Turbo Vado 2 4.0 or 5.0 or 6.0?

[mcdenny]

More conflicting info

This is the ride data graph from the Spec app showing segment where I was in 10/100 then changed to 0/100. From this it apears that the motor was indeed off. This directly conflicts with the Spec chart showing rider power needed to get max motor power. WTF?

 

[mschwett]

More conflicting info

View attachment 205772
This is the ride data graph from the Spec app showing segment where I was in 10/100 then changed to 0/100. From this it apears that the motor was indeed off. This directly conflicts with the Spec chart showing rider power needed to get max motor power. WTF?

it makes more sense that way.

you might need to try pedaling at 600+ watts just to make sure there isn’t some rounding going on. my recollection was similar to jeremy’s that at 5/10 ease settings the motor did not work very well.

 

[mcdenny]

Just finished a ride with 20 segments, about 1/2 mile long in 1-10 xx/xx and xx/100 tune settings. Now I get an error saying can't download file. Please try again later.

Also, turns out there is a 00/00 microtune setting as well as a 00/100. Setting the display to show rider power and motor power, there is 0 motor power regardless of rider power in both cases. Just what you would expect. BUT there is a clear motor whine with 00/100 but none at 00/00. clearly no whine with the regular "off" setting either. ????

My conclusion that the bike was really easy to PEDAL with the motor off, which I later retracted, I'm now asserting.

 

[mschwett]

please for the love of god .. it's PEDAL

 

[teskow]

please for the love of god .. it's PEDAL

Ouch. That smart.
Show me a man who has never made a mistake in his life and I will show you a man who has never done anything.

 

[mcdenny]

Sidebar about the Spec website: All the SL 2 4.0 and 5.0 models are back plus they added unequipped versions of the 4.0.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Sidebar about the Spec website: All the SL 2 4.0 and 5.0 models are back plus they added unequipped versions of the 4.0.

Good to hear that! Indeed, even the SL 2 like yours in the same colour is available in Poland!
I've looked at the picture of your e-bike. It looks the bidon cage fits between the top and bottom tubes so a Range Extender with its cable might fit as well!

 

[mcdenny]

Good to hear that! Indeed, even the SL 2 like yours in the same colour is available in Poland!
I've looked at the picture of your e-bike. It looks the bidon cage fits between the top and bottom tubes so a Range Extender with its cable might fit as well!

Yes, the ranger extender battery is an option. The display will show charge levels of both batteries and you can program which battery gets used first. I did a short range calculation as part of my Pm vs Pr experiments. 20/20 tune with an avg 10 mph showed 110 miles on 90% of a full battery. That’s based on only one 1.5 mile ride though so range may not really be that good.

My butt will need a range extender before the bike does.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

The display will show charge levels of both batteries and you can program which battery gets used first.

Precisely speaking, it is either both batteries in parallel or the Range Extender first
I was wondering as there is an extra pair of bosses for a vertically mounted cage, the seat tube, for the diamond frame. It looks it is only a single position for the RE on the ST frame. I only wonder if the RE cable would be long enough. (It is not long enough on my Vado SL 1).

 

[mcdenny]

Bosses on the top of the top tube also.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

Bosses on the top of the top tube also.

View attachment 205882

Anyone, are the side-loading Spec Zee cages secure enough for the RE? If so, might be a good way to carry the RE between the downtubes. Putting it on the top tube bosses would raise the bike's center of mass even more.

 

[Nubnub]

Anyone, are the side-loading Spec Zee cages secure enough for the RE? If so, might be a good way to carry the RE between the downtubes. Putting it on the top tube bosses would raise the bike's center of mass even more.

The range extenders come with the cage and rubber band to secure the RE. Seems to work well enough tho the band fails after a couple of seasons in relatively mild California weather. Hasn't been an issue for me without the rubber band. Security is prob less a concern unless used extreme off road conditions. Be sure to get the correct cable length - there should be sticker on or near the charge port cover stating what the correct length should be. If I remember correctly, my Levo SL downtube mounted cagg/RE used a shorter cable than the seat tube mounted RE on a Vado/Creo SL. I am guessing there is no cable long enough to have the RE mounted on the top tube of a step thru.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

Anyone, are the side-loading Spec Zee cages secure enough for the RE? If so, might be a good way to carry the RE between the downtubes. Putting it on the top tube bosses would raise the bike's center of mass even more.

It is absolutely secure. I ride gravel and some offroad, never had any issue. The RE perfectly locks into the Specialized Zee II cage. (I use the rubber band to secure the battery plug not the whole thing but it's me). I could even ride multi-kilometre rough cobblestone segments on three races using multiple REs!

Bosses on the top of the top tube also.

It wasn't my point. Perhaps Vado SL 2 is different from version 1 but I've installed a Range Extender in the bidon cage on the bottom tube. The RE cable was too short to reach the frame socket.

Be sure to get the correct cable length - there should be sticker on or near the charge port cover stating what the correct length should be.

Vado SL and Creo both take the long 220 mm Road Cable. Levo SL takes a shorter 165 mm MTB Cable.

McDenny if you ever plan using an RE, please check the feasibility before any order or purchase.

 

[mcdenny]

It's with some concern that I post this chart as it refutes my whole understanding of how the xx/xx and xx/100 tunes work.

I rode up and down the same street in approximately 1 mile laps in 20/20, 20/100, 40/40, 40/100, 70/70, 70/100 and 100/100. The chart shows Pm as a function of Pr for each segment. The resulting .fit file had 1880 records after I removed each record with cadence < 60. Admittedly these are still very limited rides and I'm not strong enough to pedal at much more than 200 watts for more than a few seconds at a time so there's not any data at higher Pr values. The chart lines end at the highest Pr I achieved at each tune setting.

This chart was created using the slope and Y intercept from the linear trend line up to the clear inflection point when Pmax was reached.

I had expected XX/XX and XX/100 to have the same slope but the XX/XX curve to go flat at a lower Pm value (the saturation point we've bee talking about). Not so in any of the tunes. In each case XX/100 has a significantly steeper slope than XX/XX.

I expected the inflection points where Pm=Pmax to occur at the Pr values given the Specialized table showing Pr to get Pmax in each tune.
Tune____________Pr to get Pmax._____
_____________Spec table_____my data____comment
100/100_________85___________70_______pretty close
70/100__________268__________170______way off
70/70___________185__________200______pretty close
40/100__________436__________250______way way off

I'd love for someone else try a similar exercise and see how your results compare.

 

[mschwett]

it’s interesting, and seems to suggest that the assist factor changes for a given ease when the max support changes.

i never observed that in quite a lot of rides on my SL1, they were two very clearly separate parameters. specialized’s range calculators of the time also used pretty simple logic to determine watts consumed based on the baseline math of the assist and max formulas.

so, a couple questions. is this all done in dynamic micro tune? if so, i’d say try it again with the three standing riding modes set to 20/100, 60/100, and 100/100. then repeat at 20/50, 60/50, and 100/50. make sure you don’t approach 28mph. smooth the data to at least 5 seconds. my strong suspicion is that the boost ratio will be the same as 20/100 and 20/50 as long as you are nowhere near the max. there is clearly something “different” about dynamic micro tune.

do you have a standard x/y line plot of rider power, motor power, and their ratio during a couple of the relevant segments they you extracted the slopes from? or, drop a link to the fit file. would be interesting to experiment.

 

[mcdenny]

A little more context.

Here's the individual chart for 40/100 with all records where Cadence and Pm and Pr are >0

And here's the chart with records where cadence > 59.

These charts were done in LibreCalc. It did the best fit linear trend lines. For the combined chart above I estimated the Pmax to be 380 since its a good assumption that Pmax does not change with Pr.

 

[mcdenny]

so, a couple questions. is this all done in dynamic micro tune? if so, i’d say try it again with the three standing riding modes set to 20/100, 60/100, and 100/100. then repeat at 20/50, 60/50, and 100/50. make sure you don’t approach 28mph. smooth the data to at least 5 seconds. my strong suspicion is that the boost ratio will be the same as 20/100 and 20/50 as long as you are nowhere near the max. there is clearly something “different” about dynamic micro tune.
20, 40, 70 are shown separately for micro tune and dynamic micro tune. There is no time smoothing but Pm is averaged for each instance of Pr.

do you have a standard x/y line plot of rider power, motor power, and their ratio during a couple of the relevant segments they you extracted the slopes from? or, drop a link to the fit file. would be interesting to experiment.

Coming soon.

 

[mschwett]

remind me again if we know definitively whether these values are electrical input to the motor or (estimated) mechanical output?

 

[mcdenny]

Boost ratio and Pm as a function of Pr

 

[mcdenny]

remind me again if we know definitively whether these values are electrical input to the motor or (estimated) mechanical output?

Electrical input