RIP Banebot RS550 [Archive]

evand4567

01-07-2015, 14:21

Today I went to order a couple RS550 motor and banebots was out of stock. I called and found that they are no longer carrying the motor. I was told that Robot Shop would begin carrying the motor, but when I contacted them, I was told that is not the case and they are only considering carrying the rs555. There are a number of clones/similar motors out there, but for now it looks like we are out of luck for an original banebots rs550.

nathannfm

01-07-2015, 15:00

Wow, this is pretty surprising considering it was the only FRC legal motor they sold that was compatible with an entire line of their gearboxes. I wonder if the unlimited quantities of non-CIM motors rule played a role in this. I bet they noticed a dip in sales when people could buy all the 550 style motors they wanted from AndyMark. (I have also heard people say they like the AM-9015 better than the BB-rs550)

evand4567

01-07-2015, 15:10

I don't have much experience with Andymark motors, but I know my team's first choice for planetaries was the rs550. It sounds like Robot Shop and other places are pushing the rs555, which is an inferior motor in my opinion. It will be missed.
According to banebots, the motor was cut from their product line because it was one of the few products they were selling that was not produced in house.

sanddrag

01-07-2015, 15:44

That's unfortunate. We really liked their power to size and weight ratio. However, this year, we noticed they did not perform anywhere near their rated power. I've never tried the AM-9015. Is it a suitable replacement. I sure have a ton of those sitting around.

I hope Banebots continues to sell the RS775-18V. Those are great motors.

asid61

01-07-2015, 15:46

That's a shame. The 85A stall current will be missed, although I guess the thermal mass is going to be the same as the RS-540 and such, so it's not a huge loss.

AllenGregoryIV

01-07-2015, 17:05

This is interesting, We haven't used them in a few years since the BAG motor and 775s are normally better options. Hopefully they aren't getting rid of the 775-18 that will be hard to replace. I love BAGs but the increase in cost often isn't worth it.

cadandcookies

01-07-2015, 17:11

It sounds like Robot Shop and other places are pushing the rs555, which is an inferior motor in my opinion. It will be missed.

It all depends on your use case. They are different motors intended for different uses. I'll grant the 555 isn't nearly as appealing for FRC use, but it's very nice for smaller robots in my experience.

Jared

01-07-2015, 17:38

I'm not too disturbed about this - I wasn't a big fan of the 550, especially with unlimited 775's this year.

The 550 is just an easier to destroy version of the 775 that spins way too quickly.

bigbeezy

01-07-2015, 17:40

I'm more surprised you actually got a hold of someone at BB. Called/Emailed multiple times during build season regarding their wheels and they never bothered to call/write back....

AdamHeard

01-07-2015, 18:00

I'm more surprised you actually got a hold of someone at BB. Called/Emailed multiple times during build season regarding their wheels and they never bothered to call/write back....

That's their customer service.

AdamHeard

01-07-2015, 18:10

Michael Hill

01-07-2015, 20:08

I'd wager a good sum that NONE of their motors are produced in house, let alone in the US.

Same. As I recall from markings on motors, they were Mabuchi.

http://www.mabuchi-motor.co.jp/cgi-bin/catalog/e_catalog.cgi?CAT_ID=rs_550pcvc

AdamHeard

01-07-2015, 20:57

Same. As I recall from markings on motors, they were Mabuchi.

http://www.mabuchi-motor.co.jp/cgi-bin/catalog/e_catalog.cgi?CAT_ID=rs_550pcvc

I'm pretty sure they were knockoff (lower quality) mabuchis.

waialua359

01-07-2015, 21:31

Not good!! We stocked up on a lot of their gearboxes!

evand4567

01-07-2015, 21:37

They're still selling the gearboxes, it just sounds like the rs550 has been discontinued due to them not making it in-house.

R.C.

01-07-2015, 22:00

They're still selling the gearboxes, it just sounds like the rs550 has been discontinued due to them not making it in-house.

I doubt they made the motor in house... it's most likely a motor bought from a misc Chinese vendor.

Michael Hill

01-07-2015, 22:19

I'm pretty sure they were knockoff (lower quality) mabuchis.

Possibly. My thoughts are 100% based on the picture of the motor on FIRST Choice. I don't have one handy. However, it's based on the assumption that 1) it's a picture of the actual motor, and 2) Banebots isn't buying knockoff parts that are marked the same way.

http://firstchoicebyandymark.com/fc15-124

mman1506

01-07-2015, 22:31

Possibly. My thoughts are 100% based on the picture of the motor on FIRST Choice. I don't have one handy. However, it's based on the assumption that 1) it's a picture of the actual motor, and 2) Banebots isn't buying knockoff parts that are marked the same way.

http://firstchoicebyandymark.com/fc15-124

There doesn't seem to be any machubi specific markings. The RS-550 motor is very common in battery powered tools and is made by tons of manufacturers. I wouldn't call RS-550's made by other manufactures "knock offs".

Gregor

01-07-2015, 23:12

(I have also heard people say they like the AM-9015 better than the BB-rs550)

??

Lil' Lavery

02-07-2015, 00:13

Not a big loss. It's not as if there aren't other 500 series options. I prefer the AM-9015 to the BB550.

Michael Hill

02-07-2015, 01:28

There doesn't seem to be any machubi specific markings. The RS-550 motor is very common in battery powered tools and is made by tons of manufacturers. I wouldn't call RS-550's made by other manufactures "knock offs".

I'm referring to the RS550VC-7525 part number. The only places I see using that number is Mabuchi and knockoffs on alibaba.

billbo911

02-07-2015, 09:43

Not a big loss. It's not as if there aren't other 500 series options. I prefer the AM-9015 to the BB550.

Sean, I respect your opinion, but for the sake of those that may not know why you prefer the AM-9015, can you please explain why?
Explanations of why make learning much easier and more complete than just knowing "Sean Lavery prefers them."

Lil' Lavery

02-07-2015, 17:58

Sean, I respect your opinion, but for the sake of those that may not know why you prefer the AM-9015, can you please explain why?
Explanations of why make learning much easier and more complete than just knowing "Sean Lavery prefers them."

With the very loose motor restrictions now, hunting for the most power out of motors is less important than it used to be (plus the old FP beat the 550s in that regard, anyway). So even though the 550s have more total power than the 9015s, we opt for the 9015s for a few reasons.

For high torque applications, we gravitate towards the CIM family of motors. Thus the higher stall torque on the 550s over the 9015s doesn't really come into play.

We'd consider the fan cooled 500 series motors for high speed, low torque applications. However, I have yet to find an application that actually needs anywhere close to the ~19000rpm free speed of the 550. The ~16000rpm free speed of the 9015 will typically let us to get the desired speed for our application using less reduction.

Last, but certainly not least, we trust AndyMark products and customer support a lot more than we trust BaneBots products and customer support. While the 540/550 family never had the issues of the 775s or other BaneBots products, we usually try to shy away from risk that could cost us a match.

jman4747

02-07-2015, 19:46

I would say I'll miss the power/size ratio from a 550 and a BB planetary. By wattage it was second only to the CIM and 550's aren't especially fragile in my experience. Even with the addition of the mini-CIM the size and weight of a 550 with planetary sill beats it in several applications.

Tom Line

03-07-2015, 00:35

The lack of thermal mass and the speed at which they burn or have led us to move almost exclusively to cims and bags.

protoserge

03-07-2015, 07:13

The lack of thermal mass and the speed at which they burn or have led us to move almost exclusively to cims and bags.

I'm curious if you allowed for proper air intake in your gearbox design? That was a leading cause of failure I found a few years ago. Some of the gearboxes for the RS775 and RS550 actually blocked the intake and required some machining of air slots.

Tom Line

03-07-2015, 11:50

I'm curious if you allowed for proper air intake in your gearbox design? That was a leading cause of failure I found a few years ago. Some of the gearboxes for the RS775 and RS550 actually blocked the intake and required some machining of air slots.

Yep. But 550s will fry after only a couple seconds at stall. Up until this past year with current monitoring we had no easy way to monitor them. When one Loss is the difference between 1st and tenth, it's just nice to know an accidental stall won't cost a match.

Pretzel

08-07-2015, 02:58

Having used (and abused) the RS550 this year in our claw, we finally switched to a BAG motor at championships simply due to the fact that we had burned 5 of them at that point. When we used the closing of the claw to help reorient fallen bins into the preferred orientation (bottom of the bin pointing at the robot) it would demand too much from the RS550 and the motor would burn. A larger gear reduction wasn't an option since the claw still had to open promptly during the automated stacking and our drop off sequence, and making sure to line the robot up perfectly to the bin just wasted time. Switching to the BAG we found more power to close the claw and a larger margin for error on how long the claw operator could stall the motor to grip a bin that had slid out to the tips of the claw (which would prevent the claw from being able to cam over and lock shut).

I liked the RS550 for things like the shooter flywheel on our 2012 robot or the conveyor belt running through this year's robot, but for applications that can put a decent sustained load on the motor it was less than desirable.

Nathan Streeter

08-07-2015, 13:25

I'll be missing the RS550s quite a lot... they had plenty of power at a low weight. Our team has used them quite generously (this year's robot with only 6 motors, all CIMs, being an exception).

Our ideal use for them was on our 2013 FCS. 2 RS550s in a CIM-u-LATOR had all the power and torque we wanted, at a very low weight (less than a MiniCIM)... it was fabulous.

Monochron

08-07-2015, 14:35

I may be missing something, it seems like the majority of people in here don't really mind if these aren't available. They have one of the highest power ratings for their size and weight (higher max power than either the Bag OR the MiniCIM, and higher than any of the AndyMark 9015s), at least according to the specs I gathered (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/2990). I have been a little hesitant to use them for high torque applications if stalling was going to be standard, but they are one of two or three small form factor motors legal in FRC.

We got into a situation this year where it appeared that the simplest way to increase performance of our elevator was to replace a Bag with a 550 because the size was similar. I guess that won't be an option anymore.

Jared Russell

08-07-2015, 23:44

As long as the RS775-18 continues to be available, my reaction to this is a resounding "meh".

billbo911

09-07-2015, 10:16

As long as the RS775-18 continues to be available, my reaction to this is a resounding "meh".

My thoughts exactly! (RS775-18, not RS775-125. Don't confuse the two!)

Let's look at the specs: (See attachment)

775 has more peak power. 775 has ~60% more stall torque. They have practically identical stall current.

The one additional advantage the 775's have is their ability to absorb and dissipate more heat than the 550s.

On a side by side, the 775 is a better motor in many situations.

Monochron

09-07-2015, 16:24

775 has more peak power. 775 has ~60% more stall torque. They have practically identical stall current.

The one additional advantage the 775's have is their ability to absorb and dissipate more heat than the 550s.
Geared to the same speed as the RS 775, the RS 550 has very close to the same stall torque. Max power is the important factor and while, yes, the 775 definitely has it beat, I love how small the 550 is :D
Maybe not the best factor to base motor choice on. Especially considering heat dissipation. I just love the ability to swap out a BAG or AM motor for a 550 with very little hassle.

AdamHeard

09-07-2015, 16:27

Geared to the same speed as the RS 775, the RS 550 has very close to the same stall torque. Max power is the important factor and while, yes, the 775 definitely has it beat, I love how small the 550 is :D
Maybe not the best factor to base motor choice on. Especially considering heat dissipation. I just love the ability to swap out a BAG or AM motor for a 550 with very little hassle.

I'm pretty certain the 550 specs are not accurate, and it's 20-30% less powerful than claimed.

sanddrag

09-07-2015, 16:57

I'm pretty certain the 550 specs are not accurate, and it's 20-30% less powerful than claimed.Agreed.

billbo911

09-07-2015, 17:20

I'm pretty certain the 550 specs are not accurate, and it's 20-30% less powerful than claimed.

Agreed.

Got a Dyno we can test with?? If your assertions are correct, that would explain a lot.
Seriously, how many times have you run all the calculations and built a design only to see it's performance not live up the the numbers?
THAT REALLY BITES!

sanddrag

09-07-2015, 23:56

Got a Dyno we can test with?? Yes, I do. It's about 6 feet tall and 120 lbs and it lifts totes slower than it should.... :D

Michael Hill

10-07-2015, 00:18

Got a Dyno we can test with?? If your assertions are correct, that would explain a lot.
Seriously, how many times have you run all the calculations and built a design only to see it's performance not live up the the numbers?
THAT REALLY BITES!

Did this year...The 550s should have been able to easily handle our elevator system. They held up for most of two regionals, but ended up switching to BAG motors because they spent a little too much time near stall and burned out right before elims.

AdamHeard

10-07-2015, 01:37

Got a Dyno we can test with?? If your assertions are correct, that would explain a lot.
Seriously, how many times have you run all the calculations and built a design only to see it's performance not live up the the numbers?
THAT REALLY BITES!

I sort of dyno'd them with our 2012 robot.

In 2012 we only had 4-6 of the Fisher Price motor that was real high power, so we saved them for comp. Ran 550's on the practice bot.

The practice bot performed way worse in terms of spinup time and peak rpm. The 550's had lower ratings than the FP's, but not by enough to explain it. I repeated the test on the same robot with the FPs, 550s, the andymark 9015's and some 550 sized mabuchi motors I bought surplus.

I characterized the flywheel roughly in terms of friction (a polynomial in the form Ax^2 +Bc + C) and all the motors matched with their specs pretty well... except the 550's.

Not the most scientific test as I wasn't measuring torque directly, but I'm reasonably certain the banebots 550's are not as powerful as claimed. Unsure if this was a batch issue, a supplier misleading banebots, banebots mislabeling, etc...

Jared Russell

10-07-2015, 12:40

I know of people who have done dyno tests that confirm the RS550 falls well short of its rated torque constant.

Travis Covington

10-07-2015, 13:18

I know of people who have done dyno tests that confirm the RS550 falls well short of its rated torque constant.

This. The performance of the RS550 never matches its data sheet. We stopped using the RS550 in the middle of 2014 when we had numerous 550s fry in our shooter (not really due to the lacking power). The RS775-18 is a superior motor, with power ratings that are actually accurate. I would encourage teams to look at using them instead.

AllenGregoryIV

10-07-2015, 14:31

Just cause this conversation was getting a little crazy. I called up Banebots.

They are actually going to stop selling all of their motors. They were just importing all the motors and reselling them and that wasn't something they wanted to keep doing.

They said Robotshop is going to start carrying them but they don't seem to have 775-18s listed on their website yet.

Monochron

10-07-2015, 15:18

They are actually going to stop selling all of their motors.
They said Robotshop is going to start carrying them but they don't seem to have 775-18s listed on their website yet.

Great, I was just about to calm down and be happy with the 775-18s.

I'm assuming Banebots was importing them in bulk? And that a private consumer would have trouble getting them in the same way?

AllenGregoryIV

10-07-2015, 15:31

Great, I was just about to calm down and be happy with the 775-18s.

I'm assuming Banebots was importing them in bulk? And that a private consumer would have trouble getting them in the same way?

If there isn't a reliable source then FIRST won't put them on the allowed motor list. They trimmed the list of allowed Banebots motors this year in response to Banebots asking them to do it. We used to have the 555, 395, etc. This year only BB775 and BB550 motors were allowed. If there isn't a good source, 775-18v will probably not be allowed next year.

I have a support ticket open with RobotShop to see if they plan to carry the 775-18v I'll post here when they give me an answer.

Hopefully some one comes through and i a reliable importer for these motors (VEXpro or AndyMark would be ideal).

I just got an answer back from RobotShop
"We thank you for your input. We do plan to carry the standard version of the RS-775 DC motor; the specs are slightly different, but the mounting is the same, and it is still a high torque motor. Unfortunately these are produced in high volume and it may be some time before we receive new stock. We will soon also carry new gearmotro systems which incorporate a 775 motor so we invite you to take a look at our New Arrivals section over the coming weeks and check out this new section.

Hope this helps,"

That doesn't look good.

Update
Longer phone call with Banebots just now.

They believe that RobotShop is going to pickup up both the RS550 and RS775-18v and that was discussed with the RobotShop when they agreed to stop importing motors. They also talked to RobotShop about FRC and the use of those to motors in FRC.

Hopefully that means they will both be back and hopefully FRC will continue to allow them as legal motors but who knows what the rules will be for next year.

Thad House

10-07-2015, 19:56

I could live with the 550's being gone, But the 775-18's being gone would really hurt a lot of FRC teams. The BAG motor just isn't powerful enough, and CIMs are just too big. The 775-18 was a perfect motor (after 2011's short issues) and it would be really disappointing to lose it.

AdamHeard

10-07-2015, 23:52

AllenGregoryIV

11-07-2015, 09:09

There are many 775s on the market and the banebots ones are nothing special. I'm sure the market will fill the hole.

Hopefully but it has to happen fast enough for FRC to allow them into the rules for this next season or it will hurt some teams.

Latest reply from the RobotShop technical team. I'm still hoping they will carry the RS775-18.

We would be carrying the 12V version of the 775. Would there be a particular reason why you would not be able to use a comparable system which gave similar torque and speed?

AllenGregoryIV

13-07-2015, 13:25

Latest news from RobotShop, they should have them eventually it seems. I'm a little concerned that they can't seem to get the motor names/numbers correct.

Hi Allen,

We are starting by bringing in the most popular models, which were the 755 and 555, but our initialyorder was for the stock versions of these motors rather than for the models customized to BaneBots specifications. We will likely be ordering the custom versions soon, but still do not have an ETA. We will likely not carry all of the BaneBots motor as they are produced on demand and require high order quantities. If you'd like, we can keep you posted on the 755 and 555 customized models.

Hope this helps,

Jared Russell

13-07-2015, 16:23

Latest news from RobotShop, they should have them eventually it seems. I'm a little concerned that they can't seem to get the motor names/numbers correct.

Hopefully they figure it out. What I absolutely do not want is another 2012, where superior motors (the Fisher Price 0673) were legal, but were all but unobtainable if you didn't already have them.

Lil' Lavery

13-07-2015, 17:15

I think I must be the only one who misses the more restrictive motor selections of FRC past. The power wars are absurd currently. I much preferred it when teams had to be more selection about their applications of high powered motors.

Hopefully they figure it out. What I absolutely do not want is another 2012, where superior motors (the Fisher Price 0673) were legal, but were all but unobtainable if you didn't already have them.
This is fully agree with.

Thad House

13-07-2015, 17:32

I think I must be the only one who misses the more restrictive motor selections of FRC past. The power wars are absurd currently. I much preferred it when teams had to be more selection about their applications of high powered motors.

This is fully agree with.

I agree with this, but not having a high powered motor thats not a CIM to choose from wouldn't be ideal. Without a single motor 250W+ motor option, alot of things teams have been doing in the past few years wouldnt be possible.

Lil' Lavery

13-07-2015, 17:38

I agree with this, but not having a high powered motor thats not a CIM to choose from wouldn't be ideal. Without a single motor 250W+ motor option, alot of things teams have been doing in the past few years wouldnt be possible.

I remember teams doing a lot of impressive feats prior to the 775-18 or the FP-0673 being legal motors.

Knufire

13-07-2015, 18:02

I agree with this, but not having a high powered motor thats not a CIM to choose from wouldn't be ideal. Without a single motor 250W+ motor option, alot of things teams have been doing in the past few years wouldnt be possible.

Between the CIM, miniCIM, am-9015, and BAG motors, I think there's plenty of power available. Especially when you have several COTS gearboxes on the market that will take two am-9015 or BAG motors as inputs.

GeeTwo

13-07-2015, 22:53

Between the CIM, miniCIM, am-9015, and BAG motors, I think there's plenty of power available. Especially when you have several COTS gearboxes on the market that will take two am-9015 or BAG motors as inputs.

I don't believe that 3946 has ever competed with a Banebots motor. We did, however, trust the specs and try to use one as a mostly horizontal part of our Ultimate Ascent (2013) climber. After smoking it on the very first climb attempt, we wound up replacing it with a CIM - at the same gear ratio. We found Banebots motors to be more properly name Botsbane.

magnets

13-07-2015, 23:11

After smoking it on the very first climb attempt, we wound up replacing it with a CIM - at the same gear ratio.
There's your problem! The banebots motor with the most torque still has over 3 times less torque than a CIM motor. By switching to a CIM motor and keeping the same gear ratio, you're giving the banebot motor a 3 to 1 disadvantage.

It's totally possible to vertically climb something at a reasonable rate using banebots or similar drill motors. Check out some 2004 robots for examples.

Gregor

13-07-2015, 23:17

There's your problem! The banebots motor with the most torque still has over 3 times less torque than a CIM motor. By switching to a CIM motor and keeping the same gear ratio, you're giving the banebot motor a 3 to 1 disadvantage.

It's totally possible to vertically climb something at a reasonable rate using banebots or similar drill motors. Check out some 2004 robots for examples.

I believe 1986's 2013 climber was 4 550s or 775s.

EricH

13-07-2015, 23:23

It's totally possible to vertically climb something at a reasonable rate using banebots or similar drill motors. Check out some 2004 robots for examples.

Sure you're not thinking of the FPs? THOSE were the days! Drills in the drive, the odd CIM in some random place, and FPs and Globes for everything else. (Well, unless you needed a window or van door motor...)

The FP motors (Fischer-Price motors, from say a Barbie jeep) were some really good climbers if you ran 'em through their stock gearbox. Long as you didn't stall 'em, you were golden. They could also be used in the drive to back up the drill motors (though I do recall a team a few years later using 2 CIMs and 1 FP on each side--poor little FP didn't stand much of a chance). And, they were fairly tough to kill off, though not as tough as the CIMs.

Cory

14-07-2015, 00:21

Sure you're not thinking of the FPs? THOSE were the days! Drills in the drive, the odd CIM in some random place, and FPs and Globes for everything else. (Well, unless you needed a window or van door motor...)

The FP motors (Fischer-Price motors, from say a Barbie jeep) were some really good climbers if you ran 'em through their stock gearbox. Long as you didn't stall 'em, you were golden. They could also be used in the drive to back up the drill motors (though I do recall a team a few years later using 2 CIMs and 1 FP on each side--poor little FP didn't stand much of a chance). And, they were fairly tough to kill off, though not as tough as the CIMs.

I remember that the 2005 FP had absurd power on paper as we were over volting it from the rated spec, but even so the 775's are dramatically superior to the 2005-2006 era FP's in any situation where they are under appreciable load.

EricH

14-07-2015, 00:25

I remember that the 2005 FP had absurd power on paper as we were over volting it from the rated spec, but even so the 775's are dramatically superior to the 2005-2006 era FP's in any situation where they are under appreciable load.

'04 wasn't bad, for an FP--that's what we ran in '05 (legal per the rules updates). As I recall we didn't get 775s until at least '06 (and needed to get the gearbox with them).

GeeTwo

14-07-2015, 08:14

After smoking it on the very first climb attempt, we wound up replacing it with a CIM - at the same gear ratio.

There's your problem! The banebots motor with the most torque still has over 3 times less torque than a CIM motor.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. We designed for the Banebots, but it didn't come close to meeting the spec, or at least our understanding of it. Not having enough time before bagging to get a new gearbox, we swapped to a CIM without changing gears, other than the pinion. Fortunately, we had only used four CIMs otherwise.

jspatz1

28-07-2015, 23:12

I believe 1986's 2013 climber was 4 550s or 775s.

Correct, it was 4 550's.

billbo911

12-09-2015, 17:04

I was considering "upgrading" my grandson's PowerWheels by replacing the motor in it with a RS-775.

When I went to see what was available from Banebots, having this thread in mind, I saw this in the 775 listing:

This product has been discontinued. Stock is limited to quantity on hand with no plans to restock

We should be able to fill orders for any quantity you are able to put in your basket. Please note that an out of stock message may not truly mean we are out of stock as some items may be temporarily held by the web store. We will change the out of stock message or remove the product once the product is truly out of stock.

So I ordered up three as quickly as I could. One thing to note, they are currently clearing them out for $12.25 ea.
Just got them today!