[NSRCA-discussion] bullets

AtwoodDon at aol.com AtwoodDon at aol.com
Wed Mar 30 07:57:00 AKDT 2011 

Yeah, that RVP is a clever guy!!!  Is the 'Ohm-Off' commercially  available 
or reserved for Ron's 'special' friends?  
 
Don
 
 
In a message dated 3/30/2011 8:51:53 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
jonlowe at aol.com writes:

It's caused by a build  up of ohms and electrons.  That's why RVP carries a 
can of "Ohm Off" with  him to clean his airplanes!

Jon


-----Original  Message-----
From: AtwoodDon at aol.com
To:  nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Sent: Wed, Mar 30, 2011 10:41  am
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] bullets


I have had the same experience as Earl with regards to the Dean's Ultra  
connectors.  I use a Deans male as a shorting plug so it gets connected  and 
disconnected each flight.  The spark does occur at the tip of the  negative 
contact and gradually erodes it but as Earl says, the tip is not the  contact 
surface, it is the flat side of the blade so no contact area is  lost.  
Over 1000 flights on one shorting plug and no problems or loss of  performance. 
 Contact cleaner does work well at cleaning up the gummy  residue that 
forms.  Anyone have any idea what that gummy/greasy stuff is  or where it comes 
from?
 
Don
 
 
In a message dated 3/30/2011 7:40:49 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, 
_ejhaury at comcast.net_ (mailto:ejhaury at comcast.net)  writes:

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_ (mailto:vanputte at cox.net) >
To: "General  pattern discussion" <_nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org_ 
(mailto: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_ 
(mailto: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_ (mailto: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_ 
(mailto: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_ (mailto: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)   [_mailto:nsrca-_ (mailto:nsrca-?) 
>>> _discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org_ 
(mailto: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_ 
(mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org) 
>>>  _http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion_ 
(http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion) 
>>
>>  =
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion  mailing list
>> _NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org_ 
(mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org) 
>>  _http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion_ 
(http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion) 
>>  _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion  mailing list
>> _NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org_ 
(mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org) 
>>  _http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion_ 
(http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion) 

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion  mailing list
_NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org_ 
(mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org) 
_http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion_ 
(http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion)   

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion  mailing list
_NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org_ 
(mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org) 
_http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion_ 
(http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion) 



_______________________________________________
 NSRCA-discussion mailing list
 _NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org_ 
(mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org) 
 _http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion_ 
(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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20110330/3ee6d983/attachment.html>

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list