Need response from a Castle tech for MMM question

[Mozzy]

If many people are doing this mod with a moderate amount of success, then why on earth isn't CC addressing this themselves before resending the ESC's?

I'm sure they have enough broken one's by now to have figured out what's been going wrong & rectifying the problems.

I don't geeet it.

[BrianG]

Originally Posted by TruckBasher

Brian dont feel bad about this. You clearly specified from the start that this is NOT an OFFICIAL mod and that it WILL VOID warranty. we are just lucky to get this mod otherwise we wont resurrect our MMM but then again we all do it at OUR OWN RISK. For the rest that wants to try this at home, make sure you DONT CARE about warranty...

Thanks Brian...

Thanks, but I can't help it. Many of the members here are fairly young and don't have a lot of disposable income, so when something goes wrong, they are out $150+.

Originally Posted by Mozzy

If many people are doing this mod with a moderate amount of success, then why on earth isn't CC addressing this themselves before resending the ESC's?

I'm sure they have enough broken one's by now to have figured out what's been going wrong & rectifying the problems.

I don't geeet it.

Probably because they simply don't have the amount of runtime needed to statistically ensure a good batch. I'm sure they test the designs somewhat, but it's much easier to fix when something goes wrong than try to cover every possible eventuality. CC engineers are probably scratching their heads too. They must be wondering why this is so hard - after all, the MMM isn't the first ESC to have a built-in switching BEC.

As to why they don't simply release it in opto-mode; probably because it would be a black eye to the company. I know these issues isn't exactly good, but if they removed the BEC, they would be admitting defeat. From a programmer's perspective, I know I hate it when something I made breaks. Instead of giving up and removing the offending feature, I work and work at it until it doesn't break (essentially, making it idiot proof - the trouble is, they'll just make a better idiot ). So, it may be somewhat of a pride thing. Also, I'm sure there is a lot of advertising and literature that states the MMM has a switching BEC. Wouldn't look good to downgrade.

Personally, I think they should do one the following options:

1. Use the V1 or V2 design, remove the BEC, and resell them with a packaged CCBEC. Maybe boost the price a little to compensate. Yeah, it would be more expensive, but still much less than anything comparable (Quark, MGM, Schulze, etc).
   
   
2. Design a new MMM with a linear regulator for the brains and still include the switching BEC for external servos only. That way, if the switcher goes bad, the brains will still work and people can use an Rx pack or external BEC to keep running. Not ideal, but certainly more palatable than a totally dead ESC. This would allow people to at least keep running while CC can figure things out.
   
   
3. Similar to option 2, remove the BEC and put in a linear regulator for the brains, but do not output that voltage to the throttle power line. Basically, like an opto-ESC. Then people can decide what to use (UBEC or Rx pack).