MikeSSS
1 kW
Puzzling because of preconceived notions, that the simulations do not support.
What I thought: more turns give more low speed power, fewer turns give more high speed power. But, hmmm, I seldom use full throttle, so it is better to compare turns vs actual riding use. I'm old, play racing was 50 years ago, now I ride slow and look at critters, plants and geology. So, I put my riding use into the simulator and viola, almost any hub motor will work. Whatttt? Yep.
First run was 6.5% grade and 5 mph. Next was 0 grade and 12 mph, after that 0 grade and 17 mph. After this was wide open throttle with a 20 amp controller and then a 40 amp controller. Motors were, from top down, 9C 5 turn, 6 turn and 7 turn. Then a Bafang BPM, GO1 and finally a BMC V2 torque. The first three are direct drive, the last three are probably geared hubs.
turns motor mph grade % batt watts mph grade % batt watts mph grade % batt watts
5.0 2705 dd 5 6.5 397 12 0 137 17 0 282
6.0 2706 dd 5 6.5 355 12 0 125 17 0 276
7.0 2707 dd 5 6.5 340 12 0 128 17 0 273
BF gear BPM 5 6.5 292 12 0 130 17 0 286
BF gear GO1 Std 5 6.5 340 12 0 130 17 0 284
BMC V2 trq 5 6.5 265 12 0 144 17 0 286
Note: fewer battery watts drawn is better. Note 2: this is from an Excel spreadsheet, correct formatting of columns did not come over. If preview comes out wrong, I'm not fixing it.
Conclusion: if the BMC V2 torque hub simulation is correct...what are the chances...then this hub is better for 5 mph climbing, at far less than full throttle. At 12 and 17 mph, all the hub motors are close to the same performance. At wide open throttle, fewer turns, results not shown, were faster, especially with a 40A controller, vs a 20A controller.
Hmmmmmm.
PS, the column formatting did not carry through. Why should it?
Note: on the Grin hubmotor simulator, when choosing a motor to model, go to the bottom and click "show all".
What I thought: more turns give more low speed power, fewer turns give more high speed power. But, hmmm, I seldom use full throttle, so it is better to compare turns vs actual riding use. I'm old, play racing was 50 years ago, now I ride slow and look at critters, plants and geology. So, I put my riding use into the simulator and viola, almost any hub motor will work. Whatttt? Yep.
First run was 6.5% grade and 5 mph. Next was 0 grade and 12 mph, after that 0 grade and 17 mph. After this was wide open throttle with a 20 amp controller and then a 40 amp controller. Motors were, from top down, 9C 5 turn, 6 turn and 7 turn. Then a Bafang BPM, GO1 and finally a BMC V2 torque. The first three are direct drive, the last three are probably geared hubs.
turns motor mph grade % batt watts mph grade % batt watts mph grade % batt watts
5.0 2705 dd 5 6.5 397 12 0 137 17 0 282
6.0 2706 dd 5 6.5 355 12 0 125 17 0 276
7.0 2707 dd 5 6.5 340 12 0 128 17 0 273
BF gear BPM 5 6.5 292 12 0 130 17 0 286
BF gear GO1 Std 5 6.5 340 12 0 130 17 0 284
BMC V2 trq 5 6.5 265 12 0 144 17 0 286
Note: fewer battery watts drawn is better. Note 2: this is from an Excel spreadsheet, correct formatting of columns did not come over. If preview comes out wrong, I'm not fixing it.
Conclusion: if the BMC V2 torque hub simulation is correct...what are the chances...then this hub is better for 5 mph climbing, at far less than full throttle. At 12 and 17 mph, all the hub motors are close to the same performance. At wide open throttle, fewer turns, results not shown, were faster, especially with a 40A controller, vs a 20A controller.
Hmmmmmm.
PS, the column formatting did not carry through. Why should it?
Note: on the Grin hubmotor simulator, when choosing a motor to model, go to the bottom and click "show all".