71–80 of 248 posts
I don't need that power all the time, but there is a rather steep hill on my way home which would be a challenge to get up on a less powerful motor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. For the $1500 the author spent, he could have bought a decent bike instead of strapping a motor on a $200 piece of cast-iron junk. Plus, a 1000-watt motor is ridiculous: that's the kind of power generated by a pro sprinter, and over twice what a pro climber generates on average. A 100-watt boost would be enough of an advantage to make most hills easy, and would probably weigh and cost far less.
I don't think you have tried out an eBike before, 1000W is just about enough to make most inclines easy. If I drop my BLDC controller down to 250W it makes things rather difficult. Remember you are carrying around the extra weight of a battery pack and motor.
If that is what you want, fine, but then stick to roads, stay off bike paths.
That's a motorbike. So is an e-bike really, but regulations allow it to be classified as something different so that you don't need a license.
EDIT: should clarify I enjoyed reading the article, and I think electric motorcycles and e-bikes have a bright future. I use a motorbike for my daily commute; non-riders should realise that they are far more vulnerable on two wheels. If you realise this and ride appropriately I think it is a reasonably ok thing to do. Having a bit of power actually makes things safer in an urban environment as it means cars aren't pushed into attempting dangerous overtaking maneuvers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
External drivetrains are exposed to dirt and debris, which wears down the bearing faces quickly. There are certain bicycles that use partially enclosed chains and sprockets for which chain maintenance is greatly reduced.
Bearing faces? Most bikes have sealed bearings these days, so there's no need to overhaul your bearings after riding in the rain. The chain and cogs need some cleaning and lube, but modern dry chain lube also makes that much less onerous.
> In order for E-Bike to really take off, I think there is a need to design it from the ground up. Instead of building the motor and battery pack around the frame, the right way to design an E-Bike is to build the frame around the motor and the battery pack. That's a motorbike. So is an e-bike really, but regulations allow it to be classified as something different so that you don't need a license. EDIT: should clari…
But I don’t care about that point, what I care about is efficiency in the design.
Just make the best damn, longest reaching, cheapest version that you can while sustaining your business with something people actually want.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think you have tried out an eBike before, 1000W is just about enough to make most inclines easy. If I drop my BLDC controller down to 250W it makes things rather difficult. Remember you are carrying around the extra weight of a battery pack and motor.
Most humans can't sustain 250W on a simple ergometer for 20 minutes. At 1000W, you are a motorcycle, not a bike. If that is what you want, fine, but then stick to roads, stay off bike paths.
The laws around e-bikes in the US can be a deterrent. E.g.: [The Murky Legality of E-Bikes]( https://www.citylab.com/equity/2016/02/the-murky-legality-of... ) The second paragraph gives you the flavor of it: > Under federal law, an electric bike with a maximum assisted speed under 20 miles per hour can be sold as a bicycle, not a motor vehicle. Under New York state law, riders would need to register these as they wou…
I actually worry about the "something must be done" crowd cajoling lawmakers into lazily shoehorning electric bikes into the "motorcycle" category and erasing much of their advantages to own as a bicycle. This happened with boats here as my little plastic kayak with a tiny electric assist has to be registered and taxed as if it was a full sized bass fishing boat with a v8.
You're lucky to merely have to pay some money for your "power kayak".
In my state, to actively discourage the construction of home built boats, if I want to build a 15 foot sailboat, I need to work with the coast guard and state DMV (spoiler, they don't actually work together, the finger pointing is hilarious) to get a hull number assigned, then fight the DOT to get it titled (boats are titled where I live, and its agonizing although it only costs $5) and its quite a fight involving official inspection because most "homemade" boats are people trying to register are Crestliners with the serial numbers filed off, then I can fight the DNR to register myself obtaining a DNR customer number, and then fight the DNR to register the boat, essentially linking my CG hull ID number to my DNR customer ID number for a mere $17/yr, ironically the total cost of all of this for the first year would only be roughly $30 but it takes like 100+ hours of phone calling and meeting people and filling out forms. I pay $35 for a quart of good topside marine paint so the point is not the expense but the bureaucracy agony. All that for basically an inland lake dingy with a sail on it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, that's just ridiculous. You can cycle 20-25km/h without catching a breath if you are even in decent shape
Under good circumstances, yes. When you are cycling recreationally, you get to pick a nice day. But if you are cycling to work every day and deal with strong wind, elevation differences, maintaining 20-25 km/h is going to be tough. Sustaining 20-25 is easy for me on a calm day. But on steep roads or windy days it's definitely more in the 10-15 or 15-20 ballpark. (This is from experience. I am fit, cycle 22km every wo…
That is true when you're riding uphill and/or into a headwind, but that should also be made up by the fact that the headwind/ascent becomes a tailwind/descent when you ride in the other direction.
The speeds I attain on my conventional bike range from 25 to 30 km/h on flat ground, 10 to 15 km/h going up 5% grades, but between 30 to 40 km/h going down the same grades. Headwinds on flat ground reduce my speed to 20 to 25 km/h (15 to 20 km/h if it's strong), but with a tailwind, I can maintain 30 to 35 km/h (or even up to 40 km/h if it's strong) on flat ground.
The only thing I don't like when riding are side wind gusts, but I suspect that a motor wouldn't make much of a difference in that case :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. For the $1500 the author spent, he could have bought a decent bike instead of strapping a motor on a $200 piece of cast-iron junk. Plus, a 1000-watt motor is ridiculous: that's the kind of power generated by a pro sprinter, and over twice what a pro climber generates on average. A 100-watt boost would be enough of an advantage to make most hills easy, and would probably weigh and cost far less.
> $200 piece of cast-iron junk. He used an alu bike... mechanical disc brakes worked for a decade before hydraulics.
>>> If the ride is so great and economics so favorable, why haven’t I seen more adoption here in US and Canada? The author's answers to this question focus solely on the bike technology itself. This is a common thread in a lot of discussions about cycling: If we only built the right bike, more people would ride. This is usually followed by a CAD rendering of the perfect bike, that looks like nobody would want to ride…