Cmon Castle, are you serious?

[MetalMan]

Originally Posted by BrianG

Anyone notice that the rumor is that the MMM is rated for 200A, but the MMM in the "Special Projects" page is rated for only 120A? (http://www.castlespecialprojects.com...ntrollers.html) Is it a totally different controller than the RC version we use? I really don't think so, and wonder if the amp hungry motors and/or non-optimal gearing are just too much?

My guess is that CC attempted to follow the arbitrary rating method of other brushless CAR ESC manufacturers to come up with a number that could work for the sake of comparison. But then for industrial applications they had to supply real-world numbers for actual continuous operation (unlike the 15amp average/200amp peaks we are accustomed to).

[Pdelcast]

Originally Posted by MetalMan

My guess is that CC attempted to follow the arbitrary rating method of other brushless CAR ESC manufacturers to come up with a number that could work for the sake of comparison. But then for industrial applications they had to supply real-world numbers for actual continuous operation (unlike the 15amp average/200amp peaks we are accustomed to).

We never rated the MMM for hobby use -- ever. The 200A figure was something one of our customers came up with.... We won't stoop to the level of companies who purposefully deceive the public about their ratings to sell products. For example, another company likes to rate their controllers at a "25C" rating -- basically they take the 25C surge (under 20 millisecond) rating of the FETs in their controllers and tout that as a "current" rating. What it is: essentially they are giving a complete BS rating -- the rating could never be achieved in the real world, and is therefore a completely useless rating.

Castle, in aircraft and boat world, uses realistic ratings. The current ratings can be achieved with steady state temperatures with rated airflow. So you could run, for example, a Phoenix-60 at 60 amps with 5mph airflow ALL DAY LONG without overheating the controller. If we rated it the way other car controllers are rated, the Phoenix-60 would be a 550 amp speed control. Could it handle 550 amps? No way... So we don't rate it that way. Even though our competitors in the airplane and boat markets CONTINUE to rate their controllers with unrealistic numbers, Castle has never, and will never, rate our controllers unrealistically.

In the car market though, companies have always used BS ratings to boost their sales -- they lie to the customers, the customers accept the lies as truth, and then they buy controllers that can't meet a BS rating.

We decided that rather than deceive the public with a BS rating, that we just wouldn't rate the MMM. If we rated the MMM with a realistic rating, we would look anemic compared to our competitors, when in fact the MMM could handle much more power. And I wouldn't allow a rating that was pure fiction either....

[jhautz]

While I think that not rating your controllers is certainly better than a BS rating, I for one would like to know what the real world capability is of the controllers. Even if I cant compare it to other manufacturers I would be able to compare it to other castle controllers and decide what excatly I needed for my setup and power goals. I think that if you established some sort of real test procedure that rated your controlers and pulicicised the test methods, you are popular enough and have built a respectable enough reputation that you could have a chnace of establishing a standard that if nothing else other independant organizations could test to. Its not uncommon for RC magazines to do dyno testing on nitro motors now days so as this segment grows I would expect similar types of testing to happen in the RC pubilcations of the various speed controllers. At least I hope it happens someday.

EDIT: I actually think its an opportunity to establish your company as even more of a leader in the industry.