Jump to content

Msuper V3 1900, photos from Lukas gotway (MSX)


Recommended Posts

 

2 hours ago, Hunka Hunka Burning Love said:

You do get used to it.  I didn't like the width of my Tesla when I first started riding it, and coming from a Ninebot it was like riding a wide computer case.  Very boxy!  The top side panel edge would rub against my calves making it a painful pressure point over time.

 In order for me to get comfortable on Tesla my feet need to be near the outer edge of the pedals. I’ve thought about increasing the pedal’s width.

2 hours ago, Hunka Hunka Burning Love said:

Going back to riding the Ninebot is a weird experience.  It's so slim and floppy between the legs (okay no jokes @Rehab1) that it takes a while to adjust back to it.

Jokes....ME?  I also have the ‘slim and floppy’  issue when transitioning from Tesla to the V10F. Throw in Mten3 and I have to totally recalibrate my legs and feet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 439
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, Shad0z said:

try to peel off the foam side pad from the tesla. it really helped for me. i love it without it. its much easier to maneuver

I like that idea!  Damn if I didn’t already have the covers off once. Lucky me....I used  industrial strength contact adhesive to reattach them. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Rehab1 said:

I like that idea!  Damn if I didn’t already have the covers off once. Lucky me....I used  industrial strength contact adhesive to reattach them. ?

Use dental floss or fishing line worked back and forth gently.  I haven't tried it on foam pads, but it works on auto emblems.  :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, steve454 said:

Use dental floss or fishing line worked back and forth gently.  I haven't tried it on foam pads, but it works on auto emblems.  :ph34r:

Great idea!  It is unlikely I can save the pads upon the second removal attempt but your idea may help diminish the adhesive residue left behind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Hunka Hunka Burning Love said:

I hear there's a blue MSuper that can solve that problem!  :whistling:

So what is the difference in the body width between the Tesla and the new MSuper? Curious, @Jason McNeilwhat are the widest pedals Gotway produces? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Rehab1 said:

Great idea!  It is unlikely I can save the pads upon the second removal attempt but your idea may help diminish the adhesive residue left behind.

Get yourself a can of this stuff called Acetone. Poor it over the pads and come back in 10-minutes. Pads be gone.

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Rehab1 said:

So what is the difference in the body width between the Tesla and the new MSuper? Curious, @Jason McNeilwhat are the widest pedals Gotway produces? 

The Tesla/ACM/Monster pedals actually may be slightly wider than the MSuper pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Marty Backe said:

Get yourself a can of this stuff called Acetone. Poor it over the pads and come back in 10-minutes. Pads be gone.

;)

Thanks. Pads and plastic. ☠️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Rehab1 said:

I like that idea!  Damn if I didn’t already have the covers off once. Lucky me....I used  industrial strength contact adhesive to reattach them. ?

damn... :/ 

i took them off and tried them with nothing on at all. Super meneuverable but super stable.
and then i got straight to cutting out some of this "baby foam" everyone is using for their euc. ans pit it on. Stilt felt a lot better with nothing on it. So i peeled off the baby foam. The part thats good is that its not touching your calf anymore. And also it slides when it hits your calf instead of stopping it

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Marty Backe said:

Get yourself a can of this stuff called Acetone. Poor it over the pads and come back in 10-minutes. Pads be 

there was once i clear coated my tesla sidepads to make them shiny. I thought it would go well with the carbon look. But then it was too cold and the spraypaint ended up being white residue... I tried everything it wouldnt come off. So i lastly tried acetone. Which melts abs especially the small carbon texture on the side panels. So now im left with 2 "de-carbonified" sidepads with a little residue that look bad. So i need to put vinyl on them :/ 

5 hours ago, steve454 said:

Acetone, hmmm, that might remove the residue.

And the plastic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shad0z said:

damn... ?

i took them off and tried them with nothing on at all. Super meneuverable but super stable.
and then i got straight to cutting out some of this "baby foam" everyone is using for their euc. ans pit it on. Stilt felt a lot better with nothing on it. So i peeled off the baby foam. The part thats good is that its not touching your calf anymore. And also it slides when it hits your calf instead of stopping it

 

Do you do any mountain climbing? That's where the padding is actually useful IMO - where you have to sometimes grip the wheel to be able to push the wheel up hill. I'm not talking about pushing it up a 10-meter hill. More like 100+ meters in one shot.

I imagine people who live in mostly flat lands would not miss the padding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Marty Backe said:

Do you do any mountain climbing? That's where the padding is actually useful IMO - where you have to sometimes grip the wheel to be able to push the wheel up hill. I'm not talking about pushing it up a 10-meter hill. More like 100+ meters in one shot.

I imagine people who live in mostly flat lands would not miss the padding.

i have done it before. your comes with small padding. that doesnt need to be taken off. mine came with thick padding you can still climb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Marty Backe said:

Do you do any mountain climbing? That's where the padding is actually useful IMO - where you have to sometimes grip the wheel to be able to push the wheel up hill. I'm not talking about pushing it up a 10-meter hill. More like 100+ meters in one shot.

The more I vacillate about removing the calve padding vs increasing width of the pedals I have to agree that gripping the padding between your legs is necessary for optimal control at times. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The padding can also help when doing backward manoeuvres ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Shad0z said:

you dont need padding to grip it really. For me removing the padding is best of both worlds

Whatever works best for you. When trying out a new gadget, we all have to make our own adjustments. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Scatcat said:

I think it has clear potential. Separating the rows of MOSFETs is something that should have been done generations ago. Upping the specs to 247s is more of the same. It seems there may even have been an electrical engineer involved in the design this time. ;) 

Holy cow thanks !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Vikas said:

Thanks so much. So upping the specs to 247s is also what they should have done generations ago? Just to clarify.

247 MOSFET (depending on specific part) has a much larger size, dissipates heat better and can overall take a lot more power without frying.

On 6/27/2017 at 4:37 AM, esaj said:

Well, one thing's for sure after seeing that picture: Monster, ACM and MSuper all share the same board (maybe with some slight component changes, but otherwise that's exactly the same board as Rehab1's dead ACM board he sent me). So probably also the firmware code base is the same, which could potentially mean that NEW (post end-of-April) Monsters could also be affected. I'm still leaving the "maybe Monster" in the topic name...

EDIT: I was under the impression that Gotway was using TO-247's in Monsters, but those are the same TO-220's as in the ACM. I also bet that those are the exact same IRFB4110's as in ACMs and MSupers. So looks like KingSong (KS16S, IRFP4368) and Rockwheel GT16 (IRFP4110, TO-247 -version of the Gotway mosfets) are the only ones using heavy-duty mosfets..?

03485.png

Not that heavier gauge mosfets would help with melting wires and firmware bugs... ;)

 

@esaj could probably read you chapter and verse about it. My knowledge is limited to a rule of thumb that they can take about 50-100% more power without dying on you. Gotway tried to compensate for using 220s by using twelve of them, where KS and RW used six. The problem with such a construct, is that it doesn't work half as well as using the proper parts. The load is seldom even, and heat problems travel between the components - so if one fries, the risk for a second frying too is rather high.

Now they separate the rows of six each, and still use twelve in total, but 247s - which should mean the litany of frying MOSFETs should be a thing of yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Scatcat said:

247 MOSFET (depending on specific part) has a much larger size, dissipates heat better and can overall take a lot more power without frying.

There's also this gigantic casing called TO-264

 devices.gif

They've got even higher (theoretical) maximum wattages vs. TO-247, but the, ahem, "slight" downside is that they can be about 5-10 times as expensive per piece  ;)  Above that, there are special mosfet "modules" that can take even more (much more), but the cost and size is something that makes it sure you'll never see them on wheels. Of course, if you're ready to pay $100 or so _per_ mosfet  :D

409675_t.jpg

This one's about 30x30mm, but to my knowledge there are larger ones also...

 

Quote

@esaj could probably read you chapter and verse about it. My knowledge is limited to a rule of thumb that they can take about 50-100% more power without dying on you. Gotway tried to compensate for using 220s by using twelve of them, where KS and RW used six. The problem with such a construct, is that it doesn't work half as well as using the proper parts. The load is seldom even, and heat problems travel between the components - so if one fries, the risk for a second frying too is rather high.

Now they separate the rows of six each, and still use twelve in total, but 247s - which should mean the litany of frying MOSFETs should be a thing of yesterday.

Paralleling mosfets for switching applications seems to be frowned upon, there are ways to make it more "properly" (ferrite beads, diodes paralleled to gate resistors to make the turn-off faster), but in general it would seem to be a much better idea to use a single mosfet with good enough characteristics vs. paralleling them. Especially since I didn't see any ferrites or diodes on the ACM board around the gates. The problem is not just heat, but also uneven loading (like you mention) and possible gate ringing that could in the worst case destroy the mosfets (or at least cause even higher power dissipation in them, heating them more).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/14/2018 at 4:12 AM, MacPara said:

Not sure if you could tell by looking at the removed control board but this is what I found: 

MSuper-V3S-Vs-MSuper-X.jpg

Had to go backwards a bit on the thread (sorry, I haven't really read this, or followed the forums much in general). Using larger casings should definitely help with heat dissipation. My best guess is that the currents used by the Gotways are so large that they have to use paralleling to keep things from blowing up, and using higher grade mosfets would push up the price too much or there's an issue with availability. If someone knows the mosfet model, I can look up the datasheets, but as always, I remind you that I'm just a hobbyist when it comes to electronics, so my opinion doesn't carry nearly as much weight as someone who's an actual EE (electronics engineer).

I'm a software engineer, and while both fields are technical, there's one really crucial difference between them: in software, most of the stuff is really "cut and dry", ie. you can always trust that 2+2 equals 4 (at least as long as using integers ;)), if it doesn't, the computer running the software is really broken... But when dealing with "real world" -stuff, things become much more... blurry. When I design circuits, I have to take a lot of guesses of stuff I don't know about and run simulations, and there's lots that electronics designers don't know about when just drawing up the schematic, or even at layout-phase always (I guess professional level circuit layout software can up to a point calculate RF-stuff?). Tolerances, parasitic inductances and capacitances, unknown impedances, ground loops, EMI, environmental conditions, outside interference, etc. etc., stuff that's really hard to predict or even think about without having an actual prototype to test with (that's why you usually go with more conservative values, so you have some tolerance...). If everything could be calculated from start to finish at design phase, we wouldn't need prototypes... :P 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Scatcat said:

247 MOSFET (depending on specific part) has a much larger size, dissipates heat better and can overall take a lot more power without frying.

@esaj could probably read you chapter and verse about it. My knowledge is limited to a rule of thumb that they can take about 50-100% more power without dying on you. Gotway tried to compensate for using 220s by using twelve of them, where KS and RW used six. The problem with such a construct, is that it doesn't work half as well as using the proper parts. The load is seldom even, and heat problems travel between the components - so if one fries, the risk for a second frying too is rather high.

Now they separate the rows of six each, and still use twelve in total, but 247s - which should mean the litany of frying MOSFETs should be a thing of yesterday.

Well thanks to everyone with their compendium of wisdom and knowledge on this. I am currently waiting for my Msuper X 1600wh from ewheels (on preorder).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/28/2018 at 8:33 PM, esaj said:

There's also this gigantic casing called TO-264

 devices.gif

They've got even higher (theoretical) maximum wattages vs. TO-247, but the, ahem, "slight" downside is that they can be about 5-10 times as expensive per piece  ;)  Above that, there are special mosfet "modules" that can take even more (much more), but the cost and size is something that makes it sure you'll never see them on wheels. Of course, if you're ready to pay $100 or so _per_ mosfet  :D

409675_t.jpg

This one's about 30x30mm, but to my knowledge there are larger ones also...

 

Paralleling mosfets for switching applications seems to be frowned upon, there are ways to make it more "properly" (ferrite beads, diodes paralleled to gate resistors to make the turn-off faster), but in general it would seem to be a much better idea to use a single mosfet with good enough characteristics vs. paralleling them. Especially since I didn't see any ferrites or diodes on the ACM board around the gates. The problem is not just heat, but also uneven loading (like you mention) and possible gate ringing that could in the worst case destroy the mosfets (or at least cause even higher power dissipation in them, heating them more).

 

I just did a face-palm... Of course paralleling them could cause interference problems, and I have heard of gate ringing before, even if it was a long time ago. Even so, I'd feel a lot more confident with a board where they parallel 247s rather than 220s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • RagingGrandpa changed the title to Msuper V3 1900, photos from Lukas gotway (MSX)

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...