QS 205 vs QS 273 watts consumption
- Thread starter LexHammer
- Start date
I'm just quoting examples of everyday usage. - Averages
I'm not disputing your figure on your bike. I am surprised however that the moter hasn't overheated after about 5 minutes at that rate - the reason I swapped the QS205 for the QS273.
I have yet another QS205 in for repair at the moment so I can do a direct comparison test next week.
Should be interesting
I'm not disputing your figure on your bike. I am surprised however that the moter hasn't overheated after about 5 minutes at that rate - the reason I swapped the QS205 for the QS273.
I have yet another QS205 in for repair at the moment so I can do a direct comparison test next week.
Should be interesting
I'm just quoting examples of everyday usage. - Averages
I'm not disputing your figure on your bike. I am surprised however that the moter hasn't overheated after about 5 minutes at that rate - the reason I swapped the QS205 for the QS273.
I have yet another QS205 in for repair at the moment so I can do a direct comparison test next week.
Should be interesting
I'm not disputing your figure on your bike. I am surprised however that the moter hasn't overheated after about 5 minutes at that rate - the reason I swapped the QS205 for the QS273.
I have yet another QS205 in for repair at the moment so I can do a direct comparison test next week.
Should be interesting
MadRhino
100 GW
john61ct said:
Long ago, I have built with a 6t winding 25 lbs Clyte 5306 motor that was doing exactly that. Total bike weight 65 lbs, would carry me and a passenger up a 10% slope for miles at 15-20 mph. Could ride up the stairs not overheating. This motor is still alive, after a decade. A friend now has it. Endurance building don’t need to be heavy, only properly matched components. IMO, 500 lbs is not enough to require a 56 lbs motor. Just my opinion, my way of building bikes, like I wouldn’t fit a 1000 hp motor in a pick up truck just to carry building materials.
MadRhino
100 GW
Then order the motor low Kv, avoid a large wheel, it will carry 1000 lbs all day NP.
MadRhino
100 GW
Gearing?john61ct said:
Mounting mid drive?
If so, a 273 is definitely too big. You could have better power with a smaller, wider, mid motor.
ZeroEm
1 MW
Looking at the QS 205 specs it's rated up to 96v anyone running that voltage?
i'm running a leafmotor at the moment have not maxed it out yet. But i'm looking for my next motor and been looking hard at the QS 205 - 273. Following this topic MadRhino sales the 205 quite well. So how fast is it? Would like to get it in the motor simulator. is there anything modeled that is close to it?
i'm running a leafmotor at the moment have not maxed it out yet. But i'm looking for my next motor and been looking hard at the QS 205 - 273. Following this topic MadRhino sales the 205 quite well. So how fast is it? Would like to get it in the motor simulator. is there anything modeled that is close to it?
MadRhino
100 GW
Rated voltage is irrelevant. You can run a DD motor at much higher voltage than its rating. QS motor are making those motors in 8 different windings, so you can select the kv according to your planned build. They also do custom mods, if you are willing to wait. I run 24s RC lipo.ZeroEm said:
It is pretty common to build 70 mph top speed with a QS205h50, and it can survive 25 kw bursts in acceleration. The only rating that I don’t recommend exceeding much, is continuous 3000 watts, uphill especially. This motor is 27.6 lbs and 150 mm wide, not much in common with the Leaf motor.
The 273h50 is 200 mm wide, about 47 lbs latest version, those that I’ve had in hand were 56 lbs, 8000w continuous.
ZeroEm
1 MW
Just worry about the insulation on higher voltage. Not sure i'm ready for the expense yet.
Think the QS 205 would do 50-60 mph on the next trike might need to do some areo mods.
Think the QS 205 would do 50-60 mph on the next trike might need to do some areo mods.
John in CR
100 TW
The 273 will probably have a much higher no-load current at a given rpm than the 205. Mine does. That means it will definitely consume more energy for any given level of performance that is stress free for both motors. If you run out of juice, it also means it will be much harder to pedal through the turning resistance of a 273. If the roads you ride are less than perfect, then the extra weight in the wheel will mean a rougher ride. If you need more performance or a pushing a heavier load up steeper terrain then the 273 could make a lot of sense.
MadRhino said:
The QS273 40hV3 weighs 20kgs is not 200mm wide and fits nicely into a 155mm swing arm however the axle flat is wider and requires modification to the drop outs.
http://www.cnqsmotor.com/en/article_read/QS%20Motor%204000W%20273%2040H%20V3%20E-bike%20Spoke%20Hub%20Motor/260.html
Hope this clears things up a little
MadRhino
100 GW
I said 273h50 Jonno
The H40 I never had in hand.
I had one h45 in hand once, not long enough to check much.
I know QS motors are working to make the 273 series lighter. The 2020 specs are showing lighter motors already. Still heavy, but getting better. I hope they get to make it 35 lbs. I have a Clyte X54 that is about 273X40, wighting 33 lbs. QS has more copper fill, but they should come close if they make the casing lighter. The weight had been the main turn-off keeping the QS 273 from good sales volume.
The H40 I never had in hand.
I had one h45 in hand once, not long enough to check much.
I know QS motors are working to make the 273 series lighter. The 2020 specs are showing lighter motors already. Still heavy, but getting better. I hope they get to make it 35 lbs. I have a Clyte X54 that is about 273X40, wighting 33 lbs. QS has more copper fill, but they should come close if they make the casing lighter. The weight had been the main turn-off keeping the QS 273 from good sales volume.
MadRhino
100 GW
john61ct said:
Well, they are making one with water cooling. Yet, to overheat a 30+ lbs motor, one has to ride it out of its efficient zone for quite some time. This, is building improperly for the purpose and wrongly thinking that a bigger motor is the solution. Kind of thinking that shutting the alarm will prevent the fire.
Extra weight does take a longer time to accumulate heat, but once it does reach the limit, it is at the same risk as any other. Building a bike designed for the purpose, is not motor manufacturer’s responsibility. Just avoid building a 70 mph bike when you are a 20 mph rider, or feeding 50 kw to a motor that does saturate at 26 kw.
I know you said QS273 50H, I'm just checking to let people know I'm using a QS273 40H compared to my QS205 50H- so about 14 lbs difference in weight That's the comparison I've been talking about and not the heavier QS27350H
Anyways Battery cooling/heating is next
Jonno
Anyways Battery cooling/heating is next
Jonno
MadRhino
100 GW
Yep I see. Recent motor. Lighter already but still, they should do better. I would be glad to accept the +weight of extra copper, not the overbuilt casing. +copper does translate into extra power, but +casing does translate into unsuspended dead weight. I don’t need casing weight to shed the heat, copper weight is good enough. That is the only downside I find to QS motors: they have very good copper fill but too much dead weight around it, like they are out of a Russian tank factory. 
I agree, it will interesting to see the new motors are brought out this year.
The biggest reason that I get qs 205s fail is when they get hot people just stop the bike and wait for it to cool down. This creates a hot spot in the motor (like a turbo charger) hence the fail. Just ride it gently for a few minutes to allow the heat to disapate.
I don't ride my bike hard at the moment as I don't feel the urge to visit hospital for any reason in the near future
Jonno
The biggest reason that I get qs 205s fail is when they get hot people just stop the bike and wait for it to cool down. This creates a hot spot in the motor (like a turbo charger) hence the fail. Just ride it gently for a few minutes to allow the heat to disapate.
I don't ride my bike hard at the moment as I don't feel the urge to visit hospital for any reason in the near future
Jonno
MadRhino
100 GW
I ride faster in the city now, less trafic. But, I don’t spend much time in the city lately, because it is dull. We returned to the life of our youth, communal in the countryside. I did produce 18000 l of maple syrup, while the kids are planting 30 ha of potatoes. Changes us from usual stone masonry, but getting used to it. :wink:
ZeroEm
1 MW
That maple syrup sounds good
MadRhino
100 GW
ZeroEm said:That maple syrup sounds good
Easy job, waiting for the boiler temp alarm. Smells good in here. Deers come sniffing in the window almost every morning. :wink:
ZeroEm
1 MW
Should have moved North when I was young. Sounds nice up there.
DogDipstick
100 kW
MadRhino said:
Logging is priceless to me. I ripped of mine at least once. Tore the little brass boss out and cracked the bottom good. I was thinkin about one of those cell phone bars that sit on the normal bar to keep it protected.
Iso wish more people would use the Analogger so I could compare average Th voltage, Wh/mi, power, range, accurately. Ect. 100$ for all the bragging rights I need. Infallible data.
Nothing but hearsay and conjecture without it. I totally believe 240Wh/Mi for some installs, drag after drag. I can hit about 80Wh/mi+ doing nothing but pulls from 0-Top-0, on my little overheated hub. Loads of wasted energy going into the brakes, and on accel. Repeat. Peak absolute Wh/Mi consumption. My hub can run 30-40A contin on an average ride... but... anything over ( 50A? nope) that and the heat shoots up way to fast to be practical.
Do nothing but that, I get twice the consumption easily. I mean, not a practical ride, just strict Full throttle to Top speed then brake. I could show logs where this is the difference tween 25Wh/mile and 100Wh/mile (4x) I bet... If I let the hub cool down to compound data between. Alone it would just overheat like this... but with a pause, I can compile the sprint data, and continue to raise the Wh/Mi number over the course of my discharge.
Similar threads
