Actually you can fit an 18500 or a 14650 in a Mini Remote but not an 18650 unless you cut out the needed structural supports. Don’t cut those supports out.
1 Like
I’m in need of a remote now. I purchased a gt2b remote and a friend is printing me the mad munkey case for it. That will hold me over until something better is available. I thought I heard Enertion is also making a remote to go with the unity? Hopefully it’s cool.
1 Like
Don’t play Xbox anytime soon or you might be uncomfortable 
1 Like
Most remotes that use a normal RF or Bluetooth receiver connected straight to the UART port will be doomed to have dropout issues.
The problem is there is no data processing on the board side (although this is doable with custom firmware, but not done yet AFAIK)
There are federal and international limits on RF and Bluetooth powered devices. This is to prevent escalation wars between different devices getting higher and higher power transmitters over years in an attempt for manufacturers to crowd out other devices or just to maintain range and keep up with other overpowered devices.
So, given these restrictions, there is a hard limit. your transmitter cannot be above a certain wattage. RF instead of HM10 modules will do better due to better inherent range. But this won’t help you if there is an abundance of other devices on the same frequency in the area.
So, the only solution to this problem is advanced data processing. Your modules aren’t smart, they will receive data and throw out bad packets.
With better processing board side, you could ignore certain scenarios. For example, let’s say your board starts losing packets near a traffic light due to lots of noise. Normally, as soon as you lose packets the board will stop providing power or brake upon packet loss.
You can help this kind of scenario with additional processing as a buffer between the receiver and the vesc. Such as certain failiure modes. If the remote dies suddenly you could program it to decrease throttle slowly and increase braking power over time to bring you to a stop. Or, if you only lose a few packets like over the course of an eigth of a second, don’t stop giving power or brake so you don’t get sporadic reactions in that short amount of packet loss time.
Not only this, but it’d be much easier to send alerts to the remote. A simple continous “ping” sent back to the remote could help alert you stay safe. If it starts to disconnect or lose signal your remote could beep at you if it’s not recieving a “live” signal. AFAIK the vesc doesn’t have this kind of function for telemetry, you can only pull data from the vesc, which can crowd up the already limited bandwith between the modules.
Remote disconnects will not stop, but the harsh reaction to them can be helped. Just stopping all action is pretty bad if you’re accelerating hard or braking.
I dunno. My opinion is that there aren’t enough safety features included in most boards. having hard coded “failiure modes” will help tremendously.
10 Likes
I’ve been mulling this over with regards to safety concerns with unexpected remote dropouts. I wanna implement gradual brakes on a disconnect of more than a couple of seconds. Haven’t searched around about it yet but I really want to have that fail safe in place.
1 Like
I heard that the newer maytech remotes have a similar slow braking function
2 Likes
I do hope all remotes have this out of the box going forward
2 Likes
The best single motor board I ever built had a toggle switch on the side, because I had a really shitty remote and when it would fail and I couldn’t stop the board, I could just kick it off. Easy
2 Likes
Haha 
no xbox for me.
I checked the Evolve r2 remote internals (on the interwebs) and it is essentialy just a stm32f microcontroller lcd, nrf and charger, only tricky is the lcd, could not find model info but there are only a few lcd drivers sdd (e.g. SSD1351 ) so if one is good reverse engineering hack it and make it pair a nrf24 receiver ppm module (e.g. solidgeeks)
4 Likes
I have one with a broken screen. I can send it to someone who can reverse engineer it. If thats how it works 
1 Like
Your right. This is why the GT2B is so much more reliable as it has frequency hopping and error correction. Its even low end on RC control spectrum. We need the technology from a high end RC controllers for safety. It sux if your $4000 model falls out of the sky and explodes. But is sux more if you street your face or worse. 
5 Likes
Please nooo
5 Likes
Lol, if remote makers think like apple my next remote is going to cost me $2300. That’s more than the board 
2 Likes
Without the charge and only a half size battery. The full battery is $300 extra. It has no buttons. And you can only turn it on with your face. Bet @b264 would love it
7 Likes
And no AUX jack 
1 Like
Depends…
If you get an enclosure from solid Gloria…
Your remote will be still a cheap catch 
2 Likes
Lol I forgot about him
1 Like
Never heard about him since that one day… Guess he‘s too much busy with all his orders. Very sad that we now don’t get into the taste of one of his premium enclosures…
it would actually not that hard to incorporate an frsky transmitter into our remote/board, there are some open sourced RC transmitter projects that can talk anything you like, frsky, dsm, dsmx, flysky,… so build that protocol (and rf module cc2500 instead of a nrf24) into our remote and we can use just any standard frsky receiver module, and use the standard fail-safe features
5 Likes