Comparisons? WattHrs/mi/lb. @ speed

Get real world experience and user feedback on the electric bicycle products.
User avatar
Drunkskunk   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 6977
Joined: Apr 14 2007 11:37am
Location: Dallas, Texas. U.S.A.

Post by Drunkskunk » Apr 16 2007 4:52pm

Mathurin wrote:
Lowell wrote:I propose a new unit of measure: Volcanos per coulumb per stone. :lol:
+1

And to make things fair for everyone, units should be variable.
Wouldn't you need to devide it by the weight of the beer consumed?

User avatar
TylerDurden   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 7177
Joined: Jan 04 2007 5:50pm
Location: Wear the fox hat.
Contact:

Post by TylerDurden » Apr 16 2007 4:58pm

Drunkskunk wrote:
Mathurin wrote:
Lowell wrote:I propose a new unit of measure: Volcanos per coulumb per stone. :lol:
+1

And to make things fair for everyone, units should be variable.
Wouldn't you need to devide it by the weight of the beer consumed?

Only if the ride is less than 10 min.

8)
Have a Nice Day,

TD

Image
___________________________________________________________

FYI: Adding pictures?

Bored?... take a crack at the unanswered posts

Please post your Watts-at-speed in the survey.



Image

Lowell   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1671
Joined: Jan 12 2007 4:33pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Lowell » Apr 16 2007 5:11pm

Non alcohol beer of course.

Coulombs and stones... well they're set in stone. We just need to agree on a standardized volcano unit.

Bike and rider weight of 20 stones, and I use about 50,000 coulombs to get to work. I just need the work-trip to volcano conversion factor...

Mathurin   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1166
Joined: May 24 2006 2:49pm
Location: Quebec
Contact:

Post by Mathurin » Apr 16 2007 5:12pm

But, shurely 4% vs 9% beer should be quantified differently?

Last time I drank two 1.18l's of 5.9% beer, I had to walk my bike a good part of the way to get home, plus I had to stop each 15m to take a leak. Really, it hurt my bike's efficiency.
You have to know, not fear, that someday you are going to die. Until you know that and embrace that, you are useless. - Tyler Durden, Fight club. Ditch the fake identity you've created for yourself, walk your own way in a society of mindless drones to become real, you are not your social status.

Lowell   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1671
Joined: Jan 12 2007 4:33pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Lowell » Apr 16 2007 5:31pm

Mathurin wrote:But, shurely 4% vs 9% beer should be quantified differently?

Last time I drank two 1.18l's of 5.9% beer, I had to walk my bike a good part of the way to get home, plus I had to stop each 15m to take a leak. Really, it hurt my bike's efficiency.
Every 15 meters?

User avatar
xyster   1 GW

1 GW
Posts: 3089
Joined: Jan 02 2007 8:39pm
Location: Visualize Rural Sheep

Post by xyster » Apr 16 2007 5:38pm

Lowell wrote:
Mathurin wrote:But, shurely 4% vs 9% beer should be quantified differently?

Last time I drank two 1.18l's of 5.9% beer, I had to walk my bike a good part of the way to get home, plus I had to stop each 15m to take a leak. Really, it hurt my bike's efficiency.
Every 15 meters?
To help increase your bike's efficiency, wear one of these:
http://www.urology.coloplast.com/bladde ... heters.htm
Image
Ebike: 5304/20", 72V 35A controller, 33AH 80V 20s15p (18650 sized cells) DIY lithium-ion pack
http://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewto ... 47&start=0
Scooter: '06 Stealth s1000, 48V 30A, 4x10ah SLA
http://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=148
Ebike: '06 Currie Mongoose, 32V 35A, 32V 22AH hybrid SLA/Li-ion pack
http://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1010

Lowell   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1671
Joined: Jan 12 2007 4:33pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Lowell » Apr 16 2007 5:52pm


User avatar
roller   1 W

1 W
Posts: 56
Joined: May 01 2007 1:08pm
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by roller » May 08 2007 11:21pm

will this get back to efficiency? (not that I wasn't entertained by instructions of catheter sizing for the stadium pal *note, no "small" just "medium, intermediate and large". . . but wouldn't 'medium' be the smallest?)

any holdouts against Whr/mi (at speed, level ground) as the metric de jour? it is the most repeatable by most people.

my only holdup is that I can't go that slow.

(the device formerly known as DrainBrain) recorded the Jackelope today:

37.6 Whr/mi @ 31.3 mph AVE over 15.7mi, cruising mostly at 40mph. No pedaling (possible). very flat. no wind feels like 40mph headwind.

how do people measure Whr w/o a (dfka) DB? just guestimate?

User avatar
EbikeMaui   1 kW

1 kW
Posts: 447
Joined: Mar 10 2007 8:57pm

Post by EbikeMaui » May 09 2007 1:49am

roller wrote:will this get back to efficiency? (not that I wasn't entertained by instructions of catheter sizing for the stadium pal *note, no "small" just "medium, intermediate and large". . . but wouldn't 'medium' be the smallest?)

any holdouts against Whr/mi (at speed, level ground) as the metric de jour? it is the most repeatable by most people.

my only holdup is that I can't go that slow.

(the device formerly known as DrainBrain) recorded the Jackelope today:

37.6 Whr/mi @ 31.3 mph AVE over 15.7mi, cruising mostly at 40mph. No pedaling (possible). very flat. no wind feels like 40mph headwind.

how do people measure Whr w/o a (dfka) DB? just guestimate?
If it was a 40 mph head wind your round trip speed would average out but no one figures the last halft of their trip including the voltage sag, up wind , up hill REAL averages.\ on round trips.
I just go by 1/2 the battery rating say 12 ah would be 6ha of use.Go 3 ah in half the distance then return on 3 ah. Measure your AVERAGE ROUND TRIP SPEED ans check the milage, divide the ah used by the milage. you have your figure.. noninal voltage X ah per mile = Wh per mile
Efficiency and longevity Rules!
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=ecyclemaui

User avatar
Malcolm   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 755
Joined: Jan 26 2007 9:35am
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

Post by Malcolm » May 09 2007 4:10am

37.6 Whr/mi @ 31.3 mph AVE over 15.7mi, cruising mostly at 40mph
That's pretty impressive Roller. It's about half what I get with my 300lb motorcycle at similar average speed. Just goes to show what can be achieved with some weight trimming and system optimisation. Put a small windscreen fairing on the front and you could probably shave even more off.

Lowell   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1671
Joined: Jan 12 2007 4:33pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Lowell » May 09 2007 7:18am

Took it easy on the way home from work.

AvgS 30.6mph
MaxS 46.5mph
Wh/mile 42.9
distance 20.7 miles

Lowell   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1671
Joined: Jan 12 2007 4:33pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Lowell » May 09 2007 8:31pm

EbikeMaui wrote:
Lowell wrote:Took it easy on the way home from work.

AvgS 30.6mph
MaxS 46.5mph
Wh/mile 42.9
distance 20.7 miles
figures look great when on one way trips.
Try to get some figures climbing a 2000 ft elevation in less than 20 minutes regardless of the grade, surface or distance.Lets see some figures on what efficiencies hub motors have going under 15 mph with a 800+ Watt Load for 20 minutes.Yo the man ! now lets see the videos !
The trip the other way was:
MaxS 53.4mph
AvgS 36.4mph
Wh/mile 53.1
distance 20.7 miles

I'll leave the 15mph biking to other people, as I rarely go less than 40mph cruising.

Randy: You still didn't respond with a suitable route we can both race on. I am game any time.
Starting point:
Click Here for Link

User avatar
EbikeMaui   1 kW

1 kW
Posts: 447
Joined: Mar 10 2007 8:57pm

Post by EbikeMaui » May 10 2007 4:45pm

Lowell wrote:
EbikeMaui wrote:
Lowell wrote:Took it easy on the way home from work.

AvgS 30.6mph
MaxS 46.5mph
Wh/mile 42.9
distance 20.7 miles
figures look great when on one way trips.
Try to get some figures climbing a 2000 ft elevation in less than 20 minutes regardless of the grade, surface or distance.Lets see some figures on what efficiencies hub motors have going under 15 mph with a 800+ Watt Load for 20 minutes.Yo the man ! now lets see the videos !
The trip the other way was:
MaxS 53.4mph
AvgS 36.4mph
Wh/mile 53.1
distance 20.7 miles

I'll leave the 15mph biking to other people, as I rarely go less than 40mph cruising.

Randy: You still didn't respond with a suitable route we can both race on. I am game any time.
Pick your own route to climb 2000 feet and show us YOUR VIDEO!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 2082053937
Efficiency and longevity Rules!
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=ecyclemaui

Lowell   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1671
Joined: Jan 12 2007 4:33pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Lowell » May 10 2007 5:14pm

http://www.tourismvancouver.com/visitor ... do/gardens

"Vancouver's Little Mountain, the city's highest point, is a 150-metre (500-foot) granite outcropping that, for years, was an industrial rock quarry. Now, it's a spectacular setting for a 52-hectare (130-acre) city park-and-garden complex.

It gets more than six million visitors a year - a number second only to the much larger Stanley Park. A lot of visitors arrive in wedding parties, as it's the location of choice for photographers with spectacular views and stunning natural surroundings."

How about 4 climbs in a row to the top and add the times together.

User avatar
EbikeMaui   1 kW

1 kW
Posts: 447
Joined: Mar 10 2007 8:57pm

Post by EbikeMaui » May 10 2007 5:38pm

Lowell wrote:http://www.tourismvancouver.com/visitor ... do/gardens

"Vancouver's Little Mountain, the city's highest point, is a 150-metre (500-foot) granite outcropping that, for years, was an industrial rock quarry. Now, it's a spectacular setting for a 52-hectare (130-acre) city park-and-garden complex.

It gets more than six million visitors a year - a number second only to the much larger Stanley Park. A lot of visitors arrive in wedding parties, as it's the location of choice for photographers with spectacular views and stunning natural surroundings."

How about 4 climbs in a row to the top and add the times together.
Nope ! cooling off time don't count.
Efficiency and longevity Rules!
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=ecyclemaui

Lowell   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1671
Joined: Jan 12 2007 4:33pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Lowell » May 10 2007 9:50pm

Which just reinforces my point that people don't normally have to climb mountains on their commute. That 500ft hill happens to be nearby to the Ebikes.ca store, so I will be trying it out next time I'm over that way.

scottclarke   100 W

100 W
Posts: 161
Joined: Apr 21 2007 5:06pm
Location: UK Midlands

Post by scottclarke » May 13 2007 1:30pm

Randy and all - note this is my first (and maybe last!) post in this ongoing Randy vs everyone else saga - one that bridges not just topics, but whole websites!

Randy - I too have tried the geared route - using a lightweight multiKW motor geared down before the final chain drive. It was superb - seriously. I could (start) climb 45 degree slopes with ease in 1st gear - and do 30+mph on the flats - all at greater than 80% efficiency. All made possible - as you say - by gearing :D

My motor was turning 10KRPM using a single stage worm reduction and then driving the front small chainring directly. Not as flexible as your solution of course - but then I was aiming to offer it as a kit for retro-fit to existing bicycles and it was quite clear (to me at least) that running 2 chains to the rear wheel was just not going to sell :(

I don't think anyone here actually believes its more efficient to pull 30% of max revs at full throttle up a steep incline than 100% - that is not something people are making a fuss about!

TBH I think you have pretty much the same problem as I had - mounting the motor/gbx reliably - to the various frame designs around. It's something I couldn't overcome reliably and the reason you can't buy it now!

Bottom line is - as good as a geared setup may be - the added complexity is not needed for the vast majority of people - since most people really do not live near the top of a very steep mountain range - like you!

BTW Randy and all - please take the time to do the 100ft test - it is a good (simple) benchmark and I'm eager to see just how yours, the Puma and Lowell's X5 perform:) It took me less than 3 mins to pop the battery on and do the run - go do it now!

Scott
1 off 48V 1KW/380WH suspended mtb
1 off 48V 1.2KW/380WH 'jump bike' - deceased.
1 off 2.8KW Marin Trail full susser + all RC gear - very light!

User avatar
EbikeMaui   1 kW

1 kW
Posts: 447
Joined: Mar 10 2007 8:57pm

Post by EbikeMaui » May 15 2007 8:33pm

scottclarke wrote:Randy and all - note this is my first (and maybe last!) post in this ongoing Randy vs everyone else saga - one that bridges not just topics, but whole websites!

Randy - I too have tried the geared route - using a lightweight multiKW motor geared down before the final chain drive. It was superb - seriously. I could (start) climb 45 degree slopes with ease in 1st gear - and do 30+mph on the flats - all at greater than 80% efficiency. All made possible - as you say - by gearing :D

My motor was turning 10KRPM using a single stage worm reduction and then driving the front small chainring directly. Not as flexible as your solution of course - but then I was aiming to offer it as a kit for retro-fit to existing bicycles and it was quite clear (to me at least) that running 2 chains to the rear wheel was just not going to sell :(

I don't think anyone here actually believes its more efficient to pull 30% of max revs at full throttle up a steep incline than 100% - that is not something people are making a fuss about!

TBH I think you have pretty much the same problem as I had - mounting the motor/gbx reliably - to the various frame designs around. It's something I couldn't overcome reliably and the reason you can't buy it now!

Bottom line is - as good as a geared setup may be - the added complexity is not needed for the vast majority of people - since most people really do not live near the top of a very steep mountain range - like you!

BTW Randy and all - please take the time to do the 100ft test - it is a good (simple) benchmark and I'm eager to see just how yours, the Puma and Lowell's X5 perform:) It took me less than 3 mins to pop the battery on and do the run - go do it now!

Scott
:)
Last edited by EbikeMaui on May 27 2007 12:07pm, edited 1 time in total.
Efficiency and longevity Rules!
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=ecyclemaui

Lowell   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1671
Joined: Jan 12 2007 4:33pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Lowell » May 16 2007 3:17am

How did 100ft become 71ft???

My X503 just did 0-100ft in 4.5 seconds at 28mph. I'm 178lbs, and the bike is 10x lbs with NiMH batteries. Hub motor kicks ass on chains and gears... again.

Lowell   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1671
Joined: Jan 12 2007 4:33pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Lowell » May 17 2007 1:33am

EbikeMaui wrote:
Lowell wrote:How did 100ft become 71ft???

My X503 just did 0-100ft in 4.5 seconds at 28mph. I'm 178lbs, and the bike is 10x lbs with NiMH batteries. Hub motor kicks ass on chains and gears... again.
Your in denial
Ok, do the 0-100ft test with your bike and post the results. Pedal if you have to.

Just because the rest of the world doesn't see things your way doesn't mean you have to throw a tantrum. Like I said, just the facts. 0-100ft, it's not that difficult to understand now is it?

Lowell   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1671
Joined: Jan 12 2007 4:33pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Lowell » May 17 2007 5:25pm

Randy, what exactly are you calling BS on? I am local to the Ebikes.ca shop, and the owners have ridden my bike, as well as some of their friends and other customers. I brought the bike to the Vancouver Electric Vehicle Association club meeting to support Justin @ Ebikes.ca and a presentation he was making. http://www.veva.bc.ca/home/

Every specification I have posted is 100% factual with no secrets, and no childish taunts of 'my idea is better than yours' grade school crap.

If you are calling me out as a liar, let's be clear on what facts you are disputing, for all the members here to see.

User avatar
Malcolm   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 755
Joined: Jan 26 2007 9:35am
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

Post by Malcolm » May 18 2007 5:16am

This is getting beyond a joke now. This is one of several potentially good threads that are turning into slagging matches between Randy and others who can't resist rising to his bait. The reason I liked this forum was that it was a good-humoured, irreverent exchange between knowledgeable people who shared a common interest. Recently it's started to turn into a pointless exchange of jibes and counter-jibes that doesnt benefit anyone. Any chance we can get back to the technical stuff and stop the pointless bickering?
To kill a fire you starve it of oxygen, you don't spray the damned stuff on it. :(

User avatar
Drunkskunk   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 6977
Joined: Apr 14 2007 11:37am
Location: Dallas, Texas. U.S.A.

Post by Drunkskunk » May 18 2007 10:11am

This is a good thread, with lots of usefull data in it, if you just ignore Volcano Boy and his trolling.

User avatar
knoxie   10 MW

10 MW
Posts: 2430
Joined: Jan 03 2007 5:54pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by knoxie » May 18 2007 10:21am

Yes I agree

I sometimes rise as well but I also try not to and try and be smart and bite my lip, the times I dont are normally when I have had a few beers and I get pissed! quite literally!

Its tough to do but Yes the best thing is to ignore anyone who makes inflammatory remarks, being ignored is much more annoying for people that are trying to provoke a reaction, if everybody ignored people who troll then they do eventually go away, have you noticed how this years power assist posts compare to last year? I can think of 2 people that used to post on there that now dont, it kind of proves my point.

I promise I wont rise again :twisted:

Knoxie

Lowell   1 MW

1 MW
Posts: 1671
Joined: Jan 12 2007 4:33pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Lowell » May 19 2007 1:11am

knoxie wrote:Yes I agree

I sometimes rise as well but I also try not to and try and be smart and bite my lip, the times I dont are normally when I have had a few beers and I get pissed! quite literally!

Its tough to do but Yes the best thing is to ignore anyone who makes inflammatory remarks, being ignored is much more annoying for people that are trying to provoke a reaction, if everybody ignored people who troll then they do eventually go away, have you noticed how this years power assist posts compare to last year? I can think of 2 people that used to post on there that now dont, it kind of proves my point.

I promise I wont rise again :twisted:

Knoxie
Arguing with certain people is like racing Lycras on a 5000 watt ebike. It's fun for a while, but gets boring because you already know the outcome.

Post Reply