[NSRCA-discussion] bullets

Wed Mar 30 06:40:37 AKDT 2011

Let's leave the DWT alone!

I'll chime in with a different perspective on connectors though. As 
mentioned, there can be a good deal of variance with bullets. Providing good 
tension isn't easy and maintaining it over repeated use is even more 
difficult. Some designs work better than others and folks experiencing good 
service have done their homework. Bullets are also easy to solder to heavy 
gauge leads.

OTOH - I've very good service from the Deans Ultra. The attractive part of 
the design (to me) is that they're simply buss bars held together with 
spring tension. The surface area of the bars is way more than we need for 
contact and the thickness is plenty for handling the amps. They do get a 
little nasty looking on the ends - but I haven't found that to significantly 
reduce contact area or function. In cutting the "female" side apart after 
1000+ flights I found no degradation of anything except the entrance end 
where the arc occurs, the wear pattern demonstrated full contact. They are 
more difficult to solder leads to and can easily be ruined in the process. 
If the plastic is melted allowing the bar to become misaligned, full contact 
will not be achieved.

Also , either connecter will benefit from an occasional cleaning with a good 
contact cleaner.

Great to have choices!

Earl

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ronald Van Putte" <vanputte at cox.net>
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 9:15 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] bullets

I am definitely not going to argue with Verne on this one.  He's had
more experience than I do on this subject.  However, if somebody
wants to debate the "downwind turn", let's get started.  <vbg>

Ron

On Mar 30, 2011, at 8:42 AM, <verne at twmi.rr.com> wrote:

> FWIW, the 5.5 mm connectors I used were of the slotted variety. I  ended 
> up abandoning those after discovering too much variance from  one 
> manufacturer to the next and sometimes within the same  manufacturer. I 
> had connectors that ranged all the way from too  loose to make a good 
> connection to so tight that you couldn't put  them together. The bulge you 
> mention in the 4mm connectors is  actually the "spring" that compensates 
> for slight tolerance  variances. I agree that there's not as much contact 
> area as the  slotted type, but it comes down to how much is enough? From 
> my  experience, the 4mm work just fine without the hassle of trying to 
> find connectors to match what you've already got on all your  batteries, 
> charge leads, and so on. It gets a little pricey to  start all over and 
> I've done it twice. With the 4mm, I just add as  I go without a hitch.
>
> Verne
>
>
>
> ---- Ronald Van Putte <vanputte at cox.net> wrote:
>
> =============
> I have gotten these "no bulge/slotted design" connectors from two
> sources:  HobbyKing and BidProduct.  You have to look at the pictures
> carefully to see that they are the "no bulge/slotted design".
>
> I really like BidProduct for acquiring large quantities of the
> smaller items, like connectors, extensions and hardware for my small
> hobby shop.  Many items can be purchased with free shipping.
>
> Ron
>
> On Mar 30, 2011, at 4:09 AM, Houdini76 at aol.com wrote:
>
>> Ron, what brand of connectors has the no bulge/slotted design?  Do
>> you use 4, 5 or 6mm?
>>
>> Rob
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 3/29/2011 8:01:08 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>> vanputte at cox.net writes:
>> Good stuff Verne.
>>
>> I have noticed the difference in bullet connector design.  I used
>> to buy 3.5mm bullet connectors which had a "bulge" in the center of
>> the male part.  Recently, I noticed some 3.5mm bullet connectors
>> which had no "bulge" in the male part.  They push into the female
>> part because there's a chamfer on the tip of the male part, which
>> compresses the slotted male connector so it will fit into the
>> female part.  The big advantage of this design is that virtually
>> all of the connector is mated with the other half, unlike the ones
>> with a "bulge", which have significantly reduced contact area.
>> Then I noticed that you can buy this same design in 4mm, 5mm and
>> 6mm bullet connectors.  My opinion - these are far superior.
>>
>> Ron
>>
>> On Mar 29, 2011, at 6:30 PM, Verne Koester wrote:
>>
>>> Jerry,
>>>
>>> I started out with Deans Ultra’s. They worked fine but didn’t wear
>>> too well. The arc from connecting them together was really chewing
>>> them up. Then I switched to 5.5mm bullets. Those worked great and
>>> the arc did damage where it didn’t matter. The problem I
>>> discovered later was when I needed some more. Not all 5.5mm are
>>> created equal and I ran into some serious fit problems from one
>>> batch to the next. I noticed that most of the Europeans were using
>>> 4mm bullets. These are made a little different than the 5.5mm
>>> and     have more “spring” in them so the tolerances don’t have to
>>> be so close. Like the 5.5mm bullets, the arc damage happens on the
>>> very tip which is not part of the actual electrical connection.
>>> I’ve been very happy with the 4mm bullets and will be starting my
>>> third season with them. BTW, I never noticed any power changes
>>> from the Deans to the 5.5’s to the 4’s. Hope this helps.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Verne Koester
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-
>>> discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Stebbins
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 5:29 PM
>>> To: Discussion -NSRCA
>>> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] bullets
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> All E's. What size bullets have you settled on for your packs/ESC
>>> connections? Seems like something that would sorta get
>>> standardized after a lot of 70A usage. I have heard from 3.5 to
>>> 6.0. Would think it would work itself out to support the nominal
>>> max. I that most see. I am sure 3D needs all they can get but for
>>> AMA/FAI patterns seems like it otta round off pretty close for
>>> most using 5s packs.
>>>
>>> Thanks ahead
>>>
>>> Jerry
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>> =
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion 