Old Motors vs. New Ones

[tcope]

I never, ever, said that the new motor birds have better video. They have far worse video, despite their extended flying times, over the original motor birds.

I did miss that part, sorry. Usually I'm the one saying the new motor version is no better then the old motor version despite what is being posted. I think I fell into that rut again.

However, if you/anyone can provide any confirmation/documentation to show that the transmission from the P3 was changed, I'd love to see it.

 

[Raveneapoe]

Whatzs the different between the old and new motor other than the look?

I have a P3A with the old motors and a P3P with the new motors. If there is any difference I can't see it.

 

[GadgetGuy]

I did miss that part, sorry. Usually I'm the one saying the new motor version is no better then the old motor version despite what is being posted. I think I fell into that rut again.

However, if you/anyone can provide any confirmation/documentation to show that the transmission from the P3 was changed, I'd love to see it.

Yes, tcope, we are normally in agreement, and I am sure we are, here, too, once we clear up the confusion. It's partly my fault for interchangeably using the term transmitter for the RC when I should be saying RC to differentiate it from the transmitter on the aircraft which is transmitting the video feed. In any case, the FCC ID's for each back up our shared experience.


The W323 Phantom 3 Professional has a frequency range of:
(2406.50000000 - 2476.50000000 and a power output of 0.7460000 Watts )
FCC ID: SS3-WM3231503
2406.50000000 2476.50000000 0.7460000

The W323A Phantom 3 Professional has a frequency range of:
2406.50000000 - 2476.50000000 and a power output of 0.6120000 Watts (82% of the W323)
(18% more than W323B)
FCC ID: SS3-WM3231507
2406.50000000 2476.50000000 0.6120000

The W323B Phantom 3 Professional has a frequency range of:
2406.50000000 - 2476.50000000 and a power output of 0.5200000 Watts (70% of the W323)
=========
The GL300A controller has a frequency range of:
(2404.00000000 - 2480.00000000 and a power output of 0.380000 Watts )
The GL300B controller has a frequency range of:
2404.00000000 - 2480.00000000 and a power output of 0.380000 Watts
The GL300Ccontroller has a frequency range of:
2404.00000000 - 2470.00000000 and a power output of 0.3030000 Watts.
========

The new motors are more efficient, leading to 3-4 minute longer flight times, but if you can't see stable video beyond 3 miles unless you are more than 400 feet AGL, what's the point! Video Range is far more important to me. That being said, I still use the W323A for longer flight times within 2 miles, and have a P4 on its way, with 20% less video power and 20% less control power than my original W323. Each has their place in the fleet!

 

[GadgetGuy]

I have a P3A with the old motors and a P3P with the new motors. If there is any difference I can't see it.

You won't notice it until you are 3-5 miles away using an RC mod with external batteries to support such a range. If you never fly beyond VLOS, or more than 2 miles away, you'll never know the difference. Be happy!

 

[Raveneapoe]

You won't notice it until you are 3-5 miles away using an RC mod with external batteries to support such a range. If you never fly beyond VLOS, or more than 2 miles away, you'll never know the difference. Be happy!

Haven't gotten to the RC modding stage yet! And I am very happy with both aircraft.

 

[GadgetGuy]

Haven't gotten to the RC modding stage yet! And I am very happy with both aircraft.

No reason not to be! If you do, however, get an original W323 or W322 for best video stability at long range! It's awesome!

 

[dirtybum]

Absolutely! 18% less video power on the W323A and 30% less video power W323B vs. the old motor W323, and the video drop outs are linearly related to those power differences, using the FPVLR v2 mod with boosters! Only upside is about 3 min more flight time, but if you can't see where you are going, it's a real problem!

Hey Gadget, you say the upside to new motors is three more minutes of flight time. And I've read the post where that was proven in hover tests. But has that ever been actually confirmed with straight out straight back long-distance style flying which is well known has different results flight timewise than hovering?

 

[KyleMaxxUAV]

I have a p3p with new motors and a p3a with old. My p3a definitely gets further without signal issues !! It's very noticeable ! And my p3p with new motors definitely gets a couple mins better flight time (also noticeable, but not as noticeable as they signal losses). I haven't sat and written all the info down documenting everything etc. But if I had to get rid of one, I would probably say it would be the new motors because of the shorter signal connectivity. A way around this is with a long range antenna , but you still are shorter with the new than the old when comparing apples to apples.
My 2¢


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[GadgetGuy]

Hey Gadget, you say the upside to new motors is three more minutes of flight time. And I've read the post where that was proven in hover tests. But has that ever been actually confirmed with straight out straight back long-distance style flying which is well known has different results flight timewise than hovering?

I fly full speed throughout my flights, so my results, based upon comparisons under identical circumstances (same transmitter with same FPVLR v2 mod with 3.0A booster on video side and same DJI battery with the same 2 external batteries, over the same route over multiple flights with 3 old motor birds and 2 new motor birds) of 26 minute flights with old motors, are roughly 29 minutes with new motors, but I lose FPV stability between 2 and 3 miles on the new motor birds, vs. 5+ miles with old motor birds.

 

[GadgetGuy]

I have a p3p with new motors and a p3a with old. My p3a definitely gets further without signal issues !! It's very noticeable ! And my p3p with new motors definitely gets a couple mins better flight time (also noticeable, but not as noticeable as they signal losses). I haven't sat and written all the info down documenting everything etc. But if I had to get rid of one, I would probably say it would be the new motors because of the shorter signal connectivity. A way around this is with a long range antenna , but you still are shorter with the new than the old when comparing apples to apples.
My 2¢


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

The long range antenna mod to the RC won't fix the inherent problem of low video signal power from the new motor birds. The hearing aid amp on the RC isn't effective enough.The only effective way to do that is with a birdside mod to boost the video power at the source. Fortunately, I was able to avoid that by finding another W323 bird with the original motors and the .746 Watt power output on the aircraft video.

 

[DB4Tim]

The long range antenna mod to the RC won't fix the inherent problem of low video signal power from the new motor birds. The hearing aid amp on the RC isn't effective enough.The only effective way to do that is with a birdside mod to boost the video power at the source. Fortunately, I was able to avoid that by finding another W323 bird with the original motors and the .746 Watt power output on the aircraft video.

Is that the 300A controller

 

[dirtybum]

Is that the 300A controller

If you mean the low video output then no, thats the a/c specs

 

[DB4Tim]

Sorry I am still confused ...I thought the 300a controller had the highest power out put of all three variations of the controller...

 

[dirtybum]

Sorry I am still confused ...I thought the 300a controller had the highest power out put of all three variations of the controller...

The control Power may be a little bit higher and the video processors different, but the video power is what you're going to have problems with and that's in the aircraft itself

 

[GadgetGuy]

Sorry I am still confused ...I thought the 300a controller had the highest power out put of all three variations of the controller...

As DB stated above, it's the video power output from the aircraft that is 18-30% less, too, compared to the original W323. The GL300A and GL300B have the same power output for control, but the GL300C is 20% less than either.

 

[snowghost]

Ummm... is there any documented/tested difference to the newer motors? Or is this all just "omfg, new shiny!"

Shell I can understand, assuming the new motors correspond to the somewhat updated shell.

Over 22 hours, and 132 flights, old motors and original shell. No cracks or issues.

 

[dirtybum]

Over 22 hours, and 132 flights, old motors and original shell. No cracks or issues.

Ahhh **** Snow, you jinxed it!![emoji41]

 

[GadgetGuy]

Over 22 hours, and 132 flights, old motors and original shell. No cracks or issues.

Over 50 hours and over 5 million feet using 500g of external batteries on every flight. No cracks and no issues on old motors and original shell. They were built like tanks, and fly like fighter jets, with the very best video range!

 

[L.Chaney]

I have owned both old and new on P3A's and one thing I noticed is that after a full flight the battery was much warmer with the old motors at the end of the flight versus the new motors. Has anyone else observed this?


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[GadgetGuy]

I have owned both old and new on P3A's and one thing I noticed is that after a full flight the battery was much warmer with the old motors at the end of the flight versus the new motors. Has anyone else observed this?


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

I can confirm it, but with external batteries attached, it stays cooler than alone in either!