# Estes C5-3 motors available

### Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

#### OC-Patrick

##### Well-Known Member
Got this e-mail from Estes, as many of you are probably receiving now:

Not yet available from AC Supply. I think I still have a few "Super C" motors when they were produced by Centuri.

#### cwbullet

##### Obsessed with Rocketry
Staff member
Global Mod
 ​The Estes Super C is back! Reintroducing the Estes C5-3 engine. With a 50% increase in maximum thrust over a standard C engine, you'll have the punch you need to propel those heavier rockets off the pad. The Super C is a great choice for larger birds and for payload rockets, like competition egg-lofters, that need that extra push.​

 • Total Impulse: 10.00 N-sec • Time Delay: 3 Seconds • Estimated Max Lift Weight: 8.0 oz (227g) • Max Thrust: 20.40 Newtons (4.6 lbs) • Thrust Duration: 1.85 Seconds​

Who is ordering today?

TRF Supporter

#### neil_w

##### Hunkered down and slowly going crazy
TRF Supporter
Cool, I look forward to trying these...

##### Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
This is cool, but begs a question: if the "new" C5 has an average thrust of 5.3N, should't the "old" C6, with its average thrust of 4.7N, had been called C4 or C5?

I don't mind doing a little mental back flip with Estes C5 being all around more powerful than C6.
But what's the history behind C6's "stretch" naming designation?

#### neil_w

##### Hunkered down and slowly going crazy
TRF Supporter
This is cool, but begs a question: if the "new" C5 has an average thrust of 5.3N, should't the "old" C6 with its average thrust of 4.7N been called C4 or C5?

I don't mind doing a little mental back flip with Estes C5 being all around more powerful than its C6.
But what's the history behind C6's "stretch" naming designation?
Well, the A8 is horribly misnamed as well. I think at this point some of these designations should just be accepted as historical.

I think I saw the story somewhere but I can't recall what it was.

#### Johnly

##### Well-Known Member
A10 motors also have a historical artifact in their designation.
It is now NAR S&T policy that new motor certifications correctly state their correct average thrust.

John

##### Roger Smith
Well, the A8 is horribly misnamed as well. I think at this point some of these designations should just be accepted as historical.

I think I saw the story somewhere but I can't recall what it was.
Basically, the Estes designations were grandfathered in. In the case of the A8, it was the A.8 before the conversion to SI and was allowed to keep, sort of, the designation.

#### dcastle

##### Well-Known Member
Happy to see this...I had a package from Estes come in yesterday and noticed the C5-3s in the catalogue. I have a bunch in my stash and was bummed that they were no longer certified. Guess I can use them now at the next launch I get to.

#### Stefan2k4

##### Active Member
This is cool, but begs a question: if the "new" C5 has an average thrust of 5.3N, should't the "old" C6, with its average thrust of 4.7N, had been called C4 or C5?
View attachment 418583

I don't mind doing a little mental back flip with Estes C5 being all around more powerful than C6.
But what's the history behind C6's "stretch" naming designation?
This is why I think it would make sense for Estes to simply replace both the C6-0 and the C6-3 with a C5-0 and the C5-3. They could keep the C6-5 and C6-7, because there might not be enough space left in the engine casing for those longer delay grains for a C5. But it would seem to me that any situation where a c6-0 or C6-3 was called for, could be handled just as well, if not better by a C5-0 or C5-3.

#### Alan15578

##### Well-Known Member
Great. but I can't find the new motor certification data sheet. Can someone post a link?

#### bobbyg23

##### Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Dang, sold out on estes website already.

#### Stefan2k4

##### Active Member
Looks like they've already sold out! Must be quite a bit of demand. Now, if we could only convince them to make a C5-0, booster.

#### Cape Byron

##### The BAR formerly known as Skippy-2
TRF Supporter
So... how do we add that new motor to Open Rocket form simulations?

##### Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Great. but I can't find the new motor certification data sheet. Can someone post a link?

So... how do we add that new motor to Open Rocket form simulations?
Copy it to whatever directory you had selected for storing .rse files within Open Rocket.

In my case, I keep them all in C:\Rockets\Engine Curves\
Yours is probably different. Check by going to Edit -> Preferences -> General tab

Last edited:

#### BABAR

##### Builds Rockets for NASA
TRF Supporter
Interesting that

Hasn’t updated the 1:200 Saturn V recommended motor from the C6-3 to the re-released C5-3

#### RocketTree

##### Active Member
Max weight of 227g!! Wow. Thats double the C6.

Will be ordering as soon as they are available in Canada

#### Alan15578

##### Well-Known Member

Copy it to whatever directory you had selected for storing .rse files within Open Rocket.

In my case, I keep them all in C:\Rockets\Engine Curves\
Yours is probably different. Check by going to Edit -> Preferences -> General tab
That is not what I asked for. I need a link for the NAR S&T motor test and certification data sheet, for the NEW C5 motor, signed by the S&T committee Chairman.

#### BABAR

##### Builds Rockets for NASA
TRF Supporter
Looks like they've already sold out! Must be quite a bit of demand. Now, if we could only convince them to make a C5-0, booster.
Yeah, I think that should take up LESS space than the 3 second delay, so should be do-able.

I found the MIRV to be horribly underpowered on the C6-0

I mean, single 18mm booster with three sustainers, draggy profile, 134 grams on this site, not sure if that is with or without motors

I can’t find the MIRV on the Estes site. (OOP?) Superb idea for a rocket, just didn’t bother to put a 24mm Mount, nor could it be modified for such. Thing would actually probably be fly-able with a C5-0.

#### BEC

##### Well-Known Member
The new cert data will be up shortly. Whether it's the same as the 1995 version posted above by Aaron Head remains to be seen, but it should be pretty close. And yes, once it is, the old ones we may have on hand are again usable at NAR launches.

When the Estes web store says "out of stock" it only means that they don't have any in the small area from which they fill mail orders. Those of us who got to take the NARAM-60 tour know what that looks like. They will just need to bring some more over from the main area where motors are stored. They are again showing as "in stock" as I type this.

AC Supply, as of yesterday, has not seen them yet. Soon, I hope.

#### BEC

##### Well-Known Member
Interesting that

Hasn’t updated the 1:200 Saturn V recommended motor from the C6-3 to the re-released C5-3
Give 'em time. This is certainly a logical revision to make.

In the 2020 catalog the C5-3 is shown as the first recommendation for the 1/200 Saturn V, as well as several others where that makes sense (MAV, Mercury Redstone, to name a couple).

#### KILTED COWBOY

##### Well-Known Member
Interesting that

Hasn’t updated the 1:200 Saturn V recommended motor from the C6-3 to the re-released C5-3
Wonder how the Saturn would fly on this new old motor?
Wonder if it is safe?
I am tempted to sacrifice one of mine to find out.

#### Cape Byron

##### The BAR formerly known as Skippy-2
TRF Supporter

Copy it to whatever directory you had selected for storing .rse files within Open Rocket.

In my case, I keep them all in C:\Rockets\Engine Curves\
Yours is probably different. Check by going to Edit -> Preferences -> General tab
Excellent, thank you. Now just need the importers to bring them to Oz...

#### Jeff Curtis

##### Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
They are back in stock. I hope Hobby Lobby adds these to their inventory.

#### Antares JS

##### Well-Known Member
Anyone know what is physically different about the C5-3? Is it a core burner as opposed to an end burner?

#### neil_w

##### Hunkered down and slowly going crazy
TRF Supporter
Anyone know what is physically different about the C5-3? Is it a core burner as opposed to an end burner?
According to something I read a while ago, it is a "partial cored" motor.

2