Brushless 2200 or 2650

[gt306]

Hello,

I am just getting back into the hobby with my son, and we are converting a Kanai 3 to brushless... I going with the Castle creations 2200 or 2650 combo, can somebody recommend which motor would be preferred, and suggest some lipos to use? We are planning to race a little but mostly use around the hopuse... Thanks

[Arct1k]

Buggy? 2650kv and 4s 5000mah lipo

www.rc-monster.com

for all your needs

[lincpimp]

hopuse? Is that a foreign word that refers to a home full of P?

Welcome to the forum!

[gt306]

It is a buggy, why the 2650? Less torque?

[nitrostarter]

Why overpower it with the 2200?

Unless you are planning to run 6s later, I would stick with the 2650 on 4s. Its a perfect setup for buggy, plenty of power, speed, torque. Makes a great track and basher setup.

i agree, i ran a 2650kv motor, 4s lipo setup, it works great. powerful and controllable.

[gt306]

So I guess the 2200 is too much... I figured it being an older buggy, it would weigh more thus more would be better.. But sounds like the 2650 is the better choice.. Thanks guys.

hokay...so which motor would put out more power? The lower KV motors (say, 2200 and such) or the ones with the higher KV (e.g. 2700, 2650)?


I'm curious to know...I've been under the impression that the higher KV motors would put out more power. I know the lower ones provide more torque but don't have the legs for blazing in the stretch.

I'm lost.

[Arct1k]

Its not just about KV its about the length of the rotor and the voltage input - KV drives a lot about how much amps are drawn but Power = Volts X Amps...

The 2200 is 1.5" vs the 2650 being 1.2"

[SpEEdyBL]

Both on 4s, the motors will have the same power, because they are both 1y turn motors, and thus have simliar current drawing capabilities. You would gear the 2200 a few teeth higher than the 2650 to get the top speed up, and once you did that, you lose the same proportion of torque at the wheels.

[jsr]

I read somewhere that the 2650kV was a delta-wound motor.

Regardless, having seen how a much heavier Savage Flux on 4s will lift it's wheels and be uncontrollable on the 2200kV motor, I think the 2650kV would be a better choice. Most people want enough power to do standstill flips and wheelie, but I prefer to actually drive the car/truck around and handle well.

[Cain]

after racing with someone using the 2650 in a buggy, not so sure if its a better choice than the 2200. the 2650 put out ALOT of power and he needed to really change up his diff setttings that I would have had to on my softer Neu. WHen I tried the 2200Kv I was using in my truggy in my buggy, I didn't need a diff oil change, just more percentage in punch control. It worked excellent, albeit, alittle more heavy.

As for going higher (bigger pinion) in gearing taking away torque, the Late Big Jim (he was a premier motor guy along the lines of Reedy) told me the opposite would happen, which I have experienced.

[BrianG]

Originally Posted by jsr

I read somewhere that the 2650kV was a delta-wound motor...

Unless things have changed, all CC Nue motors are 1Y wind. They just increase/decrease the length to get the various kv values. Makes sense too as the larger setups will require larger motors and probably higher voltage.

Anyway, for a buggy, 2650 on 4s is great. Might be a little on the fast side unless you gear down. If you want cooler running, the 2200 on 4s will be fine on 4s geared for around 35ish mph, and the larger can will stay cooler (more surface area). And then if you want to do some speed runs, the 2200 will be perfect for 5s or 6s without changing gearing too much.

[lincpimp]

Originally Posted by Cain

As for going higher (bigger pinion) in gearing taking away torque, the Late Big Jim (he was a premier motor guy along the lines of Reedy) told me the opposite would happen, which I have experienced.

This is mainly due to the fact we are gearing these motors for desired temps after a certain runtime, not for all out power. So they are not producing the max power, and taller gearing will load them more, pulling out that power, at the expense of heat production. If the motor is 85% efficient it will have to get rid of 15% of the total power it draws as heat. So 15% of 1000 watts is 150, while 15% of 2000 watts is 300... If we had better methods of cooling (such as water cooling or forced air) we could run these motors much more aggressively, and closer to their potential.