Crank Motor vs Hub Motor

cgattny

1 µW
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
4
Help! I am considering the R11 model sold by R Martin. He states the following on his website

Our 200 watt crank motors are much more efficient than hub motors. We get more torque on these than hub motors than a true 500 watt hub motor.

I am a newbie. Are there advantages to the crank motor over the hub motor.

R11 has a 200W brushless crank motor.

Thanks. Curt
 
The advantage is that the power goes through the gearing. This means better acceleration and the ability to use low gears to go up steeper inclines than hub motors can, albeit slowly. On flat land, hub motors might last longer because they don't have any gears to wear out and might be a bit quieter also.
 
I've not been impressed by the motors that drive a special crank and bolt on any bike like the cyclone. But the ones that are built into the bottom bracket are nice looking to me. HTB Terry is also selling them, or similar ones.

The advantages are twofold, one, good torque, so it may climb nice. I doubt it will be very fast climbing hills though, 200 watts is 200 watts. geared, or no geared, a certain amount of energy is needed to lift a given weight up a hill at a given speed. a 500 watt version would be more like it to me.

The other main advantage is the bike has normal wheels. So fixing a flat does not involve a hubmotor, and the bike will have a more normal feel, without one wheel being all heavy. With no hubmotor, you have no worries about dropouts and torque arms, front or back motor, etc etc.
 
dogman said:
I've not been impressed by the motors that drive a special crank and bolt on any bike like the cyclone. But the ones that are built into the bottom bracket are nice looking to me. HTB Terry is also selling them, or similar ones.

Dogman... I believe you are referring to HighTekBikes? I don't see a BB motor on their site. Can you point us to it? thanks!
 
It was right on their front page when I just went. http://www.hightekbikes.com/

What dogman said about 500w vs 200w. I should qualify what I said about hill climbing ability to: going through the gears is the most efficient way to use any given motor. So a 200w BB drive should get really good range, but might not climb any better than a 500w hub.

With a geared setup you have to remember that the motor makes full power at half its no-load speed, but draws a lot of amps there and is not full efficiency.

Full power is ok for short periods such as small hills and during acceleration, but for cruising you want the motor to run at close to its no-load speed.
 
Exactly right gogo. I definitely think more and more, ebikes will be using gearmotors when they need to climb hills. But a 500 watt dd motor is not an apples to apples comparison to a 200 watt gearmotor. I think you need 500 watts on any motor to get up hills well. And more will get up the hill faster.

But for flat ground riding, it's hard to beat a good dd motor wound for the speed the rider likes for efficiency.

Another issue is one seller takes a 20 amp controller and 36v battery and calls it 500 watts, while another calls it 800.

For those that don't know it, the way to get a motor to run at close to no load is called pedaling. Select a speed, and pedal enough to just go one mph faster, or more. At lower speeds, like 15-20 mph, this can really work good, and get you amazing range.
 
Those claims of efficancy should come with a disclaimer. Going through the gears allows better torque multiplication, so its possable for a 200watt motor to have more torque than a 500 watt direct drive motor. it also allows the motor to run in its most efficent rpm range during acceleration.

But, every link in the chain, metephoricly speaking, is a loss of some efficancy, so at cruising speed, 2 equil powered motors, one going through the gears, the other being a direct drive, the direct drive motor will be more efficent.
 
200 watts may very well produce more torque through gears, chain drive or planetary, than 500 watts of direct drive even with a 20" wheel.

But laws of physics rule. It will take a certain amount of energy to lift a weight up an incline at a given speed. The 200 watt motor may climb a steeper hill, but at 4 mph, while the 500 watt motor may blow the 200 watt motor away on a less steep hill.

My experience, a 400 watt gearmotor climbed a 5% hill at 10 mph, The heinzmann. A 350 watt gearmotor climbed a 5% hill at about 12 mph, the Fusin. A 750 watt direct drive motor climbs the same 5% hill at 18 mph, the Aotema. On the 5% hill I'll take the direct drive. On hills above 10% I'll take the gearmotor. The ideal thing would be a 750 watt gearmotor. Something like the BMC 600 watt is as close as it gets untill we hear more about these new botom bracket gearmotors.
 
optibike started out life as a 400W model with claims it would outperform 750W dd thanx to the gearing dividend.
i guess they discovered it takes a long time to shift thru all those gears.
it quietly morphed to 800W & now 850W just to match a good ole cheap 750W hub, the original 400W not even offered any more i don't think.
yep, kenna change da laws of fizziks.
for the money it's more efficient to lose some pounds off yer ass that you don't haveta lift uphill.
 
1hp = the power rate needed to lift 550lbs at 1ft-second.

If E-bike and rider are 275lbs, and a 5% grade hill is being climbed at 10mph (14.6ft/s), then the rate of verticle climb is 0.73ft/sec. Our rider needs 272watts, plus whatever small amount of energy is used for the 10mph forward motion rolling resistance, maybe another 50w.

To make this climb happen, <350w of mechanical power are needed. The trick is, do you want to provide this <350w mechanical power from dumping it onto a hub motor at 50% efficiency (low speed on hubs is terrible efficiency), so you draw 700w off the batteries to get your 350w mechanical, or through something able to get high coil/magnet speeds (from gearing), so to provide the needed 350w of mechanical power with your 80% efficient setup, you only need to draw 440w from your battery to get the same work done.

Keep in mind, this is just a crude example. Motor and gearing choices, tire choices, and other factors all impact these numbers.

Or, you can do an RC motor build, and easily build up enough speed on the flat to coast up the hills, or wheelie up the very long hills :)
 
Thanks for the math, if I tried it, I'd screw it up. Your example shows why my dd motor( 7 count winding on 26") NEEDS to be going faster up the hill, and why I'd choose the gearmotor for a steeper hill, that would be climbed slower unless you were Dr Bass.

I did though, want to point out, that even a gearmotor needs more watts to climb the 5% hill at more than 10 mph. 10 mph up the hill is fantastic for most of us when newbies, but then we get used to 25 mph and want the same speed up the hills too.

But on 5% or less hills, I wouldn't sweat it about gearmotor or dd. Just get enough wattage to go a speed you like. Some people, actually want an ebike that is not faster than a regular bike, just easier to get up the hills. For them, a low watt gearmotor is perfection. But some of the gearmotor ad copy makes it sound like a direct drive sucks on any hill, and it simply isn't true if you have 500 watts or more. They, dd, just suck on hills above 10%, unless yer Dr Bass.

Another little known fact about a direct drive motor, is you can climb a very steep hill efficiently at low speeds. Again, pedaling plays a role, and you simply pedal at the bikes slowest comfortable cadence in the lowest gear you have. The apply only the smallest ammount of throttle it takes to make pedaling easier. Now you get up the hill with little heat produced, and very little wasted wattage from a stalled direct drive motor. We're talking 5 mph or less here, but you can climb 15% like this on a dd motor. This works by keeping the motor at low load, the reall inefficiency of a dd motor is high load at low speed, not just low speed alone. So low load low speed is not so bad.

This method is what I use when riding my fuji with the 5304 on it up really steep mt bike trails. Only on the really steep stuff, like short sections of 30% do I use full throttle, and I get range similar to cruising on flat ground at higher speeds. Sometimes less motor and more pedaling works great. And slowing down gets you there faster.
 
Just cause you're pedaling a bunch and dumping only a little power into the motor, it doesn't make it any more efficiency at low RPMs :) It just means you are making your body do more of the work, and of the energy the motor is getting, it's still being half wasted :) You're just choosing to half-waste less energy by having your legs supply the balance :)

But yes, if you can hit the hill fast enough, and manage to hold the speed, you could keep the hub motor in an efficient range as you climb, which would perhaps use more energy total, but of the energy you use, less would be getting wasted. :)
 
but ur talking about direct to the rear wheel, not thru the crank.
a double conversion, down to the crank then up to the wheel, is poor engineering.

an electrical analog would be when u start with a 72V ebike pack, then step down with a 12V DC converter just so u can feed the input of a 120VAC inverter to power whatever AC appliance.
72 volts DC is already practically on the doorstep of 120Vrms, & the only reason for eating all that conversion loss is that 72Vin ac inverters don't exist ots.
but if ur rolling ur own anyways such as with an r/c motor may as well take the most direct route & go single conversion.
 
liveforphysics said:
Just cause you're pedaling a bunch and dumping only a little power into the motor, it doesn't make it any more efficiency at low RPMs :) It just means you are making your body do more of the work, and of the energy the motor is getting, it's still being half wasted :) You're just choosing to half-waste less energy by having your legs supply the balance :)
Hummm... could you explain why then I observe the same thing dogman is talking about, using ebikes.ca's simulator? What I understand from playing with the simulator, when you are pushing less current into any motor you will have a better efficiency (considering equal speeds). For example a NC hub at 6mph gives 54% efficiency when producing 27Nm or torque, but efficiency drops to 37% when producing 67Nm of torque at the same 6mph.

This also would explain why my 2WD hub motor setup is actually more efficient than a single drive under heavy load conditions, since each motor is only running half the load and should thus be more efficient. I do realise that under light loads the extra losses of the second motor make the 2WD less efficient than a single hub... but the 2wd bike is not meant for light loads.
 
Yep. Agreed. Single conversion is going to be the best if you're motor has a low enough KV to make it happen in a single step-down. The problem is, its quite tough to make a quiet single step conversion go more than about 12:1. If you've got a motor in the >200kV range running 26" wheels on a 48v pack, it can be very tough to get the job done in 1 step, and very tough to keep the system quiet. This is why Matt made his drive with a reduction. Gary also has some extremely promising adapters to be used with some composite 219 chain sprokets that are going to make big single stage reductions into something quiet and easy to setup.
 
Hmm... I could be mistaken, but for current levels that aren't saturating the stator, I think the biggest factor in efficiency is the speed the magnets pass by the coils, which is constant in your example of course. I think if we looked at the formula used in the calculator, we could find where it starts to fall apart at very low speed conditions. But! I could be way track here...

ZapPat said:
liveforphysics said:
Just cause you're pedaling a bunch and dumping only a little power into the motor, it doesn't make it any more efficiency at low RPMs :) It just means you are making your body do more of the work, and of the energy the motor is getting, it's still being half wasted :) You're just choosing to half-waste less energy by having your legs supply the balance :)
Hummm... could you explain why then I observe the same thing dogman is talking about, using ebikes.ca's simulator? What I understand from playing with the simulator, when you are pushing less current into any motor you will have a better efficiency (considering equal speeds). For example a NC hub at 6mph gives 54% efficiency when producing 27Nm or torque, but efficiency drops to 37% when producing 67Nm of torque at the same 6mph.

This also would explain why my 2WD hub motor setup is actually more efficient than a single drive under heavy load conditions, since each motor is only running half the load and should thus be more efficient. I do realise that under light loads the extra losses of the second motor make the 2WD less efficient than a single hub... but the 2wd bike is not meant for light loads.
 
My impression was that I2R losses in windings were unavoidable. (more current = more losses)
 
liveforphysics said:
Yep. Agreed. Single conversion is going to be the best if you're motor has a low enough KV to make it happen in a single step-down. The problem is, its quite tough to make a quiet single step conversion go more than about 12:1. If you've got a motor in the >200kV range running 26" wheels on a 48v pack, it can be very tough to get the job done in 1 step, and very tough to keep the system quiet. This is why Matt made his drive with a reduction. Gary also has some extremely promising adapters to be used with some composite 219 chain sprokets that are going to make big single stage reductions into something quiet and easy to setup.

I don't understand why Matt is not using a 10-turn astroflight motor. That has a 135kv rating.

Staton Motors also has a double freewheel Nuvinci. Wonder if that would be more efficient or less.
 
Hmm, good point liveforphysics. But I do observe some increase in efficiency , mabye mostly just from going slower, and definitely the pedal contribution increases.

Anyway, what I observe is that if you stall the motor all the way up a hill, the motor gets real hot. So say the motor at full throttle can climb the too steep hill at 7 mph. But then you notice that at half throttle, you still go 7 mph and the motor doesn't get as hot. In my book, that's better efficiency. Mabye the difference is coming from my legs, and downshifting the bike. But it definetley does work with both my dd motors.

The point I'm trying to make is that when a direct drive motor does start to choke on a hill, backing off the throttle may work better. I say may, because it works better with some motors that with others. My old brushed motors that I started out with acted different, and would just choke on the hill worse if you backed off the throttle. But something about brushless hubs is different, and finding the sweet spot gets you up the hill without killing your range. Most motors will grunt a lille when they are working too hard, and I use the sound to help me know when to back off the throttle and downshift.

Finding the sweet spot is key to riding a dd motor well, but a gearmotor is designed to have a much broader range of speeds that are sweet spot. This gains them efficiency, but then gear friction makes some of that get lost. But they are lots easier to keep in the sweet spot.

Basicly I wanted to make the point, that dd motors are not totally useless on a steep hill, and with experience and finesse, what a dd motor can do can be expanded beyond what it can do in the hands of a newbie. At first I'd overload the motor all the time, and got shitty range. Now I ride more smooth, easing on the throttle at starts, and the range is much better. I try to ride with less load on the motor as much as I can unless I'm just tired out.
 
I haven't really been reading all the posts in this thread..

But the thing than concerns me about a Crank motor is reliability of the chain drive, especially if it goes through the derailleur.


I have enough trouble keeping my 9 speed mountain bike rear derailleur aligned and working well, with it STOCK.

If I was putting heaps of power through it, it would be a disaster.

My 7 speed cassette bike is much better - less finicky, more robust. But even if the gears where perfect, I have broken a derailleur, three bottom brackets, and had a crank fall off....and the hub motor got me home (I do a lot of k's and I do them hard - my bikes break....the hub motor is 100% rock solid).



Just something to keep in mind.
 
Hi all

I need to choose between a crank and the ezee geared hub motor. I'm in the mountainous terrain of the costa rican cloud forest and need to do some steep climbs which are too much for our Currie kits. If a geared hub gives comparable performance it's tempting to get something with less to go wrong. Eg mounting, dirt, wet, too many moving parts, only 12V, running at 66A on a battery with a max 10A output.

Thanks for any advice you can offer.

-rowan
 
dont be decieved by the name "Geared hub Motor" ... it just means that the motor turns faster than the wheel speed due to a reduction gear set,..it DOES NOT mean there are a range of gears for the motor to drive through.
When it comes to hill climbing, It will still not be as versatile as a motor driving through the external cassette gears .
 
terra-ist said:
Hi all

I need to choose between a crank and the ezee geared hub motor. I'm in the mountainous terrain of the costa rican cloud forest and need to do some steep climbs which are too much for our Currie kits. If a geared hub gives comparable performance it's tempting to get something with less to go wrong. Eg mounting, dirt, wet, too many moving parts, only 12V, running at 66A on a battery with a max 10A output.

Thanks for any advice you can offer.

-rowan

A geared hub motor offers you nothing more then what you already have with your Currie setup. Your currie is a fixed ratio chain drive to the rear wheel. As is a geared hub motor the only difference is no chain.

If the Currie is fine for you with the exception you need more hill climing power then consider adding a second motor. A lot of people make a new motor mount that holds twin motors. And convert to a 48v controller/throttle and twin battery packs (lifepo4 would be a major improvement). You wire the motors and batteries in series. This will double the bikes power and add some top speed and major low end torque if/when needed. But it will not double the batteries power consumption. If used the same way you corrently use it it will likely use very little added power. In fact it may actually use less battery power because the motors will not be over loading on those big hills. Other then the battery addition it's a cheap upgrade to the bike that works well. You may find this improvement works so well you will then want more speed and can change the freewheel gear ratio and up the max speed by 25+%.

Bob

Bob
 
Back
Top