Quote:
Originally Posted by lutach
I actually tried to figure out how some big names (Castle and Tekin are not one of those as they don't claim such crazy out of this world numbers) claim such a high number and I must say it's not adding up even if I go with the MOSFET's burst rating. Are they using alien technology?
Get well soon Brian, sorry for all the questions.
|
I don't know either. Look at the Quark 125B and the original MMM: both used the same FETs and the same number of them, yet the Quark was rated for 25% higher current. I would really like to see it even try to pass 125A on a contiuous basis! Actually, I'd like to see the MM try to do its 100A as well, even though it's more realistically rated. Don't get me wrong, I really like both those ESCs and recommend them to anyone, but I think the rating is a bit "aggressive". People will push them, simple as that.
The problem with rating might be how an engineer would rate it vs how their marketing department would rate it, vs how a consumer
understands that rating. Or maybe it's about how an engineer
thinks the consumer will
hear it, or how the marketing department
thinks the engineering department is rating it, because, as we all know, most engineers tend to err on the side of caution, and so marketing will re-inflate the rating. lol, we could go in circles with this all day.
Or maybe, as you said, it's alien technology after all. Heck, there could be tiny aliens actually inside the FETs doing the work and all that jargon about silicon and gates and source/drain and rdson, yadda yadda yadda is all just technobabble to confuse and distract us.
BTW: Takedown, sorry about the thread hijack. 