<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19019"></HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" id=role_body
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 rightMargin=7 topMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV>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?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Don</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 3/30/2011 7:40:49 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
ejhaury@comcast.net writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>Let's
leave the DWT alone!<BR><BR>I'll chime in with a different perspective on
connectors though. As <BR>mentioned, there can be a good deal of variance with
bullets. Providing good <BR>tension isn't easy and maintaining it over
repeated use is even more <BR>difficult. Some designs work better than others
and folks experiencing good <BR>service have done their homework. Bullets are
also easy to solder to heavy <BR>gauge leads.<BR><BR>OTOH - I've very good
service from the Deans Ultra. The attractive part of <BR>the design (to me) is
that they're simply buss bars held together with <BR>spring tension. The
surface area of the bars is way more than we need for <BR>contact and the
thickness is plenty for handling the amps. They do get a <BR>little nasty
looking on the ends - but I haven't found that to significantly <BR>reduce
contact area or function. In cutting the "female" side apart after <BR>1000+
flights I found no degradation of anything except the entrance end <BR>where
the arc occurs, the wear pattern demonstrated full contact. They are <BR>more
difficult to solder leads to and can easily be ruined in the process. <BR>If
the plastic is melted allowing the bar to become misaligned, full contact
<BR>will not be achieved.<BR><BR>Also , either connecter will benefit from an
occasional cleaning with a good <BR>contact cleaner.<BR><BR>Great to have
choices!<BR><BR>Earl<BR><BR>----- Original Message ----- <BR>From: "Ronald Van
Putte" <vanputte@cox.net><BR>To: "General pattern discussion"
<nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011
9:15 AM<BR>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] bullets<BR><BR><BR>I am definitely
not going to argue with Verne on this one. He's had<BR>more experience
than I do on this subject. However, if somebody<BR>wants to debate the
"downwind turn", let's get started. <vbg><BR><BR>Ron<BR><BR>On Mar
30, 2011, at 8:42 AM, <verne@twmi.rr.com> wrote:<BR><BR>> FWIW, the
5.5 mm connectors I used were of the slotted variety. I ended <BR>>
up abandoning those after discovering too much variance from one
<BR>> manufacturer to the next and sometimes within the same
manufacturer. I <BR>> had connectors that ranged all the way from too
loose to make a good <BR>> connection to so tight that you couldn't
put them together. The bulge you <BR>> mention in the 4mm connectors
is actually the "spring" that compensates <BR>> for slight
tolerance variances. I agree that there's not as much contact <BR>>
area as the slotted type, but it comes down to how much is enough? From
<BR>> my experience, the 4mm work just fine without the hassle of
trying to <BR>> find connectors to match what you've already got on all
your batteries, <BR>> charge leads, and so on. It gets a little
pricey to start all over and <BR>> I've done it twice. With the 4mm,
I just add as I go without a hitch.<BR>><BR>>
Verne<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> ---- Ronald Van Putte
<vanputte@cox.net> wrote:<BR>><BR>> =============<BR>> I have
gotten these "no bulge/slotted design" connectors from two<BR>>
sources: HobbyKing and BidProduct. You have to look at the
pictures<BR>> carefully to see that they are the "no bulge/slotted
design".<BR>><BR>> I really like BidProduct for acquiring large
quantities of the<BR>> smaller items, like connectors, extensions and
hardware for my small<BR>> hobby shop. Many items can be purchased
with free shipping.<BR>><BR>> Ron<BR>><BR>> On Mar 30, 2011, at
4:09 AM, Houdini76@aol.com wrote:<BR>><BR>>> Ron, what brand of
connectors has the no bulge/slotted design? Do<BR>>> you use 4, 5
or 6mm?<BR>>><BR>>> Rob<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> In a
message dated 3/29/2011 8:01:08 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,<BR>>>
vanputte@cox.net writes:<BR>>> Good stuff Verne.<BR>>><BR>>>
I have noticed the difference in bullet connector design. I
used<BR>>> to buy 3.5mm bullet connectors which had a "bulge" in the
center of<BR>>> the male part. Recently, I noticed some 3.5mm
bullet connectors<BR>>> which had no "bulge" in the male part.
They push into the female<BR>>> part because there's a chamfer on the
tip of the male part, which<BR>>> compresses the slotted male connector
so it will fit into the<BR>>> female part. The big advantage of
this design is that virtually<BR>>> all of the connector is mated with
the other half, unlike the ones<BR>>> with a "bulge", which have
significantly reduced contact area.<BR>>> Then I noticed that you can
buy this same design in 4mm, 5mm and<BR>>> 6mm bullet connectors.
My opinion - these are far superior.<BR>>><BR>>>
Ron<BR>>><BR>>> On Mar 29, 2011, at 6:30 PM, Verne Koester
wrote:<BR>>><BR>>>> Jerry,<BR>>>><BR>>>> I
started out with Deans Ultra’s. They worked fine but didn’t
wear<BR>>>> too well. The arc from connecting them together was
really chewing<BR>>>> them up. Then I switched to 5.5mm bullets.
Those worked great and<BR>>>> the arc did damage where it didn’t
matter. The problem I<BR>>>> discovered later was when I needed some
more. Not all 5.5mm are<BR>>>> created equal and I ran into some
serious fit problems from one<BR>>>> batch to the next. I noticed
that most of the Europeans were using<BR>>>> 4mm bullets. These are
made a little different than the 5.5mm<BR>>>> and
have more “spring” in them so the tolerances don’t have to<BR>>>> be
so close. Like the 5.5mm bullets, the arc damage happens on
the<BR>>>> very tip which is not part of the actual electrical
connection.<BR>>>> I’ve been very happy with the 4mm bullets and will
be starting my<BR>>>> third season with them. BTW, I never noticed
any power changes<BR>>>> from the Deans to the 5.5’s to the 4’s. Hope
this helps.<BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>>
Verne Koester<BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>>
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-<BR>>>>
discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Jerry
Stebbins<BR>>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 5:29 PM<BR>>>>
To: Discussion -NSRCA<BR>>>> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion]
bullets<BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>><BR>>>> All
E's. What size bullets have you settled on for your packs/ESC<BR>>>>
connections? Seems like something that would sorta get<BR>>>>
standardized after a lot of 70A usage. I have heard from 3.5
to<BR>>>> 6.0. Would think it would work itself out to support the
nominal<BR>>>> max. I that most see. I am sure 3D needs all they can
get but for<BR>>>> AMA/FAI patterns seems like it otta round off
pretty close for<BR>>>> most using 5s
packs.<BR>>>><BR>>>> Thanks
ahead<BR>>>><BR>>>> Jerry<BR>>>><BR>>>>
_______________________________________________<BR>>>>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>>>>
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>>>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>><BR>>>
=<BR>>><BR>>>
_______________________________________________<BR>>> NSRCA-discussion
mailing list<BR>>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>>
_______________________________________________<BR>>> NSRCA-discussion
mailing list<BR>>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>