Nano QX vs Tiny Whoop - possible hybrid design?


#1

Ok guys … winter is coming. Time to get the whoop fleet up to snuff. Even here in Florida where winter doesn’t happen - it still starts getting dark really early and cuts into outside flight time at the end of the day. Sooooooo… I need whoops to get my daily fix in just like you guys that are snowed in soon.

Anyway in what turned into a brainstorming session with @burtlo yesterday - I had the realization that my nano qx flew with alot more umph than even my most modified whoops and it did it on much slower motors. Now we’ve seen 7mm whoops with a standard frame size, with a larger frame size, and even big 8mm whoops… but I have not seen a 6mm whoop that had ducts large enough to spin nano qx props. So the idea for a hybrid whoop is born. Big props, light high kv 6mm motors, small battery. The intention is maximizing thrust, minimizing weight, and keeping a whoop look with ducts.

I think it’s gonna rip harder than anything we’ve seen in the 6 to 8mm whoop class and still handle tight spaces like a dream from its light weight.

What do you think???


#2

That would be really cool! I think that the ducts limit quads in a way though. It seems like they have less handling compared to a ductless quad, at least in my experience. Maybe make a ducted and ductless version? :joy: I’m all for bigger props!


#3

I’m gonna go pretty minimal on the ducts of possible… more of a crash guard really. But yes you are absolutely right. Full ducts cause performance problems. Of course without them it’s not really a whoop.


#4

True, I have a love-hate relationship with ducts. I love to smash into things so they are perfect :joy:, but I also enjoy performance!


#5

@NotFastEnuf: The larger props of the Nano QX will always be more efficient than the tiny pseudo ducted props on the Indy and Tiny Whoop. With the modest type of flying I do, I always favor efficiency over all-out performance (given some minimum performance for decent agility).

I think the OEM Nano QX frame was always onto something. The integrated T-shaped prop protectors are light, prevent fatal crashes when touching walls or furniture, but aren’t heavy and cumbersome like full ducts. IMO, they’re kind of the best of both worlds. And of course, Horizon Hobby/Blade also made an FPV version of the Nano QX, long before the TW craze ruined everything. :wink:

The Nano QX was also always better for LOS orientation. With the Indy/TW, it’s hard to tell orientation. It’s like a ball of yarn randomly bouncing through the air. :stuck_out_tongue:

All this to say that I would think in terms of a NQX size version of that minimalist 3D printed ultralight whoop frame that @JBFPV demonstrated some months ago. That is, modest prop protectors, rather than full or even partial “ducts.”


#6

I’ve been flying this LOS bugger and just about can’t kill it. I made the canopy out of foam paper for 2 reasons - to hold the battery neatly and to help me see it at 50ft away - haha
I still get the best performance with the 180mah 45c lipos
I still prefer the 46mm blunt props over these Eachine props, though these are unbreakable. I’m still on original set of props.
The whole thing comes in at 18grams.

I’ll be back in West Palm Beach in a couple of weeks for 1 week to pickup among many other things, a boatload of micro-d parts - can’t wait!


#7

Very good input everyone. It’s clear that nqx performance is more efficient and stronger overall. So … I’m gonna jump on fusion 360 tonight and design a minimalistic whoop looking 6mm frame that swings nqx props. It will be controlled via silverware flashed e011 and I’m gonna order a fresh set of 19.6kv motors for it. Hopefully make it to flight footage next week.:slight_smile:


#8

You’re on the right path with that Los craft. I think a 3 to 4 g printed fame is possible shrinking down the footprint to get it as small as possible / close to whoop size as possible.


#9

Has anyone out there done some 6mm thrust tests on something other than whoop props. I remember the old cg023 props out performed the nqx ones. If i had to guess I’d say fast whoop motors make around 12g thrust - and we’ll above 15g should be possible with nqx or other props. Going from 2:1 twr to 3:1 should feel pretty good.


#10

I feel like we stopped experimenting with the nano qx at 15000 kv motors cause the fc couldn’t handle more without oscillations and the frame wasn’t conducive to a fc swap. Has anyone seen record of a nano qx on 19600kv 6mm motors?


#11

So excited to watch the outcome of this project as well. I have always had a soft spot for the nqx, but never was able to get one. it’s cute little plane style canopy that has an obvious front and backside so its easy to learn LOS on as brainstorm mentioned. Such an awesome little quad.

I have personally never really liked the idea of ducts, to me they always screamed in efficiency (extra weight added onto a quad lol) but I can appreciate what they do.

If you could get a SUPER minimalist strong bumper gaurd vs a duct system, i think you would be right on the money for a perfect 6mm “whoop like” build that isnt a whoop.

those little whoop blades probably don’t really hurt much anyway. I feel it may not even break skin if crashed into someone, so protection would mainly benefit from hitting stuff like walls or poles or something. Will be following!


#12

So I’m a bit down on supplies right now and have to order some 6mm motors. But to test the concept - I’ve stuffed some tired old stock 7mm e011 motors in a nano qx frame and I’m cutting a brick of foam tape to affix the fc to the frame now. At least that gets some nqx props on a small powerful motor at a similar weight. Not sure what I’ll learn from this test … but it will be a nice reference point to look back on.


#13

For props look into gw008 skull drone, and something called paper plane props. Sorry I can’t find links just now, if I do I’ll add them and a couple of picks. I’ve used both of those with a lot of success on H8 based builds with super light frames by Ian444.


#14

And prop protection with a very thin carbon fibre ring works well without all the negative effects of “ducts”


#15

Using the stock nQx FC mounted on a PFG 90mm Nano frame and Crazepony 6x15mm Motors (Speed: Insane) 19000KV,
Definite oscillations in Safe mode - once toggled “off”, flies amazing. I can pull-off loops and flips and it is blazingly fast.

These are my favorite nQx props.


#16

That sounds promising. I’d like to bring that kind of performance to a whoop footprint swinging the bigger props. What props are those?

How does the upper throttle portion of the stick feel? Is it punchy with small changes like a whoop or do the bigger props drag down response to throttle changes in the upper stick range?


#17

those are 46mm props that happened to come with some cheap 716 motors - totally impressed - I had to scour for some more.
I’m currently using the JJRC H8 Mini Props with decent results.


#18

The best I can say is that it feels like a well built CF nQx on super steroids. I never really got joy out of flying TWs - always felt underpowered and temperamental as to how it wanted to be flown - haha I could never recover from any sort of drop.
This little guy on the other hand, is very forgiving and maneuverable. Flies like an H style quad.

I can’t really say - I usually run out of space by the time I hit full throttle…


#19

Yeah I just flew the nqx frame on 716, stock nqx props, and a 260 mah. It’s fast. But not much more than I remember 0615-14 motors being. Recovery from drops/flips was equivalent to a good 8mm build.

I think this may actually be a decent idea. Basically a 6mm whoop with big props. I still need to tape a nickel to it and see how it would fly with added fpv weight. 716 is also an option for this whoop redesign but I’d prefer 6mm for lighter finished weight since I’m intending this for indoor.

Side note … the 716’s were so much fun on the nqx frame with an e011 fc for line of sight that I will be tweaking the tune and leaving that little experiment as is!


#20

Funny, a couple of days ago I was thinking about going back to experimenting with @sean 's honeybee frame. The bigger props (HM830 paper airplane props) really give it a lot more punch. But then I got sick… feeling a bit better now.

I started with a Nano QX and here we are again! :smiley: (Tinywhoop hypetrain) I must agree the NQX frame is hard to beat, especially weight wise. It can be a bit fragile, but I once glued carbon rods into the arms and taped 7mm motors to it, 250mah battery, that thing was pretty insane to fly LOS.

Regarding ducts/prop protection, I used to cut the T style prop protectors off because they make the quad a lot bigger and don’t really do a good job protecting. If you fly fast and hit something you are going down, with or without the protectors. But when you cut them off, it’s smaller so less chance of getting caught on an object.

I’m thinking of something like the ultralight whoop frame with the ducts, with a bigger diameter. It’s light and actually does a pretty good job protecting, even though it doesn’t cover the props completely it works better than you would think. Also when we are at it, might as well invert the motors so the props face down for maximum thrust. Just like the NQX2 did, that is the way to go imo.

I approve of this thread. :+1:

@NotFastEnuf you should try 0720 motors on the NQX with that battery, it’s pretty crazy! :cowboy_hat_face:
but 6mm big props whoop is something I have been thinking about before, let’s make it happen!