<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000066" bgcolor="#ffffff">
Ron,<br>
<br>
Does the aircraft know the wind is blowing, and which direction??? lol<br>
<br>
On 3/30/2011 10:15 AM, Ronald Van Putte wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:F3118AF2-A58A-4CA4-A898-2F98153CB67D@cox.net"
type="cite">I am definitely not going to argue with Verne on this
one. He's had more experience than I do on this subject. However,<font
color="#cc6600"><b><big> if somebody wants to debate the "downwind
turn"</big></b></font>, let's get started. <vbg>
<br>
<br>
Ron
<br>
<br>
On Mar 30, 2011, at 8:42 AM, <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:verne@twmi.rr.com"><verne@twmi.rr.com></a> wrote:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">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.
<br>
<br>
Verne
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
---- Ronald Van Putte <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:vanputte@cox.net"><vanputte@cox.net></a> 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, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Houdini76@aol.com">Houdini76@aol.com</a> wrote:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">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>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:vanputte@cox.net">vanputte@cox.net</a> 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>
<blockquote type="cite">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: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a> [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:nsrca">mailto:nsrca</a>-
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>] 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>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
=
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a>
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
-- <br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Phil Spelt, KCRC President
AMA 1294 Scientific Leader Member
SPA 177 Board Member
(865) 435-1476v, (865) 604-0541c</pre>
</body>
</html>