Maxamps Austin: Please take a look at the discharge graphs Everydayflyer has posted in RCGroups. If you were to allow him to test one of your packs using the same methods he used to test previous packs we would have a real world comparison and be able to make an informed decision about the batteries we purchase.

Conversely, you could get some higher end packs such as Thunder Powers or Hyperions and test them yourselves using your methods and show how they compare.

There are ways to back up and substantiate your claims, that is all we ask.

I hope you read this, and RCM Monster Mikes post, as the majority of us don't wish to argue, rather exchange facts. I sincerely hope you can ignore the nay sayers (there will always be some) and rejoin this discussion so we all can learn the truth about these matters.

- _paralyzed_ out

Correct, but using so much advertising that it increases the cost of the packs is bad practice. If a noob only sees adverts for one brand, then who are they to know that opther brands are better value or better performing.
MA lipos are from china, thats the point, they just assemble them in the USA. That doesnt fully explain the massive price hike though.

What vehicle/driving style/setup/ any eagletree graphes or comparative data with similar spec'd packs from other brands?

Not according to MA, they suddenly have new cells that can perform better than anything on the market, though there is no proof of that claim.Planes, helis and boats pull pretty constant loads as they are at a constant throttle level for long periods during a run, that is why a C rating is useful.
The issue is that MA says a C rating has no use, yet insist their new method of rating a cell is better than the continuous method use for years, by every other brand out there. A burst rating is equally useless, as no R/C out there pulls a constant burst of current The point of a burst is that it lasts for 1/2 a second or so at most, where as the average current draw (achieved when full thorttle is hit down a straight for example) is the more is more useful to know; hence why a continuous C rating on a lipo pack serves more purpose than the burst rating, but also why its good to have both, as most lipos do.

Anyways, the C rating on a lipo is the level at which the voltage doesnt drop below a certain point at any given discharge rate- I've explained this countless times, with worked examples. The only thing in question is the voltage at whnich the lpo must hold stable for that given current draw, but 3.2v - 3.5v is a safe level- see the other thread that sproutted from this one regarding a petition for standardized ratings.

Are you from the traxxas forum by any chance?...

I'll toss in $5 to buy everydayflyer a new MA lipo :yes: I'd truly like to see how they stand up against the competition.

Mike,

Thanks for you posts. As you know, I have loads of respect for you and anything you are involved with. I really appreciate you jumping in here.

I did NOT start this thread. I am not trying to "sell" anything here. I was just trying to explain the new testing method and rating system that we are currently using since there seemed to be a lack of understanding with regards to why we would use the new system.

Some of you guys agree with it, some don't. You all will buy whatever products you want to buy regardless of what I say.

Donating a pack to someone here will do nothing to help explain our new rating system. We changed our rating system....not our packs. I am not here trying to "prove" anything. I just jumped in on this thread to help explain our rating system and why we use it.

If I was the thread starter and started the thread with "Why don't you all just buy MaxAmps packs because they are the best" then I could see the need for your negative posts. Some of the posts in this thread that have been deleted were way, way over the line. Frankly I get a kick out of some of it because it is very creative:)

If someone here wants to test a pack, we offer a 30 day money back guarantee. Feel free to take advantage of it if you wish and it will not cost you a dime. You might just like it and end up keeping it:)

Best Regards,

Austin Else
CEO MaxAmps.com

Charles has around 1kw + capacity to test. I only have 500 watts , but am willing to send 400 watts to Charles to add to his. He can add it right in with his two cc-400 units.

I'm very close to pulling the trigger on another 400 watts myself anyways, and there are some others who may have a couple kw capacity. I can also add on a couple hundred amps to my cba graphs manually for graphing over 60C.

This brings up some questions about cell count and current. Why not test a single cell at 60C and a 3S or 3s pack at whatever current Austin says is ok? Whoever has the biggest Maxamps discount take the donations and buy the battery. I will ask Charles if He's willing to do it. I wouldn't hold my breath. If He is not I am willing to test it , generating a normal CBA graphs.

Start adding some numbers 5250 x 30C = 158 amps x 3.5 volts = 550 watts (looks like I will need that other discharger) Is anyone in favor of going higher?

i think feathers got ruffled partially by the claim 'It will maintain higher voltage under load than any other LiPo battery pack on the market'. no rating system in the world... effective and accurate or otherwise... makes that true, unless you have something to back it up with. if you do - prove it and post your graphs with comparisons with other top notch brands, and i can guarantee just about everyone here will eat crow and buy a pack from you personally.

that is a false claim... and a misleading one, if you have no proof.

I'd be more than willing to kick in a few dollars to help w/ the purchase of this new pack and have it tested. It would really help to answer the questions we all have in regards to how it stands up to packs w/ known parameters.

If the test goes well, it would go a long way towards repairing the trust factor that (at least for me) is lacking in purchasing MA products.

Donation post , if you guys edit your post with the amount I will add it in.
dezfan $20
Unsullied_Spy $5
nitrostarter
lincpimp
FastXR
Bondonutz $20
rawfuls
FastXR $10

Now we are talking:)

ClodMaxx-

You absolutely have a valid point with regards to that statement. I am going to have my web guy change it to say "It will maintain higher voltage under load than any other pack that we have tested". Since we have not actually tested every single pack on the market, the way we have it worded now is untrue. I appreciate the CONSTRUCTIVE criticism. I did not realize that it was worded that way...

Best Regards,

Austin Else
CEO MaxAmps.com

Put me in $20.00,
Time to put up or shut up, Lets do this test !!!!

Put me down for $10, I think this is going to be kinda fun. Wonder if the 30 day money back guarantee will apply to a pay that was "tested" in the way it will be.

I say we donate the test pack to the tester for a honest video recorded test

Any reason everyone is determined to test this particular pack? They have changed the rating systems for all of there packs it looks like. If you got a smaller mah pack of similar rating, you would not need such large equipment to test it.

If it wasn't so absurdly expensive, I would get this pack and test it in the same CRT.5 setup as I tested the zippies and the Neu 30C packs.

What is odd is that this battery looks exactly the same but the ratings are different (and seems somewhat arbitrary.)

Pack #1:# 2200mah Capacity
# 14.8 Volts
# 34mm X 99mm X 32mm
# 25C Constant(55 amps)
# 35C Sustained(77 amps)
# 60C Burst(132 amps)
# 220 grams

Pack #2

# 2200mah Capacity
# 14.8 Volts
# 34mm X 99mm X 32mm
# 50C - 1620 surge watts(110 amps)
# 220 grams

Both for $115ea. >_<

Which would be the more fair pack to test against do you think? I have an Eagletree and a radar gun to get real world figures as well.
It wouldn't be fair to compare against the 30C 2500 Neu pack, but the zippy pack I already have data for, and its last years zippy-h's anyway.

Neu pack #1:
NEU2100XP 4S1P

NEU2100XP 4S1P 14.8volts
1C Charge
25C/50C
$44.00

or
Neu pack #2:
NEU2100EP 4S1P 14.8 volts
1C Charge
30C/60C
$60.00

You know, I'm a small business owner. So what right? Well, I see this little debate as wildly amusing. Why? Because even though you guys have seeming good intentions, when it comes to "keepin 'em honest", It's stunning to me at what levels you will take it! Because to me MA is only playing by the same rules as everyone else. The difference is, they are still small enough to be accessible! Try blasting Integy for selling over priced JUNK, start ripping Traxxas and you'll be banned from their forum for life. Try attacking Allstate, State Farm, GM, Ford, Apple, Microsoft, and the list goes on. Do you honestly believe their claims, advertising campaigns, slogans, can be validated by consumers? Maybe or maybe not. I may have my opinion, but millions of other consumers will beg to differ. And those companies all operate under state and federally regulated guidelines! MA is operating with no real set guidelines, but believe that what they are doing is good. No where does it say that consumers have to agree right? We all have choices to make. The big guys are the easist targets to go after, and it's human nature to want to.

My point is this, even if you test the pack and it misses "your" mark, who cares because "your mark is your mark". Your method is yours, and theirs is theirs. Who wins or loses? Sounds like a lot of wasted time, ego, and posturing to me. Is it going to change anything REALLY? Maybe to you guys, but not them, and certainly not the majority of the buying public. Even if you went on a relentless smear campaign, people will look at you the same way many look at conspiracy theorists... Which is "I don't understand any of this, and don't have the time to find out for myself" which is exactly what the Govt wants you to think. It's too far fetched and complicated for me to prove or understand, so I'll continue being spoon fed what's easist to digest. Maybe that is what's wrong with society, but it is the way it is, like it or not.

Do you think RC Driver, XRC, or RCAction are going to give a rip what the boys at RCMonster said about MA, when a fresh shipment of brand new Lipo's show up for them to run in their test cars? NO! It's only going to matter to you guys, who aren't even hip to MA batteries anyway!

So no, I wld never expect Austin to send anyone here a free pack to test, because he doesn't have anything to prove to you really, and more importantly because it's pointless to. Win or lose, you will still lose and he knows it.

Frankly, I have better things to worry about then if MA is screwing me out of some continuous burst rates. I'd rather watch anything on History Channel, than to spend time worrying about a battery!

That being said, I'll gladly sit back and watch this episode infold, then turn out the light, and go bed. And mind you, I've never owned, and probably will never own a MA pack, because I need my Lipos in pairs, and just cannot afford those packs. But if people are buying the crap out of them, and the public perceives MA as being the best, then give the Marketing guy a raise, cuz guess what? Not every consumer is as educated as some of you may be on batteries, and people love to buy what is perceived to be the "best". And that is why the State Farm's, Apple Computers, GM's, and Honda's of the world survive. Quality is one thing, but perception is EVERYTHING.

Gotta go, time for Ice Road Truckers!

Jason (no, not MA Jason!... DOWN BONDONUTZ, DOWN BOY!)

The point is we are not saying it should live up to anyone's mark or standard, just define and back up that mark. A blanket "we have the best batteries in the world" is fine, if can be proven true. If so, great. Do they have anything to prove to us? Not if they don't want to. They could have just scoffed at this thread and walked away. No, they chose to post here and then many of us responded. Yeah, those discussions can get heated, but that's the nature of the beast. "Can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen."

No, maybe not everyone is as knowledgable as some here, but for how long? BL is not exactly cutting edge anymore being made available for the masses at a decent price.

As you pointed out, many other industries have standards for rating and testing. Seeing a sticker saying "meets <insert name here> standards" would eventually be trusted and would let people know that the product is rated approriately with a common set of guidelines, whatever those may be. And many of those companies you stated are considered good companies because of their quality/longevity, not their marketing. Ford could say they are the most reliable car in the world, but repair shops and consumer experience will eventually tell the tale. And guess what? Consumers will eventually come not to trust them.

You are right, many of the ratings went UP. Here's another 60C (non burst) rated. http://www.maxamps.com/Lipo-2000-74-Pack.htm

Might as well go for 70C http://www.maxamps.com/Lipo-4200-74-Flight-Pack.htm

Let those in the know better than I decide which pack is to be tested and let me know were to send the $.

I'm in for $20.00.

Well, I can't entirely disagree with you. I don't think your reasoning is off base at all really, but it's going to take a lot of time, effort, and testing to prove them wrong... right for that matter. Not to mention all the public smearing that will need to happen if u prove them to be full of it.

I guess what I was trying to imply, was that some of those companies I named have a HIGH suck factor, but have the power to crush the nay sayers. So what is the point? I agree that MA is no GM, so they are ripe for the picking if the claims are bogus. And I think the point is, they rewrote the rules (that don't exsist) to hype up their packs to those that don't realize it's not likely to be possible? Right?

It may not be possoble to damage their reputation at this point, but all is fair in love and war I guess. But don't assume they didn't see the backlash coming from this. They probably said, "those guys at RCM are going to have a fit!" They were right!

You know, if the MA packs I had for some reason burst into flames, I would definitely say this thread wouldn't be here at all.

I usually jump on crazy claims such as a ESC that can do 400A to the one that states 780A. Can they prove it, no why, because it's impossible for such little devices to put out that kind of AMPs. I tell everyone if a ESC has a real rating use it a the max continuous burst which means that will be what you see on hard acceleration and that's all. Most ESC will average from 5-20A for 1/8 scale racing depending on the voltage and correct motor used (Gearing and everything else as well). Now for a pack to claim 60C surge, I'll use that as a max burst figure that's all even if it's a number I'll never see in my RC life time. After I get a project out of the way, I'll start focusing more on my full scale electric race car and I'll show everyone what a real cell that can put out over 1500A continuous and 2 second bursts of over 3000A looks like. Now this cell has a 2V cut off and it will discharge at 240A and hold over 3V at 90% DOD. The numbers mentioned of the cell are not false as it's being used by the military.

Prove it I want to see a discharge graph - lol :whistle:

I will when the time comes. I am though trying my best to get 2 smaller cells and it's tough. I should just claim I do military work and see if I can get some.

Edit: I did actually let 2 members here see the datasheet.

Herein lies my issue with this new rating system MA is using. Nothing but Rookie problems and misunderstanding.

This is a quote from another forum, I have NOT altered it in anyway.


My issue here it that these kids are going to the 60C BURST rating here and think its the same as the 30C CONTINUOUS rating. The proof is in the pudding on this claim. And I'm sure this isn't the only guy I have noticed.

Honestly, changing the rating system sounds like a ploy to take advantage of the misinformed. They see the "60C" rating printed on the pack and think this is one hell of a pack if rated at 60C, think of it as a continuous rating of course. Just seems like another advertising plot thats going to mislead people into misunderstood buying. Sure they can read the specs underneath, but do you really think most truly understand what they mean. They see the 60C printed on the label and think thats a wrap.

Any comments? Questions Concerns?

thank you sir. :smile: very big of you, and certainly progress in the right direction IMHO.

Honestly , I took it the same way. Many of the batts say 60C burst, The ones we are talking about testing say 60 and 70C. The current is there as well. Then many of the batts list the "constant" and "sustained" and "burst"

I'm guessing it is an oversight (mistake) since a similar pack shows this

25C Constant(105 amps)
35C Sustained(147 amps)
60C Burst(252 amps)

I'm also guessing that a fair current on the "70C" packs would be around 30-35C , but am willing to pull them at whichever current Austin feels is safe. Get the info right from the "man" so to speak.

Austin may be able/willing to define the terms constant,burst, and sustained as well. One thing is for sure:

During testing one can tell very quickly when to "stop" raising the current. Things start to get very hot.

That is exactly what I was thinking. Most noobs to lipo read the new rating system and have not a clues to what it means. All they see is the 60C in MA's advertising and on the label.

Even those of us who think we know what it means , don't know what it means. The burden of interpretation of a text is always placed upon the author of that text. In this case is maxamps. That brings up the question to Austin.

Austin what is meant by the various terms listed on the website? Thank you.

sustained,constant,burst, ect. Then again, maybe we do.

It is possible I overlooked the definition and hopefully we all don't need help with the numbers in front of the terms or the terms which are very well defined by the industry.

I think I need to amend my Tutorials page somehow....

But yeah, constant ansd sustained mean the same thing to me- its the maximum amount of current a lipo can put out without dropping below below an acceptable voltage level, 3.2v per cell for arguments sake, and without heating up beyond 120*F with good airflow (the 130*F MA states in various places is simply too high, and thats not an opinion).

Im curious about the specifics of the new rating system myself, and of the old one too for that matter.

I think most of these suggestions are really fair and well thought out. At this point I do not see how anyone could take them negatively or feel that they are being bashed upon.

Again I will point toward the CC forum and Patrick Del Castillo. When he disagrees with something whether by opinion or fact there is always a detailed explanation of why with many facts to back that up. Case in point his belief in why sensorless is superior to sensored and/or why ESC constant amp ratings are so arbitrary. A lot of the issues coincide directly with the lipo rating issues and many are directly correlated.

It's true, I am one of those members, the cells he speaks of are something else. However, I believe Lipo cells are better suited because of significantly higher energy density, and we are getting to the point with these new packs (G3's, TP 40C, etc...) that the packs are not the limiting factor anymore, or at least getting close to what we can physically use. However, that said, it DOES NOT hurt, in fact I encourage it, to have higher C ratings (as most of you would agree) for the mere fact that the battery will run cooler, last longer, and increase system efficiency as a whole.

There are new technologies coming soon that will be amazing. I know for a fact that the RC industry was one of the first to adapt to the lithium and a lot of the lithium battery manufacturers out there knows this. I've seen lab results that will only make our hobby safer and at the same time provide lithium cells with amazing power capabilities. I for one am patiently waiting and will try my best to get some of the cells to test them.

Remember the video of that fuel-cell powered 1/10 TC? :yes:

I'm a n00b, having gotten into the hobby in April of last year. When I was researching LiPos, the first manufacturer I came across was MA. I was smitten by the vivid claims (the 8000mAh VXL packages had just been released, and I was considering a Rustler VXL), and for a while thought they were the shiznit. I could find very little information about anything else, and it just became a hassle digging for info about other packs. The points suicideneil, nitrostarter and others made about n00bs is quite valid and indeed applies to the majority, now more than ever considering how many brushless RTRs are in the market now. Flashy ads appeal to the consumerist mentality in all of us, and more so in the layperson who maybe looking for information in a new and unknown product. So it's only logical that MA probably has garnered the most exposure through their extensive (and I have to admit quite appealing) ad campaigns, and its small wonder that they were voted best by RCCA readers.

Further, being of a consumerist mentality results in quite a bit of scepticism towards any other similar competing product they're exposed to unless they have the "magic" factor in them (in MA's case their 60C rating). If the only difference is price and anecdotal evidence (the latter would often have to be dug up from public forums and/or 3rd part product reviews), a cheaper product would equate to a lower quality product (it's the same battery but cheaper, they must be cutting corners/QC is done by chimps/etc) and a more expensive product with inflated prices and greed (it's a frickin battery, all it does is provide power for my toys). This applies to RC just as much as it would to any other consumer product, and the reality is that RC is way more accessible to the casual user than it was 10 years ago, which has created plenty of casual users with money to spend, who want a novel remote controlled toy that goes 50mph and does standing backflips.

So my point is, partial knowledge is much more damagin in the long run that not knowing at all, and I sincerely hope the whole C rating issue is sorted out before someone gets hurt through the misinterpretation of technical jargon.

^Agreed :yes:

Good post pasan

Epic. :yes:

There is a dire lack of review sites for the RC hobby; when I was researching my Digital camera choice, I was quickly able to find several online review sites listing every major model released by all the different known (and unknown) companies dating back several years. After a few hours of reading and cross referencing, I arrived at a decision based on helpful and honest reviews, with indepth testing and no favouritism towards any particular brand- you could also see user reviews along with the experts own opinion to see if they all had the same view.

With R/C, you have to rely on magazine adverts and sketchy reviews that are based on personal bias (remember the nitro vs electric revo conversion? the nitro won because the testers felt that the BL revo had too much power; clearly they knew nothing of proper setup or driving technique for the two different platforms) and gut feelings without any proper consistant or meaningful testing (lipo shoot out carried out with vastly differing lipo packs for example).

The best place to go for reviews are forums at present, which is good, but it still isnt the same as a dedicated review center with a well laid out data base of results based on consistant testing (use an appropriate vehicle and motor for each class of lipo (voltage/mah/C rating), based on bench testing with a CBA load tester, and an indoor track that can recreate the same loads and current spikes of normal running- real world results along with bench testing).

how many people buy camaras every year?? how many people buy rc stuff??


we can all dream:whip:

If it makes you feel better, it only cost ~£229 / $366... :whistle:

you mean this one

http://cgi.ebay.com/Rare-1-10-TAMIYA...d=p3286.c0.m14