KDE Direct has added Multi-Rotor Heli motors to their lineup

[Motopreserve]

I agree chuck. Lab data is one thing - flight characteristic in the field another. I use my homemade tester to determine best prop scenario, and as long as the tester remains constant - even if it's off compared to a "proper" one, I can still get actionable results.

Everyone is is saying good things about these motors/ESCs. What sold me was A) the 3rd bearing, B) the balancing technique they use at the factory, C) made here in the USA (I mean, we have to buy SOMETHING made locally, right???) and D) Chris and the KDE boys were kind enough to take the time to jot down an explanation for MRF about the differences between "pancake" and "regular" style motors.

HobbyKing never did that...

 

[Luc Maximilien]

Claiming that a 85 gram motor with a 14" propeller gives 635 grams of thrust with only 42 watt and 15,1 gr/watt is claiming that miracles exist.
Some customers want to believe in miracles of course .
I beg your pardon but I believe in numbers and logic, the best result for a 85 gr motor with 635 grams of thrust was 10,8 gr/watt but with a 16" propeller so what KDE claim is not possible from my experience and knowledge.
It is 7 years that I'm running bench tests about motor/prop efficiency and I have build over 60 multirotors.
In my lab there is a box with already 50 "miraculous" brushless motors, I do not want to add a pricey one to it.

This is only my opinion , I'm not saying that KDE guys are liars, I just say that what they claim is too much beautiful to be true .
I will try to get one of these motors and put it on my test bench, I would be glad if I'll found that I have been wrong not believing in miracles

 

[Motopreserve]

Luc,

I don't think anyone here is suggesting that numbers and logic are not valuable or important. My point, and I apologize if I didn't articulate it well, was that at the end of the day - it's the field testing that will ultimately give us the best indication of what's working or not. Variables in test procedure, equipment, constants and the discrepancies they produce leave me dizzy.

The best we can do is research a product, through experience of others, published data etc. But until we have purchased the product ourselves and have it in-hand, we have no way to confirm whether manufacturer data is accurate or not.

I also noted that the discrepancy you are reporting is based on data not gathered by yourself, but another source. From your posts here, I trust in your experience testing and building MRs (and their components), but at this point, it seems prudent for me to reserve judgement until you test them yourself. Especially because it seems you have previous motor tests to compare to.

This is admittedly the most "high-end" motor I have purchased to date. I await their arrival, and hope they meet my expectations. The determining factors in choosing these motors was, as previously stated, reviews by sources I trust, apparent build quality, additional bearings, factory balancing, competitive price for the quality etc.

In the meantime, I'll take comfort in the fact that you stated that even the lower figure is good performance, and if the quality is as it seems, misstated data or not, I still feel I should be quite happy with my decision to try KDE.

 

[Av8Chuck]

I don't think anyone is questioning your logic, I just lack the experience to use your logic to reach the same conclusion so I have to rely on other factors to make my purchasing decisions. Although how can you be so sure that the KDE motors don't measure up to their published specs if you haven't actually tested one?

Well with KDE2814XF-515 the claimed performance is very very far from reality , they claim 15 gr/W while an owner of that motor here in the forum got only 10 gr/watt with the same prop.

How do you know the owner of that motor knew how to measure its output correctly? Maybe they did, maybe they didn't, the Internet is full of people who know how to do everything but who have never actually done anything.

It might not be your intent to call the people at KDE liars, but by calling into question their published specs the way you have, especially considering you haven't tested them personally, it s what your doing. You certainly sound knowledgeable and what you say makes sense so I'd certainly be interested in your results after you've tested a KDE motor but because you haven't tested them yourself your opinion lacks a certain credibility.

 

[fltundra]

I went back thru my telemetry logs and without my gimbal and camera mounted, the best I've seen with the KDE's 515's is 10.5 grams per watt . My old Tiger MN470's, best was 10.8 gpw.

 

[Motopreserve]

I went back thru my telemetry logs and without my gimbal and camera mounted, the best I've seen with the KDE's 515's is 10.5 grams per watt . My old Tiger MN470's, best was 10.8 gpw.

Are you still happy with them? Or do you regret the purchase based on this discrepancy?

 

[fltundra]

Are you still happy with them? Or do you regret the purchase based on this discrepancy?

Yes, very happy! Absolutely no regrets.

 

[fltundra]

Are you still happy with them? Or do you regret the purchase based on this discrepancy?

I only thing I wish I had purchased the 3510 475's, I would have done better on efficiency.
I will say, Chris at KDE has offered to help me get another quad. Just don't think it will be worth tearing my bird apart to replace.:tennis:
It goes back too "if it ain't broke , don't try to fix it"
3510XF-475

 

[kloner]

do you have any footage with sound? I'd be curious to hear what you got running.

 

[fltundra]

do you have any footage with sound? I'd be curious to hear what you got running.

Straight off Gopro:

 

[Motopreserve]

Straight off Gopro:

i don't know Tundra, that sounds like 10.47 grams per watt to me

 

[sk8brd]

yeh-those 475 on paper look to be more efficient even though they way 25 grams more per motor, kloner seen that flight vid on fpvlab, those motors had some low amp draw on that disco..looked good

 

[fltundra]

yeh-those 475 on paper look to be more efficient even though they way 25 grams more per motor, kloner seen that flight vid on fpvlab, those motors had some low amp draw on that disco..looked good

I'm wondering if maybe going with the 3510 717's might even be better on a 3S with 14"s,or up to 16" props. Actually more thrust at 100% then my 515's with 14"s and a 4S.
Maybe Kloner will shed some light.

 

[sk8brd]

its hard to really know without some test, kloners vid looked good though, the 475's is what i would go with personally.

 

[Motopreserve]

I know some of you guys are flying huge MRs, but is anyone utilizing the full 30" of motors leads??? I thought 900mm was big, but placing the motor down next to the boom makes it look like I'm building a mini

 

[fltundra]

 

[R_Lefebvre]

Well, I've ordered 4 of the KDE 2814XF-515 motors for use on a Tarot 650 quad, with 15" DJI folding props. Intent is just to fly around a Sony action cam with a gimbal. Will let you know how it goes.

 

[fltundra]

Well, I've ordered 4 of the KDE 2814XF-515 motors for use on a Tarot 650 quad, with 15" DJI folding props. Intent is just to fly around a Sony action cam with a gimbal. Will let you know how it goes.

I have the 515's , and if I were to do it again I would have gone with the 3510 475's. Especially since your going to run 15's.
I'll end up getting the 475's soon enough, and will try the 515's in an X8 config.IRECT 3510XF-475

 

[SamaraMedia]

I have the 515's for a hex build I'm working on and had originally planned on using 6s with 14 inch props but I'm reconsidering that now. Thinking 4s with 14's or 6s with 11's due to the efficiency ratings

 

[fltundra]

I have the 515's for a hex build I'm working on and had originally planned on using 6s with 14 inch props but I'm reconsidering that now. Thinking 4s with 14's or 6s with 11's due to the efficiency ratings

The Kde thrust specs are spot on. It's the efficiency numbers that don't jive.