Hay Everyone,

I've got an 8 inch Mark 4 frame, with the Xing 2806.5 / 1800 KV motors, and Im doing some searching for some 8 inch props..

I've found a couple sets and Im completely clueless when it comes to pitch...

I found a couple 8 inch props and Im completly unsure of the pitch and Im curious what everyone thinks is a better all around pitch.. Not so much for racing or tricks but for a steady canyon cruising type scenario... I found the:

Specification:

Type : 8040
Blades : 3
Material : PC
Pitch : 4in
Prop Disk Diameter : 204mm
Center Thickness : 7.5mm
Center Hole Inner diameter : 5mm
Max Prop Width: 20mm
Weight / g : 10.51g

and the:

Specs:
Brand name: Gemfan
Type: 8040
Blades: 3
Material: PC
Pitch: 6 inch
Prop Disk Diameter: 204mm
Hub Thickness: 7.5mm
Center Hole Inner diameter: 5mm
Max Prop Width: 20mm
Weight: 10.51g
Recommended Motor : 2812 and up
Included: 8 pcs Gemfan 8040 Props (4 CW + 4 CCW)


Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated....

Thanks

the best information would come by ecalc.ch

it simulates the match of build rotor and motor, show its benefits of response or efficiency.

the important needed specs would be weight of the build and the battery next to the motor infos.

a big motor with a small blade is more efficiency and responsive on multiple blades and high pitch, while a small motor on long blade provide its best performance on biblades with low pitch.

if you dont like to go for infos, 2806.5 isnt big for 8inch. they nearl suggest the doubled motorsize for that blade - you might be better suited with a lower pitched low weight 8inch blade: a carbonfiber biblade

(30-Jan-2024, 06:46 AM)hugnosed_bat Wrote: the best information would come by ecalc.ch

it simulates the match of build rotor and motor, show its benefits of response or efficiency.

the important needed specs would be weight of the build and the battery next to the motor infos.

a big motor with a small blade is more efficiency and responsive on multiple blades and high pitch, while a small motor on long blade provide its best performance on biblades with low pitch.

if you dont like to go for infos, 2806.5 isnt big for 8inch. they nearl suggest the doubled motorsize for that blade - you might be better suited with a lower pitched low weight 8inch blade: a carbonfiber biblade

I Appreciate ur direction, I'll do a lil more homework & figure out where my motor size vs weight needs to be...

Thanks....

Less pitch is always more efficient than a quick chop, Hence me feeling like I should of went with 3100/900kv set of motors vs. my 2806.5/1800KV choice.....

Well, consider that props are something that get damaged from time to time and
are relatively cheap. Many of us buy more than one type and pitch, then try them
to see which ones we like best. You might find that you like one prop for some
things and a different one for others. Plus, you might like one better regardless
of what the "numbers" would suggest. 

I wouldn't be too concerned about your motors as they will likely work just fine.
Try a set of props and see how it goes. Motor/prop combinations are a lot more
flexible than one might think. 

My 7 inch is running HQProp 7x4.5x2 4.5 pitch bi-blade props, but I didn't really 
pay attention to that when I bought them. I just picked that prop because I like 
the HQProp brand and I wanted a bi-blade. For 7 inch, the pitch seems to run 
from 3.5 to 5 so they are sort of middle ground. They work just fine for me. 

8inch props does scratch the budget if bought a bunch to test, but as more props as better :-)

its not only the pitch and size, a huge impact has the totor surface overall and the shape itself.

personal i would build with your actual motorsize for 8inch :-) a lightweight quad with big blades is much more versatile; battery choices, handling...
the tuning pita from the heavy builds with low motorresponse which does end in bad handling anyway would be what i would try to hide.

you are absolutly on the right question! the rotorchoice will be the door to get the pleasure :-)

what battery will you use?

(30-Jan-2024, 04:08 PM)hugnosed_bat Wrote: 8inch props does scratch the budget if bought a bunch to test, but as more props as better :-)

its not only the pitch and size, a huge impact has the totor surface overall and the shape itself.

personal i would build with your actual motorsize for 8inch :-) a lightweight quad with big blades is much more versatile; battery choices, handling...
the tuning pita from the heavy builds with low motorresponse which does end in bad handling anyway would be what i would try to hide.

you are absolutly on the right question! the rotorchoice will be the door to get the pleasure :-)

1st Off / No Hurt Feeling Here / Just Looking for your 1st Thought....

Above you mentioned the    "the tuning pita from the heavy builds with low motor response which does end in bad handling"  ....   Comment, You posted after reading my rhetoric description.. 
Given you were in my shoes, Are you stating that BC if you were in my shoes, and had the 8 inch Mark 4 frame, Along with the Xing 2806.6 / 1800KV motors, You would of went with a different KV motor, or even a different size? And thats why you mentioned the "Low motor Responce, Bad Handling" comment?

If so, Do you really feel like the decision I made would result in a Bad Handling Quad?
Like I said, Im looking for the "No Bullshit" opinion, That I'd expect from my brother or a stranger...lol

Anyway, Sorry for the rant, but Im trying to figure this shiete out....

Thx & Later

Thoughts On.......?

Anything else you think I would need to do in order to run a 6S Set-Up?

Jus think'n bout Battery limits / BF.
Just So Im not getting nailed with alerts when Im flying with that diesel ass Lithium ion pack.
Im dying to get my hands on the 2 batteries I just clicked on...

i would hide low motor response tuning pita on heavy builds - i would build a low weight build with small motors like you did.

5s liion battery or 4s lipo might match 1800kv
if you like to run 6s, you might get benefits by a motor outputlimit.
as allways in this size, default startuppower value doesnt match, regardless an output limit; adjust startup and timing would be my first tuning step.

i would build like you did.
that kind of build does need a good matching rotor battery combination.
i highly suggest to use ecalc.ch to figure out matching combonations - it will open your mind about the needs and abilities if you simulate a few configurations.
the fear of to small motors or to high kv will go by the ecalc date, you will get knowledge what lipo would provide best performance or what liion would let you fly for 45min ;-)
it can save many rotor and battery combination trys, bring ypu focused to gain best performance.

The two things that are easily changeable are the props and batteries.
Build it, strap on the batteries, and see how it flies. After getting a few
packs in, you will see how it flies and characteristics that you do or do
not like and might want to tune out. It might fly fine. If not, then you 
will know what it is you want the tune to take out. If you tune before 
getting it in the air, you don't know what you are trying to fix. Maybe 
you make it better and maybe you make it worse. Also, endurance 
cruiser type pilots, like me, just want smooth flight...not performance 
tuning. If the flight is smooth, I am happy. I try not to fix something, 
that is not broken. 

I never understood why anyone would tune anything before doing
some test runs (flights in this case). Is it just me or wouldn't one
want to know some baseline behavior before messing with a tune?

That said, if you build all the time, fly in a particular manner, know
how past tuning has performed, and have a more or less standard
tune that you like, then you might be ok with tuning before flying.

Except for one, all of my quads, regardless of size, are running on 
the stock, default, factory tunes even my 7-inch. 

I am an endurance, easy cruising, pilot who likes to fly at high altitudes
and enjoy the view and the scenery. Depending on the craft, I generally
fly with about 30 percent throttle or less. Also, I don't do stunts, punch 
outs, spins, flips, rolls, and hard turns so that puts me on the opposite 
end of the spectrum from the hi-performance, ACRO, pilots.

So, build it, fly it, see how it does; then decide what to do next.

Just my perspective and thoughts on it.

Later, iFly  

[attachment=11758 Wrote:hugnosed_bat pid='213300' dateline='1706778287']i would hide low motor response tuning pita on heavy builds - i would build a low weight build with small motors like you did.

5s liion battery or 4s lipo might match 1800kv
if you like to run 6s, you might get benefits by a motor outputlimit.
as allways in this size, default startuppower value doesnt match, regardless an output limit; adjust startup and timing  would be my first tuning step.

i would build like you did.
that kind of build does need a good matching rotor battery combination.
i highly suggest to use ecalc.ch to figure out matching combonations - it will open your mind about the needs and abilities if you simulate a few configurations.
the fear of to small motors or to high kv will go by the ecalc date, you will get knowledge what lipo would provide best performance or what liion would let you fly for 45min ;-)
it can save many rotor and battery combination trys, bring ypu focused to gain best performance.

I really apprechiete that. And someone mentioned the ecalc.ch before, and I just nodded like I knew what they were refering too, mainly BC my hearing is shiete.. But I just found what you mentioned, And Holy Shiete does that open up a whole new world of testing etc for me.. 
So to that, I Say Thank You Sir.....

"I never understood why anyone would tune anything before doing

some test runs (flights in this case). Is it just me or wouldn't one
want to know some baseline behavior before messing with a tune"

I could'nt agree with you more.....
Thanks for the feed back..
I did find the ecalc site, and right off Rip.....
Thats some Good Shiete right there...
Im already knee deep trying to figure that out as we speak...

Thanks,
Cole

   
Hay Bro, Quick question...
So Im digging into this eCalc deal, and for the most part I have been able to figure out, find or locate the info needed to plug into the configuration calculator, EXCEPT the 

"Controller Field" section.. In the drop down, none of the terms listed sound familiar, as Im assuming its asking for which controller Im using? 
Is it asking what Radio Im using, or like which type of ESC im using?

Im thinking maybe its looking for the ESC info, or some type of info pertaining to that.

If so Im running the SpeedyBee F7V3 Stack, with the 50A ESC.
Is there a term listed for that type of equipment Im missing or not understanding????

Thanks

(01-Feb-2024, 09:12 PM)Coleon Wrote: Hay Bro, Quick question...
So Im digging into this eCalc deal, and for the most part I have been able to figure out, find or locate the info needed to plug into the configuration calculator, EXCEPT the 

"Controller Field" section.. In the drop down, none of the terms listed sound familiar, as Im assuming its asking for which controller Im using? 
Is it asking what Radio Im using, or like which type of ESC im using?

It is probably the Flight Controller (FC) board.

Im thinking maybe its looking for the ESC info, or some type of info pertaining to that.

If so Im running the SpeedyBee F7V3 Stack, with the 50A ESC.
Is there a term listed for that type of equipment Im missing or not understanding????

It looks like you are doing pretty good to me. 

Thanks

Hi Cole,

If I remember correctly (don't quote me as my memory isn't as good as it once was, 
Ha, Ha), the controller is the Flight Controller. Back in the "old school" days, the flight
control system consisted of a Flight Controller board, a Power Distribution Board (PDB), 
and a separate ESC (normally attached to the arms) for each motor. At some point, the
individual ESCs and PDB were merged together to form a 4-in-1 ESC board. So, the
stack then (and now) consists of a Flight Controller and an ESC board. Of course, NOW,
we also have All-In-One (AIO) boards which meld the FC and ESC boards together on
a single board. Well, these are sort of AIO boards, but not really since they don't include
the RX receiver Nor VTX. That said, there are now AIO boards that also have an on-board
RX receiver and some even a VTX although not in the size craft you are building. I have
been affectionately calling these the EAIO boards = Everything AIO boards. 

Your SpeedyBee stack has one board that is the FC (Flight Controller) and the other 
one is a 4-in-1 ESC board which is a typical stack these days.

Some of the more recent AIO boards have pretty high AMP ratings are suitable for
use in the larger builds that have bigger motors (and props) and are available in
various mounting formats. 

Now moving on to eCalc. I tried it several years ago, but it didn't work for me at that
time. The first thing was that none of the drop down selections seemed to have the
components that I was using for the smaller sub-250 gram builds. It just seemed to
be geared to the larger craft. The next thing that I discovered was that much of the
information that is required was either didn't exist or at least was not readily available.
With so many fields that I was just "guessing" at, I viewed the results as just about
as good as a "guess" as well. For me, it was just easier to do real time testing with
the actual gear. That said, I believe that eCalc has evolved some over the years.
Plus, you are building a larger craft that falls more into the components that they
put into the system. eCalc is likely the best option for trying to determine thrust
which there doesn't seem to be any real good way to "test". I have seen guys
rig up a stand to mount a motor/prop and "push" down on a scales to compare
various setups. Yeah. 

I will also say that there are a lot of BNF quads in almost all sizes these days and
for all types of purposes (wasn't so in the past) and a person can just look at the 
specs of the various offerings and almost get a blueprint for a build. Of course, 
there are customizations and things a person might want to change, however, 
sometimes these work out better than others. Since I do play "outside the box", 
I have learned many things and often break from the "conventional" guidelines 
or "rules". 

Well, I should stop here. 

I hope it isn't too much and maybe a little bit of help.

Later, iFly