2014 Easy Motion Neo Jumper 650B
- Thread starter Ravi Kempaiah
- Start date
Larry Pizzi
Active Member
Ravi - Just wondering if you think the weight of the motor has any negative effect on the bikes rear suspension?
oilerlord
Member
Yikes!! I suppose no lock is impenetrable with the right tools but those bolt cutters went through the Tigr lock like butter.
Dave
Active Member
Yes, much like they would with a lower priced cable type lock. The Tigr lock certainly looks a great deal better. I really don't know what to do about locks. Like you mentioned, the best are the chain/ubolt designs, but I don't want to carry that kind of weight around. I know there are a few products with Kickstarter that revolve around audible alarm type devices. Those sound interesting, I will see what I can find.
EddieJ
Well-Known Member
Perhaps I'm wrong here, but I can't imaging that it would make any difference as it's part of the unsprung weight.
.
Larry Pizzi
Active Member
I'm interested in hearing Ravi's thoughts after riding. Eddie - Actually it is attached to the spring arm so its not un-sprung weight. This is the reason that most full suspension electric mountain bikes use center motors. But the Neo Jumper is short travel, so it may not be much of a factor as it would if the travel was typical 120 to 180mm.
Ravi Kempaiah
Well-Known Member
- Region
- Canada
- City
- Halifax
Hi Larry,
Great observation, yes the rear shock is anchored to the swingarm and connects to the frame at the other end via single pivot. After you commented on it, I started noticing how my Jumper's rear suspension is behaving in comparison with my normal MTB.
When it is fully unlocked, as you mentioned, the stroke length is ~60-70mm max. Because of the hub motor and its weight, the shaft arm tends to be fully stretched and for normal curbs/bumps on the road and mild trails, there is no negative effect at all. It is very difficult to bunny hop on this bike because of the rear hub motor and I don't intend to do any serious serious drops on this. The motor is light weight actually.
So, to answer your question, for off-road trails and commuting, no negative effect and for serious mountain biking with 6ft drops etc, I wouldn't use this shock (entry level), probably change to RockShox Vivid or FoxFloat CTD.
Having a simple rear shock has made my rides very very sweet. (put on so 75 miles so far)
Last edited:
Ravi Kempaiah
Well-Known Member
- Region
- Canada
- City
- Halifax
Some pictures from my weekend ride to D.C.
It took me 45 minutes from my house to Lincoln Memorial. Google biking maps predicted it would take me 1 hour 5 mins but I think I saved 20 minutes easily.
I predominantly used Eco mode and at the end of 30 mile ride overall, I had used only 2 bars on the battery. So I guess the remaining three bars would be sufficient for 30 more miles.
Anyhow, so many people at the traffic signs stopped and started at my bike and many bikers gave affectionate nod (no dreadful faces at all)
I took some pics in front of historic places like Lincoln Memorial, WW2 and Washington memorial.
It took me 45 minutes from my house to Lincoln Memorial. Google biking maps predicted it would take me 1 hour 5 mins but I think I saved 20 minutes easily.
I predominantly used Eco mode and at the end of 30 mile ride overall, I had used only 2 bars on the battery. So I guess the remaining three bars would be sufficient for 30 more miles.
Anyhow, so many people at the traffic signs stopped and started at my bike and many bikers gave affectionate nod (no dreadful faces at all)
I took some pics in front of historic places like Lincoln Memorial, WW2 and Washington memorial.
Ravi Kempaiah
Well-Known Member
- Region
- Canada
- City
- Halifax
Hi Court,
Just read your Neo Jumper 650B review. Nice recap of the features and brief demo. I Have couple of questions that shook me from my sleep and wanted to clarify...! Anything related to my bike keeps me wide awake, so here I am
Full suspension mountain bikes provides better traction and that is one of the advantages. For more info from a trusted source:
Let me include a quick PPT drawing to elucidate this more.
This whole process may be better pronounced in mid-drive systems but I simply do not understand how the traction is reduced?? in fact, it should increase it compared to the hard tails. Also, the rebound can be adjusted and at 140 psi, I have found it fairly quick. In fact, rear weight helps to release the compression and helps gain control.
Also, there is a difference between total travel (120mm) versus the stroke of the shock (60mm). This helps reduce stress on the shock. Jumper may not be as refined as Santa Cruz or other enduro bikes, but for off-road without drops, this is excellent. Anyways, I am looking forward to learning more about unsprung weight and how it reduces traction.
Thanks
Just read your Neo Jumper 650B review. Nice recap of the features and brief demo. I Have couple of questions that shook me from my sleep and wanted to clarify...! Anything related to my bike keeps me wide awake, so here I am
- You mentioned in your review that unsprung weight reduces traction??
Full suspension mountain bikes provides better traction and that is one of the advantages. For more info from a trusted source:
Let me include a quick PPT drawing to elucidate this more.
This whole process may be better pronounced in mid-drive systems but I simply do not understand how the traction is reduced?? in fact, it should increase it compared to the hard tails. Also, the rebound can be adjusted and at 140 psi, I have found it fairly quick. In fact, rear weight helps to release the compression and helps gain control.
Also, there is a difference between total travel (120mm) versus the stroke of the shock (60mm). This helps reduce stress on the shock. Jumper may not be as refined as Santa Cruz or other enduro bikes, but for off-road without drops, this is excellent. Anyways, I am looking forward to learning more about unsprung weight and how it reduces traction.
Thanks
EddieJ
Well-Known Member
Ravi to hopefully clarify the unsprung/sprung debate.
As I first stated, the wheels of the bike are unsprung, not sprung as Larry has stated. This appears to be where the confusion has started. To be sprung, there would need to be suspension mounted below the axle of the wheel.
Sprung and unsprung mass/weight
The sprung mass/weight of a bicycle is all of the components which are mounted over the working suspension unit, so that means all of the parts of the bike which move up and down when riding or sitting on the bike . It therefore follows that the unsprung mass/weight is everything that does not move up and down.
To simplify, the unsprung/weight mass of every bike consists of tyres, wheels, axle, brake discs, calipers, rear cassette, derailleur, the lower section of the front forks, and the swingarm. Some of the suspension spring mass is also classified as being unsprung, but in reality this makes up a tiny amount of the unsprung mass/weight. Supposedly the roadholding of a bike is improved by reducing a machine’s unsprung mass/weight.
The key part is here:
When a cycle wheel hits a bump, a lower unsprung mass/weight will allow the suspension system to act faster and more effectively, meaning that the tyre is better able to stay in contact with the surface below.
This why a mid drive cycle suspension is 'probably' always going to be better in the suspension department than that of a hub drive. The lighter rear the wheel as fitted to a mid drive, allow the suspension to work more efficiently.
Court is correct in his statement, and was specifically comparing the bikes unsprung weight/mass to that of a mid drive. In reality I doubt that as non proffesional riders, that the likes of you and I would ever notice, so please don't loose any more sleep over the matter, and hurry up and get out there to post up some more photos of the bike in action, but more importantly concentrate on enjoying the ride.
As I first stated, the wheels of the bike are unsprung, not sprung as Larry has stated. This appears to be where the confusion has started. To be sprung, there would need to be suspension mounted below the axle of the wheel.
Sprung and unsprung mass/weight
The sprung mass/weight of a bicycle is all of the components which are mounted over the working suspension unit, so that means all of the parts of the bike which move up and down when riding or sitting on the bike . It therefore follows that the unsprung mass/weight is everything that does not move up and down.
To simplify, the unsprung/weight mass of every bike consists of tyres, wheels, axle, brake discs, calipers, rear cassette, derailleur, the lower section of the front forks, and the swingarm. Some of the suspension spring mass is also classified as being unsprung, but in reality this makes up a tiny amount of the unsprung mass/weight. Supposedly the roadholding of a bike is improved by reducing a machine’s unsprung mass/weight.
The key part is here:
When a cycle wheel hits a bump, a lower unsprung mass/weight will allow the suspension system to act faster and more effectively, meaning that the tyre is better able to stay in contact with the surface below.
This why a mid drive cycle suspension is 'probably' always going to be better in the suspension department than that of a hub drive. The lighter rear the wheel as fitted to a mid drive, allow the suspension to work more efficiently.
Court is correct in his statement, and was specifically comparing the bikes unsprung weight/mass to that of a mid drive. In reality I doubt that as non proffesional riders, that the likes of you and I would ever notice, so please don't loose any more sleep over the matter, and hurry up and get out there to post up some more photos of the bike in action, but more importantly concentrate on enjoying the ride.
Last edited:
Ravi Kempaiah
Well-Known Member
- Region
- Canada
- City
- Halifax
Haha..!
Good point Eddie I am looking forward to explore all the trails this summer. We just had a snowstorm yesterday ...oops.
I just wish to confirm the findings and it is a good learning experience for me to understand the geometry of the bikes. It is a fun and stimulating discussion, and noticed something similar on MTBR forums.
You mentioned "When a cycle wheel hits a bump, a lower unsprung mass/weight will allow the suspension system to act faster and more effectively, meaning that the tyre is better able to stay in contact with the surface below" and for that to happen, the bike suspension needs to be acting against the gravity to push the weight upward and hence face the resistance. Also, the rider weight plays a role to certain extent as it is distributed over the front and rear axles.
Now, my question is, because of the rear hub motor and its weight, the wheel tends to get back into fully-stretched position Vs a normal MTB whose weight is 15-20 pounds lesser. The suspension need not push it back to stretched position, just the weight of the hub motor will do that and hence gain more traction. I agree that non-electric bikes have an upper hand here in this case but FSP bike is designed to gain more traction and I just couldn't understand how it reduces traction. Trying to get better understanding without complicating it with too much engineering physics.
Good point Eddie
I am looking forward to explore all the trails this summer. We just had a snowstorm yesterday ...oops.I just wish to confirm the findings and it is a good learning experience for me to understand the geometry of the bikes. It is a fun and stimulating discussion, and noticed something similar on MTBR forums.
You mentioned "When a cycle wheel hits a bump, a lower unsprung mass/weight will allow the suspension system to act faster and more effectively, meaning that the tyre is better able to stay in contact with the surface below" and for that to happen, the bike suspension needs to be acting against the gravity to push the weight upward and hence face the resistance. Also, the rider weight plays a role to certain extent as it is distributed over the front and rear axles.
Now, my question is, because of the rear hub motor and its weight, the wheel tends to get back into fully-stretched position Vs a normal MTB whose weight is 15-20 pounds lesser. The suspension need not push it back to stretched position, just the weight of the hub motor will do that and hence gain more traction. I agree that non-electric bikes have an upper hand here in this case but FSP bike is designed to gain more traction and I just couldn't understand how it reduces traction. Trying to get better understanding without complicating it with too much engineering physics.
Ravi Kempaiah
Well-Known Member
- Region
- Canada
- City
- Halifax
I read up on the terminology for motorcycles and how unsprung weight leads to better road handling.
But unlike motorcycles that don't have hub motors, electric bike with a 7lb light weight motor should gain better traction. Now, different suspension designs may have different dynamics, that's a different topic altogether.
Probably, I lost my sleep over this head-hurting topic You know, if I put this kind of effort in my actual school research, I would graduate much quicker haha.
Not trying to insinuate some kind of discussion, only trying to understand this better. I'll change my stance if someone can explain this properly with science.
But unlike motorcycles that don't have hub motors, electric bike with a 7lb light weight motor should gain better traction. Now, different suspension designs may have different dynamics, that's a different topic altogether.
Probably, I lost my sleep over this head-hurting topic
You know, if I put this kind of effort in my actual school research, I would graduate much quicker haha.Not trying to insinuate some kind of discussion, only trying to understand this better. I'll change my stance if someone can explain this properly with science.
EddieJ
Well-Known Member
Actually your thinking has provoked even deeper thinking.
You now have me thinking about tyre (tire) side wall technology, and how much thought is given or not given to it, and also thought about the shock absorber itself and whether steps have or being taking in relation to R&D on E-bike specific shocks, rather than just off the shelf, one model suits all.
Traction is a very hard thing to actually get your head around, and it wasn't until I recently went out for a muddy ride with a lad who was riding a pedal powered MTB, that the differences were very much highlighted to.
His bike being probably 7kg lighter than mine, almost skipped across the mud, where as mine dived down and cut in like a tractor.
As you have already mentioned, bunny hops was another aspect of the ride that struck me. He must have had helium in his tyres, whilst I had lead! I have to say though that fitting the Rock shox Rebas, has now changed that aspect, and whilst the back still drags, the front end now lift effortlessly.
You now have me thinking about tyre (tire) side wall technology, and how much thought is given or not given to it, and also thought about the shock absorber itself and whether steps have or being taking in relation to R&D on E-bike specific shocks, rather than just off the shelf, one model suits all.
Traction is a very hard thing to actually get your head around, and it wasn't until I recently went out for a muddy ride with a lad who was riding a pedal powered MTB, that the differences were very much highlighted to.
His bike being probably 7kg lighter than mine, almost skipped across the mud, where as mine dived down and cut in like a tractor.
As you have already mentioned, bunny hops was another aspect of the ride that struck me. He must have had helium in his tyres, whilst I had lead! I have to say though that fitting the Rock shox Rebas, has now changed that aspect, and whilst the back still drags, the front end now lift effortlessly.
Hey guys, great thoughts here!
Assertion: given two full suspension bicycles with the same frame, suspension setup, tires and overall weight (including rider) the one with less unsprung weight will experience better traction. This is due to momentum that builds as the wheel changes position when traveling over obstacles at speed.
Quick point, not saying you implied this but I want to cover it... a heavier wheel does not fall more quickly back towards the earth, this violates Newton's law... Remember, an apple and a pencil both fall towards Earth at the same speed 9.8 meters per second squared. Now, a heavier wheel may "prime" suspension springs more fully (I think this was your point Ravi) creating a stronger rebound but this will also result in bouncing forces that may compromise traction as well.
To expand a bit more, if we had a super duper strong and fast suspension fork that could slam the wheel right back down immediately after being engaged we might actually be talking about the equivalent of using no suspension because the force required to activate it would have to be so strong. This kind of thing may be possible and comfortable if it were computerized... but that's not the reality with the bikes we're talking about here.
As you called out, maybe the mass of the motor and wheel would benefit a system that requires more force to engage springs... In this case, the ground has to push up extremely hard in order to move the wheel at all (back to momentum, equation) putting a lot of force on the tire, tub, rim and spokes as they tug at the weight of the motor up. As a result, everything on the wheel, dropouts and suspension arm would have to be reinforced and much sturdier (likely heavier) like a car... which does't sound too great for riding up hills and stuff.
Ultimately the forumula momentum=mass*velocity (p=mv) helps us understand that with less mass we will experience less momentum (given the same velocity of force acting upwards on the tire as you hit rocks or bumps) and that means that the wheel can rebound more quickly, staying in contact with the riding surface more often, and this enables better traction. Here's a quick video I shot do demonstrate exactly how this works using a couple of basic props.
Remember, the overall weight of the bicycle and rider in this scenario are constant, we're just talking about how easy it is for the wheel to stay glued to the ground and it is easier if the wheel weighs less because it experiences less momentum... which takes time to recover from. Increased recovery time = decreased traction time.
Assertion: given two full suspension bicycles with the same frame, suspension setup, tires and overall weight (including rider) the one with less unsprung weight will experience better traction. This is due to momentum that builds as the wheel changes position when traveling over obstacles at speed.
Quick point, not saying you implied this but I want to cover it... a heavier wheel does not fall more quickly back towards the earth, this violates Newton's law... Remember, an apple and a pencil both fall towards Earth at the same speed 9.8 meters per second squared. Now, a heavier wheel may "prime" suspension springs more fully (I think this was your point Ravi) creating a stronger rebound but this will also result in bouncing forces that may compromise traction as well.
To expand a bit more, if we had a super duper strong and fast suspension fork that could slam the wheel right back down immediately after being engaged we might actually be talking about the equivalent of using no suspension because the force required to activate it would have to be so strong. This kind of thing may be possible and comfortable if it were computerized... but that's not the reality with the bikes we're talking about here.
As you called out, maybe the mass of the motor and wheel would benefit a system that requires more force to engage springs... In this case, the ground has to push up extremely hard in order to move the wheel at all (back to momentum, equation) putting a lot of force on the tire, tub, rim and spokes as they tug at the weight of the motor up. As a result, everything on the wheel, dropouts and suspension arm would have to be reinforced and much sturdier (likely heavier) like a car... which does't sound too great for riding up hills and stuff.
Ultimately the forumula momentum=mass*velocity (p=mv) helps us understand that with less mass we will experience less momentum (given the same velocity of force acting upwards on the tire as you hit rocks or bumps) and that means that the wheel can rebound more quickly, staying in contact with the riding surface more often, and this enables better traction. Here's a quick video I shot do demonstrate exactly how this works using a couple of basic props.
Remember, the overall weight of the bicycle and rider in this scenario are constant, we're just talking about how easy it is for the wheel to stay glued to the ground and it is easier if the wheel weighs less because it experiences less momentum... which takes time to recover from. Increased recovery time = decreased traction time.
- What's easier to turn or stop given the same speed, a large heavy truck or a small light weight commuter car?
- Have you ever been skiing? What feels better, heavy long skis or short light weight skis? Does this impact how quickly you can move your legs given the same groomed slope conditions?
- If someone told you that you had to run doing the grapevine for a mile and that you could either put the weight around your ankles or in a backpack, which would you rather do? How do you think your leg muscles would feel in each scenario?
Ravi Kempaiah
Well-Known Member
- Region
- Canada
- City
- Halifax
Court and Eddie,
Thanks for the input. Always good to have constructive discussion that is beneficial for all.
I think that is how one learns. One of my favorite Prof used to encourage students to probe more and understand it fully before accepting anything. He would say, " If you ask, you are a fool for 15 mins, but if you don't ask, you're a fool for life." So, there is no teacher / student situation here, but it is a collective group and shared knowledge. With google a click away, one can learn things really fast.
Coming back, formula momentum=mass*velocity (p=mv) is used for explaining a lot of linear motion and more on that here.
A heavier item doesn't fall more quickly, that's right. But the static inertia of a bare spring and loaded spring are different because of the mass. If we consider the suspension as a spring, there is something called Hooke's law. If you look at the compression and elongation curve on that page, it can explain the difference between a hard tail and a FSP. While a hard tail has nothing like rebound, FSP has much better traction. So, important not mix up physics concepts. A spring with a mass attached at the end stretches longer and moves quickly compared to a static spring.
A neat video from Khan academy:
Now, the jumper may not have the traction of a non-electric FSP bike but it's better than any hard tail electric bike for traction on any rugged surfaces. I am a flat footed person and have been a long distance runner. So, my area of contact is much higher than normal feet and hence lesser speed. Now, if I carry 5lb dumbbells on each hand and run (trying to equate it to hub motor scenario), of course I will have more mass, more momentum and better traction.
So, if the reverse cycle of rebound (elongation after compression) is held back by a suspension, doesn't the extra weight acting on the hub create more downward force? (Newton's law conserved here, Hooke's law) and get the wheel to touch the ground quicker? The pedal bob depends on the terrain and speed as well
Some excellent animations from GT Suspension. Fox has some excellent designs as well.
I will distill the question to this point:
Why is the traction reduced? because the suspension always to stay in stretched state not in compressed state.
Thanks for the input. Always good to have constructive discussion that is beneficial for all.
I think that is how one learns. One of my favorite Prof used to encourage students to probe more and understand it fully before accepting anything. He would say, " If you ask, you are a fool for 15 mins, but if you don't ask, you're a fool for life." So, there is no teacher / student situation here, but it is a collective group and shared knowledge. With google a click away, one can learn things really fast.
Coming back, formula momentum=mass*velocity (p=mv) is used for explaining a lot of linear motion and more on that here.
A heavier item doesn't fall more quickly, that's right. But the static inertia of a bare spring and loaded spring are different because of the mass. If we consider the suspension as a spring, there is something called Hooke's law. If you look at the compression and elongation curve on that page, it can explain the difference between a hard tail and a FSP. While a hard tail has nothing like rebound, FSP has much better traction. So, important not mix up physics concepts. A spring with a mass attached at the end stretches longer and moves quickly compared to a static spring.
A neat video from Khan academy:
Now, the jumper may not have the traction of a non-electric FSP bike but it's better than any hard tail electric bike for traction on any rugged surfaces. I am a flat footed person and have been a long distance runner. So, my area of contact is much higher than normal feet and hence lesser speed. Now, if I carry 5lb dumbbells on each hand and run (trying to equate it to hub motor scenario), of course I will have more mass, more momentum and better traction.
So, if the reverse cycle of rebound (elongation after compression) is held back by a suspension, doesn't the extra weight acting on the hub create more downward force? (Newton's law conserved here, Hooke's law) and get the wheel to touch the ground quicker? The pedal bob depends on the terrain and speed as well
Some excellent animations from GT Suspension. Fox has some excellent designs as well.
I will distill the question to this point:
- Imagine a jumper without a hub motor
- and now add the weight of hub motor to the same jumper
Why is the traction reduced? because the suspension always to stay in stretched state not in compressed state.
Ravi Kempaiah
Well-Known Member
- Region
- Canada
- City
- Halifax
Thanks for the explanation Court.
I have attached some basic calculations. With simplified geometry, it's a very simple dynamics problem.
I will try to summarize my thoughts
I have attached some basic calculations. With simplified geometry, it's a very simple dynamics problem.
I will try to summarize my thoughts
- Compared to mid-drive bikes, Jumper's rear suspension has to do slightly more work which is not the best case scenario for extremely rough terrain and 4ft drops.
- The reduction in traction as a result of moving some of sprung weight (5-7 lbs) to unsprung weight, is actually very very small. Exact quantification will require precise dynamics simulation which could be a fun semester project for junior or senior year mechanical engineering students.
Thanks Ravi! I appreciate your questions and often learn more as a result of trying to find an answer together. It seems like the big takeaway here is that ~7lbs of extra unsprung weight in the rear wheel of a full suspension ebike will not upset traction very much compared with a mid-drive design but is slightly inferior.
It does make the rear end of the bike heavier and is also harder on the tire, tube, rim, spokes and hub because there's no shock absorber between them and the weight of the motor itself as there would be if it was mid-mounted. Still, these hardware components are designed to endure that force so it should not be a critical issue.
While I understand that a loaded spring will respond more quickly, I do not agree that the weight of the wheel or hub motor is what is loading the spring. It is the weight of the bike and rider pushing down against the Earth. Even if the rear end of the bike weighed zero... even if the entire bike itself weighed zero, the spring would still be loaded through the weight of the rider.
Maybe what you're driving at here is the difference in performance from hub to mid motor is not significant enough to call out in reviews and may just cause concern where none is needed? Is this your feeling or do you think it's worth keeping as a point? I have heard Larry and other leaders mention it and I do appreciate the central balance of a mid-motor but still prefer the zippy feel of hubs and the fact that they do not pull the chain or impact pedal cadence. Thanks again man
It does make the rear end of the bike heavier and is also harder on the tire, tube, rim, spokes and hub because there's no shock absorber between them and the weight of the motor itself as there would be if it was mid-mounted. Still, these hardware components are designed to endure that force so it should not be a critical issue.
While I understand that a loaded spring will respond more quickly, I do not agree that the weight of the wheel or hub motor is what is loading the spring. It is the weight of the bike and rider pushing down against the Earth. Even if the rear end of the bike weighed zero... even if the entire bike itself weighed zero, the spring would still be loaded through the weight of the rider.
Maybe what you're driving at here is the difference in performance from hub to mid motor is not significant enough to call out in reviews and may just cause concern where none is needed? Is this your feeling or do you think it's worth keeping as a point? I have heard Larry and other leaders mention it and I do appreciate the central balance of a mid-motor but still prefer the zippy feel of hubs and the fact that they do not pull the chain or impact pedal cadence. Thanks again man
Ravi Kempaiah
Well-Known Member
- Region
- Canada
- City
- Halifax
It is always fun deciphering these small engineering systems, Court.
I know a lot of people on Endless Sphere experiment with different kinds of battery/controller setup. But we are just tinkering with theoretical but relevant parameters here.
I have enjoyed learning so much from your videos. You showcase a wide variety of bikes to people who otherwise wouldn't have heard of these. Keep up the great work and also in the process, we may all learn something more. Collective knowledge is great fun.
Yes, you're right. If the rear of the bike weighed zero, the shocks would still be working due to the weight of the rider. I only presented a simplified case, but if we go into a minute details of force/moment distribution on each point of the swing arm, we will see that not all the travel is translated into suspension movement. Also, some of these joints bear certain load thereby reducing the effective unsprung mass.
Very minute % MTB community are thinking of ebikes and even among those riding electric MTB's, not all of them go on mountain trails. So, I wouldn't be worried about it at all.
As for the other point raised on few reviews, how do we know if the battery is locked in place or not?? I might have stumbled on something.
Once I insert the key and remove the battery, I can't take the key out unless I turn it the other way and lock it. So, I have never run into a problem of thinking whether the battery is locked or not. If the key is stuck there, battery is unlocked/removable. If the key is not stuck that means battery locked. I'm not sure how it was with previous jumper and but I haven't had any issue with it.
I know a lot of people on Endless Sphere experiment with different kinds of battery/controller setup. But we are just tinkering with theoretical but relevant parameters here.
I have enjoyed learning so much from your videos. You showcase a wide variety of bikes to people who otherwise wouldn't have heard of these. Keep up the great work and also in the process, we may all learn something more. Collective knowledge is great fun.
Yes, you're right. If the rear of the bike weighed zero, the shocks would still be working due to the weight of the rider. I only presented a simplified case, but if we go into a minute details of force/moment distribution on each point of the swing arm, we will see that not all the travel is translated into suspension movement. Also, some of these joints bear certain load thereby reducing the effective unsprung mass.
Very minute % MTB community are thinking of ebikes and even among those riding electric MTB's, not all of them go on mountain trails. So, I wouldn't be worried about it at all.
As for the other point raised on few reviews, how do we know if the battery is locked in place or not?? I might have stumbled on something.
Once I insert the key and remove the battery, I can't take the key out unless I turn it the other way and lock it. So, I have never run into a problem of thinking whether the battery is locked or not. If the key is stuck there, battery is unlocked/removable. If the key is not stuck that means battery locked. I'm not sure how it was with previous jumper and but I haven't had any issue with it.
Similar threads
