9 replies to this topic

[havlicek]

The Parma "D".  Yeah, it's not the lightest or most refined D, but when Parma was around, they were cheap and became the source of a lot of good racing from what I've seen here.  The end bell setup is kind of weird, but serviceable, and other than that, it's a pretty straightforward setup.

This one came to me unmolested, and was loaded with a long form arm with what appears to be #30 wire.  The arm is old-school with fiber stack end insulators and soldered com tabs.  Inside I found a nice strong set of EPX magnets...so yes...I removed the seal (YIKES!!!!!)

Sooo...when you don't give a darn, the world is your oyster, and this motor can go in any of a number of directions:

1)It can simply be cleaned-up, reassembled and get a hotter arm...all the way up to #25 wire thanks to the mags.  You know...cheap thrillz

2)The end bell hardware can be swapped for the Mura stuff, as the screw hole pattern is about the same.

3)The magnets and end bell (*with or without the existing hardware) can be installed in a Mabuchi D can...lighter and more gauss, plus at least some of the vintage vibe, in a sacrilegious kinda way.

4)Thanks to the 6mm bushing holes, any of the above can get bearings or oilite bushings with no effort at all.

[Kim Lander]

Those were fun to blueprint.

[Bill from NH]

Parma Deathstars used EP magnets in their early motors, EPX in the later ones. The EPX magnet is a bit stronger, but both look virtually identical.  I use whatever I have on hand at the time.

[havlicek]

Those were fun to blueprint.

 

Sure thing Kim.  It is after all...just a D-sized can motor.  More room to work, but familiar technology.  It would be interesting to find out what motivated Parma to go with the D instead of a C.  If they were investing the big bucks in having a motor produced, they theoretically *could* have gone either way, but it's probably down to something about the D already having existed as an Asian motor-size...maybe?  Still, the can and end bell were obviously made with new tooling, and these magnets as well.

Anyway, these and similar D motors can, by themselves or as parts donors, make for some serious horsepower.  I don't think there's many around for sale, but there's still probably a bunch of them in people's basements and garages.  For big punch, the .560" arm is probably the best way to go, no matter what direction the build goes.

[old & gray]

Some observations from the 1990's; we used S16D for flexy cars with Intrepid GTP bodies and 16D (similar to what you show) for flexy cars with wedge bodies.

 

The substitution of Mura copper hardware was common, it was an easy upgrade to 36D brushes from the slightly smaller Parma brushes.

 

The magnets in the S16D were notably  stronger than those in the 16D, it was a known "cheat" to substitute S16D magnets for the 16D magnets.

[havlicek]

So, in keeping with the whole "Cheap Thrillzz" theme here, I stopped myself from going very far on this motor.  Yes, it all has been taken apart and gone over, but the setup is pretty dead-bang "on".  I set the magnets with epoxy, and using a .560" diameter arm blank I pressed with some tape around it...and not much tape at that (*the "hole" is tight on these things with the larger diameter arm).  Before doing all that, I spun the arm blank in the setup with no magnets and got a beautiful result.  The arm spun like it WAS in bearings, but with no discernible play at all.  Tilting the setup slightly fore and aft while spinning moved the arm back and forth like "buttah".  Maybe I just got lucky with this one (!?), but if all the Parmas were/are like this, QC must have been pretty good at the factory, as well as tooling and design tolerances.

On the end bell, I went with the Mura hardware for three reasons:

1) The Mura hardware on the Parma end bell closes-up the distance between the commutator and the unsupported ends of the brushes...an important and very good thing for obvious reasons.

2) The Mura hardware is a slightly closer/tighter fit to the brushes, often requiring the running of an alignment bar back and forth to get the brushes to slide without resistance.  Between the tighter brush fit and the closer space between the brush ends and the com, you have a setup whereby the brushes will wear evenly and stay more or less perpendicular to the com.

3) The Mura hardware looks cooler. 



Having said all that, there's nothing all that bad about the stock hardware.  Considering the price point of these motors, there's an awful lot to like about them just the way they came.  *Could an Asia-produced inexpensive "C" can have been a thing?  DUH!  *Should an Asia-produced "C" can have been a thing?  Well, this is where you get into opinion, and you know what they say about opinions!    

Anywho, I'm at the armature-decision part of the equation.  There is no doubt in my mind that this setup and the .560" arm could be very happy with anything from a reliable and fun 60/30 road-racer...to a barn-storming 38/27...to a tire-shredding #25 or even #24 drag motor.  Like I said, when you don't give a darn, the world is your oyster.  For whatever use people have for the "good-ol D", Parma had a winner.

 

[havlicek]

Well, I showed the "cheap" part, so on to the "thrillzz" part...an 18/24 for the big wire guys (*you know who you are!). 

[Geary Carrier]

Big wire is too scary...

[Kim Lander]

WOW....thats purty.......LOLOL..would be good in a GTP Flexi....hahahaha

[havlicek]

WOW....thats purty.......LOLOL..would be good in a GTP Flexi....hahahaha

 

 

Thanks Kim   Of course, this one is another reverse wind, so I would call it an 18/24R, and the three-layer coils are clear in the picture.  This is another case where the reverse wind comes in handy because, even at only three-layers, there's so much room in these .560" lams that the issue is about having too much space.  I could probably have gotten as much as 20 turns on there in three layer coils, and four layer coils would have been "stoopit".

As for a GTP Flexi, I think it might be slight overkill.