BetaFPV Wants to Kill PH2.0 with BT2.0 (The Meteor65 Review)

This is the BetaFPV Meteor65 Tiny Whoop review, but I also want to introduce you the new BT2.0 battery connector that is on this tiny little FPV drone. The BT2.0 is a new battery connector for 1S LiPo that are supposed to be better than the classic PH2.0.

Where to Buy BetaFPV Meteor65?

The Meteor65 comes with one 1S 300mah LiHV batteries (3.8V), an charging adapter and a spare 25 degree tilt camera mount (the default one is 35 degree).

Meteor65 Specs

    • 65mm Wheelbase Frame
    • F4 1S AIO Board with built in 4x4A ESC and Frsky RX
    • 0802-22000KV Brushless Motors
    • 31mm triblade Props by Gemfan
    • 25mW VTX supports SmartAudio
    • Weight: 23.4g without battery

Closer Look at the Meteor65 Whoop

For me, the most interesting feature of the Meteor65 has to be the new BT2.0 battery connector. I will talk more about this in a moment, but first let’s have a look at the components.

While most recent whoop-style micro quads have settled on 75mm sized frames, running 2S battery and 40mm size props, the Meteor is going retro. It’s uses a smaller 65mm sized frame running 1S and 31mm props.

This is a brushless whoop, with 0802 22000KV brushless motors – KV seems aggressive for this light weight setup. The Beta65 Pro that was released last year was using 0802 17500KV motors, you can see the difference there. And these motors have 1mm shaft, it means you can’t use your brushed tiny whoop props on this model, which normally have 0.8mm shafts.

See this post for the differences between brushless and brushed tiny whoops.

Another advantage of brushless motors is that it allows for a lower profile than brushed motors. Here is a side by side comparison to the Acrobee.

The FC in the Meteor65 is the new light weight F4 1S 4A AIO board from BetaFPV. It has a built-in Frsky compatible receiver (D16 Non-EU).

The FPV setup is the M01 combo, consists of a 600TVL camera and a 25mW video transmitter. The VTX doesn’t have any button on it, as the settings are changed via SmartAudio in Betaflight OSD.

Note that the VTX just rests on the FC freely, with a piece of foam in between. The canopy seems to be doing its job holding the VTX down, but a piece of double-sided foam tape would probably be a good idea.

Tearing down the drone with Wowstick electric screwdriver

The dipole antenna is stiff and stays away from spinning props. The quad weighs a little more than I expected at 23.4g. With the 1S 300mah battery that it comes with, it weighs 32g.

How to Setup

To bind the receiver to your radio:

  1. Connect the FC to computer, open Betaflight Configurator and go to the CLI tab
  2. Enter this command to force FC into bind mode:
    • frsky_bind
    • Enter save
  3. Activate the bind option on the radio
  4. Wait 10 seconds then reboot FC, Done!

There is also a bind button can be easily accessible from under the drone, but entering CLI command is easier for me :)

The Meteor65 is loaded with Betaflight 3.5.7, firmware target is MATEKF411RX. No need to update the firmware. Here are the settings I changed for my first flight:

  • Motor Idle Throttle Value: 8%
  • Setup switches for arming, horizon mode and beeper
  • Setup ESC DShot Beacon
  • In Power tab, lower Voltage Meter Scale to 109 to avoid getting “Land Now Warning”.

By default, rates and expos are all set to 0 for some reason. And PIDS are not tuned well out of the box, there are oscillations even when flying indoor. Here is my rates and PID which works pretty well for me.

Flight performance

The Meteor65 is much more powerful than other 65mm whoops I’ve flown before! Lots of punch and very snappy. It would make a good racer in a larger indoor course. The special battery connectors seem to work well for keeping up with those high KV motors.

However this motor prop combo isn’t the most efficient one and flight time suffers. I am only getting about 2 to 2.5 minutes flight time with the provided battery, which is not a lot comparing to the 5 mins of flight time from my Acrobee.

VTX is pretty good and i have no problems flying in the house through every room with WiFi and everything. However the camera isn’t very good with dynamic range, when you face the windows in day time, the image just gets blown out.

Here is a dynamic range comparison between the camera from the Beebrain Lite and Meteor65. (The plus side is that you don’t see any of the frame in the view)

The default camera mount gives you a 35° tilt, which is a bit too much in my opinion for indoor flying.

The good news is you can replace it with the spare mount that gives you a lower 25° tilt. I had to swap it out on my 3rd flight :) feels much better.

And the paint job on the frame is not very durable, the paint started coming off on the first day after some crashes…

Special Battery Connectors

This new BT2.0 is basically a “beefier” battery connector, and has lower resistance than the PH2.0. It’s designed to reduce voltage sag and keep your voltage more stable during flight. The lower sag can also give you a bit more flight time too.

BT2.0 has a similar design to the XT30/XT60, just smaller. The shape of the BT2.0 prevents reverse polarity, and the connection is very solid.

Comparing to PH2.0 side by side, you can clearly see the pins are larger in the BT2.0.

The BetaFPV Meteor65 comes with two spare batteries with female BT2.0 connectors. They are 1S 300mAh LiHV (4.35V), same specs as the ones they’ve been selling with PH2.0 connector.

Here is a close up of the female BT2.0 connector comparing to the PH2.0.

Because most chargers don’t support BT2.0 right now, to charge these batteries, you have to use the adapter provided to convert BT2.0 to PH2.0. They’ve given me one adapter, so I can only charge one battery at a time.

Is BT2.0 Actually better?

To find out, I ran a discharge test on both BT2.0 and PH2.0 connectors and see which one gives less voltage sag.

I discharged both batteries at 4A when they are fully charged, the voltage sags at the first 10 seconds are: 3.84V (PH2.0) and 3.92V (BT2.0). You can see the BT2.0 connector does make a pretty big difference assuming the batteries from BetaFPV are the same cells.

The weight difference between the two connectors is less than 0.5g, with BT2.0 being heavier.

BetaFPV also provided a graph from a similar test they ran, but they were discharging at a much higher current, at 9A.

This graph confirms that the BT2.0 has lower voltage sag, and it can sustain the same current draw for a much longer time period than the PH2.0 before reaching 3V. This means batteries with BT2.0 can support more powerful motors, with longer flight time.

You can give BT2.0 connector a try:

Conclusion

BT2.0 connector is an interesting new concept, and it definitely performs better than the good old PH2.0.  But are the benefits enough for every pilot and manufacturer to change? I think it depends mostly on the motor and prop setup we use.

For a power hungry beast like the Meteor65, the BT2.0 is certainly important in order to bring out that level of performance. But it probably wouldn’t make much of a difference on an efficient build like my Acrobee.

And for people who already have a bunch of 1S batteries with PH2.0 connectors, it’s going to be expensive to replace.

I think BetaFPV should sell adapters for batteries, from PH2.0 to BT2.0, so people can carry on using their existing batteries while slowly moving over to BT2.0. But I think those old batteries with PH2.0 might struggle to power the Meteor65 given the aggressive motor KV, so it might not be ideal…

6 thoughts on “BetaFPV Wants to Kill PH2.0 with BT2.0 (The Meteor65 Review)

  1. Jonny Schwank

    Thanks for the review and tune!
    Over Black Friday/Cyber Monday weekend I ordered the parts to build one of these, mainly because BetaFPV only had select models in stock with Frsky receivers (I have Flysky). The parts I ordered were pretty much the same as the ones on the Meteor except I ordered 19500 kv motors. BetaFPV claims that these motors coupled with the Meteor65 give somewhere around 3:30-4:00 minutes of flight time over the 2 or so minutes of the 22000kv motors, with obviously a slight loss in power. I am excited to see how it turns out.

    Reply
  2. Val45k

    I was strugling with many connectory sutiable for micro drones. 1s can be amp hungry as they pulling only 4.2v, i had issues with heating conncectors. So im very glad that somone finally provide a better sollution. Ive already order those for mi micro whoops.

    Reply
  3. 0ral

    Why not XT30? Can you update the article with differences? Like how much smaller or lighter is it…if it is.

    And it would be better to use the same battery. 1 min job to resolder :) But thanks anyway.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your e-mail address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Are you Robot? *

For prompt technical support, please use our forum IntoFPV.com. I check blog comments weekly.