2312 motors with 9450 props: 800g more carrying weight?

Joined
Aug 29, 2014
Messages
489
Reaction score
130
As advertised, the new 2312 motors with 9450 props (and V2.0 ESC's) can carry 200g more per axle. So, does that mean you can load on an EXTRA 800g of stuff without affecting battery life? So, should the recommended take-off weight be changed from <1300g to <2100g??
 
Thanks for the correct. Per axis. So, anyone know the answer to this?
 
Not 2100g, but probably 1600g
It can generate 200g more thrust per axis (800g vs 600g of old motor with 9443). The 800g of extra thrust translate to about 400g of more lift capacity because you need 50% reserve for maneuvering and stabilization. This would give the total take off weight of 1600g vs 1200g before. The 1300g figure before was on the high side and DJI had to bump it up because they cannot market the p2 being overweight out of the box.

That being said, flying with 1600g weight will definitely cost you in terms of battery life. The extra energy needed to lift those 400g will have to come from the battery. You'll just be able to do it and fly safety for a reduced amount of time. I would expect a 30% reduction in endurance compared to 1200g auw.
 
macheung said:
Not 2100g, but probably 1600g
It can generate 200g more thrust per axis (800g vs 600g of old motor with 9443). The 800g of extra thrust translate to about 400g of more lift capacity because you need 50% reserve for maneuvering and stabilization. This would give the total take off weight of 1600g vs 1200g before. The 1300g figure before was on the high side and DJI had to bump it up because they cannot market the p2 being overweight out of the box.

That being said, flying with 1600g weight will definitely cost you in terms of battery life. The extra energy needed to lift those 400g will have to come from the battery. You'll just be able to do it and fly safety for a reduced amount of time. I would expect a 30% reduction in endurance compared to 1200g auw.

Hmm,
Any thoughts as to how the FC40 could be affected by these motors? It's nice to see someone thinking these things through.

I'm viewing my machine as an easily modifiable machine. I'm a visionary. :D
 
macheung said:
Not 2100g, but probably 1600g
It can generate 200g more thrust per axis (800g vs 600g of old motor with 9443). The 800g of extra thrust translate to about 400g of more lift capacity because you need 50% reserve for maneuvering and stabilization. This would give the total take off weight of 1600g vs 1200g before. The 1300g figure before was on the high side and DJI had to bump it up because they cannot market the p2 being overweight out of the box.

That being said, flying with 1600g weight will definitely cost you in terms of battery life. The extra energy needed to lift those 400g will have to come from the battery. You'll just be able to do it and fly safety for a reduced amount of time. I would expect a 30% reduction in endurance compared to 1200g auw.

Thank you. That helps a little. But, this is confusing to me. Official description of the motors: "this new propulsion system allows you to load more equipment on your Phantom without sacrificing flight time, offering you a better flight experience." So, it appears it isn't just a matter of giving us lifting ability but also increasing flight time.
 
It is very possible that the new motor will be more efficient and use less power at a given level of thrust. However, that efficency gain is likely not enough to offset the increase in weight if you do fully load it. So an increase in payload by 33% will likely translate into a endurance drop of a little less than that. The energy gotta come from somewhere.
 
Marketing Hype.

Unfortunately you cannot overcome the laws of physics and you can't get something for nothing!

Are there proper specs posted for these motors anywhere? I glanced quickly at some advertising blurb but my eyes quickly glazed over after about 4 words. I noticed that they state the motors have a 25% output improvement..... measured how exactly?

Can we see some loading(Amp)/thrust figures at various throttle levels on various voltages/lipo/prop combinations?
 
Forget about loading extra weight, what about with existing weight. Does it give a longer flight time? 25% increase should be more than 30 mins flight time, yet DJI has not changed that in their advertising/specification material on the web. It still says 25 min as before. Why?
 
Just regard it from the efficiency side:
The old motors are not that bad, so let's assume an efficiency of 90%, which means that 90% of electric energy will be converted into thrust and 10% into heat.
If the new motors are much better let's assume an efficiency of 95%. That means that flight time per battery could increase for around 5% which is around 1:20 minutes in best case.

Regrads, Gerd
 
Cloud9 said:
As aggressive as DJI's marketing is, you would think they would mention "increased flight time" as a feature

Ahhh-Ha.... that's because there wont be any ! (Well, not worth mentioning in any case).

Another thing of course is they are slightly heavier. Another factor to pull down flight time (albeit only a few grams).

DJI should post proper spec for these motors like companies such as T-Motor do. Then individuals could make a educated decision as to whether they consider it worth while to buy the snake oil.... er sorry I mean super efficient magic motors.

Of course there may well be a very good reason why DJI do not post specs and that's because the negligible advantage would mean they would not sell as many as they would by using phrases like 'pioneering stator' and 'increases slot wire embedding degree' :lol:
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,355
Members
104,934
Latest member
jody.paugh@fullerandsons.