• Hello ES! We could use some help to get us past the finish line on building the new knowledgebase for the forum.
    Can you donate? Please see our fundraising page. Thank you!

CYC Photon Gen 2?

That gearing sounds about right for 500W to always be a problem. Mine is 0.8 and I'd say 350W is about where I've always started spinning, but thats also my point, unlike top speed gears, we all have higher gears, and we would generally agree that it is easiest to ride bikes moving faster than the slow granny gearing, and we would also agree that the granny gears have the potential to wear very quickly (often aluminum for 1x conversions)... so we can just gear up and move faster for that input power. For myself, I generally prefer climbing at at least 10 mph if I'm not pushing myself to completely minimize motor assist, and that requires gearing of about 1.3 to climb at a comfy 90 rpm cadence (4th from the top on my cassette), and a good bit of power depending on the hill.

Anyways back on topic for this motor. JNO just posted a video where the torque was a bit suspect to me, but I dont know what his gearing range was. The top speed he showed also was irrelevant because its clear the bike was spinning out using only a 38:11 top gear.
Some more hill climbing tests with average fitness rider. Speeds taken at certain gearing and hill grades:

0.7 gear ratio:
2kw full throttle: 30% 11-12mph, 33% 10mph
250w pas: 30% 5mph, 33% 4mph
500w pas: 30% 5-6mph, 33% 5mph

1.3 gear ratio:
1kw pas: 30% 8-9mph, 33% 8mph.

1.7 gear ratio:
2kw pas: 30% 12mph, 33% 10-11mph

2.1 gear ratio:
2kw pas: 33% 5mph (standing pedal)

Since I can get 8mph with 1kw on 30%+ grades, I assume for the steepest climbs you’ll encounter on 99% of trails (~25%), 1kw will be needed to get a solid 10mph there.
 
Last edited:
I did some assist tuning today, testing both low/high gears and low/high PAS. Here’s what I found, maybe someone can explain the mechanics better, but most of it behaves pretty much how you’d expect.

Low sensitivity reads light pedaling as nothing, medium pedaling as light, and hard pedaling as medium. It’s good if you don’t want the motor to engage accidentally with light pedaling (though cadence start usually prevents that unless you’ve turned it off). It also makes the motor feel less eager overall, but if your legs are weak, the motor might not start at all.

High sensitivity detects light pedaling instantly and treats it like medium effort, and medium like hard. I haven’t had any issues with this mode; I like how it gives quicker acceleration from a stop. Even if the watts are low, it engages right away and gives you something to work with.

Low amplification is probably the most useful adjustment for me. It lets you use a “one-size-fits-all” power mode (like 2 kW) by keeping assist moderate (around 250 W) under normal pedaling, but still leaving plenty of reserve power when you push harder. It prevents spin-out and gives smoother, more proportional power delivery. I prefer this setting overall, though on low PAS it can feel sluggish, like the system is fighting for crumbs.

High amplification gives you more power for less effort, ideal if you want to pedal lightly but still get a big boost. It works similarly to high sensitivity, but with a stronger effect. Think of it this way: high sensitivity reads your effort as ×2, while high amplification feels more like ×2.5. The main difference is that sensitivity affects how easily the system detects your pedaling, while amplification affects how much power it adds once it detects it.

Low ramp-up time gives a very quick response, instant bursts that can feel jerky, like each individual pedal stroke is being assisted. It can be useful in technical riding where precision matters, but it feels harsh on high assist levels due to the torque. It’s similar to mashing pedals up a steep hill.

High ramp-up time smooths things out, spreading assist between pedal strokes but letting the motor run off slightly after you stop pedaling. This can be managed with a backward-pedal motor cutoff. Full power delivery feels delayed at first, but it’s barely noticeable once you’re pedaling steadily.

These settings are all situational, but personally I find myself preferring the higher settings for most use cases, and not surprisingly, the defaults are already close to high.

Changing PAS levels often feels similar to adjusting sensitivity or amplification at max pas, since both affect how your pedaling effort is translated into motor power. PAS level directly scales the target power output (like saying “only give me 30%, 60%, or 100% of the available motor power”). However, I sometimes prefer fine-tuning with low amplification at high power (for example, 2 kW) instead of switching to a lower PAS mode. It feels like a more precise way to dial in assist, rather than jumping between fixed levels like 250 W or 500 W. The trade-off is that if you get tired and want to pedal lightly, you don’t have a higher assist mode to fall back on since you’re already maxed out. Also, while I did test all these settings on low pas on all gears and not just high pas, I wouldn’t do any setting adjustments (setting lower than default) for low pas, it just makes the motor extremely weak, sluggish, and unresponsive, which is why I haven’t really mentioned the low pas results. It’s definitely a very situational thing.

Overall, sensitivity and amplification work similarly, the key difference is that sensitivity determines when the motor engages, while amplification determines how much power you get once it does.
 
Last edited:


I would assume the defaults are different for the Gen2 but I think most of the rest applies.
Interesting, first video was pretty much in line with what I observed. Does the second one mention PAS tuning? All I heard was “skipping over PAS”.

As far as sensor sensitivity, I don’t think it was just initial engagement, it seemed to alter the watts as well. If it was just initial engagement that would make it a lot simpler but I’m pretty sure it wasn’t just that.

The ramp up time explanation matches, low for tech, high for smooth ride.

Amplifier explanation matches. When he said it’s good for if “it feels like the support of the motor runs out”, that’s exactly why I said I liked that for the 2kw mode specifically (unusable on low pas). Though like I said at the end, it’s essentially the same experience as just turning the assist level up, which can be better in some situations like if you’re unable to push harder for full power, keep amplification high and switch to higher pas. You only run out of assist if you’re not switching pas modes, which can happen if you’re focused on a climb.
 
Last edited:
Does the second one mention PAS tuning? All I heard was “skipping over PAS”.
No, I guess because CYC knew they had scheduled a PAS specific video. I included it because others who are new here may be unaware these exist.

There are a lot of options in the app, and the big deal about CYC is that BT connection, settings and firmware upgrades are easy and are all free. Not the case for many other systems unfortunately. The idea of paying $1000s for an ebike and then having to pay a shop to adjust settings or upgrade firmware is truly insane.
 
No, I guess because CYC knew they had scheduled a PAS specific video. I included it because others who are new here may be unaware these exist.

There are a lot of options in the app, and the big deal about CYC is that BT connection, settings and firmware upgrades are easy and are all free. Not the case for many other systems unfortunately. The idea of paying $1000s for an ebike and then having to pay a shop to adjust settings or upgrade firmware is truly insane.
True, also I should mention the Bluetooth connection issues I had in the beginning have gone away.
 
So turns out GPS’s aren’t that accurate. Had 5 running at the same time, with much different speed stats. Full 2kw throttle, avg speed ranged from 20-24mph. The top speed was fairly consistent at ~38mph, but one listed ~40mph and strava listed 41.6mph
 
Some more hill climbing tests with average fitness rider. Speeds taken at certain gearing and hill grades:

0.7 gear ratio:
2kw full throttle: 30% 11-12mph, 33% 10mph
250w pas: 30% 5mph, 33% 4mph
500w pas: 30% 5-6mph, 33% 5mph

1.3 gear ratio:
1kw pas: 30% 8-9mph, 33% 8mph.

1.7 gear ratio:
2kw pas: 30% 12mph, 33% 10-11mph

2.1 gear ratio:
2kw pas: 33% 5mph (standing pedal)

Since I can get 8mph with 1kw on 30%+ grades, I assume for the steepest climbs you’ll encounter on 99% of trails (~25%), 1kw will be needed to get a solid 10mph there.
BBSHD with 14s6p Samsung 35e 90% (73.5 miliohm internal resistance @ 1kHz, 6 charge cycles) battery can manage only 15-16 km/h on 22% grade in 42t:51t gear 700c wheels and 120kg system weight, 55mm Continental eContact plus tyres, DT Swiss e1900 Spline wheels, in 7°C at 25A current draw with full throttle.
BBSHD could achieve 15mph with unused battery in 40t:34t ratio, 20°C, 117kg system weight on 18% grade at 25A current only once with 37mm 700c Continental Contact Urban tyres and Cyclecross wheels.
 
Last edited:
Attached here in case of link rot
Just be aware that especially because this is an early release of the manual, the file posted here may quickly be outdated and it will be preferable to download the original from CYC unless no longer available. There is considerable room for confusion as CYC don't seem to enforce strict or understandable version controls.
 
I noticed the speed sensor without the adapter is meant to be the perfect length. Wondering if it’s possible to splice the adapter connection to the normal wire to shorten it

I also got a slight hunch running my motor hard in various odd ways has impacted it or maybe I’m just getting used to it , at max power it feels like slightly slower top speed on average and slightly louder (it used to be completely silent on 250w mode). I’ll keep pushing it, time will tell
 
Last edited:
Just be aware that especially because this is an early release of the manual, the file posted here may quickly be outdated and it will be preferable to download the original from CYC unless no longer available. There is considerable room for confusion as CYC don't seem to enforce strict or understandable version controls.

We could update it.
It's a good idea to grab tings when you can, never know when a future revision will disclude something useful.
 
Hey guys, I'm looking to buy a Photon Gen 2 in the next couple days and I'm just trying to decide on the project bike. Looking at a full suspension mountain bike to build as I live about 1/8th mile from trail heads that have hundreds and hundreds of miles of trails. You can almost ride from LA to San Diego where I'm at, all offroad. I'm caught up on 27.5" vs 29" wheels and the amount of clearance. I had a hardtail diamondback 29er that I put a BBS02 and 48v battery on years ago. It was a blast, but that BBS02 really hung down there and I bashed it a few times. I would like to keep it tucked up as much as possible, but have found a couple 27.5" bikes at really good prices since 29s seem to be the current coolaid in the MTB community. Anyone have any insight? Do I really need that extra 3/4" clearance?
 
The biggest problem is modern full suspension usually has a frame design that comes parallel to the bottom bracket before bending up so the motor hangs straight down. The older suspension bikes usually with 26 wheels avoid this problem. Then putting a battery on a full suspension can be a problem. I run a Bbso2 on a hardtail and it tucks up against the frame pretty much out of the way so if you were able to bash one like that, you don't want a modern full suspension frame.
 
If the controller on these is still VESC based like the gen 1 it doesn't look like CYC has paid their lip service absolute bare minimum effort to open source yet. Last update to their GitHub was over a year ago. Even with the gen 1 I was convinced they were holding back the real source though since the UART messages I captured did not match what the source said they put out.

Is disappointing, the hardware on this seems awesome. Community contributions could only improve it.
 
Hey guys, I'm looking to buy a Photon Gen 2 in the next couple days and I'm just trying to decide on the project bike. Looking at a full suspension mountain bike to build as I live about 1/8th mile from trail heads that have hundreds and hundreds of miles of trails. You can almost ride from LA to San Diego where I'm at, all offroad. I'm caught up on 27.5" vs 29" wheels and the amount of clearance. I had a hardtail diamondback 29er that I put a BBS02 and 48v battery on years ago. It was a blast, but that BBS02 really hung down there and I bashed it a few times. I would like to keep it tucked up as much as possible, but have found a couple 27.5" bikes at really good prices since 29s seem to be the current coolaid in the MTB community. Anyone have any insight? Do I really need that extra 3/4" clearance?
As someone else said a non-straight downtube wouldn’t be ideal. Even though i have a hard tail my downtube has welds that prevent the motor from fully tilting up, I haven’t hit it yet but I feel like I might get close, just wouldn’t take the chance on something lower. I also have 29ers which help.

As for battery setup on a full suspension, I’m looking to change my setup to have small battery hang below the downtube for better handling, I don’t really care about fitting a fat battery in my triangle anymore. If you need more range just swap with another small battery. It’s faster to charge separate batteries as well, and less weight on the bike. If you can figure out how to mount multiple small batteries simultaneously you will also get insanely high output like what’s used on some high power setups. Downside: multiple batteries come with slightly more overall weight and size per wh, and more expensive
 
Last edited:
Hey guys, I'm looking to buy a Photon Gen 2 in the next couple days and I'm just trying to decide on the project bike. Looking at a full suspension mountain bike to build as I live about 1/8th mile from trail heads that have hundreds and hundreds of miles of trails. You can almost ride from LA to San Diego where I'm at, all offroad. I'm caught up on 27.5" vs 29" wheels and the amount of clearance. I had a hardtail diamondback 29er that I put a BBS02 and 48v battery on years ago. It was a blast, but that BBS02 really hung down there and I bashed it a few times. I would like to keep it tucked up as much as possible, but have found a couple 27.5" bikes at really good prices since 29s seem to be the current coolaid in the MTB community. Anyone have any insight? Do I really need that extra 3/4" clearance?
I wouldn't get hung up on wheel size alone, my 27.5+ wheels are not far different from y 29" with smaller tires. What I would pay attention to is frame design since this can dramatically increase motor clearance, as well as BB height from the frame geometry. For some styles of modern bikes, geometry has increased BB clearance and the trend to larger size bikes over the past 10 years has also helped. My 2014 Stumpjumper is L, about the same size as my modern M bikes.

edit: the difference between my 29" and 27.5" wheels is about 10mm at the axle. That is less significant than the effect most bike geometry or suspension sag would have. Sure, more is nice, but there are other tradeoffs to be made. 27.5 might be cheaper secondhand.

I would not use any frame that wasn't Boost and I wouldn't use any 26" frame either - in general too cramped and tend to have lower BBs and less room in the frame for batteries. Get the right style of bike for the riding you will actually do (rather than possibly maybe perhaps do one day).
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't get hung up on wheel size alone, my 27.5+ wheels are not far different from y 29" with smaller tires. What I would pay attention to is frame design since this can dramatically increase motor clearance, as well as BB height from the frame geometry. For some styles of modern bikes, geometry has increased BB clearance and the trend to larger size bikes over the past 10 years has also helped. My 2014 Stumpjumper is L, about the same size as my modern M bikes.

I would not use any frame that wasn't Boost and I wouldn't use any 26" frame either - in general too cramped and tend to have lower BBs and less room in the frame for batteries. Get the right style of bike for the riding you will actually do (rather than possibly maybe perhaps do one day).
I heard boost is good too. I happen to have boost on mine.
 
I heard boost is good too. I happen to have boost on mine.
Apart from future-proofing, the through-axle is IMNHO important. e-bikes are heavier and can easily be travelling a twice the speed if you were pedaling, which means the bike is dealing with 4x the energy. Stronger wheels, bigger brakes and solid axles are all worth the extra weight when it counts.
 
Does anyone have the SW102T display in the Gen2?
If so, does the auto-power-off work?
For me, regardless what timeframe in minutes I configure, it does not power off.
Despite that, the Gen2 is a super motor. Have it on two MTB installed, as upgrade from Gen1.
Torque sensor mode feels even smoother and more natural now compared to Gen1. Power is enormous, did not yet manage to get into thermal throttling, even when climbing the hills here with 2kW throttle.
Wondering now how good reliability will be, with Gen1 we had several faults...
 
Just installed a Photon 2 on my 2017 Santa Cruz Chameleon. Its good match, tucks up close to the frame nicely. Currently using a 36t chain ring, I figure there is clearance for at least a 38, maybe even a 40t. Still waiting for battery to arrive, looking forward to getting it finished.

On a side note, for people looking for a full suspension option, DIY carbon bikes has a full sus frame that might be a good candidate for a photon, it has a straight down tube and a decent amount of room for a battery. Its got a press fit bottom bracket but there is an available conversion kit from cyc that should work. The geo is pretty modern as well if you are ok using a carbon frame.

IMG_8650.jpg
 
Efficiency?

Can anybody compare the real world efficiency of the Photon and the Gen 2, preferably using as many similar factors as possible - ideally same frame and battery?
 
Back
Top