There is NO reliability problem with Quest motors.

They simply ha ve a different thrust-time curve. The C6 motors made in China have a decent liftoff thrust, but it then drops way, way down and continues to burn for a LOT longer than an Estes motor.

The Chinese Quest motor will make a lightweight rocket go significantly higher than the similar Estes motor.

The Quest motors are outstanding in normal size and weight models.

If the rocekt is heavy - and by that I mean the model is anywhere near the Manufacturer's Recommended Liftoff Weight as listed by ESTES in their motor table, then the Quest motor will not be a good match as the sustaining thrust will not be enough to keep the rocket pointing upward.

There would be much less discussion about this (and a lot less negative sounding comments) on the various rocketry discussion forums if Quest would list a more useful-to-the-average-American-consumer maximum liftoff weight for their motors. And that includes a lower weight as the delay time increases. I completly understand the reluctance to label them as a C3.5 instead of a C6 because the average American consumer "knows" C6-5 and would think a C3.5 or a C4 was 'less powerful', even though the total impulse is as much or greater than the Estes C6.

So, the Quest Chinese motors are astounding great in lightweight and normal weight models as they thrust forever. Quite frankly, part ot the fun is listening to the motor burn as you watch the rocket climb, and they make that portion of the experience last much longer. So, you are getting MORE entertainment for the money.

__________________
-Fred Shecter NAR 20117 (L2)
Southern California Rocket Association, NAR Section 430

Thanks Fred!

__________________
I plan ahead that way I don't have to do anything right now.

Oh by the way, I'm not here just for the "olde" rocket discussions.

http://www.nar.org/SandT/NARenglist.shtml

http://www.nar.org/SandT/pdf/Estes/C6.pdf

http://www.nar.org/SandT/pdf/Quest/C6_cn.pdf

__________________
-Fred Shecter NAR 20117 (L2)
Southern California Rocket Association, NAR Section 430

That is a tough problem to solve unless we change the motor labeling scheme to include peak thrust and thrust duration in the numbers or print the full specifications including the thrust curve on the packaging; then only the rocket scientists among us will understand them.

Other common misunderstandings include:

Why can a C6 lift less weight than a C5?

And why can an A8 not lift more weight to a lower altitude than a B6 or C6?


Are the ejection charges of the Chinese Quest motors as sooty as the German ones? Some had complained about the mess the old motors made of the inside of the rocket.


Bill

I don't think they are sooty, but the best way is to get a few (or a bunch) and try them out and compare them side-by-side with the Estes motors.

Launch two identical lightweight models side by side and simultaneously using an Estes C6-5 and a Quest C6-5. Watch the Quest powered model go much higher.

If you have your NAR Member Guidebook, there is a 40% off coupon for Quest. Perfect for placing that big $500 order and loading up on motors and new kits.

__________________
-Fred Shecter NAR 20117 (L2)
Southern California Rocket Association, NAR Section 430

Yes, exactly well stated, Fred.

I have designed a series of large Depron based gliders for the Quest motors. My favorite is the near BT70 Bomarc, which boosts perfectly on the Quest C6-3, hissing nicely as it goes up, and ejects at apogee. I even made a D5 pod for this and flew it last month. It did even better, going straight up seemingly slow and forever, and even a glider that size became a dot in the sky. Barely got it back too.

Dont forget that Depron Space Camel from my thread in the Glider forum, it too is a great flyer on these motors.

My observation is that the Quest C6-3 is good up to 3.0z (sans motor weight), whereas the Estes C6-3 is good for another full ounce.

Large light gliders on Quest motors are really something to behold.

The main reason I have not used them is that they are pricey. I almost always find Estes A's, B's, and C's for about a buck a piece. Have not had such luck with the Quest motors. Dollar for dollar, Estes gives the most bang, IMO.

Allen

if you are still finding Estes A, B and C motors for "a buck a piece", then you are finding a supply of ultra discounted product from a store or retailer who is dumping a "discontinued" item.

Normal Estes list price for motors is pretty much the same as Quest.

Estes 18mm C motors come in a 3 pack for over $10:

http://www.estesrockets.com/store/rockets/engines.html

__________________
-Fred Shecter NAR 20117 (L2)
Southern California Rocket Association, NAR Section 430

You are definitely finding better deals than I am. I usually find Estes B-C engines for around five dollars in various local stores for a pack of 3.

I buy the bigger motors (Estes D Aerotech E-G) online since I can get better deals that way.

__________________
I plan ahead that way I don't have to do anything right now.

Oh by the way, I'm not here just for the "olde" rocket discussions.

I have bought a large number of fresh boxes of 'blast off packs' from Michael's using the 50% and 40% off coupons. Plus I was able to score quite a few packs at the Wal Marts around town for $3 a pack when they were dumping. I reckon I have about 400 to 500 motors now!
Clearly, I should launch more, but I started hoarding a long time ago. Frankly, I enjoy the building more than the launching. I think I have about twice as many rockets as I have first launched ones (I think I said that right). IOW, I've launched only half of them. I tend to take my favorites and 2 or 3 of the new ones when I go, just for some variety.

As Fred said, the longer burn of the Quest C's is part of the experience. I owe it to myself to try those.

Allen