Thread Tools
Jun 05, 2019, 07:04 PM
big ignore list/drama is dumb
brushless55's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimHSoars
Joe,
What is your Youtube name?

Jim
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCSGUY
TheMcsGuy
you flying jets on there Joe!!
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Jun 05, 2019, 09:08 PM
aka JetMan Joe
MCSGUY's Avatar
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by brushless55
you flying jets on there Joe!!
Yep, that's some of my high moments. The best one was filmed and posted by TripleThreadRC, I have a link on my blog.

Joe
Jun 08, 2019, 02:44 PM
Hamburger
hamburger's Avatar
The maxamps ad here at rcg promotes *True 175C rating*. Curious why they chickened out from a clean and lean 200C?
Jun 08, 2019, 02:59 PM
aka JetMan Joe
MCSGUY's Avatar
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by hamburger
The maxamps ad here at rcg promotes *True 175C rating*. Curious why they chickened out from a clean and lean 200C?
OMG that’s beyond hype, that’s outright fraud. I’m surprised RCG allows that kind of scam to be advertised here especially when both their “True 100C” and “True 120C” tested as 20C packs at best. That’s saying a 5000mah pack could survive 875 Amps and on its bare face that’s impossible. It’s like letting a predator in to prey on the RCG newbe’s.

Joe
Jun 08, 2019, 07:15 PM
Registered User

Information about IR battery readings


I am new to using IR readings!

My New HTRC C240 Duo Charger has IR test and I have been taking IR readings on most of my Lipo Batteries.
I noted that newer Batteries from same Manuf, Cell count, C ratings, & Capacity have somewhat lower IR readings than
Batteries I have been using for awhile.

Where do I find what the IR readings should be for a particular Battery and how should I interpert the increase in IR readings?
Jun 08, 2019, 07:47 PM
aka JetMan Joe
MCSGUY's Avatar
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by scharlach
I am new to using IR readings!

My New HTRC C240 Duo Charger has IR test and I have been taking IR readings on most of my Lipo Batteries.
I noted that newer Batteries from same Manuf, Cell count, C ratings, & Capacity have somewhat lower IR readings than
Batteries I have been using for awhile.

Where do I find what the IR readings should be for a particular Battery and how should I interpert the increase in IR readings?
JJ604 is our resident IR expert, he monitors this thread I believe so he may respond soon. Otherwise you can read through his IR thread:
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/show...rformance-tool

Joe
Jun 08, 2019, 10:39 PM
HAL... Open the damn doors!
jfetter's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCSGUY
OMG that’s beyond hype, that’s outright fraud. I’m surprised RCG allows that kind of scam to be advertised here especially when both their “True 100C” and “True 120C” tested as 20C packs at best. That’s saying a 5000mah pack could survive 875 Amps and on its bare face that’s impossible. It’s like letting a predator in to prey on the RCG newbe’s.

Joe
Wow, forget the True 175C rating, obviously bad enough but I just spent 5 minutes browsing their site and checked these guys out (having zero knowledge before) and from what I see, the "BBB" logo on their page and "assembled in the USA" prominently listed, they are taking the Thunder Power approach to marketing (total disregard for accuracy) and frankly I don't want them to burn lots of new users this way.

Joe, I personally will pay for whatever packs you would like to test to put the smack-down on this BS before it gets out of hand; with your capabilities to validate any claims like this, I think there should be a conscious effort to brand companies like this as vagrant BS artists with a highlighted entry on the first page when appropriate! I have no loyalty here, if they are good, so be it but this is a path we can't let another vendor take again (IMO)...

Jack
Jun 08, 2019, 10:43 PM
HAL... Open the damn doors!
jfetter's Avatar
Call it the "most egregious BS award" and highlight it in bold and the color RED on the first post so anyone/everyone reading your forum will immediately see what to steer clear of...

Jack
Jun 08, 2019, 11:26 PM
Registered User
GryphonRCU's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCSGUY
OMG that’s beyond hype, that’s outright fraud. I’m surprised RCG allows that kind of scam to be advertised here especially when both their “True 100C” and “True 120C” tested as 20C packs at best. That’s saying a 5000mah pack could survive 875 Amps and on its bare face that’s impossible. It’s like letting a predator in to prey on the RCG newbe’s.

Joe
Maybe a thoughtful and respectful PM to Jim.T. (Admin) would be a good start.
We should “assume” he/they did not know or did not notice......
Hoping they will be happy its been brought to their attention.


G.
Jun 08, 2019, 11:33 PM
HAL... Open the damn doors!
jfetter's Avatar
They don't (and shouldn't) care, it's not their job to vet nor do they have the resources, I can't hold them responsible and I hope others don't either...

Jack
Jun 08, 2019, 11:41 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by scharlach
I am new to using IR readings!

My New HTRC C240 Duo Charger has IR test and I have been taking IR readings on most of my Lipo Batteries.
I noted that newer Batteries from same Manuf, Cell count, C ratings, & Capacity have somewhat lower IR readings than
Batteries I have been using for awhile.

Where do I find what the IR readings should be for a particular Battery and how should I interpert the increase in IR readings?
IR increases as the batteries are used and as they age, that is pretty much how you interpret the readings, it aligns with a performance drop.
Jun 09, 2019, 12:02 AM
aka JetMan Joe
MCSGUY's Avatar
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfetter
I personally will pay for whatever packs you would like to test to put the smack-down on this BS before it gets out of hand; with your capabilities to validate any claims like this, I think there should be a conscious effort to brand companies like this as vagrant BS artists with a highlighted entry on the first page when appropriate! I have no loyalty here, if they are good, so be it but this is a path we can't let another vendor take again (IMO)...

Jack
Quote:
Originally Posted by GryphonRCU
Maybe a thoughtful and respectful PM to Jim.T. (Admin) would be a good start.
We should “assume” he/they did not know or did not notice......
Hoping they will be happy its been brought to their attention.

G.
I think Jacks answer is the first step before contacting the Admin. If in fact we can document truly fraudulent conduct (as in labeling a 20C pack as 175C) then I would be very comfortable approaching the RCG authority and making the case for bouncing MaxAmps.

My exposure to them in June last year was so startlingly bad I left room in my thinking (and comments) that maybe they had just gotten sold bad product and needed to improve QC to avoid screwing customers in the future. If their new release displays the same level of deficiency then I believe making some noise is justified. If their even honest 50C packs (as I assume they should be because of the 1450mah 6S weigh 276g) then I would still make noise, just not as loud.

However the only way I can compare apples to apples using my testing regimen is to purchase (4) 6S 1450 "170C" packs, balance them to within .010v of each other then test them in parallel as one 5800mah 1104g pack. That's probably not what you were thinking when you made the offer Jack so I'd be willing to split the $400 cost with you. We can subtract equally the amounts any of the other guys here want to contribute towards a MaxAmps mini investigation.

Joe
Jun 09, 2019, 01:41 AM
HAL... Open the damn doors!
jfetter's Avatar
After seeing this claim I just assumed it was a "new" claim, I then went back through your thread and saw you calling shenanigans on them starting in 2013, clearly a long history of BS and even back that far, I think they were claiming 125C, totally unheard of!

My only concern with your suggested testing is that it may confuse anyone unfamiliar with what you are doing, i.e. trying to test at their claimed rating. I personally leave it up to you with the only concern being might this technicality make some see "apples-to-oranges" despite your attempt to do just the opposite?

Would it serve the average user (and you not to have to waste so much effort), to just drop a 3S or 4S x 2,250 in the rig and ramp up until you kill it? Again, just making sure you don't lose the intended audience by being true to their claims versus just showing it can't even take 50% of their claimed load.

I know you have more time and effort expended than anyone, pick your test, up to you and I'll foot the entire bill or split (half or in any combination) the bill with anyone else volunteering to donate except you! You are not permitted to expend anything but your time and effort as there should be no bias or possibility of bias on this one ;-) (not to mention you've already given at the office!)...

Jack
Last edited by jfetter; Jun 09, 2019 at 01:48 AM. Reason: Spelling...
Jun 09, 2019, 01:45 AM
HAL... Open the damn doors!
jfetter's Avatar
Here it is, someone commenting on the MaxAmps "150C" claim in 2013!

Jack
Jun 09, 2019, 03:46 AM
Registered User
This Maxamps joke has been going on for years.
I recall on this forum their claiming and several people asking them to post a discharge plot which was always ignored.

To save Joe the trouble, I could run a constant current set of discharges in 5C steps on a up to 40C on a 3S 2250 pack or perhaps John Julian could do so as his rig is capable of 90C although it sounds as though 25C would be adequate

I think it would be better to test a single lipo as connecting four in parallel is certainly valid but it might give them an opportunity to criticise the test methodology.

Wayne


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools