BigSquid 4S LiPo Shootout

[hoober]

Capacity test

1 Turnigy 4500 102%
2 AcePow 5000 101%
3 Venom 5000 100%
3 ThunderPower 5300 100%
5 Checkpoint 5400 99%

This capacity comparison is quite fine to compare apples to oranges (doing it my way) and the new winner is turnigy , but I'm guessing that a retest might provide different winner since they are so close to 100% that it isn't even worth mentioning.

Top speed test

I can't argue with too much. I suppose I am most impressed by the Turnigy especially as I keep it's price in mind as I view the top speed numbers with a smile. The only thing I can say about a top speed test is that since the speed isn't great and the load was very small that ANY battery with 4S would top out at the same speed (even a junky e-bat type pack would fair well if it is geared like this) As neil pointed out there isn't much load on the packs at this speed and weight.


Voltage test

I can say alot about this since it is what I do. It is pretty much the same story as the speed test. A 10 minute test is 6C and none of the packs are even close to breaking a sweat. I'm most impressed with the Turnigy and the AcePow. The temp ratings actually can tell more than the graphs and to me the AcePow pack might do very well if the current were doubled or more. This one really is an unfair comparison , but could've been a fair comparison if the "C" rating and the capacity of the pack were taken into account when selecting a discharge current. Instead they selected the same current for all packs and did so because the equipment is maxxed out.

FWIW I do notice that the capacity even at 30 amps still remains in order according to the pack's labels. Again a 30 amp test isn't any kind of load for these packs.

Weight test

I can't say much about it. I agree with it. I like a light pack hehe.

Price test

This is the one that is unfair to all the larger packs. It is obvious that a smaller , lower rated, lighter pack would cost less. Even if it were adjusted to a % test the Turnigy would blow the others away with the AcePow in second. It really is an unfair comparison , but nonetheless I would consider nothing but the top two.

Driving test

There's a reason that the Acepow "felt better" and has to do with it's power. If the discharge test and the top speed test were done at higher loads then this "feel" would show up on the numbers.

Fit test

I don't even know what to say

Final results

My take is that the venom is a dog and is properly in last place. The acepow is winner and I agree. I do like the turnigy though too (I'm a miser)

[thzero]

You've got completely overboard. I am positive no one singled any packs out for any reason.

And actually its not worse than MaxAmps, not even close. Its far better than MaxAmps because AT LEAST THEY ARE TRYING. Think you can do better testing with better methodology? Then do it. Don't like their methodology? Then start a civil discussion, not a bunch of name calling. Geesh.

Originally Posted by hoober

...

Good summary. And even a civil one. :)

[hoober]

If I had the samples I would do a higher current discharge test and post graphs. To me this is the most important test.

[josh9mille]

Originally Posted by thzero

You've got completely overboard. I am positive no one singled any packs out for any reason.

And actually its not worse than MaxAmps, not even close. Its far better than MaxAmps because AT LEAST THEY ARE TRYING. Think you can do better testing with better methodology? Then do it. Don't like their methodology? Then start a civil discussion, not a bunch of name calling. Geesh.

Actually i do think they are biased against Turnigy. There are 2 most talked about lipo manufacturers and they are Turnigy and Maxamps. Maxamps is a sponsor on their site, which is why they have never tested a maxamps pack. In the test they even said some smart ass comment about the "cheap turnigy packs"

Turnigy 4S 4500- Anyone that says “Turnigy packs are every bit as good, and cost 1/3 the price!” hasn’t looked at the numbers. The Turnigy did not put out the voltage of the other batteries in this test. The lack of voltage will show itself as less speed when drag racing your neighbor and while trying to clear the big triple at your local track. Temp at the end of test was 89F, it put out 4495 mah, in 541 seconds (barely over 9 minutes).

Just the way they are talking about the Turnigy packs you can kinda tell they are biased against them.

[sikeston34m]

Originally Posted by josh9mille

Actually i do think they are biased against Turnigy. There are 2 most talked about lipo manufacturers and they are Turnigy and Maxamps. Maxamps is a sponsor on their site, which is why they have never tested a maxamps pack. In the test they even said some smart ass comment about the "cheap turnigy packs"

Just the way they are talking about the Turnigy packs you can kinda tell they are biased against them.

That's exactly the impression I got too.

[brainanator]

I also feel they blew it on this run....very poor experimental design and assumption. Even the data analysis was way off as pointed out by others.

[lincpimp]

Reading thru this "review"...

Heres an interesting quote

"In our last shootout, we used a truck set up strictly for high speed, one that was geared to the moon running a high kv brushless motor. Doing it that way pushed each battery to its limits, and helped separate the men from the boys. This time, we decided to take a different approach, to use a power set-up that you’d actually use on a track. Using only moderate gearing and a mild kv motor would not push the packs very hard, making the gap between a great pack and weak pack very small."

So they intentionally did not really load the packs. So this test was a waste of time...

The capacity test was not something you could grade, only if the battery exceeded its capacity claims... Not that I care if a battery mfg gets its specs wrong, in either direction. Not really a worthwile test, as the deviation for all of the packs is so minor. Good thing to point out, but not really a grading matter. Since they did not test capacity under load, the test did not provide "usable capacity" which I have always found turnigy packs to do very well with, and also enerland packs.

The "under load" test was decent, as it showed what a constant 30 amp load would do, which is pretty close to what some popular setups pull ON AVERAGE.

The turnigy actually put out more than its rated capacity and stayed cool. Looks good there.

Weight test is silly, unless they are trying to show that a mfg cannot weigh a pack correctly. Lower mah and c rating equals less weight, duh...

As far as price goes, you can get 6 turnig for the price of the TP... I would be interested to see how well the ACE stand up to use, as that was the main complaint with the turnigy, construction quality. Still , you can get them so cheap...

THe data was nice, the BS way they grouped and organized it was not. Of course a higher spec battery will outperform a lower spec, and I am guessing the weight of the ACE suited the buggy the best. That along with the higher output potential compared to the venom and turnigy made the ACE the favorite.

[thzero]

You know how they improve the next one? With some constructive feedback (sorry, and not in the way neil put it... if I was them and received it, I'd just hit delete). There have been lots of valid points; if everyone summarizes them in a constructive way and sends them individually to them then hopefully the next shootout (because who else has taken the time to do this?!) will be better. Bitching about it here doesn't do a lot of good.

And no, I still believe that you are reading way too much into it the whole Turnigy thing. They did a Zippy in the last test I do believe and didn't seem to care one way or another. And they didn't seem one way or another with Ace, which is yet another Chinese cell company.

[josh9mille]

I dont think there is anything wrong with the way Neil put it. That test was 99% retarded. I am not a lipo guru but even i knew it was a complete waste of internet space.

[suicideneil]

Its worth mentioning that the email I sent is how it appeared after moderating it myself; twice. I know it is very harsh & lots of derogatory remarks are made, but like I said, the results are as good as worthless in most cases since the packs on test are not of the same spec.

I agree though, if the people who drew their own conclusions would kindly email those thoughts to Bigsquid I would be very greatful; they might even make a post aknowledging their methodology was flawed and redraw the results in a much more sensible & meaningful way, or atleast when they do another test compare like with like ( which is the main issue with their tests to begin with ). Cheers guys

Brian@BigSquidRC.com
Squiddy@BigSquidRC.com

[simplechamp]

I agree with thzero.

It is easy to criticize what they are doing, and point out all the flaws. IMO at least they are trying. They are the only group I'm aware of that are at least making an attempt to test lipos and give some type of results. It is a work in progress and hopefully it will improve each time.

[suicideneil]

The tests they actually do are fine, if a little feeble ( 6C discharge test & low load/gearing to test runtime & speed are easily improved ), but its the fact they test dissimilar packs together that creates almost useless comparison charts. All the batts should be the same mah capacity, and they should all be the same C rating too, or no more than ~200mah difference at most in order to create a fair test.

[lincpimp]

In esscence the results were that the buggy they had worked just fine with all of the packs. So you can save your self 220 bucks on the tp pack and just buy a turnigy. Or if you want a little more runtime can the hardcase requirement, build/use a decent battery tray and just buy a higher capacity soft pack from HC (or buy 2-3) and pocket the cash.

If they just want to do the CBA test, low draw capacity tests and skip the subjective stuff I would be just fine. Do it to every battery they can get their hands on and we would have some great data to look at.

[DrKnow65]

As bad as the test was run, I believe if they WERE biased against turnigy they failed miserably.
They did however solidify my decision to pickup a pair of 4S 5000mah turnigy packs for my current build. At ~$109 shipped for 10,000mah's at 40c constant it will be a long time before I spend 4 times as much to buy a label...

The test showed me that turnigy performs close enough to advertised to warrant a purchase.

Now I'm waiting for the "nano-tech" turnigys to hit the warehouse here in America.

[simplechamp]

Off topic, but do you plan on using 2 of the 4S 5000mah packs in parallel for 10,000mah? That's going to be pretty heavy in a 1/8 buggy (or it's for a different project?)