393 vs 269

I know several FRC and Vex teams have paired different motors with different specs, but they usually run at the same rpm. Theoretically it would be valid to run a 393 and 269 on the exact same shaft or mechanism and not have any problems, but I’ve known some teams who do this with their drive systems and constantly strip the internal gears in the 269s; my brother just switched his drive (both front and back) to a 3:2 sprocket ratio and just had the same problem. (Note: both the 393 and 269 ratios were 3:2 on the drive system and the internal gearings were in their original configurations)

I was speaking to an engineer and he said that it might be risky because even though the motors run at the same rpm, the speed the motors run at, when under load, would spike differently on a chart. Thus one motor would pretty much be dragging the next one along. But since some of the best teams like to pair different motor types, I wanted to know if there were any risks involved in coupling a 269 and 393.

Have you guys had any weird experiences when paring these motors?

i am using both the 393 and the 269 motors in the same way on my gearbox without having any problems so far

i noticed this issue too
we had a roller intake system (similar to 254’s december intake)
one side had a 3-wire motor connected directly to it
the other side had a 269 motor (only one internal) gear ratio
the motors were y-cabled and we noticed that the 2-wire motor was significantly faster 120%
the specs say that it has 120% more torque, but we noticed that in speed
we generally dont mix and match different motors just to be on the safe side

I thought the 269 motor gears were metal, so they didn’t strip (as much).
I would double check that the 393s are geared for torque, not speed, before linking them with a 269.

We tried paring a 393 with a 269 straight and found it to be slower than the 393 all by itself.

I have never had one break teeth (although Titan managed to), however I have had a trouble with them binding. That’s what seems like is happening, at least. We had one 269 on our claw and after a minute or two of use it would stop working all together, and when we tried to pull the claw open or closed it was stuck, and wouldn’t budge. After a little while it would just stop and we’d be able to move it freely and regained control. We tried opening up the motor and looking at it, but nothing appeared to be wrong. We also tried replacing the motor, but had the same thing happen. Finally we replaced it with a 3-wire and haven’t had any problems whatsoever.

We have only paired 393 and 269 motors together once, on our 4-bar on our “fail bot”. It sucked way too much power and we didn’t need the extra strength of the 269’s as we weren’t hanging yet so we just took them off. Now on our 4-bar we have two 393’s and two 3-wire and again haven’t had any problems.

For our drive on our “fail bot” we had four 269 motors, and they would suck current like nothing. (Because we had them on a 1:2 geared up ratio, which was probably too much.) Then we switched to two 393 and two 269 and it still had some problems.

Finally after our first competition with our “fail bot” we took it apart (the drivetrain, at least) and used 2.75" wheels geared up 1:3 with two 393’s and two 3-wire, and once again, with this combination of 3-wire and 393’s we had no problem at all.

So I would suggest (just from the problems people seem to be having) never gear 269’s together with 393’s. Also I would suggest trying to use as few of the 269 motors as possible, and use more of the 3-wire motors. (if you have them)


if the 393 is geared internally for speed instead of the default torque it will be faster too. make sure it is internally geared for torque

We have a 269 and a 393 on each side of our drive and have never had any issues with different speeds.

However we have broken the 393 internal motor gears but i don’t think it is related to the speed of the 269s.