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.