I just ordered a 19A 9-FET "Normal Controller" from Elifebike. I'm hoping it's the same as my original two KU93's from BMSbattery.
I assume you mean the QQ-500-9M. I have used that very same controller on my original MXUS and the Q100H. I'm sure you know, but the harness is made to connect to the kit supplied 3 light, one button throttle. I don't care much for that throttle and don't have room for it anyhow. So I had to add an on/off switch connected to the orange(looks like pink) and red wire connector.
The controller uses the common genaric 63V caps and has a double shunt.
It is a fairly "soft" controller, but on a fresh 12S, there can be some abruptness at start, but as the top charge "burns" off, it smooths out. It's not as powerful as my Infineon 22A, but it doesn't hammer either. Overall, these ELB controllers are the quietest i have used after the sine-waves.
It has a very fast activating Cruise, like 3 to 4 sec.s.
i haven't tried the PAS.
Unlike the KU93, it has a hard LVC of 42V, which I have tested. On my 12S pack, that left cell Voltage between 3.5V and 3.6V. That's a little low and some of my cells had started to stray, but they came back in line with a normal balance charge.
I have recently detuned my GT Idrive for slow speed "boardwalk" cruising(second link in my sig.)and replaced it with the very low-power QQ-250-6M+810.
I then used the QQ-500-9M on the rear Q100 CST 328 on my 2WD Rocky Mountain. But eventually, I felt that the 19 Amps were a little much for the CST and if I had to run a on/off switch, I might as well use the 810 Meter(which is useful on the 2WD anyhow). So I replaced it with the 17A QQ-350-9M+810. I actually went with 2) QQ-350-9M+810's and feel this is the best combo for the twin 328's yet(28 mph top speed, 25 mph on second speed setting.).
Although, I really din't feel much difference between the two ELB 9-FET controllers(I don't use any meters anymore other than Voltmeters).
was thinking more along the lines of the weight of the Big Apple and larger Slimed tube. I did yank the wheel and checked to see if it was still true on my stand. I did replace the 350g Slimed tube with a regular 216g tube. It didn't make a difference. Sitting up and releasing the handlebars the shake begins at around 14 mph and becomes violent very quickly at higher speeds. It could easily cause me to wipe out if I didn't lean forward and grab the bars. The bike is so stable otherwise but now that I think about it I don't believe in the 3+ years of riding this bike I ever tried it no-hands. I do remember always noting that the front fender would tend to shake some when I lifted one hand to drink from the water bottle, so perhaps this isn't a new phenomenon.
I did some reading into what causes this kind of shaking and there seems to be no cut and dried answer. Apparently the idea about a loose or worn headset is incorrect, though I checked it anyway. There is some consensus that it's a function of the frame stiffness, especially the top tube, along with weight distribution (the higher the worse it is) and geometry, especially of the front of the bike.
The bike is no longer made by Kent but there was no geometry info there anyway. I used this website http://www.bicyclecalculator.co.uk/createamap.htm
to model this bike as well as my Gravity bike and Nashbar frame that I do have some geometry info for. What the model showed was a large amount of "trail" for the Jeep bike. With the fork uncompressed I get 92mm which is far more than the Gravity (63mm w/700x38 tires) or the Nashbar (60mm with 700x32 tires). Larger wheels and tires also increase trail. The program indicates the 28x2.15 tires add about 7mm to this bike compared to 700x40's.
I was a motocycle mechanic for 25 years and almost every Japanese bike from the '70's and '80's would develop "The Shake", always at 40 mph. The standard shop joke was when the Cust. pleaded, "When I take my hands off the bars, the whole front of the bike starts to shake'. "Well, don't take take your hands off the bars"
But seriously, what i found that, what mitigated the phemon., after not over-loading the rear rack, was the type and profile of tire tread and construction. Some tires put down a contact patch that dampened the oscillation better than others.