But I was saying that electrical efficiency or battery range is not why I like dual so much better. It’s because now you have two wheels biting the ground instead of one wheel. Also redundancy – if you have a failure with two independent drivetrains you probably still have braking ability and can probably still get home without pushing or crashing. (It’s of-note here that most dual builds are not two independent drivetrains)
single 5065 < single 6355 < single 6374 < dual 5065 < dual 6355 < dual 6374
So yea, I’d rather have dual 5065 than single 6374 even if it’s less power
Yeah the two points of traction thing is undeniably valid. Wondering if the ugly but light weight solution though would be to use a wider driven wheel (flywheels seem to be very narrow by modern standards) with a larger contact patch… Redundancy is a good point too, but I feel that if you know how to foot break (which every e skate rider probably ought to learn), and otherwise design for reliability, it might not be so crazy to trade the redundancy for weight.
It also has a lot to do with what your priorities are and if you want a toy or a tool.
Some folks might want to optimize for range while others want to optimize for weight while others want to optimize for reliability and yet others might want to optimize for performance and yet others might want to optimize for compact size and still yet others might want to optimize for cost. Those folks might pick single 6374, single 5065, dual 6355, dual 6374, dual 5065, and single 6355, respectively. They all have their merits. I’m in the third group: reliability.
well that is a good point right there
Skills that are necessary on analog boards are still necessary on esk8. More so I would imagine with the speeds some of these builds achieve. Hand slides, hard carve slides are all very good ways of saving your ass but for those of us that are getting a bit long in the tooth for extreme manoeuvres the foot brake is awesome.
This is the second time a term of yours has me questioning and for that I thank you
first was “drinking the koolaid” (for that guy who did the ios app) and please put me out of my misery for that one.
and now this. Please elaborate on the dual drive-train thing.
@dareno I’m referring to a system where the only connection between the left and right wheels is the battery. There are 2 separate radio receivers paired to the same remote and no “split PPM” or “CANBUS” connection between them, so that one ESC can fail and not cause a failure in the other one. I suppose you could even use 2 separate batteries, but I haven’t yet seen that done in practice.
and you can use the traction control on the vesc with the two which is really nice. amazing and never slips in the wetness or when you unweight a wheel around a sharp turn.
I bet the two is more efficient too even with the drivetrain loss.
wait till you see their new single drive… with a 5095. No, that’s not a typo. We’re going to be doing some AB customer upgrades soon, swapping out their old drives for the new ones.
he specified the dual system motors had about 2.5 times as much electrical resistance as the single motor…
so the single had lower thrust, but it also had greater electrical to mechanical conversion efficiency during full throttle acceleration (green line, top left chart).
That’s what happend in any experiment, first you go like “perfect, got great result, and numbers match” then when you take it to practice everythinkg goes Hiroshima XD
