Search results

Looks like the new Scott Addict with TQ 40 motor has been released.

Welcome and thanks for sharing your observations. Looking forward to further insights as you continue to ride your new bike.

I will, she will be trilled to hear that. She probably weights 50kg on a 12kg bike, so just a little lighter...

Funny story. For her 80th birthday my aunt asked if I would join her doing her favorite ride (Mt Adams loop 53miles/3500'). She rode her Pinarello with a TQ50, me my analog Emonda. She made it no problem with 40% battery capacity remaining, whereas I felt fully depleted after trying to keep up...

No , first I heard of it. 8.5kg...amazing, curious to understand how they can achieve that. The TQ is lighter, but not by that much..

Excellent, thanks. It will be interesting to see if other brands (Scott, Orbea, etc.) using the X-20 switch to TQ for road bikes and beat Canyon to the US market.

@Yako; If you have further conversations with TQ or Canyon perhaps you could tease out of them when a TQ40 equipped road bike will be available in the US (or Canada)? Itching to get one after watching your review...

Great review, worth the watch. Has me rethinking the Scott eRide with X-20 in favor of a TQ40 bike, hopefully some will make it across the pond soon.

Yes for sure, I rode a friends Pinarello with TQ50 and watching rider power and motor power was fascinating... Clearly not an Musk offspring (or I would buy an Addict eRide and Canyon Endurace ;)), apctjb was my AOL username and for some reason I have used it ever since. (Anyone else old enough...

As a recreational rider never felt I needed a power meter (although the tech intrigues me) so not sure what average power may be needed for my routes or what is realistic to expect in terms of sustained power from me or the motor. I do have some range anxiety as I ponder which bike and drive...

Can your Addict eRide with X-20 and ~236Whr battery make a ride like that providing 100W assist on the climb or would that require an extender battery?

Thanks, the additional context of 6000 vertical is super helpful reality check. Does the 80% system efficiency you mention include battery derate/losses plus motor losses? That is more in line with my initial assumptions but the 65% efficiency being mentioned for the TQ had me rethinking about...

Great appreciate all the responses and help wrapping my head around some of the concepts. I think I am getting it but let me summarize a few things to make sure. Assuming a 70 kg rider on a 10 kg bike climbs an 8% grade at 8 mph (3.58 m/s), the total power required is approximately 250 W...

Like choosing a cadence for mid drive could one choose a average speed for doing the calculation (say 10kmh)?

Very helpful, thanks. Any idea of how the Mahle X-20 drive compares (not sure what value you use for cadence on a hub drive...)

That looks more like an average efficiency of 60-70% which should show up in real world testing of battery range. Anyone know the approximate average efficiency of the X-20. About the same, better, worse?

Wow, a ton of useful information in this report. Thanks for sharing!!

Ditto, and Calcoaster thanks for the comparison data you provided.

Thanks. 90% would be impressive. Looking forward to your upcoming reviews. And yes, comparing range can be difficult when you can't really measure Whr or Ahr or access the BMS data.

I am guilty of gross oversimplification when I asked the question about power requirements and was hoping for a simple ball park answer. I greatly appreciate the responses I received.