Part of my ride is on a greenway and stealth is an absolute requirement for using the motor on the greenway; motors are prohibited.
Rassy wrote:I don't know where you are located, but the statutes that apply to bicycles with electric assist in Oregon, Washington, and California are very careful to distinguish them from "motorized" vehicles. Those signs on the greenways that say motorized vehicles are prohibited do not apply to legal electric assist bicycles. This has been discussed elsewhere, and if anyone wants to discuss it further a good start would be to find one of those old threads.
recumbent wrote:. . .
The most likely reason your bike sways to one side when you hit a bump (when loaded-up) is because of the dish on your rear wheel.
. . .
That is a very interesting review, one of the few I've been able to find for the StokeMonkey. I wonder about those "20% hills" -- how long are they? The hills I need to climb are anywhere from 1-4 miles and more. I'd considered the SM but couldn't find any real-world accounts of its hillclimbing capabilities, especially over longer distances.
Also... am I correct that the pedals always move when the motor is engaged? If this is true, wouldn't it flog your ankles half to death if you suddenly have to use your feet to balance the bike while still under power? For example, if you bog down on a very steep grade and may need to take your feet off the pedals?
pdf wrote:hillbilly wrote:That is a very interesting review, one of the few I've been able to find for the StokeMonkey. I wonder about those "20% hills" -- how long are they? The hills I need to climb are anywhere from 1-4 miles and more. I'd considered the SM but couldn't find any real-world accounts of its hillclimbing capabilities, especially over longer distances.
pdf wrote:hillbilly wrote:Also... am I correct that the pedals always move when the motor is engaged? If this is true, wouldn't it flog your ankles half to death if you suddenly have to use your feet to balance the bike while still under power? For example, if you bog down on a very steep grade and may need to take your feet off the pedals?
pdf wrote:Yes, the pedals turn whenever you give it throttle. I haven't had a situation where I actually got hit by a pedal but when I first started using it, there were a couple of comedic moments when I tried to stop pedaling but did not de-throttle. You get used to it pretty quickly though. The other thing you have to think about is that you don't want to shift when the motor is pulling hard, just like when you are pedaling up hill. It is obviously not good for the chain or gears when it jumps down a ring under a lot of tension. I have a feeling you could bend a derailer or mess up a chain or ring that way pretty easily, stoking up a hill. You have to shift ahead just like when pedaling alone.
pdf wrote:I am clearly a fan of the SM for my route, but I think the most important thing is matching the system to the job. A hub motor system would be just as efficient on a hill if you provide the extra power needed to get it into its efficent speed range. The SM is more efficient at slow speed, like when geared down and pulling up a hill. When not geared down, there is no advantage to the SM system.
tfahrner wrote:Well, I agree that the flatter the terrain and the more constant the desired speed, the more a single-speed system such as a hub motor makes sense. But there are some small benefits to SM anyway even in this case: if the hub motor is a direct-drive type, then there is cogging resistance when not using the motor. There's also the additional rotating mass of the rotor to accelerate. If geared, there's noise. There can be advantages to SM even when geared up: higher top end. For example, while a hub motor might reach its power peak at, say, 15mph, with the power tapering down to 0 as you approach 30mph, with SM you can just shift to keep the motor at peak power at every speed from 5 to 25mph (500% gear range).
pdf wrote: if I buzzed by a group of blue-hairs doing 20, I am pretty sure I'd hear about it.
.. I'm really impressed with the fact that you can go 13 miles with 4.8 Amp Hrs at 36 volts. On my eZip with Ping 24V, 15 Amp Hr I get 15 or 18 miles, depending how big the hills and how much pep I have. The hills on my 15 mile (one way) commute are pretty big and numerous. My Watt's Up says I get something less than 1 mile per Amp-Hr @24 volts. I guess with the same efficiency, I'd get a mile and a half per amp-hr at 36V. Your 2.7 miles per Amp-Hr says your getting 80% higher efficiency.
.. A white paper from the Nu Vinci people says they got a 20% increase in efficiency by shifting using a CVT (continuously variable transmission ) compared to fixed gearing. I liked the sound of +20%. I like +80% even better. My next bike will apply power through gears. I'm looking for range without heavy and expensive big batteries. I hope I can get results like yours.
donob08 wrote: amberwolf, I know chains/gears are more efficient than Nu Vinci, but most tests seem to say you loose 5 or 8% efficiency. pdf is getting 80% more efficiency than the Nu Vinci (pretty rigorus test) showed. I'll dig up a link to that white paper. Here it is: http://www.fallbrooktech.com/Docs/LEV_C ... rrev10.pdf
andyh2 wrote:Considering one of these for my Xtracycle so nice to have such an informative review.
A small thing, right at the start you mention a problem with indexing your gears. I use an old style thumbie set in friction rather than index mode and it works well even with the extra cable length.
Users browsing this forum: andrewlsu1 and 3 guests