Taranis X9D doesn't feel as "snappy" as Flysky i6x on same type of quad

[userix]

I have two wizard x220s' and I have recently switched one over to TBS crossfire using my X9D and crossfire tx module. I notice the drone isn't as "peppy" or snappy as the other x220s with the fli14+ and using my i6x radio. With the X9D, the drone is more mellow (sluggish?) in terms of the controls, but I don't have the snappy response of the i6x when I am trying to do acrobatic maneuvers. Both X220s are running identical components (FC and 4in1 ESC) and motors. The PIDs in betaflight are pretty much the same PIDs (has identical expos/rates) I have checked the receiver tab in betaflight and ensured all channel ranges reach 2000 max, as is does for the i6x drone. The x9d x220s quad is running betaflight 4.2.2 and my the i6x x220s is on betaflight 3.5.5. Both are the OmnibusF4 FCs.

Are there other settings I am missing in the X9D? I'm a first time user of the X9D, so I haven't learned of all its extensive features.

 

[PsyBorg]

Thats because Frsky uses the entire 1000us to 2000us range by default where Spectrum and Flysky do not. Its a matter of resolution.

With the shorter range it seems more snappy but over all will just be less accurate because of the stick scaling. Its like using 100% of the DPS but only 80% of stick throws. Think of it as reverse expo.

 

[userix]

Thats because Frsky uses the entire 1000us to 2000us range by default where Spectrum and Flysky do not. Its a matter of resolution.

With the shorter range it seems more snappy but over all will just be less accurate because of the stick scaling. Its like using 100% of the DPS but only 80% of stick throws. Think of it as reverse expo.

How would I go about making the X9d behave exactly like the i6x? I have trained flying on the i6x for a while now and have gotten use to its feel.

 

[PsyBorg]

Just changing the end points to match what ever the Flysky uses would work but I would recommend you tweak rates a touch instead though as you are much better off having and using the full resolution.

Hopefully you dont use expo in your settings so a simple drop in RC super rate will get you more snappy without too much effort then raise RC rate up a touch so you end up with same dps you started with.

 

[userix]

Just changing the end points to match what ever the Flysky uses would work but I would recommend you tweak rates a touch instead though as you are much better off having and using the full resolution.

Hopefully you dont use expo in your settings so a simple drop in RC super rate will get you more snappy without too much effort then raise RC rate up a touch so you end up with same dps you started with.

Sorry, I'm not familar with DPS or RC super rates settings.

As for endpoints, they are the same when checked through the receiver tab on betaflight. The i6x hits 2000 at the max and 1000 at the lowest point. The X9D also reaches the same 2000 max on all channels and 1000 at the lowest. So I believe endpoint are the same between the two radios.

I actually just checked and the channels are all on Expo 0 curve, so this is not what I want?

 

[PsyBorg]

hrmmm.. If they match and you did not change rates then they should be and feel exactly the same.

DPS = degrees per second. Tells you how fast the quad will rotate on any axis. RC rate and RC super rate are how you manipulate the DPS to get the "feel" of the quad. for example these are my Rc rate, Super rate, and DPS I use on my 3 inch build to make it fly like a tinywhoop. Notice pitch and role have super low RC rate and super rates and use 40 and 45 degree per second rotations but for roll that gives little changes and lower "Expo feel" center sticks. For yaw I use a much higher rc rate for the faster rotation dps but no super rate because I want that linear. The graph on the right shows what the curves are like.

In this one notice Much higher RC rates and super rates used for freestyle. Notice the DPS is in the 900 range vs the 40 -45 range for the whoop style settings. See how the higher super rate now gives a high "expo'd" looking curve for pitch and roll. disregard the .20 Expo that was before I knew it was a bad thing.

So look thru the Taranis and make sure you do not have expo set up in the radio itself. Because the end points are the same there should be zero changes to the feel of the quad unless you somehow changed the settings in the flight controller for the rates I just showed you.

One other thing could be stick length. If your Taranis sticks are higher then your Flysky then it could also give a feel of sluggishness because you may not be going to the same place with the longer sticks.

 

[Bricks]

Good point about stick lengths changing the feel of the controls.

 

[LitterBug]

There could be some sort of a bell curve in the flysky too. (dunno, I've never used one). But I would dump out the config from both TXes and compare every nook and cranny of the config.

I set my TXes up with a straight line, Switch locations on same channels, and let the FC do all the expo and gee wizz stuff. That way I can switch between my DX8 and X9D without there being much difference. Just the feel of the boxes themselves and slight variances in switch locations. (and lack of switches and sliders on the DX8)

Cheers!
LitterBug

 

[PsyBorg]

Good point about stick lengths changing the feel of the controls.

I like a hybrid pinch so I modded my sticks with metal dart bodies that have finger grooves in the perfect place for me. they are almost double normal stick lengths and with my shaky hands I am not so spastic with them.

 

[userix]

I looked at both the curves in my i6x and the x9d and the throttle curve is a straight line, going diagonally from the bottom left to the upper right, no expo curves in the line, just plain straight.

Here are the BF pids, rates, filters from the X9D x220s:

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Here are the pids, rates, filters for the i6x X220s:

So in Betaflight settings in both quads, they have identical rates and PIDs. Not sure if the filters have any effects on the "feel".

The stick length theory might be the contributing factor. I do notice the gimbals on the X9d are larger than the i6x and also the sticks at their lowest position is still 3mm taller than the i6x. I know stick scaling is not ideal, but how would I scale the travel of the x9d so that full throw would be the same physical travel of the gimbal on my i6x?

 

[PsyBorg]

Ok the screenies show us a different story then you have told. The Anti grav has been changed as well as feed forward so yes there will be a big difference in how they fly. Both seem to be on stock tune and stock beta flight rates. It looks like someone followed a few Bardwell videos for the greatest things since sliced bread tunes but did not do the same thing for each build.

 

[userix]

Ok the screenies show us a different story then you have told. The Anti grav has been changed as well as feed forward so yes there will be a big difference in how they fly. Both seem to be on stock tune and stock beta flight rates. It looks like someone followed a few Bardwell videos for the greatest things since sliced bread tunes but did not do the same thing for each build.

I have tried copying all values to match the i6x quad settings, but it still doesn’t feel as snappy. The x9d actually had higher feed forward values, so shouldn’t that make the quad feel even more snappy and not so mellow?

 

[PsyBorg]

Well not being familiar with an I6 I got nothing else as far as differences between radios. Unless you set your radio up with expos or other settings instead of letting the fc's do all the work I dont know.

The only thing left going by the information you have given is the versions flashed on the two quads are not the same. All I can suggest is flash to the same version you use with the i6 and copy the setup exactly. If all things are in fact the same they should fly the same way.

I dont use all them fancy filters and fad of the moment gimmiks. I shut it all off and tune the pids. The only thing I have played around with is feed forward on one quad to hit corners harder when I run tracks.

 

[userix]

I'm trying to flash the 3.5.5 for the 4.2.2 quad, but when I load the hex file and click flash firmware, nothing happens. I can flash any 4.* versions from betaflight directly downloaded online. Nothing happens, no error messages either.

 

[PsyBorg]

Need an earlier version of Configurator to match the 3.5.5 hex. to be able to burn. You can mod parameters in previous versions you just cant flash the older ones from a newer one.