Bafang BBSHD, 1000W, 68mm-120mm BB

[tomjasz]

I would like to see something like it with a replaceable sprocket section.

Beyond bling or getting a chainring size not available from the steel OEM election, I don't see the advantage of a "purty" soft metal chainring. And what's a few grams, or ounces on a motorized bike. Meh.

 

[Ade]

I would like to see something like it with a replaceable sprocket section.

Beyond bling or getting a chainring size not available from the steel OEM election, I don't see the advantage of a "purty" soft metal chainring. And what's a few grams, or ounces on a motorized bike. Meh.

It's not about weight, besides number of teeth it's about offset to help the chain line and also narrow-wide to help with chain retention. I guess that CNCing them produces better results than stamping out steel as well.

 

[crossbreak]

[..]
for half that price you can get the 48v 1680w (3000w peak) cyclone that is twice power and 1kg lighter !

or for around the same price get the 1680w AFT if you want better quality and twice the power if the BBS03.

Ás always, there sadly is no free lunch. We dont know the figures for the 1680W AFT nor the BBSHD.

But we know the ones for BBS02 and Cyclone 1200W. If measured at the cranks, the BBS02 has a Km² of 74, the cyclone has only 60. So from a technical point of view the BBS02 is the bigger motor than the cyclone "1200W" and has less copper loss at the same output torque at the cranks

The cyclone just pays off as it may crank much faster than the rider can, shifting late and using lower gears. But i think this is not the primary intention of a middrive. The cyclone/AFT is much too load for most people anyway

 

[tomjasz]

I would like to see something like it with a replaceable sprocket section.

Beyond bling or getting a chainring size not available from the steel OEM election, I don't see the advantage of a "purty" soft metal chainring. And what's a few grams, or ounces on a motorized bike. Meh.

It's not about weight, besides number of teeth it's about offset to help the chain line and also narrow-wide to help with chain retention. I guess that CNCing them produces better results than stamping out steel as well.

Apparently I'm one of the lucky ones. The kit lines up perfectly on 4 frames.

 

[StinkyGoalieGuy]

Apparently I'm one of the lucky ones. The kit lines up perfectly on 4 frames.

So you already have one of the BBS-HD units? Have you already done a review? What kind of power have you been able to run through it?

 

[Ade]

Beyond bling or getting a chainring size not available from the steel OEM election, I don't see the advantage of a "purty" soft metal chainring. And what's a few grams, or ounces on a motorized bike. Meh.

It's not about weight, besides number of teeth it's about offset to help the chain line and also narrow-wide to help with chain retention. I guess that CNCing them produces better results than stamping out steel as well.

Apparently I'm one of the lucky ones. The kit lines up perfectly on 4 frames.

Yes, but how many fat, 100mm BB conversions have you made?

 

[tomjasz]

Regardless, I'd still prefer steel teeth.

 

[Lurkin]

^Agreed. I'm really hoping this motor has an increased offset chainring (due to motor width) which will solve this issue for BBS01/02 users providing both a more durable and more affordable solution. Definitely looks like there will be room for material to be removed from it to reduce weight...

 

[Ade]

Regardless, I'd still prefer steel teeth.

Have you ever heard of anyone wearing out a quality alloy chainring?

And have you ever seen a rusted steel chainring?

 

[speedmd]

You could use stainless. And Yes, the alloy rings will wear out very quickly in the smaller tooth counts with this power level. At least three times quicker than good quality steel. No need to limit manufacturing methods to stamping out crappy plate either.

 

[Ade]

You could use stainless. And Yes, the alloy rings will wear out very quickly in the smaller tooth counts with this power level. At least three times quicker than good quality steel. No need to limit manufacturing methods to stamping out crappy plate either.

Realistically, what do you think the timeframe is on that 3x less longevity and would it really make a difference to the majority of people running 42t chainrings?

 

[speedmd]

Alloy ring would be hard pressed to last a season in on/off road use in moist conditions. There are posters that toasted alloy rings in less than a few months use. Search the BBS thread and you can contact them to get further details. Chains would hopelessly suck on them after a few rides if I recall.

 

[Ade]

Alloy ring would be hard pressed to last a season in on/off road use in moist conditions. There are posters that toasted alloy rings in less than a few months use. Search the BBS thread and you can contact them to get further details. Chains would hopelessly suck on them after a few rides if I recall.

Well, I've been commuting on my bike with a Lekkie chainring every day since early in the year and I see no sign of wear yet.

Perhaps some need steel but I'm guessing your average rider wouldn't notice the difference - all else being equal, which they aren't as smaller chainrings wth a good offset and are narrow-wide just don't exist in steal.

 

[Phife]

Alloy ring would be hard pressed to last a season in on/off road use in moist conditions. There are posters that toasted alloy rings in less than a few months use. Search the BBS thread and you can contact them to get further details. Chains would hopelessly suck on them after a few rides if I recall.

I got the Lekkie Bling Ring on my 750w BBS02 and I do mostly hard trail riding, single track and long distance rides. Ive had it on all season and no signs of wear on it. Over 5 months with around 1200kms on it.

I think the statement that it would be hard pressed to last a season is not correct, I expect mine to last several seasons.

 

[speedmd]

Wet / moist conditions? No signs of wear? You lost me. Sure they will last for some time with a well lubed clean chain, but for most of the folks that do not live in dry climates it is a non starter paying for a relatively expensive / soft sprocket if you are in mud often if there is a choice of a steel ring with the same offset. The 1000W has a bunch more torque than the BBS02 also.

 

[Phife]

Wet / moist conditions? No signs of wear? You lost me. Sure they will last for some time with a well lubed clean chain, but for most of the folks that do not live in dry climates it is a non starter paying for a relatively expensive / soft sprocket if you are in mud often if there is a choice of a steel ring with the same offset. The 1000W has a bunch more torque than the BBS02 also.

Yeah, you got me there.. Where I live its very dry.. Not been in mud or much rain at all. Also, I should say, minor signs of wear.. The paint or anodizing on the sprocket teeth have worn away.

 

[Ade]

Wet / moist conditions? No signs of wear? You lost me. Sure they will last for some time with a well lubed clean chain, but for most of the folks that do not live in dry climates it is a non starter paying for a relatively expensive / soft sprocket if you are in mud often if there is a choice of a steel ring with the same offset. The 1000W has a bunch more torque than the BBS02 also.

Hm, torrential rain? Check. Snow, ice, slush and salt? Check. No problems here. Check.

I really don't know what you'd want. A steel chainring in the conditions I'd ride would be corroded - stainless would fair a little better with salt corrosion but would be softer steel so would wear more than plain steel anyway.

The fact is, alloy lasts long enough to be good enough, then, when you need it, you buy a new one. I mean, really, is $70 too much to shell out every couple of years?

 

[tomjasz]

Have you ever heard of anyone wearing out a quality alloy chainring?

Yes, in 50 years of riding I've seen and worn out a few.

And have you ever seen a rusted steel chainring?

No, none of mine, I tend to my bikes basic maintenance. I've seen completely neglected and poorly maintained chainrings rusted. I have a 1974 Schwinn, original chainring and no rust other than some surface pits.

But then I don't claim to be an expert with sarcastic responses. :wink:

 

[tomjasz]

I mean, really, is $70 too much to shell out every couple of years?

Yes especially when it's just bling. :lol:

Each to their own. We all have own own way.

 

[Ade]

I mean, really, is $70 too much to shell out every couple of years?

Yes especially when it's just bling. :lol:

Each to their own. We all have own own way.

How can you say, "it's just bling" when there is nothing else around that can provide the functionality I and others need besides other, very similar, alloy chainrings.

If you're putting together a standard bike, fine, use a standard steel chainring, but some of us need more than they provide. If someone came out with a steel alternative, I'd take a look, but there is no such option and for now, the alloy chainrings out there do a great job and yes, they look pretty doing it.

 

[Lurkin]

 

[speedmd]

Postby Ade » Tue Nov 03, 2015 5:26 pm

speedmd wrote:
Wet / moist conditions? No signs of wear? You lost me. Sure they will last for some time with a well lubed clean chain, but for most of the folks that do not live in dry climates it is a non starter paying for a relatively expensive / soft sprocket if you are in mud often if there is a choice of a steel ring with the same offset. The 1000W has a bunch more torque than the BBS02 also.


Hm, torrential rain? Check. Snow, ice, slush and salt? Check. No problems here. Check.

I really don't know what you'd want. A steel chainring in the conditions I'd ride would be corroded - stainless would fair a little better with salt corrosion but would be softer steel so would wear more than plain steel anyway.

The fact is, alloy lasts long enough to be good enough, then, when you need it, you buy a new one. I mean, really, is $70 too much to shell out every couple of years?
Nakamura bigbob 4.0 Fatbike with Bafang BBS02 750W (100mm conversion), 10Ah bottle battery with 25R cells.
Ade
100 W
100 W

Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 4:29 am

So you mostly road ride to work (from your original posts) and you can expect to have the same results as folks slogging through muddy trails most of the time. You have a system with much lower torque and guessing the same results will be found with much higher torque levels. Your OK with 3 times the wear and 3 times the money. Stainless is a big subject. Very big... several hundred pages in the ASTM metals handbook. You need to learn a bit about it before making general wear claims. I get it, your happy with your purchase, but it is clearly a issue that folks have had with soft metal rings already on low powered bikes. Making the thin tooth ring replaceable rather than replacing the heavily machined entire center section with it is just a good option IMO for this power level. Feel free to disagree.

 

[crossbreak]

Hope there will be a 52T chainring so my gears last for a while. IMO for a 1000W middrive this fits fine in combination with a 12-36T cassette. In first gear i can still pedal well up a 30% inclination at 85rpm cadence and 15kph. 1000W Motor power + 200W human power is sufficient for that and a 100kg bike+rider weight

Never had a hill that i could not climb with my Bafang BPM middrive setup that does 1000W ouptput continuously. Math is so simple. A 1000W with 52T will climb hills better than a 750W with 42T

The large 52T will go easy on the chain since you use larger rear sprockets automatically and more often, this makes a big difference for the wear in my experience. But yet I cannot find a 52T replacement for the BBSHD maybe again i have to make my own adapters maybe the 130mm BCD chainrings can fit with such an adapter? Only time will tell

Anyway, $660+ $80 shipping is $740 not sure if I want to be the guinea big again :lol: but at least it seems like it is now available for shipping here: http://www.aliexpress.com/item/48v-1000w-bafang-BBSHD-electric-bike-kit/32479722197.html?spm=2114.01020208.3.19.yf6ARI&ws_ab_test=searchweb201556_3_71_72_73_74_75,searchweb201644_5,searchweb201560_9

 

[Ade]

So you mostly road ride to work (from your original posts) and you can expect to have the same results as folks slogging through muddy trails most of the time. You have a system with much lower torque and guessing the same results will be found with much higher torque levels. Your OK with 3 times the wear and 3 times the money. Stainless is a big subject. Very big... several hundred pages in the ASTM metals handbook. You need to learn a bit about it before making general wear claims. I get it, your happy with your purchase, but it is clearly a issue that folks have had with soft metal rings already on low powered bikes. Making the thin tooth ring replaceable rather than replacing the heavily machined entire center section with it is just a good option IMO for this power level. Feel free to disagree.

No one is disputing that steel is a harder metal than aluminium - we'll have to see if the BBSHD wears out these alloy chainrings so quickly that they become useless. I'm guessing that for the majority of people, for normal use, it won't be an issue - especially if the alternative is to have a steel chainring with a crappy chainline (seriously wearing in itself) or a chaingring too large for the task at hand.

And I'm not sure why you think a muddy trail is much harder on the drive train than winter road riding with all the crap and salt that goes with it.

 

[TorEddy]

Disapointed:-(

http://electric-fatbike.com/2015/11/04/bbshd-first-impressions-meh/