So as I received the HQ5030 few months back, I never put them on for an outdoor flight. Because in my thrust test, I found them generate less thrust than the Gemfan 5030 propeller and they are really easy to break. But today I am going to compare the HQ 5030 props with the Gemfan 5030, by the FPV video footage.
Let’s have a look at this video first.
Good and Bad
I will summarize what I want to say with bullet points.
Good things about HQ 5030 props:
- Very hard to bend.
- Very smooth, and stable at punch-out’s, in wind.
- Able to take higher P gain than the Gemfan.
Good things about the Gemfan 5030
- Cheap! Nearly half of the price to the HQ ones.
- More power (thrust), but not as smooth as the HQ 5030.
- Feels easier to control (maybe it’s me used to those props?)
So, they are both very good props, and I am probably going to use both of them. But if I know I am going to break a lot of props, like flying in the wood, I will definitely going to use the Gemfan 5030. :-D
I really like the quality from HQ props, very solid and smooth. The lack of power from the HQ, can be sorted by upgrading to 5040 size. I just ordered some HQ 5040, so hopefully can do some comparison with the Gemfan.
What Happens to these Props When I Crash?
The Gemfan 5030 usually get bent at the center of the prop, or pieces go missing at the end. I sometimes just keep using bent props, or pieces-missing props. But that’s not recommended! :-p
While the HQ 5030 usually just snap in the middle. You can also see the material from this picture.
Although I like the stiffness of the HQ prop, some people actually complained about them being too brittle, and easier to break than the Gemfan. Maybe I haven’t used the HQ as intensively as the Gemfan, so my view might be bias.
The quad I used in this video can be found here.