Was browsing and noticed that the Lowrance Recon and other brushless trolling motors seem to double the price. I have had only ones with brushes, but haven’t ever had to change any. Are there other significant benefits? Are they that much quieter? That more efficient? Not looking to buy. Just curious.
TinBoats.net
The original aluminum boat site!
Are brushless trolling motors that much better?
- Thread starter FuzzyGrub
- Start date
Help Support TinBoats.net:
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2009
- Messages
- 2,406
- Reaction score
- 2,279
- Location
- Perrysburg Ohio
- LOCATION
- Perrysburg Ohio
Can only reference my brushless experience in my R/C cars. When compared to brushed motors, the brushless motors are far more efficient, less heat buildup and use less power to gain more rpm ( power).. Brushless motors are more costly to make due to the electronics needed to control the speed. No electrician here by any means...but from my experiences, the brushless motors are a much better bang for you buck !! Enough to make the expense worth while ??? Only you can decide that...
MrGiggles
Well-known member
~10% more battery life. I thought it was more, but apparently not. PWM brushed motors are pretty efficient. Brushless motors have less rotating mass, better for quickly ramping up speed or instant torque, doesn't mean much in the world of trolling motors though.
As far as noise, I'd say it's a wash. My buddy has a Force, it's definitely quiet, but not silent.
Doesn't seem at all worth it to me, my $500 Ipilot Terrova from 2009 is still working like a champ. No way could I justify $3500 on a trolling motor. Certainly seems like we've reached the point of diminishing returns with some of this new tech. You'll spend as much on electronics as you do the whole boat, outboard, and trailer.
As far as noise, I'd say it's a wash. My buddy has a Force, it's definitely quiet, but not silent.
Doesn't seem at all worth it to me, my $500 Ipilot Terrova from 2009 is still working like a champ. No way could I justify $3500 on a trolling motor. Certainly seems like we've reached the point of diminishing returns with some of this new tech. You'll spend as much on electronics as you do the whole boat, outboard, and trailer.
I did a little seaching on the difference between the motor types. Brushless has about 10-15% better efficiency (as MG said above), less electrical noise, and less acoustic noise. The brushless motor itself, should cost less than a brushed one, once production levels match. ie less components. The electronics are an adder, but not at what the costs are showing on the trolling motors. It shouldn't be more than the PWM circuitry on brushed motors. On the MK website, take a Terrova, and add the Quest option (brushless motor), and price jumps up $1600! $3.5K - 5K for these brushless trolling motors!
Buster
Well-known member
Fuzzy, I think you're mistaken on the costs. Brushless motors have been around a long time in many applications and production volumes in those applications are similar to brushed motors. They cost more. Not that they should cost as much more as MK is marking them up, but they will remain more expensive. Another big advantage is lower maintenance as they have no brushes to wear or buildup on the commutator. And when you lose a seal and get water in a brushed motor it can kill it, whereas if the electronics are sealed in a brushless they should be immune as there are no contact points. Similar to Airshot, I used them 20+ years ago in RC airplanes, as well as in my job. They are a superior product but right now in this industry they're charging for novelty and recouping development costs more than anything else. Although I'm only seeing an $800-$1000 difference if we're looking at same specs (36V vs 36V) If they made a 12V I'd upgrade, but my little 14' Lund is already overpowered with 55 pounds of thrust.
Mr Giggles, the rotating mass issue depends on whether it's an inrunner or outrunner. You're right that an inrunner would likely have less rotating mass but an outrunner would have more. In RC airplanes we used inrunners when we wanted high speed, high RPMs and Outrunners when we wanted to turn a bigger prop for scale and aerobatic models. It looks like the Quest uses an inrunner so you're probably right that the rotating mass is lower.
Mr Giggles, the rotating mass issue depends on whether it's an inrunner or outrunner. You're right that an inrunner would likely have less rotating mass but an outrunner would have more. In RC airplanes we used inrunners when we wanted high speed, high RPMs and Outrunners when we wanted to turn a bigger prop for scale and aerobatic models. It looks like the Quest uses an inrunner so you're probably right that the rotating mass is lower.
I don't question the lower maint at all. I just haven't had a trolling motor wear out the bushes yet. If they did, I would do the repair. For people that spend every week on the water, might make sense. Tournment guys, for sure. If it was a $500 upcharge or less, then would consider.
You are correct on the MK. While I was pricing the 80lb Terrova, when I sellected the Quest option, I didn't see it also changed it to the 36V/24 model.
You are correct on the MK. While I was pricing the 80lb Terrova, when I sellected the Quest option, I didn't see it also changed it to the 36V/24 model.
I had a MG W45 from 2012 2008. It was used on our primary river boat, except for last three years which it was a lake boat. Scrubbed allot of rock bottom with it over the years. It died last year. When I opened it, it was from water intrusion. Here is a picture of the brushes. Still allot of brush left.
Correction: It was at least from 2008 or earlier. It was mounted on our 14' Starcraft Mariner before the DMI1648.
Correction: It was at least from 2008 or earlier. It was mounted on our 14' Starcraft Mariner before the DMI1648.
Attachments
Last edited:
MrGiggles
Well-known member
This is a good point. It's hard to make a direct comparison since the brushless motors seem to always have more features, or being dual voltage, higher output.
Buster
Well-known member
Agree on your price break point. Unless there were other significant upgrades.
