LightningRods said:
One of these days (soon) I'm going to have to build a suitable test rig and see what the big block will do steady state and burst power. The small block has been run up to 5000 watts burst so the big block with twice the rotor and stator? Building a bicycle that won't fold in half is the first step.
I might presume too much, that you would only test the motor? so I apologize in advance for my early morning rant if you would test the whole kit.
A lightning rods mid drive kit should be considered as one unit. We already are happy with the motor and its strength to deal with heat.
Obviously you are not a big company with the resources of one, so nobody would expect rigorous testing to the levels of one either. In that context, I don't really think more information of what the motor can do in isolation is of much use to the people coming to this thread looking for lightning Rods mid drive kit information, compared to serious component of all the parts connected to it.
If you were a bigger enough company we could fancifully suggest:
When doing tests it included the exact kit specs that ran it and Km before part failure. The motor itself should not be the listed spec of continuous power, if all the bits supplied with it as a unit are not included in the testing. That would include which jackshaft, freewheel, which BB, which tensioning system... etc.
This is the crucial information to what power the version a person is buying is actually capable of sustaining and a realistic longevity.
(this is not about the end users half of things SM might mention)
Fortunately as the great designer you are, you keep modding up weak points, but unfortunately the kit test data would then need redoing.... this is where huge costs would increase exponentially.
It may then be beneficial to add versions. Like: Big block version with a spec sheet history a potential customer could access by date. Example:
Big 16/4
dicta, 12mm solid cro mo shaft cir clip, screws on inside of 2mm mild steel,
tested to 3kw 1000 km before freewheel failure, shaft distortion, etc.
etc.
But I don't see too many small DIY companies being able to sustain that kind of research unless it were a simple unit like a hub motor. The LR is not. Unless the whole kit is seen as a unit the same way a hub motor is seen as a complete unit, I don't see much point in "testing".
This does sound over the top but you know and we all know we compare things.
If I am being a bit airy fairy here...
For example we say this hub motor, let's say the
MXUS v3 3kw. It is a complete distinct unit. Potential customers scratch their heads "should I buy this or that...." When people say it (mxus) can do 3kw cont. and I got 5000 km out of it before I replaced the bearings for example. And then we can compare that to the complete unit of
LR Big block 3kw 16/4.
Then we have some useful information to compare in debates like a mid drive is better than a hub motor.
I would love to see a ton of rehashed mythology by people who have not run both put to rest (or proven to be fact)
Some simplistic perpetuated myths which purposefully forget the difference between low power and high power (3+kw):
a high powered mid drive is better because it uses the bicycle drive train with gears. (how many km did you get?)
a high powered mid drive is better because the motor weight is sprung. (Overlooking compression of suspension under load and myriad of other problems such as twisting the swingarm as power pulls only to one side.)
I would look forward to that data but doubt it would ever come.
Justin seems like the only one in this field being able to do this sort of thing.... He might have a more economical system to try?
or if buyers had a separate thread here where the data was compiled at least roughly...
Anyway I always enjoy reading this thread all "500" pages of it. 8)