared for 35mph, again, 151 amp spikes and threw the fan of my HPI Q Base (MMP) esc on within a matter of minutes.

I have to wonder what Castle was thinking, how can you build a reputation for 'good quality' motors etc then cheap out to appeal to a large manufacturer like HPI, produce a product that is clearly less efficient but still allow your brand name to be plastered all over their advertising for the truck. A lot of people would be attracted to the XS as it has "Castle Electronics" but at the moment, I wonder if it's less efficient than the old 2 pole Traxxas VXL motor.

Wow
 

Dude baja what's with tha cc bashing? It's already been stated the motors were built to HPI specs and pricing not castles.

The motor is a slightly less expensive version of the 3800kV motor, with just a slightly less expensive stator and rotor. The main differences are the stator laminations (.35mm on the HPI, .2mm on the Castle) and N35UH magnets instead of N38UH magnets. Not a big difference like with the 1517B motor and the 1515.

Patrick del Castillo
President, Principle Engineer
Castle Creations

honestly the thickness of the stator laminations will have a bigger effect on price and performance than magnets will. So ease up a little dude. Ultimately you should be asking HPI why they speced a cheaper motor for such a large truck.

At the end of the day though it's still Castles name thats pushed in all the online adverts and magazine spreads etc.

If it's built by Castle to HPI spec, thats fine, but then it's not really a Castle motor is it? castle motors have a reputation that has been built up over time, but if Mercedes went out and built a Kia spec car, would they still slap a Merc badge on it?

OMG -- did you ever think that the difference might be from the different Kv? Or did you just run two different motors with the same pinion side-by-side?

Cmon -- if you have constructive criticism, that's fine. But to come in here and just bash and bash for no reason (and without good cause) is just abusive.

PDC, I think it's top notch of you to still respond to people like this.

This guy has bashed you from the beginning and that's all he does, yet he still buys your products. At this point, it really is out of your hands. I mean, if your products are as bad as he says, then maybe he should stop using them. Yet time and again he still buys CC. This can mean only one of two scenarios here for him.

I know that when I have too many issues with a manufacturer that don't get resolved, i go elsewhere.

I have had a few issues with with CC products here and there, but you have always taken good care of me. In the end, that's all I ask. No matter what, things in RC will break and fail as is the nature of this hobby. We run things to the extreme. In the 1:1 world vehicles that are treated like our RC's get constant rebuilds and tend to see much more breakage. I think scaled down our failure rate is probably much lower.

So we're equating 200kv to 30-35 amps?

Because that's really what's being argued isn't it? If I was running a 9000kv motor at the same gearing as the 3800 well then yes, you'd expect a marked difference, but for 200kv?

This doesn't sound like Castle-bashing to me - it sounds like actual data from testing in applications that these motors are designed for. I would be unhappy with this 4000kv motor if it was giving these results.

I also agree that the 200kv difference should not be a major factor here. It's a 5% difference.

I'm running almost all CC escs and motors and am a great supporter of the company. But if these are real results - then I agree with fb5b that CC maybe should reconsider building parts to other company's specs if the Castle name is on it. Am I bashing CC for saying this here?

It's anecdotal evidence from a single person who loves to post negative comments about Castle products.

We have dyno tested this motor, and are fine with it's performance. It peaks around 88% efficiency.

It's a different motor than the 3800kV Castle motor -- but that doesn't make it a bad motor. It's better than pretty much any other motor out there in that form factor -- except perhaps for the Castle 3800kV motor.

And the difference in performance between the two motors is around 2% efficiency.

For Castle, that 2% is worth the extra cost. For a high volume product in an OEM RTR, it's not.

Thanks for your response Patrick. If you are pleased with your testing and stand behind the product - that's good enough for me.

-brian

Brian, what PDC said is my point. fastbaja bashes CC left and right and any chance. He comes on threads constantly and makes unwarranted and unwanted comments. He has complained for the last year how bad CC is yet he still buys their products.

I don't even know if I believe his "real world" data he has posted as everything coming from him about CC is suspect in my book at this point.

You sir are in a different boat altogether and a respected member of the forums.

Personally, I agree. That "measly" 2% can make a pretty big difference when we are talking about the power levels we run. At 88% efficiency, a motor drawing, say, 500w, but would have 440w of usable output, with 60w wasted as heat - a lot considering the physical motor size. An extra 2% reduces wasted power to 50w - still a lot, but even that 10w difference can translate to a few degrees in reduced temperature and/or increased runtime.

Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but a stator is the heart of these motors. With hpi specing laminations almost twice as thick as the standard cc motors that's alot less material to focus the flux lines. If it equates to 2% then so be it. It's a rtr setup what do you expect. Like Brian G said too, 2% can be a bigger differance than most would realize when it comes to heat losses. Honestly I would have to say that the real issue here is the fixed gearing. That's a no no IMO.

I think the overall thickness of the laminations is the same, just the better motors use thinner individual laminations, but more of them to get the same overall size. Thinner is better since you have fewer eddy current losses.

I always like to put it into a perspective similar to this. The 2% efficiency increase is somewhat misleading - 2% doesn't sound like a lot, but if you go from 88% efficiency to 90% efficiency, you could also express this as going from 12% inefficiency to 10% inefficiency.....or a 16.7% difference in efficiency and therefore heat. :)

I find it a bit insulting that because I choose to question what I consider issues I am being labelled as a 'basher' as I don't maintain the status quo.

What happened to informed intelligent discussion?

The numbers don't lie, I am curious how the SCT combo is specifically labelled as 2s only (no 3s with that motor on that ESC) yet the Flux XS uses an ESC with similar specs, a motor which is clearly less efficient, but they pretty much invite you to run 3s through it.

I've been told here that a 30 odd amp jump is reasonable for 200kv, so by that logic, if I go down from the 4000kv to a 2000kv, my battery should be getting charged as every 200kv drop is a 30 amp drop? Doesn't make sense.

I have no problem proving my data:

Flux XS, stock esc, stock motor

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/c...ata/fluxxs.jpg

Compared to Flux XS, stock esc, Castle 3800 motor
http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/c...rreststock.jpg

And when placed in a Hyper 10SC, with a HPI Q Base esc, geared for around 30-35mph, the 4000kv motor still pulls huge amps (and runs hot)

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/c...v15tpinion.jpg

..the numbers don't lie. (Esc's both run with default settings, deans plugs, Turnigy Nanotech 65/130C 2s Hard Cased Lipo)

Well that's just silly. :lol:


Going from a N38UH magnet to an N35UH magnet is about a 8% decrease in air gap flux. This causes the kV to rise by about 8%.

A Castle 3800kV motor is about 3770kV actual.

An HPI 4000kV motor is about 4050kV actual.

They have exactly the same DC resistance.

So the difference in current maximum is determined by back-EMF. Because the HPI motor has lower back-EMF, when using the same gearing and throttle ramp rate, the maximum currents will be significantly higher.

Your observed 30% maximum current difference is about right, and doesn't have anything to do with how the motor is constructed. If we made you a custom 4070kV CC 1410 motor (by shortening the stator stack and magnet) the peak currents would also be about 30% higher than the CC3800kV motor.

IF you change the gearing so that the HPI motor is geared approx. 8% lower than the 3800kV CC motor, you should see about the same peak currents.

OR - if you change the throttle ramp rate by 8% (using punch control or torque limiting) you will see about the same peak currents.

It's just that you can't compare peak currents on two different kV motors side-by-side without making a similar gearing or throttle ramp rate adjustment.

Ok, well I'll gear both for the same speed and do a back to back test.

Can we use the 1410 rebuild kit (specifically the rotor) in the HPI branded motor?

You sure can. :)

Now will that improve the efficiency I am seeing (obviously not KV as that is Stator based?), or with it being the magnets as you stated, will putting in a rebuild kit bring this HPI motor to the same spec as the 3800 Castle?

If you change the rotor, the kV will drop because of the stronger magnets in the CC rotor.

The efficiency of the motor will go up slightly, but still won't be as good as the CC3800 motor because of the difference in the stator lamination thickness. Thicker laminations = lower cost = higher iron losses = higher maximum flux density. Thinner laminations = higher cost = lower iron losses = lower maximum flux density.

The .2mm laminations in the CC motor are rated at 150watts loss / kilo @10khz, the .35mm laminations in the HPI motor are rated at 230watts loss / kilo @10khz (for comparison.) But the .2mm laminations are three times as expensive as the .35mm laminations.

Both perform well. But the .2mm laminations have a small advantage in high speed motors, at a large cost disadvantage.

We make both .2mm and .35mm lamination versions of many of our motors. Really depends on whether the application and cost target can justify the extra expense for the thinner laminations.

All of the CC branded motors use .2mm laminations. For OEM motors, some use .2mm laminations, some use .35mm laminations. Really depends on the application.

Thanx!

Apparently HPI are swapping failed ESC's with a new version

Any comment on what has changed Patrick ?

Cheers