How I OPTIMISED the 5" FPV Motor with SCIENCE: AOS Supernova 2207 

Best comment! Thank you!

It is good to be able to technically land on the 'solution' to the source of so much variance in motors available though, at least so the industry can then focus in on what actually are good configs using actual result data and move on to innovating elsewhere.

I agree @JonE5FPV in fact I think a majority of fpv pilots out there would fly better if they had less power in their builds. The top % can take advantage of almost all advantages, but everybody else - nah.

Same with motorcycles lol...

@@jollyrogergaming9842 yep, honda put a throttle sensor on the bike, and discovered the rider only used full throttle for about 2 seconds. so downsized the engine, and weight, and made a bike that went faster since it ran full throttle much more often.

I would love to see a whole line-up of motors utilising the principles of the Supernova. A 15 or 1404 around 3600kV for 3.5" 4s, 1204, 7500kV for 3" 2s and 5000kV for 3s and 2006 2900kV for 4", 4s and a 6s equivalent as well.

I'll do my best! 😁 I want to do a 2808 and 1404 class motor as well

Something for the rc plane hobby would be amazing. 2212 size or even bigger like a 2820 or 3820 would be a huge gift to the modeling world.

​@ChrisRosser if you're taking requests, a 2808 1k would meet my 7" 8S LR needs 😊

@@ChrisRosser great! I guess the best showcase for a new product is to stack it up against some tough competition - both 2207 and 1404 (don't know much about larger quads/motors, so no comment/opinion about the 2808) have pretty tough line-ups! Regarding what you said in the interview with JB about optimising your 2206 for maximum performance while maintaining the weight - asking ppl what they want is not always the best way, ppl often don't know what is they really need - the less experience the more likely they will ask for more power (look at cars), but with more power they will struggle to both tune and fly - this is why the 'smooth' motors have had their following. I personally think optimising for minimising the weight, while keeping 'average' performance would be a more interesting direction - the power you are used to, but reduced weight and faster response - this is IMHO what freestyle needs, optimising for performance has more merit at racing.

I like Chris Rosser, but was kind of hoping the top comment would be the motor measurements

100% Pretty misleading to put it in the title, even though he does say it here (not everyone who buys this motor will have watched this video). Also kinda ridiculous that he wants people to keep the actual size "secret". It's not like there's gonna be this "magical" set of dimensions that are somehow better than any others. It's also plainly, physically measurable, so it's likely not gonna be long before someone does publish it.

​@@dooddrones6521 It’s 34g, and the FPVCycle 25mm imperial is 35g, where the Five33 2207 is 28g. It’s not a crazy difference but certainly for the weight it seems like it should be bigger than 2207. The steal doesn’t help the weight, but appears to add power.

What part of 2207 class do you not understand?

@@cinemoriahFPV Title is “AOS Supernova 2207” not “AOS Supernova 2207 CLASS”. I think I’d be ok if “class” was added to the name. Though Five33’s 2207 is 28g where this is 34g. But ok it’s maybe it’s more durable. Even the pre-order page just says “2207” not “2207 class”

Ultimately stator proportions are kind of a meaningless metric. It's not stator proportions that make drones fly, its power vs weight. If it weighs the same as other 2207 motors then it's reasonable to compare them. He doesn't want the stator specs released because he'd like this motor to actually be on the market for 5 seconds before getting cloned, which will happen anyway, he's just trying to slow that down a bit.

Since it has the weight of 2207 with a much thicker flux ring, I assume the stator is actually smaller. I also assume if he released a 2106 motor or something like that, all the talk would be about the size, how it's super heavy for the size etc, instead of focusing on the results compared to 2207 motors. All just a guess ofc.

@@Kai-P Yeah, I think the goal is to move the talk away from the size as what makes it unique.

Definitely agree, it is like calling an 18650 battery although it is not 18x65mm size. Yes perhaps the motor size means nothing but then do not give size at all. To be honest publishing the dimensions now would not make too much of a difference given that those who want to find out, will find out.

@@jovaraszigmantas an 18650 being a different size would make it incompatible with many applications. An FPV motor only needs to have the right mounting pattern to be compatible. The 2207 name is used because that's what people search for. Can't sell a product no one will find.

I'll see what I can do!

Echoing this, something for 3.5" sub250.

​@@ChrisRosser1504 would be a cool size for 3.5 inch drones

​@@ChrisRosserI still didn't get how it got that design increased it's all round specs?

Yes Please. For the AOS 3.5 with an o3... maybe a 4" biprop... @@ChrisRosser

I would love to have a set but not for 130 dollars if you include tax & shipping. Especially if i don't know what the true size is. But they look nice. So Bo how many did you pre order? hahahaha i know you love that power! and will want a few to try. You be sure to let me know if this hype is real.

Why even ask that, now I want to buy one just to publish the measurements

Just click a link, and it has a diagram with measurements on?

It’s a genius marketing ploy!

Stupid fuckin' decision tbh

Haha, You don't get to know

Go check recursion labs T-motor 1404 for super light 3.5 inch

@@xnoux1yeah, but key word was "the best". Im happy with xing 1504s.

@@pixonification he did the same kind of testing than Chris but for 1404 motors. Finding "the best" for 3.5 inch. Anyway, if you’re happy, I’m happy.

2109

How can this be confusing? The best performing 2207 class motor you can get.

What breakthrough? He made 2308 motor and called it 2207. He also compared it to 2207. If we exclude the weight, of course the 2308 will be better than the 2207.

@@vdz89 I mean.. did you watch the 12 minute video above? Compared to 2207 motors of the ***same*** weight class he has produced a motor with better efficiency, power, and responsiveness... for no additional weight... you know... a breakthrough... I think it is mentioned somewhere out there he actually used smaller magnets and a thicker flux core or something like that rather than the industry's trend of bigger magnets and a a thinner flux core. Also, his stator core is hollow, between those two weight savings it allows his physical dimension to be slightly larger while gaining no weight. So it is a motor that spins a 5" prop that weighs the same as all the other motors designed to spin a 5" prop. The reason you don't compare this to a 2308 is because they weigh more... Here, I found the video where he gets into the more technical design decisions: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-yxZZ2M3gRyI.html good luck trying to watch a 40 minute video though.

The total inertia of magnets and flux ring is only very slightly more than a typical motor but the extra torque is 33% more so that dominates.

Also to add to that, with a 6S the motors and the battery get extremely hot, and a 6S 1100Mah is depleted in about 40 seconds

We totally need better micro motors! All the way down to 070x please ;)

I think the model should be good across different sizes (I'd need to check this) so it should be possible to optimise motors for any size.

@@ChrisRosser That would be amazing... :)

I can imagine how excited you are for these. I’m excited for you

Ah that'll be Excel's "auto scale" at work!

They weigh the same as a 2207 and are designed for the same purpose, the name is to make sure they end up in the right place on store listings.

I hope for answer… rly. ;)

I tested multiple samples and have retested motors over time. In general the results vary by up to 1% over time.

Fair enough, that's Excel "auto scale" for you 🤣 I'm sure this approach could be applied for tiny whoops.

I agree 💯 with you. Unfortunately, one person cannot decide how motors are named and sold in the hobby. Pilots are searching for 2207 motors for 5" quads so this motor has to be called a 2207 to show it's for the same purpose. I wish this weren't the case!

​@@ChrisRosserthats bullshit. Before 2207s, people were running 2206, 2305s, 2205s. Make a good product, and label it truthfully and people will use it if it's good, no matter the size. But the arbitrary value for the size is dumb

Or do like T-Motor and name it something else. Like the F40 Pro V - 2306.8

​@@harrylenon9594 I just looked through many drone motors for a fixed wing application. Size wasn't even a consideration. Motors without published technical data weren't considered. It was easy to find something for the application based on weight, Kv, and resistance, mainly. The same way I've done it since NiCd was the only battery available.

@@ChrisRosser I disagree the tmotor f60/f40 sold very well. Same as the fpv cycle emerald motors. None of those motors listed their size.

They are really nice for racing apart from the slight weight overhead. We found ~8g (

Weight of the motor with 5" wires compared to average weight of all 2207 motors tested with 5" wires

@@ChrisRosser please clarify the calculation, I can't get 4.3% with the values read from the graph.

what would you like to do with video antennas? RF is much more complicated than BLDC motors. Too complicated for chris.

@@sigterm15His contribution would in come in the form of the modeling he does - finding that undiscovered needle in the haystack.

1306 seems like it would be underpowered and overheat easily. So far the best motors I've seen for sub 250g are RCINPOWER 1804s.

@@Bruno-cb5gk Totally depends on what he means with sub 250g. 150g is also sub 250g.

@@uhu4677 1404 is better for that. 1306 is just too tall.

Great suggestion 👍👍

What do you think of them? Are you happy with the battery performance and are they stable during crashes? I'm thinking about getting those or the xing2.

@@leonf8870 I like them a lot. Battery life does not seem to differ much, tho I'm more free styling than racing so I'm not punching them out all time. I havent had a serious crash with em yet, just hit a few branches 'n stuff - they didn't really care. I also thought about xing2, ended up with the supernova instead. Was flying with schubkraft motors before

Ideally motors would be labelled by their weight class. A heavier motor should give more performance than a lighter motor of the same dimensions. Unfortunately we live in the real world where people buy 2207 motors for 5" drones so this motor had to be called a 2207 to clearly signal what the motor is for.