Hobbywing Xerun AXE

[robert@castle]

Originally Posted by Panther6834

Honestly, I know this isn't necessarily the truth. This sounds to me like it's a limitation of the Bluetooth chipset your using, and not of Android.

Although I could give more examples, I'll give just two - a Bluetooth headset, and a smartwatch. With both, once out of range (approximately 20ft for a Bluetooth 3.0/3.1 device, 30ft for a Bluetooth 4.0-4.2 device, and up to 60ft for a Bluetooth 5.0 device), my smartwatch connects almost immediately upon being back in range, and my headset connects within a few seconds after that...and, yes, I have actually tested this several times, under different companies.

Additionally, although I'm a professional chauffeur by trade, I review tech products on the side. As I'll be driving a group from Google's Android division tomorrow, I'll be sure to ask, and, if I get an answer, I will post whatever is said in here tomorrow night.

~ More peace, love, laughter & kindness would make the world a MUCH better place

For reference we are using bluetooth low energy and I believe that it is an issue with their BLE library. If you can provide any insight on how to bypass this it would be fantastic, but everything we have seen online says there isn't a way to improve it with the Android BLE library.

[JatoTheRipper]

Originally Posted by robert@castle

We may bundle a B-Link in the box with the ESC or allow the use of the Castle Link Coupon on the purchase of the B-Link, but I don't see us building into any ESC any time soon because of technical limitations.

The coupon on the B-Link would be a great idea! Once you use the coupon on the Castle Link and/or Field Card it's pretty much useless moving forward. I say that because once you have those items you typically don't need to buy them again.

[Panther6834]

Originally Posted by robert@castle

For reference we are using bluetooth low energy and I believe that it is an issue with their BLE library. If you can provide any insight on how to bypass this it would be fantastic, but everything we have seen online says there isn't a way to improve it with the Android BLE library.

First, in what I'm about to say, I am not trying, or wanting, to put Hobbywing down...I'm trying to help. Also, I won't post all the technical jargon, partly because I can't remember it all, and partly because I didn't exactly understand all of it. Anyways, here's the "condensed" version of what I was told:

Bluetooth 5.0 BLE can handle approximately twice the data, and to approximately twice the distance, as Bluetooth 4.2...when it's implemented properly...and therein is the problem that several companies are having problems with. In the API, you should be targeting at least Level 21...anything lower/older, and your, essentially, causing a limitation. Additionally, while Bluetooth 4.0-4.2 is backwards-compatible with older versions, Bluetooth 5.0 is not...a BT5 device can only connect with another BT5 device. Some manufacturers have tried to create "hybrid" chips, but all have (supposedly) been proven to be problematic...if they work at all.

Another problem is radio interference. Having too many "devices" (a chipset, in the circumstance being received, can be considered a "device), too close together, operating on similar frequencies, will problems. BT operates on the 2.4GHz band, as do RC receivers. Electronic devices, such as ESCs, can "create" frequencies...and those are usually in the 2.4GHz range. When he mentioned this, I thought to all the times I've been wearing me BT headset in the kitchen, and the interference that's been caused when the microwave is on (which also emits frequencies in the 2.4GHz range.

Finally, as I mentioned in an earlier post, the chipset, itself, can also cause this type of problem. Cheaply designed and/or manufactured chips can lead to problems, but even chips from well-known/high-quality manufacturers can have problems. When he mentioned that last point, it reminded me of my Samsung Galaxy S5. Instead of using their own BT chipset, they went work a 3rd-party design. Little did they know, but it had connectivity problems, to the point that other BT devices (headsets, speakers, etc) would randomly disconnect/reconnect with the phone. Continuing on that point, where iOS is concerned, since all iPhones are built under the complete control of Apple, Apple controls (essentially) all the variables, including the BT chipset, thus not as much testing by other manufacturers (including Hobbywing) is required. Unfortunately, there are not only dozens of Android device manufacturers, but each manufacturer can easily have a dozen...or a few dozen...different models, and there's no way any "accessory" manufacturer can possibly test their product with every Android device.

What this all boils down to is this: neither Android, or the API library, is "at fault" for causing the distance problem being experienced with the AXE ESC. There are numerous factors which can cause, or lead to, "distance-draining". As you mentioned, yourself, the max distance is shortened when dealing with surface vehicles, as opposed to air vehicles, which makes sense, and ground (ie. the Earth) provides the greatest insulation. If you've heard of SLAC (Stanford Linear Accelerator), then you'd understand why the actual accelerator is 25ft below ground.

~ More peace, love, laughter & kindness would make the world a MUCH better place

[mewalsh100]

Has anyone tried running it on 4s yet? I know it’s outside the specs, but was curious to see if anyone has tried it, and if so, how it reacted.

[brimdogg]

Originally Posted by mewalsh100

Has anyone tried running it on 4s yet? I know it’s outside the specs, but was curious to see if anyone has tried it, and if so, how it reacted.

To my knowledge, the ESC is only capable of 3s max.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[mewalsh100]

Originally Posted by brimdogg

To my knowledge, the ESC is only capable of 3s max.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Correct. 4s is outside of specifications, but we often see mfg’s low ball these spec numbers a bit. For example, the old Axial AE-2 had a spec limited to 2s, but I ran mine on 3s with zero issues.

[robert@castle]

Originally Posted by Panther6834

First, in what I'm about to say, I am not trying, or wanting, to put Hobbywing down...I'm trying to help. Also, I won't post all the technical jargon, partly because I can't remember it all, and partly because I didn't exactly understand all of it. Anyways, here's the "condensed" version of what I was told:

Bluetooth 5.0 BLE can handle approximately twice the data, and to approximately twice the distance, as Bluetooth 4.2...when it's implemented properly...and therein is the problem that several companies are having problems with. In the API, you should be targeting at least Level 21...anything lower/older, and your, essentially, causing a limitation. Additionally, while Bluetooth 4.0-4.2 is backwards-compatible with older versions, Bluetooth 5.0 is not...a BT5 device can only connect with another BT5 device. Some manufacturers have tried to create "hybrid" chips, but all have (supposedly) been proven to be problematic...if they work at all.

Another problem is radio interference. Having too many "devices" (a chipset, in the circumstance being received, can be considered a "device), too close together, operating on similar frequencies, will problems. BT operates on the 2.4GHz band, as do RC receivers. Electronic devices, such as ESCs, can "create" frequencies...and those are usually in the 2.4GHz range. When he mentioned this, I thought to all the times I've been wearing me BT headset in the kitchen, and the interference that's been caused when the microwave is on (which also emits frequencies in the 2.4GHz range.

Finally, as I mentioned in an earlier post, the chipset, itself, can also cause this type of problem. Cheaply designed and/or manufactured chips can lead to problems, but even chips from well-known/high-quality manufacturers can have problems. When he mentioned that last point, it reminded me of my Samsung Galaxy S5. Instead of using their own BT chipset, they went work a 3rd-party design. Little did they know, but it had connectivity problems, to the point that other BT devices (headsets, speakers, etc) would randomly disconnect/reconnect with the phone. Continuing on that point, where iOS is concerned, since all iPhones are built under the complete control of Apple, Apple controls (essentially) all the variables, including the BT chipset, thus not as much testing by other manufacturers (including Hobbywing) is required. Unfortunately, there are not only dozens of Android device manufacturers, but each manufacturer can easily have a dozen...or a few dozen...different models, and there's no way any "accessory" manufacturer can possibly test their product with every Android device.

What this all boils down to is this: neither Android, or the API library, is "at fault" for causing the distance problem being experienced with the AXE ESC. There are numerous factors which can cause, or lead to, "distance-draining". As you mentioned, yourself, the max distance is shortened when dealing with surface vehicles, as opposed to air vehicles, which makes sense, and ground (ie. the Earth) provides the greatest insulation. If you've heard of SLAC (Stanford Linear Accelerator), then you'd understand why the actual accelerator is 25ft below ground.

~ More peace, love, laughter & kindness would make the world a MUCH better place

The limitation we've run into on android isn't an issue of range. We get about the same range between iOS and Android.

The module we are using is Bluetooth 4.1 BLE(it can't do full bluetooth). 5.0 would be fun to play with because of the ability to do mesh networks, but isn't feasible because of the limited numbers of devices able to use it at the moment.

The limitation we have run into on Android with their BLE library is a matter of re-connection. When the link disconnects from user input or falling out of range, the library applies a 20 second timeout on the connection and will not reconnect to a disconnected device until the timeout is up. You can connect to a different device in that time, but the UUID of the device is locked out and can't be connected to in that 20 second window. iOS has the same timeout but it is 1.6 seconds. The timeout is named "link supervision timeout". The BLE spec only requires this to be 720ms.

It can be explained by this blog post under the section "What about Android?" and links to bug reports that other have filed and have a screenshot of the android source code where the issue lies. https://blog.classycode.com/a-short-...s-fa89e3f6a456

[Panther6834]

Originally Posted by robert@castle

The limitation we've run into on android isn't an issue of range. We get about the same range between iOS and Android.

The module we are using is Bluetooth 4.1 BLE(it can't do full bluetooth). 5.0 would be fun to play with because of the ability to do mesh networks, but isn't feasible because of the limited numbers of devices able to use it at the moment.

The limitation we have run into on Android with their BLE library is a matter of re-connection. When the link disconnects from user input or falling out of range, the library applies a 20 second timeout on the connection and will not reconnect to a disconnected device until the timeout is up. You can connect to a different device in that time, but the UUID of the device is locked out and can't be connected to in that 20 second window. iOS has the same timeout but it is 1.6 seconds. The timeout is named "link supervision timeout". The BLE spec only requires this to be 720ms.

It can be explained by this blog post under the section "What about Android?" and links to bug reports that other have filed and have a screenshot of the android source code where the issue lies. https://blog.classycode.com/a-short-...s-fa89e3f6a456

Other than, "I don't know what to say", I don't know what to say. I have experienced a delay (not necessarily 20sec) when a failed connection between a 'controlling' device (cell phone, tablet), and a 'slave' device (for example, a car stereo), occurs...but, when dealing with already connected devices that lose the connection, I've never experienced that kind of delay.

~ More peace, love, laughter & kindness would make the world a MUCH better place

[subspd]

Building a trx4 sport single speed this time. What KV Axe 550 motor should I get? I’m guessing the 2700 instead of the 3300. But could you still crawl with the 3300? If so wouldn’t that offer more “spread” of speed on a single speed trans?

[soze]

I ran with the Axe in my Capra today. I'm actually ok with it. Of course it's the new firmware with the mid setting for the throttle assist, so maybe it's not as numb as the old firmware setting. I kind of like it in the Capra, and I'll probably keep it in there.

[Voodoobrew]

So what's the difference between having a revolver, with a ton of torque, vs a hobbywing axe with throttle matching?

The end result is suposed to be the same, the motor keeps a constant rpm.

But many of you put one on a pedestal and spit on the other.

Only when the axe does it, it's damn near silent, no earplugs required.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[fyrstormer]

Are people actually spitting on the AXE? I got the impression they were just complaining about technical problems.

[Voodoobrew]

To be clear I'm talking about the throttle control from earlier, not the Bluetooth. The Bluetooth I think kinda sucks.

To me the axe 540 2300kv drives pretty similar to the revolver except for 3 things.

1) The revolver has more real torque, so it can accelerate faster. However the axe is made for crawling not drag racing so this dosent matter to me.

2) The axe is near silent, especially in contrast to the revolver.

3) the minumum start speed on the revolver is lower. That's better for creeping.

What is very similar is how both of these motors retain about the same speed when driving over rough terrain. And do to the extra torque on the revolver it feels like it is more likly to break parts when it gets bound up too bad.

I'm not trying to say the axe is the best or anything like that. It has some downsides. But most of the naysayers I see (not specifically here but all over the web) are concerned about the throttle matching. In contrast I feel that's the number one reason why people like the revolver. It's also the same reason why you would gear down and volt up, to increase your ability to maintain a more constant velocity, especially when creeping at lower rpms.

It just seems hipacritical, and I think it is misleading. I think it comes more from a misunderstanding then malice.

To me the downside to the axe are the minumum start speed of about 350rpm (which is too high), a giant sensor wire plug, and a weak Bluetooth signal, possibly acceleration is an issue for some but it's not something I need.

I'm perfectly OK with people not buying the axe system and saying it's crap compared to the competition. I just don't think the throttle matching (automatically applying more power to maintain a constant velocity) is a valid reason from people who love the revolver's ability to do pretty much the same thing.

It's not like the axe tries to go full throttle when you bump into a wall until stuff explodes, well maybe it does, but there isn't enough torque for things to explode...

Maybee I'm just over reacting, I just feel like I see it a lot.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[King Dork]

Myself personally, prefer a LCD program box over anything else. I do like that the AXE has bluetooth built in as opposed to the Castle requiring purchasing an additional gizmo for bluetooth. However, the crawler course in the basement at our local track has fairly piss poor signal for phones making on the fly adjustments via bluetooth hit or miss. If Castle had a nice LCD program box for their Escs I'd try one in a heartbeat. I kept some of my Viper escs mainly because their program box is great. I guess I'm a little behind the times but I like what I like. Lol

[fyrstormer]

Bluetooth is a local broadcast from your phone to the ESC. Unless radio interference is being generated inside the basement of your local track, it will have no effect on the functionality of a Bluetooth connection.

Having said that, I also prefer self-contained programming boxes; there's less to go wrong.

[King Dork]

Originally Posted by fyrstormer

Bluetooth is a local broadcast from your phone to the ESC. Unless radio interference is being generated inside the basement of your local track, it will have no effect on the functionality of a Bluetooth connection.

Having said that, I also prefer self-contained programming boxes; there's less to go wrong.

I guess technology and I just aren't meant to be buddies. Lol.

[subspd]

Got my 3300 in today... Now to gear it right. It came with a 12t pinion is this a 32 pitch? Looks like it.

[mewalsh100]

Just installed the HW AXE system in my Capra. The ESC was a tight fit in the Capra, but I managed to get it mounted on a rear bulkhead I made out of ABS. Routing motor, sensor and battery leads cleanly to avoid the dig was the hardest part. I will say, especially given the tight packaging and limited physical access to the ESC, that the bluetooth programming is a god-send! There is no way I would want to dig back in to the rig to connect a program card or Castlelink during the test and tune phase. I literally just completed it last night, so I’ve only driven around in the house and the garage this morning. Low speed creep and start up are stellar. It’s also an extremely quiet system. Anxious to get it out on the rocks / trails to really assess. It’ll have to wait though since we’ve had 2 solid days of rain and my backyard course is swamped.

[Panther6834]

Just a hint, programming other ESCs, such as the Castle Mamba X, doesn't have to be as difficult as you've made it out to be. Solving the "problem" is as simple as connecting the Carole Link QuickConnect, which you leave connected to the ESC. The Quick Connect contains a chip that is programmed to detect when a programming device (programming box, Castle Link, etc) is connected, and automatically "disconnects" the ESC from the receiver, changing the data path to the programming device.

Setting it up (which you only have to do once, as you leave it connected) is simple. You plug the ESC into the QuicConnect's forward connector, then plug the QuickConnect's second connector into the receiver. The third connector (the one with the longest wires) is what you use for programming. Since I installed my Capra's ESC in the same location you did, and the receiver onto the backside of the battery tray, I ran the QuickConnect's third connection into the fuel cell. Any programming of the ESC needing to be done, I simply undo the 4 screws holding the fuel cell lid, and I have access to the QuickConnect.

I've been considering the AXE for another vehicle, but there's a few things dissuading me from going that route, one of which is the Bluetooth connection. When HW first announced the AXE, they made it sound like you could program it while out on the trail and/or rock crawling, as long as the vehicle was within normal Bluetooth distance (typically, up to 30ft). Unfortunately, the reality is quite different. Due to "problems" with the Bluetooth chipset there done with, as well as how they've implemented the Bluetooth connection, the Bluetooth connection only works if the ESC, and your device (phone, or tablet) are within 2-3ft of each other. If you haven't yet actually programmed the ESC, you'll discover this "programming distance problem" soon enough.

I tried to give their engineers some advice on how they could improve the programming distance...tho, it should be said, that advice didn't actually come from me, but only passed through me - it actually came from programmers at Google (I'm a professional chauffeur, and one of the contacts we have is in driving Google's executives, as well as driving for all Google events). I'm not going to say HW didn't listen, as V2 of the hardware is still in development, and they could be using the info. As for my using the AXE in the vehicle I was considering it for, I'm still considering it...the Bluetooth problem hasn't deterred me, not has other AXE "issues" (which, in all honesty, HW had been improving with subsequent FW updates).

~ More peace, love, laughter & kindness would make the world a MUCH better place

[mewalsh100]

Originally Posted by Panther6834

Just a hint, programming other ESCs, such as the Castle Mamba X, doesn't have to be as difficult as you've made it out to be. Solving the "problem" is as simple as connecting the Carole Link QuickConnect, which you leave connected to the ESC. The Quick Connect contains a chip that is programmed to detect when a programming device (programming box, Castle Link, etc) is connected, and automatically "disconnects" the ESC from the receiver, changing the data path to the programming device.

Setting it up (which you only have to do once, as you leave it connected) is simple. You plug the ESC into the QuicConnect's forward connector, then plug the QuickConnect's second connector into the receiver. The third connector (the one with the longest wires) is what you use for programming. Since I installed my Capra's ESC in the same location you did, and the receiver onto the backside of the battery tray, I ran the QuickConnect's third connection into the fuel cell. Any programming of the ESC needing to be done, I simply undo the 4 screws holding the fuel cell lid, and I have access to the QuickConnect.

I've been considering the AXE for another vehicle, but there's a few things dissuading me from going that route, one of which is the Bluetooth connection. When HW first announced the AXE, they made it sound like you could program it while out on the trail and/or rock crawling, as long as the vehicle was within normal Bluetooth distance (typically, up to 30ft). Unfortunately, the reality is quite different. Due to "problems" with the Bluetooth chipset there done with, as well as how they've implemented the Bluetooth connection, the Bluetooth connection only works if the ESC, and your device (phone, or tablet) are within 2-3ft of each other. If you haven't yet actually programmed the ESC, you'll discover this "programming distance problem" soon enough.

I tried to give their engineers some advice on how they could improve the programming distance...tho, it should be said, that advice didn't actually come from me, but only passed through me - it actually came from programmers at Google (I'm a professional chauffeur, and one of the contacts we have is in driving Google's executives, as well as driving for all Google events). I'm not going to say HW didn't listen, as V2 of the hardware is still in development, and they could be using the info. As for my using the AXE in the vehicle I was considering it for, I'm still considering it...the Bluetooth problem hasn't deterred me, not has other AXE "issues" (which, in all honesty, HW had been improving with subsequent FW updates).

~ More peace, love, laughter & kindness would make the world a MUCH better place

Own a couple Mamba-X’s - very familiar with them and a big fan. Awesome ESC overall. My reasoning for the AXE in the Capra was two fold...er several. 1.) to try a new system and evaluate. 2.) Knowing how limited space was within the Capra, to leverage the bluetooth connectivity for programming.

Additionally, the Rx box also only has so much real estate available, so to have the quick connect there, or stashed under the cockpit in the Capra was not something I wanted to deal with. I’m running additional lighting up front and added a HeyOk lighting controller in the Rx box, so it’s the proverbial 10lbs in a 5lb sack.

With regard to the bluetooth and programming distance, it’s a non-sequitur. You’re going to be within spitting distance of your rig to program it any given time. Further, it still saves you from having to physically connect to the ESC in any way. I did “test” the connectivity last night. I was easily able to detect the ESC and update programming from 10 -12 feet in my garage. Again, what more do you need in terms of ability to remotely program?

To be fair, I have not had the chance to truly test the system in terms of drive-ability and feel for intended application. I.E., Crawling, Rocks, Trails. That will obviously be the true test. That said and as I stated earlier, low speed creep is fantastic - easily on par or better than my Mamba-X / 1800kv Revolver system - and did I mention......QUIET! Super quiet system. The low speed start up is also phenomenal and on par with the Mamba/Revolver.