Question - DNA 75/200/250 - Why?

[greenj22]

Hey all,
I was thinking just now; why doesn't Evolv simply make ONE board capable of running on a single cell or a 2S/3S configuration?  I'm not an electrical engineer, but obviously the DNA 250 can run at 75 watts, at 166/167 watts, 200, and 250.  These boards are all the same footprint essentially (the balance tap being the notable difference) so basically any mod that incorporates a DNA 75 "frame"/layout, could fit a 250 (minus the 75C's b/c of the screen)...which leads me to wonder why....why 2-3 different boards?  With all of the R&D/tech built into these chips, I can't imagine it being difficult or costly to simply produce one board capable of running on a single cell or multiple cells.  Almost like a 250 can be run at 167....why not have Escribe firmware to allow that board to run a single cell at 75 watts? 

This now leads me to my final thought, which I would rather be completely wrong about: Do the 75, 200, 250 boards all exist simply as a way to sell more boards?  Is this to have a larger catalog of products?  Why sell three different boards when one board could do it all? I would also think this could cut manufacturing costs, and streamline mass production, marketing, and the sales cycle - all allowing a higher gross profit.

What makes more sense - genuinely?  I know the 75 is marketed as a more affordable chip, but would they not be able to play with the sale price of one board capable of it all?  I can't see the justification of charging more for one board that can run all cell configurations.  I think the 200/250 price point is the ceiling, but that's just me.  Is it more cost-effective and better for the consumer to produce and sell 2-3 boards....or who's best interest is it in?

EDIT:  I suppose the balance tap adds in, what, about 4 mm?  That is a nice little size difference to have with a DNA 75 vs a 250....but still!

[SadikYP]

The DNA75 is cheaper than the DNA250. I would assume this is due to the 75 costing less to produce.

My guess is that the DNA200 will be phased out as soon as existing stocks are depleted.

[turbocad6]

the dna 250 is just an updated 200, and the 75 is a completely different chip even though it shares the same footprint and looks similar it's not. I'm sure what you are saying may be possible BUT the cost of a board that can do it all like that would put it over the cost of even the top of the line dna250, why make the cheapest board now become the most expensive board for those that just want a 75 single cell device? just not cost effective even if it was very possible to do 

[greenj22]

I see it differently.  It would and should cost LESS.  Do you really think that they are not able to make the 250 capable of running off of a single cell?  They could pass along the savings of not even messing around with producing a DNA75 (I bet they could save some money if they dropped the LED. Lol) to the consumer or simply make more money - the latter is what I'm thinking is the hold up. And with mass production, the cost of those components only decreases I'm pretty sure.  The 75 is marketed as a cheaper alternative, but is it physically $40 cheaper?  I bet not.  I'm going conspiracy theory here and saying that I think it's all for the revenue. The more products they can offer the more money they can make. There are many analogies for this. Why have multiple boards that likely cost VERY close to the same to manufacture when you could simply sell one?  I understand they are different boards, but given the fact that the 250 can run any configuration EXCEPT 1s is very suspicious and odd to me.....unless I'm worng and they offer the firmware for it.  Hell - they just came out with the 75C and added a larger screen, Escribe, and 9 volts yet the board is the exact same size.  Sure, components cost a bit more, but my point is that they likely have the tech/talent in house to, for example, make the balance tap a breakout component!  Why not?!  Then you have a board w/ an identical footprint to the 75.  Just an example.  Make one board for 0-250 watts of that footprint - simple.  

I love this company - FYI.  I just was sitting here and had that thought.

[turbocad6]

by that logic GM should only make a Cadillac, it gives you everything you can get in a chevy and then some, so why make different levels of vehicles? I really think you are over simplifying things a bit and I think you just believe it's all a marketing scheme but that's not the case here at all... different layouts for different purposes with each one doing what they are designed to do... "jack of all trades master of none" comes to mind... each board is that much better when it's designed for a certain task, there is a huge difference between 3.7v input and 11.1V input and trying to design one chip to do it all will mean that it will be more inefficient in some areas o course... different tools for different jobs...