Yep, i’m running 5.2 on og focboxes
4 Likes
According to the MFG:
VESC 4 60k eRPM
Focbox 100k eRPM
VESC 6 150k eRPM
VESC 75/300 & 100/250 150k eRPM
I think the eRPM limit is based on how fast the processor can track where the motor is and give pulses at the correct time. The early versions were limited because of their poor tracking, but I think the 150k is a theoretical number… I don’t know if I’ve seen a test at that level.
I was just going through the edit list, but I did change the wiki to add the Flipsky 6.6 based on your comment 
Confirmed I am running VESC 5.1 on the 4.10 hardware (how’s that for an OG VESC? haha)
2 Likes
Does anyone know actual safe limits for some of these? I thought the Flipsky v4s couldn’t actually run 50A continuous without overheating, nor could it really handle 240A at any point.
Something about “keep raising the numbers because we sell more when we raise them”
I doubt those numbers are any more than loosely coupled to the actual device’s performance.
It also depends highly on what kind of heatsinking (and/or thermal mass) is used.
3 Likes
Yeah that was kinda my point. I was wondering if anyone had any empirical testing data or experiences with them with actual performance. Otherwise someone uninitiated might look at this chart and go for the biggest number and lowest price (we probably should put price on here as well come to think of it, although it’s pretty variable).
2 Likes
Funny enough these were the specs Vedder originally released the v4 at.
There have been a few tests if you search around
Time before thermal throttling:
MakerX Go-FOC DV4 60A x1 for 1:52
MakerX Mini-FOC (v6) @ 50A for 3 min
MakerX DV6 @ 100A x2 for ~25 seconds
MakerX Go-FOC HI100 @ 100A for 43 seconds
MakerX Go-FOC HI100 @ 150A for 9 seconds
Focbox Unity @ 80A x2 for 1:30
Stormcore 100S @ 80A for 2:25
Vesc 4 @ 70A for 32 seconds, stabilizes at 35A or so
Vesc 6 @ 70A for 2:50, stabilizes at 50A or so
VESC 75/300 @ 250A for ~20 seconds before throttling down to 180A for a few min
EDIT: VESC 4 test was in the same video
4 Likes
Do you know which VESC this is? Or is it any HW based on VESC 6?
Its a ben vedder video so I’m assuming its a trampa vesc
2 Likes
Based on the date I’m pretty sure this is the beta VESC 6, hardware “60”. They are on MK5 now.
I’d guess that any VESC 6 with a big chunk of aluminum attached to the fets would perform similar.
You confuse two things here. One is the HW version and that goes hand in hand with a FW for that specific HW. HW4.12 needs the 410&411&412 FW. See list below…
However, the Firmware evolves and now you have versions of such FW. So the 410&411&412 exists in revisions. So there is a 3.xx to 5.3 revision of that FW.
When the new VESC-Tool will be released, you will likely need to update your FW to the latest revision.
The HD column is wrong BTW. The FOCer HD60 is actually a different design and needs different FW.
It uses a different chipset to drive the mosfets. I think it is also renamed to BMESC BM60.
The amount of Amps you can push has little to do with the HW type. I could design a VESC 6 that can only push a few amps and one that can push 100A. It depends on the power stage and how well it is built and what kind of FETs are used. However, the DRV chip inside the VESC 6 can only drive a certain amount of certain Mosfets. So there is a limit on the top side of things.
4 Likes
My goal in splitting out the various VESC variants was to help end users decide which version to pick by grouping up similar functioning ESCs. For example:
V4 - 10s BLDC only. 12s FOC, 60k eRPMs
V6 - 12s FOC, higher continuous amps, higher eRPMs
75/300 - 16s, higher amps, no DRV chip
100/250 - 22s, no DRV chip
I wanted to avoid having a huge spreadsheet-like list of each model with all it’s various features/functions/issues by grouping them up by hardware version with a small list of differences within that group, but maybe there are too many differences for that to be possible.
You need to compare them by electronic/schematic design, by power output, by features, by quality etc.
If the electronic schematic is similar, it uses similar or even the same firmware.
Then the differences can be in power output but also the quality of the layout and how precise currents and voltages can be measured and therefore how well they can drive a motor. Two devices, identical on paper, similar in electronic schematics can still be very different in performance when it comes to driving a motor.
Noise in the measurements can impact the performance drastically. Driving a motor in FOC means relying on precise input data so you can then compute in real time which spools are to be swelled with current in a certain millisecond, creating the most perfect magnetic field to generate high torque on the magnets.
Then there is also the mechanical quality and QC warranty and customer service…
I wouldn’t call the 100/250 schematic a 22S controller, since it barley can handle 20S.
Right?!
Damn marketing skews this list making it harder to compare apples to apples, but I’m working on adding voltages which should normalize it a bit
VESC 100/250 listing from Trampa:
frank you have beautiful handwriting
4 Likes
what is Vedder Sensorless Startup ?
Is that what they changed the ASS acronym to?
okay and Vedder Sensorless Startup/ass/hfi start?
is that coming with fw 5.3?
I could be wrong but I think that requires the upgraded hardware, but yes, also a newer firmware version
1 Like
also require temp sensor 
1 Like