The one new product we haven't seen -

a brushless 775pro.

Kinda surprised that not a single vendor has released a version of this especially with the brushless revolution with Neos and now the new Falcon 500.

2 Likes

Wouldn’t the falcon 500 be replacing 775s in a lot of places?

3 Likes

Size wise? Most 775 applications would probably be better off with a NEO 550 (assuming the specs are reasonable). The Falc’s have juice, but they are sized to match

5 Likes

I bet we’ll see it next year, depending on how well the Neo 550 fills the need. Of course, it’s not like brushed motors will be going away anytime soon so regular 775pros will still do the job unless you really need a bit more power or a bit more weight.

Brushless throttle motor may make throttle motors relevant again (were they ever?).

4 Likes

Question time: who actually wants a brushless 775pro? My main beef is that there are almost no applications in FRC that can utilize the free speed (~19000rpm); the minimum reduction anybody runs seems to be around 3:1. Conveniently, that’s right in the CIM/MiniCIM/NEO/Falcon range.
So what’s wrong with the aforementioned motors? The only complaint I’ve heard is size: people seem to want a brushless motor just in the form factor of a 775pro (or the diameter at the very least). An outrunner in that form factor would have a longer bell with a small diameter, non-optimal for various reasons (if anything, you’d want the exact opposite in most scenarios). Existing inrunners are actually right around the form factor of the 775, but they would still be unreasonably fast at 12v, thus requiring more reduction.

Basically, a brushless 775 can be a thing, but is it worth still dealing with an extra stage of reduction? I’d argue that the NEO and Falcon already fill this hole and people are just unwilling to move on, but there are certainly some edge cases where the smaller diameter can be useful, particularly planetary gearboxes that may not even need an extra stage to accommodate the higher rpm.
I have a feeling the MiniNEO will mostly fill this form factor gap, assuming people can live with the fiddly encoder cable. Even if the only motors on the market were the NEO and MiniNEO, I’d argue the use case gap between them is so small a third motor wouldn’t be necessary.

12 Likes

Full disclosure: I like throttle motors and run the Costco of FRC suppliers.

14 Likes

(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

1 Like

Actually, that fact has been mentioned in almost every post in this thread already…

It’s generally recommended that you read a thread before posting in it :wink:

6 Likes

If they ever make a throttle motor that doesn’t have the electrical leads coming out the same end as the output shaft, I might actually consider using it… :laughing:

TBH, what I REALLY want is a brushless BAG motor. Something with a little more juice than the NEO 550 but still small enough to fit behind the profile of a versaplanetary gearbox.

I feel like the neo 550 is gonna be more powerful than a bag. It may be more powerful than a 775 too although I doubt it. It’s brushless and in a smaller package. For example, the neo and falcon are both brushless in about the same package as a minicim or smaller (if you discount the esc) and they have more power than a cim.

1 Like

That’s fair, I guess I’m just coming from the position that the size of the BAG motor works fine for basically any application (IMO), so if someone could take advantage of that slightly larger profile to get a bit more performance (or stall-tolerance) out of it, I wouldn’t complain. I don’t think I’ve ever been in a situation where I’ve said to myself “Darn, I wish I had a more powerful 550 motor, cause this BAG motor just doesn’t fit” (not saying there aren’t those situations, just that I’ve never encountered one in my 15 years of doing this).

I also doubt the 550 will be as powerful as a 775, since that would put it in the same power category as a CIM (since the 775s were basically the first lightweight CIM replacement due to their similar power, less the stall-tolerance).

Right, but that’s assuming you’re giving them the full 12V. Most teams (that I’ve heard from, including mine) chose to limit the max voltage they gave the 775pros to make sure they wouldn’t self-destruct.

We haven’t seen the specs for the new NEO 550, but there was a rumor floating around in the previous thread that it will be about 200W. I did the math there to show that’s the same as a 775pro at 9V. If this rumor turns out to be true and the NEO 550 is also more efficient, more stall-resilient and has a lower free speed*, I could see them replacing 775pros in the future without the need for a brushless 775 equivalent.

The biggest problem I see at the moment is they need to be controlled by the $75 SPARK MAX as opposed to a $40 SPARK (or Victor SPX). So that’s a waste for intakes or other open-loop systems that otherwise wouldn’t need a smart controller.

 
* These are assumptions, but I think they’re reasonable knowing what we know about brushless motors

The jump to brushless from brushed is a larger deviation than from one FRC brushed motor to another.

I expect this 550 to likely be able to replace use of all high RPM motors that are 775 and smaller.

I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s peak output power was a smidge less than the 775, but it’s continuous output capability due to higher efficiency will likely be higher.

If we were to get a 775 sized brushless motor, it would start to approach the continuous power level of CIMs. It’s much easier to get high power with higher RPM.

3 Likes

I’d be more interested in an FRC legal brushless compressor for the efficiency gains.

12 Likes

Spark MAX Mini when?

1 Like

A big chunk of the problem is that reciprocating piston air compressors are inherently inefficient; brushless gains would be almost negligible in most cases. Of course, if you’re running the compressor the entire match there may be some tangible benefit.

2 Likes