 | | Re: Yet another Technic 9V motor comparison update —Paul Kleniewski
| | | | thanx philo it shows this new kind of motor is... pure... weak why it takes 10 times more current giving just 1/4 more rpm than 71427? and why it consumes almost 2 times more current with load? why they use it? i hope there were some cases (not only (...) (21 years ago, 3-Sep-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Yet another Technic 9V motor comparison update —Philippe Hurbain
| | | | | Hi Pixel, (...) I think you're a bit harsh with this motor. Granted, no load current is much higher, but here we depend on friction alone so it is not very significant. Under load, current is indeed higher, but speed too, so mechanical power is (...) (21 years ago, 3-Sep-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Yet another Technic 9V motor comparison update —Paul Kleniewski
| | | | | "Philippe Hurbain" <philohome@free.fr> wrote in message news:HKMzyF.16v9@lugnet.com... (...) ok! tanx for correcting me your'e the master of these parameters :))) pixel (21 years ago, 3-Sep-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | | |
