Alan B
100 GW
Thanks for the update!
2 Speed Xiongda hubmotor
- Thread starter d8veh
- Start date
cycleops612
10 kW
Alan B said:
Silly suggestion #2 for better brains than mine
Using Suitably; strong, link sized & long length of chain & some correct thread bolts.
Bolt thru & secure two of the chainS links to the hub, so you can contrive torque, via a lever that can insert into any link (like a phillips head screwdriver shaft) .
Alan B
100 GW
I think this will result in the freewheel rotating. It only engages in the tightening direction.
I may not be understanding your suggestion correctly however.
I may not be understanding your suggestion correctly however.
Alan B said:
You are regressing from rational exchange to "Anything to make me right". Did you happen to notice that these posts are over 2 years old, and that NONE of them diss shift speed? The problems they DO address have been long since solved with improved controller function. As an actual USER, I continue to judge that although shift pausing is discernible , it poses NO barrier to actual operations. I.e. on almost no grade shifts (with both "heavy" and "light" loads, since, in spite of your mention of bike loads, there is no weight term in gravitational acceleration) does the bike slow down enough to force legs down. More to the point, the alternative of a motor twice as heavy, 2/3 as efficient, and 2-3* as expensive is not a viable option for most actual e bikers. Want an e motorcycle, buy one.
You continue to fail to point to current posts of users who (1) have sensible builds and (2) have actual design based auto shift problems. But I'l throw you a bone. If you want to diss Xiongda, I would focus on problems with their initial lube. The might have solved it, might not have. I'm happy with my easily executed relube job, per recommendations from this very thread. I'm up to ~1000 miles of service, at an average power use of over 500 watts, much of it with ~450# of load, uphill, and with maybe 1/4 mile of pedaled.......
Alan B
100 GW
Not interested in dissing Xionga. Just reviewing data.
Glad it's working out for you, I hope it is a great motor. 1000 miles is a good start. I think they made some mistakes with the lube, gear strength, clutch springs, the gear ratio, and they had quite a few controller problems. Reports show the power falls off in first gear significantly. Perhaps there isn't room in the motor to narrow the ratio, or on a really extreme hill it would be useful. Reminds me of the compound low first gearing in a trucks (that used to be common) that you skip over when starting out since it doesn't give enough speed to justify the time for an extra shift, so you just start in second unless there's a special need to crawl. This tradeoff has existed for much longer than the Xiongda hubmotor.
What speeds and power consumption do you see on gradients with your setup? Do you get to 500W in both gears? On what gradient?? Most reports that I've seen indicated the low gear didn't fully load the motor, only seeing 200W or so instead of the 500W commonly reported in high speed gear, but at some gradient the low speed gear load should rise.
Another way to look at the value of shifting: Compare accelerating from zero to some value of near max high speed on level ground in two ways. In one case you start in high and stay there. In the other case you start in low, shift, continue to the same max speed. What is the time (or distance) to the same near-max speed in each case? I haven't tried to simulate this, but in the shifting case you have more torque but waste time. Is the shift worth it? Does it help by reducing time to speed, or integrated power to accelerate to this speed?
My comparison application is for a lightweight folding bike using the XD vs BBS02, hardly a motorcycle. Not much reason to use a lightweight hubmotor on a heavy bicycle, for a few more pounds a full size gearmotor will perform better, however some may prefer the small motors. My folder has 20" wheels and starts out at around 25 pounds. With the BBS02 it weighs about 34 pounds w/o battery. So with the XD it might be 33 or 32 pounds, not much of a weight savings. The XD has two speeds with about a 1.8:1 ratio, the BBS has 8 speeds on this bike, spread across a 2.6:1 ratio (28:11, or it could be changed to 32:11 if needed). In my case the system weight will be a little over half yours for a reduction in load of around 450/250 or 1.8:1. The wheel is 25% larger, for a corresponding decrease in torque and increase in speed. The actual test bike will have both motors onboard for the testing since it is not that easy to remove the BBS02.
I plan to test with a small 52V 6AH 300wH Luna "Mighty Mini" 14S 2P 30Q 3.3 pound battery pack, so it won't add a lot of weight.
What tests should I run?
It will be interesting!
Have a great 2017!
Glad it's working out for you, I hope it is a great motor. 1000 miles is a good start. I think they made some mistakes with the lube, gear strength, clutch springs, the gear ratio, and they had quite a few controller problems. Reports show the power falls off in first gear significantly. Perhaps there isn't room in the motor to narrow the ratio, or on a really extreme hill it would be useful. Reminds me of the compound low first gearing in a trucks (that used to be common) that you skip over when starting out since it doesn't give enough speed to justify the time for an extra shift, so you just start in second unless there's a special need to crawl. This tradeoff has existed for much longer than the Xiongda hubmotor.
What speeds and power consumption do you see on gradients with your setup? Do you get to 500W in both gears? On what gradient?? Most reports that I've seen indicated the low gear didn't fully load the motor, only seeing 200W or so instead of the 500W commonly reported in high speed gear, but at some gradient the low speed gear load should rise.
Another way to look at the value of shifting: Compare accelerating from zero to some value of near max high speed on level ground in two ways. In one case you start in high and stay there. In the other case you start in low, shift, continue to the same max speed. What is the time (or distance) to the same near-max speed in each case? I haven't tried to simulate this, but in the shifting case you have more torque but waste time. Is the shift worth it? Does it help by reducing time to speed, or integrated power to accelerate to this speed?
My comparison application is for a lightweight folding bike using the XD vs BBS02, hardly a motorcycle. Not much reason to use a lightweight hubmotor on a heavy bicycle, for a few more pounds a full size gearmotor will perform better, however some may prefer the small motors. My folder has 20" wheels and starts out at around 25 pounds. With the BBS02 it weighs about 34 pounds w/o battery. So with the XD it might be 33 or 32 pounds, not much of a weight savings. The XD has two speeds with about a 1.8:1 ratio, the BBS has 8 speeds on this bike, spread across a 2.6:1 ratio (28:11, or it could be changed to 32:11 if needed). In my case the system weight will be a little over half yours for a reduction in load of around 450/250 or 1.8:1. The wheel is 25% larger, for a corresponding decrease in torque and increase in speed. The actual test bike will have both motors onboard for the testing since it is not that easy to remove the BBS02.
I plan to test with a small 52V 6AH 300wH Luna "Mighty Mini" 14S 2P 30Q 3.3 pound battery pack, so it won't add a lot of weight.
What tests should I run?
It will be interesting!
Have a great 2017!
Alan B
100 GW
I checked the front forks on the bike, the Xiongda motor is wide and may collide with the fork tubes if the blades are mounted too far out, best if they are flush with the inside of the fork tube. On this bike they are flush to the inside and should provide plenty of clearance. They are steel so reportedly no torque arm is required.
Samd
10 MW
Confused as hell on which motor to order so holding off. So many install width. Was really keen on rear disc model but i think its too wide.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Alan B
100 GW
The disc equipped motors do require additional width, that comment has been made many times. Even the front V brake motor is reportedly 105mm.
Samd
10 MW
155mm is 20mm over. Can it really be that much?
I've stretched plenty of motors into rear drops but thats insane.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've stretched plenty of motors into rear drops but thats insane.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
spinningmagnets
100 TW
Yes Sam, I agree. I would advise anyone to only use this motor if you are happy with rim-brakes / V-brakes...it was not designed to work with a disc, and so many customers demanded that feature that the company slapped it on, but...the disc version adds to the width.
Then again, I am quite happy with rim-brakes for the rear wheel
Then again, I am quite happy with rim-brakes for the rear wheel
cycleops612
10 kW
spinningmagnets said:
https://www.electricbike.com/2-speed-e-matic-xiongda/tidalforce1/
"A Warning
The NON disk brake Xiongda hubs (using V-brakes at the rim) will fit the common 100mm front / 135mm rear drop-outs. However, the disk brake hubs are about 10mm wider, so several builders who wanted to use disk brakes had to spread the drop-outs, which is only recommended on steel frames.
If you want to use one of these hubs (or two of them?) on a fat bike, order the hub with a drum brake, which has 166mm wide shoulders on the axles to fit the 170mm drop-outs on fat bikes."
pity.
I could live with rear calipers fine (but not all frames/forks have lugs for them).
a front disk is sure nice tho
so a no hassle front hub w/ disks would be a popular simple kit for many.
as is, this option would usually require new oddball 110mm forks (u cant stretch alloy or suspension forks)
cant say i fancy a front drum brake on a fatbike fork either, tho maybe dual drum/rim brakes?
On a lean bike standard bike, it seems rear hub w/ back caliper brakes is the only mainstream configuration, IF the frame provides caliper brake lugs.
Alan B
100 GW
I didn't count, and only am halfway through it. OtherDoc's broke twice, we saw that of course. The early grease was apparently killing gears. I don't know that there is enough data to analyze each failure's cause. Would be nice, but I'm not going to try to do that at this point.
The other problem with gear breakage is it can be caused by the controller. We see they had quite a few controllers with different firmware, and all it takes is one software mistake to pound the gears during a shift. An unloaded electric motor that is shifted into reverse in a retro direct system has the potential of building up a fairly large amount of torque, and when the clutch locks the gears are subjected to a large torque spike as they attempt to transfer the momentum of the neodymium and iron rotor to the wheel. Even if most shifts are soft, it only takes one combination of circumstances and incorrect software to basically hit the gears with a hammer, and plastic isn't very good for that.
I think it is important with this motor to use a sinewave controller that is measuring motor current. Otherdoc's controller was not sinewave. The controllers without actual motor current measurement can easily generate uncontrolled torque spikes and break gears in a geared hubmotor, we've seen that with other geared hubs.
It would be good to correlate gear and clutch failures with grease as well as controller. I don't think I'll do that. The thread is pretty long and there aren't that many failures.
There were clearly changes made to the controllers, motor structure, grease, and the gear plastic could have been changed easily (I would be surprised if it hasn't changed one or more times over the motor's history). So it could be misleading to make predictions about current production reliability from past production.
It is a concern, and we should test the new motors. I will test one if I get the opportunity, but my schedule for January is pretty full so it may take awhile.
The other problem with gear breakage is it can be caused by the controller. We see they had quite a few controllers with different firmware, and all it takes is one software mistake to pound the gears during a shift. An unloaded electric motor that is shifted into reverse in a retro direct system has the potential of building up a fairly large amount of torque, and when the clutch locks the gears are subjected to a large torque spike as they attempt to transfer the momentum of the neodymium and iron rotor to the wheel. Even if most shifts are soft, it only takes one combination of circumstances and incorrect software to basically hit the gears with a hammer, and plastic isn't very good for that.
I think it is important with this motor to use a sinewave controller that is measuring motor current. Otherdoc's controller was not sinewave. The controllers without actual motor current measurement can easily generate uncontrolled torque spikes and break gears in a geared hubmotor, we've seen that with other geared hubs.
It would be good to correlate gear and clutch failures with grease as well as controller. I don't think I'll do that. The thread is pretty long and there aren't that many failures.
There were clearly changes made to the controllers, motor structure, grease, and the gear plastic could have been changed easily (I would be surprised if it hasn't changed one or more times over the motor's history). So it could be misleading to make predictions about current production reliability from past production.
It is a concern, and we should test the new motors. I will test one if I get the opportunity, but my schedule for January is pretty full so it may take awhile.
spinningmagnets
100 TW
I would like to add that this motor has proven to be quite popular in China, so there have been a large volume of sales there. By this I mean that...the endless sphere buyers have been a small portion of the customer base, and any upgrades that have been demanded have been mostly from Chinese customer input over the last two years.
knutselmaaster
1 kW
I use the backwheel disc type with freewheel and I got it in without much trouble. Adding another 10mm for a cassette is too much imo on a standard 135mm dropout.
But with a powerful motor like the XD I do not really feel the need to have 2 more sprockets on the rear.
The automatic shifting works very good, it just doesn't anticipate but with the switch right under the thumb that isn't really a problem, I manually shift down if I know that I will want to be in low and stay there for a while.
I think that the effectiveness of the automatic shifting depends on a lot of elements like rider weight, input power (electronic aswell as muscle), wheel size and terrain.
In my case it works very good and I have never had it shift back and forth like someone reported earlier in this thread.
But with a powerful motor like the XD I do not really feel the need to have 2 more sprockets on the rear.
The automatic shifting works very good, it just doesn't anticipate but with the switch right under the thumb that isn't really a problem, I manually shift down if I know that I will want to be in low and stay there for a while.
I think that the effectiveness of the automatic shifting depends on a lot of elements like rider weight, input power (electronic aswell as muscle), wheel size and terrain.
In my case it works very good and I have never had it shift back and forth like someone reported earlier in this thread.
Ypedal
100 TW
I'm curious about the efficiency % at X rpm .. .. reductions = losses ..
Alan B
100 GW
I don't have a lot of faith in what the company says, of course they will probably tell you that they have made improvements. Over a period of time manufacturers make changes for many reasons that may be related to production efficiency, profitability, availability of parts or materials, changes of suppliers, and product improvement. With a product as complex as this it isn't certain that the end result of those changes can be predicted with any accuracy.
The amount of failure data in this thread is pretty small and somewhat old, most of it is helping people understand the product.
There is no value in the negative speculation that we are seeing here. We have little data on the Lunacycle variation, I don't see how we can somehow predict it more accurately than the Lunacycle testing that has already been done until independent evaluation takes place. Hounding a vendor to request factory information and reveal it publicly seems to be a veiled attack rather than an honest information request.
I suspect that if the Lunacycle testing had caused a lot of failures in this motor we would not see them as enthusiastic about them, and they would not be on their website. They are clearly looking for testers, would they do that if they knew about problems? We do need more independent testing. We welcome new test results.
The amount of failure data in this thread is pretty small and somewhat old, most of it is helping people understand the product.
There is no value in the negative speculation that we are seeing here. We have little data on the Lunacycle variation, I don't see how we can somehow predict it more accurately than the Lunacycle testing that has already been done until independent evaluation takes place. Hounding a vendor to request factory information and reveal it publicly seems to be a veiled attack rather than an honest information request.
I suspect that if the Lunacycle testing had caused a lot of failures in this motor we would not see them as enthusiastic about them, and they would not be on their website. They are clearly looking for testers, would they do that if they knew about problems? We do need more independent testing. We welcome new test results.
knutselmaaster
1 kW
Out of 15-20 what?
15-20 people that wrote here, what can you possibly want to try to proof with that data? How many people come to a forum to tell they don't have any problems? One goes to a forum to get help, to complain, to find people that ran into the same problems...
Man you're getting annoying by always repeating the same thing.
In every one of your posts there is IMO, well we all know your O now, stop repeating it endlessly.
If you're so sure of what you say, than don't post for some months and reply "I told you so" once your statements have been proven.
You don't add anything to the discussion and call yourself an expert because you read all of the topic :s
15-20 people that wrote here, what can you possibly want to try to proof with that data? How many people come to a forum to tell they don't have any problems? One goes to a forum to get help, to complain, to find people that ran into the same problems...
Man you're getting annoying by always repeating the same thing.
In every one of your posts there is IMO, well we all know your O now, stop repeating it endlessly.
If you're so sure of what you say, than don't post for some months and reply "I told you so" once your statements have been proven.
You don't add anything to the discussion and call yourself an expert because you read all of the topic :s
knutselmaaster
1 kW
You're repeating yourself again...
Because of your personal problem with some guy you are trashing a product he sells.
Other vendors, like myself, will loose clients too because of your clueless bashing of this product.
You have never ridden this motor, you've never even seen it, and you have no idea why some people had gear problems so you're not in a position to judge.
I'm sure that a small motor like this one doesn't like to be heavily charged on too high power, but that doesn't make it a bad product.
It might not be very suitable to the American market, where heavy non pedaling people put a 14s lipo on it, but that doesn't make it a bad product neither.
Do you realize that there are people, like me, that have kids to feed with the sales of this motor?
Personally I don't want to risk putting my money in worthless crap that makes my customers unsatisfied because in that case I risk not to be able to feed my family.
So I thoroughly test and investigate products before I put them in my shop.
This motor is very suitable for the European market, and it is very reliable when it remains under 400W.
Because of your personal problem with some guy you are trashing a product he sells.
Other vendors, like myself, will loose clients too because of your clueless bashing of this product.
You have never ridden this motor, you've never even seen it, and you have no idea why some people had gear problems so you're not in a position to judge.
I'm sure that a small motor like this one doesn't like to be heavily charged on too high power, but that doesn't make it a bad product.
It might not be very suitable to the American market, where heavy non pedaling people put a 14s lipo on it, but that doesn't make it a bad product neither.
Do you realize that there are people, like me, that have kids to feed with the sales of this motor?
Personally I don't want to risk putting my money in worthless crap that makes my customers unsatisfied because in that case I risk not to be able to feed my family.
So I thoroughly test and investigate products before I put them in my shop.
This motor is very suitable for the European market, and it is very reliable when it remains under 400W.
knutselmaaster
1 kW
Lol! There is 250w or 350w on the motor, the manufacturer documentation states that it is a 350w motor...
It is on the first page of this topic too.
For someone as well informed as you, you're ehrr, not that well informed actually.
I do not financially depend on this product, it is one of the products I sell.
Never put all my money on one single horse
And no I have no reliable statistics yet, and even if I had them, I'm not sure that sensitive business information like that should be made public that easily.
It is on the first page of this topic too.
For someone as well informed as you, you're ehrr, not that well informed actually.
I do not financially depend on this product, it is one of the products I sell.
Never put all my money on one single horse
And no I have no reliable statistics yet, and even if I had them, I'm not sure that sensitive business information like that should be made public that easily.
knutselmaaster
1 kW
The 400w comes from my personal experiences with this motor and the European law.
250w nominal is the max here, so 10A on a 36v li-ion as peak power is already barely legal.
Sound and vibration levels increase quickly when I put more power on them.
It doesn't break them though, I never managed to break one yet, and I did many thousands of km of mistreating.
And I don't know Eric, nor do I feel the need to cooperate with him.
Exchange automatic shifting for a color screen is not what I would do.
Maybe he has another version of the motor, for higher power.
About the efficiency, my bike with this motor certainly goes a bit further than a comparable testbike with q100, when using the same battery pack.
I think I get about 20% more distance with the 2speed.
The more low speed parts in the ride (traffic lights, Hills, bad roads), the bigger the difference gets.
But it really is hard to compare accurately as no 2 rides are the same.
250w nominal is the max here, so 10A on a 36v li-ion as peak power is already barely legal.
Sound and vibration levels increase quickly when I put more power on them.
It doesn't break them though, I never managed to break one yet, and I did many thousands of km of mistreating.
And I don't know Eric, nor do I feel the need to cooperate with him.
Exchange automatic shifting for a color screen is not what I would do.
Maybe he has another version of the motor, for higher power.
About the efficiency, my bike with this motor certainly goes a bit further than a comparable testbike with q100, when using the same battery pack.
I think I get about 20% more distance with the 2speed.
The more low speed parts in the ride (traffic lights, Hills, bad roads), the bigger the difference gets.
But it really is hard to compare accurately as no 2 rides are the same.
LewTwo
1 MW
knutselmaaster, I am more interested in the lower end use of this motor. If do not mind sharing a bit more information, can you give us any idea what Motor RPM vs wheel RPM vs ground speed are you using in the 36 Volt configuration (low and high). Thank thee.knutselmaaster said:
Alan B
100 GW
The squarewave controllers are much harder on the gears. I believe the company has moved on to sinewave controllers completely now and no longer uses the squarewave models. I would discount all failures with the squarewave controllers due to their lack of control of motor current and the resulting poor peak torque control. I suspect that many or most failures of the motor occurred with the less smooth squarewave controllers.
As we know so well here on ES the motor power ratings are nearly meaningless. The useful performance limits are more specific, like max RPM and max continuous current and torque. It is common to put a lot more power into a motor at high speed with lots of airflow and low loading, and even more for short periods. Referring to someone else's experience and power measurement as a Lie without proof sounds like trolling.
Bruce Teakle's blog indicates new improved gears on order around Sept 2016. He has thousands of km's on a couple of motors. He indicates the high speed sun gear is the one failing on his motors, after about 4000 km with one gear, (and another with flawed material failed sooner which is not very useful data). This is the gear that would likely take the most shock load from shifting and pre-shift stalling, so it is a prime candidate for improvement. If what Bruce says is true Xiongda did improve this gear at some point, possibly very recently. Perhaps it is totally fixed.
As we know so well here on ES the motor power ratings are nearly meaningless. The useful performance limits are more specific, like max RPM and max continuous current and torque. It is common to put a lot more power into a motor at high speed with lots of airflow and low loading, and even more for short periods. Referring to someone else's experience and power measurement as a Lie without proof sounds like trolling.
Bruce Teakle's blog indicates new improved gears on order around Sept 2016. He has thousands of km's on a couple of motors. He indicates the high speed sun gear is the one failing on his motors, after about 4000 km with one gear, (and another with flawed material failed sooner which is not very useful data). This is the gear that would likely take the most shock load from shifting and pre-shift stalling, so it is a prime candidate for improvement. If what Bruce says is true Xiongda did improve this gear at some point, possibly very recently. Perhaps it is totally fixed.
knutselmaaster
1 kW
Yes, they're all sine wave now.
The KT controller seems to do a better job for smooth and silent operation and has a lot more tweaking options too. At least, the ones I tested.
The difference in gear ratio gives the difference in max speed with no load.
It is 1,6 ratio, L is about 18km/h and H about 29km/h @36v on my 26" mtb.
The influence of load is a lot smaller in L than in H as 1,6 gear ratio already makes a difference (1,6x less slowdown) but the motor is also stronger in L and thus gets less slowdown from load. On hills it still does 15km/h.
The max speed setting only kicks in on H (of course)
My 28" city bike goes to 36km/h in H and about 22 in L on no load and 32km/h in H and 20km/h in L (18km/h in climb) @36v.
Of course, to achieve this high speed I ordered motors for smaller wheels than the ones I actually have.
And for the European policeman reading this: of course I only use them on private terrain ^^
The KT controller seems to do a better job for smooth and silent operation and has a lot more tweaking options too. At least, the ones I tested.
Hard to say...LewTwo said:
The difference in gear ratio gives the difference in max speed with no load.
It is 1,6 ratio, L is about 18km/h and H about 29km/h @36v on my 26" mtb.
The influence of load is a lot smaller in L than in H as 1,6 gear ratio already makes a difference (1,6x less slowdown) but the motor is also stronger in L and thus gets less slowdown from load. On hills it still does 15km/h.
The max speed setting only kicks in on H (of course)
My 28" city bike goes to 36km/h in H and about 22 in L on no load and 32km/h in H and 20km/h in L (18km/h in climb) @36v.
Of course, to achieve this high speed I ordered motors for smaller wheels than the ones I actually have.
And for the European policeman reading this: of course I only use them on private terrain ^^
cycleops612
10 kW
re:
My 28" city bike goes to 36km/h in H and about 22 in L on no load and 32km/h in H and 20km/h in L (18km/h in climb) @36v.
Of course, to achieve this high speed I ordered motors for smaller wheels than the ones I actually have.
I was under the impression u could opt for different gearing on geared hubs, then i was told u cant, now i hear you can.
cool u r using a 28" roadbike. i have long thought for a light rider, a drop bar roadbike ebike would be a blast - awesome power to weight (~12kg bike & 5kg XD motor or 2kg geared hub) & low road & wind friction.
My 28" city bike goes to 36km/h in H and about 22 in L on no load and 32km/h in H and 20km/h in L (18km/h in climb) @36v.
Of course, to achieve this high speed I ordered motors for smaller wheels than the ones I actually have.
I was under the impression u could opt for different gearing on geared hubs, then i was told u cant, now i hear you can.
cool u r using a 28" roadbike. i have long thought for a light rider, a drop bar roadbike ebike would be a blast - awesome power to weight (~12kg bike & 5kg XD motor or 2kg geared hub) & low road & wind friction.
markz
100 TW
I am just trying to find out if there are actual models for the 8fun bbs motors because I am surfing a website through a keyword search dribbling through the chinese garbage of english skills and ran across a bbs03. Most of the motors are under 500W like they list 250W, 350W, 400W, while I find ONE at 1000W and ONE at 750W. I better start my own thread.
Green Machine said:
