I have mixed feelings on this one. As has been said already, the specific impulse of this A"3" is vastly inferior to the Estes A3. That being said however, this isn't really an A3. It is an A1. I like the long burn aspect, but forgive me for saying so, this kind of false advertising has lead to the crashes of some models with the Quest C"6" (Really a C3.5). Why the NAR allows the mislabeling is beyond me. Don't get me wrong, for something like an M motor labeled as a (hypothetical) M2000, a two or three Newton difference is inconsequential (or even a 20 or 30 Newton variation). However, at this scale, that is a 66% deviation!
Brian, it infuriated me for a long time as well, until I had an epiphany and realized that, long ago, the
Engine Code became a
Product Name and therefore a marketing tool.
Say, for instance, that you were a model rocket motor manufacturer, and you had a
C7-5 motor. It produced 10NS total impulse, and had seven newtons average thrust. Your intent was to sell that motor through Hobbytown, Michaels, and Hobby Lobby. You may or may not have kits to sell, but even if you did, the majority of kits in the store would be Estes kits. A large number of Estes kits have as one of their recommended motors a
"C6-5".
It is bad enough that your motors have to compete with similar motors that have an Estes logo, but when Timmy or Timmy's parents look for motors to use with Timmy's new rocket, or worse -- the buyers for the stores look for motors to stock, they more than likely won't take a chance on your
"C7-5" motors, or Jack's company's
"C4-4" motors, which would probably work just as well.
Instead, you and Jack both label your motors
"C6-5", and get them certified as such, since there's enough leeway in the NFPA tolerances. Now, all you and Jack have to compete against is the Estes logo.
In the same way, Estes itself can't do much about it. Say that, over the years, the quality of ingredients for their black powder, particularly the charcoal, has changed. They can't make a C6-5 motor quite like the C6-5 motor they made 20 years ago. To get the total impulse back into the correct range, they have to cut the average thrust back to 4.5 newtons. And they have to cut back a tiny bit on the delay powder so they have enough room in the casing for the slower propellant. This causes the 5 second delay to become more like 3.7 seconds.
They can't suddenly start selling a "C4-4" motor, since all their back catalog of models specifically recommend C6-5! And they can't call it a "C5-4" for the same reason and because a few might confuse it with the old "Super C5" motor from 30 years ago. But as long as the triennial certification from the NAR is done and is within those somewhat loose NFPA tolerances, they can still call it a C6-5 and all is well.
Of course, in this case the Quest A3 motor itself is too big to fit in an Estes model anyway (55mm vs Estes' 45mm) so the branding issue may not be important here, but this explains why there can be such widely differing motors on the low end all with the same branding.
