Another new TQ motor: hpr40

[Calcoaster]

Just announced, and Canyon’s high end TQ hpr40 ebike weighs under 22 lbs. Interesting direction for TQ: lower power, smaller battery, no top tube ebike display, hidden assist level buttons, all but invisible. 200 Watts (nominal and peak) and 40nm torque. They’re going for the ultimate roadbike experience with a bit of help but not too much. It will be interesting to see if trek and the others go this direction or use the larger hpr60 in their next gen. bikes.

TQ HPR40 On Review: Stealth Motor for Drop-bar Bikes

TQ HPR40 motor on review: ultra-lightweight e-drive for road and gravel bikes with a natural ride feel, quiet performance and top-class integration

granfondo-cycling.com

 

[Base]

also have seen it on a ridley

 

[Stefan Mikes]

I wonder why TREK gave up on Fazua.

 

[Rás Cnoic]

Just seen the new gravel bike from Ridley you mentioned, lovely. The Canyon looks good too. But that weight; 22lbs/10Kg with a 290wh battery and 40nm torque. That hits the sweet spot for sure. Plus a RE for longer rides. 22 pounds. My Salsa Vaya all steel road bike is 27 lbs ffs.

Shoddy Dave here (legend) at Eurobike checking them out:

 

[Calcoaster]

I wonder why TREK gave up on Fazua.

I’ve read multiple people who have moved from the earlier treks with fazua to the newer TQ versions say that TQ is a huge improvement. More reliable, quieter, smoother power delivery, overall better performance.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

I’ve read multiple people who have moved from the earlier treks with fazua to the newer TQ versions say that TQ is a huge improvement. More reliable, quieter, smoother power delivery, overall better performance.

In other words, TREK has left their customers where the sun doesn't shine...
I'm saying this because in two days I will be e-racing against a strong competitor riding a 2022 Fazua TREK e-Caliber, which was marketed as an ultimate XC e-bike and cost a fortune.

 

[Calcoaster]

They moved forward with a better product. I think trek and fazua still support the older gen systems, but who knows for how long.

 

[Rás Cnoic]

Coming back to the subject at hand not Fazua or Trek but Canyon, Ridley & this new lightweight TQ40 motor.

Just been looking up the new Canyon Endurace ONfly specs.

The cheapest model comes in at £4,100 weighs 26lbs/12kg has same carbon F&F, 105 groupset, DT Swiss hubs and rims. It takes mudguards/fenders and has a relaxed endurance /all road geo. Plus built in tail lights.

For comparison the top of the range ONfly SUB-10 costs £9,299 and weighs 9.86kg/21.73. Crazy light!

The new TQ40 motor is rated at 40nm with peak power of 200 with a 290wh battery plus 160wh RE is available.

Looking forward to tests of the motor. But overall this is a remarkable package for this weight and price. That is a massive weight saving for a mid drive system.

When the Creo 2 came out most criticisms brought up on these pages were to do with the lack of a model for road users who wouldn't necessarily want a gravel orientated, more powerful, heavier bike. Leaving the market dominated by either Mahle hub motors or smaller brands like the BH iAerolight mid drive.

I'm very interested in this. With my Vado SL a few months shy of its 5th birthday I'd been looking around , thinking ahead to its eventual replacement. I'd decided on drop bars for a long time, and have even been looking up used Creo 1's on eBay. Now I'm out of warranty with my motor I know of 2 motor repair shops in U.K. who can fix or replace parts if needed so a used Creo might be a solid replacement. But this new TQ40 motor and especially the light weight system has my attention. If it's like the TQ50 it'll also be quiet for sure.

I won't be getting a new bike until the new year at the earliest, so time to watch how this roll out goes and what other brands hop on board. Very interesting.

 

[stompandgo]

Excellent points, Ras. I am also looking closely at TQ down the road. A couple of other points. Adding this motor gives them a really nice road drive unit line, 40Nm 1.2Kg, 50Nm 1.8Kg, and 60Nm 1.9Kg. All of them are user upgradeable and tuneable via their app, and the system supports ANT+ to connect to a bike computer.

 

[Rás Cnoic]

Couple of other things on the Canyon, 35mm tyre clearance and surprisingly it comes with 180mm brake rotors, not 160 or 140. This issue was discussed here recently and I'd found myself, that on the steep descents around me that there was much better modulation with 180 rotors over 160 and my hands weren't getting as tired. Overall this looks a very well thought out machine:

 

[Calcoaster]

I just noticed trek is starting to use the hpr60 on their domane+ slr models, at least on the U.S. site. I wonder if they’ll eventually have both the 40 and the 60 as options.

 

[BlackHand]

I just noticed trek is starting to use the hpr60 on their domane+ slr models, at least on the U.S. site. I wonder if they’ll eventually have both the 40 and the 60 as options.

It has a different mounting system, so they would probably need a new frame. So maybe a sslr or xslr model?

Also interested in this drive unit, especially now that they've had a couple years to work out the kinks with the hpr50. It makes a LOT of sense in countries with 25kph limits, but I'll want to hear reviews of how well it does with the higher 20 or even 28mph limit it would have here in the US.

 

[CreoGainRider]

Also TQ showcasing 8.5 kg BMC prototype with the same motor plus display

 

[CreoGainRider]

Another look

 

[Catalyzt]

On the power side, I bet 40nm is plenty of torque for a bike that light-- at first I couldn't believe the listed potential range, but when I thought about it, it seemed less crazy. I mean, I guess... if a 47 pound 250W 40nm eMTB can do about 45 miles with 4,500 feet of vertical, it makes sense intuitively that a 22 pound bike with a 200W 40nm motor could do 62 miles with 6,500 feet of vertical, though I think the gearing and grade of the vertical would be significant variables (as well as rider fitness!) (I am noticing that the Grizl's range is significantly better for a given amount of vertical if the grade is more gentle.)

The concept of a 22-pound electric road bike is fascinating and vaguely terrifying. I don't know if I'd like being on even an acoustic bike that light except someplace where there are no cars. I know professional riders and racers must do this all the time, it just scares the hell out of me.

My Salsa Vaya all steel road bike is 27 lbs ffs.

I think my 1974 531 Reynolds Raleigh Competition is over 23 pounds, might be 24, and I only had it up to about 38 or 39 MPH once or twice when I was young and crazy, 34 or 35 were more normal speeds. Even then, I was rarely going over 30 MPH when there was any traffic, usually only in the park with other cyclists, which was scary enough.

I have not had the Grizl:ON over 37 MPH on descents because-- even with the dampening from the front shock & the seatpost and the CF-- I still don't feel confident (yet) going that fast on a 36 pound bike, though I'm comfortable taking the 46.5 pound eMTB up to 43 MPH. Descending on the Hollywood side of the Cahuenga pass, I feel this weird safety-related cognitive dissonance because on the one hand, I want to go faster so the difference in speed between myself and the cars is decreased, but slower because I don't know how the bike will react if there's a crack or pothole that I don't see in time, so I held it to around 34.

I'm sure there are roads where you can ride a road bike without encountering this problem, just very few that I am aware of near where I live!

I wonder what a 22 pound CF bike with no suspension and thin tires, with or without motor, feels like on bad pavement over 30 MPH. I'm sure it feels better than a steel or aluminum bike does, but still...

 

[Calcoaster]

Keep in mind that the predicted range is based on the European rules limiting assist speed to 15.5mph. The reviews point out that the bikes are intended for serious road bikers who will be riding above this speed except when climbing or maybe encountering big headwinds. If these come to the U.S. market as 28mph bikes, the predicted range will be much different.

 

[mschwett]

…I have not had the Grizl:ON over 37 MPH on descents because-- even with the dampening from the front shock & the seatpost and the CF-- I still don't feel confident (yet) going that fast on a 36 pound bike, though I'm comfortable taking the 46.5 pound eMTB up to 43 MPH. Descending on the Hollywood side of the Cahuenga pass, I feel this weird safety-related cognitive dissonance because on the one hand, I want to go faster so the difference in speed between myself and the cars is decreased, but slower because I don't know how the bike will react if there's a crack or pothole that I don't see in time, so I held it to around 34.

I'm sure there are roads where you can ride a road bike without encountering this problem, just very few that I am aware of near where I live!

I wonder what a 22 pound CF bike with no suspension and thin tires, with or without motor, feels like on bad pavement over 30 MPH. I'm sure it feels better than a steel or aluminum bike does, but still...

it doesn’t feel much different than any carbon road bike with similar geometry, I’m sure. My addict eRide weighs about 24lb, and descends a bit more solidly than my 14lb aethos. they have the same tires, similar wheels (a bit deeper and heavier on the scott), the same drivetrain and gearing, and almost exactly the same touch points geometrically,

the new canyon looks really nice - the integrated lights are slick, the bottom bracket is tiny for a mid drive, uses 2x drivetrains, integrated cable routing, etc etc. I’m curious how it feels with the motor off, given the description of it basically not having a clutch.

 

[stompandgo]

I wonder what a 22 pound CF bike with no suspension and thin tires, with or without motor, feels like on bad pavement over 30 MPH. I'm sure it feels better than a steel or aluminum bike does, but still...

It feels like a proper race bike. My last race bike, a Felt Fc, shod with Zipp 606 tubulars, weighed 14#. I raced it mainly in American criteriums, on downtown streets, full of cracks, potholes, sunken manholes, and whatever the city threw at us, at 28mph+ average. It was fine, until a 50+ mph wind blast blew me and the bike off the road as I was setting up a sprint. That ended my career. No fault of the bike.

I've been going through this equation a lot lately. I need to ride roughly 75-80 miles with 2,000 feet vertical on my longest day trip here. I love my Tesoro, but it's a truck. In order to do that distance, I need both batteries, so it weighs 63# dry. If I was able to drop that to 33# dry, which would include the rack and trunk bag, could I do that with a TQ HPR50, a 400Wh main battery, and a range extender? Two range extenders? It's fun to think about.

 

[Rás Cnoic]

It feels like a proper race bike. My last race bike, a Felt Fc, shod with Zipp 606 tubulars, weighed 14#. I raced it mainly in American criteriums, on downtown streets, full of cracks, potholes, sunken manholes, and whatever the city threw at us, at 28mph+ average. It was fine, until a 50+ mph wind blast blew me and the bike off the road as I was setting up a sprint. That ended my career. No fault of the bike.

I've been going through this equation a lot lately. I need to ride roughly 75-80 miles with 2,000 feet vertical on my longest day trip here. I love my Tesoro, but it's a truck. In order to do that distance, I need both batteries, so it weighs 63# dry. If I was able to drop that to 33# dry, which would include the rack and trunk bag, could I do that with a TQ HPR50, a 400Wh main battery, and a range extender? Two range extenders? It's fun to think about.

It is fun to think about! I think of it as a non assist ceiling, that moment on a hill where you need to hit assist because the weight of the bike makes it sluggish, not fun to ride. I once rode the same few miles of rolling hills on my Vado SL (38lbs+) and the following day on my my Salsa Vaya (27lbs no assist). On the SL I thought that the additional weight would create momentum to propel me further up the second little hill after flying down the first descent. But the weight penalty kicked in quite early on and I stabbed the assist button halfway up the hill. On the Salsa I was propelled uphill much further and a few out of saddle pedal turns got me over the brow efficiently.

In short, looking at my current bike and comparing, I think the weight v power balance means that bikes with this TQ40 system need to use less assist and so the range, despite a smaller battery of 290wh, would be easily comparable to my 320wh. Or rather these lightweight bikes would probably need to use assist less often and when it is in use, use less power on climbs because of the lower weight of overall bike. Of course fitness and steepness is a factor too. And correct low gearing if steep.

Right now I'm pretty unfit after a busy work period. Did a 25 mile loop, 3000ft climbing, with 5 or 6 steep short (under a mile) hills of 15 to 22+% gradients. I went approx 40% without assist. On a TQ40 system that unassisted mileage would definitely increase and on the climbs I'd guess I'd use less power as well, overall saving battery. The TQ motors thus far seem to be a bit weaker then advertised so I'd guess that 40nm is probably not far off the Specialized 35nm of the SL motor.

Everyone is different, everyone's riding landscape is different, but for me it looks very attractive. Plus impressive high quality road brands so far with Ridley, Canyon, BMC.

 

[stompandgo]

Where I live, the wind is constant. It's more of a factor than elevation, because I like to ride fast.