I never thought much about the full carbon fiber cinewhoops because I had a bad experience with the Armattan Bumper where it broken during my first crash, so I that gave me a bad impression of how carbon fiber props guards will perform. But that was a long time ago, plus I was very new to building drones. Then recently, after talking with a few people online about the QAV Pro, it peaked my interested, especially when pair it with a set of 1604 3800kv motors. The main draw reason why I did not go with a QAV Pro 2.5” frame is the cost, $85 is too expensive for a frame like that. That is where cncdrones.com comes in the picture. Some people may also know them as CNC Madness, they custom cut anything carbon fiber. I assume due to the popularity in drone frame cutting, they started a new site called CNCDRONES. You can order different frames directly from their website and they even partnered up with other frame designer to purchase their frames too. On that website I found a frame that Hurcan Yilmazer designed called Hurricane 2.5. He had a lineup of different size Hurricane cinewhoop, you should check out his website turn learn more about it: https://www.longwalkproduction.co.uk/post/hurricane

The only concern I had with TMotor 1604 motors is the 3800kv rating. For optimal throttle resolution 3800kv motors would be better than 4500kv motors but you might not get the extra pop especially if you plan to do some light freestyle moves. However, I hope I will get similar results as I did when I switched from 1507 3100kv motors to 2205 2300kv motors on a Shendrone Squirt v2. Both quads will be using a 6s lipo but the KV difference between these 2 motors is huge! I was afraid that the 2300kv motor would be too slow for the Squirt, but it was totally the opposite. I guess the larger 2205 motors was able to get the props up to speed faster than a smaller 1507 motor with higher KV rating, because the 2205 motors out performed the 1507 in every way.

The Build

I did not do any fancy prints for this build because I was kind of rushed to finish it. So, I dropped all the 3d prints I think I need and printed everything one color. Then I started to build the quad as the TPU parts are being printed. I could always go back and make pretty, later. Overall this frame was very easy to build, and like the SnapShot frame it can be both a Pusher or Regular motor configuration. Like I said before, I do not like pusher quad so I will be building this regular.

The AIO flight controller and motor fit as normal so nothing unique was needed to be done. The USB port is accessible for both the FC and Caddx Vista. Compaired to all the other 2.5" cinewhoop this is handsdown the easiest frame to build and work on.

The only modifications I have made so far is the Camera mount. I moved the mounted hole as much as I could forward because I was worried I was get some of the camera guard in the view of the FPV feed.

The 166g dry weight is not totally horrible, but it could be better. I could save about 10g if I used a naked Caddx Vista and Nebula Pro Nano camera. Also keep in mind that I did not install the 2 front and 2 rear standoff to help save 3.4g I think a lighter lipo batter will make the biggest impact in comparison to the Cinelog 25.

Initial thoughts after first few flights

This point of this build is to find something that can dethrone the Cinelog 25. I a way it could be a unfair comparison because of the larger motors being used. But with the heavier frame and lower KV motors I think everything evens out. My first impression of the 1604 motors is that you can fell the extra power because it is more responsive, especially for it being a 3800kv motor compared to the 1404 4500kv. However, the difference is not night and day, but still, it is a definite improvement. I was enough of a performance gain that I had to go back and change my rates in Betaflight to it is less sensitive by added some RC expo, Throttle expo and Throttle MID.

Can the Hurricane 25 replace the Cinelog 25? I think I has good potential but first I will need to try and lose some weight. I do not expect it to be the same weight as the Cinelog 25 because the Hurricane has larger motors, but somewhere in the ballpark of 10g would be nice.

Tune with MPU6000 - Betaflight 4.2.9 (UPDATE: I am no longer using this tune)

PID: I am using the same tune I have on my other 2.5" cinewhoop for baseline testing. Here are the PIDS:

Rate: When use the larger Tmotor 1604 3800kv motors, I adjust the rate to tame the extra power. Normally, I assume the 1404 motors at the same KV the power is very mellow. I added some expo to the RC and gave the throttle a slight curve and adjusted the throttle midm, but I do not like the feel when flying indoors. I removed the RC Expo and it feels better with the stock zero setting. With these motors, the Throttle MID feels good at 0.03. I am still feeling out the Throttle EXPO but my current setting is at 0.40 and it seems okay.

Filter: This is my filter settings.

UPDATE OCT 08, 2022 : Weight Loss

The initial 166g was too heavy and I needed to make it lighter! The first thing I did was redesign the GoPro mount so it is fixed at 15 degrees. With this new mount it will be lower

Next is the FPV camera mount. Since I will be switching to a nano size camera, I needed to modify the FPV camera mount to accommodate the smaller size camera. I should use the adapter that comes with the camera but that will add about 1.2 grams. Instead, I incorporated a spacer in the camera mount and able to reduce the weight by .4 grams. Even though I did not lose much weight, the best part of all is that I am able to mount the smaller camera and save some weight, instead of gaining.

Finally, the last thing I did to lose some weight is to de-case the Caddix Vista and switched out the Caddx Nebula Pro (6g) camera to the Nebula Pro Nano (3.5g).

With all those changes I was able to reduce the weight by 17g and when I pair that with a GNB 720mah 4s Lipo the AUW (all up weight) with a Naked GoPro 7 Black is 246 grams!

I had to remix the FPV camera mount for the Nebula Pro Nano camera because the mount was visible in the FPV feed. The Naked GoPro mount was also beefed up a little because I think it was wobbling during heavy throttle.

New Props - HQ Prop T63MMX8 Octo-Blade

Trying some out some different props, HQ Prop T63MMX8 Octo-Blade. I only have 2 flights on it and it seems to be good so far. I need to do more testing to be sure. But so far, the biggest improvement is the sound. You get less of the whinny high pitch sounds like a 3-blade prop, and it appears to sound quieter. It sounds less intimidating when flying proximity to sensitive targets. There is a tradeoff for lower noise and that is efficiency. While using the same Lumenier 850mah 4s 45C lipo, I will lose about 30 sec of flight time. In the past, I can get up to 7 minutes, but now only 6:30 minutes.

Pusher Conversion

Another reason why I wanted to try this frame is because it can support both a Pusher and Regular motor configuration. The transition between the two is very easy, and no solder is needed. Mechanically you only need to do 4 things. Rotate the camera, antenna mounts, props and move the battery strap. On Betaflight you need to set the orientation of the FC and Reorder the motors. Here is what you need to change in Betaflight. Keep in mind that this info is specific to my build only because of how my AIO board is positioned.

The following info is more for me so I can copy and paste the CLI info (FC alignment and motor position) to switch between a Pusher and Puller.

Regular Setup:

FC Board and Sensor Alignment – CW 270

set gyro_1_sensor_align = CW270
resource MOTOR 1 B00
resource MOTOR 2 B01
resource MOTOR 3 E09
resource MOTOR 4 E11

Pusher Setup:

FC Board and Sensor Alignment – CW 270 Flip

set gyro_1_sensor_align = CW270FLIP
resource MOTOR 1 E09
resource MOTOR 2 E11
resource MOTOR 3 B00
resource MOTOR 4 B01

First Impressions

Overall, the difference between the 2 setup is not significant. However, the quad does feel floaty with the HQ 63MMX8 props, where are it did not when it was in the regular configuration. They both sound very similar and did not get any louder as I claimed most pusher are. The same goes with the jello and vibration in the FPV video, it was not any better or worst between the 2 setups. But I did notice some jello during heavy throttle (punch out) when using the DAL 2530 props in both pusher and puller configuration.

PID

Next up, I will try the PID tune that frame designer Hurcan Yılmazer has suggested for this quad. The PIDs that originally use for this build felt soft in flight but there is a slight bounce in the FPV video feed. I suspect it will be worst when it gets windier. Yilmazer's tune feels more linear on the sticks with precision control, I added some throttle expo but I still need to tweak that a little more. As for the bounce in forward flight, it is noticeable less. I am still waiting for a windy day so I can see how it performs.

Efficiency
I guess the next question will be the efficiency. I do not have any fancy equipment to do any of my tests, so take what I do with a grain of salt. There is NOT a big difference in flight time when switching between pusher and puller configurations, maybe an increase flight time of 10 seconds as a pusher. The only things that are making a noticeable difference are the props and tune. Here are a few examples flight times with the same Lumenier 820mah 45c Lipo.

My Tune
DAL 2530: 7 min
HQ 63MMX8: 6.28 min

Yilmazer's Tune
DAL 2530: 7:22 min
HQ 63MMX8: 6:57 min

As you can see in the numbers above, the 3 Blade DAL 2530 props are more efficient and with Yilmazer's Tune you gain about 20 - 30 second of flight time. Keep in mind that I am using a larger 1604 motor so you might not get these results with a 1404 motor because the smaller motor might have a hard time spinning up the 8 blade props. Kind of like with the SnapShot build, the quad did not like the HQ 63MMX8 props, even with the larger 1404.5 size motors too. But it did fine with the HQ 63MMX6 props. Also, the same thing happened to the Cinelog 35 build, when I tried using HQ 89MMX8 eight blade props with 2004 motors, it performed horribly, but when paired with the 2105 size motors, it flew well.

Why would I choose the HQ 63MMX8 over the DAL 2530? The quick and easy answer for me is the noise level. It really depends on you what is more important for you when flying a cinewhoop. The noise level is on the top of my list, so I am willing to sacrifice some flight time for better sound quality.

Hurcan Yilmazer's Tune - Betaflight 4.3.0

PID:

Rate:

Filters:

Videos

Puller - Windy 12mph / 25mph gust - GoPro 7 Black Naked

Puller - Windy 12mph / 25mph gust - Same flight as above but with DJI DVR

Test flight with Naked GoPro 7

Same video as above, but with DJI DVR

Indoor Flight - GoPro 7 Naked

Same video as above, but with DJI FPV