CYC PHOTON

[nervagon]

The Proton will basically be a BBSHD with torque sensing and is delayed until 2025:

7:57 mark

 

[neptronix]

Gruesome, i think you would be happier with a revel propulsion kit. It won't give you a super wide Q factor on that narrow bike.

I would almost recommend the lightest.bike mid drive but they may take a year to ship, and the first generation is a bit troublesome so far.

 

[Gruesome]

Gruesome, i think you would be happier with a revel propulsion kit. It won't give you a super wide Q factor on that narrow bike.

I would almost recommend the lightest.bike mid drive but they may take a year to ship, and the first generation is a bit troublesome so far.

Neptronix, thanks for the recommendation. I wasn't aware of Revel Propulsion. Besides being currently sold out of the motor, it doesn't look like they have a bottom bracket adapter that will fit (they do have PF30, but supposedly that is 46mm diameter, my PF86/BB86 is 41mm diameter).
So you think the pedal stance will be awkwardly wide with the Photon kit? I just received my press, and will take the bottom bracket apart tomorrow to check the fit of the Photon template, and also measure actual bore diameter.

 

[raylo32]

Understatement. Lightest is just not ready for prime time, which is unfortunate because it has promise. And their marketing methods where everything is an add on cost and different firmwares for different configs and extra charges for unlocking capabilities. Sheesh. You guys installing these now are not even Beta testers, you are guinea pigs.... and masochists.

Revel looks interesting but with the 2-chain design it might be kind of loud like the CYC Stealth and X1s... Which work very well and have normal separate torque sensing bottom brackets.

If you want to get a motor and just ride the Photon or other CYC offerings, the TSDZ2, and ToSevens with torque sensors or BBS models with PAS are dead easy installations. All you need is a couple of hours and you will be out riding. Lightest, maybe a couple of months if you can ever figure out how to make it fit your particular bike and get the correct parts and firmware.

The Q-factor issue with Photon may or may not be a problem for you. Many of us have no issues even though there are a few folks here that are very vocal about it. YMMV. Good luck.

I would almost recommend the lightest.bike mid drive but they may take a year to ship, and the first generation is a bit troublesome so far.

 

[Zambam]

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.

Are you aware of the new BikeOn - Turn Your Bicycle To A Smart E-Bike In Seconds ?

 

[raylo32]

Yes, very cool product. But unfortunately needs an active phone connection to function fully. Would be much better with a dedicated display.

Are you aware of the new BikeOn - Turn Your Bicycle To A Smart E-Bike In Seconds ?

 

[Chalo]

Yes, very cool product. But unfortunately needs an active phone connection to function fully. Would be much better with a dedicated display.

I have concerns about the durability, efficiency, and thermal qualities of that system. But I'm curious to see how it works out in public hands.

 

[Mongo]

adding a Photon to a Canyon Roadlite 6

An aluminum-framed lightweight flat bar bike with 30mm tires, hydraulic brakes, and either thru-axle or QR, depending on the year?

add a motor to my road bike to make the last 20-30 miles of 60+ mile road trips

torque sensing seems to be more important there [mountain biking] than for my street application

50T option

How about tried & true "old school" - Bafang BBS02B with a Bafang 52T ring and a SW102 display, the Lekkie BB86/92 adapter, and some sort of lightweight battery (mini-shark for example). Or not ... If your rear hub is 135mm QR, I'd also consider the Bafang G310 or similar lightweight geared rear hub motor, which (AFAIK), would have less pedaling drag than a mid motor and less freewheeling drag than a DD hub motor.

 

[neptronix]

Neptronix, thanks for the recommendation. I wasn't aware of Revel Propulsion. Besides being currently sold out of the motor, it doesn't look like they have a bottom bracket adapter that will fit (they do have PF30, but supposedly that is 46mm diameter, my PF86/BB86 is 41mm diameter).

Bummer!

So you think the pedal stance will be awkwardly wide with the Photon kit? I just received my press, and will take the bottom bracket apart tomorrow to check the fit of the Photon template, and also measure actual bore diameter.

Try riding your bike with each foot 1 inch away from the center more than normal. That's approximately the pedaling stance you'll have.

 

[raylo32]

Of course, you do.

I have concerns about the durability, efficiency, and thermal qualities of that system. But I'm curious to see how it works out in public hands.

 

[nervagon]

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.

If the terrain is mostly flat, and you only need a couple hundred watts of assist on a road bike, why are you even bothering with a mid drive? The hub motor will keep your bike looking clean, and you can keep your existing crankset (and q-factor) and drivetrain. The grin all-axle is about the same weight as a mid drive.

 

[neptronix]

I agree, most people who think they need a mid drive don't need the expense or extra maintenance requirements of a more complex drive.

A small geared hubmotor will work for many of these low power requirement cases... unless you live in an area with roller-coaster like terrain.

 

[nervagon]

I agree, most people who think they need a mid drive don't need the expense or extra maintenance requirements of a more complex drive.

A small geared hubmotor will work for many of these low power requirement cases... unless you live in an area with roller-coaster like terrain.

The biggest issue for road bikes and hub motors was easy wheel removal, but it seems that GRIN have pretty much made that as clean and straightforward as possible.

I wish I had a GRIN all-axle to experiment with.

 

[hindesite]

If the terrain is mostly flat, and you only need a couple hundred watts of assist on a road bike, why are you even bothering with a mid drive? The hub motor will keep your bike looking clean, and you can keep your existing crankset (and q-factor) and drivetrain. The grin all-axle is about the same weight as a mid drive.

I was going to make the same comment - mainly because pretty much all the mid drives will significantly and unavoidably increase the Q-factor (which really would be a shame on that bike) and most of the other alternatives really are the usual kickstarter rubbish. If the demands are really low, speeds are high and the terrain is flat, a front geared hub motor would be relatively easy to add or remove and wouldn't compromise the rest of the bike much. You wouldn't have torque sensing (at least, not easily) but the OP seemed ambivalent about that anyway.

Still rate the Photon option highly, though...love mine.

 

[Gruesome]

Thanks for all the comments!
The BikeOn looks like a clean solution, assuming of course the mounting hardware is well engineered and works wobble free. It's a bit odd that all these newer solutions (Photon, Lightest, BikeOn) seem to target the $1000+ area (or maybe it's not odd).
I think I need though the ability to connect a large (kWh-class) battery, to provide assistance (I'm assuming 100W average) for 60-80 mile rides, and BikeOn really wants you to use their batteries.

Obviously I do not know whether I really need torque sensing. Maybe constant power would be just fine. In order to find out I started by looking into and actually ordering a relatively cheap bolt-on friction drive, but the mechanics seemed wobbly and on top of that would also simply not fit. I had also thought about building an outrunner (outside rotor) friction drive myself, there are several examples of that on this forum and elsewhere on the internet, but some precision is required for a mechanism that you want to rely on for multi-hour bike rides. (I once had a motorcycle with a bad repair-to-ride ratio, it's just not that enjoyable.) I could see putting a proof of concept together, but trying to make it stable, light and reliable might require more machining skills than I have. Plus I already have enough hobbies, I'd rather bike than build a drive.

My next step is to have a look at the fit of the Photon template in my bottom bracket shell. We'll see how that goes.

 

[hindesite]

Thanks for all the comments!
The BikeOn looks like a clean solution, assuming of course the mounting hardware is well engineered and works wobble free. It's a bit odd that all these newer solutions (Photon, Lightest, BikeOn) seem to target the $1000+ area (or maybe it's not odd).
I think I need though the ability to connect a large (kWh-class) battery, to provide assistance (I'm assuming 100W average) for 60-80 mile rides, and BikeOn really wants you to use their batteries.

Obviously I do not know whether I really need torque sensing. Maybe constant power would be just fine. In order to find out I started by looking into and actually ordering a relatively cheap bolt-on friction drive, but the mechanics seemed wobbly and on top of that would also simply not fit. I had also thought about building an outrunner (outside rotor) friction drive myself, there are several examples of that on this forum and elsewhere on the internet, but some precision is required for a mechanism that you want to rely on for multi-hour bike rides. (I once had a motorcycle with a bad repair-to-ride ratio, it's just not that enjoyable.) I could see putting a proof of concept together, but trying to make it stable, light and reliable might require more machining skills than I have. Plus I already have enough hobbies, I'd rather bike than build a drive.

My next step is to have a look at the fit of the Photon template in my bottom bracket shell. We'll see how that goes.

Don't know, but this might help. You can see there is a lot of clearance - 11mm - between the BB and the back of the motor. (Ignore how the forum stuffs up the description by quoting the first post on the page):

CYC PHOTON

What is max motor RPM in photon? For example max RPM in stealth is 4000 I thought the CYC's Photon specification said 3800rpm unloaded for the motor core (not spindle or cadence), but my DS103 display reads approx. 3200rpm (bike run unloaded on a repair stand). All of these motors run way past...

endless-sphere.com

 

[moped-dan]

My next step is to have a look at the fit of the Photon template in my bottom bracket shell. We'll see how that goes.

If you can get it to fit think you'll like it. My older specialized had a press fit bb also (pf30) and and this adapter worked to get the photon and now a bbshd onto it. Not sure if they have something similar to fit your bottom bracket but its worth a look.

FSA PF30 to 68mm English Bottom Bracket Adaptor (Silver) (PF30 to BSA)

I have never thought twice about the q factor until I read the last few posts either, not sure what to tell you there other than I don't notice it at all.

I have my photon setup to feel exactly like my bosch commuter bike and I am very happy with it.

• bicyclemotorworks.com (a bit further away in Pennsylvania),

^^ This is where I bought from, no complaints. Good luck.

 

[Gruesome]

Short version: So, the 'Q factor' pedal mounting plane distance on the Roadlite 6 is currently about 131mm, and with the Photon PF92 kit this would be 220mm. That seems a lot (90mm or almost two inches on each side). Furthermore, the inside tooth edge of the big chain ring currently coincides with the right side bottom bracket shell surface, the Photon moves that and thus the chain approximately 10mm or about two gears further out. So it's not clear whether the two lowest (slowest) gears would still be usable.
Food for thought.

Too much detail: It's a bummer that the Photon BB clamping mechanism adds so much width (45mm) on the left. With my current setup, it's just the crank right against the BB shell. Until I looked at the Roadlite 6 dimensions I thought Cycmotor had done a pretty good job keeping the right (drive) side width buildup minimal; now, that also looks quite bulky in comparison. The Roadlite fits a second chain ring/gear ring in there, just like the Photon does, and builds up 45mm less. I guess Cycmotor can't use all that available space on the Roadlite for an inset drive in place of the smaller chain ring because they have to make the kit universal for all kinds of bikes that might not have this space available. But 45mm on each side is a lot; the Photon PF92 kit essentially doubles the crank-to-crank inside plane distance.

I also learned that my right spindle bearing is feeling slightly crunchy already after just a little bit over two years and a few thousand miles! So I ordered a new BB assembly (and not just a new bearing, because I'm not sure what the plastic and other parts of the existing BB will look like after I press them out.)

I should also mention that Cycmotor customer service did reply to my latest email inquiring about the five dealers listed in my first post: they say they are all good and commendable dealers to work with, and work well with them. They point out that Electrifybike has a service center, I assume that means the others do not. I did come across a few posts with negative experiences for some of the dealers, but those might have been teething problems when the Photon was first introduced? In any case, shipping the drive within the US must be a lot cheaper than postage to Hongkong.

 

[Gruesome]

Don't know, but this might help. You can see there is a lot of clearance - 11mm - between the BB and the back of the motor. (Ignore how the forum stuffs up the description by quoting the first post on the page):

CYC PHOTON

What is max motor RPM in photon? For example max RPM in stealth is 4000 I thought the CYC's Photon specification said 3800rpm unloaded for the motor core (not spindle or cadence), but my DS103 display reads approx. 3200rpm (bike run unloaded on a repair stand). All of these motors run way past...

endless-sphere.com

Thanks, hindesite. On the Roadlite there are no chain guard 'ears' to cut off, but it's good to see those pics anyway!

 

[hindesite]

Thanks, hindesite. On the Roadlite there are no chain guard 'ears' to cut off, but it's good to see those pics anyway!

Those are ISCG tabs, your bike certainly won't have them - this was more about the motor to BB clearance (which, since you will be using extra adapters, might be more critical, since your PF92 BB diameter is larger). Mine is shown on a BSA73 BB which is ~35mm, BB92 is 41mm which all else being equal gives you 3mm less clearance which is worth looking at.

I don't notice my 200mm Q-factor particularly (which is a lot more than the bike originally had), even with really short cranks, but I think I'd start to notice 220mm.

 

[hindesite]

Furthermore, the inside tooth edge of the big chain ring currently coincides with the right side bottom bracket shell surface, the Photon moves that and thus the chain approximately 10mm or about two gears further out. So it's not clear whether the two lowest (slowest) gears would still be usable.
Food for thought.

According to the CYC Instruction Manual the BB92 set up achieves a centre offset of 0.1mm, which is among the best they list. Chainline is at 59.3mm.

And I thought Boost was a PITA...

 

[Gruesome]

According to the CYC Instruction Manual the BB92 set up achieves a centre offset of 0.1mm, which is among the best they list. Chainline is at 59.3mm.

And I thought Boost was a PITA...

Hindesite, I'm not sure I understand your comment. Left vs right is very centered with the Photon BB92 kit, as you are saying. What I was talking about in the part you quoted is that on the Roadlite as is the inner edge of the big chainring coincides with the right edge of the bottom bracket shell (frame edge). (The small chainring sits even further inboard, fully over the BB shell part of the frame.) For the BB92 kit Cycmotor quotes 13.3mm (dimension 'I') to the center of the (single) chainring; so that chainring is about 10mm further away from the frame than on the pre-conversion, which is about the width of two cogs on the cassette. (You could also say dimension 'J' is about 45mm on the Roadlite).

 

[Gruesome]

Those are ISCG tabs, your bike certainly won't have them - this was more about the motor to BB clearance (which, since you will be using extra adapters, might be more critical, since your PF92 BB diameter is larger). Mine is shown on a BSA73 BB which is ~35mm, BB92 is 41mm which all else being equal gives you 3mm less clearance which is worth looking at.

I don't notice my 200mm Q-factor particularly (which is a lot more than the bike originally had), even with really short cranks, but I think I'd start to notice 220mm.

I see. The Roadlite downtube has a protrusion in the forward direction, and the bracket outer diameter without this protrusion is 47mm. So this might warrant further checking.

(@moped-dan and @hindesite) About Q factor and stance: until this very moment I had never given any thought to the distance between my feet (except once when I was told to widen my skiing stance a bit). It seems my normal stance when I just plop my feet down without looking is 3 to 4 inches, the Roadlite Q factor of 5 inches feels ok, but it's already wider than I would normally chose. I'm having a hard time guessing how 9 inches of stance / Q factor would feel for pedaling. It seems ok but certainly wider than normal while standing. Maybe more like a John Wayne/coal miner gait? Cyclingnews has a link to this paper which supposedly (TL;DR) claims most of the few people they tested would prefer 90mm (about 3.5").
This is devolving rapidly into what seems way too much thinking effort for bicycling....

 

[hindesite]

Hindesite, I'm not sure I understand your comment. Left vs right is very centered with the Photon BB92 kit, as you are saying. What I was talking about in the part you quoted is that on the Roadlite as is the inner edge of the big chainring coincides with the right edge of the bottom bracket shell (frame edge). (The small chainring sits even further inboard, fully over the BB shell part of the frame.) For the BB92 kit Cycmotor quotes 13.3mm (dimension 'I') to the center of the (single) chainring; so that chainring is about 10mm further away from the frame than on the pre-conversion, which is about the width of two cogs on the cassette. (You could also say dimension 'J' is about 45mm on the Roadlite).

Yeah, I see that. CYC specify the chainline as either 59.3, 60.3 or 58.6 (I think) depending on which document you look at. All are a lot wider than you'd want for your particular bike. Might work though if you don't ever pedal backwards Which, BTW is the case with modern MTBs anyway.

I can't see how any chainless mid drive is going to be able to achieve the correct chainline for your bike, which seems narrower than other BB92 setups. I think somebody suggested a dished chainring - but on my installation with the 34T chainring, the inner face of the chain is already only 5mm from the end of the motor. Fortunately my Boost and BSA 73 the chainline is absolutely perfect. I'm surprised CYC weren't able to better accommodate BB92 installations and narrow Q-factors, I suspect they were focusing more on 1x and Boost MTBs (which I'm glad they did).

On the plus side, maybe it doesn't matter - you'll have an even better chainline for the gears you'll mostly use. So there's that.

 

[hindesite]

I see. The Roadlite downtube has a protrusion in the forward direction, and the bracket outer diameter without this protrusion is 47mm. So this might warrant further checking.

The back of the motor is shown as 30.55 from the CL of the BB, so you'll have about 7mm clearance between the outer BB casing and the motor I would think. Depending on motor orientation, the protrusion might not be a problem.