CYC PHOTON

[hindesite]

Ok I have used a rubber mallet and the axle is now fully inserted but the plastic left bearing shield pop out in the process and I can't set it back

Moreover the axle O-rings seem to be pretty fragile (there are damaged by the sharp groove of the axle), CYC should include some spare

You won't be able to get it back in with the shaft in place. It should pop back with the shaft removed though - it is held in place by a slight lip on the inboard outer perimeter (see my photo). Maybe it wasn't fully seated and the shaft pushed it out.

 

[nervagon]

That seems similar to the version shown by Rikus in his video, mine is different to that, probably lighter. I wouldn't worry about the O-ring, it didn't have one before the revision. Unless your BB is getting really wet.

Once upon a time... it never rained in southern California... lately we've been Seattle.

One downside to a bunch of internal cable routing is more water ingress point's to trickle down to the BB.

I wonder how I can get that missing O-ring.

 

[nervagon]

You won't be able to get it back in with the shaft in place. It should pop back with the shaft removed though - it is held in place by a slight lip on the inboard outer perimeter (see my photo). Maybe it wasn't fully seated and the shaft pushed it out.

I recommend using a bearing press to make sure the left side bearing was pressed in correctly from the factory as mine wasn't.

 

[hindesite]

I'm even using 145mm short cranks (QX BlackZeroQ ISIS 145mm) on my Photon MTB. Takes a few rides to get used to it, but then I would not like to go back to longer ones.Nice clearance against ground, and good for high cadence riding. Pretty good matches characteristic of the Photon.
Have to add here: These also fit very tight of the ISIS axle. Never got loose until now (~2000 km MTB).

Those look better than the Miranda ones, and the same price. Inserts probably worth having.

Short cranks is one of those things where your intuitive assessment is very different to real life experience.

 

[NexusG]

You won't be able to get it back in with the shaft in place. It should pop back with the shaft removed though - it is held in place by a slight lip on the inboard outer perimeter (see my photo). Maybe it wasn't fully seated and the shaft pushed it out.

Yes, I have set it back, it’s easy with the shaft removed
But then every time I try to insert back the axle, the bearing shield pop out again
As the fit is extremely tight, the friction between the bearing shield and the axle is very high, even with the included grease (as recommended by CYC for waterproofing)
I have to find a solution to stop the plastic shield from moving when inserting the axle, maybe some sort of press

 

[nervagon]

Yes, I have set it back, it’s easy with the shaft removed
But then every time I try to insert back the axle, the bearing shield pop out again
As the fit is extremely tight, the friction between the bearing shield and the axle is very high, even with the included grease (as recommended by CYC for waterproofing)
I have to find a solution to stop the plastic shield from moving when inserting the axle, maybe some sort of press

Your bearing might be slightly off axis.

 

[hindesite]

Yes, I have set it back, it’s easy with the shaft removed
But then every time I try to insert back the axle, the bearing shield pop out again
As the fit is extremely tight, the friction between the bearing shield and the axle is very high, even with the included grease (as recommended by CYC for waterproofing)
I have to find a solution to stop the plastic shield from moving when inserting the axle, maybe some sort of press

Pressing the shield back into the bearing should be quite hard - it has a lip that is larger than the bearing ID (see my photo) that has to hook the shield in place. This is a standard BB shield configuration, only with a 22mm shaft instead of the more common 24mm or larger. Once installed, the lip is superfluous though, not required since the preload collar holds everything together.

Maybe try the fit of just the shield on the shaft only - examine if end of the thicker part of the shaft or if it is the thin O-rings that are getting hung up on the edge of the shield. Maybe it needs a chamfer to help the O-rings pass trough? The friction between the shield and shaft is necessary, the shaft should not turn inside the shield. If it does, there is something wrong. It should be a smooth fit on the shaft, though.

If the shield is an impossibly tight fit with everything apart, maybe talk to CYC, you may have a defective or deformed shield. They are plastic components and that can happen if they aren't handled correctly during manufacture.

This is a similar installation for 24mm shield (thanks ebay). Note the lip being pressed into the bearing. In my experience, knocking out the shield required a fair bit of force.

 

[nervagon]

'lightest.bike' 1.7kg 1000w mid drive

If it's like the CYC X1s and Stealths a lot of the noise comes from gearbox and extra chain. Not sure much can be done about that. CYC sure can't solve that problem no matter how much they claim each new gen is "quieter". I wish we got some communication on that here, thanks for passing it on.

endless-sphere.com

I've managed to fit the Photon and Bikee lightest together as dual-mid drive. The Photon will be PAS, and the Bikee Lightest is a 4lb supercharger connected to throttle.

More info as the build comes together.

 

[nervagon]

Electrifybike replied back that the voltage reading being way off is a known issue with no solution ATM.

 

[hindesite]

Left bearing Cup

Early owners of the Photon might benefit by inspecting their left bearing cup.

IMNSHO CYC made a small error with the design of this component - it isn't a big deal but might affect the longevity of the BB. CYC have addressed this with at least 2 revisions of the left bearing cup design since Photons original release. Rikus' recent video shows an updated bearing cup, and the one I received recently was different to that.

The issue is that their application of the BB bearing shield was incorrect. In normal use, the bearing shield is intended to protect the BB bearing from direct water and dirt ingress. It isn't intended to seal or to touch the bearing cup, just move freely beside it. It is a shield, not a seal. The shield that CYC use has a flange on the "underside" or inward facing perimeter, which runs against the bearing cup outer face. This causes the new bearing to feel unusually stiff when you spin it by hand.

View attachment 353441

View attachment 353434

This has implications for assembly. If you put no preload on the bearing, there is still existing preload from the shield itself, because it clips into place inside the bearing and puts tension against the bearing cup face. With no or little preload added at installation, that friction may be enough to cause the shaft to spin inside the shield but generally there is enough friction from the shaft o-rings to make the shield and bearing spin..

As you increase the preload slightly, you actually increase the friction between the shield and the cup as you press the centre of the shield inward, and the shaft spins inside the shield. You may have seen how this causes shiny wear on the shaft itself in at least one teardown video - the bearing is not spinning, the shaft is wearing against the shield itself. Additionally, the adjustable preload collar wears against the outer face of the shield, this is obvious on inspection as the shield becomes contaminated with aluminium, and the inside face of the collar has its finish removed.

View attachment 353433

View attachment 353435

As you increase the preload further, the shield rotates with the bearing and things appear to be working correctly. They are not. Now the shield flange is cutting a groove in the face of the bearing cup, just outside of the bearing perimeter. The material from this seems to stay behind the shield and perhaps may contaminate the bearing. My bearing failed after ~1000km.

View attachment 353436

View attachment 353437

CYC have addressed this and replaced my bearing cup assembly under warranty (though for me, shipping is expensive). Owners could undertake their own workaround, the easiest is probably to just remove the back perimeter lip on the shield. Bearings are easily available. Bearing is S6805RS - stainless 25x37x7 rubber seal. There are many alternative configurations that should work - chrome steel and ceramic options, with one or 2 rubber seals. Bearings 61805 are the same size and should also work. If you are out of warranty, the bearing cup assembly is not an expensive item.

CYC made the cup flange thicker and introduced a recess for the shield to correctly sit into. They also increased the length of the unit and introduced and O-ring to seal the connection where the cup threads in to the motor body. Old on left, new on right. It should be reassuring that CYC are continually improving the Photon behind the scenes.

When setting preload, ensure the shield is rotating with the shaft.

HTH...

View attachment 353439

View attachment 353440

I have renovated the original bearing cup assembly. This involved removing the bearing and shield. Removed the bearing seals, cleaned and regreased the bearing, it is good enough for temporary use. Also removed the lip from the plastic shield, so there is clearance between the shield and the cup. Good enough as a workaround and feels so much better.

 

[nervagon]

So I fixed my Photon:



The Bikee Lightest + CYC Photon is a match made in heaven. Tandem torque sensing PAS works seamlessly. There is crazy torque. The drives together only need a combined 600W to feel super powerful. PAS ride feel is very good combined. I am stunned this turned out so well. I only got up to a combined 800W on my maiden test ride, and that was more than enough power.

 

[kuromaku]

Tandem torque sensing PAS works seamlessly. There is crazy torque.

That's pretty awesome! Will have to keep that in mind if I ever need to ride up a wall

 

[maiz]

So I fixed my Photon:

View attachment 353807

The Bikee Lightest + CYC Photon is a match made in heaven. Tandem torque sensing PAS works seamlessly. There is crazy torque. The drives together only need a combined 600W to feel super powerful. PAS ride feel is very good combined. I am stunned this turned out so well. I only got up to a combined 800W on my maiden test ride, and that was more than enough power.

This really opens up design possibilities. Smaller but dual motored mid drives for redundancy and efficiency/power.

 

[Atak_Snajpera]

So I fixed my Photon:

View attachment 353807

The Bikee Lightest + CYC Photon is a match made in heaven. Tandem torque sensing PAS works seamlessly. There is crazy torque. The drives together only need a combined 600W to feel super powerful. PAS ride feel is very good combined. I am stunned this turned out so well. I only got up to a combined 800W on my maiden test ride, and that was more than enough power.

One DM01 would give you similar effect.
You could also add hub motor in back and in front for LULZ ULTIMA POWAH!

From efficiency point of view single motor will be more efficient than two. Just look at TESLA Model 3 car.
Single motor = more range.

 

[neptronix]

From efficiency point of view single motor will be more efficient than two. Just look at TESLA Model 3 car.
Single motor = more range.

This totally depends on the motor design. Sometimes you get higher efficiency, sometimes you get lower efficiency when running dual motors.

 

[nervagon]

One DM01 would give you similar effect.

DM01 has 230Nm of torque? These two motors have a way higher combined torque output than the DM01’s 160Nm. This dual-motor drive train is also capable of pulling a double the max amps of the internal DM01 controller.

The DM01 is a pig that weighs as much, maybe more than this dual motor drive train, while delivering less. I already know what it feels like to ride a DM01 because I have a BBSHD. The DM01 adds a mediocre torque sensor.

I know the DM01 can be pushed to high power/performance with an external ASI BAC855, but don't you then give up torque sensing? Has anyone been able to get an external controller working with the toseven torque sensor?

From efficiency point of view single motor will be more efficient than two. Just look at TESLA Model 3 car.
Single motor = more range.

Are you comparing AWD to dual tandem motors spinning the same axle and each other? That aint the same thing. The EV equivalent would be 2 netgain hyper 9 motors in tandem driving the same output shaft... a common configuration in EV conversions. The Bikee Lightest is a very efficient motor on it's own, and it is now aided by a second motor and a human all pulling on the same chain, and driving the same axle. And you think that is less efficient? Lugging is reduced on both motors.

An important thing to note is that the Bikee Lightest is not adding any additional complexity to the mechanics of the drive train... just it's own pinion gear helping to spin the chain... and helping to spin the Photon. For the cost of an additional 3.8 pounds, the Bikee motor is bringing an additional 120Nm of torque and another 1000W of additional power.

Both Motors are currently being powered by the same battery pack... which is the limiting factor ATM. I have samsung 35E cells in a 6P pack with a 35A continuous BMS, 70A peak BMS driving the dual motor drive train. My power lines from battery to motors is also only 12awg. So, for now, the system will be limited to 1800W peak combined power. But 800W on my test ride felt like my BBSHD, so I don't think I will ever want more power than what I am limited to right now.

But stay tuned... it should be obvious by now that I don't suffer from sunk-cost fallacy syndrome, and I am very self-critical and hard to please. I will do some long climbs and stress testing, and if this crazy drive train doesn't deliver... I will be honest about it.

 

[nervagon]

CYC Photon in cow udder mode is deceiving... as in it's not as bad as it looks clearance-wise. Take a look a how far below the spindle the mid drive on most factory ebikes protrudes down. For comparison, I had my friend measure the ground clearance on his Specialized hard tail ebike:



I've got over an inch more clearance with a Photon at 7 oclock orientation.

Also, due to the rectangular shape of the motor unit, I've only lost about 2cm of clearance compared to before I added the Bikee Lightest kit to my bottom bracket. That's why I didn't bother to modify the Bikee mounting brackets to allow me to tuck the Photon up closer to the downtube. It was a lot of work for little return.

 

[Atak_Snajpera]

The DM01 is a pig that weighs as much, maybe more than this dual motor drive train, while delivering less. I already know what it feels like to ride a DM01 because I have a BBSHD. The DM01 adds a mediocre torque sensor.

Have you tested dm01 with latest firmware from may? Torque sensing is on par with your overpriced 500W motor.

If you really believe that more motors is better then install extra hub motors as well. Also Do not be obssesed with those declared torque values. Manufactures like to inflated their numbers.

 

[hindesite]

If you really believe that more motors is better then install extra hub motors as well.

I would agree with that part of your statement.

Using a hub motor in addition to mid drive will give decent low speed assistance and at the same time give you higher speed assistance that doesn't destroy your chain (and smaller gears). And more redundancy when you do destroy your chain

 

[raylo32]

Two mid drives?? Why not then add front AND rear hubs? LOL. Call it Frankenbike and start a new bike event that is a 2-wheel version of a tractor pull.

I would agree with that part of your statement.

Using a hub motor in addition to mid drive will give decent low speed assistance and at the same time give you higher speed assistance that doesn't destroy your chain (and smaller gears). And more redundancy when you do destroy your chain

 

[hindesite]

CYC Photon in cow udder mode is deceiving... as in it's not as bad as it looks clearance-wise. Take a look a how far below the spindle the mid drive on most factory ebikes protrudes down. For comparison, I had my friend measure the ground clearance on his Specialized hard tail ebike:

View attachment 353828

I've got over an inch more clearance with a Photon at 7 oclock orientation.

Also, due to the rectangular shape of the motor unit, I've only lost about 2cm of clearance compared to before I added the Bikee Lightest kit to my bottom bracket. That's why I didn't bother to modify the Bikee mounting brackets to allow me to tuck the Photon up closer to the downtube. It was a lot of work for little return.

Yeah, Photon has heaps of clearance - even the 34T chainring is more of a factor than the motor casing (in most situations).

 

[nervagon]

Have you tested dm01 with latest firmware from may? Torque sensing is on par with your overpriced 500W motor. Also Do not be obssesed with those declared torque values. Manufactures like to inflated their numbers.

I'll come feel your PAS and you can come feel my torque values.

Also, can you share your affiliate link and employee discount on the toseven motors? If you can get the price down low enough for me, I might try it. Can you get me 50% off?

If you really believe that more motors is better then install extra hub motors as well.

Here's what I believe: I can do whatever weird frocking experiments I want, and you can frock right off if that bothers you. This is the last frocking forum that I would expect derision over such a test.

 

[nervagon]

Thoughts after a long test ride.

With 300W of assist from the Bikee Lightest, the Photon never overheats. Same weather today and took the same route that caused extreme overheating and throttling of the Photon. This is with the Photon running at about 600W. The combined 900W will climb pretty much anything all day.

With the Bikee assist on, the Photon runs at usually between 300W to 600W in PAS 3. This doesn't appear to be throttling, but simply both motors sharing the load and requiring less wattage from each. Shocking, I know!

So the Photon was close... it just needed a little more power/heat shedding during the design phase to be a badass motor. Hopefully the rumored Proton model will have that extra oomph to make it a reliable workhorse.

300W from the Bikee + 300W from the Photon, is way more powerful than just the Photon at 600W.

 

[nervagon]

I would agree with that part of your statement.

Using a hub motor in addition to mid drive will give decent low speed assistance and at the same time give you higher speed assistance that doesn't destroy your chain (and smaller gears). And more redundancy when you do destroy your chain

I have 29” wheels. Most hubs laced to a 29” wheel are pretty useless.

 

[Gruesome]

Summary: I'm thinking of adding a Photon to a Canyon Roadlite 6. I'd appreciate advice and comments, both on the installation and riding experience on this or similar (road) bikes, and also on where to order and after sales support.
I originally started a new thread with this question, but hopefully this is a better place.

I have done several unsuccessful searches for installs or experience reports for Canyon Roadlite 6 conversions. Cycmotor support also tells me they do not have such a conversion in their database, but that doesn't mean it hasn't been done. They think their BB92 kit option should fit.

Background: I would like to add a motor to my road bike to make the last 20-30 miles of 60+ mile road trips (mostly flat, but there are mountains nearby...) more enjoyable, and maybe also increase my range a bit. I think adding of order 100W, more if there is headwind, would already help. I was initially looking at friction drives, and then the TSDZ2, but the Photon seems to be available with a fitting bracket (still need to remove the current drive assembly and check with their print out template), and has a built-in temperature sensor and temperature management. I don't think I need the top end power, but hopefully that leads to good thermal and mechanical stability at lower power. I'd appreciate comments on my intended application. I have ridden motorized mountain bikes; torque sensing seems to be more important there than for my street application (which is why I initially considered a friction drive with mechanical decoupling and throttle control; but the mechanics just seems quite rickety, plus potential bricolage involved in fitting it).

Lastly, I'd very much appreciate recommendations, comments and experience reports regarding where to order from. Amazon does not seem to be an option, Cycmotor directly from Hongkong takes 2-3 weeks, and charges a lot for restocking, handling, plus shipping back to Hongkong. While I'm not planning to return, it would be nice to have that avenue at least open, should the install turn out to be physically impossible or ill advised upon inspection of the parts in hand. Any comments on purchase and after sales experience with

• electrifybike.com (Utah, parts supposedly in stock, 2-4 day shipping?),
• goldenmotor.bike (currently inquiring about missing 50T option; part seems available, but not as an option in the Photon kit),
• bicyclemotorworks.com (a bit further away in Pennsylvania),
• johnnynerdout.com (west coast, but not on cycmotor dealer map?),
• r-ecycle.com,
• or anybody else I should consider?

I'm in the greater Los Angeles area, biking one or two times per week for two years, and I don't think my VO2max is going to increase significantly anymore, so adding an electric motor seems like a good option.